Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 52

Thread: Worst World Cup "on paper"

  1. #1
    International Coach social's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    12,607

    Worst World Cup "on paper"

    Ok, so everyone knows that Australia aren't as good "on paper" as they have been for quite some time.

    However, having watched a number of the other major countries over the past few months, the standard of the other teams in this WC really appears to be relatively poor as well

    SA are representative of most teams in that they have an excellent core group of players but have precious little to back it up

    SL have some high quality batsmen but will only field a couple of decent bowlers

    Ditto India

    Ditto NZ but with only one bowler

    Pakistan are anyone's guess

    WI are no hope

    Only England look balanced but they lack players of the highest quality

    I'd go as far to say that every major nation, bar possibly England, could point to virtually any team that they have fielded in the past 15-20 years and declare them better "on paper"

    Dont get me wrong, I'm expecting an exciting contest as there is no longer a dominant team, but the overall standard simply doesnt appear to be there IMO
    Last edited by social; 19-01-2011 at 11:59 AM.

  2. #2
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend smalishah84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    21,769
    Quote Originally Posted by social View Post
    Ok, so everyone knows that Australia aren't as good "on paper" as they have been for quite some time.

    However, having watched a number of the other major countries over the past few months, the standard of the other teams in this WC really appears to be relatively poor as well

    SA are representative of most teams in that they have an excellent core group of players but have precious little to back it up

    SL have some high quality batsmen but will only field a couple of decent bowlers

    Ditto India

    Ditto NZ but with only one bowler

    Pakistan are anyone's guess

    WI are no hope

    Only England look balanced but they lack players of the highest quality

    I'd go as far to say that every major nation, bar possibly England, could point to virtually any team that they have fielded in the past 15-20 years and declare them better "on paper"

    Dont get me wrong, I'm expecting an exciting contest as there is no longer a dominant team, but the overall standard simply doesnt appear to be there IMO
    I think the only exception to your rule, alongwith England, might be India. This seems to be their strongest team fielded in a wc to date. That is debatable too. But you do have a very valid point. Pakistan might be fielding their weakest ever team since the 1983 wc.
    And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW

    Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,456
    Quote Originally Posted by social View Post
    Ok, so everyone knows that Australia aren't as good "on paper" as they have been for quite some time.

    However, having watched a number of the other major countries over the past few months, the standard of the other teams in this WC really appears to be relatively poor as well

    SA are representative of most teams in that they have an excellent core group of players but have precious little to back it up

    SL have some high quality batsmen but will only field a couple of decent bowlers

    Ditto India

    Ditto NZ but with only one bowler

    Pakistan are anyone's guess

    WI are no hope

    Only England look balanced but they lack players of the highest quality

    I'd go as far to say that every major nation, bar possibly England, could point to virtually any team that they have fielded in the past 15-20 years and declare them better "on paper"

    Dont get me wrong, I'm expecting an exciting contest as there is no longer a dominant team, but the overall standard simply doesnt appear to be there IMO
    Not sure about the others, but there haven't been too many better Indian ODI sides. This is quite possibly the best Indian ODI side post-1983.

  4. #4
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend Furball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Anyone But England
    Posts
    20,252
    Interesting post, and for once () I agree with social.

    However, both the format and that lack of a genuinely stand out side (bar perhaps India) should IMO make for quite an exciting tournament.

    Australia in the last tournament were fantastic to watch, I don't think you'll find many ODI sides as good as the 2007 side - but watching them utterly smash the competition out of sight did get a bit boring as the tournament wore on.


  5. #5
    Cricket Web Staff Member Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    41,728
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerFurball View Post
    Interesting post, and for once () I agree with social.

    However, both the format and that lack of a genuinely stand out side (bar perhaps India) should IMO make for quite an exciting tournament.

    Australia in the last tournament were fantastic to watch, I don't think you'll find many ODI sides as good as the 2007 side - but watching them utterly smash the competition out of sight did get a bit boring as the tournament wore on.
    For you maybe
    WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
    "People make me happy.. not places.. people"

    "When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson

    "Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn

  6. #6
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    32,624
    I have doubts over whether I'll see a side as powerful as the WC07 one assembled, well, any time in the next few decades. So of course this WC will be weaker when that is the benchmark.
    + time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +


    get ready for a broken ****in' arm

  7. #7
    Request Your Custom Title Now! benchmark00's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Is this CricketWeb's greatest poster in the short history of the forum?
    Posts
    37,156
    It's a known fact that world cups are a better spectacle when they're played on turf pitches opposed to paper ones.
    Parmi | #1 draft pick | Jake King is **** | Big Bash League tipping champion of the universe
    Come and Paint Turtle
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono View Post
    Kohli. Do something in test cricket for once please.

    Thanks.

  8. #8
    International Coach howardj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    brisbane
    Posts
    12,876
    I agree - not a great WC on paper in terms of the strength of the teams.

    The format is ****ed too. No Super Sixes, just straight to the QFs. This has the double whammy of less good games, and at least under the Super Sixes everyone played each other and therefore you had the most deserving four teams advancing to the Semi Final stage.

