What's new

Is England the new Aussies of 2000s?

Gullycricket

Gullycricket

First Class Star
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Runs
3,937
Looking at the talent at their disposal whether its their Test or ODI side they look poised for dominance.When a player like Bairstow cant find place in the side it speaks volumes about their bench strength.
If they win WC19 I feel they will dominate world cricket for years to come.
Thoughts?
 
No. The top order batting is still very weak - no Hayden, Langer, Ponting, certainly no Gilchrist, and on the bowling front definitely no McGrath and no Warne.

Broad has lost pace and Anderson has maybe a year left.

Good players are coming through but nothing like the Aussie team of at least five champions.
 
Have people forgotten how good that Aussie team was?

Hayden, Langer, McGrath and Warne. Who is supposed to be the equivalent of these guys?

And I'm being very generous here just so you know. Ponting is better than Root ( so far at least) and Gilchrist is superior to Buttler ( again so far).
 
This forum doesn't understand how good that Australian team was . They had 5/6 ATG. England have some terrific talent but they are still inconsistent even at home.
 
Need some good bowlers.Very good team but not aussies.Their cup to win since australia is in disarray,
india doesnt have a middle order,pakistan has won its quota trophy for next 20 years,NZ competes but doesnt win and Saffers in WC are well..saffers.
 
OP hasn't seen the Aussies of 2000s. The current England or India are (and probably will never be) nowhere close to that side.
 
The Australian side of the late 90s and early 2000s is arguably the best of all time and could potentially beat the great West Indies side of the late 70s and early 80s. I consistently see people here underestimating the talent of that side while making nonsensical comparisons with current teams. This has to be the most bizarre assertion yet.
 
What is this obsession with Aussies of 00s?

I mean just 2 weeks ago, this team was struggling to find a half decent opening batsmen, a quality pace bowler to work with Anderson and a quality spin bowler. Now it all comes to Aussies of 00s, lol.

On a serious note, England still don't have an established opener, the duo did well in this series but let them take some time, let alone comparing with Langer and Hayden.

Root is good but no Ponting, that guy at peak was crazy, no McGrath, no Warne,no Gilchrist (Foakes started well but still just 2 tests till now).

Buttler is good but he is no Gilchrist. Bairstow will come into XI, possibly in place of Moeen. The England XI will be: -

Opener
Opener
Root
Bairstow
Buttler
Stokes
Foakes(wkt)
Curran
Rashid?
Leach
Anderson
 
Gullycricket said:
Looking at the talent at their disposal whether its their Test or ODI side they look poised for dominance.When a player like Bairstow cant find place in the side it speaks volumes about their bench strength.
If they win WC19 I feel they will dominate world cricket for years to come.
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Not as good as Aussies but they are probably on the right track... Currently I think they are the best team globally
 
They're actually the India of the 2000s. Quality team, nearly invincible at home and very competitive away. Good in tournaments but struggling to win cups.
 
Mighty Eng of 2010s struggling to defend 300+ against worst SL team of all time.
 
Gilchrist
Hayden
Ponting
Martyn
Lehmann/Clarke
Bevan
Symonds/Watson
Lee
Mcgrath
Warne
Gillespie

The only team to have equaled that may have been -

Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Richardson/Kallicharan
Lloyd
Gomes/Harper/Logie
Dujon
Garner
Roberts/Walsh
Marshall/Croft
Holding
 
Ab Fan said:
What is this obsession with Aussies of 00s?

I mean just 2 weeks ago, this team was struggling to find a half decent opening batsmen, a quality pace bowler to work with Anderson and a quality spin bowler. Now it all comes to Aussies of 00s, lol.

On a serious note, England still don't have an established opener, the duo did well in this series but let them take some time, let alone comparing with Langer and Hayden.

Root is good but no Ponting, that guy at peak was crazy, no McGrath, no Warne,no Gilchrist (Foakes started well but still just 2 tests till now).

Buttler is good but he is no Gilchrist. Bairstow will come into XI, possibly in place of Moeen. The England XI will be: -

Opener
Opener
Root
Bairstow
Buttler
Stokes
Foakes(wkt)
Curran
Rashid?
Leach
Anderson
Click to expand...

