Should World Cup Finals be a best of 3 ?

[Lone Wolf]

1 hour ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

Pak has tended to have a wood over the kiwis in big games somehow.  if they face them in semis- likely they will make it finals. 

 

And if they have a day like champions trophy 2017 final...they win.

 

They are not even a top 4 team , let alone deserving to win the world cup

Also Pak deserved CT 17 final win...  Remember India lost to SL in final league game... And allowed a huge chase.  Bowling attack showed weakness. 

We faced easier Bangla side that fluked their way into Semis...  And beat them. 

 

Pak won over favorites England in Semi final...  And were battle hardened.  They cashed in on the bowling (spin)  weakness & collective choke by India & stupid af Toss decision. 

[Need4Speed]

no let the wcup fnals be knock out only..else it weill take away the beauty of handling pressure..

else..just dont play it..give wcup to lead icc odi ranking team instead..haha

 

[rangeelaraja]

1 hour ago, Need4Speed said:

no let the wcup fnals be knock out only..else it weill take away the beauty of handling pressure..

else..just dont play it..give wcup to lead icc odi ranking team instead..haha

 

 

Thing is there are too many luck factors in finals - toss, evening dew, other  change of weather /  playing conditions either side of the innings 
 

Cricket is very cruel in the sense that sometimes nothing is done to offset all this “luck” and ensure the best team wins. 

Test cricket in that sense is probably the fairest in the sense that the stronger team can stage a fight back in the second innings both with bat and ball if it was initially hugely disadvantaged. 
 

the shorter the format becomes in cricket - the more luck plays a factor. 

 

 Best of 3 is fair to better ascertain the stronger team in the shorter format. 
 

one off final game - luck  can be a huge factor. 

 

Maybe that’s just me. 
 

 

Edited October 17, 2023 by rangeelaraja

[Nikhil_cric]

4 hours ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

Pak has tended to have a wood over the kiwis in big games somehow.  if they face them in semis- likely they will make it finals. 

 

And if they have a day like champions trophy 2017 final...they win.

 

They are not even a top 4 team , let alone deserving to win the world cup

Pakistan is our best chance after South Africa. Apart from CT final, they have always been beaten by us.

 

The team I fear most in a KO is NZ. I'm tired of being bullied by NZ.

 

2000 CT final,  1999 Super Six,  2019 World Cup SF,  WTC final 2021.

 

PAK, SA and OZ are the best chances for India in KO's.  Heck , I'll take any team over NZ in a KO!

[Need4Speed]

4 hours ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

Thing is there are too many luck factors in finals - toss, evening dew, other  change of weather /  playing conditions either side of the innings 
 

Cricket is very cruel in the sense that sometimes nothing is done to offset all this “luck” and ensure the best team wins. 

Test cricket in that sense is probably the fairest in the sense that the stronger team can stage a fight back in the second innings both with bat and ball if it was initially hugely disadvantaged. 
 

the shorter the format becomes in cricket - the more luck plays a factor. 

 

 Best of 3 is fair to better ascertain the stronger team in the shorter format. 
 

one off final game - luck  can be a huge factor. 

 

Maybe that’s just me. 
 

 

I understand and even I used to think the same..but then I thought it will take the excitement,pressure and nervousness energy away..

[Gollum]

No, KOs are the beautiful part about tournaments, to see how teams handle the occasion. And mostly in ICC tourneys the better team has won the final, remaining 10-20% cases, that's the charm, no better example than India beating that WI side in 1983 final. 

Edited October 18, 2023 by Gollum

[Mariyam]

On 10/17/2023 at 9:23 PM, rangeelaraja said:

I know gun / clutch teams always fire on the big day.

 

But at a time where we have so much gap in the games and just 1 game a day. 

 

We should change that to 2 games a day whereever it makes sense but allow a 3 games final to take out the freak day out of the equation.

 

 

If its a best of 3 ODI final, I simply wouldn't watch the first game. I suspect you'd find a lot of people who would share the sentiment.

 

[Need4Speed]

however..i would like to somehow neutralize unfair advantage of the toss in certain conditions..which totally kills the contest on favor of one side..like dew later..

better to schedule match at a time which finishes it just before dew or dew is minimal at the start..

or is there any chemical that can be sprayed..which wont let the dew settle on grass..?

 

or if morning conditions are extremely bowler friendly..then go for a delayed start..

Edited October 18, 2023 by Need4Speed

[rangeelaraja]

5 hours ago, Mariyam said:

If its a best of 3 ODI final, I simply wouldn't watch the first game. I suspect you'd find a lot of people who would share the sentiment.

