"I would like to play the 3-Test match series for the WTC Final": Rohit Sharma

[MenInG]

Rohit Sharma said in the post-match press conference - Do you agree?

"I would like to play the 3-Test match series for the WTC Final. We worked hard and we fought but we played just 1 game. I think a 3-match series would be ideal in the next WTC cycle"

 

[Rana]

It makes sense

You play 2-5 Test match series to accumulate the points to get into the final only to play a one off for the title

It’s not like this in ICC World Cup events where you only play each other once or max twice to lift a trophy

 

[Free Hit]

What if a team gains
2-0 lead

Do they then play a dead rubber

 

[MenInG]

The rest of the cricket world does not have time for their cricket calendar to be disrupted for a 3 match series.

Enough games have been played as lead up to this game.

 

[Technics 1210]

Well done to ICC and ECB ensuring BCCI doesn't get its way.

No final in the history of popular sports is based on best of 3.

As for best of 3, why not ask for best of 5, or better yet, why don't BCCI push for a best of 3 toss? Or even a best of 3 or 5 ICC ODI/T20 final?

Sour grapes by a side that has been HUMILIATED. If you want best of 3 final, then lets start with a best of 3 IPL final - oh wait, cheer leaders will need to be paid overtime.

Accept second place recognition and jog on Rohit.

 

[MenInG]

Poll added.

 

[MenInG]

And Pat Cummins with a good repy:

"We already won the WTC title. Not only three-match series for WTC final, there could be 16-match series too. Players win medals in Olympics with just one chance and final,"

 

[gazza619]

The rest of the cricket world does not have time for their cricket calendar to be disrupted for a 3 match series.

Enough games have been played as lead up to this game.

How about have 2 semi finals and a final?

Give all teams in top 4 a chance

The current layout is boring

 

[Champ_Pal]

Rohit man, please stop. Your team got owned and just accept it.

The real problem is the team combination goes into disarray when playing in overseas conditions. India cannot play all 3 of Jaddu/Ashwin/Axar. They can only play one and that affects the batting mightily.

The only solution for this is India needs to unearth a pace bowling worldclass all rounder or just play your strength of spin irrespective of conditions. At least you can hope for a draw. With this team combination, a loss is guaranteed. Tail is way too long for a batting order where the top 5 are not reliable.

Even if India played a 10 Test final, they will lose in England. India never learns.

 

[MenInG]

How about have 2 semi finals and a final?

Give all teams in top 4 a chance

The current layout is boring

Yes that is a proper tournament - keeps everyone interested.

 

[Savak]

Rohit is one overrated captain. Kohli was a better captain, he absolutely hated losing

 

[Ab Fan]

Rohit has been one of the biggest bottler in the history of game. Barring 2019 World Cup, he has failed in every single ICC tournament.

 

[MenInG]

And Pat Cummins with a good repy:

"We already won the WTC title. Not only three-match series for WTC final, there could be 16-match series too. Players win medals in Olympics with just one chance and final,"

Think a good reply from Cummins.

 

[ElRaja]

where on earth could u schedule a neutral 3 match series and get viewership if india isnt playing? if this ever happened all the india finals would eventually end up being played in india.

 

[Rana]

The rules should be:

1 out of any series (2-5 matches) should be a WTC points match

Otherwise it’s pretty dumb to have points divided into the course of the series but the final only being a one off

 

[Fenrir]

Football World Cup final is played between two top teams.They don’t play three matches to decide the winner.Same goes for lawn tennis,hockey and other supports.It will disturb cricketing calendar if it is a three match series.People will lose interest as well.I doubt if you can sell all tickets in neutral venues.Take WTC as the final and prepare for it.Play hard cricket and give your best.Winning and losing is part of the game.

 

[Energy]

3 match series is bonkers. 15 days to decide the winner? Then it's not sport, but a soap opera. All championships are decided by one match.

Rohit thinks everything is like IPL and we need to apply eliminator, qualifier, burnol adequately to settle everything.

 

[zarak]

Bhai how about you take it seriously and prep. Aussie players sat out of IPL played county cricket because it was important. You are thinking you are going to rock up and beat them.

 

[CrIc_Mystique]

Imagine if the 2021 finals was played in india. It would be over in 2.5 days and hence it would be unfair and not a true test of skills.

for all those bringing in comparison with soccer and other sports, cricket is the singular sport on which climatic weather conditions play a massive bigger role than on that sports. Hence why it should be a best of 3 played in different conditons.

I know the usual suspects who crawled out of the woodwork on the last day of WTC finals will be quick to put the boot in & scream 'sore losser' and the rest of the baggage that comes with it, but i congratulate Aus on being the more superior and better prepared team which won fair and square with plenty of introspection for our guys for the next WTC cycle which should have a semis and best of 3 finals.

 

[hitthestump]

One chance, one opportunity is what finals are all about. You have to be a pretty low IQ individual to even think otherwise.

In this case Rohit is just crying sour grapes and we all know why. The empty trophy cupboard is looming heavily over this team now.

 

[leonidas_alexandar]

This penetrating insight from Rohit would have been believable had he uttered it before the match - not after falling flat on his face and losing it.

In any case - it is a mindless suggestion. Australia won 9 World titles playing these one off matches - big teams always find a way to win in these finals - lots of character, nerves and bravery.

