The NRR issue

[Saj]

View attachment 93496

Very interesting this and some excellent points.

 

[gazza619]

We should have chased down the Afghanistan target in 35-40 overs...

 

[farazaidi]

We should have chased down the Afghanistan target in 35-40 overs...

we should've bowled out both Afghanistan and NZ under 170. We had them early but allowed the game to drift, this is where Sarfraz needs to improve

 

[Napa]

smacked him all the way to oblivion in Dubai during Asia Cup 2018.

True, and the Aussies also hammered him in the WC. But there is no denying that in the last 4 games he seems to have improved dramatically. He has been the largest contributor to the Pakistani victories in the last 3 games, outperforming Amir consistently. Maybe Amir has lost interest (as he often does) and maybe the batsmen in the last 3 games were not that great, but Shaheen certainly seems headed to the top. As we don't have bilaterals with Pakistan, we will only have occasional tournament encounters with him.

 

[sweep_shot]

Pakistan lost to West Indies badly and failed to beat Afghanistan comprehensively. These two were primary factors.

 

[Napa]

View attachment 93496

Very interesting this and some excellent points.

You can balance these excellent points with the fact that if the umpire had raised his finger either time when the Pakistani batsman was out against Afghanistan, all this talk would not be happening. Especially relevant is the Imad LBW not given where ball-tracking showed the ball hitting the middle stump.

 

[geraltofrivia]

You can balance these excellent points with the fact that if the umpire had raised his finger either time when the Pakistani batsman was out against Afghanistan, all this talk would not be happening. Especially relevant is the Imad LBW not given where ball-tracking showed the ball hitting the middle stump.

or the ct final no ball. luck evens out.

 

[Hasan123]

View attachment 93496

If Hafeez wasnt dropped versus England I doubt we get 350.
If Latham catches Babar, we may not beat NZ
Against Afghanistan we had luck as well.

Let's not act like Pakistan have not had luck too.

 

[OmaIR1]

I think it's quite obvious the WI loss hurt the NRR pretty bad.

But they also lost the plot vs. AFG and failed to use that game as NRR booster.

 

[Chokli]

I think it's quite obvious the WI loss hurt the NRR pretty bad.

But they also lost the plot vs. AFG and failed to use that game as NRR booster.

Not only that but it seems like they didn't even know NRR was a thing.

Very poor from the think tank.

 

[Snatch]

Agreed. Look at NZ, they ensured against England and Australia that they face most of the overs so their NRR isn’t affected. We should have done the same against India, Australia, and West Indies so NRR wasn’t affected.

Could've should've, but you weren't good enough to.

 

[Captain caveman]

Could've should've, but you weren't good enough to.

You seem very happy with our team!
I hope your team is just as big hearted, because i would love to enjoy the feeling and let everyone on here know it!

 

[Snatch]

All the sides knew the scoring/format rules before they started.

NZ played the NRR rules better than Pakistan, clearly.

It reminds me of Hillary winning the popular vote in the 2016 US election and moaning how Trump won the electoral college, but the reality was Trump's campaigning tactics were based around winning the electoral college, and not necessarily the popular vote. So he played the game much better.

I know Mickey wants to have a cry now, but it's no one but Pakistan's fault that they were annihilated by The west indies the way they were. You can't blame NZ for this, they only have themselves to blame.

 

[Titan24]

You can balance these excellent points with the fact that if the umpire had raised his finger either time when the Pakistani batsman was out against Afghanistan, all this talk would not be happening. Especially relevant is the Imad LBW not given where ball-tracking showed the ball hitting the middle stump.

If Hafeez wasnt dropped versus England I doubt we get 350.
If Latham catches Babar, we may not beat NZ
Against Afghanistan we had luck as well.

Let's not act like Pakistan have not had luck too.

There is a difference between getting luck in the game while playing or getting lucky due to reasons not related to game i.e rain and getting easy fixtures upfront. Also if NZ was playing so exceptionally well why couldnt they get lucky against any of the top teams?

Talking about catches and luck in the field, India’s highest scorer Rohit Sharma was dropped in every single game before he made his century.

 

[Snatch]

Very interesting this and some excellent points.

Not really, all that person has done is list areas that went against Pakistan. There;s lots of other little dismissals and things that went for them, and there's lots of unlucky things and dismissals, tosses, pitched conditions that went against NZ. So any team can list stuff that went against them and make it looks like some interesting points in isolation, but of course it's only one-sided

 

[The Viper]

NZ managed to comprehensively beat Afghanistan and Sri Lanka which boosted their NRR. Pakistan limped past Afghans. That was the game to improve nrr.

