Zero_Unit Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 ^ thats was your best answer? If you can't win games you don't get a chance to qualify, simple as that. What BD and IRE did later on is not the concern here. Both IND and PAK managed to find the exit early. It was not BD's or IRE's problem that they went to loose with them. And not to mention, we had a chance to kick SL's behind and we failed to do that aswell. And if we did manage the win against Lanka then our NRR would have been higher then BD's. So who is to blame here? BD or us? Why do you think they reduced the teams to 14 from 16? So that they can make 2 groups out of 7 teams meaning more chance for India and Pakistan NOT TO FLOP! And BTW what makes you think IND or PAK would have done a heck of a better job in 2nd round after the AWESOME performance they gave before getting the boot from the tournament? ... Don't tell me you did not enjoy the pressure ENG was under just the other night. I enjoyed it alot. Like I said in a previous thread, by 2015 the BD of today will be facing the big boys of today HEAD to HEAD. IRE and ZIM will be where BD is today. CAN and NL will probably be where BD was in 2007. You can already see the improvement in all 3 of those cricket nations. Espacialy look at where IRE came from ... It amazes me so see a fan so closed in a box. Learn to see outside the box. Your thinking is biased toward India.
gaurav92 Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 ^Not at all. I did enjoy the Eng Ned game, but I am sure they would be pwned ruthlessly against India. The reason they did well was 1) The track was a belter. I am sure you would agree on this :) 2) They were always good players of pace bowling, and With a track, as flat and flaccid as that of Nagpore, India would have piled on 350+ surely. Not to undermine a brilliant performance from them though. 3) English pacers didn't bowl with intent, they kept dishing freebies and "hit me away" balls too often. 4) Neds didn't play Swanny well, they were found guessing against Swanny, even though the track offered nothing for him. It was hard as a rock, not a single ball kept low, or Spun an inch. So clearly they struggle a bit. 5) England missed a few chances on the field. Well it can happen, but I am sure even if the Neds had made 300-320 score, Eng would have chased that down, because of the inexperience of the Dutch men to grab the opportunity with both the hands, and to panic at the crucial stages would have been easily traced by the Englishmen. But have to say that they are improving. And yes I agree with you about the Bangladeshi side, they are also improving a great deal, and I will not be surprised if they compete head to head with the other teams in the next World Cup. I am not sure about the other minnows though. They don't get much international exposure, no tournaments away from their home conditions against the Bigger teams. ICC should allow them to make bilateral tournaments in SL India and Bangladesh too so that team like Ireland, Holland and Scotland get a chance to see how the tracks in Sub-continent behave. And of course some tours downunder to see how the bouncy tracks behave, just for the international exposure and a kind of tester as to how much have they improved and how much work needs to be done to improve further.
Zero_Unit Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 ^^ Yes to all! Now we have a better understanding with each other :)
girishk14 Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 My views: 1. Throw Canada, Hong Kong, etc out - no ones interested in seeing immigrants play cricket in countries where the locals have just no interest. No ones gonna spend much time or money on cricket either. 2. Cricket gives them billions. So let the players do something for cricket, play a Ind XI vs Rest of Subcontinent XI series in grounds like blore, chennai, eden and raise money to imrpove their neighbour Afghanistans cricket infrastructure. 3. Use T20 to popularise the game. But that doesn't mean the world cup should become a champions trophy + bang + zimb, where the latter 2 are as good as knocked out, thus making it a long version of champs trophy.
Kriterion Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 Bangladesh ranking is due to WI player strike. fair point, but WI would be only 10 pts ahead even without a player strike.