 

[Sachin136]

No final in the history of popular sports is based on best of 3.

Have you heard of the NBA, NHL, MLB, or chess?

 

[Colorblind Genius]

Whole heartedly agree with Rohit.

Technically speaking, longer the format, there is a least factor of luck playing its role, and higher the probability of both teams getting a fair chance to fight back and bring truly the better team winning the cup.

Even though Australia is a clearly the better team and a three match test series would probably have humiliated the very tired and out of gas Indian team - but in principle, I agree with Rohit.

It should be a best of three format.

 

[Punjab Kings]

Rohit Sharma said in the post-match press conference - Do you agree?

"I would like to play the 3-Test match series for the WTC Final. We worked hard and we fought but we played just 1 game. I think a 3-match series would be ideal in the next WTC cycle"

So that BCCI and ICC can come in your rescue, when you will loose ist test of final

 

[FastBowlingAllrounder]

Shorten IPL to schedule another 2 WTC matches. Simple.

 

[Itachi]

As long as IPL schedule isn't affected, I don't see it as an issue.

Its not something that I would vote for because I see 3 test matches meaningless, but wouldn't mind either. But it shouldn't be under IPL timeframe.

 

[par]

Do away with the final. Give the trophy to the team that finishes first on the points table. Simple.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Seems to me like Rohit is making excuses for the loss. Any given time, any day, you are paid millions, you have to perform, no exceptions, no excuses...

 

[Hitman]

As if this humiliation is not enough, he wants to humiliate us further with a whitewash of 0-3. After losing the 3 Test series 0-3, he'll ask for multiple Test series.

 

[light]

It's not because India bottled it 2x, but this is probably a fair statement. Unlike ODI cricket, the test championship should have at least 3 matches.

 

[MenInG]

Have you heard of the NBA, NHL, MLB, or chess?

Remind us how long each of these matches last?

3 Tests = 15 days of cricket between 2 teams - you cannot occupy the international cricket calendar for so long in terms of logistics and worldwide interest.

If anything make the Final such that a draw is not possible.

 

[Technics 1210]

Have you heard of the NBA, NHL, MLB, or chess?

Why doesn't Rohit call for a best of 3 IPL final?

Face it, Rohit is crying, and looking for excuses.

And yes I have heard of those sports, they do not last 5 days, let alone 15 days.

 

[Usman Chadda]

Imagine if the 2021 finals was played in india. It would be over in 2.5 days and hence it would be unfair and not a true test of skills.

for all those bringing in comparison with soccer and other sports, cricket is the singular sport on which climatic weather conditions play a massive bigger role than on that sports. Hence why it should be a best of 3 played in different conditons.

I know the usual suspects who crawled out of the woodwork on the last day of WTC finals will be quick to put the boot in & scream 'sore losser' and the rest of the baggage that comes with it, but i congratulate Aus on being the more superior and better prepared team which won fair and square with plenty of introspection for our guys for the next WTC cycle which should have a semis and best of 3 finals.

Why is it fair to have a best of 3 finals for the WTC, and not a best of 3 for the ODI WC, where one bad day can cost a team the trophy?

Atleast you have all of five days to stage a comeback in Test cricket.

 

[Mamoon]

People who are suggesting a best of 3 final for IPL or other ICC tournaments are missing the point.

All these tournaments provide a level-playing field for all competitors because all teams play equal number of matches in similar conditions/venue.

There are three ways in which the ICC Test Championship can become more credible:

(1) ICC Test Championship should become a stand-alone tournament. It should be played in one country with each team playing each other once and the top two sides playing the final.

(2) All teams should play fixed number of matches home and away.

(3) Nothing changes except the final is a best of 3.

Options (1) and (2) are extremely unrealistic.

Option (1) can work in theory but it will be a broadcasting nightmare because you will have to play 4-5 Test matches at the same time in different venues across the country to ensure that the tournament is completed within 2 months maximum.

Option (2) can never happen because cricket is riddled with politics and driven by revenue. Option (2) means Ireland and England will play the same number of Tests in a calendar year and Australia will play as many Tests in Bangladesh as they would in India. This will never happen.

Option (3) is the least that ICC can do to add credibility to this so-called “championship” where teams are playing different number of matches in different conditions against different opposition. There is no level-playing field.

 

[Major]

) India is crying. He even said why play test final in England only and why after IPL..

Indians phir roo ray hai

 

[Thanos]

Rather host final in country which topped the table.

 

[Major]

People who are suggesting a best of 3 final for IPL or other ICC tournaments are missing the point.

All these tournaments provide a level-playing field for all competitors because all teams play equal number of matches in similar conditions/venue.

There are three ways in which the ICC Test Championship can become more credible:

(1) ICC Test Championship should become a stand-alone tournament. It should be played in one country with each team playing each other once and the top two sides playing the final.

(2) All teams should play fixed number of matches home and away.

(3) Nothing changes except the final is a best of 3.

Options (1) and (2) are extremely unrealistic.

Option (1) can work in theory but it will be a broadcasting nightmare because you will have to play 4-5 Test matches at the same time in different venues across the country to ensure that the tournament is completed within 2 months maximum.

Option (2) can never happen because cricket is riddled with politics and driven by revenue. Option (2) means Ireland and England will play the same number of Tests in a calendar year and Australia will play as many Tests in Bangladesh as they would in India. This will never happen.

