India [245/3] beat New Zealand [243] by 7 wickets in the third ODI, lead series 3-0

[Ganju Baba]

Then why stop at final? What about semi? QF?

Because they hold less importance than the final and round robin is ensuring that best teams reach QFs and forward.

 

[Mamoon]

I agree with this one that it should be best of 3 finals.

NBA, MLB have the best of 3 finals to prove who is the best of the lot. That eliminates the stroke of luck or just a team having an off day.

The example you gave of Australia is flawed because they were so far ahead of everyone having 4 or 5 ATGs that it was inevitable they would win the World Cup.

But was India really the better team in 83 WC? Or was Pakistan the best team in the 92 World Cup?

I am all for having best of 3 finals to rule out flukes.

India beat West Indies twice in the 1983 World Cup. When you beat the best team in the world twice in the same tournament, why should the best team in the world get another opportunity in the form of a best of 3 final?

India had West Indies' number in that tournament. It was not one bad day, there were two. What NBA and MLB does is irrelevant in cricket. The Americans like to do everything differently.

Australia's example is not a flawed one because it is not about the weak team fluking a win but the strong team delivering on the day. I will exclude 1999 because Australia were not the best team in the world at that point. The dominance started in late 1999 and lasted till late 2007.

During these 8 years, they were undoubtedly the best team in the world. However, they did not win every single match. They did lose games and did have off-days, but they ensured that those off-days never took place in World Cup knockouts. They did not lose a game in consecutive World Cups, but they did lose in between. This proves that not only were they the best in the world, they also had the ability to rise to the occasion.

If India and England keep having off-days in finals and semi-finals and end up losing to weaker teams, it is simply their problem and not the weaker teams'. They do not deserve leeway in the form of a 3 match final. It is their job to rise to the occasion and perform on the big day.

India and England are the two best ODI sides in the world. Ideally, they should play in the final and the better team on the day should prevail. However, if either of them shells another semifinal or a final to a weaker team, it will simply prove that in spite of being a brilliant team, they lack the composure to rise to the occasion and absorb the pressure.

Flukes do not happen frequently. India or England have no excuse for not winning the upcoming World Cup. South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and West Indies are not good enough to beat these two teams in a bilateral series anywhere in the world, and the onus is on India and England to ensure that they do not lose to these teams in a knockout game again.

 

[Titan24]

It has been pretty one sided series so far, I was expecting some competitive cricket from NZ.

 

[BDfanforever]

In football, there are at least 10 competitive teams who can win the world cup, but they always play knockouts. Sometimes a team can be placed in the weaker side if desired draw and luck out like England did last year. However, best of the best will always win most of the time.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

India beat West Indies twice in the 1983 World Cup. When you beat the best team in the world twice in the same tournament, why should the best team in the world get another opportunity in the form of a best of 3 final?

India had West Indies' number in that tournament. It was not one bad day, there were two. What NBA and MLB does is irrelevant in cricket. The Americans like to do everything differently.

Australia's example is not a flawed one because it is not about the weak team fluking a win but the strong team delivering on the day. I will exclude 1999 because Australia were not the best team in the world at that point. The dominance started in late 1999 and lasted till late 2007.

During these 8 years, they were undoubtedly the best team in the world. However, they did not win every single match. They did lose games and did have off-days, but they ensured that those off-days never took place in World Cup knockouts. They did not lose a game in consecutive World Cups, but they did lose in between. This proves that not only were they the best in the world, they also had the ability to rise to the occasion.

If India and England keep having off-days in finals and semi-finals and end up losing to weaker teams, it is simply their problem and not the weaker teams'. They do not deserve leeway in the form of a 3 match final. It is their job to rise to the occasion and perform on the big day.

India and England are the two best ODI sides in the world. Ideally, they should play in the final and the better team on the day should prevail. However, if either of them shells another semifinal or a final to a weaker team, it will simply prove that in spite of being a brilliant team, they lack the composure to rise to the occasion and absorb the pressure.

Flukes do not happen frequently. India or England have no excuse for not winning the upcoming World Cup. South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and West Indies are not good enough to beat these two teams in a bilateral series anywhere in the world, and the onus is on India and England to ensure that they do not lose to these teams in a knockout game again.

So at the end of the day, its not about being the best in the world.

Its about the ability to rise to the occasion on a specific day.

 

[happydavy]

Not only is the language inappropriate, but you are also undermining DK's ATG Nidhadas Trophy chase!

