What's new

Which Test team is better at the moment - England or Australia?

street cricketer

street cricketer

Test Debutant
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Runs
15,677
Post of the Week
7
We endlessly debate about who is the better out of India and Pakistan here, but would like to know the opinion of ppers on which team is better of the Ashes rivals - England or Australia.

Looks actually close to me. Hence the thread.

Would like a poll on it if possible.
 
Australia have found a great player in Handscomb. Their middle order and pace attack is stronger. I'll go with Australia.
 
England for me.. Comfortably better batting unit in asia despite whatever results suggest

Don't see Australia drawing series in Bangladesh
 
Quite a few similarities between the teams right now coming to think of it. Good pace bowling attacks, one pretty solid opener and the other young but promising, one of the best batsmen in the world in the middle order with the rest being a bit undecided at the moment and a pretty average spinner. Only real difference in the structure is a good all rounder with Marsh not quite coming on as he should of yet.
 
Australia need to replace Renshaw with Bancroft. The latter is not ready and Bancroft is the better option, period.
 
Traditional talking point was that Australia are pants in asia while England are better. I'm not sure if they can claim that after failing to win a single game in India and the UAE. You could argue though that England have drawn 2 matches while Australia have folded in all of them.

Australia are more dominant at home (the SA series defeat notwithstanding).

England won in SA, but so did Australia 2 years back.

England drew away with the west indies while Aus destroyed them in the carribean.

So who's better?
 
Australia.

Better pace attack and spinner.

Both teams have a weak middle order.

If they get similar pitches to what England did in India, I see them drawing at least 2 of the 4 matches.
 
Not going to comment on who I think is better as my bias will show through, but I think the next Ashes series (down under) could be on of the most competitive ones we've had for a while.
 
HitWicket said:
Not going to comment on who I think is better as my bias will show through, but I think the next Ashes series (down under) could be on of the most competitive ones we've had for a while.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, we won't mind as long as it's supported by a well made argument.:afridi
 
For all the talk about Aus being poor and Eng doing better in Asia, I would like to see Aus getting the same pitches as Eng got in India. Same for SA when we tour there. Otherwise, we are comparing apple to oranges.
 
Australia seem to have a found decent batting lineup all of a sudden whilst England batting is deep but is packed with all rounders and not enough specialists. Anderson seems to be coming to the end, wood can't stay fit and Finn seem to have lost his form. Broad is still good. Starc and Hazelwood are approaching there peaks and bowl well as a pair.

I'll go with Australia just, next year ashes should be good.
 
Hasan123 said:
Australia seem to have a found decent batting lineup all of a sudden whilst England batting is deep but is packed with all rounders and not enough specialists. Anderson seems to be coming to the end, wood can't stay fit and Finn seem to have lost his form. Broad is still good. Starc and Hazelwood are approaching there peaks and bowl well as a pair.

I'll go with Australia just, next year ashes should be good.
Click to expand...

The Urn will keep switching hands over the next few years - both England and Australia will continue to win their home series. A competitive Ashes rivalry is good for the game, keeps the neutrals interested.
 
Mamoon said:
The Urn will keep switching hands over the next few years - both England and Australia will continue to win their home series. A competitive Ashes rivalry is good for the game, keeps the neutrals interested.
Click to expand...

More than likely the home team will be the victors. On green mambas don't see Australia doing well but on pitches with bounce and pace Australia should have enough to beat England. But I think England will give better fight than what they did in India.
 