Option (3) is the least that ICC can do to add credibility to this so-called “championship” where teams are playing different number of matches in different conditions against different opposition. There is no level-playing field.

You cannot have a 3 game final. Its not possible.

The first issue is that you have a 50 over and t20 over world cup year every year. Teams focus on that. The second issue is that a final is overwhelming for a player.

A Test final means, you are playing high level of cricket for 5 days. By playing a 3 match series, you are playing a final that will last for 20-25 days (15 days of test cricket and 10 days of training and rest included). It would be really overwhelming. No one would want to play that and risk their fitness.

Rohit Sharma and Indians are whining finding excuses. He even said that why should it be played in England and why not all over the world (basically wants to play in India). Than he also whined why after IPL. All this was schduled well in advance. Its up to bcci to move around its ipl not ICC to move its finale.

Even if have a 3 match series finale, same Rohit Sharma would be whining about how a 3 match finale takes a toll on the body and that to in a world cup year.

The excuses will keep coming.

The current format is copied from the intercontitental cup that ICC has been running for years for Associate and affiliate teams.

 

[Major]

Rather host final in country which topped the table.

nope. Finla was decided well in advance. World Cup doesnt get hosted in the country of the highest ranked team.

You are hosting a tournament, and to host a tournament a Bid needs to be placed.

But Indians can cry

 

[YousafTheBeast]

People who are suggesting a best of 3 final for IPL or other ICC tournaments are missing the point.

All these tournaments provide a level-playing field for all competitors because all teams play equal number of matches in similar conditions/venue.

There are three ways in which the ICC Test Championship can become more credible:

(1) ICC Test Championship should become a stand-alone tournament. It should be played in one country with each team playing each other once and the top two sides playing the final.

(2) All teams should play fixed number of matches home and away.

(3) Nothing changes except the final is a best of 3.

Options (1) and (2) are extremely unrealistic.

Option (1) can work in theory but it will be a broadcasting nightmare because you will have to play 4-5 Test matches at the same time in different venues across the country to ensure that the tournament is completed within 2 months maximum.

Option (2) can never happen because cricket is riddled with politics and driven by revenue. Option (2) means Ireland and England will play the same number of Tests in a calendar year and Australia will play as many Tests in Bangladesh as they would in India. This will never happen.

Option (3) is the least that ICC can do to add credibility to this so-called “championship” where teams are playing different number of matches in different conditions against different opposition. There is no level-playing field.

Option 3 would mean 15 days of test cricket and 3-4 days of rest between each test. So, that’s almost a whole month used up just for a final.

If a team wins 2-0, what happens to the 3rd test?
What happens to those who’ve flown from abroad to watch the 3rd test?

 

[Major]

Have you heard of the NBA, NHL, MLB, or chess?

Those sports are played for 1-2 hours max. 20 mins of game play in each period with rest in between.

A test match lasts 5 days.

Like Cummins said, in olympics you dont have a best of three, you just have one shot to take the glory.

Anyways, Rohit Sharma and Indians can keep on whining

 

[Marooned]

Sounds like a loser's excuse with all due respect.

It's like a crying child wanting a second chance to bat after getting out in gully cricket. Or a kid failing in exam wanting to have another bite immediately because he feels he will do better given another chance.

I absolutely don't see the point of a 3 test finale because it defeats the very purpose of a final.

You got to bring your A game to the final. That's what finals are for. You have one shot. That's when the pressure is the highest, the margins for error are the slimmest and it's a test of not just skills but mentality too.

So dont ask for extra games just because you feel you failed to 'wake up' in time, instead hold yourself accountable. Learn to play these high pressure games. This is not a one off by any means as India has been consistently disappointing in later stages of tournaments too.

There is a clear pattern with India's shortcomings, address that instead of whining about how the final should be.

 

[Thanos]

.

 

[RamLakhan]

Give the winners chance to host the next WTC Finals... Hence Australia should host the next WTC Finals regardless of whoever makes it...! (This time it should have been NZ hosting it!) That way at least we will see variety in playing conditions...!

OR

Give the table toppers chance to host the finals for that very cycle. This way India would have got the chance to host finals this time! You may call it desperation but I will say that its an honor for having topped the group by winning maximum home matches & being competitive away compared to rest of the teams! Home advantage can be negated by asking ICC to choose the venue/city & prepare the pitch...

OR

Rotate the playing venues every time across all the major cricketing nations (India, England, Australia, South Africa, West Indies, NZ, etc) like they do for ODI & T20 world cups!

Even I don't consider 3 match series or playing long test tournaments is feasible!

But this act of considering only England as host is kind of imbalance in measuring the quality of team! English pitches don't guarantee the "true neutral condition". For instance tall fast bowlers always get advantage in England. India traditionally don't have enough tall bowlers! They are good at zipping-off the pitch! Indian fast bowlers have out-bowled (even Umesh Yadav) the opposition counterparts in test matches played in India! For hell-sake I am repeating that India's home test triumph is not completely based on spinners & turning tracks! You should check what all has happened in last 15-20 years of India's dominance in home test matches! Shouldn't the skill of Indian fast bowlers outbowling opposition bowlers in Indian Conditions (even in Australia they have outbowled Australian bowlers) be appreciated? Just like at times how Australian/English spinners outbowl Indian spinners when we go there! These are also skills!

If you want truly neutral venue then I think only "West Indies" pitches can be considered that way because it gives the same advantage for Batsmen, Fast Bowlers & Spinners! So all WTC Finals should be played there!

 

[Thanos]

nope. Finla was decided well in advance. World Cup doesnt get hosted in the country of the highest ranked team.

You are hosting a tournament, and to host a tournament a Bid needs to be placed.

But Indians can cry

Well it's better to cry for how to win the final, rather than cry for how to reach the final.
Easiest fixture and yet ending at 7th place just above WI and BD. Lol

 

[Major]

Well it's better to cry for how to win the final, rather than cry for how to reach the final.
Easiest fixture and yet ending at 7th place just above WI and BD. Lol

We dont go running around claiming we are rich or the Australia of 2000s... Yet we currently hold a ICC champions tag while India has none.

The minnows of ICC finals )

 

[Mamoon]

You cannot have a 3 game final. Its not possible.

The first issue is that you have a 50 over and t20 over world cup year every year. Teams focus on that. The second issue is that a final is overwhelming for a player.

A Test final means, you are playing high level of cricket for 5 days. By playing a 3 match series, you are playing a final that will last for 20-25 days (15 days of test cricket and 10 days of training and rest included). It would be really overwhelming. No one would want to play that and risk their fitness.

Rohit Sharma and Indians are whining finding excuses. He even said that why should it be played in England and why not all over the world (basically wants to play in India). Than he also whined why after IPL. All this was schduled well in advance. Its up to bcci to move around its ipl not ICC to move its finale.

Even if have a 3 match series finale, same Rohit Sharma would be whining about how a 3 match finale takes a toll on the body and that to in a world cup year.

The excuses will keep coming.

The current format is copied from the intercontitental cup that ICC has been running for years for Associate and affiliate teams.

India is one of the strongest teams in the world. They have made back to back finals and you will find India in the final in at least 70% of the next 10 ICC TC finals.

Eventually they will win a few too. At some point they will spank Australia in Australia and they will also host a few finals and no one will be able to compete with them when they play the final in India.

If anyone has to make excuses, it should come from the team that were handed a place in the final on a golden platter by ICC but they weren’t good enough to beat Australia, England and New Zealand at home.

Rohit’s point is a valid one and it is up to the ICC to consider any changes. The problem with our mentality is that if someone on the losing end suggests something we assume that it’s whining. If Cummins said it should be a best of three people would praise him for being objective.

 

[Mamoon]

Option 3 would mean 15 days of test cricket and 3-4 days of rest between each test. So, that’s almost a whole month used up just for a final.

If a team wins 2-0, what happens to the 3rd test?
What happens to those who’ve flown from abroad to watch the 3rd test?

The third match will go ahead as planned. The matches can contribute towards ranking points to ensure that teams have incentive to perform even if they have lost the championship.

For example, if there is a WTC Final Series between Australia and India in Australia, India can spank Australia in the first two Tests as they normally do in Australia with Pant making them cry as usual, but Australia (the current number 1 team) will have something to play for in the dead rubber match if winning the match and losing the final series 2-1 means they still retain their number 1 ranking.

There are multiple ways and stipulations in which you can incentivize teams to give their best in the WTC Final Series even if they are 2-0 down after the first two Tests.

 

[sindhiboy]

Maybe hold a 2 test series of semi finals to give 3rd and 4th ranked teams a chance.

However the points table wouldn't hold any significance in this scenario. As everything would depend on the semi finals.

But if you wanna make any amends, I see this as the most feasible option

 

[Thanos]

We dont go running around claiming we are rich or the Australia of 2000s... Yet we currently hold a ICC champions tag while India has none.

The minnows of ICC finals )

Richness doesn't decide who'll win the trophy. So your argument is invalid. And your ICC champions tag doesn't make any sense in this thread, because we both can go on and on with like how many world cups then you come with Ind-Pak h2h record, and then I with Ind-Pak h2h in WC etc etc.

The thing is this thread is about WTC and your team got easiest fixture to reach final and yet ended 7th. And you guys are having another thread to discuss how to reach WTC final next cycle. Lol

My two cent on Rohit's statement is that it doesn't seem feasible to have best of 3 in test championship but if everytime final is played in England only, chances of winning by SENA teams is higher. We are on receiving end two times, tomorrow it could be SL, Pak. And just because you have decent record in England doesn't mean you'll win it easily.
Oh wait, for that you have to qualify.

 

[Babeikh]

No that would be over kill.

You play series to qualify for the final and then you have to turn up in that game or tough luck.

 

[Major]

India is one of the strongest teams in the world. They have made back to back finals and you will find India in the final in at least 70% of the next 10 ICC TC finals.

Eventually they will win a few too. At some point they will spank Australia in Australia and they will also host a few finals and no one will be able to compete with them when they play the final in India.

If anyone has to make excuses, it should come from the team that were handed a place in the final on a golden platter by ICC but they weren’t good enough to beat Australia, England and New Zealand at home.

Rohit’s point is a valid one and it is up to the ICC to consider any changes. The problem with our mentality is that if someone on the losing end suggests something we assume that it’s whining. If Cummins said it should be a best of three people would praise him for being objective.

bro, no one cares that they are in the finals. Only the trophy matters. Sri Lanka were finalist of World Cups, but no one cares about that. Only the winner of those tournaments matter.

