The 2nd best?

[Unattainableguy]

Its the old 'if and but' thing though..you cant say that pakistan would have done better if they had those players at full health....coz it didnt happen.

You would always do well with better bowlers than normal ones.

So its fair enough to say Pakistan has potential to produce results which might allow them to be considered for second place in say 6 to 12 months time,but based on results recently,Pakistan have not shown any consistancy...on their day they can beat anyone,but to be honest just about anyone can beat Pakistan as well.

Again, you're more keen into analyzing these recent results. I do agree that Pakistan haven't shown any consistancy, but again, that's because their bowlers were unfit for those matches. And do watch the West-Indies' upcoming matches, and you'll know the importance of great players to any team.

You can only judge how well a team has done based on results produced...and to be honest a measure of a teams strength is how they adapt when injuries do strike.

You can adapt to 1 or 2 injuries because you always have a few players to play, who are as good as the unfit ones. But you can't with four injuried players when all of them are the bowlers.

 

[Swervy]

You would always do well with better bowlers than normal ones.


Again, you're more keen into analyzing these recent results. I do agree that Pakistan haven't shown any consistancy, but again, that's because their bowlers were unfit for those matches. And do watch the West-Indies' upcoming matches, and you'll know the importance of great players to any team.




You can adapt to 1 or 2 injuries because you always have a few players to play, who are as good as the unfit ones. But you can't with four injuried players when all of them are the bowlers.

but this thread is about who IS the second best..ie who have performed the second best in the world at ODI...

 

[Unattainableguy]

but this thread is about who IS the second best..ie who have performed the second best in the world at ODI...

That's your definition of a best team. And what a lame way to judge would that be knowing once all the injured bowlers are back, Pakistan are going to claim the 2nd spot. So why not just rate the teams by considering quality of their batsmen/bowlers/all-rounders, and you will see NZ and SL lack such players.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

That's your definition of a best team. And what a lame way to judge would that be knowing once all the injured bowlers are back, Pakistan are going to claim the 2nd spot. So why not just rate the teams by considering quality of their batsmen/bowlers/all-rounders, and you will see NZ and SL lack such players.

Except Pakistan aren't going to claim second spot. Sri Lanka and New Zealand are comfortably better ODI teams, and if you are going to include players who haven't played in ages like Shabbir, then Sri Lanka get Murali back and New Zealand get Bond back. And if you want to pick one player out of Shabbir, Murali and Bond to have in an ODI, well... which one do you think would be the last picked?

 

[marc71178]

How is f***ing Pakistan or New Zealand both better then Sri Lanka. Last time i checked that we played series aganist Pakistan in the last 18 months and won them both (Asia Cup and Paktel Cup). We smashed the South Africa 5 nil, in the last 12 mouths and out of all the three teams we were the closest to Australia, we took two games off them.

And what have SL done in One Day games outside SL?

 

[Unattainableguy]

Except Pakistan aren't going to claim second spot. Sri Lanka and New Zealand are comfortably better ODI teams, and if you are going to include players who haven't played in ages like Shabbir, then Sri Lanka get Murali back and New Zealand get Bond back. And if you want to pick one player out of Shabbir, Murali and Bond to have in an ODI, well... which one do you think would be the last picked?

Except from those 2, are there any other bowlers from both teams as good as other Pakistani ones?

 

[chaminda_00]

Except from those 2, are there any other bowlers from both teams as good as other Pakistani ones?

Last time i ckecked we beat Pakistan twice in the last 18 months and in those series u had nearly full strength sides. You may have injuries to ur bowling line but so have SL and NZ. Sri Lanka have Dilhara, Nissanka, Zoysa and Murali all out, that 4 out of our top 5 bowlers. Before u were talking about Danish and Saqlain Mushtaq out of ur side, but the fact is that they don't get picked even if their fit. Add to that guys like Gul and Shabbir aren't that much better then the bowlers from Sri Lanka or New Zealand.

Also u guys have a stronger middle/lower order but u have a useless opening combination compared Fleming/Astle and Atapattu/Jayasurya, even Jayasuriya/Jaystha is better then your crap openers. If all teams had full strength sides then New Zealand and Sri Lanka would still be infront of Pakistan.

 

[chaminda_00]

And what have SL done in One Day games outside SL?

