Pakistan most fluke team (and discussion about tournament structure fairness)

[Top_Cat]

I've always thought carrying results over from one round to another a flawed concept. When it was first introduced (99 from memory) we had the unedifying spectacle of teams going deliberately slowly in run chases to make sure the NRR allowed an opponent whom they'd taken two points from to advance.

Yeh, Steve Waugh and Bevan blocking out Phil Simmons' meds to stop NZ advancing was hilarious. Especially so when it didn't work anyway.

I agree with PEWS: each stage is just a way of determining who advances. We all have hard luck stories where a team (usually our own) has gone out unluckily, but them's the breaks.

Not all of us. '92 for OZ comes about as close as they're gotten to being unlucky (were relying on NZ beating Pakistan in the final prelim game) but, tbh, they didn't deserve to advance after losing to SA, England, Pakistan and NZ and being helped a great deal by the rain against India.

Remember rumours being thrown around that the OZ batting tactics in '99 were payback for NZ throwing said final prelim game in '92. Ah those Kiwis and their crazy conspiracy theories.

 

[superkingdave]

If points were carried forward, England (even though it wouldn't have mattered) would have been carrying forward a loss in a dodgy DL result...how would that be fair? It wouldn't but if it were the rules...

 

[Sir Alex]

If points were carried forward, England (even though it wouldn't have mattered) would have been carrying forward a loss in a dodgy DL result...how would that be fair? It wouldn't but if it were the rules...

Thats different altogether. A loss is loss is a loss for this discussion.

 

[GraemeSmith]

While I'm sad that SA is eliminated, I realize the potential of comedy gold if Pakistan somehow manages to beat Aus in the semis

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

If NZ doesn't make it then have to feel sorry for it as it has played some cool cricket so far, i.e. beat SL (chasing) and Pak (defending a low total)

Nah, I disagree. NZ played pretty crap the whole tournament and didn't deserve to go through to the semis.

 

[Xuhaib]

lol what a thread though I do agree their should be carry forward points.

 

[Sir Alex]

To say there was genuine possibility of India not making semifinals despite winning againsr SL and WI in the Super 8

 

[Stapel]

New format:
Three groups of 4 teams. Nos 1 & 2 go through to super6, carrying points. Leader and runner-up of super6 play best of 5 over three days.

That would shut up all the craphola we have now, and still be a sizeable format.

 

[marc71178]

Except it isn't fair to carry forward points based on playing against different opposition - with 3 groups of 4 under the current structure, 1 group would have 2 of Ireland, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and Afghanistan - so the teams from that group carry forward 2 easier games whereas the teams from the other 2 groups only get 1 game to carry over.

 

[Hurricane]

New format:
Three groups of 4 teams. Nos 1 & 2 go through to super6, carrying points. Leader and runner-up of super6 play best of 5 over three days.

That would shut up all the craphola we have now, and still be a sizeable format.

This would work if there were nine good teams in the world but there are only eight. Everyone would be jealous of the teams who got the easy pool. Unless you put in the number 1 and 2 ranked teams in the world into that "easy" pool.

 

[Athlai]

Bangladesh are a good limited overs nation and Zimbabwe aren't far off from being one. Didn't Zim beat two big teams in the warm ups? I know they're only warm ups but still the divide in Test cricket and the divide in T20 are two very different things.

Ireland also ran England quite close.

 

[NUFAN]

I like the current system in place.

All 8 teams have had the chance to make the semis going in the last group match, what more could you want.

 

[Hurricane]

Bangladesh are a good limited overs nation and Zimbabwe aren't far off from being one. Didn't Zim beat two big teams in the warm ups? I know they're only warm ups but still the divide in Test cricket and the divide in T20 are two very different things.

Ireland also ran England quite close.

I think the key against the likes of Bangladesh is to play them with respect. If you get ****y you might lose it is true. But even in 20-20 you should win if you respect them.
In a game at seddon park a few years back where we lost in a 20-20 to Bangers we thought we had the game won before it started and Ashraful and company did a number on us.

I still think there is a gap between the top 8 and the other nations. But you are right it isn't as pronounced as in test cricket.

I don't know what to make of warm ups as an indicator for how good teams are. I remember Neil Broom getting an 80 against India in a warm up and then looking less convincing in the real games. What do you think are warm ups a reliable guide?

Just a final note in this post. I think that Bangers are coming on as a team. And Tamim in particular really impresses me. The patience shown to them by the ICC may pay off.

 

[Stapel]

Except it isn't fair to carry forward points based on playing against different opposition - with 3 groups of 4 under the current structure, 1 group would have 2 of Ireland, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and Afghanistan - so the teams from that group carry forward 2 easier games whereas the teams from the other 2 groups only get 1 game to carry over.

Obviously, only the points won against the other team that goes through, are carried over...

This would work if there were nine good teams in the world but there are only eight. Everyone would be jealous of the teams who got the easy pool. Unless you put in the number 1 and 2 ranked teams in the world into that "easy" pool.

Fair enough, not?

Anyway, officially, Aus were #9 or #10 before this tourney. It was pure luck that each of the 4 groups got one of Ire/Afg/Zim/Ban.
Last WC, Ban and Ire were in one group, whereas Aus, SRI and WI were in another.

 

[Athlai]

I think the key against the likes of Bangladesh is to play them with respect. If you get ****y you might lose it is true. But even in 20-20 you should win if you respect them.
In a game at seddon park a few years back where we lost in a 20-20 to Bangers we thought we had the game won before it started and Ashraful and company did a number on us.

I still think there is a gap between the top 8 and the other nations. But you are right it isn't as pronounced as in test cricket.

I don't know what to make of warm ups as an indicator for how good teams are. I remember Neil Broom getting an 80 against India in a warm up and then looking less convincing in the real games. What do you think are warm ups a reliable guide?

Just a final note in this post. I think that Bangers are coming on as a team. And Tamim in particular really impresses me. The patience shown to them by the ICC may pay off.

I think a warm up is kind of like a match against an A team, high levels of cricket in patches but lighter by a bit than internationals.

 

[Burgey]

lol what a thread though I do agree their should be carry forward points.

What a thread is right. I've just done Sydney- Hong Kong and the ****ing thing is still going!

Props if still active come Heathrow.

 

[GraemeSmith]

Yeah I don't see anything wrong with the current system. I can bet that people who are complaining in this thread don't actually care about the system itself, they are just upset that a team they hate has gone to the semis and are taking it out on the format

 

[funnygirl]

Worst whining thread I have ever seen in any forum.Glad that the guy got banned.

 

[Uppercut]

One simple change that would make the second group stage much fairer would be to play the final matches simultaneously. It's not making a big difference this time round but it has the potential to.

 

[Quaggas]

One simple change that would make the second group stage much fairer would be to play the final matches simultaneously. It's not making a big difference this time round but it has the potential to.

TV revenues an issue?