• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Semi Finals

pasag

RTDAS
This sort of comment has its downsides and is not entirely valid.

Take for example the 1996 World Cup. Everyone would agree that Aus was the best team leading upto the final. SL caused probably the biggest upset in world cricket at the time by winning the final, and that too relatively easily.

Everyone thought it was a flash in the pan and that Aus just had a bad day (if you were an Aus fan)

A few weeks after the final, Steve Waugh even went onto say in an interview that "Its a pity that we lost to SL...if we had played them 10 times, we would have won 9 times" - Bert Newton show, Channel 9.

What happened next? Aus toured SL a few months later for the Singer Cup. They lost to SL in the preliminary game in a close contest. Then the Lankans walloped Aus in the Singer Cup Final. Suddenly, it was 3 played, 3 lost to the so called top dog.

Now go back to Pasag's original comment. Perhaps you may think a bit differently.

The champions is the winner of the final - no ifs and buts....the whole campaign to win a cup must be geared towards this goal. Not just maintaining for a the longest period of time.
Right. I'm not strongly disagreeing with any of that really and I would never begrudge a side that won, say Sri Lanka, New Zealand or South Africa in this World Cup. However, in general as a sports follower, I don't like supporting the underdog in finals situations and I rather the side that has dominated throughout the year and has clearly been the best win it. That's just me however. When my side Carlton got into the 99 Grand Final, they didn't deserve to be there, they fluked their way in and where no way near the second best side in the comp. More like 6th best and when they lost the Grand Final convincingly I wasn't even that upset because we didn't deserve to win (if we did, like 93 I'd be inconsolable).

There is however an argument against this that you could say that whoever wins in finals situations, under that pressure is infact the better side and deserves to win, no matter what happened during the year. But that's not a huge (deciding) factor imo.
 

meatspx

U19 Cricketer
No offence to the Aussies on this board....but there are too many 'pansies' or 'poofs' in your current side.

I don't think the likes of Watson or Clark (or anyone with blonde hair for that matter) will be able to handle the pressure of a World Cup final. I'd rather have the mongrel street smarts of a Craig McMillan or Piggy Styris any day of the week over a bunch of fairies.

Have I mentioned the canary yellow yet?
 

Fiery

Banned
You're back :) Good to see, the Watson love has been out of control after that knock he played against us, we need you to put those damn Aussies back in their place.
G'day Perm. I have to be on my best behaviour. I'm on a final warning from James. He has organised a probation officer to check on me daily. Not sure who that is yet...probably Richard ;)
 

Fiery

Banned
No offence to the Aussies on this board....but there are too many 'pansies' or 'poofs' in your current side.

I don't think the likes of Watson or Clark (or anyone with blonde hair for that matter) will be able to handle the pressure of a World Cup final. I'd rather have the mongrel street smarts of a Craig McMillan or Piggy Styris any day of the week over a bunch of fairies.

Have I mentioned the canary yellow yet?
:laugh: *high fives meatspx*
 

pasag

RTDAS
No offence to the Aussies on this board....but there are too many 'pansies' or 'poofs' in your current side.

I don't think the likes of Watson or Clark (or anyone with blonde hair for that matter) will be able to handle the pressure of a World Cup final. I'd rather have the mongrel street smarts of a Craig McMillan or Piggy Styris any day of the week over a bunch of fairies.

Have I mentioned the canary yellow yet?
Yeah, Ponting, Hayden and McGrath get criticised for being to hard, too one-eyed (admittedly not by you), Watson and others get criticised for being too soft. There is literally no winning with some and as I said before, things start going into the irrational to try and find ways to dislike the team when at the end of the day, it's because they win alot and chances are they've beaten your side recently.

It's a fair price to pay for whooping all your arses though :D (**** of Cameron)
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah, Ponting, Hayden and McGrath get criticised for being to hard, too one-eyed (admittedly not by you), Watson and others get criticised for being too soft. There is literally no winning with some and as I said before, things start going into the irrational to try and find ways to dislike the team when at the end of the day, it's because they win alot and chances are they've beaten your side recently.

It's a fair price to pay for whooping all your arses though :D (**** of Cameron)
Basically what it comes down to is people like to find excuses to criticise them, becausing disliking them simply for being Australian isn't really much of a reason.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
I know it may be a bit much to ask, but I'd still like to see at least one "neutral" fan come in here and say something to the tune of "I'd like to see Australia win it because they have the best side at the moment, have played the best cricket in the tournament and hence deserve it the most." Still yet to happen and I somehow doubt it will now, but it's a perfectly sound reasoning that I'm somewhat surprised hasn't been considered yet.
I agree with that, but on one condition that SL at full strength could've tested them at Grenada , although I don't know if they will if they happen to get to Bridgetown where the conditions will favour the Aussies.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Just because it might get boring for (some) to see Aussies win all the time doesn't mean that the Aussies are getting anything on a platter, they have worked their backsides off to remain so consistent for such a long time so all credit needs to go to them.


Other teams just haven't been good enough to match upto the Aussies, so i would love to see the Aussies win and be crowned as the (deserving) world champions for the 3rd time in a row.
Agree with this too.

But any of the four teams at this stage of World Cup can on their day if they play to their best potential upset the Aussies ....and I repeat upset because it would only be a one off occurrence if it happened.
 

pasag

RTDAS
I agree with that, but on one condition that SL at full strength could've tested them at Grenada , although I don't know if they will if they happen to get to Bridgetown where the conditions will favour the Aussies.
Chasing 226? Highly doubtful tbh - If SL's batsman had made 260/270 I'd agree with you.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
Chasing 226? Highly doubtful tbh - If SL's batsman had made 260/270 I'd agree with you.
Murali, Vaas, Malinga have managed to restrict a lot of Teams under 200 -230, and with the conditions at Grenada , there is a very high possibility Aussies would've struggled against Murali and Malinga at Grenada. I am not saying that SL would've won, but it would've been a close run thing IMO.

May be I am saying this from a patriotic point of view, but I am sure their presence would've also meant the batting may have contributed a bit more resolutely than with a sense of non chalance given to a match you expect to lose anyway, if you get my drift.
 

Top