No, they couldn't because the rain rule only comes in after 25 overs, and by that point, there was no chance of rain and Aus were on top anyway.harry674 said:actually at some point india could have got away with (unfair?) victory with help of rain, now do u call this a masacre.
The odds were only 12/1. And I had a right few quid on as well.tooextracool said:just imagine the returns someone who bet on bangladesh winning the match would have got! against pakistan the favourites of the tournament and everything the odds would have been 1000/1 and anybody who put heap loads of cash would be instantly rich
Where do these people come from? How come whenever something is reported in the news, it is automatically true? Until there is some absolute evidence that this match is fixed, I refuse to believe it!tooextracool said:the bang vs **** match from wc 99 was fixed!! i mean wasim akram was smiling like his team just won the world cup or sometin. in the post match interview he says "we lost to our brotherS". i know ppl will say whats wrong with smiling, but for a captain whos team just lost to bang and is on the decline he should be seriously worried not happy!
just imagine the returns someone who bet on bangladesh winning the match would have got! against pakistan the favourites of the tournament and everything the odds would have been 1000/1 and anybody who put heap loads of cash would be instantly rich
At every world cup some players are seen with match fixers in a restaurant or somewhere else.This is according to newspapers.Richard said:Personally I find it almost inconceivable that the Ban-Pak match in WC99 was not fixed.
I didn't see the match so i can't comment, but for Pakistan to bowl 40 extras in that match (let alone 28 wides) is ridiculous.Richard said:Personally I find it almost inconceivable that the Ban-Pak match in WC99 was not fixed.
this is bangladesh were talking abt...they were one of the worst teams in the wc and pakis were the best. how in the world can bangladesh score 260 on any wicket, i doubt they could do that even if it was the joberg pitch for the wc final against an attack of wasim akram,waqar younis,abdur razzaq at his best and saqlain mushtaq????clearly sometin is fishymarc71178 said:Depends how much the ball was doing - if it's swinging around as it can in certain conditions in England, for players not used to that, it can be a nightmare.
Actually, that ausd team wasnt nvery good, and the zim team was....so IMO, it isnt an upset....zim troubled india too( 17-5), hence that wasnt an one off thing..Australia losing to Zimbabwe in the '83 WC
What does that have to do with the Pakistanis bowling a lot of wides and conceding a lot of extras?tooextracool said:this is bangladesh were talking abt...they were one of the worst teams in the wc
Upset usually involves the lesser side actually winning though.chris.hinton said:Also back in 97 warwick where 25/6 against Berkshire but Brown and Giles put on a lot of runs and Warwick won Just