    I think the format from the 1999 World Cup in England was the best - it was the best World Cup I have seen.

    12 nations – 2 Group of 6 (9 test playing nations + 3 qualifiers)
    Super Six Stage
    Semi-finals
    Final
    - Winner of the 2011 and 2012 CricketWeb AFL tipping competition

    - Winner of the 2011, 2012 and 2013 CricketWeb NRL tipping competition

  9. #9
    International Coach howardj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    brisbane
    Posts
    12,876
    NZ and Pak seem particularly weak.

  10. #10
    JJD Heads Athlai's Avatar
    Duck Hunt Champion! Plops Champion!
    Tournaments Won: 2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    ksfls;fsl:lsFJg/s
    Posts
    27,623
    Pakistan's weakness is overstated, their ODI team will be pretty decent. Losing Asif, Amir and Butt doesn't really weaken their limited overs teams all that much.

    New Zealand are an interesting one, if we had Bond you could argue this would be our best world cup team in a while. Yet without him our pace attack seems toothless, still got plenty of potential despite all our humiliating recent losses.

    This is going to be a good world cup because pretty much anyone could get to the semi finals.
    Direbirds FTW!

    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    Wellington will win the whole thing next year. Mark my words.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    I'll offer up my avatar to Athlai forever if Wellington wins the Champions League.
    President of T.I.T.S
    Tamim Is Talented Society

  11. #11
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Locked up inside my opium den, surrounded by some Chinamen
    Posts
    45,261
    Quote Originally Posted by howardj View Post
    I agree - not a great WC on paper in terms of the strength of the teams.

    The format is ****ed too. No Super Sixes, just straight to the QFs. This has the double whammy of less good games, and at least under the Super Sixes everyone played each other and therefore you had the most deserving four teams advancing to the Semi Final stage.

    I think the format from the 1999 World Cup in England was the best - it was the best World Cup I have seen.

    12 nations – 2 Group of 6 (9 test playing nations + 3 qualifiers)
    Super Six Stage
    Semi-finals
    Final
    100% agreed re the format; it was the fact that quarter-finals meant the group stages were rendered, to all intents and purposes, redundant in 1996 that lead to the creation of the "Super Sixes" in 99. But after India and Pakistan failed last time the ICC obviously feel the need to cook the books again to (pretty much) guarantee the big 8 all safely advance. & even if one of the big countries contive to eff up they're guaranteed 6 games.

    In 96 we qualified for the quarters by beating the might of UAE & the Netherlands; this time we can safely lose to India, SA & the Windies & as long as we beat the Irish, the Dutch and the Banglas we'll be right.
    Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "I don't believe a word of Pietersen's book, but then I don't believe a word anyone else has said either."
    - Simon Barnes renders further comment on KP's autobiography superfluous in a sentence

  12. #12
    International Coach howardj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    brisbane
    Posts
    12,876
    Yep, we need 42 group games to eliminate Zim, Canada, Kenya, Bangers, Ireland and Netherlands and estalish that they aren't in the best eight teams.

    OK, there may be an upset and WI may dip out to Bangers.

    But ****, do we really need 42 matches to estalish the above, and 42 matches wherre no points accrued carry over to tne next stage.

  13. #13
    State Vice-Captain laksh_01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    India
    Posts
    1,175
    I hate super 6&8. Keep it simple like Fifa WC & Rugby WC. Groups>Quarters>Semis>Finals. I like this format better then past 3 CWCs. The point wen CWC gets boring is during Super 6&8 rounds. The boring pace of Super 8 is wat hit the 2007 CWC not India & Pakistan exit & definitely not the number of nations. This only problem I see with 2011 WC is the 1st round. I would have preferred 16 team Wc Groups (4x4) > Quarters > Semis > Finals. Fast - short & thrilling. Thats wat everyone wants not the boring extension to 2 months.
    Friends, I've started a group for all the WCL fans on facebook. So, who ever is interested pls join... Search "Non-Test Cricket Playing Nations!" in facebook. Thanks...

    Cricket Is The Best Sport On Earth, It Deserves More Respect, More Partispating Nations & More Fans. Lets Do Our Best To Spread The Game, Friends.

    <<<<<LAKSH>>>>>

  14. #14
    International Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,374
    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze 18 View Post
    Not sure about the others, but there haven't been too many better Indian ODI sides. This is quite possibly the best Indian ODI side post-1983.
    Didn't the side in 2003 have a better or more inform bowling attack?

  15. #15
    vcs
    vcs is offline
    International Coach vcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    India
    Posts
    10,305
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    It's a known fact that world cups are a better spectacle when they're played on turf pitches opposed to paper ones.
    This.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Future of Cricket, suggestion to the ICC
    By LA ICE-E in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 170
    Last Post: 01-12-2011, 03:16 PM
  2. The Best and The Worst of 2010
    By ripper868 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 20-12-2010, 12:12 PM
  3. Best World Cup 2010 Promos
    By silentstriker in forum 2010 Football World Cup - South Africa
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-07-2010, 01:50 PM
  4. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 08-05-2009, 01:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •