Why are England so overrated?

[Chief Destroyer]

They are mentally weak. Incapable of dominating. If you match their strength for half a match, consider yourself victorious.

 

[Hasan123]

England winning in SA or AUS or NZ is like Indian winning in SL or UAE or BD.Conditions that are similar to home.

India beats everyone at home.Lost 1 test in last 17.Lost 3 series in last 30 years at home.

Don't even like the England team but Australian conditions are not like English conditions.

 

[Abdullah719]

To be honest, they really aren't very good.

 

[Hasan123]

A very average team. Cook seems past it. Anderson won't be around for very much longer. England will have a good period on LO but a struggle in tests awaits.

 

[Buffet]

Why don't you enjoy a win? Eng lost and not playing well, but it's better to enjoy your win than pointing out you won because Eng is not playing well. Also, one match doesn't mean much. Eng may play much better in the next match.

 

[hadi123]

Why don't you enjoy a win? Eng lost and not playing well, but it's better to enjoy your win than pointing out you won because Eng is not playing well. Also, one match doesn't mean much. Eng may play much better in the next match.

Who isn't enjoying this victory? We all are?

As for England, I see problems in the future. Cook is nowhere near the player he used to be and they've tried so many openers recently, once he retires they will need to find 2 solid openers when they struggle to find 1 to partner Cook. Broad and Anderson aren't getting any younger either and I can't see many people doing better than them.

 

[Forum363]

A decent team with plenty of match winners, that are currently short of match practise / form.

I expect them to sort their act out shortly and beat India this summer quite comfortably (I predict 3-1).

Lets hope they haven’t regrouped by friday .

On a side note, glad Bess got a 50. Would much rather he was playing rather than woakes. Will be an easy fifth bowler.

 

[Aman]

They aren't very good home or away.

I'm surprised how easily Pakistan beat them at home, that too in the very first Test which Pakistan would still be adjusting to conditions.

Their next generation doesn't seem any good either, that's to go with an uninspiring captain and 'elite' batsmen who cannot score a century to save his life.

Hopefully Pakistan thump them again

 

[barah_admi]

England are a terrific home side. Hammered Australia, beat SA rather well too and have not lost a series in 4 years. That#s not being overrated, that is just facts.

If Pakistan beat them in this series, this will be the first time in a long time that an Asian side has completed the double over them.

Let us also not think of this in a bubble, if we take into account the last 8 or 9 years, England have completed the double over Australia, South Africa, West Indies and India. Maybe NZ too but I can't remember. Maybe 2017 to now is the end of an era with ageing names but they are still a home threat.

 

[aloo paratha]

England abroad are terrible, England in England are a good team. We wouldn't have gotten a this big lead against them if they could catch, their bowlers did their job.

 

[Aman]

England are a terrific home side. Hammered Australia, beat SA rather well too and have not lost a series in 4 years. That#s not being overrated, that is just facts.

If Pakistan beat them in this series, this will be the first time in a long time that an Asian side has completed the double over them.

Let us also not think of this in a bubble, if we take into account the last 8 or 9 years, England have completed the double over Australia, South Africa, West Indies and India. Maybe NZ too but I can't remember. Maybe 2017 to now is the end of an era with ageing names but they are still a home threat.

It's not just that, it's the manner of defeats. No one is stepping up for them.

Root should be the leading their batting, but he's only good for his pretty useless 50s that have zero bearing on the result.

 

[Kaptan]

Always said, the current English side is very very overrated (LOI side included) mainly by commentators, British media and British Pakistanis on this forum.

 

[Rahul1]

If we don't win the series against this mediocre English team, we should be stripped of the no 1 ranking.

 

[Aman]

If we don't win the series against this mediocre English team, we should be stripped of the no 1 ranking.

Yep.

If you can't beat this England team, you don't deserve to be ranked number 1.

 

[Kroll]

England has a habit of overhyping themselves to the rafters just like the football team. They've had some decent performances like the Ashes at home and South Africa away. But today showed how much they've regressed in the longer format.

 

[Ab Fan]

England are overrated for sure. They are behind Australia, South Africa and India by quite a margin in test cricket post 2000s.

Not dominant at all at home and had some very rare wins against big teams away from home, mostly when the bowlers werent all that great.

 

[ManFan]

They are overrated but not as much as people believe.

At home, they are a very good side as seen in recent victories.

They have the support of the English media and funding to advertise.

They lack a fighting mindset because they are comfortable being successful at home.

They need a Ganguly, a Border, a Nasser, to change their mental approach to winning.

 

[Usman Chadda]

India should not underestimate a wounded England. There is still enough talent in this line-up to beat good sides at home atleast. Two of Cook, Root, Stokes or Buttler firing would mean a difficult series.

 

[barah_admi]

It's not just that, it's the manner of defeats. No one is stepping up for them.

Root should be the leading their batting, but he's only good for his pretty useless 50s that have zero bearing on the result.

Again, England rarely lose a test at home, let alone an entire series.

There are various criticisms that can be aimed at them, being overrated at home is not one.

 

[James]

I don’t think England are overrated or underrated. At the moment they simply don’t seem to be rated at all. And the English pundits and England fans are currently their harshest critics.

Not losing a series at home since 2014, and usually beating teams convincingly at home during this time, yes that is a decent record - but I’m much more concerned with the here and now, and the fact is that an absolute caning just got handed out to us by a young and inexperienced (however brilliant) Pakistan lineup.

