India Team Discussion

[MattW]

I think I put my comment into context when I made it:

I'd say India finished 4th - the South Africa that played New Zealand would beat the India that played Australia. Sure the result of their pool match went the other way, but on the basis of their semi-final performance - only one team went down fighting.

I wasn't looking at the tournament as a whole - India were obviously more consistent across the whole thing, but that doesn't matter in a knockout - it comes down to one high pressure match.

In the end South Africa were 2 balls away from the final, I think that counts for a lot.

 

[SaiSrini]

I think I put my comment into context when I made it:

I wasn't looking at the tournament as a whole - India were obviously more consistent across the whole thing, but that doesn't matter in a knockout - it comes down to one high pressure match.

In the end South Africa were 2 balls away from the final, I think that counts for a lot.

Frankly Matt, when you just look at a knockout game to decide if the teams are better than each other, its putting all your money in a lottery. India have performed way better than South Africa in this tournament (in fact until the semifinal, they were better than Australia in terms of tournament performance and Australia balanced it out with that semifinal win) and also India have beaten South Africa head to head. These two criterias are the most crucial in deciding the better team ATM. Net Run rate and Margin of Defeat are weaker criterion for deciding better team because the first one can be influenced by easy opponents/conditions, etc and the second one again can be influenced by the same along with the performance on a particular day.

In this tournament, India won 7 matches out of the 8 that they played vs South Africa who won 5 out of 8. And head to head, India beat South Africa by 130 runs. Enough to really say India were better than South Africa.

 

[MattW]

Frankly Matt, when you just look at a knockout game to decide if the teams are better than each other, its putting all your money in a lottery.

If New Zealand lose tomorrow, they are still the best team in the world cup on overall performance, but I think there's relevance to how teams perform in the pressure situation of a knockout match.

South Africa obviously stumbled in the group stage - but they pulled it together to be able to be within striking distance of making the final. One close chance going the other way had SA in the final, they got closer so I rank them higher.

 

[Satan666]

Frankly Matt, when you just look at a knockout game to decide if the teams are better than each other, its putting all your money in a lottery. India have performed way better than South Africa in this tournament (in fact until the semifinal, they were better than Australia in terms of tournament performance and Australia balanced it out with that semifinal win) and also India have beaten South Africa head to head. These two criterias are the most crucial in deciding the better team ATM. Net Run rate and Margin of Defeat are weaker criterion for deciding better team because the first one can be influenced by easy opponents/conditions, etc and the second one again can be influenced by the same along with the performance on a particular day.

In this tournament, India won 7 matches out of the 8 that they played vs South Africa who won 5 out of 8. And head to head, India beat South Africa by 130 runs. Enough to really say India were better than South Africa.

I gotta agree with you here Sai, on paper South Africa are better than India but looking at the overall performance as you showed above India come out tops and deservedly are the unofficial third placed team, its an argument that will never find a common ground however and frankly speaking it doesn't matter because both teams weren't good enough to make it to the finals!

 

[Satan666]

If New Zealand lose tomorrow, they are still the best team in the world cup on overall performance, but I think there's relevance to how teams perform in the pressure situation of a knockout match.

South Africa obviously stumbled in the group stage - but they pulled it together to be able to be within striking distance of making the final. One close chance going the other way had SA in the final, they got closer so I rank them higher.

Thats highly debatable since in the group stages they had a close match with the Scots and there are still some questions with the lower order, even though they shone against SA they haven't been tested. Australia I think overall have outperformed the rest!

 

[Biggs]

I agree with Matt in theory, but the best team wins the Final. If Australia win, they deserve it. We've done well and had some seriously close games and had an individuals ability to get over the line every time. That's the success of a team scenario, one player taking the game away when required.

Based on the India that showed up against Australia in the Semi South Africa are miles above them, as Matt said, 2 balls away from the Final. I would make the case Sri Lanka would've done better in that match had they had an easier quarter final opponent.

3. South Africa
4. Sri Lanka
5. India
6. Bangladesh
7. Ireland
8. West Indies / Pakistan

Would be my rankings this WC

But whomever wins on Sunday deserves it. Just want a close game with a dabble of drama.

Addendum: Pool A had much tougher matches and a higher quality of cricket overall, IMO. You can talk about smaller grounds in NZ but actually they're great levellers for all teams and provided better looking crowd numbers, closer games and better cricket.

