smash84
The Tiger King
But there is only a world cup for the associate nations in 2012New Zealand led by Daniel Vettori, 2012.
But there is only a world cup for the associate nations in 2012New Zealand led by Daniel Vettori, 2012.
Only two sides, namely AUS and WI. But the way SL muscled all the oppositions (most of them away from home) that wouldn't have been a much factor. Would have floored both of them in home conditions. BTW they have beaten AUS in the final. That leaves only WI. SAF was the only side that had characteristics to beat SL in '96. But they were cut short by Lara.I would say 1983. Immense stuff. Wouldnt say 1996, I felt at the time that SL got a free ride for most of the tournament because several sides pulled out of playing in SL, I cant remember who or how many points SL got as a result, but they pretty much were able to get to the quarter finals without even playing a match. All credit to them for winning though, its never easy and they were underdogs.
Found Zaheer Khan gobbing off at Hayden and Gilchrist then getting slapped like a bitch in the 2003 final a very profound life lesson.
awtasri lanka 1996. In a very short space of time sri lanka went from semi-minnow to world cup winners.
It was such a shame that eden gardens turned to hell in the semi-finals robbing the sri lankan's of a proper path to the final. It was a poor world cup overall if not for sri lanka, kenya and a couple of fantastic individual performances.
Wrong forum1966, clearly.
Go back to Off Topic tbh03 because Ponting pwned India in the final.
I think 96 was more important since it signaled a permanent shift to the SC as the center of gravity of cricket fandom. 83 and 87 didn't do that.Most poignant - 1992. Pak coming back from the dead under Imran. Must have been great to see.
Most important in the histroy of the world - 1983 and it's after effects.