Austin 3:!6 Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 Even in 1992 under Imran bhai...we achieved this, even in 1992 we were cornered tigers, even in 1992 luck was with us and we might repeat 1992 again in 2015. 1992 this...1992 that...1992 then :giggle: Now that you sorry souls realise this is 2015 and not 1992, I wish you a safe flight back home straight to Karachi. Bye Bye Pakistan :bye::bye::bye:
Precambrian Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 I just don't understand the hyping up of WC 92 win. The whole tournament, Pakis won fewer matches than NZ did. Shows how stupid the format of the tournament that a team that finishes joint second in total wins tally actually gets to win the World cup.
ViruDilSeKhelo Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 Good thread. Keep hearing 1992 this and that, I mean get with the friggin time. It's like a minnow talking about one lucky time. You don't even see Indians keep saying oh 83 or oh 11 and we are the defending champions. What the guy on top said is true. They were very lucky to win it with that format.
Ranjha Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 The reason they bring it up is because they hoped for a similarity. Pakistan started off poorly in 92 as well and turned the corner around and after beating SA this time after starting poorly, they were hoping for the same. All fans hope the best for their team. It's alright. But the fact is that their batting is super weak and fielding horrendous. And bowling weak after some key names missing and a proven failure afridi in the team.
bones Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 I just don't understand the hyping up of WC 92 win. The whole tournament' date=' Pakis won fewer matches than NZ did. Shows how stupid the format of the tournament that a team that finishes joint second in total wins tally actually gets to win the World cup.[/quote'] No, it shows that one team won when it mattered. NZ may have won more matches, they didn't win the ones that mattered. For example NZ beat Aus in the group game in this WC, but if they win the WC they will have won the matches that mattered the most.
cricketfan28 Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 luck doesn't happen every time .. but they always had great fast bowlers
bones Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 But the fact is that their batting is super weak and fielding horrendous. And bowling weak after some key names missing and a proven failure afridi in the team. Without 4 first choice bowlers, Pakistan still put together a potent bowling attack that held it's own. The bowling has and never will be the issue. If not for the flat wickets we see all the time, the bowlers would be more successful. The problem is the rubbish batting, probably the 2nd worst batting line up in the tournament.
Vijy Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 Without 4 first choice bowlers, Pakistan still put together a potent bowling attack that held it's own. The bowling has and never will be the issue. If not for the flat wickets we see all the time, the bowlers would be more successful. The problem is the rubbish batting, probably the 2nd worst batting line up in the tournament. Whose was the worst? You also forgot the horrible fielding.
Ranjha Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 I just don't understand the hyping up of WC 92 win. The whole tournament' date=' Pakis won fewer matches than NZ did. Shows how stupid the format of the tournament that a team that finishes joint second in total wins tally actually gets to win the World cup.[/quote'] Worldcup is about winning when it matters. SA won all their league games in 96 and lost to Windies in quarters.
bones Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 luck doesn't happen every time .. but they always had great fast bowlers No such thing as luck in sport. You make your own luck. They won in 1992 because they earnt it, they are out in the QF this time, because they deserve it.
bones Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 Whose was the worst? You also forgot the horrible fielding. The worst is UAE. Bangladesh, England, Scotland, Ireland and Afghanistan all have better batting line ups.
cricketfan28 Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 No such thing as luck in sport. You make your own luck. They won in 1992 because they earnt it' date=' they are out in the QF this time, because they deserve it.[/quote'] i will give that but evry team must have that luck not only paki ...
bones Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 i will give that but evry team must have that luck not only paki ... No luck involved. It's not a one off game they won't they won enough matches to win the tournament, the right ones as well. The words "luck" and "if" should not be used when discussing sport in this way.
Stuge Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 Moment of Silence those, who felt this is 1992 World Cup
Autonomous Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 I never felt this was 1992. Even 1992 was fluke, But in this world cup just loved how the team bounced back after poor start up. And excellent fast bowling has entertained us,Don't care about a QF exit, Im very much okay with it because Pak played good cricket except a few lows. Hopefully Haris and Maqsood get experience by this. Time to drop hack akmal
NareshK Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 Bye bye Corn Tigers. Go home and make some Corn Soup. :bye:
cricketfan28 Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 dil dil paki ... they lost to the best team ..
Cricket_Hacker Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 they did as expected.Their odi record was minnow-esque in 2014
ViruDilSeKhelo Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 dil dil paki ... they lost to the best team .. Struggled to over 200 batting like tests, that really is minnow :hysterical:
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