 

[Napa]

There is a difference between getting luck in the game while playing or getting lucky due to reasons not related to game i.e rain and getting easy fixtures upfront. Also if NZ was playing so exceptionally well why couldnt they get lucky against any of the top teams?

Talking about catches and luck in the field, India’s highest scorer Rohit Sharma was dropped in every single game before he made his century.

Not sure what your point is?

If anything, a dropped catch shows a weakness in the opponents' fielding, and should not be counted as luck. Otherwise, even bad bowling like bad fielding would count as luck.

On the other hand, a mistake by the umpire is definitely luck as it has nothing to do with the opponents' abilities.

 

[Donal Cozzie]

Absolutely nobody whinged when Ireland were denied a QF in 2015 on NRR, or Bangladesh were denied one in 2011, so the current complaining is extremely hypocritical. Both those sides missed out to WI and Eng respectively, both sides they had defeated in their group stages. If it wasnt an issue then why now?

Everyone knew the rules prior to the tournament. Pakistan started off pathetically, got humiliated by a side who went over a month between wins in this tournament. They struggled vs Afghanistan also. Credit to them they battled back manfully but tournaments are tournaments . you cannot afford slip ups or slow starts. Pakistan did and suffered the consequences.

NZ on the other hand demolished SL and Afghanistan and showed tremendous bottle and nerve in winning very tight games vs Bangladesh,SA and WI.

Can say they lost to x,y and z and we beat a,b and c but the end reality is they won their games more convincingly and lost them by smaller margins. Only thing Pakistan can blame is themselves for letting a WI attack who were subpar all tournament bowl them out for 104.

Fact is if NZ were knocked out on NRR this thread wouldnt exist. There does exist a genuine argument over whether head to head or NRR is better for future editions but then I'm sure some people who say head to head unfairly penalises teams for one loss and NRR is much fairer.

EDIT: BD didnt lose on NRR in 2011, so disregard that

 

[jnaveen1980]

Be rear for a change. What front line bowler? Afghan team is all about spin. On that track it wasnt easy to chase vs 4 spinners. We have seen chasing is very tough in this WC but PAK chased in back 2 back games under huge pressure.

Huge props to the team.

If you notice one of their main seamer left the ground after bowling an over or two. So they had to use a part time leggie who was bowling drag downs. But many of the pak batsmen camped on the backfoot and defended him instead of taking him on.

 

[Indiafan]

View attachment 93496

Pretty sure people can say similar things about Pakistan team in 1992 league stages

 

[TheNightWatchman]

Pretty sure people can say similar things about Pakistan team in 1992 league stages

Except the 92 worldcup team didn't tie with anyone on points and beat the team in the points table below them Head to head.

 

[Napa]

Except the 92 worldcup team didn't tie with anyone on points and beat the team in the points table below them Head to head.

1992 was the worst WC as far as rain disruption goes. India lost to Australia by one run after the target was reduced by 2 runs for 3 overs taken out. I believe they had the awful system of taking out the least productive overs of the side batting first.

India SL was washed out. If these two games had not been affected by rain, there was a fair chance that India would have been equal on points with Pakistan in the group stage if Pakistan hadn't received one point from the game where they were 74 all out.

I am not saying that Pakistan would not have won the WC if there were no rain interruptions in 1992, just that we will never know and the whole tournament was chaotic.

Just like this WC the washed out game against SL cost Pakistan heavily, India's washed out game against SL and revised target against Australia cost India heavily in 1992. I remember following the games and losing interest due to the farcical results from rain interruptions.

 

[Captain caveman]

Absolutely nobody whinged when Ireland were denied a QF in 2015 on NRR, or Bangladesh were denied one in 2011, so the current complaining is extremely hypocritical. Both those sides missed out to WI and Eng respectively, both sides they had defeated in their group stages. If it wasnt an issue then why now?

Everyone knew the rules prior to the tournament. Pakistan started off pathetically, got humiliated by a side who went over a month between wins in this tournament. They struggled vs Afghanistan also. Credit to them they battled back manfully but tournaments are tournaments . you cannot afford slip ups or slow starts. Pakistan did and suffered the consequences.