It does seem that England had their worst collective match possible at Lord’s and Pakistan meanwhile were at peak performance, however I can’t see things changing so drastically in 5 days that Headingley will not either be a very close game that England edge, or another Pakistan win.

England have thrown all of their eggs into the LOI basket because they want to win their home World Cup next year, and good luck to them, they may well do so.

But Test cricket is important to English cricket followers, and my opinion is that Pakistan are one of the numerous teams in Test cricket at the moment that are quite obviously better than us.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Again, England rarely lose a test at home, let alone an entire series.

There are various criticisms that can be aimed at them, being overrated at home is not one.

This is not true at all. Since 2014 , England have lost 10 test matches out of 28. That's quite a good percentage of lost home test matches . If you're losing more than a third of your test matches at home in this era of home bullying and you have the worst W/L ratio away for the last 7 years among top teams , it clearly shows that they aren't good at all.

 

[barah_admi]

This is not true at all. Since 2014 , England have lost 10 test matches out of 28. That's quite a good percentage of lost home test matches . If you're losing more than a third of your test matches at home in this era of home bullying and you have the worst W/L ratio away for the last 7 years among top teams , it clearly shows that they aren't good at all.

They have lost 8 tests since they have gone on their unbeaten test series run (excluding the recently concluded Lord's test). Most importantly they haven't lost a test series.

The publicity has been that England are good at home, not so good away. How is that overrating them?

 

[Mian]

According to english media aka hype machine they are always the fav going by last 4/5 ICC events and they always end up screwing their chances.

I still can't get over the act they lost CT 2013 final to India when they had Buttler/Bopara and needed around 15 runs in 12 balls

 

[ManFan]

They are better than every team barring India right now.

But they are overrated in their ability to win tournaments, they just cannot get over the hump.

 

[Hawkeye]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Told you in the start Eng ain't winning it.

Don't have it in them to win tournaments.

 

[sugumarrising]

England is good but they are not unbeatable, too much of over hype as if they have won the world cup already, most of their batsman have some issues with quality spin bowling, their test will be against india, australia & new zealand.

 

[Mian]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Told you in the start Eng ain't winning it.

Don't have it in them to win tournaments.

And before he use the same weak bowling excuse well both matches in this WC they lost were due to their batting.

CT13 WC15 CT17 WC19 in all the events they had players who could come at number 9 and bat but as usual Eng managed to screwed some how. I always find it funny to see English fans bashing SA for being chokers well they should be the last one to bash SA inability to win tournaments

 

[Ab Fan]

They are very similar to SA as far as ICC tournaments are concerned.

They have already lost to Pakistan and Sri Lanka in this tournament and are yet to play the top three teams in this WC.

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Told you in the start Eng ain't winning it.

Don't have it in them to win tournaments.

It is a long tournament and they don’t have to win every game. When you play 9+ matches, you are bound to slip up once or twice.

It was just a bad day for them. Bairstow was very unlucky - 9/10 times, umpires will give the batsmen benefit of doubt in a shout like that, and Root was very unlucky as well.

They are badly missing Roy who is their best opener and sets the tone at the top. The only problem for England is Moeen who is a complete dunce.

Their bowling attack is coming along very nicely, which was their only weak-link. People are really desperate for England to fall short so that they can call them chokers.

 

[battler]

It is a long tournament and they don’t have to win every game. When you play 9+ matches, you are bound to slip up once or twice.

It was just a bad day for them. Bairstow was very unlucky - 9/10 times, umpires will give the batsmen benefit of doubt in a shout like that, and Root was very unlucky as well.

They are badly missing Roy who is their best opener and sets the tone at the top. The only problem for England is Moeen who is a complete dunce.

Their bowling attack is coming along very nicely, which was their only weak-link. People are really desperate for England to fall short so that they can call them chokers.

But do you think they have it in them to beat India or Australia in a high stakes knock out game? We know they have the ability but do they have the temperament?

 

[Hawkeye]

It is a long tournament and they don’t have to win every game. When you play 9+ matches, you are bound to slip up once or twice.

It was just a bad day for them. Bairstow was very unlucky - 9/10 times, umpires will give the batsmen benefit of doubt in a shout like that, and Root was very unlucky as well.

They are badly missing Roy who is their best opener and sets the tone at the top. The only problem for England is Moeen who is a complete dunce.

Their bowling attack is coming along very nicely, which was their only weak-link. People are really desperate for England to fall short so that they can call them chokers.

They don't have to win every game indeed, but till now they've lost all the matches (two) against half decent teams that are not certified minnows.

And.. they've yet to face the top teams!

 

[Mamoon]

But do you think they have it in them to beat India or Australia in a high stakes knock out game? We know they have the ability but do they have the temperament?

This Australian side is average. People are overrating them based on their perception of what Australia is supposed to be like.

They smashed them in the Champions Trophy which was essentially a must win game for Australia, and I don’t think they will lose to them this time.

India though are fully capable of beating England. These are the two best ODI sides and it will be anyone’s game. That is why I am hoping for an England vs India Final.

In a way, it was good for England to lose to rubbish teams like Pakistan and Sri Lanka, because it will ensure that they don’t get complacent.

Nonetheless, Roy’s fitness is key for England. Vince doesn’t have the temperament for this level, and England are a different side when their openers set the tone for them.

 

[Mamoon]

They don't have to win every game indeed, but till now they've lost all the matches (two) against half decent teams that are not certified minnows.

And.. they've yet to face the top teams!

