BeeGee
International Captain
India, definitely. Trying to beat India in India is nigh on impossible for NZ (as our recent results show). My preferred opponent would be England, especially now that Broad is out.
-
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.
*Official* Group A General Discussion
- Thread starter James
- Start date
I hope the team doesn't suffer from such myths...
Blaze 18
Banned
Australia's prowess in World Cups and under pressure isn't a myth, Shankar.
salman85
International Debutant
Four World Cups in a row is stretching it a bit though.Especially when you take into account that this is perhaps one of their weakest,if not the weakest team in almost two decades.
They have cruised through so far,but they've not been tested.New Zealand were tamed,and the one match where they could have been tested was rained out.Sure they're good under pressure,but the golden days are over,and the golden run will come to an end this year too.I won't be surprised if it's against an unfancied side like West Indies,who they have a strong chance of playing in the QF.
They have cruised through so far,but they've not been tested.New Zealand were tamed,and the one match where they could have been tested was rained out.Sure they're good under pressure,but the golden days are over,and the golden run will come to an end this year too.I won't be surprised if it's against an unfancied side like West Indies,who they have a strong chance of playing in the QF.
Last edited:
Howe_zat
Audio File
No, but the idea that it's down to some innate "Australianism" or something is. They kept winning because they had a ****awesome team, that was then outstandingly well coached, trained and held together.
Blaze 18
Banned
They had a bloody good team, true, but they were also mentally very strong under pressure. Having a good team alone won't take you far if you lack the mental strength (see South Africa in World Cups, etc.)
I appreciate this isn't the same Australian side that won three World Cups in a row but, personally speaking, they are still the team I fear the most.
The best teams come out on top both in conditions where there isn't much pressure and when there is pressure. We don't see anything out of the ordinary in the former. But when the latter happens, we experience it as a different phenomenon and look for additional factors to explain it. But both are in fact only instances of the same phenomena i.e. a better team beating a worse team.
There's a second factor at play. When you're a good team, you have the capability get out of tough situations. Doing this a few times adds to your confidence in future situations of a similar nature. So there's a sort of virtuous circle at play. So because of being better, members of such a team might gain additional composure in such situations. So this should happen to any team that becomes the no. 1.
We can test what I've said by checking if people used to say similar things about the W.Indies teams of the 70's and 80's. Something similar is happening to descriptions of the Indian test team - People perceive the present team to have more 'steel' and made of sterner stuff than teams in the 90's. It's not a coincidence that they're no. 1 in test matches. Has there been any instance in a history of a middling level team being considered as mentally strong and performing especially better under pressure?
Agree. As a result of that there would be an ability to better opponents in pressure situations - not because they're Australia.
Ausage
Cricketer Of The Year
Rubbish. We have a better team because we're Australian
BeeGee
International Captain
NZ in the '92 World Cup. A hopeless team that nobody gave any chance at all and they were only knocked out at the semi-final stage by an incredible innings from Inzaman-ul-Haq when Pakistan looked dead and buried. That performance came from the shear mental determination of Martin Crowe and his team of nobodies to perform in a home WC. Their performance was WAY above their talent level.
SA is an example of the opposite situation. A very good team, full of talent, who always seem to under perform in the big tournaments.
Spark
Global Moderator
Yeah this.
I mean you look at our side and it's still quite strong. The batting is very strong, the pace attack is dangerous and whilst the spin options aren't brilliant, they do take wickets.
Obviously it's not a patch on "approaching-the-greatest-ODI-team-ever-assembled" lineup of four years ago but this idea that our team is punching above its weight somehow isn't exactly accurate.
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Well, it's somewhat true though. There is certainly a cricketing culture embedded into the team - especially those teams - that had a never say die attitude. Not in 87, 96 nor 99 did we have the best teams but we got to finals in all 3 and won 2 of them.
There is a certain sports theory I tend to agree with: upto a certain point, lots of players are comparable on a skillset basis. It is the mental difference that carries them over. Now that may be the difference between a bad and an average side, an average side and a good side, or a good and a great side; but talent/ability alone is not always the difference. Especially when you are talking about long dynasties. It takes a truly special mental approach to keep on wanting to be the best in a long span of time. And also, especially in knock-out tournaments which are rife with smaller teams upsetting bigger (better) teams. To not lose a WC game in something like 12 years is ****ing incredible.
Last edited:
smash84
The Tiger King
Add Pak side of 92 WC to that list as well. It was a pretty ordinary team but extremely well led by Imran.
Blaze 18
Banned
Quality post, Ikki.
TumTum
Banned
This shoul have its own thread. I agree with both sides here, i do feel something different in the competetiveness of this aussie generation which could have led them to being better players or it could be the other way round where they "seem" competetive due to their training.
Its simply a question of what came first, the chicken or the egg?
Its simply a question of what came first, the chicken or the egg?
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
Interesting to note, there are scattered thunderstorms forecast for the Australia-Pakistan match.
If there is a N/R there, the two possible outcomes from Group A are:
Sri Lanka beats NZ
1. Australia 10
2. Sri Lanka 9 (would beat out Pakistan on NRR)
3. Pakistan 9
4. New Zealand 8
NZ beats Sri Lanka
1. New Zealand 10 (would beat out Australia on wins)
2. Australia 10
3. Pakistan 9
4. Sri Lanka 7
So Australia guaranteed a top 2 place.
Pakistan guaranteed 3rd place. Probably India. :o
If there is a N/R there, the two possible outcomes from Group A are:
Sri Lanka beats NZ
1. Australia 10
2. Sri Lanka 9 (would beat out Pakistan on NRR)
3. Pakistan 9
4. New Zealand 8
NZ beats Sri Lanka
1. New Zealand 10 (would beat out Australia on wins)
2. Australia 10
3. Pakistan 9
4. Sri Lanka 7
So Australia guaranteed a top 2 place.
Pakistan guaranteed 3rd place. Probably India. :o
Last edited:
Fusion
Global Moderator
Don't like. Please offer another scenario.
KiWiNiNjA
International Coach
Sri Lanka beat New Zealand
Pakistan beat Australia
Pakistan finish top of their group!
Then Bangladesh beat South Africa, and West Indies beat India by 300 runs. India ends up 4th in group B on NRR resulting in a Pakistan vs India quarter final.