No Asians ?

[Sanz]

you would've thought it would come in england or australia or something not subcontinental conditions.

It's never enough for some people, is it ? I mean how much biased one has to be claim something like that ?

 

[aussie]

well even though none of the 3 asian titans haven't qualified for the semi's i don't think it down to them being less superior to the other nations at all, just that they didn't play to potential at times, i.e Sri Lanka played some good cricket, the game vs PAK could have easily gone their way & vs SA were exposed a bit againts quality pace bowling.

Pakistan were hampered by the loss of Shoaib & Asif o doubt while were also exposed againts quality pace bowling as well.

India were a bit woeful & have to really make some tough decisions in their team selection i'd say.

 

[magsi23]

YEP fair enough really, 4 best teams in the semis

 

[Beleg]

Irony.

Explain, please.

 

[vic_orthdox]

It's never enough for some people, is it ? I mean how much biased one has to be claim something like that ?

But he's just stated a simple fact.

If you were told that there was to be a major tournament held, and there would be no team from the sub-continent in the last 4 of the tournament, and then you were asked where the tournament was being held...

Most people would think it's more likely to be away from the sub-continent.

 

[Turbinator]

But he's just stated a simple fact.

If you were told that there was to be a major tournament held, and there would be no team from the sub-continent in the last 4 of the tournament, and then you were asked where the tournament was being held...

Most people would think it's more likely to be away from the sub-continent.

We have Sherlock here with us.

 

[Sanz]

But he's just stated a simple fact.

If you were told that there was to be a major tournament held, and there would be no team from the sub-continent in the last 4 of the tournament, and then you were asked where the tournament was being held...

Most people would think it's more likely to be away from the sub-continent.

How do you know most people think that way ? India, Pak both won their wc away from Subcontinent, both countries last final appearances in the WC came away from sub continent.

I dont even understand why it is such a surprise ? It happens all the time, no ? SA didn't make the WC held in Sa, England didn't make the WC finals in England, Test cricket is supposed to be so popular in England and they didn't win the Ashes for close to 20 years.

Seriously folks like you, who are much respected on this forum, lose a lot of credibility when they start to defend idiotic crap like this.

 

[silentstriker]

How do you know most people think that way ? India, Pak both won their wc away from Subcontinent, both countries last final appearances in the WC came away from sub continent.

I dont even understand why it is such a surprise ? It happens all the time, no ? SA didn't make the WC held in Sa, England didn't make the WC finals in England, Test cricket is supposed to be so popular in England and they didn't win the Ashes for close to 20 years.

Seriously folks like you, who are much respected on this forum, lose a lot of credibility when they start to defend idiotic crap like this.

Well, its no secret that on average, subcontinental teams, especially India and Sri Lanka, do much better at home than they do away. It's a matter of historical record, I don't see how anyone can deny that.

 

[Sanz]

Well, its no secret that on average, subcontinental teams, especially India and Sri Lanka, do much better at home than they do away. It's a matter of historical record, I don't see how anyone can deny that.

Are we talking about tests or ODIs ?

Besides I iask you look into the history of most (if not all) cricket playing countries and see that their home records is almost always better than their away record.

 

[tooextracool]

well it's not so much that the pitch was awful, pakistan were pretty woeful themselves.

Well i think when you are missing your captain and your best batsman as well as your 2 best fast bowlers, its never really going to be easy.

 

[silentstriker]

Are we talking about tests or ODIs ?

Besides I iask you look into the history of most (if not all) cricket playing countries and see that their home records is almost always better than their away record.

ODI Records:

India Home: 56%
India Away: 37%
Difference: 19%

Sri Lanka Home: 72%
Sri Lanka Away: 37%
Difference: 35%

Australia Home: 65%
Australia Away: 58%
Difference: 7%

West Indies Home: 64%
West Indies Away: 54%
Difference: 10%

England Home: 58%
England Away: 41%
Difference: 18%

South Africa Home: 73%
South Africa Away: 48%
Difference: 25%

Pakistan Home: 61%
Pakistan Away: 48%
Difference: 13%

New Zealand Away: 56%
New Zealand Home: 31%
Difference: 25%

So the difference, in terms of largest difference to least:

1. 35%: Sri Lanka
2. 25%: South Africa
3. 25%: New Zealand
4. 19%: India
5. 18%: England
6. 13%: Pakistan
7. 10%: West Indies
8. 7%: Australia

So on the face of it, Australia are the most consistent home and abroad, whereas Sri Lanka are the least. However, that is a simple list based on just home-away and not subcontinental or not matches.