Poms lost 4-0 in IND, Aussies can do at worst is 4-0 in 4 Test Series.
Poms made 1-1 in Bangladesh, which I think is going to be tougher for us against Starc & Hazlewood
AUS lost 3-0 in SRL, not sure how Poms will do there, but their recent Asian tour suggests, it won't be much better than 0-3
Aussies crashed WI 2-0 & 2-0 both home & away - would have required to bat half innings 3 times out of 4, had they wished; Poms couldn't hang on to 1-0 lead in that 1-1 Series in WI
Poms drew 2-2 against PAK at home, Aussies have so far beaten PAK & weather for a 2-0 lead
Poms managed to draw 1-1 against Kiwis at home, AUS won both series home & away, by clear margin of 2-0 & 2-0

Poms beat an under strength SAF 2-1 in SAF, who later beat AUS 2-1 in AUS - we'll have to wait for SAF's summer tour, before that Poms has slight edge; though Poms lost last home 3 Test Series to SAF 2-0, AUS drew 1-1 in SAF
Poms beat AUS 3-2 at home in last Ashes, Aussies won the previous one 5-0 at home & most likely to repeat again in a years time
In between, Poms managed to win & lose a Series to SRL at home.

I am not sure, how ENG is a better team than NZ or PAK, let alone SAF, IND & AUS - based on their one Series win in SAF?
 
^^ that's because England are incredibly overrated thanks to their media.

ICC test team of the year had 4(!) English players and most people on PP have 3 in their best xi for 2016.
 
MMHS said:
Poms lost 4-0 in IND, Aussies can do at worst is 4-0 in 4 Test Series.
Poms made 1-1 in Bangladesh, which I think is going to be tougher for us against Starc & Hazlewood
AUS lost 3-0 in SRL, not sure how Poms will do there, but their recent Asian tour suggests, it won't be much better than 0-3
Aussies crashed WI 2-0 & 2-0 both home & away - would have required to bat half innings 3 times out of 4, had they wished; Poms couldn't hang on to 1-0 lead in that 1-1 Series in WI
Poms drew 2-2 against PAK at home, Aussies have so far beaten PAK & weather for a 2-0 lead
Poms managed to draw 1-1 against Kiwis at home, AUS won both series home & away, by clear margin of 2-0 & 2-0

Poms beat an under strength SAF 2-1 in SAF, who later beat AUS 2-1 in AUS - we'll have to wait for SAF's summer tour, before that Poms has slight edge; though Poms lost last home 3 Test Series to SAF 2-0, AUS drew 1-1 in SAF
Poms beat AUS 3-2 at home in last Ashes, Aussies won the previous one 5-0 at home & most likely to repeat again in a years time
In between, Poms managed to win & lose a Series to SRL at home.

I am not sure, how ENG is a better team than NZ or PAK, let alone SAF, IND & AUS - based on their one Series win in SAF?
Click to expand...

Results from 5 years ago are hardly relevant when making comparisons over who's currently a better team are they....
 
Sin Nombre said:
^^ that's because England are incredibly overrated thanks to their media.

ICC test team of the year had 4(!) English players and most people on PP have 3 in their best xi for 2016.
Click to expand...

I know you've got your thread for Stokes so I'll leave that debate there, but not sure how you could argue there's no serious case for the other 3.
 
England beating weak SA excuse is getting too predictable and frankly boring..

If Eng were to play SA right now, it would be 50-50 for me regardless of the venue. Eng has pace attack and ridiculous batting depth to succeed against SA. And they have found a wonderful prospect in Hameed.

Eng's recent performance in India shouldn't be considered as I see no team beating India at home any time soon.
 
Last edited:
I think its pretty clear that there is very little seperating the top 9 sides in world cricket in either Tests or ODIs. Or at the very least you have the top 5 and the next 4. All teams play well at home, and get totally outclassed overseas with very few exceptions. Its probably due to the fact that teams travel too much these days and also due to how much technical assistance there is that home teams can exploit even minimal weaknesses in touring sides to exact maxmimal advantage.
 
HitWicket said:
I know you've got your thread for Stokes so I'll leave that debate there, but not sure how you could argue there's no serious case for the other 3.
Click to expand...

Other 2 right? Only one person on PP (and the ICC) had Cook as their opener.

Root and Bairstow are both strong candidates though I would take QdK over YJB (higher SR, higher average and better keeper).
 
Sin Nombre said:
Other 2 right? Only one person on PP (and the ICC) had Cook as their opener.