Eventually? Umm its been 10 years, a team has aged. Nothing is for sure. You are making assumptions.

Teams like Pakistan, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Australia and even England have won ICC tournaments in the last 10 years. India used to make fun of England that they started a game and never won a world cup, and now look at the results.

You can insult Pakistan all you want, but atleast Pakistan currently holds an ICC title and to when it was 8th ranked.

No, Rohits point is not valid. He is whining cause he lost. You are just being biased for them. Why the ifs and buts when Cummins never said anything stupid?

 

[Major]

Richness doesn't decide who'll win the trophy. So your argument is invalid. And your ICC champions tag doesn't make any sense in this thread, because we both can go on and on with like how many world cups then you come with Ind-Pak h2h record, and then I with Ind-Pak h2h in WC etc etc.

The thing is this thread is about WTC and your team got easiest fixture to reach final and yet ended 7th. And you guys are having another thread to discuss how to reach WTC final next cycle. Lol

My two cent on Rohit's statement is that it doesn't seem feasible to have best of 3 in test championship but if everytime final is played in England only, chances of winning by SENA teams is higher. We are on receiving end two times, tomorrow it could be SL, Pak. And just because you have decent record in England doesn't mean you'll win it easily.
Oh wait, for that you have to qualify.

umm, current icc tournament winners: Pakistan, Australia, England....

Thread is about WTC final and you still bought Pakistan to it, yet when i mention about iCC tournaments you are now whining )

Ever since SUnday happen, all indians are doing is crying ). Everytime you guys show up to England, zaleel hokar jatay.

10 years of failiure.

 

[Thanos]

umm, current icc tournament winners: Pakistan, Australia, England....

Thread is about WTC final and you still bought Pakistan to it, yet when i mention about iCC tournaments you are now whining )

Ever since SUnday happen, all indians are doing is crying ). Everytime you guys show up to England, zaleel hokar jatay.

10 years of failiure.

You seem like a troll. Nothing else.
I suggested change in venue and you could've simply made your point but you decided to took this opportunity to troll.

That's where your team's zalaalat of securing 7th position came into discussion. So you get what you deserve no 7. Now you can continue your rant.

 

[Major]

You seem like a troll. Nothing else.
I suggested change in venue and you could've simply made your point but you decided to took this opportunity to troll.

That's where your team's zalaalat of securing 7th position came into discussion. So you get what you deserve no 7. Now you can continue your rant.

You guys lost at a netural venue.

WE 7th, but still hold an ICC champions title currently, while India holds to none. Oh the zalalat

 

[Rana]

You guys lost at a netural venue.

WE 7th, but still hold an ICC champions title currently, while India holds to none. Oh the zalalat

Rehnde Major

Apne girebaan main jhaanko

 

[Colorblind Genius]

No that would be over kill.

You play series to qualify for the final and then you have to turn up in that game or tough luck.

Then why play the entire Test cricket WC tournament based on best of three series?

Let’s make it one test match only between all teams for the two to emerge and play the one final match.

There has to be consistency.
If the entire WC was played on best of three series, then so should be the final, IMO.

 

[Technics 1210]

Then why play the entire Test cricket WC tournament based on best of three series?

Let’s make it one test match only between all teams for the two to emerge and play the one final match.

There has to be consistency.
If the entire WC was played on best of three series, then so should be the final, IMO.

There is no enough time for consistency in Test matches, unless of course T20 franchise leagues are dumped for good.

 

[Rana]

Then why play the entire Test cricket WC tournament based on best of three series?

Let’s make it one test match only between all teams for the two to emerge and play the one final match.

There has to be consistency.
If the entire WC was played on best of three series, then so should be the final, IMO.

I am ashamed to see that only you and [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] out of the Pakistan fans have genuinely clocked on to the issue here.

As I mentioned earlier, 1 match only of any Test series should consist of WTC points if the final of this is going to be a 1 off

 

[Technics 1210]

Sounds like a loser's excuse with all due respect.

It's like a crying child wanting a second chance to bat after getting out in gully cricket. Or a kid failing in exam wanting to have another bite immediately because he feels he will do better given another chance.

I absolutely don't see the point of a 3 test finale because it defeats the very purpose of a final.

You got to bring your A game to the final. That's what finals are for. You have one shot. That's when the pressure is the highest, the margins for error are the slimmest and it's a test of not just skills but mentality too.

So dont ask for extra games just because you feel you failed to 'wake up' in time, instead hold yourself accountable. Learn to play these high pressure games. This is not a one off by any means as India has been consistently disappointing in later stages of tournaments too.

There is a clear pattern with India's shortcomings, address that instead of whining about how the final should be.

Spot on.

At the end of the day a best of 3 final in WTC is just Indian sour grapes having lost 2 consecutive finals. I am surprised Rohit hasn't asked for best of 3 coin tosses.

When India lost the WTC at the inaugural WTC final, there was no talk of best of 3.

vs NZ, India were in the UK about a month before the WTC.

vs AUS, India were in the UK about a week before the WTC.

Rohit should go to BCCI and get them to reschedule the IPL, because beyond excuses, it is clear as daylight the IPL is affecting Indian players, but no Indian player has the balls to stand up to the BCCI or speak against the IPL.

