Which top team has the weakest batting line up? India or England?

[Joseph Gomes]

We know this is currently a bowling friendly era in tests and all teams have average to terrible batting line up. But which one of the top 5 team has the worst? India or England? Neither seem to be able to score over 250 in an innings.

Meanwhile Australia have 2 batsmen with 60+ average somehow o.o

 

[Ab Fan]

India have got a very strong batting lineup for subcontinent and Australian conditions.

Pujara for example averages 56 in Australia and 55+ in India and 90 in Sri Lanka. The way he puts his body on line against bouncers without using bat is amazing.

 

[Varun]

How are England a top team?

 

[Joseph Gomes]

How are England a top team?

They rank 4th in ICC test ranking

 

[Robert]

England has the weakest batting.

They heavily defend on one superstar. India has a superstar but also a very reliable bloke at #3

The Indian openers can at least score runs on the Subcontinent. The England openers cannot score anywhere.

Pant, though largely ineffective in England, has played matchwinning hands in Australia. Buttler is a walking wicket now and can’t catch either.

 

[cricketjoshila]

England has the weakest batting.

They heavily defend on one superstar. India has a superstar but also a very reliable bloke at #3

The Indian openers can at least score runs on the Subcontinent. The England openers cannot score anywhere.

Pant, though largely ineffective in England, has played matchwinning hands in Australia. Buttler is a walking wicket now and can’t catch either.

Indian openers scored in England as well.

 

[Manunited18]

We know this is currently a bowling friendly era in tests and all teams have average to terrible batting line up. But which one of the top 5 team has the worst? India or England? Neither seem to be able to score over 250 in an innings.

Meanwhile Australia have 2 batsmen with 60+ average somehow o.o

England are a moderate test side with a very poor batting line up, at the moment are far from a top side.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

There are guys in the England team like Hameed and Burns that would never even get selected for India A on a tour of Zimbabwe.

 

[Mesozoic]

England aren't a top team.

Only India, New Zealand and Australia should be considered "top" in red ball cricket.

And yes, India comfortably has a better batting lineup. Someone or the other usual steps up in the top6 to post a par total for the bowlers to take care of the rest.

 

[Unbiased-Fan]

India actually have good backup players who are ready to make impact but management and skipper are sticking with some out of form players.

Rahul, Rohit, Agarwal and Gill are better players than Burns, Crawley and Sibley. Shaw and Panchal are on par with above trio.

Coming to middle order, we have likes of Vihari, Surya and Iyer in the backup which are clearly better than Pope, Lawrence and are on par with Bairstow and Malan.

Root is better than Kohli form wise but Pant is better than Buttler impactwise.

Overall India as a batting unit and as a team are better than England.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

India actually has the highest away batting average among alll teams. Thing is for the last few years, we have, by accident or design, had the toughest conditions to bat in. Whenever the conditions have eased even slightly, the batting has stood up.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

England. They couldn't even bat properly in England against India and New Zealand last year.

 

[James]

England’s batting lineup is Bangladesh/West Indies level at best, India’s is better than that albeit still very flawed and often gets bailed out by their world class bowlers.

 

[Buffet]

Is this a serious question?

Indian have issues, but a far better batting lineup.

 

[shamaan]

England batting is Bangladesh level

 

[gazza619]

If Arshdeep Singh is listed to bat at no.8 then something isnt right.