Root and Bairstow are both strong candidates though I would take QdK over YJB (higher SR, higher average and better keeper).
Click to expand...

And do you have any suggestions for which opener should've replaced Cook?

No way De Kock could be justified over Bairstow with him having only 4 games in the period (all at home) in which Bairstow did the most part of breaking the record of the most runs and dismissals by a keeper in a year.
 
Last edited:
HitWicket said:
Results from 5 years ago are hardly relevant when making comparisons over who's currently a better team are they....
Click to expand...

Then take the last 1 month - ENG has lost 4 in a row with 2 innings defeats; AUS has won 3 in a row with the last one by innings to a side that beat ENG 2-0 at home & drew 2-2 in ENG.

I am not sure which cut off makes ENG better team - may be just from the start of SAF-ENG Series :)
 
HitWicket said:
And do you have any suggestions for which opener should've replaced Cook?

No way De Kock could be justified over Bairstow with him having only 4 games in the period (all at home) in which Bairstow did the most part of breaking the record of the most runs and dismissals by a keeper in a year.
Click to expand...

Are we talking about ICC period or 2016 now?

ICC period - opener Warner (dominated at home and top scored for the Aussies in 3 of their 6 innings in SL).

2016 - Braithwaite.

English players are always going to win the aggregate records given how many tests they play.

As for wicketkeepers, Bairstow wins the ICC spot by default (given as you say, QdK's injury in second half of 2015) but not for calendar year 2016.
 
Sin Nombre said:
Are we talking about ICC period or 2016 now?

ICC period - opener Warner (dominated at home and top scored for the Aussies in 3 of their 6 innings in SL).

2016 - Braithwaite.

English players are always going to win the aggregate records given how many tests they play.

As for wicketkeepers, Bairstow wins the ICC spot by default (given as you say, QdK's injury in second half of 2015) but not for calendar year 2016.
Click to expand...

So the ICC test team is overrating English players because it's not picking other players based on performances outside the qualification period it sets out...? :jimmy

And Warner's already in the ICC team so you're going to have to find another replacement for Cook.
 
I'd say England have the advantage in their openers (Cook and Hameed) and in the #6 position with Stokes. They have the better wicket-keeper batsman by far.

The other departments I'd hand the advantage to Australia. The new ball pair of Starc and Hazlewood is world class whereas it seems Anderson is on his last legs and Broad has picked up a few injuries recently. Yet that being said, Australia are very vulnerable in seaming and swinging conditions. I think England would've put up a slightly better fight on those Sri Lankan turners.

England need to go back to first principles. Pick your best 5 batsmen, your primary AR, keeper and your best four bowlers. England ironically have the opposite problem as us in that they lack a grinder in their middle order.

Losing Trott was a bigger blow than people imagined. They've so prone to collapses and there's been too much irresponsible strokeplay recently.
 
Aus batting is 2 men army at moment (Smith & Warner ) & add Usman if they are playing Aus, Aus is struggling with number 6 and wicket keeper (for batting point of view) at moment. both positions are very important now a days .

Eng have better combination for pitches in England & Australia. so they are just ahead
 
There's still some doubts whether England has the bowlers to win in Australia. Anywhere else they are the better team.
 
Australia. I rate their attack - Bird/Haze/Starc comfortably ahead of England's and Smith and Warner are world class.
 
England

And quite comfortably also

Aus have been getting hammered away and recently at home by SA

When they tour India, it will be another 4-0

England might not be winning, but still.
 
England is declining. Their bowlers are not what they used to be a couple of years ago, and even batting looks weak.
 
England have busts of mental frailty. Brilliant and resilient one moment, mediocre the next.
Australia on the other hand are a side dependent on conditions. If the ball is moving in either direction be it swing, seam movement or spin you could swear they've never handled the willow before.

It's a tough one, it's hard to rate inconsistency or mediocrity.
 
England.

Australia have the better pacers.
England have the better spinners.
England have the better batsman.
 
