Rolling World Cup squad thread

[Wedge McManus]

Your 'evidence' would presumably mean that New Zealand is one of the worst Test nations right now, given their abysmal win rate of 95 out 431 - worse than Scotland's ODI record.

And when the West Indies were number one, presumably they weren't really number one because they had such a terrible win rate before that.

And look at this graph, taken prior to the Aus/Ind ODI series:

From this, we can only conclude that Australia is the worst ODI nation. Right?

I don't know why you are so upset? They get to play alot of cricket around the world, play in the world cups, play top teams during their England tours and lose most of their games... Prompting me to utter an opinion that they are atrocious. You need to remember this precedent you have started has put you into a corner. I expect you to ram strawman arguments down the throats of everyone with the temerity to offer a difference of opinion with you

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Two of the most memorable World Cup games I remember both involve Ireland when they were an associate. V Pakistan in the West Indies and v England in India. That Ireland chase against England is one of the most phenomenal things I have seen in a big tournament. Had goosebumps watching it, I hate it when there are no Associate teams in big tourneys.

 

[The Speaker]

I don't know why you are so upset? They get to play alot of cricket around the world, play in the world cups, play top teams during their England tours and lose most of their games... Prompting me to utter an opinion that they are atrocious.

And again you refuse to rebut the argument.

They do not get to play a lot of cricket. They haven't played an ODI since June, and that was a one-off. In fact, ignoring the World Cup Qualifier they haven't played an actual series for over a year now. They don't get to play against full members outside of tournaments (apart from Ireland now, who they still haven't faced for over a year) - so you're wrong again. Their win rate since the last WC is about 50%, which is fine. Certainly not "atrocious", an opinion you are still yet to prove and are now complaining about being asked to validate. Australia plays a lot of cricket. Scotland does not.

You need to remember this precedent you have started has put you into a corner. I expect you to ram strawman arguments down the throats of everyone with the temerity to offer a difference of opinion with you

I have no idea what this is meant to mean, other than being some kind of bluff.

 

[Kram]

Two of the most memorable World Cup games I remember both involve Ireland when they were an associate. V Pakistan in the West Indies and v England in India. That Ireland chase against England is one of the most phenomenal things I have seen in a big tournament. Had goosebumps watching it, I hate it when there are no Associate teams in big tourneys.

Problem is for every game like that there is about 10 where they just get pummeled. I'm mean that fat guy from Bermuda taking that screaming catch is one of my all time cricketing moments. But it was a bit of joke that there was someone in that physical condition was able to make it into the showpiece cricket tournament. In saying that as I posted earlier there should have still had more teams in it.

 

[Wedge McManus]

And again you refuse to rebut the argument.

They do not get to play a lot of cricket. They haven't played an ODI since June, and that was a one-off. In fact, ignoring the World Cup Qualifier they haven't played an actual series for over a year now. They don't get to play against full members outside of tournaments (apart from Ireland now, who they still haven't faced for over a year) - so you're wrong again. Their win rate since the last WC is about 50%, which is fine. Certainly not "atrocious", an opinion you are still yet to prove and are now complaining about being asked to validate. Australia plays a lot of cricket. Scotland does not.



I have no idea what this is meant to mean, other than being some kind of bluff.

Sigh.... I'm going to break it down for you. I offered an opinion. You had a schizophrenic episode and couldn't take it. Instead of walking away you made some silly strawman arguments and refused to look at my evidence for my statement. I reiterated my original stance. You wrote another essay and hijacked your own thread. End result Scotland is still atrocious and you just got owned

 

[Kram]

Or Sultan Zarawani going out to face Alan Donald wearing a floppy hat.

Or him knocking over Satchin Tendulkar! edit - not in WC this.

 

[Wedge McManus]

Or Sultan Zarawani going out to face Alan Donald wearing a floppy hat.

Or him knocking over Satchin Tendulkar!

lol. I don't mind the associates being in the world cup. Ireland beating England in 2011 was epic. And those associate teams should be happy. They have their biggest fan here lmao

 

[Doodlesweaver]

What I don't understand is this argument against Associates not providing good competition ie Good games to watch.

There are plenty of games you can watch that don't involve associates so why is it so awful that occasionally the test nations deign to let them play in the big tournaments? No one is ever forced to watch a game of anything.

Punter had the nerve to complain about associate teams playing in the big tournaments one year. Thank god, the footie world cup doesn't have such arrogant attitudes or the Aussies would never be in it.

 

[Kram]

lol. I don't mind the associates being in the world cup. Ireland beating England in 2011 was epic. And those associate teams should be happy. They have their biggest fan here lmao

iirc he wants a 24 team WC or something.

 

[Agent93]

You're fogetting Heazlett's infamous NZ tour a couple of years back.

You're right... I actually checked nearly everyone else.

 

[Wedge McManus]

iirc he wants a 24 team WC or something.

Wow that explains alot

 

[The Speaker]

Sigh.... I'm going to break it down for you. I offered an opinion. You had a schizophrenic episode and couldn't take it. Instead of walking away you made some silly strawman arguments and refused to look at my evidence for my statement. I reiterated my original stance. You wrote another essay and hijacked your own thread. End result Scotland is still atrocious and you just got owned

You accuse me of a lot of things, but you have nothing to back it up. All bark, no bite.

Problem is for every game like that there is about 10 where they just get pummeled. I'm mean that fat guy from Bermuda taking that screaming catch is one of my all time cricketing moments. But it was a bit of joke that there was someone in that physical condition was able to make it into the showpiece cricket tournament. In saying that as I posted earlier there should have still had more teams in it.

Statistically, World Cup matches between full members are just as likely to be blowouts as matches between a full member and an Associate, so this is just confirmation bias.

iirc he wants a 24 team WC or something.