Plus, India will next play WI in 2 Test matches, why doesn't Rohit demand 3 test matches under the excuse of best of 3?

 

[Usman Chadda]

bro, no one cares that they are in the finals. Only the trophy matters. Sri Lanka were finalist of World Cups, but no one cares about that. Only the winner of those tournaments matter.

Eventually? Umm its been 10 years, a team has aged. Nothing is for sure. You are making assumptions.

Teams like Pakistan, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Australia and even England have won ICC tournaments in the last 10 years. India used to make fun of England that they started a game and never won a world cup, and now look at the results.

You can insult Pakistan all you want, but atleast Pakistan currently holds an ICC title and to when it was 8th ranked.

No, Rohits point is not valid. He is whining cause he lost. You are just being biased for them. Why the ifs and buts when Cummins never said anything stupid?

Sri Lanka point is very valid.

Before India’s rockstars came up, with all talk and nothing to show for it, Sri Lanka was comfortably the best Asian side in world cricket. They used to reach semis and finals consistently, yet never got the adulation they deserved and which India unnecessarily gets right now, due to not being able to win those crunch games and fall short most of the time at the final hurdle.

Indian fans are proud about their team reaching finals and getting absolutely thrashed, giving the opposition an easy win.

Happened in 2017.

Happened in 2022.

Happened now in 2023.

Insulting Pakistan or Sri Lanka or Bangladesh would not put trophies in the Indian team’s cabinet. These three countries combined cannot match the facilities India consistently provides to its cricketers day-in and day-out, and yet they continue to get destroyed in ICC finals.

 

[Mamoon]

bro, no one cares that they are in the finals. Only the trophy matters. Sri Lanka were finalist of World Cups, but no one cares about that. Only the winner of those tournaments matter.

Eventually? Umm its been 10 years, a team has aged. Nothing is for sure. You are making assumptions.

Teams like Pakistan, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, West Indies, Australia and even England have won ICC tournaments in the last 10 years. India used to make fun of England that they started a game and never won a world cup, and now look at the results.

You can insult Pakistan all you want, but atleast Pakistan currently holds an ICC title and to when it was 8th ranked.

No, Rohits point is not valid. He is whining cause he lost. You are just being biased for them. Why the ifs and buts when Cummins never said anything stupid?

Since 2004, only Australia have won more ICC trophies than West Indies. However, in this period, West Indies have been a borderline minnow and winning those three ICC trophies didn’t change their perception and image. It didn’t help them become a top team.

Trophies don’t make up for general inconsistency and mediocrity. India haven’t won a trophy since 2013 but in these 10 years, they have played top class cricket in all formats.

I would rather not win a trophy for a few years and be a consistently strong side like India instead of fluking a trophy as a low-ranked side like Pakistan and West Indies.

Pakistan have won a trophy since India last won one, this is true, but only a completely biased and blind individual would claim that Pakistan have been a better team than India over the last 10 years and that they wouldn’t swap the respective achievements of the two teams.

India have achieved a lot more than Pakistan has over the last 10 years and I would happily have what they have and give them the Champions Trophy.

- Longest ever reign as a number 1 Test side in the 2010-20 decade

- longest ever reign as a number 1 Test side in Asian cricket history

- two Test series wins in Australia

- two WTC Finals

I would happily take all of this and give up the 2017 Champions Trophy which is the least important ICC tournament. Any sane person would.

If it was a 50 over World Cup or even the T20 World Cup I might reconsider, but winning the Champions Trophy is not even remotely comparable to winning Test series in Australia.

 

[Mamoon]

Sri Lanka point is very valid.

Before India’s rockstars came up, with all talk and nothing to show for it, Sri Lanka was comfortably the best Asian side in world cricket. They used to reach semis and finals consistently, yet never got the adulation they deserved and which India unnecessarily gets right now, due to not being able to win those crunch games and fall short most of the time at the final hurdle.

Indian fans are proud about their team reaching finals and getting absolutely thrashed, giving the opposition an easy win.

Happened in 2017.

Happened in 2022.

Happened now in 2023.

Insulting Pakistan or Sri Lanka or Bangladesh would not put trophies in the Indian team’s cabinet. These three countries combined cannot match the facilities India consistently provides to its cricketers day-in and day-out, and yet they continue to get destroyed in ICC finals.

The reason why Sri Lanka did not receive much adulation and hype was because they were mainly a tournament team. They would raise their game in tournaments but they were generally inconsistent and rarely won anything away from home because their chucker with 800 wickets was not bowling (I should say throwing) them to victories outside Colombo and Kandy.

Had Sri Lanka won multiple Test series in Australia or stayed top of the Test rankings for 4-5 years on the trot like India, they would also get hyped.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

In cricketing context, this might have been a genuine concern.

But the fact Rohit only commented after losing the test definitely makes India look like its asking for excuses or validation of their loss.

Lets be real.

Another test would have given India the same mauling with this same team.

So where is Rohit going with this?

 

[RexRex]

But the fact Rohit only commented after losing the test definitely makes India look like its asking for excuses or validation of their loss.

Agree, I'm getting a real sore loser vibe with this comment of Rohit.

 

[Maliq_Mudasir]

I absolutely agree with Rohit. It's time to bring some dramatic changes to make game more interesting. Few more changes ICC can think of is:

To play WTC final in T20 format
To play WTC final in India if India reaches final
To play WTC final against SRH
In case SRH manages to win somehow, make the format best of 3 or best of 5 or even best of infinity till the India wins historic WTC.

