Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

Cricket World Cup Thread


  • Please log in to reply
3815 replies to this topic

#381 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 08 March 2003 - 12:38 AM

well, I think any day/night matches are going to influence the odds. Side battin first should win, but that is historically true.
will us outsiders bet on the night people? I think not! Question anyone?
  • 0

#382 tedward

tedward

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 147 posts

Posted 08 March 2003 - 10:12 AM

for what its worth I am backiing India against SriLanka as well.

BTW, All the other forums seem so depressing. You have the usual America bashers having a go all the time, but nothing else of note. All the decent folk seem to gravitate towards the Culture forum.



Yeh I started looking at these forums for a laugh really and I had to do a double take when I saw a cricket world cup thread in here. Th culture forums are though quite 'cultured' its also my favourite cricket wc forum at the moment.
  • 0

#383 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 08 March 2003 - 12:50 PM

This is an article that has all punters keeping their fingers crossed.
The arguments are crazy. They are however, not impossible.
I'd like you guys to give your opinions.

Points for the captain

March 05, 2003


This is a Janus-faced column: one face looking forward, the other looking back.

This morning, I read in the Times of India an article by Soumitra Bose, wherein skipper Sourav Ganguly is quoted on the importance of India winning its first Super Six game against Kenya, on March 7.

"We should be qualifying for the semis if we get full points against Kenya," Bose quotes Ganguly as saying.

Hopefully, that is a mis-quotation. Because the alternative is frightening: if the quotation is right; it indicates how the captain and the team are approaching the second stage of this tournament. And the 'all we have to do is win one' approach is loaded with dangers.

(Mandatory pause, here, to allow the shoot-the-messenger-if-you-dislike-the-message types to shoot off angry mails about how much I dislike Ganguly. Done? Fine, thank you, nice to hear from you, now let's move on because the message is about the team's prospects and not about any individual, huh?)

Take a hypothetical reading of how the Super Six games could go; also take, as bedrock fact, that India wins only one of its three Super Six games.

On March 7, Australia beats Sri Lanka at Centurion, and India beats Kenya at Cape Town. Points at that stage: Australia 16, Sri Lanka 7.5, India 12, Kenya 10.

On March 8, New Zealand defeats Zimbabwe at Bloemfontein. New Zealand 8; Zimbabwe 3.5

On March 10, India loses to Sri Lanka at Johannesburg. India 12, SL 11.5

On March 11, Australia defeats New Zealand at Port Elizabeth. Australia 20; NZ 8.

On March 12, Kenya defeats Zimbabwe at Bloemfontein (Hey, Kenya has already defeated Sri Lanka in this Cup; the West Indies in an earlier edition). Kenya 14, Zimbabwe 3.5

On March 14, India loses to New Zealand at the Centurion. India 12, NZ 12.

On March 15, Sri Lanka defeats Zimbabwe at East London, and the game between Australia and Kenya is rained out (at Durban, the venue where, the other day, it rained on SA's parade). SL 15.5; Zimbabwe 3.5; Australia 22; Kenya 16.

Or take the more conservative view, that Australia will defeat Kenya in the Durban game: Australia 24, Kenya 14.

In either instance, Australia, Sri Lanka and Kenya go through. India and New Zealand tie on 12 points apiece -- and the fact that the Kiwis have defeated India in the head to head means it is New Zealand that goes through as fourth placed team.

Also, consider this: Teams like Australia and New Zealand have, in previous editions of the Cup and in other tournaments, not shied from manipulating results to ensure they get to play the opponents they are most comfortable with.

Ever since India's win over England, expert opinion has veered to the view that if there is a team in this competition capable of challenging the Aussies, it is India. This opinion has hardened in the wake of India's win against Pakistan -- in just the last three days, we have heard Mark Nicholas, Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards, Dean Jones, Ian Chappell, Mike Atherton and Arjuna Ranatunga argue this case.

What if -- again, hold off the brickbats, all this is pure hypothesis -- Australia decides it would rather not have India, a team it cannot predict nor really plan for, entering the next stage? All it takes to ensure that is to lose to New Zealand.

If that happens, the points at the end will read: Aus 20, New Zealand 16, Lanka 15.5, Kenya 14.

India, with 12 points, are out.

Couldn't work out better, could it? While the Kiwis and the Lankans battle it out in one semi-final, Australia plays Kenya in the other!

Kenya in the semis? You'll laugh that out of court -- just as you would, a little over a month ago, have laughed out of court the possibility of Zimbabwe and Kenya both making the last six while the likes of West Indies, South Africa, Pakistan and England go back home.

Was it Sherlock Holmes who said that it never paid to confuse the impossible with the improbable?

It is against this backdrop that you might want to look back, a bit. India beat The Netherlands in its first World Cup match. No big deal -- that was four points for the taking. India then lost to Australia, the defending champions and world champions. (The two are not always synonymous -- for instance, in 1987, India was defending champion but hardly the other).

Again, no big deal, we can shrug -- a win would have been brilliant but a loss was the more expected result. (It needs mentioning, to give matters a context here, that much of the disappointment was not over the result, but the lack of fight -- but that is water under the bridge, let it flow for now).

