Well that was odd how do I go about getting rid of the multiple posts?
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Cricket Thread
- Thread starter TRF_Cymro
- Start date
I think India aren't all they are cracked up to be. A bunch of ego's more interested in their own glory than the team. It's also very poorly captained Kholi doesn't seam to have an inventive bone in his body when they are loosing intact the entire sides shoulders seam to slump. Compare that to Finch who tried everything against England yes he stil lost but you always sensed the Aussie's were not going to lose. It's toss up for me between Finch, Morgan and Williamson who is best captain.
Whilst you call the game against NZ an anomaly let's not forget England also comprehensively beat them in the group stages.
Reality is England are the number 1 ODI side in the world and have been for some time. And in this tournament they are the only team to beat all the semi finalists. They are the most complete team both in batting and bowling yes they flummoxed their lines in the group stages and that was partially down to Roy but they still should of beaten SL and against Aus and Pak they are capable of playing much better.
Honestly the other big factor nwas playing Ali instead of Plunkett as Ali was a complete passenger.
Whilst you call the game against NZ an anomaly let's not forget England also comprehensively beat them in the group stages.
Reality is England are the number 1 ODI side in the world and have been for some time. And in this tournament they are the only team to beat all the semi finalists. They are the most complete team both in batting and bowling yes they flummoxed their lines in the group stages and that was partially down to Roy but they still should of beaten SL and against Aus and Pak they are capable of playing much better.
Honestly the other big factor nwas playing Ali instead of Plunkett as Ali was a complete passenger.
Even if I was to accept England are consistently better than either (India or Australia which I don't) you aren't playing a team that should even be in the finals.
It is a little sad that the two best teams are not in the final (they finished third and fourth), I guess I am just a little disappointed NZ is not a team that is capable of makng the final a fitting spectacle.
Although I suppose they can collapse spectacularly.
It is a little sad that the two best teams are not in the final (they finished third and fourth), I guess I am just a little disappointed NZ is not a team that is capable of makng the final a fitting spectacle.
Although I suppose they can collapse spectacularly.
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 3,575
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
There's no shouldn't/shouldn't in a knockout tournament. There's only is/isn't. NZ won enough games to get top 4 then won their semi because they played best on the day, ditto England. Whoever does enough to score more runs than the other team in Sunday will win the World Cup and that's all there is to it.
England are consistently the best side in the world that's why they are ranked number 1.....
And that still as Every Time Ref points out doesn't matter one jot when it come to knock outs. Otherwise we may as well do away with a world cup and just go by rankings.
And that still as Every Time Ref points out doesn't matter one jot when it come to knock outs. Otherwise we may as well do away with a world cup and just go by rankings.
I really don't share that view to me this is like watching a South Africa v Japan RWC final, one team can justify being there and the other got lucky, sure it could win but would anyone ever consider Japan the number one rugby nation in the world.
So the question is could you ever justify calling NZ World Champions?
I recall NZ winning the rugby league world cup and it was more embarrassing than anything because everyone knew Australia were the world's best.
In part I think these world cup formats should be ditched as they aren't indicative of world standings just who ever was better on a particular day.
Not sure how you draw that conclusion given that England lost more games than Australia and India combined, personally I think the pool finishing places are probably closest to world rankings right now.
1. India
2. Australia.
3. England.
4. New Zealand.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2012
- Messages
- 2,964
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
I agree with a lot of this. World cups are complete nonsense. But it doesn't mean we should get rid of them. They are a great spectacle where a number of teams who aren't necessarily the best can claim the crown. Sport is only popular because of the randomness factor, whether people admit it or not. It's what creates the illusion of competition when in reality one team will be better than the other despite what one result may suggest. But given sports have this random factor it does mean one tram can play above themselves and win, and that is a heroic thing that we all like to watch.
So yes world cups determine very little about who is best but they are great spectacles and all teams go I. With the agreement that the winner will get bragging rights for winning the most important competition.
So as long as people recognise that World Cup winners aren't necessarily the best teams but that they still deserve kudos for winning the World Cup, all will be right in the world. I mean, except world peace.
