• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Three horse race to be the best team in the world?

zaremba

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
Teja. said:
But then all of the above might not stand the trials of rigorous proof of past experiences and is based on a highly generalized 'feel' of what I've seen. Most of y'all have seen much more cricket than me and can differ.
Click to expand...
This is the sort of caveat we'd all do well to bear in mind!
 
vic_orthdox

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Meh, somedays two bowlers will bowl well in partnership and will take 3 each, the next time one bloke might get all the benefits. All the "prognostications" and "hypotheticals" are pretty irrelevant, to be fair. It's more about how many players are bowling well; a guy is more likely to take 6/50 if other bowlers are bowling well.

With a team effort, India would have won in 03/04 vs Australia, but instead they relied upon one guy the whole time to do the job with the ball - bar the one Test match that they won.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Prince EWS said:
Don't really agree; there are a significant number of members on CricketWeb who don't read posts properly and instead just look for key phrases they can reply to with rhetoric; these people will miss the point regardless.

Of course, these same people also claim people have missed their point when they post something irrelevant and get called out on it.
Click to expand...
Well yes, this is true, however the 'argue with what I've said not what you think I've said' defence is quite frequent from a lot of posters. If multiple people are misinterpreting your point, then perhaps you didn't make it well enough.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
GeraintIsMyHero said:
Well yes, this is true, however the 'argue with what I've said not what you think I've said' defence is quite frequent from a lot of posters. If multiple people are misinterpreting your point, then perhaps you didn't make it well enough.
Click to expand...
Well to use a recent example, I don't think I could've made my point any better in the Gough thread, and yet people still quoted my posts over and over again and cited past series results to illustrate that India have performed better than England in the recent past; something I never once refuted.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Yeah but that was more of a straw man argument from a few people I guess. There were plenty of people who followed you as well. It's hard to define I suppose, but I did say that 'perhaps' you aren't making your point well enough if nobody understands you. It's like in my job, I have to each people how to do their jobs. If they don't know how to do it afterwards, there are two possibilities, one is that they just don't understand the role etc or the other is that I haven't explained and shown everything properly. I will always review whether it's the first before I argue to management that it's the recruitment that's screwed.

bit of a tangent there, but you see my point. I hope :ph34r:
 
G.I.Joe

G.I.Joe

International Coach
Two players with 3/30 each is more often than not better than one player with 6/60, for the sole reason that it keeps both bowling ends (roughly) productive, while the latter has a less than productive other end, thereby diluting the 6/60 for the team. This is assuming the net strike rates remain the same in both instances, otherwise there's no comparison to begin with.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Prince EWS said:
Well to use a recent example, I don't think I could've made my point any better in the Gough thread, and yet people still quoted my posts over and over again and cited past series results to illustrate that India have performed better than England in the recent past; something I never once refuted.
Click to expand...
I was one of those who cited past series results. It was to make the point that I fundamentally differ with you on the period of time that should be taken into account to judge a team (and its strengths/weaknesses).
 
Jarquis

Jarquis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
GeraintIsMyHero said:
Well yes, this is true, however the 'argue with what I've said not what you think I've said' defence is quite frequent from a lot of posters. If multiple people are misinterpreting your point, then perhaps you didn't make it well enough.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps they're stupid, but you're not allowed to tell them that.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
zaremba said:
If England and India were to play a Test series in India instead of playing in the WC, India would of course be favourites. But I just don't understand the bullish "I can't see how England could win a Test match here" talk coming from some of the Indian fans on this forum. .
Click to expand...
No one said that. I said series, not match. A vital distinction - due to the nature of how it would need to play out (e.g, even if England won a match and got ahead, England would have to win on a dustbowl).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top