 

[Usman Chadda]

The reason why Sri Lanka did not receive much adulation and hype was because they were mainly a tournament team. They would raise their game in tournaments but they were generally inconsistent and rarely won anything away from home because their chucker with 800 wickets was not bowling (I should say throwing) them to victories outside Colombo and Kandy.

Had Sri Lanka won multiple Test series in Australia or stayed top of the Test rankings for 4-5 years on the trot like India, they would also get hyped.

Multiple Test series win in Australia is commendable, but then India compensates for that by getting whitewashed in New Zealand.

I don’t see the current Sri Lankan team getting much praise for whitewashing South Africa in South Africa aswell.

 

[Mamoon]

Multiple Test series win in Australia is commendable, but then India compensates for that by getting whitewashed in New Zealand.

I don’t see the current Sri Lankan team getting much praise for whitewashing South Africa in South Africa aswell.

Getting whitewashed away from home is normal for every team. Every side has been whitewashed away from home at some point. Winning a Test series in Australia is not canceled out by getting whitewashed in New Zealand or any country in particular.

South Africa don’t lose him series frequently unless they are playing Australia but they have the tendency to lose home Tests frequently. They are a bit like England - very hard to beat over a series in England but they would rarely inflict a whitewash on any visiting side.

Australia is brutal venue for Asian sides. Pakistani fans of all teams would know this. Pakistan and Sri Lanka have absolutely no chance of beating Australia Down Under so what India did not once but twice deserves all the respect in the world.

 

[RajBan]

What is wrong with Rohit? He wants the humiliation to be 3-0?

 

[Colorblind Genius]

In cricketing context, this might have been a genuine concern.

But the fact Rohit only commented after losing the test definitely makes India look like its asking for excuses or validation of their loss.

Lets be real.

Another test would have given India the same mauling with this same team.

So where is Rohit going with this?

Most probably yes.
And I have mentioned the same in my post above - but this is not the point and this not between india and Australia.

If the league games are played in a best of 3 series then the final should also be a best of three.
It makes perfect sense.
Why, you ask?

You play a best of 3 series to truly increase the probability of the better team emerging as the winner - if all league games are played with this approach (which works very good) - then final should also be played with the same approach.

 

[Technics 1210]

Most probably yes.
And I have mentioned the same in my post above - but this is not the point and this not between india and Australia.

If the league games are played in a best of 3 series then the final should also be a best of three.
It makes perfect sense.
Why, you ask?

You play a best of 3 series to truly increase the probability of the better team emerging as the winner - if all league games are played with this approach (which works very good) - then final should also be played with the same approach.

Here is India's road to the WTC 2023 final:

India's tour of England (5 Tests)
New Zealand's tour of India (2 Tests)
India's tour of South Africa (3 Tests)
Sri Lanka's tour of India (2 Tests)
India's tour of Bangladesh (2 Tests)
Australia's tour of India (4 Tests)

Why doesn't Rohit complain about the WTC league games comprising of an even number of Tests? Oh wait, because India won the said series?

Rohit is nothing but a cry baby who is looking for excuses.

 

[Technics 1210]

What is wrong with Rohit? He wants the humiliation to be 3-0?

Rohit will then ask for a best of 7 series.

 

[Major]

Since 2004, only Australia have won more ICC trophies than West Indies. However, in this period, West Indies have been a borderline minnow and winning those three ICC trophies didn’t change their perception and image. It didn’t help them become a top team.

Trophies don’t make up for general inconsistency and mediocrity. India haven’t won a trophy since 2013 but in these 10 years, they have played top class cricket in all formats.

I would rather not win a trophy for a few years and be a consistently strong side like India instead of fluking a trophy as a low-ranked side like Pakistan and West Indies.

Pakistan have won a trophy since India last won one, this is true, but only a completely biased and blind individual would claim that Pakistan have been a better team than India over the last 10 years and that they wouldn’t swap the respective achievements of the two teams.

India have achieved a lot more than Pakistan has over the last 10 years and I would happily have what they have and give them the Champions Trophy.

- Longest ever reign as a number 1 Test side in the 2010-20 decade

- longest ever reign as a number 1 Test side in Asian cricket history

- two Test series wins in Australia

- two WTC Finals

I would happily take all of this and give up the 2017 Champions Trophy which is the least important ICC tournament. Any sane person would.

If it was a 50 over World Cup or even the T20 World Cup I might reconsider, but winning the Champions Trophy is not even remotely comparable to winning Test series in Australia.

Bro, you can be as consistent as you want, trophy matters at the end of the day. Legacies are built on the trophies won. Your short comings are ignored when you win a tournament.

When Imran was captain, he had his flaws. During the Misbah days, i was curious how people looked at Imran, and I was able to meet people that told me that Imran was also very much criticized and that the whole cornered tiger thing was from 1988 World Cup. Thing is, Zia called him back and when he won the 1992 World Cup, he became an icon, and after that World Cup the guy was elevated and rightly so.

The Pakistan of 2005-2007 was doing well series wise, yet its no show at the world cup was for what the team was insulted.

Call it a fluke or whatever, but Pakistan did win a trophy. You are telling me that during the last 10 years, the amount of tournaments India played they werent even good enough to even fluke a win?