Losing to two pathetic teams is actually better for them. You can expect them to bring their A game against Australia, New Zealand and India now.

 

[Hawkeye]

Losing to two pathetic teams is actually better for them. You can expect them to bring their A game against Australia, New Zealand and India now.

Okay, if that's what you think, then good luck for the remaining matches.

 

[Afhan Ali]

Getting difficult for England now
India will smash them because India bowling is far better than their bowling. And India batters will perform very well under pressure

 

[Afhan Ali]

Australia is not better than England but its is 50-50 game now because England confidence must be hurted with these 2 defeats against such a mediocre team.

 

[sugumarrising]

Till yesterday england is the greatest odi team, but after their defeat to srilanka england team has been brought down to earth, now their semifinal dream is in doubt, the greatest sports on earth is our cricket what a sport.

 

[hadi123]

This Australian side is average. People are overrating them based on their perception of what Australia is supposed to be like.

They smashed them in the Champions Trophy which was essentially a must win game for Australia, and I don’t think they will lose to them this time.

India though are fully capable of beating England. These are the two best ODI sides and it will be anyone’s game. That is why I am hoping for an England vs India Final.

In a way, it was good for England to lose to rubbish teams like Pakistan and Sri Lanka, because it will ensure that they don’t get complacent.

Nonetheless, Roy’s fitness is key for England. Vince doesn’t have the temperament for this level, and England are a different side when their openers set the tone for them.

Finally someone agrees with me in saying Australia are average. They're honestly nothing threatening. If you see off Starc and Cummins their bowling is extremely mediocre. The one time they came up against a world-class opposition, they got beaten comfortably. Against West Indies and Pakistan, they didn't win, but the opposition lost. Brainless batting by WI, and poor umpiring contributed in WI's loss v Aus, whereas Pakistan were in a great position against them in the chase but gave the game on a plate to the Aussies.

 

[Ab Fan]

The way they have lost ICC tournaments playing at home grounds have been kind of stuffs even SA would find it hard to replicate.

2013 CT- England messed it up from a win-win situation.

2015 WC- lost to BD and couldn't even make it to Quarter-Final

2016 WT20- Again a mess by Ben Stokes, gets smashed for 24 runs in the last over, lol.

2017 CT- Pakistan showed them who are the big game masters!

2019 WC- Already lost to Pak and SL

 

[Hasan123]

This Australian side is average. People are overrating them based on their perception of what Australia is supposed to be like.

They smashed them in the Champions Trophy which was essentially a must win game for Australia, and I don’t think they will lose to them this time.

India though are fully capable of beating England. These are the two best ODI sides and it will be anyone’s game. That is why I am hoping for an England vs India Final.

In a way, it was good for England to lose to rubbish teams like Pakistan and Sri Lanka, because it will ensure that they don’t get complacent.

Nonetheless, Roy’s fitness is key for England. Vince doesn’t have the temperament for this level, and England are a different side when their openers set the tone for them.

Australia would never lose to these Pakistan and Sri Lanka teams in the WC and they are overrated. Your favourite team may not even get to the semis. Australia just need to beat South Africa and they are there lol.

 

[Obaidd]

Replace Ali with Dawson?

 

[Captain caveman]

I have said it before and i will say it again - jason roy is the key to englands success. Without roy, england are a less formidable team!
Similar to pak, in the sense , when fakhar performs, pak more often tha not wins!
People get carried away with buttler, hes not much better than umar akmal, laugh if you like, but its true! Also, shows pak fans ignorance at ridiculing umar and not wanting him in the wc!
Baistow is decent, but not much better than kamran akmal. I hear you laugh in the background, you should be crying that we chose imam and asif over the akmal bros!
Root is good, similar to babar, but both are not match winners!
Morgan is decent but not a match winner, similar th hafeez!
Stokes is englands second best odi batter. We don't have a player like him in our team!
Overall roy is england's match winner, and without him england are beatable!
Just like fakhar is our match winner!

 

[Technics 1210]

It is a long tournament and they don’t have to win every game. When you play 9+ matches, you are bound to slip up once or twice.

It was just a bad day for them. Bairstow was very unlucky - 9/10 times, umpires will give the batsmen benefit of doubt in a shout like that, and Root was very unlucky as well.

They are badly missing Roy who is their best opener and sets the tone at the top. The only problem for England is Moeen who is a complete dunce.

Their bowling attack is coming along very nicely, which was their only weak-link. People are really desperate for England to fall short so that they can call them chokers.

I got to hand it to you, you really are a work of art.

When your favourite team loses, your excuses include bad day, bad luck, unlucky, fluke, and law of averages. I mean 9/10 times the Umpire would give the benefit of the doubt? This is your defense? Have you forgotten the pressure in a WC is very different to bilateral series, especially when chasing?

Now I do not think you watched the match, maybe highlights, but not the full match, because as the old adage goes, you do not know what the wicket is like until both sides have played, and clearly the wicket in this match was favouring the bowlers, and a 35 year old took 4 English wickets - I guess Malinga was lucky right!? BUT wait, the English bowling is the weakest link!

For once give credit where it is due, Sri Lanka exceptionally well.

 

[Captain caveman]

I got to hand it to you, you really are a work of art.

When your favourite team loses, your excuses include bad day, bad luck, unlucky, fluke, and law of averages. I mean 9/10 times the Umpire would give the benefit of the doubt? This is your defense? Have you forgotten the pressure in a WC is very different to bilateral series, especially when chasing?