Oops, not sure how I typed it, will have Broad or Woakes back in place of Rashid.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
They're actually the India of the 2000s. Quality team, nearly invincible at home and very competitive away. Good in tournaments but struggling to win cups.
Click to expand...

They have lost at least 1 test apiece to each of the top-8 nations in the last few years alone - at home.

We never did that. Not yesterday. Not today.
 
No. That team was attacking and relentless with atleast 6 or 7 players that can win games on their own. But English are doing something right. They have been producing decent talent in the last few years. Look how AUS is struggling to find 2 decent batsmen.
 
Aussies Team of that time was almost invincible , 3 consecutive WC wins is not a Joke.

It was a team that won 16 consecutive Test Matches .
 
No, they are not even strong as Australia B team of 2000s. Australia in early 2000s was a divine team. Beating them in a series was considered an upset, home or away.
 
I really like this new guy Sam Curran. I find he has added 10% more value to England in both batting and bowling.

England is definetely the team to beat.
 
gazza619 said:
I really like this new guy Sam Curran. I find he has added 10% more value to England in both batting and bowling.

England is definetely the team to beat.
Click to expand...

He is a good batsman but he will be chicken feed in India, Aus and UAE, doesn't have pace to be a factor. SL are an average side, outside swinging conditions this English team is going to be very difficult to lose to. Also with Jimmy retiring soon that is a hole too difficult to fill for England.
 
India and England will be the top two teams across formats over the next 4-5 years.
 
Mamoon said:
India and England will be the top two teams across formats over the next 4-5 years.
Click to expand...

Not England. In tests they still have loads of problems such as top order. Winning a series against Sri Lanka means nothing.
India are probably around their peak now. I don't see them getting any better or worse in the near future. In tests they will always win at home and lose away from home while in odis and t20s they will always be a top team.
I see Pakistan as a team on a slow rise atm but I doubt we will ever be to the level of India.
 
The answer is still no.

It was a good series win away from home but they will have to win many, many more before they can be considered to be close to the Aussie side of the 2000's
 
Last edited:
Eng have no openers all there batsman want to bat @ 8 9 10

One thing is for sure there spin attack is on another level to Paks.
 
As everyone has said no but, they have a squad across formats that could be so good. I believe winning the WC is the final hurdle for the odi side and they look good enough to dominate for another year or so after that. Maybe two.

The issue is the test side, with no long term spin option, no obvious replacements for Jimmy and Broad and the top order still too weak. Where are these much needed players going to come from? I can only see porter in the county circuit but no batsman approaching a root or cook or kp.
 
Minnowbasher said:
Not England. In tests they still have loads of problems such as top order. Winning a series against Sri Lanka means nothing.
India are probably around their peak now. I don't see them getting any better or worse in the near future. In tests they will always win at home and lose away from home while in odis and t20s they will always be a top team.
I see Pakistan as a team on a slow rise atm but I doubt we will ever be to the level of India.
Click to expand...

Pakistan does not have the quality to consistent rank in the top four in ODIs and Tests. England have the depth and quality to get to #2 in Tests. In ODIs and T20s, they are already the best team along with India.

India is the dominant team across all formats while England is already dominant in Limited Overs. They just need a few things to fall in place to be dominant in Test cricket.

They have a very strong core and most of the players have plenty of years left. The biggest challenge of course will be to replace Anderson.
 
Mamoon said:
Pakistan does not have the quality to consistent rank in the top four in ODIs and Tests. England have the depth and quality to get to #2 in Tests. In ODIs and T20s, they are already the best team along with India.

India is the dominant team across all formats while England is already dominant in Limited Overs. They just need a few things to fall in place to be dominant in Test cricket.

They have a very strong core and most of the players have plenty of years left. The biggest challenge of course will be to replace Anderson.
Click to expand...

Dominant team means winning away from home. There is no dominant team just now. If England win the WC and a few more away series then they will be.
 
i can't remember that aussie team collapsing too many times, i still feel this england team when put under the right pressure will crumble, especially away from home. Mentally not strong as that aussie team with this new modern gung ho approach
 
Robert said:
No. The top order batting is still very weak - no Hayden, Langer, Ponting, certainly no Gilchrist, and on the bowling front definitely no McGrath and no Warne.