Can we consider Bangladesh as the fulcrum here? England drew 1-1 out there, but Australia would most likely get whitewashed.
 
Sin Nombre said:
Australia.

Better pace attack and spinner.

Both teams have a weak middle order.

If they get similar pitches to what England did in India, I see them drawing at least 2 of the 4 matches.
Click to expand...
Not me. Though on flat tracks Aus are just as good as India, but not in India.
Buffet said:
For all the talk about Aus being poor and Eng doing better in Asia, I would like to see Aus getting the same pitches as Eng got in India. Same for SA when we tour there. Otherwise, we are comparing apple to oranges.
Click to expand...
I'd rather we dish out Bangladesh type pitches for Australia & see a train wreck unfold in slow mo :snack:
 
Last edited:
Ellipsism said:
I'm sure many would take Rashid over Lyon in Asia any day of the week.
Click to expand...

And I'm sure many would take Lyon over Rashid every day of the week ( I only say that because Lyon has a better average, economy rate and more f'fers than Rashid in Asia.)

But Rashid would be handy if England ever play Australia in Asia.
 
Why has O'Keefe never really been given a go despite his numbers in FC?
 
Here is all spinners away in the last 2 years.

lyon.jpg
 
yeah, that would be very interesting. Instead of touring Lanka again I'd like to see Australia in Bangladesh. 3 Tests and three ODI's.
Who would be the favourites [MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION] and [MENTION=132373]Convict[/MENTION].
Even SA would have it tough there.
 
Australia don't think they will be defeated twice by an innings after putting up a 400 plus score on non-rank turners.

Also Warner and Smith(combination) are better than Cook and Root atm as both of them have an impact on the match.Pace wise without Wood England is below Aus,Lyon better than Rashid.

Aus doesn't have Stokes or Bairstow though and both are very good but not enough.
 
soso_killer said:
yeah, that would be very interesting. Instead of touring Lanka again I'd like to see Australia in Bangladesh. 3 Tests and three ODI's.
Who would be the favourites [MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION] and [MENTION=132373]Convict[/MENTION].
Even SA would have it tough there.
Click to expand...

I obviously can't prove it now but I think the selectors have woken up to decisions they have to make for us to be more competitive in Asia than in the recent past.

I have no doubts that we'd definitely win the ODI series regardless though
 
Convict said:
I obviously can't prove it now but I think the selectors have woken up to decisions they have to make for us to be more competitive in Asia than in the recent past.
Click to expand...

What do you think has changed with the selectors' policy?
 
street cricketer said:
What do you think has changed with the selectors' policy?
Click to expand...

1. Getting rid of oldies
2. Not just picking someone like Maxwell because "he must be good against spin and his bowling will be useful"
3. And based on what they have said in public they acknowledge that they may need to do a horses for course policy selection in batting rather than sticking with players who clearly can't play spin at all just because they scored in Australia.

we'll still get whitewashed by India though
 
Australia performance will depend upon the type of pitches , if we gave them flat ones like recent England series then Australia will draw and can even win as Starc and co are good in reverse . Starc was very good in Lanka .
 
Aussie selectors and fans only seem to care about wrist spinners thus guys like Lyon get bottom of barrel treatment
 
HitWicket said:
So the ICC test team is overrating English players because it's not picking other players based on performances outside the qualification period it sets out...? :jimmy

And Warner's already in the ICC team so you're going to have to find another replacement for Cook.
Click to expand...

I thought ICC had picked Azhar Ali and Cook as their two openers, but that was an incorrect assumption.

Given ICC period and applying normal rationale with some minimum number of tests, I will agree with you about Cook as the second opener.


That said, ICC did pick Steyn with just 3 tests in their own review period so screw that, it is QdK over Bairstow and Azhar/Rahul over Cook :P
 
England at this very moment. But they are on a downward trajectory and Aus are improving. In the Ashes series a year from now, I expect Aus to win narrowly, say something like 2-1.
 