Now I do not think you watched the match, maybe highlights, but not the full match, because as the old adage goes, you do not know what the wicket is like until both sides have played, and clearly the wicket in this match was favouring the bowlers, and a 35 year old took 4 English wickets - I guess Malinga was lucky right!? BUT wait, the English bowling is the weakest link!

For once give credit where it is due, Sri Lanka exceptionally well.

Amazing, i wrote a similar post to mamoon sahib, as you have written, in the SL decline thread, almost at the same time you wrote this!
Mamoon needs to learn to give credit to good performances and not just dismiss them as flukes or luck - its called good sportsmanship!

 

[marlonbrowndo]

[MENTION=134608]Hawkeye[/MENTION] and I already know what’s coming

 

[Mamoon]

Australia would never lose to these Pakistan and Sri Lanka teams in the WC and they are overrated. Your favourite team may not even get to the semis. Australia just need to beat South Africa and they are there lol.

This Australian team is nothing special. They have played average cricket throughout the World Cup and would have lost to both West Indies and Pakistan but didn't because of the latter's incompetence. They are fully capable of losing to any half-decent team in this World Cup.

To win the World Cup, you not only need to be a strong side but you also need to have a bit of luck. England have been very strong in Limited Overs since 2015, but they have had some bad luck as well. Yesterday, the decision to give Bairstow LBW was a shocker - 9/10 times, umpires would not give that out. Similarly, Root's dismissal was lucky as well.

However, this England team have proved their doubters wrong so far. We were told in 2015-2016 that they can only bully weak sides and will be exposed against India and Australia, but then they demolished Australia in Australia and England, as well as in the Champions Trophy as well. Last summer, they beat India 2-1 as well.

The only thing that's left for them is to win this World Cup, and I still think they are favourites. They need Roy back as soon as possible and stick to their guns. Also, they need to somehow make the dunce Moeen performer because his runs down the order are very important.

 

[Mamoon]

I got to hand it to you, you really are a work of art.

When your favourite team loses, your excuses include bad day, bad luck, unlucky, fluke, and law of averages. I mean 9/10 times the Umpire would give the benefit of the doubt? This is your defense? Have you forgotten the pressure in a WC is very different to bilateral series, especially when chasing?

Now I do not think you watched the match, maybe highlights, but not the full match, because as the old adage goes, you do not know what the wicket is like until both sides have played, and clearly the wicket in this match was favouring the bowlers, and a 35 year old took 4 English wickets - I guess Malinga was lucky right!? BUT wait, the English bowling is the weakest link!

For once give credit where it is due, Sri Lanka exceptionally well.

Actually I did watch the match. In fact, since the 13 over of Sri Lanka's innings, I watched every ball. Firstly, the conspiracy theory that ECB were ensuring that England gets flat wickets in this World Cup was blown into pieces, like all conspiracy theories do eventually.

Secondly, Sri Lanka is a circus team that is ranked 9th in the world. There is a reason why they are 9th, why Pakistan is 6th and why England is 1st. The gulf between the former two and the latter is huge, for them to beat England, England needs to have a stinker (which they had against Pakistan) or get unlucky, which they did against Sri Lanka.

Malinga is a wonderful bowler, but the wickets of Bairstow and Root were gifts.

 

[Sidilicious]

Finally someone agrees with me in saying Australia are average. They're honestly nothing threatening. If you see off Starc and Cummins their bowling is extremely mediocre. The one time they came up against a world-class opposition, they got beaten comfortably. Against West Indies and Pakistan, they didn't win, but the opposition lost. Brainless batting by WI, and poor umpiring contributed in WI's loss v Aus, whereas Pakistan were in a great position against them in the chase but gave the game on a plate to the Aussies.

As individuals, Australia is not one of top teams out there. But they know how to win even when they are not at the top of the game. They will mostly beat teams similar or lower to their skill level, and will compete well, and occasionally win with teams above their skill level.

If you remember, under Fergie, United (IIRC you too are united fan??) just knew how to win games (seems like an era now) despite being the 2nd best team on the pitch for a majority of the match. We would rarely drop points against the likes of Hammers, wolves or any teams not in the top 5.

The Aussie teams of the last couple of decades have that aura. They will fight and fight till the end and somehow find that win against you. Its not that the opposition can't win, but the opposition needs to be considerably better. They avoid making small mistakes, are professional in their approach. I hardly recall them dropping points and losing against inferior teams. England, Pakistan and even SA keep doing that. Thats the biggest difference and that's why they cant be counted out.

 

[Robert]

According to english media aka hype machine they are always the fav going by last 4/5 ICC events and they always end up screwing their chances.

I still can't get over the act they lost CT 2013 final to India when they had Buttler/Bopara and needed around 15 runs in 12 balls

Poor old Bops choked. He had a habit of getting England to the line but not over it, which is why they dropped him.

 

[Hasan123]

This Australian team is nothing special. They have played average cricket throughout the World Cup and would have lost to both West Indies and Pakistan but didn't because of the latter's incompetence. They are fully capable of losing to any half-decent team in this World Cup.

To win the World Cup, you not only need to be a strong side but you also need to have a bit of luck. England have been very strong in Limited Overs since 2015, but they have had some bad luck as well. Yesterday, the decision to give Bairstow LBW was a shocker - 9/10 times, umpires would not give that out. Similarly, Root's dismissal was lucky as well.