Broad has lost pace and Anderson has maybe a year left.

Good players are coming through but nothing like the Aussie team of at least five champions.
Click to expand...

You're comparing players. The OP's question is in terms of dominance.

England compared to all others teams have the most balance and depth in their squad. England have enough top class players to compete on any surface against any other team in the world in pretty much all 3 formats. Now if they play in Asia, they have 3 or 4 good enough batsmen who can play spin and enough spinners to take wickets.

The ODI team is on the road to domination. The test team is improving quickly now winning 2 series in a row, both with dominance. The T20 have potential but Pakistan is dominating this format atm.
 
KingKhanWC said:
You're comparing players. The OP's question is in terms of dominance.

England compared to all others teams have the most balance and depth in their squad. England have enough top class players to compete on any surface against any other team in the world in pretty much all 3 formats. Now if they play in Asia, they have 3 or 4 good enough batsmen who can play spin and enough spinners to take wickets.

The ODI team is on the road to domination. The test team is improving quickly now winning 2 series in a row, both with dominance. The T20 have potential but Pakistan is dominating this format atm.
Click to expand...

I don't think England dominated India - they won 4-1 but it was a question of maybe one crucial session turning England's way in most matches. I think the scoreline flatters England a bit.

Prior to that they were smashed in India away and Australia away, lost in NZ and could only draw at home with Pakistan.

England have a long way to go in tests. They need top-order batters to help Root, and bowlers to come through to replace creaking Anderson and Broad.
 
Robert said:
I don't think England dominated India - they won 4-1 but it was a question of maybe one crucial session turning England's way in most matches. I think the scoreline flatters England a bit.

Prior to that they were smashed in India away and Australia away, lost in NZ and could only draw at home with Pakistan.

England have a long way to go in tests. They need top-order batters to help Root, and bowlers to come through to replace creaking Anderson and Broad.
Click to expand...

4-1 is a dominating results as most Indian and cricket fans thought India would win easily but England were pretty comfortoable winners in the end. NZ and Pak were close series but since then England have changed their approach bringing in the likes of Butler, return of Leach and some new young blood to replace Cook.

Yes there is an issue at no.3 but both openers have looked good in Sri Lanka on spinning pitches. Sure it will be a difficult task to match the Aussies of the past but England have the all round capablities of any team to even challenge this. This England team could win a test series in Aus, SA, India, UAE and SL. I can't think of any other team with this potential.
 
Mamoon said:
Pakistan does not have the quality to consistent rank in the top four in ODIs and Tests. England have the depth and quality to get to #2 in Tests. In ODIs and T20s, they are already the best team along with India.

India is the dominant team across all formats while England is already dominant in Limited Overs. They just need a few things to fall in place to be dominant in Test cricket.

They have a very strong core and most of the players have plenty of years left. The biggest challenge of course will be to replace Anderson.
Click to expand...

dominant? lol. India are a mediocre test team and their away performances are poor. The pro-India bias here is amazing. I am crying from laughter.
 
England have done well to make some changes now.

Buttler
Foakes
Curran
Leach

That's a good move. I am not too sure of openers still. But you gotta give them some time for sure. Both did fine in SL.

A below England lineup in England looks fantastic: -

Burns
Jennings
Root
Bairstow
Buttler
Stokes
Foakes
Curran
Woakes
Leach
Anderson

Can add Moeen Ali or even Adil Rashid to it for Asian conditions. I believe in SL, Broad would have fared better than Jimmy or perhaps anywhere with Kookaburra but given Anderson performance, it was Broad who had to make way.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">“It’s not doom and gloom, but it’s just a big reality check” <br><br>Alastair Cook not panicking about England’s series defeat. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/bbccricket?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#bbccricket</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WIvENG?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WIvENG</a> <a href="https://t.co/mHYOEs8rub">pic.twitter.com/mHYOEs8rub</a></p>— Test Match Special (@bbctms) <a href="https://twitter.com/bbctms/status/1092062106453790720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 3, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
That Aussie team was a once in a generation team. Don’t compare teams with them unless that team wins 3 WCs in a row, and wins all teams in tests home and away.
 
