Pak_Fan_4_Eva Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Pakistan have won more series in England than they have in Pakistan. I never knew that:adore:
special K Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 First off,it doesn't matter how many times you repeat yourself, it is not going to make your argument anymore valid. Australia and England started playing Cricket way before any other country so they're OBVIOUSLY expected to have had a headstart. In England's case, most of these wins came when England and Australia were the only major teams in Cricket. If you compare their wins/losses in modern times I'm sure England's record would look very ordinary. Australia however have always been a strong team throughout the history of Cricket and I'm sure their win/loss ratio would be higher in any time period anywhere in the world. Secondly, nobody is going to remember how many matches a particular team has won against another team in a certain part of the world whereas EVERYONE remembers how many times a particular team has won the world cup and to a lesser extent, other ICC trophies. This is exactly why world cups>head-to-head in the bigger picture. What's the point in winning meaningless bilateral series if you're going to flop time and again at the grandest stage. Thirdly, SA has been a very competitive team ever since they came back to International Cricket in 1992, much more so than England who were considered minnows throughout the 90's and early 2000's. Lastly, even in Test Cricket which you consider the best format of Cricket because it is the only version of Cricket your team is fairly good at, England have only been rated no.1 for about 4 months whereas Australia have been no.1 for several years and India have been no.1 for nearly 2 years. England has a long way to go before you can claim they're a better Cricketing nation overall. England and SA record since 2000 is virtually Identical. Difference is we've won three tests series against Aus unlike SA who've the one. India is a fair bit behind. And btw India has lost to Zimbabwe in a test match.:yay: We've won 30 more tests since 2000 then we've lost. And we're not onbly good at test cricket. We'ren good at 20/20's also. We own you in that also with 3 win to 1.
Adeel Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 I never knew that:adore: Pakistan have won more series in England than they have in Pakistan. Didn't know that too :omg:
deathmonger Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Didn't know that too :omg: Well India have lost to Eng once in 1933 at home. And since there wasn't partition that time..... Ok, let's be nice and share that loss between Ind and Pak That way England in India - 2.5 India in England - 3 England in Pakistan - 2.5 Pakistan in England - 3
deathmonger Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 England and SA record since 2000 is virtually Identical. Difference is we've won three tests series against Aus unlike SA who've the one. India is a fair bit behind. And btw India has lost to Zimbabwe in a test match.:yay: We've won 30 more tests since 2000 then we've lost. And we're not onbly good at test cricket. We'ren good at 20/20's also. We own you in that also with 3 win to 1. Even we have won three test series against Oz. And btw England lost to current WI team (who are crappier than the Zim team you mentioned which included your esteemed coach) in a test match.
Adeel Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Well India have lost to Eng once in 1933 at home. And since there wasn't partition that time..... Ok, let's be nice and share that loss between Ind and Pak That way England in India - 2.5 India in England - 3 England in Pakistan - 2.5 Pakistan in England - 3 Hamaray 4 bowlers thay aur tumharay 6 batsmen us team mai tou 1.9 hamara aur 2.7 tumhara :yay:
deathmonger Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Hamaray 4 bowlers thay aur tumharay 6 batsmen us team mai tou 1.9 hamara aur 2.7 tumhara :yay: Actually there were 5 muslim players in that squad. 4 migrated to pakistan. 2 batsmen and 2 bowlers.
NareshK Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 England has been a mediocre team in all formats as far as I can remember. Now they are getting a bit better in pacer friendly conditions in Tests but they continue to be crap in ODIs. They were beaten by Bangladesh and Ireland in the World Cup and lost the last 10 ODIs they played against India in India. That's a pretty dismal record.
Sundar88 Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 England and SA record since 2000 is virtually Identical. Difference is we've won three tests series against Aus unlike SA who've the one. India is a fair bit behind. And btw India has lost to Zimbabwe in a test match.:yay: We've won 30 more tests since 2000 then we've lost. And we're not onbly good at test cricket. We'ren good at 20/20's also. We own you in that also with 3 win to 1. England lost to Ireland and Bangladesh in a WORLD CUP. India = 2 time world champs, 1-time champ trophy winners, 1-time world t20 winners, no.1 ranked test team for 22 months. England = 1-time world t20 winners and no.1 ranked test team for 4 months. As you can see India>England in Tests and ODI's whereas in T20 both teams are more or less equal if you don't count the inconsequential one-off T20 matches they've played. The only thing England are better at than India is being thrashed in a game they invented.
special K Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 India is not better at tests. You greatest ever victory was a narrow series win in England back in 07. The rain saved you at Lords when you were 9 down and Monty was denied a clear wicket, otherwise that was a drawn series. Since 2000 we've won 30 tests more then we've lost. India has something like 15 more wins then losses. 20/20 we one you. The IPL's best players are all foreigners. Champions trophy is a joke trophy. You never won it either, you drew with Sri Lanka. you've spent 22 months at the top. We've been there years and years. Test cricket never started in 2007.
