saeed5646
T20I Debutant
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2015
- Runs
- 7,931
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
banglades are below zimthough they have played less matches
How have SL and Zimbabwe played so many matches??
Ah yes,Zimbabwe has played a lot of games against other minnows as well e.g scotland,netherlands etczim have played 15 odi matches with the afghanistan in last two years
sl have played too many home series thats in last two years
The list is sorted by matches won so it is disadvantageous to teams that have played fewer games.
So pakistan 9th in the list wrt w/l.
banglades are below zimthough they have played less matches
So pakistan 9th in the list wrt w/l.
If you are trying to get under skin, try to do it properly, otherwise posters will call you troll.
You set KPI of W/L ratio, then sorted with number of wins, which is a function of matches played.
Do the same with matches against top 9 teams & sort it with W/L ratio to see the real picture. Afghans have played many matches against IRL & ZIM, hence their ratio is between NZ & AUS.
i have stated the obvious that bd have played less matches and zim have won more whether they played
against kenya or ireland i don,t care the title also say win/loss not NRR
No, you have to rephrase the title then.
Put it as teams with number of wins, it's fine. You can't say overall figure to of W/L in last 2 years & then sort teams with different criteria.
What you have done is a laughing stalk - basic lack of understanding of any KPI & its significance & how to present any data (not to mention failed troll effort).
Read it how it sounds -
Batsmen in Test history in order of batting average - then sort it on total runs; then try to troll around that Bradman is below Atherton & Fleming in the ranks of Test batting average.
Your list is fine, but if it was possible, I would have suggested you to delete the 2nd post - it exposed you.
i am your huge admirer+fan but have tell you once some time you have no idea what you are saying
don,t judge some one with his attention
if the thread was invalid it would have been deleted by mods
Lol nice trolling.banglades are below zimthough they have played less matches
Basically even with just 5 Million population and with virtually zero interest in cricket, NZ is still a monster in Cricket.
I would say AF Milne, Southee, Boult>Amir, Hasan, Junaid Khan.
Thanks, I actually requested after running the quarry myself.
Still the result is a bit mis-leading, because of Poms playing 9 ODIs against Azhar's PAK & SAF clean sweeping an under strength Aussie side.
Overall, PAK's result swings most because of 4-0 at the end & 0-3 at the start - by picking start & end time, you can bring miracles, which is statistical manipulation.
Overall, India's record is most surprising - probably because of that 3-2 home loss to SAF & 2-3 win against NZ.
Short periods like 1-2 years will always going to present a bit misleading picture. I think 4-5 years normally balances it out, but then teams can differ a lot in longer periods.
One better way could be to look at last 50 matches for every team - but that's also misleading.
I rather go by ICC ranking which actually covers most factors - only change I would have brought in is differentiation for Home, Away & Neutral results and putting more weights for ICC events. Apart from PAK, most teams, these days don't pick available first choice XI for bilateral.
8th and same to 7th with just one win short
What surprises me the most, is Paks lowest score compared to others
Only two teams have lower w/l than ours in 11 , does not that make us 9 in 11?
Currently Pakistan is playing good cricket than these records shows. Limit it to 1 year its going in Pakistan's favor.