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?
- As featured in The Independent.
"Predictably, the ending of his international career did not end the argument about Pietersen's merits, as an army of informed commentators and Piers Morgan weighed in to defend or attack him."
- The Guardian's Andrew Anthony
Yeah but Oz doesn't have Swanneh and are hence mere mortals by default.
This was a serious post:
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)