BUMP. So a 50 over Wc and a T20 WC since this thread was made. Thoughts?..I think they will dominate for long given the talent they have
 
That Aussie team was simply incredible. Think of England need to win one more ICC tournament and then dominate Test cricket for a decade with bowlers of McGrath and Warne stature. Test cricket probably not possible but in white ball perhaps a case can be made to be third best now after Aus and Windies.
 
No way, Australia bossed Test cricket all over the globe and won successive 50 over World Cups.

England now hold both of the World Cups which is an awesome achievement, but they’re just getting back off the ground in Test cricket after a difficult period and we haven’t seen their attempted World Cup defence yet.
 
Nope.

There is no team currently that can match Windies of 80's and Aussies of 2000's.
 
Buttler and Stokes was the difference in the WC 2019 final. They were the difference today as well in the T20 final.

Were their chasing abilities forged in the fiery cauldrons of the IPL ? :rabada2
 
In White ball cricket maybe If England win next ODI world cup. Australia dominated all over, across format 99-2007
 
Nah, they are not even in contention due to poor test team.
 
Mas-LFC said:
In White ball cricket maybe If England win next ODI world cup. Australia dominated all over, across format 99-2007
Click to expand...

Their 1999 world cup win was scratchy but after that they just didn't win 2 world cups, they just brushed everyone aside. Totally dominated each and every game.
After 1999 loss to Pakistan in world cup in group stage, the next world cup odi they lost was 2011 quarterfinal. Epic domination.
England's 2019 WC itself will have an asterisk next to it as it was a tied game in every possible manner.
 
England needs to win Tests overseas. That is where England is well behind Australia of 2000. They lost in Australia/India.
 
That australia had a bunch of gun players in almost every positions,most of them are legends of the game

This england don't have not many players to match that ausis...may be a butler or stokes in Loi's and Root and anderson in test.Apart from that dont think its anywhere close let alone the better debate
 
RexRex said:
Buttler and Stokes was the difference in the WC 2019 final. They were the difference today as well in the T20 final.

Were their chasing abilities forged in the fiery cauldrons of the IPL ? :rabada2
Click to expand...

Stokes mostly. Buttler was support role in both cases.
 
Gullycricket said:
Looking at the talent at their disposal whether its their Test or ODI side they look poised for dominance.When a player like Bairstow cant find place in the side it speaks volumes about their bench strength.
If they win WC19 I feel they will dominate world cricket for years to come.
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Biggest joke ever.

2000's Australia wasn't continiously losing to minnows twice a year every year like England do.

Ireland, Scotland, Netherlands have all had their way with the England boys.

Look at history before asking such things, please.
 
Not really. This time England chased and they won in the semi and final. Last year 2021 when they were forced to defend totals they were found wanting. NZ scored 60 runs in 3.5 overs against England.
 
Not even close. That Aussie team had a handful of ATGs. A world class batting line up + world class bowling line up which included world class pacers + an ATG pacer + the greatest spinner of all time.

This England team has a world class batting line up, the best in the world. Good Allrounders. And a world class pacer.

Their bowling attack is far from world class level of the Aussies in the 2000s.

150-160 was on today. We had to just maintain the runrate not even increase it. We were at 7.5 rpo by the 14th over.

We misread the pitch big big time.
 
James said:
No way, Australia bossed Test cricket all over the globe and won successive 50 over World Cups.

England now hold both of the World Cups which is an awesome achievement, but they’re just getting back off the ground in Test cricket after a difficult period and we haven’t seen their attempted World Cup defence yet.
Click to expand...

Yep. In ODIs they would have to defend their title twice at least to equal Australia’s record.
 
Robert said:
Broad has lost pace and Anderson has maybe a year left.
Click to expand...

Shows how much I know.....