Kriterion Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 i think most people are forgetting what is really important. as vvslaxman stated - and its not often i agree with him - cricket is about a culture and building that takes time. even when its there it takes time for the effects to trickle down into performances. but there has to be a start. what is of utmost relevance is that Associates with potential (performance + history) need to be seperated from those that do not. there are only 2 associate nations that i think merit a world cup spot - Ireland and Afghanistan. If the Netherlands continues as they started against England they'll join the club. But Ireland and Afghanista are the only two associate nations who have consistently topped the non-Test charts. All other teams occilate wildly from one season to teh next. Ireland and Afghanistan also have the potential of seeing significant home-grown support. With the Afghans, it exists already. Canada, Kenya, Bermuda, UAE, Oman, Hong Kong are worthless. They are just immigrants from the subcontinent who were maybe club cricketers back home and get a trip to the WC every 4 years only to get whipped. They should continue to play amongst themselves in the WCL, etc, and the ICC should save the money of sending them to the world cup and instead try to pupularize the game in their countries. The ICC should really try to tap into the Chinese and US markets, even Russia might be a possible adventure. Those countries have large enough populations where even if you ever got 5% of the sports fanatics interested in cricket, they could have a player base large enough to theoretically support Test cricket. And expanding Test cricket should be the ultimate goal of the ICC. 5% of Russia's population is still bigger than 100% of NZ and West Indies' population, so the math makes sense. So the 2015 World Cup should have 12 teams, with 2 associates who should be picked on a 4 year ODI ratings table so that an upset at the WC Qualifiers doesn't see worthless Kenya playing ahead of Afghanistan. That way everyone wins. The best teams will almost guaranteed to be there, all minnows have a chance at qualifcation, and qualification is earned.
gaurav92 Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 ^^ Yes to all! Now we have a better understanding with each other :) Glad to hear that :) :icflove:
DaFan Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 10 teams is a good format to have. yep. Aus, SA, Ind, Eng, Sl, Pak, Nz, WI, Zim, Ireland. Keep Bangladesh away from WC 2015.
someone Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 Here is my view, please do comment. I think to answer this question, we must consider 3 questions? 1) How to define minnows? 2) Should minnows get to play in world cup? 3) If so, how many spots they should have? Question 1 is not as easy as one thinks. Is minnows a team that India does not play? Do they also include teams like Bangladesh whom do not have great record in ODI. But we have forgotten, there is a people aspect, if cricket is No.1 sport in the country, so how can they be classified as minnow? 2)Arrogance is a bad thing when clearly we India can also be classified as minnow just few years back when we used to have competitive matches only against Zimbabwe and pretty poor rankings. And more importantly, how can minnow not deserve a chance to compete in the biggest competition(world cup), if that was the case, India should not even play in any Olympics, football etc. And cricket was not our own sports, we ourselves got it from some immigrants. 3) Now, this is the major issue. Pretty sure every minded person will agree minnows deserve to play, but the next question is how many which is where people have very different answers. My answer is very simple, it does not matter how many teams play as if the schedule is good, the key teams will remain the focus unlike diminshing interest by long breaks for the key teams much like this years WC. If this year WC, had two matches a day, pretty sure this issue would not be raised as people would be busy commenting on their team matches who would be playing with shorter break as compared to current situation.
vvvslaxman Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 Difference in class between teams is humongous. NZ murdered Kenya Then NZ was murdered by Ozzies
girishk14 Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 The Olympics point is very true and valid. Whats the point of India going to olympics? To scatch through with 10 medals having the second biggest population in the world? Canada (18 medals in 08) and Kenya(14 medals) have been doing way better than us (3 medals). They arent complaining that we minnows make the Olympics boring and less competitive. We are happy getting those 3 medals. Same way, they are happy in WC making the occasional upsets, and playing against the best and acheiving (eg. Rizwan whacking worlds best bowler, Ryan Ten century, Kenyas disciplined bowling). In retrospect, I agree, Olympics arent getting boring cos of India, cos each sport isnt a 7 hour ordeal. But WC is hell boring cos of these pointless matches.
Ashrafool Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 It's the schedule which is ruining the cup...not the minnows One game per day. Is ICC really that dumb? For today we have huge game coming up in Sri Lanka vs Kenya:two_thumbs_up:
Clarke Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 support kenya today Dude Himalaya Putra, move to Mt. Kilimanjaro. Kenya shouldn't be far from there.
Sir john Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 Dude Himalaya Putra' date=' move to Mt. Kilimanjaro. Kenya shouldn't be far from there.[/quote']
ganeshran Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 I agree all minnow matches should be 2 per day.. not this torture happening currently
Raghav_12 Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Bump.. So what people think after today's Ireland performance ?
coffee_rules Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 One match doesn't make up for a month of mediocrity. Good one, Ireland. Thanks for taking revenge on India's behalf.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now