2nd ODI: Australia v India at Brisbane on Jan 15, 2016

[JJ]

I don't know anything about rugby but I do know how the icc operates. What possible reason outside of massive bribes would they give it to NZ lol

Unfortunately the one thing we can't offer...

 

[Mr Angry]

As a league man I am happy for NZ to win every Kickby WC, not the Poms, Saffas and least of all us.

In cricket

Rank - Games Played - Points - Rating
Tests
3 Australia 40 4376 109
5 New Zealand 36 3578 99
ODIs
1 Australia 44 5569 127
4 New Zealand 52 5767 111
20/20
2 Australia 17 2006 118
7 New Zealand 21 2393 114

 

[Meth]

No - I'm not.

Your fallacy here is that you are generalizing a wide all encompassing rule applied to all games from the specific set of facts in the context of one match at a moment in time thereof.

How then were you 'proven right'?

 

[Pete Cash]

I think NZ are like rugby's powerhouse... They are not a cricketing powerhouse. I dont blame rugby officials giving a rugby world cup to NZ over Australia. I would too. Nobody really follows rugby here it's an extremely niche sport.

Australia is a global cricketing power much more so than NZ. Cricket is widely followed here more so than NZ, Australia is politically more powerful than NZ in cricket by a factor of a gazillion.

 

[ANTiLAG]

How then were you 'proven right'?

Because Australia in the context of one particular match, at a particular point in time, did go onto win.

 

[ANTiLAG]

I think NZ are like rugby's powerhouse...

We're not even close.

UK and Europe is the powerhouse. And Japan is well on its way.

NZ is the poor cousin who just plays well.

We're like the South Africa of cricket, in rugby. Not a member of the "big three".

 

[Pete Cash]

To promote the game.

But in saying that, $$ rule and Melbourne makes much more sense to that end

If they wanted to "promote" the game they wouldn't be limiting the associates.

The icc is an extremely shitty governing ody. They have done nothing but marginalise the poorer full members. Cricket in south Africa could be extremely rooted finacially when steyn and ab go and they were the top side for 6 to 7 years.

 

[ANTiLAG]

If they wanted to "promote" the game they wouldn't be limiting the associates.

The icc is an extremely shitty government body. They have done nothing but marginalise the poorer full members. Cricket in south Africa could be extremely rooted finacially when steyn and ab go and they were the top side for 6 to 7 years.

Yeah, but so far Australia has been far too concerned about pandering to its Indian overlord to do anything about it. So if in the future, and if you have an Indian tour every second year, and Ashes tour in the other year - and you get bored. just think what Australia could have done to stop it.

 

[Meth]

Because Australia in the context of one particular match, at a particular point in time, did go onto win.

So how on earth could that possibly prove you right in this instance unless the team that wins the match shows themselves to have been invariably 'on top' throughout the match.

hint: it can't

 

[ANTiLAG]

So how on earth could that possibly prove you right in this instance unless the team that wins the match shows themselves to have been invariably 'on top' throughout the match.

hint: it can't

But they were still on top at 2/20 in my opinion and that continued to the finish.

hint: I'm logical.

 

[Meth]

If they wanted to "promote" the game they wouldn't be limiting the associates.

The icc is an extremely shitty governing ody. They have done nothing but marginalise the poorer full members. Cricket in south Africa could be extremely rooted finacially when steyn and ab go and they were the top side for 6 to 7 years.

I get that they aren't motivated by what's best for cricket globally, or wanting to 'share it around'. I even sympathise with their being driven by commercial realities.

 

[Meth]

But they were still on top at 2/20 and that continued to the finish.

hint: I'm logical.

ffs

that's fine if you want to argue that.

But the fact that they went on to win doesn't prove you right.

 

[Mr Angry]

lol

Sydney does not even get a look in for WC final, why would NZ?

You want to host the final, host the entire tournament on your own.

 

[Meth]

lol

Sydney does not even get a look in for WC final, why would NZ?

You want to host the final, host the entire tournament on your own.

Not really up to us, is it?

 

[ANTiLAG]

I get that they aren't motivated by what's best for cricket globally, or wanting to 'share it around'. I even sympathise with their being driven by commercial realities.

As am I. Well actually, I sympathize with the players maximising their earning potential and the right to free trade.

But is a 6 to 7 month club T20 competition in India tournament with players from all round the world, like the NBA, MLB, NHL and NFL, with limited internationals outside of that between 3 countries what is ultimately the best for the game?

 

[ANTiLAG]

ffs

that's fine if you want to argue that.

But the fact that they went on to win doesn't prove you right.

Not deductively entailed, no. But on the balance of probabilities in a reasonable inductive argument, I'm satisfied with it. The winning carries a lot of weight in support, enough for me to discharge the burden of proof of my claim.

 

[Meth]

Not deductively entailed, no. But on the balance of probabilities in a reasonable inductive argument, I'm satisfied with it. The winning carries a lot of weight in support, enough for me to discharge the burden of proof of my claim.

oh i get it. this is a sabremetrics thing

 

[Twatface Magee]

ffs

that's fine if you want to argue that.

But the fact that they went on to win doesn't prove you right.

Don't bother.
Antilag is the most intellectually challenged poster this forum has ever seen.
He makes BunniesMan look like he really was part of MENSA.

 

[ANTiLAG]

lol

Sydney does not even get a look in for WC final, why would NZ?

You want to host the final, host the entire tournament on your own.

Well, personally I think Sydney should get a look in.

And as for hosting it on our own, that should be unnecessary, but if its the only way, I am sure NZC would jump at that opportunity.

 

[ANTiLAG]

oh i get it. this is a sabremetrics thing

No. It is not.

Again, ad hominem.