• 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.

The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread (white ball edition)

MrPrez

MrPrez

International Debutant
jimmy101 said:
Win/loss ratios (1996 - 1999)

South Africa: 3.666
Australia: 1.386
Pakistan: 1.290
Sri Lanka: 1.224
West Indies: 1.000
India: 0.906
England: 0.756
New Zealand: 0.755
Zimbabwe: 0.574

This is a pretty insane statistic. The Proteas were smashing it in the late 90's, winning 77 out of 102 ODIs played during the timeframe. Incredibly the Windies seem to have won exactly 50% of their matches played during these years.
Click to expand...
Yeah that was an awesome team.

Having Klusener, Pollock and Boucher in the middle order, as well as the bowling of Kallis in the top order, was the big differentiator imo. We had 6 guys who were good enough to be picked for most teams as specialist bowlers without compromising on our batting at all.

EDIT: Guys like McMillan waiting in the wings too.
 
Last edited:
h_hurricane

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
jimmy101 said:
Win/loss ratios (1996 - 1999)

South Africa: 3.666
Australia: 1.386
Pakistan: 1.290
Sri Lanka: 1.224
West Indies: 1.000
India: 0.906
England: 0.756
New Zealand: 0.755
Zimbabwe: 0.574

This is a pretty insane statistic. The Proteas were smashing it in the late 90's, winning 77 out of 102 ODIs played during the timeframe. Incredibly the Windies seem to have won exactly 50% of their matches played during these years.
Click to expand...
Thought it will be something similar to this. SA were having a great time those days, unless of course it was a knockout.

Also tells that unlike general perception, SL were pretty good but not all that awesome during this period. Clearly remember them not having a good time in 98 and 99(except for the Natwest trophy). 96 and 97 was a different story though.
 
Migara

Migara

International Coach
stephen said:
Against Australia they went 11-7 during that time as well. And that includes three losses on the trot in the lead up to the 99 semi final.
Click to expand...
The best team against SAF during that time was us. SAF 5 - SL 3. And no home games for SL of above were home games for SAF. We used to beat SAf for fun at home in late 90s.
 
Migara

Migara

International Coach
SAF had some good defensive bowlers like Matthews, McMillian, Snell and DeVilliers to go with Donald and Pollock. Pollock was attacking as well as not giving runs.
 
SillyCowCorner1

SillyCowCorner1

Moooo
jimmy101 said:
Win/loss ratios (1996 - 1999)....

West Indies: 1.000
Incredibly the Windies seem to have won exactly 50% of their matches played during these years.
Click to expand...
Needed to drop Keith Arthurton immediately after WC of '96...but he went on to play 17 more innings in the next 3 years...scoring 252 runs at 21.00 (0x50, 0x100, 3xduck)
 
jimmy101

jimmy101

Cricketer Of The Year
Win/loss ratios (1992 - 1995)

Australia: 1.548
West Indies: 1.454
England: 1.388
Pakistan: 1.365
India: 1.212
South Africa: 0.842
Sri Lanka: 0.750
New Zealand: 0.666
Zimbabwe: 0.137

Following on from my earlier post, here are the W/L ratios for each side from 1992 until 1995. England had a much better time during this period, whilst RSA in their early years tended to lose more games than they won. Not much separating the top 5 though.
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Again, the 90s were such a good time to be a fan of ODI cricket and cricket in general.
 
ankitj

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
jimmy101 said:
Win/loss ratios (1992 - 1995)

Australia: 1.548
West Indies: 1.454
England: 1.388
Pakistan: 1.365
India: 1.212
South Africa: 0.842
Sri Lanka: 0.750
New Zealand: 0.666
Zimbabwe: 0.137

Following on from my earlier post, here are the W/L ratios for each side from 1992 until 1995. England had a much better time during this period, whilst RSA in their early years tended to lose more games than they won. Not much separating the top 5 though.
Click to expand...
No clue how India was winning more than losing in that period. Probably many teams sucked around that time. England were one of the strongest teams in early years of 1990s. Made the world cup final in 92 after topping the league table.
 
jimmy101

jimmy101

Cricketer Of The Year
ankitj said:
No clue how India was winning more than losing in that period. Probably many teams sucked around that time. England were one of the strongest teams in early years of 1990s. Made the world cup final in 92 after topping the league table.
Click to expand...
Sachin was coming into his prime then, plus Azhar & Jadeja were doing good things. On top of that you had Kapil & a young Javagal Srinath mostly opening the bowling, plus the latter-day spin quartet of Kumble-Raju-Chauhan-Hirwani to back them up. Robin Singh sometimes gets overlooked here too.

England had a great team during that time, but eventually they lost a large chunk of their batting when Gooch, Gatting, Smith & Lamb all retired.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ankitj said:
No clue how India was winning more than losing in that period. Probably many teams sucked around that time. England were one of the strongest teams in early years of 1990s. Made the world cup final in 92 after topping the league table.
Click to expand...
We probably bullied SL (who weren't that good back then) and Zimbabwe a fair bit.

We won a tri-series at home involving WI and NZ. Also drew an ODI series against England at home 3-3 which involved two big chases in the last two matches. Loved watching those games as a kid.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Yeah but Robin Singh's debut was an one off like Hayden's test "debut". Actually 1992 to 1995 India had plenty of alround cricketers. Sachin, Prabhakar, Kapil, Srikkanth, Shastri, Jadeja, Kumble and Srinath could hold a bat. We had lots of home games too and no one is beating us in ODIs in those conditions back then, until SL became good. That could be the reason for those numbers.


EDIT: On Robin Singh, he was someone always asked for by Azhar since he became captain and back then, the Board and selectors did not like giving the captain what he asks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top