 

I get where you're coming from, but watching the entire series can make you appreciate the journey and the eventual champion even more. Who knows what surprises the first game might bring.

[rangeelaraja]

18 hours ago, Gollum said:

No, KOs are the beautiful part about tournaments, to see how teams handle the occasion. And mostly in ICC tourneys the better team has won the final, remaining 10-20% cases, that's the charm, no better example than India beating that WI side in 1983 final. 

 

Yes because cricket is unlike any other sport, where 2 teams can play in different conditions.

 

Can you name any other sport where one team can have significantly different playing conditions than the other team  ?

 

How many times have we seen two evenly matched teams - one bats in unfavorable conditions, the other in much much conducive conditions  - because toss was critical. 

 

How does the better team win in this case ? Does something as prestigious as a World Cup deserve to be determined by " luck" with conditions ?

 

We have made it second nature to romanticize the "uncertainties " of cricket.   

 

This does not fly in modern sports - where almost always the best team wins.

 

Best of 3 ensures that to a certain extent "luck" is taken out of the equation.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2023 by rangeelaraja

[Gollum]

1 hour ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

Yes because cricket is unlike any other sport, where 2 teams can play in different conditions.

 

Can you name any other sport where one team can have significantly different playing conditions than the other team  ?

 

How many times have we seen two evenly matched teams - one bats in unfavorable conditions, the other in much much conducive conditions  - because toss was critical. 

 

How does the better team win in this case ? Does something as prestigious as a World Cup deserve to be determined by " luck" with conditions ?

 

We have made it second nature to romanticize the "uncertainties " of cricket.   

 

This does not fly in modern sports - where almost always the best team wins.

 

Best of 3 ensures that to a certain extent "luck" is taken out of the equation.

But in a best of 3 case one team can win all 3 tosses. Even 2 consecutive toss wins may be enough to seal the deal.

 

I much prefer splitting ODIs into 4 innings of 25 overs each like Sachin suggested. Even T20s can be split into 4 innings.

 

[rangeelaraja]

12 minutes ago, Gollum said:

But in a best of 3 case one team can win all 3 tosses. Even 2 consecutive toss wins may be enough to seal the deal.

 

I much prefer splitting ODIs into 4 innings of 25 overs each like Sachin suggested. Even T20s can be split into 4 innings.

 

Sachin may have said it, but it will never happen because it is almost akin to playing 2 T20s to decide the fate of 1 ODI.  It will destroy the very essence of ODI cricket -  test of mid innings counterplay, building innings after collapse etc… 

 

 

 

[Trichromatic]

Which world cup finals were won due to luck with conditions?

[Frustrated]

No. 

[rangeelaraja]

40 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Which world cup finals were won due to luck with conditions?

 

For 15-20 recent years Aussies were overwhelmingly stronger than other teams - winning 3 back to back world cups since 1999, 2003, 2007

 

The gap between them and the 2nd best team being so much that condition advantage / disadvantage was not consequential. So our minds are clouded by that.

 

It does make a hell of a difference when teams are more evenly matched. 

 

If one recognizes that conditions do change between innings in a day night game , situations where toss can be become a big advantage  - then one doesn't have to wait for a world cup final where massive advantage is yielded to toss winning team to wisen up.

 

There have been several instances where in finals absolute belter pata pitches - the obvious choice for toss winning captain is to bat first and have the advantage of applying scoreboard pressure in a big game to the team chasing.

 

2002 Natwest Series- we totally dominated SL and Eng in the tri-series.  In the finals  -England won the toss put up 300+ ( as any decent team batting on pata wicket would ) and , but for Yuvraj and Kaif's miracle innings - we would have lost the finals to Eng after totally dominating them and SL in the league games. And it would have no way reflected how we were a much better ODI side than Eng in 2002.

 

It would be a shame if a world cup final were to be ever decided based on duckworth lewis for a single final game. 

 

NBA which is the pinnacle of modern team sport and where conditions don't even vary between teams like cricket - playoffs are best of 7.

 

Cricket will remain decades behind modern sport in the spirit of sticking to " old tradition ".

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2023 by rangeelaraja

[goose]

Never ever felt the 50 over WC winner didn’t deserve it - so no

[rangeelaraja]

* BUMP * 

 

 

Could see this from a country MILE

[Vickydev]

Please no

[goose]

your threads should be best of three

[vvvslaxman]

Don't want 2-0 in the final lol