NZ on the other hand demolished SL and Afghanistan and showed tremendous bottle and nerve in winning very tight games vs Bangladesh,SA and WI.

Can say they lost to x,y and z and we beat a,b and c but the end reality is they won their games more convincingly and lost them by smaller margins. Only thing Pakistan can blame is themselves for letting a WI attack who were subpar all tournament bowl them out for 104.

Fact is if NZ were knocked out on NRR this thread wouldnt exist. There does exist a genuine argument over whether head to head or NRR is better for future editions but then I'm sure some people who say head to head unfairly penalises teams for one loss and NRR is much fairer.

EDIT: BD didnt lose on NRR in 2011, so disregard that

So this is all YOUR fault!
You should have screamed and shouted and made a rucus about it!
Maybe the rule would have been CHANGED!
Sorry mate, had no clue that happened to you guys, seriously, you should have made more fuss about it, its a pathetic rule!

 

[Hasan123]

Could've should've, but you weren't good enough to.

Lol and I am one of the few who is saying we arent good enough.

 

[MenInG]

Pakistan coach Mickey Arthur has called for a rule change at the Cricket World Cup after his side were eliminated from the competition.

Needing a historic victory to usurp the Black Caps for the fourth and final semifinal spot, Pakistan beat Bangladesh by 94 runs – not enough of a margin to move ahead of the Black Caps on net run rate.

The two teams ended level on 11 points, and were tied on the first tiebreaker of wins, so the second tiebreaker of net run rate came into play.

There, the Black Caps held a healthy buffer of 0.175 to Pakistan's -0.43, with Pakistan left to regret an abysmal outing against the West Indies in their opening game, where they were routed for 105 in 21.4 overs, and saw the West Indies chase it down with 36 overs to spare. That ruined their net run rate, with -5.802 the ugly figure which proved too much of a hole to clamber out of.

As a result of his side's scenario, Arthur believes the current tiebreaker set-up punishes a side too heavily for one bad day.

"When you lose like we lost, it's almost impossible to get back on net run rate, and we saw that. So that was disappointing.

"I think the nerves got us in the West Indies game. We froze in that game."

He argued – perhaps self-servingly – that head-to-head record should be the next tiebreaker, which meant Pakistan would have advanced to the semifinals, having beaten New Zealand by six wickets in Birmingham.

"I would certainly have liked them to consider head-to-head because then tonight we'd be in the semifinal. I do think it needs a look. I certainly do. I think amount of wins, head to head, and then if there's three teams all together, then I think net run rate can sort it out.

"Because what it does and what it's done to us is that one very poor game and you really battle to recover again."

There have been suggestions that Pakistan were more 'deserving' of a semifinal spot than the Black Caps, having beaten two of the top four sides – England and New Zealand – and pushed Australia close, while they had a winnable game against Sri Lanka washed out. Comparatively, New Zealand had no success against their semifinal rivals, being thrashed by England and Australia, and receiving a point against India thanks to a washout.

While Arthur acknowledged that the best four sides made the semifinals, he also felt his side were unlucky.

"It's nice to sit here and know we've beaten two of those top four teams during our campaign, which shows we are not a mile off in terms of where we are as a cricket team.

"We beat England, then we got rained out against Sri Lanka, and we didn't play a game for nine days. We didn't train other than indoors, and we lost momentum again going into what was two very tough fixtures, Australia and India.

"I'm not saying by any means we would have beaten Sri Lanka, but we were right there. We were getting on really well. It was almost as if we had to start again, and we hit two of the semifinal teams in Australia and India. And then obviously the second half of the tournament has been superb, and I think we've showcased our talent and played some very, very good cricket."

However, the start and end of Pakistan's tournament will leave Arthur with nightmares.

"It hasn't ended as we would have liked to have ended it.

"I think it just goes back to the first game, the West Indies game. If we looked at the Australian game, we had an opportunity to win that. 145-2 chasing 307, we had an opportunity. We didn't take that opportunity. Those are the two games that, when I go to bed tonight and lie back and think on the campaign, those are the two nightmares I'm going to have."

The Black Caps, on the other hand, can sleep soundly tonight with a spot in the World Cup semifinals tucked away.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12247200

 

[Hasan123]

There is a difference between getting luck in the game while playing or getting lucky due to reasons not related to game i.e rain and getting easy fixtures upfront. Also if NZ was playing so exceptionally well why couldnt they get lucky against any of the top teams?