However, this England team have proved their doubters wrong so far. We were told in 2015-2016 that they can only bully weak sides and will be exposed against India and Australia, but then they demolished Australia in Australia and England, as well as in the Champions Trophy as well. Last summer, they beat India 2-1 as well.

The only thing that's left for them is to win this World Cup, and I still think they are favourites. They need Roy back as soon as possible and stick to their guns. Also, they need to somehow make the dunce Moeen performer because his runs down the order are very important.

But when England are incompetent they lose the game as we have seen against Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Australia wouldn't lose to these 2 teams and we have seen that already.

They are playing average cricket and they are still ahead of England. They may get better as the tournament goes on

Yes average team who beat India in India in ODIs. Not many other teams who would average teams would be able to do that. Australia may not be at their strongest . But mentally they are strong and don't collapse under pressure like your favourite teams.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

This Australian team is nothing special. They have played average cricket throughout the World Cup and would have lost to both West Indies and Pakistan but didn't because of the latter's incompetence. They are fully capable of losing to any half-decent team in this World Cup.

To win the World Cup, you not only need to be a strong side but you also need to have a bit of luck. England have been very strong in Limited Overs since 2015, but they have had some bad luck as well. Yesterday, the decision to give Bairstow LBW was a shocker - 9/10 times, umpires would not give that out. Similarly, Root's dismissal was lucky as well.

However, this England team have proved their doubters wrong so far. We were told in 2015-2016 that they can only bully weak sides and will be exposed against India and Australia, but then they demolished Australia in Australia and England, as well as in the Champions Trophy as well. Last summer, they beat India 2-1 as well.

The only thing that's left for them is to win this World Cup, and I still think they are favourites. They need Roy back as soon as possible and stick to their guns. Also, they need to somehow make the dunce Moeen performer because his runs down the order are very important.

Actually the more I read your posts, the more I am convinced Australia will probably win the World Cup.

The World Cup is usually not won by the best team, but the team that can play the semis and finals well and I think no one does it better than Australia.

England isn't a bad team, but they will need to have 5 flat belter pitches to go all the way from here on in. If the final 5 pitches are flat belters, England will win the final. But if it's anything else, I don't see England going all the way.

India can win the whole thing too, but they are riding on a top order of Rahul, Kohli and Rohit to perform and if in semis or finals the top order is blown away, its game over for India.

Australia are the most adaptable team in the World Cup. On paper, they look average to above average, but all their bowlers can bowl on any pitch and all their batsmen can play on any pitch. You can remove Warner or Finch early but Khawaja and Smith can cover and if something really bad happens even Maxwell can now hang around enough for Australia to get through.

You really are underrating Australia.

They will end up in the final and if things go their way, it will be Cup number 6.

 

[Hasan123]

Actually the more I read your posts, the more I am convinced Australia will probably win the World Cup.

The World Cup is usually not won by the best team, but the team that can play the semis and finals well and I think no one does it better than Australia.

England isn't a bad team, but they will need to have 5 flat belter pitches to go all the way from here on in. If the final 5 pitches are flat belters, England will win the final. But if it's anything else, I don't see England going all the way.

India can win the whole thing too, but they are riding on a top order of Rahul, Kohli and Rohit to perform and if in semis or finals the top order is blown away, its game over for India.

Australia are the most adaptable team in the World Cup. On paper, they look average to above average, but all their bowlers can bowl on any pitch and all their batsmen can play on any pitch. You can remove Warner or Finch early but Khawaja and Smith can cover and if something really bad happens even Maxwell can now hang around enough for Australia to get through.

You really are underrating Australia.

They will end up in the final and if things go their way, it will be Cup number 6.

He can find weaknesses in every team but refuses to find weakness in his favourite teams. England gung ho approach is extremely risky in a knockout game especially in a chase.

 

[saeed5646]

As a pakistani fans it won,t favor our worldcup compagain but i can see england thrashing both nz and aus to reach semi finals

 

[Mian]

Mamoon's analysis are always based on 2 factors:

If he hates/dislike a team or player and they endup winning/performing then it's just a good day, law of average or fluke.

If he is fan of a team/player and they end up losing/failing then it was their bad day/bad luck, bad umpiring etc

Now when his fav team is failing he started talking about how good they were in JAMODIS )

 

[Technics 1210]

Actually I did watch the match. In fact, since the 13 over of Sri Lanka's innings, I watched every ball. Firstly, the conspiracy theory that ECB were ensuring that England gets flat wickets in this World Cup was blown into pieces, like all conspiracy theories do eventually.

Secondly, Sri Lanka is a circus team that is ranked 9th in the world. There is a reason why they are 9th, why Pakistan is 6th and why England is 1st. The gulf between the former two and the latter is huge, for them to beat England, England needs to have a stinker (which they had against Pakistan) or get unlucky, which they did against Sri Lanka.

Malinga is a wonderful bowler, but the wickets of Bairstow and Root were gifts.

Your judgement is based entirely on rankings, this is a mistake given how rankings are calculated. Yes rankings provide an indication, but are by no means conclusive. Your view of cricket is basically when a lower ranked team beats a higher rank team then it is a fluke because the higher ranked team had a bad day in the office.

As for the conspiracy theory, what's your point? England struggle on a challenging wicket? Well, this in itself proves England are overrated if they can only perform on flat wickets.

 

[Technics 1210]

This Australian team is nothing special. They have played average cricket throughout the World Cup and would have lost to both West Indies and Pakistan but didn't because of the latter's incompetence. They are fully capable of losing to any half-decent team in this World Cup.

