• 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.

India will tour Bangladesh in December

Swervy

International Captain
Deja moo said:
So were they in 99 , until a certain last match vs Pakistan.

*Cricket is a game of glorious uncertainties*

i think we all know the reasons why Pakistan lost that game vs bangladesh
 

tooextracool

International Coach
biased indian said:
what about SL in 1996
as i have said earlier....SL would have qualified regardless because they only needed to beat the minnows to go thro to the QFs...they did that successfully + they beat india.....and lets not discount the fact that they went through that entire tournament undefeated.if thats not deserved then what is?

biased indian said:
in every case its the one who was boycotted
is the non deserving one isnt it.u point could have been true if kenya had reaced semi only because of NZ boycotting them its not like that kenya had won games and that's what matter
incase you havent been reading i have clearly stated that the only reason kenya made the super sixes was because of the boycott and the rain......
 

biased indian

International Coach
tooextracool said:
as i have said earlier....SL would have qualified regardless because they only needed to beat the minnows to go thro to the QFs...they did that successfully + they beat india.....and lets not discount the fact that they went through that entire tournament undefeated.if thats not deserved then what is?
QUOTE]
as u have been saying with NZ what is AUS and WI had gone to SL and beaten them. SL will had to face say SA or PAK in QF who where far superior side than ENG and might have lost.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Neil Pickup said:
It amuses me how you continue to resort to insults... I find it difficult to believe that suggesting that SA weren't the only side disadvantaged by the WC'92 rules is equivalently biased to rating Amit Mishra over Shane Warne.
I didn't start the term 'Terrace Group', some of You folks did.
 

tooextracool

International Coach
biased indian said:
as u have been saying with NZ what is AUS and WI had gone to SL and beaten them. SL will had to face say SA or PAK in QF who where far superior side than ENG and might have lost.
one must remember that SL did beat aus in the finals and that they went through the tournament undefeated........
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
tooextracool said:
one must remember that SL did beat aus in the finals and that they went through the tournament undefeated........
One must not forget that Kenya were denied a chance to perform. There is no way in the world you can prove that NZ was going to win against Kenya.

Even If I remove WI's match against BD, WI won 3 matches out of 5, So did Kenya(excluding the NZ boycott). How can you call Kenya non-deserrving and WI deserving ??

Kenya deserved it more than anyone. I was so happy to see England going out of the tournament after the first round and NZ after super six. They deserved it. :p
 

Top