Talking about catches and luck in the field, India’s highest scorer Rohit Sharma was dropped in every single game before he made his century.

I really don't get your point here. Instead of making comments like "Pakistan would be more entertaining in the knockouts " you should be concentrating on the simple fact we arent good enough to get through.

Also a team who wins 5 out of 22 games and loses most bilateral games to top teams easily isnt very entertaining.

 

[Captain caveman]

1992 was the worst WC as far as rain disruption goes. India lost to Australia by one run after the target was reduced by 2 runs for 3 overs taken out. I believe they had the awful system of taking out the least productive overs of the side batting first.

India SL was washed out. If these two games had not been affected by rain, there was a fair chance that India would have been equal on points with Pakistan in the group stage if Pakistan hadn't received one point from the game where they were 74 all out.

I am not saying that Pakistan would not have won the WC if there were no rain interruptions in 1992, just that we will never know and the whole tournament was chaotic.

Just like this WC the washed out game against SL cost Pakistan heavily, India's washed out game against SL and revised target against Australia cost India heavily in 1992. I remember following the games and losing interest due to the farcical results from rain interruptions.

Thats why i say all games MUST be played!
Set aside 3 days between group stage and next stage. Hold all washed out games in these 3 days! There is alway about three days between stages, so will not affect length of the competition.

For tied teams for qualification, select the top 2 on nrr(if more tha 2 teams tied) and play an eliminator for qualification! Can be played in the three days between stages!

This makes no difference to pak being eliminated in this wc, but will make things fairer in future wcs, where your team may find itself in a similar position as the pak team did this wc!

 

[TheNightWatchman]

1992 was the worst WC as far as rain disruption goes. India lost to Australia by one run after the target was reduced by 2 runs for 3 overs taken out. I believe they had the awful system of taking out the least productive overs of the side batting first.

India SL was washed out. If these two games had not been affected by rain, there was a fair chance that India would have been equal on points with Pakistan in the group stage if Pakistan hadn't received one point from the game where they were 74 all out.

I am not saying that Pakistan would not have won the WC if there were no rain interruptions in 1992, just that we will never know and the whole tournament was chaotic.

Just like this WC the washed out game against SL cost Pakistan heavily, India's washed out game against SL and revised target against Australia cost India heavily in 1992. I remember following the games and losing interest due to the farcical results from rain interruptions.

Very true. But you would think 28 years down the line they would probably have this figured the rain thing out by now especially considering what the 2007 WI worldcup was. Rained out DLS matches are also different than completely rained out matches atleast one team walks away with 2 points and there is some closure-no matter how flawed and unfair I think DLS is. And now if ICC had figured out what to do with no result washouts we wouldn't have 2 teams stuck on equal points now.

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Mickey Arthur "I do think it needs a look. I certainly do. I think amount of wins head to head, and then if there's three teams all together, then I think net run rate can sort it out" <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CWC19?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CWC19</a> <a href="https://t.co/Cihcnzzhj6">pic.twitter.com/Cihcnzzhj6</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1147386573756993536?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 6, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Points then Head to Head then a duck worth Lewis system would be the way I would go for the next World Cup ... Net Run rates are garbage ... <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CWC19?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CWC19</a></p>— Michael Vaughan (@MichaelVaughan) <a href="https://twitter.com/MichaelVaughan/status/1147171330103623685?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 5, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[TheNightWatchman]

Michael Holding also commented against the NRR fiasco. Its lasted so long in cricket. Im surprised it's even grounds for elimination especially in 50 over cricket. In 20 over cricket it's fine because it's such a short format, teams generally do have an oppurtunity to play catch up. But one bad match is all it takes it seems.

 

[TheNightWatchman]

https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1147049647409696768

 

[TheNightWatchman]

It was relevant in 1999 with SA and its still relevant now. Still you could make the case that Aus Beat SA head to head in the super sixes of that tournament

 

[IamIndian]

Pakistan was extremely unlucky in this world cup. no doubt about it. They were better than the Kiwis during the entire tournament.

 

[Gullycricket]

NRR is fine incase of group games where teams may not play each other but in this format head to head is better metric as each team plays every other one

 

[DHONI183]

It is said that the human brain erases memories that are too painful to bear, like the game on June 16th!

It is true Pakistan was on a roll winning 4 consecutive games, and if Shaheen continued performing the way he had, it was quite possible they would have lifted the trophy. Would have loved to see if Rohit, Rahul, Kohli, Pant, Dhoni and Pandya could have got the better of him, but it is not to be.