Wait a minute, are you suggesting had Pakistan beaten Australia the victory would not have been a fluke?

 

[Mamoon]

But when England are incompetent they lose the game as we have seen against Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Australia wouldn't lose to these 2 teams and we have seen that already.

They are playing average cricket and they are still ahead of England. They may get better as the tournament goes on

Yes average team who beat India in India in ODIs. Not many other teams who would average teams would be able to do that. Australia may not be at their strongest . But mentally they are strong and don't collapse under pressure like your favourite teams.

Transitivity means nothing in cricket. Australia won in India, but they have been smashed by England more times than I can remember in the last 3 years, including in the Champions Trophy where Australia's strong mentality etc. did not help them stop England's onslaught.

England have lost to two rubbish teams in this World Cup, but they still have a better chance than Australia of beating India, and will start as favourites against Australia on Tuesday as well. If Australia do beat England and go onto win the World Cup, I will agree with you that this bunch of Australian players have the same big match temperament and mentality as their previous generations. At the moment though, I don't see it in them.

 

[Mamoon]

Actually the more I read your posts, the more I am convinced Australia will probably win the World Cup.

The World Cup is usually not won by the best team, but the team that can play the semis and finals well and I think no one does it better than Australia.

England isn't a bad team, but they will need to have 5 flat belter pitches to go all the way from here on in. If the final 5 pitches are flat belters, England will win the final. But if it's anything else, I don't see England going all the way.

India can win the whole thing too, but they are riding on a top order of Rahul, Kohli and Rohit to perform and if in semis or finals the top order is blown away, its game over for India.

Australia are the most adaptable team in the World Cup. On paper, they look average to above average, but all their bowlers can bowl on any pitch and all their batsmen can play on any pitch. You can remove Warner or Finch early but Khawaja and Smith can cover and if something really bad happens even Maxwell can now hang around enough for Australia to get through.

You really are underrating Australia.

They will end up in the final and if things go their way, it will be Cup number 6.

I still think England and India are the two clear favourites to win the World Cup. After these two, Australia and New Zealand have the best chance. If the pitches are slow and low from here, India will have the edge over England, but not Australia. I don't think Australian batsmen apart from Smith can play on any pitch. The likes of Warner, Finch and Maxwell etc. all prefer pace on the bat, and they can be strangled with tight bowling on sluggish pitches.

I don't think I am underrated Australia, I just don't think they are a better all-round team than England and India.

 

[Mamoon]

Mamoon's analysis are always based on 2 factors:

If he hates/dislike a team or player and they endup winning/performing then it's just a good day, law of average or fluke.

If he is fan of a team/player and they end up losing/failing then it was their bad day/bad luck, bad umpiring etc

Now when his fav team is failing he started talking about how good they were in JAMODIS )

If Pakistan was good enough to be a high ranked team, I would not talk about good/bad day, law of averages, fluke etc., but there is a reason why Pakistan is 6th and Sri Lanka is 9th. They are simply not good enough, and simply playing good cricket on the day is not enough against the better teams. You also have to hope that the better teams underperform, because England's best is well above Pakistan and Sri Lanka's best, and that is why they are ranked 1, which is beyond the abilities of Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

Before you bring T20s into the discussion, I will accept that Pakistan is the number one T20 team in the world if they prove it by beating India, who have also had a prolonged unbeaten run in the last two years. However, you and I both know that if Pakistan were to play India in a T20 series, they will get spanked like no tomorrow.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

I still think England and India are the two clear favourites to win the World Cup. After these two, Australia and New Zealand have the best chance. If the pitches are slow and low from here, India will have the edge over England, but not Australia. I don't think Australian batsmen apart from Smith can play on any pitch. The likes of Warner, Finch and Maxwell etc. all prefer pace on the bat, and they can be strangled with tight bowling on sluggish pitches.

I don't think I am underrated Australia, I just don't think they are a better all-round team than England and India.

Counter points.

1. India are heavily dependent on the top 3 and with loss of Dhawan are looking pretty vulnerable.

2. England are only good on flat pitches and will struggle on anything else.

Do you agree or disagree?

 

[Mamoon]

Wait a minute, are you suggesting had Pakistan beaten Australia the victory would not have been a fluke?

It would have been a fluke, because Australia is far stronger than Pakistan. However, they had a bad day against us and handed us the match on a platter, but we were too pathetic to take advantage. Had we played as well as we played against England, we would have beaten them.

 

[Hasan123]

Transitivity means nothing in cricket. Australia won in India, but they have been smashed by England more times than I can remember in the last 3 years, including in the Champions Trophy where Australia's strong mentality etc. did not help them stop England's onslaught.

England have lost to two rubbish teams in this World Cup, but they still have a better chance than Australia of beating India, and will start as favourites against Australia on Tuesday as well. If Australia do beat England and go onto win the World Cup, I will agree with you that this bunch of Australian players have the same big match temperament and mentality as their previous generations. At the moment though, I don't see it in them.

2017 was poor but also they would have beaten Bangladesh had rain not stopped the game and who knows what could have happened against NZ had it not rained ? They were only beaten badly by England. So the way you go on about their CT exit is pathetic. 1 bad defeat out of 3.

I don't see a big game mentality in this English team. Let's see if they prove you right.

 

[Mamoon]

Counter points.

1. India are heavily dependent on the top 3 and with loss of Dhawan are looking pretty vulnerable.

2. England are only good on flat pitches and will struggle on anything else.

Do you agree or disagree?

