Again, your reading comprehension is taking you adrift.
Shifting the Goal post again ? Here is what you said (You talked about a match not being no. 1 or two) :-
"the difference between Ponting and Sachin is that is Sachin scores runs; regardless of how the team does, he is ok. If Ponting scores runs and loses a match; people want his head. "
How have I shifted the goal posts? I did generalise, but I did not shift the posts. It's true; if Australia don't win, people look to Ponting. It doesn't matter that we lost to India for a decade because India had hardly been our main rivals. If we had lost our #1 position to India because of those losses, with the team that we had then, it'd be a completely different ball-game.
In any case you are wrong, there was no national holiday. Secondly unlike Australia, India has had very few sporting success and then we have our way of celebrating stuff. We did so after 1983 WC, T20 WC, Victory in Triangular series in Australia. Infact we do it after every major sporting achievement, I sill remember the celebration we had in 1998 when India won the Hockey Gold medal in Asian games after 20 years.
For you to come and question our way of celebrating our victory basically tells us about your ignorance of the culture itself. I would recommend you to visit India and participate in an Indian wedding, you will see it is completely different from an Aussie wedding, we just celebrate things differently.
Erm, I wasn't talking about India, I was talking about Australia. I said when we won, WE didn't have a national holiday about it showing that there wasn't this grand interest in finally beating India as you seem to think there has been by your questioning of the pressure of when we lost. Obviously, if they don't make a huge ruckus about it when we lose, they're not going to start a parade just because we won. The only series that could be as important as a clash for #1 for Australians are the Ashes; and that's merely because of the tradition and history surrounding it.
Just because you put it in bold doesn't mean that it came that way. There was no comma, it seemed the whose statement was some sort of fact, when it clearly isn't.
[/SIZE]
Next time do the decent thing and ask instead of going on a tirade. I even clarified what I meant and you still insisted I meant something else. If I had meant it, I'd say I meant it.
Yeah we get it. Australia are permitted to retain their no.1 status till the next warne and mcgrath are born and play for them and other teams manage to beat them then.
Waitaminute, india did that in 01 dim't they?
Na, i'm a dimwit, warne was not at his peak then, and of course india weren't contenders to no.1, so it matters little.
Right, ikki?
Well, you said it this time
.
I am not saying it mattered little when India beat us at other times. I said there is a whole different pressure being #1 and beating us when we are coming to take that from you. You can't point to 01 as being comparable because, guess what, you weren't #1 or contenders.
@ this whole thread and the blokes arguing that Sachin has done nothing at WCs. How this number of people clutch on to that single feeble straw, I will never know.. 