Haha, you legend troll! I did not forget the loss over India, as you can clearly see it being mentioned in my post that you´ve quoted. I just got it wrong, thinking that the match versus India came before the one against Australia. Come on you cruel man, I was off target by mere four days!

However, although Pakistan would´ve fancied their chances, and I wouldn´t bet against them either given that they were on a roll, but I still don´t think that they would´ve won the World Cup. As I said in a post over here a few days ago, in order to win a world cup, in this era, you need a team which can chase down at least 280-ish scores, and Pakistan´s batting line-up isn´t quite capable of that for the time being - especially in pressure games. Without it, all you have to do is to pray that they bat first everyday of the week!

And maybe had your hero Dhoni showed some spine the run chase he would have gotten to the total. Instead he was playing for the draw.

such a loser!

I was waiting for someone or the other over here to take a dig at me for MS´ innings, and I´m surprised that it came so late. Par bhai, aap mere moonh pe mere pasandeeda khilaarrhi ko "loser" bol rahey hai´n. Kuchh tou kheyaal kijiye!

No, on a serious note.... Yes, I can understand that the pitch might´ve slowed down that day towards the end of the innings, also that the England bowlers bowled really well. They mixed up the pace nicely and bowled to their field, but I´d have hoped for more intent than that on Dhoni´s (and also Jadhav´s) part. It´s sad that they chose to play for a non-existent draw!

It´ll perhaps forever stay a mystery as to why they batted like that.some have tried to explain by using the net run-rate theory, but God knows! Maybe we´ll have to wait for MS to write an autobiography once he retires and to explain his thought-process in that. Or maybe, 42 off 31 is the best that he can manage at this stage of his career?

 

[Arajit]

If WI had chased the score in 20 overs instead of 13.4 our NRR after the first match would have been -3.2 instead of -5.8 and we would have qualified for the semi despite the horror show with the bat against WI. Small margins.

Not 20 Overs Pakistan should have stretched them to 42.4 Overs for 108 West Indies scored to have had better NRR than New Zealand

 

[bones]

We should have chased down the Afghanistan target in 35-40 overs...

Not so easy when the pitch was slow and turning square. It might have been possible to chase it quicker had they played on fresh wickets.

 

[ethan hunt]

While we may have improved out net run rate against Afghanistan but a lot of people dont realise the pitches for the newzealand and afghan match were essentilly 5th day pitches. and most teams would have lost those games chasing.Pakistan would have demolished them batting first.
Our decision at the toss vs india , should never ever have chased and our selection in the early part of the tournament was terrible.
The Rain favoured NZ no doubt.
We should look to improve and become more consistent . there is serious upcoming talent .
Haris Rauf and Naseem Shah are special bowlers.

 

[bones]

I'm not fussed about Pakistan's situation in this world cup but there is so much wrong with cricket. The problems are endless.

1. ODI cricket is pointless and useless since the advent of T20. Drop ODIs and keep T20s and Tests only. Why must this terrible format with so many dead phases continue?

2. The time it takes to review decisions, yes lots of factors to consider but man does it need to take 3 mins every single time "rocking and rolling" the same footage.

3. The CWC has almost always been a joke because they are never consistent with the format, super 6s to QFs and now to this sh*t again?

4. Time wasting by captains (Dhoni was the worst) at the deep end of matches. Sometimes it feels as if it's taking 10 mins to bowl an over.

5. The importance of the toss. In T20 the innings are short enough to not really have that much of an effect but in ODIs almost every game sees the pitch change substantially from one innings to the next.

My solution to this dreadful CWC if it has to exist would be as follows:

1-4 play 5-8 randomly and publicly drawn in a straight knockout format. If India or Pakistan or England or whoever loses tough sh*t, you're on your way home. It means 3 games to win the title. Yes short, but should be completed within a fortnight and guess what, they can run it more frequently. Maybe every 2 years or even every year if it can be accomodated.

Cricket is not football, we have a handful of decent teams and every 4 years we present this type of nonsense.

My solution to cricket full stop is end ODIs - they are killing the sport.

 

[Arajit]

Remember WorldT20 2012? India had lower RR than Pakistan but had won head to head. Then where was this NRR thing?