I don't think either of them are particularly great at the moment. England holds the Ashes and also won away in SA which was a seriously impressive performance over 4 Tests, but then there are the horrible performances in Asia and the failure to beat Pakistan in their own conditions. Australia seems to blow similarly hot and cold. Probably equally mediocre at the moment.
 
Australia play the bounce well but they have struggled against the moving ball over the last few years. But in Australian conditions, there does not tend to be too much seam movement.

England on the other hand do seem to struggle when their pace bowlers are not getting much from the surface. Nasser Hussain went so far to label them as a bit of one-dimensional team.

Given the above and that the next Ashes series is in Australia, that might give the Australians a bit of an advantage as we stand at the moment.
 
Australia have series wins in SA, NZ and WI. Won 2 matches in England and already 1 in India.

Eng have series wins in SA and WI and drew in NZ. Didnt won any in Australia and India.

It's quite clear here.

However, during early part of 2010s, England were superior test team having won series in Australia and India both.
 
HitWicket said:
The same South Africa we beat in their own home a little over 12 months ago? And New Zealand, really? :usman
Click to expand...

England lost a match in Bangladesh and almost lost the first one. Was hammered in India, humiliated in the UAE, could not win a series against aging batting line-up of Pakistan in their own backyard. The win against SA was a fluke and mostly due to the beating that SA received in India.

India, Australia, SA, and NZ have all better W/L ratio than England in the last 12 months. Only Pakistan is worse but then Pakistan won a series at home against England and drew a series in England. So, overall Pakistan has been better.
 
street cricketer said:
We endlessly debate about who is the better out of India and Pakistan here, but would like to know the opinion of ppers on which team is better of the Ashes rivals - England or Australia.

Looks actually close to me. Hence the thread.

Would like a poll on it if possible.
Click to expand...

We'll find out in a bit when the two play each other in a test series and an ODI series in 8 or 9 months...you know, how sport is normally decided. Unlike the India situation.
 
The_Odd_One said:
England lost a match in Bangladesh and almost lost the first one. Was hammered in India, humiliated in the UAE, could not win a series against aging batting line-up of Pakistan in their own backyard. The win against SA was a fluke and mostly due to the beating that SA received in India.

India, Australia, SA, and NZ have all better W/L ratio than England in the last 12 months. Only Pakistan is worse but then Pakistan won a series at home against England and drew a series in England. So, overall Pakistan has been better.
Click to expand...

Right, the series win in South Africa was a 'fluke'... Guess we'll see in the upcoming series.

How many of the teams you've listed have played more half their games in the last 12 months in conditions they're inexperienced in that would be considered unfavorable for the respective teams (In Englands case Asia).
 
HitWicket said:
Right, the series win in South Africa was a 'fluke'... Guess we'll see in the upcoming series.

How many of the teams you've listed have played more half their games in the last 12 months in conditions they're inexperienced in that would be considered unfavorable for the respective teams (In Englands case Asia).
Click to expand...

Nobody has played more games in Asia than England recently. Still the only test they could win was against Bangladesh and that too was very close. Even, if I do not go by results, England has shown no improvement in any aspect of their game despite fielding a younger team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Devadwal
  • Poll Poll
Which series is bigger: The Ashes or the Border-Gavaskar trophy?
5 6 7
Replies
494
Views
11K
Fanboy375
Fanboy375
K
Which team would have won at the ICC Champions Trophy 2025 if both India and Australia were at full strength?
Replies
43
Views
1K
kron
K
T
James Anderson versus Andy Roberts: Who is the better Test bowler?
Replies
71
Views
1K
sindhiboy
S
C
Asian teams have higher chance of success in modern LOIS due to flat pitches which support spin more than seam.
Replies
1
Views
222
kron
K
mominsaigol
Does Australia have an unfair advantage for the upcoming World Test Championship 2025-27 cycle?
Replies
21
Views
966
harshjoshi87
harshjoshi87
Back
Top