WTC 2025 Final : Qualifying scenario

[Fuller Pilch]

Did SA play Australia, England or India to gain qualification for the WTC? If not (and I think I know the answer) the whole thing is a farce.

They had a 1-1 series draw against India.

They also beat Bangladesh in Bangladesh which I doubt England or Australia could do.


In addition, they played NZ who thrashed India, and had they caught properly should've beaten England and drawn against Australia

They beat a very strong SL team which won a test in England.

SA have won 6 tests in a row. No one got close to that.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

To be honest, I don't think it's who you play which is so much the problem, it's how many. It's become pretty obvious that to reach the Final the optimal route is to play the least amount of Tests, which is ironic tstl.

Disagree. If NZ had got to have a 5-test series against India like Australia and England did we would've qualified top.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

There is a much smaller margin of error for those who play shorter test series

 

[Ali TT]

The format of the WTC is inherently flawed and its the easiest thing in the world to pick holes at whoever makes the finals or even wins the thing. But all of this was known to all teams and supporters when the bloody thing started. SA performed admirably and won a lot of cricket games against good sides to be here. Anyone saying anything else is just spouting out the sourest of grapes.

Just because everyone knew the format was stupid before it started doesn't mean it isn't stupid now.

Anyhow, SA deserve it.
England didn't give a **** so right they aren't anywhere near the final

 

[Anthony Clayden]

Everyone knew the WTC rules, SA designed their draw to get the most benefit, but they still had to win those matches.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Maybe England should've tried beating India in India instead of sucking arse.

 

[Prince EWS]

I love the fact that the qualification method is so flawed because it makes people take it less seriously.

 

[centurymaker]

This is the 2nd last WTC Final. Enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[honestbharani]

England didn't play well enough so right they aren't anywhere near the final

Ftfy.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Maybe England should've tried beating India in India instead of sucking arse.

Or even coped with a couple of old Pakistani spinners

 

[Molehill]

England didn't give a **** so right they aren't anywhere near the final

And yet, had they only played 2 Test series, they'd still be in with a (small) chance of qualifying for the Final.

 

[Ali TT]

Maybe England should've tried beating India in India instead of sucking arse.

Or even coped with a couple of old Pakistani spinners

Was it the mind **** of facing a 3 test series or being scared of how hard the England players hit the ball that that caused the Black Caps to be so garbage against our useless lot?

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Possibly too confused about why they had anything to do with England sucking arse in India and Pakistan.

 

[Dendarii]

Everyone knew the WTC rules, SA designed their draw to get the most benefit, but they still had to win those matches.

There were people saying that South Africa were going to struggle in Bangladesh and also that they might come a cropper against Sri Lanka because they'd picked the two most spin-friendly grounds in South Africa to play at. How reasonable those opinions were is up for debate, but they weren't completely wild either, so it wasn't a given that South Africa would make it to the final.

 

[TheJediBrah]

To be honest, I don't think it's who you play which is so much the problem, it's how many. It's become pretty obvious that to reach the Final the optimal route is to play the least amount of Tests, which is ironic tstl.

That's not the case. No one's going to buy these excuses of yours for England. Over rate deductions is a better whinge because it's actually true

 

[TheJediBrah]

Disagree. If NZ had got to have a 5-test series against India like Australia and England did we would've qualified top.

Know this a joke, but wouldn't you get the exact same points for a 5-0 win as a 3-0 one?

 

[Qlder]

Know this a joke, but wouldn't you get the exact same points for a 5-0 win as a 3-0 one?

No, the latest formula is % of points earned vs points available in games played

Example if you lost first 5 tests in WTC cycle then won 5-0 you would have a 50% ratio overall. However If you lost first 5 tests then won 3-0 you would have only a 37.5% ratio

 

[Molehill]

Know this a joke, but wouldn't you get the exact same points for a 5-0 win as a 3-0 one?

Actually an interesting question that one (surprising for you, although you've probably achieved it by mistake). It's 12 points for a win, 4 for a draw, so obviously a 3-0 win gets you 36 points and a 5-0 60. But as a percentage it's still 100%, it's just that the 5-0 will clearly have a greater overall effect on your Final Score.

That's not the case. No one's going to buy these excuses of yours for England. Over rate deductions is a better whinge because it's actually true

Is it easier to make the Final if you play 2 Tests in Bangladesh or 5 in India (assuming it's not a freak result by NZ)?

To be honest, I'd have kicked SA out of the comp when they sent that C Team to NZ. If NZ had qualified as a result of that it kind of makes a mockery of it (which of course it is already).

 

[Prince EWS]

No, the latest formula is % of points earned vs points available in games played

Example if you lost first 5 tests in WTC cycle then won 5-0 you would have a 50% ratio overall. However If you lost first 5 tests then won 3-0 you would have only a 37.5% ratio

Better off trying to schedule long series at home against **** teams and making your away series and series against better sides 2 matches each then.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Oh that explains The Ashes