There is a significant difference (two out of top three), though its not as large as I expected. With that said, it is still the first time since the 1970's where none of the subcontinental teams are through to the second round! Especially amazing considering the winning % of some of the teams in the subcontinent. The one that sticks out is South Africa. I knew that they had troubles, but didn't know it was that bad (bad in terms of difference, their winning % is still higher than most teams).

 

[R_D]

maybe not so hard to beleive all asians teams are out..considering the pitches were far from being the usual sub-contiental pitches.
Should be interesting finally thou... i do hope WI or NZ win.

 

[Sanz]

So on the face of it, Australia are the most consistent home and abroad, whereas Sri Lanka are the least. However, that is a simple list based on just home-away and not subcontinental or not matches.

There is a significant difference (two out of top three), though its not as large as I expected. With that said, it is still the first time since the 1970's where none of the subcontinental teams are through to the second round! Especially amazing considering the winning % of some of the teams in the subcontinent. The one that sticks out is South Africa. I knew that they had troubles, but didn't know it was that bad (bad in terms of difference, their winning % is still higher than most teams).

SS - That's stupid statistics at best. Did you know that Neutral games are not played at home either and normally played away from home ?


Besides what is the point, are you using your own statistics to prove yourself wrong ?

 

[adharcric]

maybe not so hard to beleive all asians teams are out..considering the pitches were far from being the usual sub-contiental pitches.
Should be interesting finally thou... i do hope WI or NZ win.

I'll definitely root for Australia. Unless they're playing India, I'll always take an Aussie victory. One reason why: I don't want anyone but India to beat 'em.

 

[R_D]

I'll definitely root for Australia. Unless they're playing India, I'll always take an Aussie victory. One reason why: I don't want anyone but India to beat 'em.

there was a time when i used to root ( had to use that word ) for the aussies. Most of my mates pretty much don't care about cricket now cause they know Aus is going to win. There'll nothing better than seeing Aussies lose to NZ.... hahaha the ultimate shame for them.
No disrespect to NZ, aussies hate losing to NZ just as much as England.
I'll have a field day after they loss

 

[tooextracool]

ODI Records:

New Zealand Away: 56%
New Zealand Home: 31%
Difference: 15%

Didnt take subtraction too seriously in kindergarten did you?
Anyways i think its pretty obvious that SL and India are both vastly superior teams at home than they are away. Pakistan is a bit better in that regard.

 

[silentstriker]

Didnt take subtraction too seriously in kindergarten did you?
Anyways i think its pretty obvious that SL and India are both vastly superior teams at home than they are away. Pakistan is a bit better in that regard.

Oops!

 

[silentstriker]

Besides what is the point, are you using your own statistics to prove yourself wrong ?

Actually, it did prove me wrong. I posted those statistics so I can agree with you, except in case of Sri Lanka. That's what I get for admitting I'm wrong, I guess.

 

[Sanz]

Didnt take subtraction too seriously in kindergarten did you?
Anyways i think its pretty obvious that SL and India are both vastly superior teams at home than they are away. Pakistan is a bit better in that regard.

And the reason for that is not because their batsmen are any better/worse against any particular type of bowling but because SriLanka and SriLanka have a very poor pace attack over all to achieve decent success away from home.

Pakistan is better because they have always had great fast bowlers in last 30-35 years.

 

[tooextracool]

And the reason for that is not because their batsmen are any better/worse against any particular type of bowling but because SriLanka and SriLanka have a very poor pace attack over all to achieve decent success away from home.

Pakistan is better because they have always had great fast bowlers in last 30-35 years.

In indias case that maybe true, bit in SL case i think their batsmen have the tendency to struggle on foreign soil while being extremely productive at home.