special K Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 We have more wins against India in 20/20's and tests. A small country where football is the national sport dominating a country with a population of over a billion people.:clap:
wobblydoggy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 We have more wins against India in 20/20's and tests. A small country where football is the national sport dominating a country with a population of over a billion people.:clap: Only at present due to the corruption within the BCCI When India gets a better group of people running their board they will eventually emerge to dominate World Cricket like the Aus did IMHO
howzatandall Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 India is not better at tests. You greatest ever victory was a narrow series win in England back in 07. The rain saved you at Lords when you were 9 down and Monty was denied a clear wicket, otherwise that was a drawn series. Since 2000 we've won 30 tests more then we've lost. India has something like 15 more wins then losses. 20/20 we one you. The IPL's best players are all foreigners. Champions trophy is a joke trophy. You never won it either, you drew with Sri Lanka. you've spent 22 months at the top. We've been there years and years. Test cricket never started in 2007. England havent been top for years you lying sack of rubbish.
daryl1985 Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 We have more wins against India in 20/20's and tests. A small country where football is the national sport dominating a country with a population of over a billion people.:clap: India obviously underachieve in cricket (with the population being larger than any other countries). However, i don't agree with England's selection policy. Jonathan Trott (an English Grandmother) and Eoin Morgan (not English at all) should not be allowed to play for England. At least the whole Indian team is 100% Indian.
wobblydoggy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 England havent been top for years you lying sack of rubbish. No you are right we haven't, but we have been rising up with a new squad of players and younger ones all getting experience abroad. What are India doing? Mainly relying on 39 year olds and counting IPL money, if you want to be respected, then make the difficult choices in your test team and sort out your corrupt board
wobblydoggy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 India obviously underachieve in cricket (with the population being larger than any other countries). However' date=' i don't agree with England's selection policy. Jonathan Trott (an English Grandmother) and Eoin Morgan (not English at all) should not be allowed to play for England. At least the whole Indian team is 100% Indian.[/quote'] Be fair to Irish players we are pretty much a group of small islands in alliance (see recent $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ bail out by Uk of Sothern Ireland) They are pretty British, surely you do not resent us casting our net fifty miles, when you have so many to chose from?
special K Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Only at present due to the corruption within the BCCI When India gets a better group of people running their board they will eventually emerge to dominate World Cricket like the Aus did IMHO Nah I'm not convinced. They should dominate with the population they've got and the being a cricket mad country. But they have little interest in test cricket. They only care about ODI's, even their fans here prioritize one day cricket. I doubt they'll ever be a top team in tests like the Aussies or Windies were. They'll be a top team in ODI's and be up there on 20/20 because that form of the game is a lottery. The current West Indies could easily win the next 20/20 world cup if they hit some form.
deathmonger Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 India is not better at tests. You greatest ever victory was a narrow series win in England back in 07. The rain saved you at Lords when you were 9 down and Monty was denied a clear wicket, otherwise that was a drawn series. Since 2000 we've won 30 tests more then we've lost. India has something like 15 more wins then losses. 20/20 we one you. The IPL's best players are all foreigners. Champions trophy is a joke trophy. You never won it either, you drew with Sri Lanka. you've spent 22 months at the top. We've been there years and years. Test cricket never started in 2007. What were you doing in the 85-86 series when we defeated you 2-0 in England. Check your history. Also Oval in 2007 we would have easily won if follow on had been enforced. As for Champion's trophy we are joint winners with SL. And just because England didn't win it does not mean it's a joke. The only thing that is a joke is the Ashes. If it were a joke then your mythical World Test Championship would not have been cancelled for the Champion's trophy. And as for your being at the top for years and years that's when there were two teams. You've also been at the bottom for a while. IPL's best players being foreign means nothing. EPL's best players are foreign. You have won one T20 world cup, same as us. In ODIs which you forget to mention each time we have creamed you repeatedly.
special K Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 India obviously underachieve in cricket (with the population being larger than any other countries). However' date=' i don't agree with England's selection policy. Jonathan Trott (an English Grandmother) and Eoin Morgan (not English at all) should not be allowed to play for England. At least the whole Indian team is 100% Indian.[/quote'] Jonathan Trott has English ancestry. Has an English name, looks English and even speaks English. So why shouldn't he play for England? Eoin Morgon is a poach but so what? He wants to play test cricket so we provide it to him. Not every Indian is born in India, but many support Indian cricket and consider themselves Indian. Same thing applies to Trott.
wobblydoggy Posted January 14, 2012 Posted January 14, 2012 Nah I'm not convinced. They should dominate with the population they've got and the being a cricket mad country. But they have little interest in test cricket. They only care about ODI's, even their fans here prioritize one day cricket. I doubt they'll ever be a top team in tests like the Aussies or Windies were. They'll be a top team in ODI's and be up there on 20/20 because that form of the game is a lottery. The current West Indies could easily win the next 20/20 world cup if they hit some form. They are young in world cricket and unfortunately the one day game has been prevalent for most of the time that they have been watching cricket. For old farts like me who grew up listening to tests on the radio, there is only one real form, Test Cricket But, give them time, if you are a real cricket fan there is nothing more pure than a real test of ball against bat. All these grandiose slogfests pail into the gloom when compared to such battles like Donald- Atherton Boycott- Vrs WI The World Vrs Warne:haha:
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