India then defeated Zimbabwe and Namibia -- and as with Holland, no big deal; eight points there for the pocketing, when you go by the relative strengths of the teams.

Effectively, thus, India's real test -- and in that sense, the real campaign -- began in game five, when it took on England. From that point on, India's task was simply defined: win seven straight games (two in the prelims, three in the Super Sixes, one semifinal, one final), and win the Cup.

Remember the previous World Cup? Australia looked down and out; many experts and former greats from that country (including Dean Jones, then a rediff.com columnist) suggested that the team should be immediately recalled, rather than play on and heap more embarrassment on the country -- a reaction eerily similar to what was being said after the India-Australia game here.

That was when Steve Waugh made his famous little speech to his team: 'Nothing is lost, guys -- we only need to win seven straight games!'

That is pretty much the position India is in -- two down, five to go. Any relaxation of that mindset, any tendency to do 'just enough', any attempt to get cute with calculators and to go hey, even if we win two and team X wins three and Y wins four but A loses two... can prove fatal.

Postscript: The competition has barely entered stage two, and in various countries the knives are already out.

In Pakistan, a committee has already been appointed to probe the team's defeats; in Bangladesh, the coach has been sacked; in South Africa, there are rumblings led by a former player and current selector against the captain and the coach; in England the captain elected to jump before he was pushed; and we are waiting to hear from the West Indies.

It is highly likely that before the year is out, at least three more losing captains will lose their armbands.

But none of the selectors and administrators in these countries are likely to lose their jobs why?

Who picked the captains and the teams? The selectors.

Who picked the coaches? The administrators.

Today, if these selectors axe the captains and the administrators axe the coaches, what in effect are they saying? That their judgment of who should lead, and who should coach, was wrong.

So how come they get to axe the players and coaches and captains, while remaining in their positions to make more such errors of judgment?


http://rediff.com/wc.../mar/05prem.htm
  • 0

#384 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 08 March 2003 - 01:17 PM

A brilliant (if somewhat mind boggling) discourse ag!
Wholly concur with your conclusions though. Similar to the Warne thing. If he took the diuretic knowingly, hang him. BUT if his trainers and medical staff at the ACB told him it was OK hang them!
India needs the mind set to win ALL the games, to have any chance to get through.
I still see Oz v India as the final.
  • 0

#385 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 08 March 2003 - 01:48 PM

Hmmm NZ appear on target here. 94-2
Anything can happen!
C'mon Zim tighten up the bowling.
  • 0

#386 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 08 March 2003 - 03:35 PM

NZ 223/4 needing 30 runs from 34 balls, with Chris Harris(0) and Nathan Astle(89) at the crease.
  • 0

#387 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 08 March 2003 - 03:53 PM

7 needed in 18 balls. Astle 102 n.o.
  • 0

#388 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 09 March 2003 - 12:36 AM

Okay, we have some real grudge matches coming up here. Aus v Kiwis, India v Lanka Big fireworrks I RECKON! Go the Aussies, compliments however to ag and z
  • 0

#389 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 09 March 2003 - 12:40 AM

Also the African contingent Favour Zim v Kenya, but you don't know your luck in the beg city????
  • 0

#390 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 01:59 AM

There will be a lot of absenteeism in offices today. Those that come will have one window open on their screens for the flash scoreboards.:D
  • 0

#391 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 11:48 AM

292/6 is not bad at all, although it could have been better.
Hope the boys pull it off.:)
  • 0

#392 Gospel

Gospel

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 11:52 AM

Another great batting display from the Indian's.
However Ag, what's Sachen got against
reaching the ton? That's a 98 and now a 97.

Methinks Sri Lanka are up against it. But the
run chase should be explosive. Games involving
India are the toast of the tornament. :)
  • 0

#393 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 11:53 AM

It'll be a good run chase ag
SL bats can do it, but batting 2nd in SA, don't know?
  • 0

#394 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 12:17 PM

It's going to be a tough match. I'm off to watch TV. I'll be back.:P
  • 0

#395 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 12:59 PM

SL 35/4. Seems like it is India's day today.
  • 0

#396 Agnostic

Agnostic

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9978 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 01:12 PM

46/5 with Russel Arnold who is the beginning of the SL tail at the crease. Srinath seems to be a man possessed. 4 for 19 in 4 overs.:cool:
  • 0

#397 Gospel

Gospel

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 01:38 PM

Bleedin heck - India are murdering the poor
buggers; methinks the prospect of an India v
Australia finale is drawing ever closer.

Do the top twi in the super g's play the 3rd and
fourth placed teams? It would seem the logical
choice - but given this ICC farce so far I could
envisage OZ and India being eliminated on
principle of winning matches....
  • 0

#398 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 03:47 PM

109/10 in less than 25 overs. Thats what I call a very convincing victory. ;)
  • 0

#399 traveller

traveller

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 620 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 03:53 PM

What a thumping! Tears in Colombo tonight.
  • 0

#400 zxb

zxb

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4574 posts

Posted 10 March 2003 - 04:07 PM

I expected a Lanka defeat, but not by that margin. Wonder what score Lanka would have made, had they been able to bat first??? 200? 250? :confused:
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru