Ditto.My earliest cricketing memories are from that World Cup.
I'd have been 6-and-a-half during it.I turned five during that tournament
Some of mine, too. Remember a girl in my class at school being allowed to stay up all night to watch the South Africa games. I thought that was really cool!My earliest cricketing memories are from that World Cup. I turned five during that tournament, but remember adopting New Zealand as my team after hearing my family rave on about how well Martin Crowe was batting. When Crowe went off with his injury in that semi, I remember asking my dad why New Zealand didn't just go home.
There were clearly only three years between the 96 and 99 WCs...I know what you are trying to say but they brought it forwards on that occasion.Ditto.
I'd have been 6-and-a-half during it.
Anyway, since the original post hasn't had one direct reply yet... World Cups have gone: 1975, 1979, 1983, 1987/88, 1991/92, 1995/96, 1999, 2002/03, 2007, 2010/11. The fact that it's been transferred between England (for whom a season is one number) to other countries (where mostly they're a combination of two) means that things haven't been straightforward, but whatever way you look at it, there've always been 4 years between World Cups.
Hmmm. Richard's maths clearly not functioning too well, as there cannot be two four-year periods between 1995/96 and 2002/03.There were clearly only three years between the 96 and 99 WCs...I know what you are trying to say but they brought it forwards on that occasion.
In terms of months, yes; in terms of cricketing seasons, no. 1995/96 and 1999 can be said to have 4 years between it.There were clearly only three years between the 96 and 99 WCs
There certainly can. 1995-2003 = 8 years. 8\2=4.Hmmm. Richard's maths clearly not functioning too well, as there cannot be two four-year periods between 1995/96 and 2002/03.
Er, how?In terms of months, yes; in terms of cricketing seasons, no. 1995/96 and 1999 can be said to have 4 years between it.
The World Cup was played in the country which was amidst the 1991/92 season. The only obligation of the host country was to host it that season - not in calendar-year 1991 or calendar-year 1992. It'd have been plain daft to have hosted the World Cup in July 1991 in New Zealand.Don't get this 91/92 season thing. The entire WC was played in 92 (Feb-March I think?)
Why wasn't it just in 91 then? or 90/91 if your using seasons.
1995/96 is 4 years before 1999.Er, how?
Have said it before but - if something was wrong, I'd not say it.Richard reminds me of a famous Homer Simpson quote... " I'm not always right but I'm never wrong"..