It's that time of the working day when the mind wanders and the thought occured to me that, even after beating them in the final, England's number of wins in the tournament (5) was less than Australia's (6). By using Sir Alex's "results carry forward from previous round" method surely England as champions looks a grave injustice?
Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion
- As featured in The Independent.
"as much a news event as an actual footballer, a worthy stop-start centre forward, but an all-time hyper-galactico when it comes to doing funny things with cars and hats, a player whose signing proves once again that the Premier League is still undoubtedly the best in the world when it comes to doing things with cars and hats."
- Barney Ronay on Mario Balotelli
Yeah but Oz doesn't have Swanneh and are hence mere mortals by default.
It's just such a Dickinsonesque argument (in that SA presupposes the correctness of an assumption and then uses it to support a contention, in this case that prelim games exist "to find 4 best teams of the lot") I couldn't resist a playful jab.
I don't see any compelling arguments for carrying forward results from one round to the next; as I said before it raises the spectre of attempts at collusion like we saw in 1999. If a team isn't good enough to beat their opponents in subsequent rounds it seems unfair to me their results in previous chapters could separate them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)