If India manages to defeat each team comprehensively before KOs , then what's the point of SF and final?

[nevada]

The top two teams should play a best of three finals series. Semi finals can be scrapped altogether. 

[mishra]

India is undoubtedly best team if it beats every team in league stage. However cocept of quarterfinal, semifinal and final is like giving another chance to second bests to have a go at silverware. Still feel there should be atleast two groups at league stage to justify the concept of semis and finals

[Trichromatic]

1 hour ago, neel roy said:

Thats the beauty and fallacy of the format. England won 6/9 matches in 2019 grp stage and won the wc. India won 7/9 matches and got one hour of bad play and martin guptas throw to be classified as a choker

India hadn’t won against everyone else.

[dilliboy]

They should have an IPL like playoffs for a long group stage tournament like this. Imagine winning 9 out of 9 group stage matches and facing a team who has won just 5 and getting knocked out in a close match in the semi finals.

[Vickydev]

Not sure if serious but I'll treat it as such. It's because the World 'Cup' is about the Knockouts.

 

The league phase is only there to decide who qualifies to play the KOs, every team will take it seriously as long as their fate is undecided. For example, SA could decide to rest QDK and co for the fixture against us because they wouldn't care and then the win against them is meaningless

 

Argentina lost to Saudi Arabia of all teams in GS in last FIFA WC. But no one cares because they won the games that matter ( enough league games to qualify for and then win the KOs) . 

[BacktoCricaddict]

1 hour ago, neel roy said:

Thats the beauty and fallacy of the format. England won 6/9 matches in 2019 grp stage and won the wc. India won 7/9 matches and got one hour of bad play and martin guptas throw to be classified as a choker

From a fans' perspective, it turns anticlimactic once the league stage is done. 2 SFs and a Final. That's it?

 

One way to get around this is to use the eliminator format in the knockouts. That way the table-topper is handed some advantage for its consistency through the tournament.

 

The other way is to get just the top two teams to play a 3-match series as the final. Like the old WSC cricket series in Aus.

[BacktoCricaddict]

4 minutes ago, Vickydev said:

Not sure if serious but I'll treat it as such. It's because the World 'Cup' is about the Knockouts.

 

The league phase is only there to decide who qualifies to play the KOs, every team will take it seriously as long as their fate is undecided. For example, SA could decide to rest QDK and co for the fixture against us because they wouldn't care and then the win against them is meaningless

 

Argentina lost to Saudi Arabia of all teams in GS in last FIFA WC. But no one cares because they won the games that matter ( enough league games to qualify for and then win the KOs) . 

But his argument is that the SF/F KO format works when you have groups and teams have only proven themselves against others in their groups. When everyone plays everyone else, that is out of the picture. At least a double-elimination format for the KOs is warranted if we are doing this kind of all-play-all league.

[putrevus]

3 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

And just to clarify, I am not talking about simply topping the group by getting maximum points, or winning games in a group only, rather it's about beating all the teams playing WC and beating them easily. What does that prove?

That is why I wanted IPL style playoffs. You need to get rewarded for topping the group.

Some  have argued why to change the format for semis.Formats have to change for better.

 

Why did they change format of 2007. India was out of the world cup after losing just two games. 

 

2019, champion lost 3 and finalist lost 4. It would not have made into semis if not for rain out.

 

Same thing happened in 1992, NZ were best team by a mile but were beaten by a fluke innings and fluke team.

 

Edited November 3, 2023 by putrevus

[BacktoCricaddict]

23 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

India hadn’t won against everyone else.

You can't retroactively change the format just because one team won all their matches.

[Trichromatic]

20 minutes ago, Vickydev said:

Not sure if serious but I'll treat it as such. It's because the World 'Cup' is about the Knockouts.

 

The league phase is only there to decide who qualifies to play the KOs, every team will take it seriously as long as their fate is undecided. For example, SA could decide to rest QDK and co for the fixture against us because they wouldn't care and then the win against them is meaningless

 

Argentina lost to Saudi Arabia of all teams in GS in last FIFA WC. But no one cares because they won the games that matter ( enough league games to qualify for and then win the KOs) . 

 

I am basically questioning the format.