Wow that explains alot

20, like the Rugby World Cup. You don't see anyone complaining about theirs.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

20 teams jeepers! How many ordinary sides do we need? After 12-13 you are struggling big time!

 

[Wedge McManus]

20 teams jeepers! How many ordinary sides do we need? After 12-13 younare struggling big time!

Shhhh don't let the associate fan hear you. You'll have some essays and a few lectures coming your way

 

[Wedge McManus]

You accuse me of a lot of things, but you have nothing to back it up. All bark, no bite.



Statistically, World Cup matches between full members are just as likely to be blowouts as matches between a full member and an Associate, so this is just confirmation bias.




20, like the Rugby World Cup. You don't see anyone complaining about theirs.

20 teams??????!!!!! 20 teams????!!!! And comparing this to the rugby world cup where the games are only 80 minutes long????!!!. Why do you use strawman arguments? Utter rubbish.Stick to the very rules you force others to and stop bringing in silly strawman distractions to justify your silly position

 

[JackOutback]

I gave you the evidence FFS. A shitty win rate. What more do I need to give you? You came back with some Nelson Mandela bullshit without addressing the evidence for my statement. Pull your head out and stop attacking everyone with a difference of opinion about your precious associates. You don't own this place

That's hardly evidence as it doesn't differentiate between the distant past and the present. Also, it's a pretty decent win rate for an associate nation.

You're free to have an opinion that the associates shouldn't play in the WC, but your claim they don't belong because of a uniquely atrocious record doesn't actually stack up.

 

[Wedge McManus]

That's hardly evidence as it doesn't differentiate between the distant past and the present. Also, it's a pretty decent win rate for an associate nation.

You're free to have an opinion that the associates shouldn't play in the WC, but your claim they don't belong because of a uniquely atrocious record doesn't actually stack up.

What are you on about???? I never said they shouldn't play in the WC. Please read posts before wading in and replying

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Shhhh don't let the associate fan hear you. You'll have some essays and a few lectures coming your way

I can maybe get 14-16 but 20 is seriously pushing it. What do we want 4-5 teams like Holland or Namibia or something.

 

[The Speaker]

That's hardly evidence as it doesn't differentiate between the distant past and the present. Also, it's a pretty decent win rate for an associate nation.

You're free to have an opinion that the associates shouldn't play in the WC, but your claim they don't belong because of a uniquely atrocious record doesn't actually stack up.

Either he doesn't understand this argument or he does and can't admit defeat. Hence the bluffing.

 

[Wedge McManus]

Either he doesn't understand this argument or he does and can't admit defeat. Hence the bluffing.

Put up or shut up. Where are the posts where I said they shouldn't be in the WC?

 

[The Speaker]

Put up or shut up. Where are the posts where I said they shouldn't be in the WC?

Do you or do you not understand that a team's overall record is not helpful in deciding how good a team is currently, because it counts matches from decades ago with equal weight as matches from last year?

 

[Wedge McManus]

Do you or do you not understand that a team's overall record is not helpful in deciding how good a team is currently, because it counts matches from decades ago with equal weight as matches from last year?

They are atrocious

 

[frenchcutforsix]

And again you refuse to rebut the argument.

They do not get to play a lot of cricket. They haven't played an ODI since June, and that was a one-off. In fact, ignoring the World Cup Qualifier they haven't played an actual series for over a year now. They don't get to play against full members outside of tournaments (apart from Ireland now, who they still haven't faced for over a year) - so you're wrong again. Their win rate since the last WC is about 50%, which is fine. Certainly not "atrocious", an opinion you are still yet to prove and are now complai

Nothing passive about it. You said something that was wrong and the sole piece of evidence you used to back it up was an all-time ODI stat, despite Scotland having played ODIs for 20 years. Should I use stats from 20 years ago to say that Australia is as good now as they were then? If you had seen any of them in action, you would've said so - and yet only silence.

I have no problem with people having different opinions, and am happy to debate them. But if they have different opinions with nothing to back it up, that's when we're going to have a problem.

Going to put you on ignore. Your replies to this poster and LP are below civil. I tend to feel when one floods the forum with a post the length of yours to try and convince someone they are right it usually means you are trying to convince yourself that you are right. The two kids are mouthy no doubt but their only crime here was having an opinion and your response is indecent imo

 

[The Speaker]

They are atrocious

Thanks for proving my point.

Going to put you on ignore. Your replies to this poster and LP are below civil. I tend to feel when one floods the forum with a post the length of yours to try and convince someone they are right it usually means you are trying to convince yourself that you are right. The two kids are mouthy no doubt but their only crime here was having an opinion and your response is indecent imo

Both you and Wedge have complained about how long these posts are. Given they are just hitting 100 words, that's concerning.

20 teams jeepers! How many ordinary sides do we need? After 12-13 you are struggling big time!

Actually, the gap between the 7th/8th best and 15th/16th best is much smaller than the one between 1st/2nd and 7th/8th.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

That's okay but I find it hard to believe that fans who hardly know about the world cup taking place in England and don't care enough to watch it, will suddenly tune into an Ashes series in England. If that post is true, then it gives me a picture that a majority of cricket fans in Australia are casual fans who just tune into watch the big stuff, which in this case is the Ashes, like many casual tennis fans tune in just during grandslams. And the section of dedicated fans who watch the world cup and all other away series like the people here is a minority. Is that right?

Which they are. Apart from the Ashes, most fans don't even realise there are tours on once the footy starts. And not only because everything else is usually hidden by the paywall.
I have to say this WC doesn't have me at all interested. The ICC (read Aus and India) cutting the world out of it and making it a chronically extended champions trophy has taken a lot of interest out of the pre-knock-out stage.