But The Ingerlund have had fine six or seven months. Busted up in WI, but then the dreadful Silverwood era ended and the Bmac and Stokes era began. Six test wins out of seven, usually by thumping margins. India and NZ blown away, SA overcome too. Then the experimental team that narrowly won in Pakistan, and the T20 WC triumph in NZ.
 
jnaveen1980 said:
England needs to win Tests overseas. That is where England is well behind Australia of 2000. They lost in Australia/India.
Click to expand...

Let's see how they do now they have good management. and an attacking skipper who understands his bowlers.
 
If England are near their best, i would expect them to dominate any opposition in the 50 over or 20 over format regardless of conditions

Tests, nah.
 
If they win the World Cup next year, they will achieve parity with 2000s Australia in ODI/T20Is.
 
Aussie team had ATG players for all formats - T20 wasn't there - and for sustained period so their domination was around a decade from mid 90s to 2000s period, similar to domination by West Indies in parts of 70s/80s decade.

England domination is in white-ball - for which I agree they are comparable in domination level to Australia, just need to win something back to back to really really prove it, but on paper for sure they are at that level. For Tests, they are not, for one they are lacking anyone close to Shane Warne, which allowed Australia to dominate against all oppositions and all type of conditions apart from their pace bowling.

For White-ball, just think who they actually didn't even have playing in the recent world cup final XI:
1. David Malan
2. Mark Wood
3. Roy
4. Bairstow
5. Ben Duckett
6. Sam Billings
7. Joe Root (for odi not t20)
8. Liam Dawson
9. probably others that I can't recall off the top of my head

Team like Pakistan that came second, wouldn't mind taking a few of those players straight into their playing XI, especially from batting side.
 
One other thing in favor of Australia - saying this more off the top of my head - but many of the other top tier teams were either highly inconsistent or going through their low period during the 90s which also benefitted Australia in their domination. West Indies was one-man show - Lara, India - Tendulkar and didn't start domination until after the Dravid/Gangula era turning it on in the Dhoni era, Pakistan could only match Aussies outside Australia never in Australia, England at their lowest in white ball in that era, NZ just recently got to the near top ranking, winning test mace, etc.

In current era, England faces much stiffer competition in all the formats from other teams not being so far behind relative to them which makes it harder for them to dominate as much as Aussies did in their decade.
 
In limited overs, they are about par with that team. Will cement that with further glory. No team in history has been double champions so we are witnessing history
 
During 2000s

Played 283 won 202 lost 66 W/L ratio 3.060

That is a staggering W/L ratio for Australia

Last 5 years England in T20

74 matches won 44 Last 27 W/L ratio 1.629

In ODIs England last 5 years

73 matches Won 46 Lost 20 W/L ratio 2.300


2.300 is impressive enough.
 
Robert said:
Silverwood - Root era. Very defensive with lots of wrong picks and bad tactics.
Click to expand...

Didn't had enough resources at disposal either. Root was one man batting. Second best was Stokes averaging 36 with bat.
 
But Aussies dominated massively in 21st century as well.

3 ODI world cups (2003,2007,2015)
2 ICC Champions Trophy (2006,2009)
1 T20 world cup (2021)

That is 6 ICC trophies.

England has 3 World cups in past 12 years but they need to add 1 more world cup in the next 5 years to be talked on all time great side.
 
Within the past year, England has lost 4-0 to Australia and 1-0 to the West Indies.
 
It's fair to say if England win world cup in india they will be on the same level as Aus in 99/03 in limited over cricket. They're definitely one of the favorites!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BouncerGuy
West Indies tour of New Zealand (2025)
Replies
40
Views
416
Ball Blazer
Ball Blazer
Asad T
Shaheens thrashed by club cricketers in the Top End T20 Tourament – what does it say about Pakistan’s future?
Replies
47
Views
2K
ahmadharis1
ahmadharis1
The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
Which team is favorite to win the Asia Cup 2025?
2 3 4
Replies
318
Views
17K
starpain
S
T
Now is the perfect time to compare Babar Azam, Mohammad Rizwan, and Shaheen Shah Afridi with the greats of the past
Replies
68
Views
984
SportsWarrior
S
The Bald Eagle
"The Ultimate goal is to win the World Cup in South Africa in 2027": Shubman Gill
Replies
41
Views
876
bunda_bindaas
B
Back
Top