What are you talking about? Pakistan Edged India out to qualify for semi finals. India was disqualified inspite of H2H win against PAK

have a look

http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-world-twenty20-2012/engine/series/531597.html?view=pointstable

 

[Arajit]

No, on a serious note.... Yes, I can understand that the pitch might´ve slowed down that day towards the end of the innings, also that the England bowlers bowled really well. They mixed up the pace nicely and bowled to their field, but I´d have hoped for more intent than that on Dhoni´s (and also Jadhav´s) part. It´s sad that they chose to play for a non-existent draw!

It´ll perhaps forever stay a mystery as to why they batted like that.some have tried to explain by using the net run-rate theory, but God knows! Maybe we´ll have to wait for MS to write an autobiography once he retires and to explain his thought-process in that. Or maybe, 42 off 31 is the best that he can manage at this stage of his career?

What kind of intent? An INTENT similar to the one Pakistan shown to go for 400 after winning the toss against Bangladesh for helping themselves qualify?

Why would Dhoni then show an INTENT to get Pakistan Qualified, While key thing on his mind should be India's NRR shall not falter in the match they are losing so that they should not get disqualified if they lose next two matches.

 

[zee-za-man]

This NRR issue makes no sense and it absolves Pakistani batters from their responsibilities. Leaving West Indies match aside, they had ample opportunity to improve their net run rate.

Pakistani batsmen had limited capability they barely finished 2 matches in the last overs which they won.

India match was the worst and will be reminded to them again andagain as they showed zero intent in winning the match. Could'nt finish the Australian game.

That ***** nephew Imam got a life in the Australia match, just like in South Africa where he edged to the slips made a 50 and then immediately got caught behind again. Carrying such players and then crying about other teams is just behaving like sour losers.

Whe our performance is assessed in future nobody would care about NRR, would blame Pakistani batting lineup that was sent to 2019 World Cup made up of relatives and friends of the chief selector.

 

[Bewal Express]

I felt at the time that the Windies game would cost us dearly and it did. I know I am going against the grain but this poor PK team with one decent bat, and a couple of decent Bowlers came this close to SF place. I never expected them or Saffers to do well because both are not very good teams but in the end we did ok with these players.
The think tank should look at developing 8 young batsman some of whom​ may not have stats but have potential, from these guys we only need to 2 to become decent and we won't be too far from a decent batting lineup( Saud, Nazir and Haider etc ) We need to find spinners that spin the ball, Imad is not a spinner and Shadab is struggling. If Asghar stops trying to be a medium pacer like Imad,he has a chance. I would like to see us develop 8 good pacers,and here if handled with care,we are not that far off.

 

[DHONI183]

What kind of intent? An INTENT similar to the one Pakistan shown to go for 400 after winning the toss against Bangladesh for helping themselves qualify?

Why would Dhoni then show an INTENT to get Pakistan Qualified, While key thing on his mind should be India's NRR shall not falter in the match they are losing so that they should not get disqualified if they lose next two matches.

Sir, I´ve no idea where Pakistan´s intent´s question comes from, or even Dhoni showing intent for Pakistan to qualify. However, to get that out of the way, yes, I´m of the opinion that Pakistan should´ve at least tried to score 450 to give themselves an outside chance. What was there to lose anyway?

As for MS, I´ve not denied or rejected the possibility of him having played for the net run-rate. He might well have, and it´s the most plausible explanation for his and Jadhav´s batting, but I just don´t agree with it being the right way to go. Both MS as well as Jadhav had a batsman batting at the other end, and for as long they should´ve still tried. This approach would´ve made more sense if India´s tail had already been exposed at one end at least.

So the key thing on their mind, in my opinion, should still have been to go for a win as long as neither of them had been dismissed. The net run-rate could´ve been given consideration after that. However, I suppose we´ll have to peacefully agree on a disagreement here.

 

[fitCricFan]

And maybe had your hero Dhoni showed some spine the run chase he would have gotten to the total. Instead he was playing for the draw.

such a loser!

Get a grip, MSD was playing for India, not Pakistan. Had our team performed well in the opener, we would not be looking at other teams for our qualification. YOu can only be lucky so many times

 

[Sindragosa]

This is ridiculous. Head-to-head over NRR is a completely unworkable and unfair method to determine table rank. I could prove it mathematically, but from what I've seen most people in this forum don't know enough arithmetic to undertand NRR, so explaing a proof using logic and group theory would be a waste of time.

Suffice to say that some people are ex post facto determined to come up with a set of criteria that would give their preffered team a place in the knockouts.