Nothing wrong with the language, it means trivial chases. But if it hurts ur Shakespearean sensibilities, then be my guest. Nidhadas trophy win was against Bdesh, though regardless it was a sweet victory. But for someone who has playing for over 15 yrs for India, all you have is 1 memorable performance, then you know how good or bad he is. I wud call him bekaar player but then u cud read it as useless player.

 

[WengerOut]

So NZ is playing full strength and India is resting main players. But according to some, NZ are just testing out players ahead of WC while India is trying hard to win JAMODIs ( Series has been downgraded to JAMODI just after India won it).

 

[Savak]

Pakistan got trashed 5-0 in NZ and did not appear to have any answer to turn things around. India are leading 3-0 already and have made NZ look much worse than they actually are.

Shows the ever growing gulf between India and Pakistan

 

[a_tahir]

Pakistan got trashed 5-0 in NZ and did not appear to have any answer to turn things around. India are leading 3-0 already and have made NZ look much worse than they actually are.

Shows the ever growing gulf between India and Pakistan

That was over a year ago. But you are telling the truth

 

[Mamoon]

So at the end of the day, its not about being the best in the world.

Its about the ability to rise to the occasion on a specific day.

The great teams in history have been able to do both.

 

[TheRock]

So NZ is playing full strength and India is resting main players. But according to some, NZ are just testing out players ahead of WC while India is trying hard to win JAMODIs ( Series has been downgraded to JAMODI just after India won it).

I dont think this comes as a surprise, going by the trend on this forum.

First, India beat an Aussie Z team. Some posters had pointed out that SL can also achieve the same down-under (as a mediocre Indian team beat Aussies, it is nothing special). Now that SL is getting brutally thrashed, they are keeping quiet.

Second, NZ was considered to be very tough team to beat at home. and the general perception was India would be thrashed in NZ or will definitely lose marginally coz Pak got hammered one year ago by the same team. Now that India have thrashed NZ left right and centre, they have started calling it JAMODI.

Guess, What would be next !!

If India win the WC 2019, then it's obviously because other teams were playing their C teams in order to finalize their best team combo for the 2023 WC.

 

[Pakhs]

India is playing beautifully and beating a team that has been dominant at home. Great performance.

 

[Canford Cliffs]

Best of 3 defeats the purpose of a knockout game and dilutes the excitement. A final is supposed to be what it is, a final. It is about performing on the day and going home with the trophy or with regrets. It is not about having a 3 match bilateral series to determine the champion.

The ability to perform on the day is a big component of being a champion team. The great West Indies managed to do it twice and Australia did it thrice. This Indian team will also have to do it to be remembered in history. Same goes for England as well.

Knock outs are more of a lottery and not necessarily determine the best team of the tournament. A team that plays fantastic cricket throughout the competition and just had 1 bad day undo all the hard work of previous games is bit unfair. Personally, I would get rid of all knock out games (semis, finals etc.) and adopt the English premier league kinda format. All teams play against each other twice and team that tops the group is the winner. Now that is the most fair way to judge the best team.

 

[fitCricFan]

So at the end of the day, its not about being the best in the world.

Its about the ability to rise to the occasion on a specific day.

Sorry, disagree. A good team will consistently rise to every occasion, each time its on the field, regardless of the opposition. Thats the path towards greatness. That team can still have a bad/off day and loose

 

[jnaveen1980]

As i said in the other thread if India is at their best they will blow away every team. But great AUstralian team even at their worst were able to claw back and win matches. India hasn't reached that level yet. Certain things have to go right. If that happens they can beat anyone. Even the all conquering sides have had stutters. 1983 is a case in point. Some want to see the worst case scenario of India. Some best case scenario. India is good enough to reach semis. After that lot of factors come into picture. But we are happy that we are able to dominate a home track bully team like NZ. Beating NZ in NZ is not an easy joke. Williamson is a decent captain as well.

 

[Smbhayi]

In football, there are at least 10 competitive teams who can win the world cup, but they always play knockouts. Sometimes a team can be placed in the weaker side if desired draw and luck out like England did last year. However, best of the best will always win most of the time.

despite 32 team playing worldcup only 8 teams won it..

 

[BreadPakoda]

Yep, this series has ruled Munro and CdG out of the WC squad.

Need to have a look at a few batsmen and bowlers before the WC, but those shouldn't be on the plane to England.

India have exposed our weaknesses while we've helped to cover theirs, we've done all the other teams a service for the WC

Agree with Aman. Blessing in disguise for NZ. Hopefully NZ crashes badly and exits early from this WC so that they can build a solid team to reach semis in 2023. That would be a great blessing in disguise. Would help in long term