Last time i checked we won the Paket Cup in Pakistan, outside Sri Lanka isn't it.

 

[Unattainableguy]

Last time i ckecked we beat Pakistan twice in the last 18 months and in those series u had nearly full strength sides. You may have injuries to ur bowling line but so have SL and NZ. Sri Lanka have Dilhara, Nissanka, Zoysa and Murali all out, that 4 out of our top 5 bowlers. Before u were talking about Danish and Saqlain Mushtaq out of ur side, but the fact is that they don't get picked even if their fit. Add to that guys like Gul and Shabbir aren't that much better then the bowlers from Sri Lanka or New Zealand.

Also u guys have a stronger middle/lower order but u have a useless opening combination compared Fleming/Astle and Atapattu/Jayasurya, even Jayasuriya/Jaystha is better then your crap openers. If all teams had full strength sides then New Zealand and Sri Lanka would still be infront of Pakistan.

And here are the results with full strength Pakistan:
Pakistan and Sri Lanka: 103 62(Pak) 38(SL)
Pakistan and New Zealand: 77 47(Pak) 28( NZ)

 

[chaminda_00]

And here are the results with full strength Pakistan:
Pakistan and Sri Lanka: 103 62(Pak) 38(SL)
Pakistan and New Zealand: 77 47(Pak) 28( NZ)

What are these match scores. they make no sence

 

[Unattainableguy]

Last time i checked we won the Paket Cup in Pakistan, outside Sri Lanka isn't it.

That doesn't change the fact that you had lost first two games to Pakistan. And your win to loss ratio still remains very poor outside Sri Lanka.

 

[Unattainableguy]

What are these match scores. they make no sence

Number of matches played, number of wins for the 1st team, number of wins for the other.

 

[chaminda_00]

That doesn't change the fact that you had lost first two games to Pakistan. And your win to loss ratio still remains very poor outside Sri Lanka.

Last time i checked urs is worse then ours

 

[chaminda_00]

Number of mathes played, number of wins for the 1st team, number of wins for the other.

How long do they date back, my guess is that their not current at all. You come up with no vaild reasons why ur better then us, just some hypothecially (sp) BS that if u had your top side u would be better then us, which is completely wrong as all three countries have had injuries problems.

 

[Unattainableguy]

Last time i checked urs is worse then ours

SL have won 120 and lost 200, ratio being 1:1.67
Pak have won 252 and lost 213, much better.
So being worse is just another thing, Pakistan are no where as bad as Sri Lanka( in fact, Pak have a very good record).
And consider this: SL have played more games with minnows.

 

[Unattainableguy]

How long do they date back, my guess is that their not current at all. You come up with no vaild reasons why ur better then us, just some hypothecially (sp) BS that if u had your top side u would be better then us, which is completely wrong as all three countries have had injuries problems.

My purpose there was to just show you Pakistan's dominance with a full strength team over NZ and SL in the past since you said they would still be better than a full strength Pak team.

 

[chaminda_00]

All that matter is recent performances and the current side not these stupid stats that just show that Pakistan was better then NZ and SL 10 years ago. Why don't u put up the home and away stats for Pakistan and Sri Lanka for the last 18 or 12 months (recent performances) and you will see that Pakistan have been as bad if not worse then Sri Lanka away from home. It is a clear cut issue consider that we beat u in 2 OD tournments recently. Pakistan aren't anywhere near Sri lanka full strength side or not.

 

[Prince EWS]

Tests: England
One Dayers: New Zealand

Its that simple really.

 

[chaminda_00]

Tests: England
One Dayers: New Zealand

Its that simple really.

I really can't see how New Zealand is clearly second to Sri Lanka, the fact is that we have a better record over the last 18/12 months and we are second on the ICC table. We have not done much outside asia but it not like NZ have done much in conditions that don't favour their game. the last two times they went to asia they lost 5 nil to Pakistan (second string side but) and hadly won a game in the TVS Cup (which include Australia and India).

 

[Unattainableguy]

Judging a team by it's recent performace? Okay

Judging a team's recent performance while it's players are injured? No, you can't do that.
Simply take out all Australian bowlers( assume injuries), and have them play a series or two. They will lose because of injured players not in the line-up and not because they're all of a sudden a bad team.

So you can't say Pakistan have done bad within this or that length of time because results can be different in a reasonably short time frame once everybody is fit.