Your logic is very muddled going into the world cup England were ranked world number 1 having had many impressive series victories including just last year a 5-0 drubbing of Australia. They were clear favourites.
Now due to the fact you don't play a series but one off games and England lost three games in the group stages your claiming they don't deserve to win. But you also say world cups are ******** to form. However this is also despite the fact England in this tournament have beaten all the other semi finalists.
So either how you play in the world cup matters where England have beaten all the top teams. Or it doesnt in which case England were already number 1 and the best side in the world.
Infact 3 teams have now lost 3 games as Australia lost 2 group games and a Semi-Final so they are not deserving under your logic.
India only lost 2 games but didn't actually play NZ in the group stages...they also beat Sri Lanka by the skin of their teeth and Afghanistan should of likely beaten them to.
But you know what the fact you are concentrating on win loss /record makes me think you don't really know what you are talking about.
Whoever wins today deserves to win the overall championship because that's how world cups work.
Now due to the fact you don't play a series but one off games and England lost three games in the group stages your claiming they don't deserve to win. But you also say world cups are ******** to form. However this is also despite the fact England in this tournament have beaten all the other semi finalists.
So either how you play in the world cup matters where England have beaten all the top teams. Or it doesnt in which case England were already number 1 and the best side in the world.
Infact 3 teams have now lost 3 games as Australia lost 2 group games and a Semi-Final so they are not deserving under your logic.
India only lost 2 games but didn't actually play NZ in the group stages...they also beat Sri Lanka by the skin of their teeth and Afghanistan should of likely beaten them to.
But you know what the fact you are concentrating on win loss /record makes me think you don't really know what you are talking about.
Whoever wins today deserves to win the overall championship because that's how world cups work.
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 3,575
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Are you kidding me?? You actually wouldn't be happy for the RWC final to be Japan Vs South Africa?
I mean yeah obviously that's not going to happen, but I honestly can't believe there are rugby fans out there who would rather any of the "Big Teams" were there ahead of a fairytale story like Japan teaching the final.
Well yeah you call the team who wins it world champions, that's what "world champions" means. Like ncurd said, world rankings exist and are possibly a better indication of who is strongest team at any given time (although that's arguable, it's still very arbitrary). But ultimately, sport is decided by teams / individuals playing against each other and one of them winning. If you don't like that, maybe sport isn't really your thing?
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, you're a kiwi right? You were embarrassed when your team won a World Cup because in your opinion another team was better? Surely that's the best way to win a World Cup?? Against the odds, the Boy's Own fairytale ending! Isn't that exactly how you won World Cups in your imagination in the garden or the local park when you were a kid?!
What else is sport apart from a contest to see who is better on a particular day?
I honestly get the feeling from these posts that you just don't actually like sport very much.
Cricket also has a history of underdog winnings finals and they've arguably helped the sport rather than hindered it.
India 1983
Pakistan 1992
Sri Lanka 1996
All three led to an explosion of support in their respective countries.
Hell without 1992 would Imran Khan be prime minister of Pakistan right now?
India 1983
Pakistan 1992
Sri Lanka 1996
All three led to an explosion of support in their respective countries.
Hell without 1992 would Imran Khan be prime minister of Pakistan right now?
Hey I don't think it is a stretch to describe the Kiwis as over-hyped under achievers much like our cricketers, no team in the history of sport have been able snatch defeat from the jaws of victory like our cricket team.
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2015
- Messages
- 7,467
- Country Flag
33-1. I'm happy!
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Messages
- 11,633
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
1/2 way
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2015
- Messages
- 7,467
- Country Flag
Your wish. Nice work, Plunkers.
EDIT. My bad. Not Taylor, but Nichols was well in, so still a good wicket.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Messages
- 11,633
- Country Flag
- Club or Nation
Nice
I wasn't as worried about Nicholls as the rest of NZ's top order - but that's still a big wicket
I wasn't as worried about Nicholls as the rest of NZ's top order - but that's still a big wicket
