**Official** Asia Cup 2012

[Cruxdude]

So you went into a tournament and your most important goal wasn't to win it??

Beat Pakistan. Anything else is a bonus.

 

[Fusion]

I like the head-to-head tie breaker. It's a standard in pretty much all American sports. Why do you guys think it's unfair?

 

[G.I.Joe]

I don't think it's unfair.

 

[ankitj]

It ignores what the teams did against others. In this case, the fact that India beat the table topper, Pakistan, is ignored and so is the NRR. If two teams finish with equal points, there has to be opposition that one team could beat and the other didn't. Why overlook that.

 

[cricman]

Milk some singles damnit

 

[marc71178]

I also don't mind B-desh getting to the finals. But honestly this stupid rule of "if u beat opposing team one on one u go through if tied on same points" is rubbish. They need to take that out for future tourneys.

Why? It's a much better way of separating 2 teams than NRR is.

Also if, as is appearing more and more likely, Bangladesh go through then India have no-one to blame but themselves.

 

[Contra]

I like the head-to-head tie breaker. It's a standard in pretty much all American sports. Why do you guys think it's unfair?

Because it doesn't necessarily reflect which team has played the better cricket overall. If we went by NRR then B-desh would have had to chase this score by a certain number of overs to topple India, would have made things hella more interesting, and had they managed it would have rightly claimed they played better than India over the course of the tourney.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Oh well, I guess the trophy is probably ours. Thanks Bangladesh for getting rid of the 2 worst teams in Asia, all you now have to do is hand over the cup to us.

 

[ankitj]

And no, I am not making it up because it disadvantages India in this case. Proof

 

[Contra]

Why? It's a much better way of separating 2 teams than NRR is.

Also if, as is appearing more and more likely, Bangladesh go through then India have no-one to blame but themselves.

Not it isn't. India's two wins were more convincing then B-desh's which is what the NRR indicates.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

LOL we tried our level best to give India a chance in the final but they just weren't good enough.

 

[Turbinator]

Oh well, I guess the trophy is probably ours. Thanks Bangladesh for getting rid of the 2 worst teams in Asia, all you now have to do is hand over the cup to us.

Whatever dude, you lost to us. That match was the Asia Cup.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Sri Lanka have always been safe bankers against minnows, but I just knew they'd make special exemption and be ducking aunts today.

 

[cricman]

That dochebag president of the BCB is gonna take all the credit when he had Tamim dropped from the squad

 

[ankitj]

Why? It's a much better way of separating 2 teams than NRR is.

Also if, as is appearing more and more likely, Bangladesh go through then India have no-one to blame but themselves.

And if Bangladesh don't go through, they'd have no one to blame but themselves. Point being?

 

[unam]

Because it doesn't necessarily reflect which team has played the better cricket overall. If we went by NRR then B-desh would have had to chase this score by a certain number of overs to topple India, would have made things hella more interesting, and had they managed it would have rightly claimed they played better than India over the course of the tourney.

Just because something is not in favor of India, doesn't mean it is not good for the game

 

[unam]

LOL we tried our level best to give India a chance in the final but they just weren't good enough.

 

[Fusion]

It ignores what the teams did against others. In this case, the fact that India beat the table topper, Pakistan, is ignored and so is the NRR. If two teams finish with equal points, there has to be opposition that one team could beat and the other didn't. Why overlook that.

Because it doesn't necessarily reflect which team has played the better cricket overall. If we went by NRR then B-desh would have had to chase this score by a certain number of overs to topple India, would have made things hella more interesting, and had they managed it would have rightly claimed they played better than India over the course of the tourney.

But you LOST to the team you are directly competing with. If they beat you head-to-head, then why does it matter who's NRR was better? They just proved they were better than you (at least in that tournament). They have the same number of wins as you and they beat you. I don't see why that's unfair at all. The NRR can be affected by so many variables that it almost becomes too unreliable at times.

 

[ankitj]

Just because something is not in favor of India, doesn't mean it is not good for the game

I was fully expecting someone questioning the honesty and integrity. Seriously, more maturity people.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Head to head is perfectly fine.