 

Scenario 1: Multiple groups/A team wins all matches in the group

It proves that team has performed than everyone else in the group and needs to be tested further against strong teams of other groups. Basically this system first aims at elimination of weaker teams and them match up of stronger teams from different groups to decide the winner.

 

Scenario 2: Multiple groups/A team wins some matches in the group

Team may or may not be best in the group, but it is good enough to compete against other teams from other groups to decide who should be the WC winner.

 

Scenario 3: Single groups/A team wins some matches in the group

Team may or may not be best in the group and have faltered against some opposition. Further matchups are done to decide winner.

 

Scenario 4: Single groups/A team wins all matches in the group

Here team has already won all the matches against all oppositions. What is there to prove? Whether they can beat strong teams 2nd time or not. How?

 

Team winning all the matches against all oppositions of the world cup should be given trophy directly or format of the tournament should be changed in such a way that further matchups make sense.

[putrevus]

9 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

You can't retroactively change the format just because one team won all their matches.

I agree but they have change this garbage format which has chance to reward flukey teams and don't reward the teams for topping the group.

[The Realist]

Bottom line is you need more teams playing cricket or change the format to introduce more jeopardy. One long tedious league format does not really work as can lose as many as you win and still creep into 4th place. 

 

And Its ridiculous that that the cricket WC is longer than the football WC despite the latter having 3x as many teams. 

[BacktoCricaddict]

2 minutes ago, putrevus said:

I agree but they have change this garbage format which has chance to reward flukey teams and don't reward the teams for topping the group.

Right, but it seemed like @Trichromatic is fine with this format if a team doesn't win/dominate all its matches (like India in 2019), but feels it's a problem when a team does dominate the league stage like India has. Of course, it's likely I misunderstood :-)!

[MediumPacer]

2 minutes ago, The Realist said:

Bottom line is you need more teams playing cricket or change the format to introduce more jeopardy. One long tedious league format does not really work as can lose as many as you win and still creep into 4th place. 

 

And Its ridiculous that that the cricket WC is longer than the football WC despite the latter having 3x as many teams. 

how's aunty

[mishra]

@Trichromatic is worried about what happened to India in Champions trophy 2013. We were a Team which was unbeatable and looked unbeatable till the finals

[neel roy]

1 hour ago, mishra said:

@Trichromatic is worried about what happened to India in Champions trophy 2013. We were a Team which was unbeatable and looked unbeatable till the finals

We won that final by sheer luck due to 2 atrocious shots played by bopara and morgan.. on flipside you could say it was great captaincy from dhoni to keep ishant on.. we lost 2017  ct final but we were beaten in group stage by sri lanka even after scoring 320 plus..to win a CT you basically need to win 4 / 5 matches .. thats it.. Pakistan did same in 2017..

[Dil Dil India]

6 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Won't it mean that India is conclusively best team of this WC?

Why play WC at all then? We can just use rankings to award the trophy. 

[Trichromatic]

19 minutes ago, Dil Dil India said:

Why play WC at all then? We can just use rankings to award the trophy. 

 

These matches are also in WC only. These are not bilaterals.

[Serpico]

6 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

And just to clarify, I am not talking about simply topping the group by getting maximum points, or winning games in a group only, rather it's about beating all the teams playing WC and beating them easily. What does that prove?

It proves that India is a great team in winning when the stakes are slightly less. They're still world cup games against best opponents ofcourse, these wins showcase great set of skills and coordination, but the stakes of a single match are still low.

 

Keep in mind that, competitive sports test both physical and mental aspects before deciding the champion. Ofcourse we already know that kohli is good enough to chase 275 against Newzealand, we have countless examples to prove that. But is he good enough to handle the nerves if one loose shot will throw him out of the world cup and put a stinker on the last 4 years of his preparation?? Playing his trademark cover drive against Henry is great skill no doubt, but can he do that when his legacy is directly on the line? When is 0*(4) in a semi final? If he can do that in that situation, he will be the true champion. That is why semis and finals are important

[bowl_out]

The bigger farce would be if India remain undefeated through the league stage and then lose to NZ in the semi-final  (due to one hour of bad play )

This is why IPL playoffs make more sense than semi-finals