Disagree on both counts. India have the most well-rounded attack. They open and finish with Bumrah and Kuldeep and Chahal work their magic in the middle-overs. Australia's spinners are not at the same level. India's only weakness is the duo of Shankar and Jadhav, who are not bad players, but they can be improved on. The loss of Dhawan is huge, but Rohit and Kohli are the two best players in their position by some distance. Hence, I think to state that India are too dependent on the top 3 is a bit of an overstatement.

As far as England are concerned, I think it is too much of an assumption to state that they can only play on flat wickets. Root, Morgan and Bairstow are capable of playing on slow wickets, and it also brings Rashid into the mix, who is a wicket-taking spinner.

 

[Mamoon]

2017 was poor but also they would have beaten Bangladesh had rain not stopped the game and who knows what could have happened against NZ had it not rained ? They were only beaten badly by England. So the way you go on about their CT exit is pathetic. 1 bad defeat out of 3.

I don't see a big game mentality in this English team. Let's see if they prove you right.

The England match was the biggest test for Australia and they failed with flying colours. Hence, I don't think it is pathetic to criticise them for that performance.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Disagree on both counts. India have the most well-rounded attack. They open and finish with Bumrah and Kuldeep and Chahal work their magic in the middle-overs. Australia's spinners are not at the same level. India's only weakness is the duo of Shankar and Jadhav, who are not bad players, but they can be improved on. The loss of Dhawan is huge, but Rohit and Kohli are the two best players in their position by some distance. Hence, I think to state that India are too dependent on the top 3 is a bit of an overstatement.

As far as England are concerned, I think it is too much of an assumption to state that they can only play on flat wickets. Root, Morgan and Bairstow are capable of playing on slow wickets, and it also brings Rashid into the mix, who is a wicket-taking spinner.

India's dependence on top 3 is a bit of an overstatement?

99% indian fans believe that mate.

How is it an overstatement?

I just feel you overrate India and England a lot bhai.

 

[Mamoon]

Your judgement is based entirely on rankings, this is a mistake given how rankings are calculated. Yes rankings provide an indication, but are by no means conclusive. Your view of cricket is basically when a lower ranked team beats a higher rank team then it is a fluke because the higher ranked team had a bad day in the office.

As for the conspiracy theory, what's your point? England struggle on a challenging wicket? Well, this in itself proves England are overrated if they can only perform on flat wickets.

Rankings are the most accurate measure of the capability of a team, because it is measured over a long period of time. Hence, it takes into account all variables. The fact that Pakistan is ranked 6th is the biggest proof of its mediocrity.

A 6th ranked team is not as skilled or talented as a number 1 or number 2 team. As a result, it cannot beat the number 1 or number 2 team simply by playing well, because if both teams play well, the number 1 or number 2 ranked team will win.

 

[Mamoon]

India's dependence on top 3 is a bit if an overstatement?

99% indian fans believe that mate.

How is it an overstatement?

I just feel you overrate India and England a lot bhai.

India's bowling attack is stronger than any team which compensates for their relatively weak middle-order. That is what I feel. Indian fans might differ, but I am speaking for myself.

 

[shaz619]

England are not over rated, they have the most complete team in the tournament; but anyone can be beaten on their day in a World Cup. I still see them making the semi-finals

 

[Hasan123]

The England match was the biggest test for Australia and they failed with flying colours. Hence, I don't think it is pathetic to criticise them for that performance.

If the they won the other 2 games they would have been through. England losing to Pakistan was even more pathetic in the same tournament. There was no fight .

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Disagree on both counts. India have the most well-rounded attack. They open and finish with Bumrah and Kuldeep and Chahal work their magic in the middle-overs. Australia's spinners are not at the same level. India's only weakness is the duo of Shankar and Jadhav, who are not bad players, but they can be improved on. The loss of Dhawan is huge, but Rohit and Kohli are the two best players in their position by some distance. Hence, I think to state that India are too dependent on the top 3 is a bit of an overstatement.

As far as England are concerned, I think it is too much of an assumption to state that they can only play on flat wickets. Root, Morgan and Bairstow are capable of playing on slow wickets, and it also brings Rashid into the mix, who is a wicket-taking spinner.

1. We are not talking about Indian bowlers who will make a game in every match. The point remains if Kohli, Rahul and Rohit get dismissed cheaply, there isn't a single player in India who can chase 300 runs if required to win the match. It's a clear chink in the armor and whether teams can exploit that or not is another matter. You have moved the argument to India having better bowlers than Australia which no one doubts but it doesn't help solve their batting issues.

2. I have yet to see England win a game in this WC on a pitch that wasn't so good for batting and I shall be waiting till England either crash out or win the whole thing together in next 5 games by having batting heavens to play. I am still confused as to how the English team plans to win this event by having only stroke making batsmen only. Only Root can hold his own on a tough pitch, but he can't do it every time.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

India's bowling attack is stronger than any team which compensates for their relatively weak middle-order. That is what I feel. Indian fans might differ, but I am speaking for myself.

Of course.

You mentioned its an overstatenent but if vast majority of fans believe something, it aint an overstatement is it?

Yes Indian bowling is very good but it eats into strength of Indian batting where 6 down will feel like 8 down.

Also middle order being shaky puts on psychological pressure on top order too.

On paper, bowling compensates for India.

In reality, not so much.

India can win the WC but they need a lottt of luck to ensure their weakness isn't exposed.