At the end of the day, its the ICC tournaments that matter and create legacy for players. Reaching the finals, does not matter, if it did, than Sri Lanka would had been the most iconic team ever. They are forgotten, while the 1996 Sri Lankan team (a group of unfit and misfit players) is highly recognized

You can call anything least important, but the thing is, Pakistan has the least important ICC champion title, while India does not have a single one.

If it was a t20 or a 50 over world cup, you would still come up with an excuse. Point is, India also played that final but they came out as a loser.

As I said before, India has almost been knocked by every team during the last 10 years. That is nothing to be celebrated. The only team that is yet to Knock India out is South Africa.

The event got knocked out to West Indies

 

[Technics 1210]

Lets not forget, had the WTC final ended in a draw, the accolade would have been shared.

Why doesn't Rohit ask for a timeless Test match WTC final?

Pathetic excuses from Rohit, absolutely pathetic.

 

[Smbhayi]

What if a team gains
2-0 lead

Do they then play a dead rubber

He probably meant best of 3..

 

[Colorblind Genius]

Here is India's road to the WTC 2023 final:

India's tour of England (5 Tests)
New Zealand's tour of India (2 Tests)
India's tour of South Africa (3 Tests)
Sri Lanka's tour of India (2 Tests)
India's tour of Bangladesh (2 Tests)
Australia's tour of India (4 Tests)

Why doesn't Rohit complain about the WTC league games comprising of an even number of Tests? Oh wait, because India won the said series?

Rohit is nothing but a cry baby who is looking for excuses.

Again,

it's NOT about Rohit or India.

It's about the entire format of the structure of the WC. And in my opinion, if the league games are based on a best of 5 or 2 or 3 or a best of 4 test series, then perhaps 3 a good number to have a 'best of 3' for the final game REGARDLESS of whether Rohit Sharma or India is playing or not.

 

[Technics 1210]

Again,

it's NOT about Rohit or India.

It's about the entire format of the structure of the WC. And in my opinion, if the league games are based on a best of 5 or 2 or 3 or a best of 4 test series, then perhaps 3 a good number to have a 'best of 3' for the final game REGARDLESS of whether Rohit Sharma or India is playing or not.

This IS about Rohit and India, no other team is bemoaning or suggesting the WTC final should be a best of 3 Tests.

So it goes back to what I asked, why doesn't Rohit demand an odd number of Test matches within a series in the WTC league when India were padding points in 2 Test series vs lower ranked Test teams? You know the answer.

In fact, I suggest you have a look at how the WTC points system was changed from 2021 to 2023 to make the WTC comp fairer.

You want fair? 3 Test series in the league you say? Fair is a round robin format vs. every Test member, home and away, oh but wait, BCCI refuse to play Pakistan, AND prioritises IPL. You know this too.

So respectfully, stop pretending this isn't about Rohit/India, when it is exactly about Rohit/India, and had India won the WTC you know deep down Rohit would never had made such a ludicrous statement.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

This IS about Rohit and India, no other team is bemoaning or suggesting the WTC final should be a best of 3 Tests.

So it goes back to what I asked, why doesn't Rohit demand an odd number of Test matches within a series in the WTC league when India were padding points in 2 Test series vs lower ranked Test teams? You know the answer.

In fact, I suggest you have a look at how the WTC points system was changed from 2021 to 2023 to make the WTC comp fairer.

You want fair? 3 Test series in the league you say? Fair is a round robin format vs. every Test member, home and away, oh but wait, BCCI refuse to play Pakistan, AND prioritises IPL. You know this too.

So respectfully, stop pretending this isn't about Rohit/India, when it is exactly about Rohit/India, and had India won the WTC you know deep down Rohit would never had made such a ludicrous statement.

Well, if you wanted to shove it down to my throat then it's your call.

I still feel that if the league games are based on best of multiple test matches, then so should be the final game.

This my personal opinion and if this is what Rohit believes too, then it's not my fault.

Benson & Hedges used to have a best of three finals - so the concept is not new or alien to the cricket world.

 

[MP2011]

'No. This has been decided for a long time, you know even before you enter that first match of the cycle that the final is going to be just a one-off. So, you have to be prepared mentally,' Gavaskar said on India Today.

'Just like you prepare for the IPL, you don't say best of three. Everybody can have a bad day, or a couple of days, but before the first ball of the cycle you know what it is. So, you can't be asking for a best of three. Tomorrow, you may say best of five,' Gavaskar added.

https://www.rediff.com/cricket/report/they-are-dadas-in-india-when-they-go-overseas/20230613.htm

 

[MP2011]

Well said Sunny.

Rohit, Dravid and Kohli have just been sooks, sooking about WTC format just because they were ill prepared for WTC final.

I've my reservations about the venue of WTC final but the format of WTC is absolutely right. Final should be 1 single opportunity for all concerned so that they can bring their best on that day(s).

 

[MP2011]

In March 2023, Rohit used to say they'll manage with whatever number of days they'll get before WTC. And now after losing the WTC final miserably, he is singing a completely different tune that they needed 20-25 days to acclimatize.

Who stopped them to come to England early? Didn't Stokes etc leave early to prepare for Ashes which hasn't even started?

We are so cursed to have such a sorry and pathetic bunch representing us internationally at cricket.