 

[grkrama]

LOL mate nah we would have lost against bangladesh too man if not for that no ball and ireland if they had turned up as they did against WI we would have lost , west indies the way they assaulted barrage of sixes against NZ that wt too we would have lost , pak no need to say that riaz was steaming in no chance in hell to play them .. woohoo we are getting the wooden spoon.


India are ranked last! brought to you and sponsored by happily BiggsonMatt runsubjectivelyrate theory

 

[lion100lion]

I agree with Matt in theory, but the best team wins the Final. If Australia win, they deserve it.

Australia - Best team ? lol...
I thought that best team can play fearlessly in all conditions. Just to remind you that Australian cricketers were literally pleading to the curator for not making the Sydney pitch spin friendly. Ha ha, afraid of Ashwin. [The fact is that the Australians were able to breathe properly because the ball was not turning at all]

 

[Snowy]

Australia - Best team ? lol...
I thought that best team can play fearlessly in all conditions. Just to remind you that Australian cricketers were literally pleading to the curator for not making the Sydney pitch spin friendly. Ha ha, afraid of Ashwin. [The fact is that the Australians were able to breathe properly because the ball was not turning at all]

Care to share your best team and reasoning instead of just 'lol'?

And afraid of Ashwin? His ODI statistics against Australia overall are; 14 wickets @ 46. Specifically on "spin friendly" wickets in India? 12 wickets @ 35. Hardly frightening.

 

[Satan666]

Care to share your best team and reasoning instead of just 'lol'?

And afraid of Ashwin? His ODI statistics against Australia overall are; 14 wickets @ 46. Specifically on spin friendly wickets in India? 12 wickets @ 35. Hardly frightening.

India still have wickets that offer turn?

 

[Satan666]

LOL mate nah we would have lost against bangladesh too man if not for that no ball and ireland if they had turned up as they did against WI we would have lost , west indies the way they assaulted barrage of sixes against NZ that wt too we would have lost , pak no need to say that riaz was steaming in no chance in hell to play them .. woohoo we are getting the wooden spoon.


India are ranked last! brought to you and sponsored by happily BiggsonMatt runsubjectivelyrate theory

I am feeling left out

 

[Snowy]

Point being there would have been no reason to fear Ashwin regardless of conditions based on past performance

 

[Satan666]

Point being there would have been no reason to fear Ashwin regardless of conditions based on past performance

I know, moreso since his overseas record is pretty pathetic imo a better batsman than a bowler!

 

[Aalay]

I know Indian team is not very popular among the non Indians here but the posting is getting even more weird now. Ranking India number 5 in the competition when they only lost 1 match in the tournament? It does not matter how many balls South Africa were close to the semi finals when they were beaten fair and square by India. It is not our problem that they decided not to turn up on the day. Even though their coach was expecting them to walk over both India and Sri Lanka even before the tournament started and were focusing more on India match even before they played their first game against Zimbabwe.

South Africa better placed than India, Sri Lanka - Domingo | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

We got a easier quarter final because we performed well in the group stages and topped group B. However, we could have still faced England in the quarter finals against whom we lost both the matches in the Tri-series. It's not our fault that Bangladesh won against England and we faced them in the quarter finals. Yes we did not turn up on the semi finals day. After that loss I can't go out and say that even though Australia won, we were the better team because we didn't lose a match till that game. If you are comparing two teams, you have to look at how they performed when they played each other. To say that South Africa was a better team just based on the fact that they played a better semi final is silly. As a whole, India was a much better team than South Africa.

 

[MattW]

If you are comparing two teams, you have to look at how they performed when they played each other. To say that South Africa was a better team just based on the fact that they played a better semi final is silly.

You look at it, but it's not the only factor. If you can't perform in a knockout situation, it matters more than if you fail to fire in a fairly unimportant group match.

South Africa pummelled Sri Lanka and took New Zealand to the wire. In the matches that mattered the most South Africa performed better than India, who didn't defeat Bangladesh nearly as decisively and lost badly to Australia.

I certainly disagree with Biggs that you'd rank India 5th - I might be saying India were 4th, but a very close 4th. I don't think it's silly to think that being able to perform well in knockout matches matters in a tournament decided by knockout matches.