I agree, England’s team was way better than ours in the final. We had 4 young players. But the great Khan was the difference b/w two teams. :rotato: Aggressiveness…YES!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by smooth_guy: *
Umair, I would agree with you on this point. But India's current team looks slightly better than ours, with those 5 steelmen in the top batting order. It can further improve if Zahreer, Nehra and Patel/Phattan groom up with time.
On the other hand, Pakistan has no worries about the pace attack, they just emerge every now and than :) Alhamdollillah. On the batting side, its always been a place where we need improvement. But with recent findings like Taufeeq, Farhat and Hameed, we also have a bright future ahead.
So let see who improves more in next couple of years. The series between two countries will also be very interesting as both teams are pretty much balanced these days.
[/QUOTE]
Definitly!
When you remove the likes of Wasim, Waqar, Saeed from any team in the world, the opposition will always look better but these stats are overall performance of the teams for the past 50-60 years and majority of these matches were played in the last 2 decades.
As far as their so called "pace" attack is concerned, I don't see any special things from Zaheer Nehra, they had a good WC but other then that they are your average medium pace bowlers that you can find laying on the streets of Pakistan anyday.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zero_one: *
someone (i don't know the name yet) said about the `92 WC winning team that the better lost and the aggressive team won it
[/QUOTE]
When you are talking about agressive team of 92 WC, there were plenty.
New Zealand were the most agressive, followed by South Africa, West Indies, Australia, on the otherhand Pakistan were the least agressive, they scored like 140 odd runs in the first 40 overs, and Wasim was the only attacking bowler in that team while Aaqib and Imran were hardly agressive bowlers.
hmm......ur rite on that.
do we have a record of the fastest deliveries by these Indian so call pacers? Or its another hype created by Indian media about vegie-pacers :)
I got it.
Ashish Nehra, India: 149.7 Kph / 93.0 mph
Zaheer Khan, India: 147.4 Kph / 91.6 mph
No dought Pakistan has historically been a better side. In the last few years since the 96' world cup Pakistan has been choking like it ain't no thang but a chicken wang. The most unpredictable cricket side in the world with probably the most talent because of the idiots that are allowed to run this team like Aamir Sohail and General Zia. Until these fools are kicked out and someone with captains experience is allowed to run the team the team will do the same b.s. it's been pulling in ODI, especially.
Something thats pretty wack is that Pakistani's always compare themselves with India. In everything. Our goal is to always be better than India and as long as we accomplish that we are game. I think it would be better if we tried to be the best rather then try to be better than just India.
*Pakistan or India: Who is the best team? *
Between the two, India is the bestest team or in other words India is the most best team. Pak is worserer than India.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Some1: *
**Pakistan or India: Who is the best team? *
Between the two, India is the bestest team or in other words India is the most best team. Pak is worserer than India.
[/QUOTE]
India can be the BESHT or even BESHTESHT TEAM, but not best, simple.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zoab_Khan: *
No dought Pakistan has historically been a better side. In the last few years since the 96' world cup Pakistan has been choking like it ain't no thang but a chicken wang. The most unpredictable cricket side in the world with probably the most talent because of the idiots that are allowed to run this team like Aamir Sohail and General Zia. Until these fools are kicked out and someone with captains experience is allowed to run the team the team will do the same b.s. it's been pulling in ODI, especially.
Something thats pretty wack is that Pakistani's always compare themselves with India. In everything. Our goal is to always be better than India and as long as we accomplish that we are game. I think it would be better if we tried to be the best rather then try to be better than just India.
[/QUOTE]
i agree with you man, we should not worry ourselves with indiks. we have 52-30 and 9-5 edge so what the heck do we have prove. there was this guy who i was watching pak cricket with and we got into this conversation about which would we rather have, win against indoos or winning the world cup. and no matter what i said to change his mind, he kept talking about how beating indiks are much much more important. i felt like downsizing his face with a shovel.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zoab_Khan: *
No dought Pakistan has historically been a better side. In the last few years since the 96' world cup Pakistan has been choking like it ain't no thang but a chicken wang. The most unpredictable cricket side in the world with probably the most talent because of the idiots that are allowed to run this team like Aamir Sohail and General Zia. Until these fools are kicked out and someone with captains experience is allowed to run the team the team will do the same b.s. it's been pulling in ODI, especially.
Something thats pretty wack is that Pakistani's always compare themselves with India. In everything. Our goal is to always be better than India and as long as we accomplish that we are game. I think it would be better if we tried to be the best rather then try to be better than just India.
[/QUOTE]
Well we are discussing Pak v Ind, and looking from the stats above, Pak is obviously marginally ahead of India in everything.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by UMAIR316: *
Well we are discussing Pak v Ind, and looking from the stats above, Pak is obviously **marginally* ahead of India in everything.
[/QUOTE]
your margins are very wide I guess.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Changez_like: *
your margins are very wide I guess.
[/QUOTE]
You should read my complete statement, I was talking about the overall picture.
If the statement is that Pakistan is the better team, a point to be pondered........
Anytime there is an India-Pakistan match, the teams have a 50 50 chance of winning. Regardless of how well a team has been playing until then.
This leads to the conclusion that on the whole Pak has a better record, but when it comes to a India Pakistan match, there can be no sure winners.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by UMAIR316: *
When you are talking about agressive team of 92 WC, there were plenty.
New Zealand were the most agressive, followed by South Africa, West Indies, Australia, on the otherhand Pakistan were the least agressive, they scored like 140 odd runs in the first 40 overs, and Wasim was the only attacking bowler in that team while Aaqib and Imran were hardly agressive bowlers.
[/QUOTE]
i was talking about the final
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Toddytapper: *
If the statement is that Pakistan is the better team, a point to be pondered........
Anytime there is an India-Pakistan match, the teams have a 50 50 chance of winning. Regardless of how well a team has been playing until then.
This leads to the conclusion that on the whole Pak has a better record, but when it comes to a India Pakistan match, there can be no sure winners.
[/QUOTE]
please check pak-ind match record and you will see who has the better record.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Toddytapper: *
If the statement is that Pakistan is the better team, a point to be pondered........
Anytime there is an India-Pakistan match, the teams have a 50 50 chance of winning. Regardless of how well a team has been playing until then.
This leads to the conclusion that on the whole Pak has a better record, but when it comes to a India Pakistan match, there can be no sure winners.
[/QUOTE]
yep, suprisingly the stats show that pakistan has always been a better side than india, as i said before, i was not expecting this much margin b/w two countries.
There is always a 50/50 chance between all top 6 teams. b/w pak/aus, pak/ind, pak/sri, aus/ind, aus/rsa, ind/rsa, pak/rsa, rsa/eng and list goes on and on........so thats not what matters here. main point is that statistically which is the better side in history.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by karachiexpress: *
please check pak-ind match record and you will see who has the better record.
[/QUOTE]
I meant, before the match starts, you cannot decide on a clear winner. For example if India was playing Australia 9 outof 10 the Aussies win, and the records show that, and even Indians know this, but when playing Pak, all previous history goes out, for example the worldcup matches...
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zero_one: *
i was talking about the final
[/QUOTE]
The same situation applied in the final as well, Pakistan scored like 140 odd in the first 40 overs and did some serious damage in the end.
Ofcourse Pakistan...No other thought about it...
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by smooth_guy: *
main point is that statistically which is the better side in history.
[/QUOTE]
You proved it in your second or third post. Everyone knows 52-30 & 9-5 record. Ab kya reh gaya discuss karne ko :)