Even the greatest Indian batting lineup in 2011 were stretched to their limit to win the WC. Even if one out of their top 7 had failed in a crucial moment, they would hav lost.

 

[Mamoon]

England are not over rated, they have the most complete team in the tournament; but anyone can be beaten on their day in a World Cup. I still see them making the semi-finals

Moeen's form makes a huge difference for England in the lower-order. Without him playing well, their batting depth looks shallow. Not only is he in poor form, he is also playing very reckless cricket. Morgan and Bayliss need to knock him back into his senses.

 

[Mamoon]

1. We are not talking about Indian bowlers who will make a game in every match. The point remains if Kohli, Rahul and Rohit get dismissed cheaply, there isn't a single player in India who can chase 300 runs if required to win the match. It's a clear chink in the armor and whether teams can exploit that or not is another matter. You have moved the argument to India having better bowlers than Australia which no one doubts but it doesn't help solve their batting issues.

My point is that India's bowling strength negates the lack of depth in the batting lineup, and just like England's batting strength negates their relative weak bowling, although Archer has changed the complexion of their attack. You are right about 300+ scores, but India's bowling is more capable than any attack in the tournament to restrict opposition to below par scores.

2. I have yet to see England win a game in this WC on a pitch that wasn't so good for batting and I shall be waiting till England either crash out or win the whole thing together in next 5 games by having batting heavens to play. I am still confused as to how the English team plans to win this event by having only stroke making batsmen only. Only Root can hold his own on a tough pitch, but he can't do it every time.

They just had one match against on a slowish pitch where they had two unlucky dismissals. I think you are looking too much into it, but that's your call.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Of course.

You mentioned its an overstatenent but if vast majority of fans believe something, it aint an overstatement is it?

Yes Indian bowling is very good but it eats into strength of Indian batting where 6 down will feel like 8 down.

Also middle order being shaky puts on psychological pressure on top order too.

On paper, bowling compensates for India.

In reality, not so much.

India can win the WC but they need a lottt of luck to ensure their weakness isn't exposed.

Even the greatest Indian batting lineup in 2011 were stretched to their limit to win the WC. Even if one out of their top 7 had failed in a crucial moment, they would hav lost.

Not that I advocate weakening the bowling per se... Just pointing its effects.

 

[Mamoon]

If the they won the other 2 games they would have been through. England losing to Pakistan was even more pathetic in the same tournament. There was no fight .

Losing in the semifinal will never be more pathetic than losing in a group game to your big rivals.

 

[big_gamer007]

Indian batting minus Kohli and Rohit is garbage.we won't win world cup with such abysmal batting unless Kohli/rohit has a world cup of their life.

 

[Mamoon]

Of course.

You mentioned its an overstatenent but if vast majority of fans believe something, it aint an overstatement is it?

Yes Indian bowling is very good but it eats into strength of Indian batting where 6 down will feel like 8 down.

Also middle order being shaky puts on psychological pressure on top order too.

On paper, bowling compensates for India.

In reality, not so much.

India can win the WC but they need a lottt of luck to ensure their weakness isn't exposed.

Even the greatest Indian batting lineup in 2011 were stretched to their limit to win the WC. Even if one out of their top 7 had failed in a crucial moment, they would hav lost.

I understand the concerns of the Indian fans, but I also think they are quite a pessimistic bunch in spite of the fact that India is an elite team. The success of the past 15-16 years has spoiled them. They are pretty much the opposite of Pakistani fans, who are deluded beyond measure and tend to live in denial.

Indians fans tend to overemphasise on the weaknesses of their teams instead of focusing on their strengths.

 

[Hasan123]

Losing in the semifinal will never be more pathetic than losing in a group game to your big rivals.

Losing to a lower ranked team is way more embarrassing than losing to a evently matches team.

Also the mentality of the teams is summed up by the captains. Smith said he was embarrassed to be eliminated that early. Morgan said getting to the semi finals should be seen as a achievement if England football team did the same . )

 

[Mamoon]

Losing to a lower ranked team is way more embarrassing than losing to a evently matches team.

Also the mentality of the teams is summed up by the captains. Smith said he was embarrassed to be eliminated that early. Morgan said getting to the semi finals should be seen as a achievement if England football team did the same . )

He said it as a joke. Not only have you mistranslated it, you haven't captured the humour of his expression as well. Anyway, not winning the World Cup would count as a failure for this England team. This is their best ODI side of all time and they have put all their eggs in the World Cup basket for four years. They have been preparing for it since 2015, and if they fall short, it will be very heartbreaking. I do hope they go all the way.

 

[Technics 1210]

Rankings are the most accurate measure of the capability of a team, because it is measured over a long period of time. Hence, it takes into account all variables. The fact that Pakistan is ranked 6th is the biggest proof of its mediocrity.

A 6th ranked team is not as skilled or talented as a number 1 or number 2 team. As a result, it cannot beat the number 1 or number 2 team simply by playing well, because if both teams play well, the number 1 or number 2 ranked team will win.

Rankings do not take into account all variables. The teams do not play each other equal number of times within the 3 year period, and the points system is weighted. A high rank team beating a low rank team will gain less points compared to a low rank team beating a high rank team. Moreover 2/3 teams can play each other day and night and gain points respectively to the top.

Pakistan's 6th rank is not proof of anything, it is an indication. If the cricket rankings were proof of anything, then bookmakers would be out of business as there'd be no fluke results.