The lankans, though they are a great team were completely trashed!!!
So this massive victory proves Pakistan is the undisputed king of Sharjah cricket, and is definitely amongst the top two or three one day cricket teams.
Theres a match in Rawalpindi April 24th Pak vs NZ, im going, anyone else here planning to go?
[quote]
Originally posted by khiska hoowa:
**1st of all jal pari kaunsi duniya mein hain aap match starts at 7 am
2nd spit fire do u have dial up or cable i really wanna know
**
[/quote]
I dunno much about these things but i got T1 connection i guess....its fast
~~Hum aah bhi karte hein to ho jaate hein badnaam~~
~~Woh qatal bhi karte hein to charchaa nahi hotaa~~
What a great match!
Srilanka has beaten us so many times but they have never beaten us like the final, it was a treat to watch.
Commentators are whinning about Murali being injured and the game would have been much different, I don't think so, Murali hasn't taken much wickets against Pakistan in this tournament but his economy rate only mattered, if he would have played the score would have been about 250 and Pakistan would have still won easily, the bowling was better part of the team, SL had no chance, maybe the best performance I have seen by the Pakistanis in a long long time.
The way our team played yesterday, even Australia doesn't stand a chance against our players.
You loose two matches against them, win one when their main bowler can't bowl and still think you can beat Australia. Height of arrogance, that too on the basis of just one match.
Like I said in my last post, Murali or not Pakistan would have still won but maybe in smaller margin maybe 150.
So what, our star player was missing as well, Saeed Anwar, we managed to win.
Thats what Pakistan is all about, when they loose matches and learn from their mistakes, and comeback and annihlate that very same opponent.
I can now confidently say is that Pakistan is best team in Asia or maybe the top 2 in the world.
It takes a lot of nerves of scoring 295 against a powerfull attack and bowling out the whole solid batting lineup in just 78, if Murali would have played, would he be able to score a century and chase 295.
btw score 78 and venue Sharjah brings back some memories, do you remember asif bhai.
I don’t want to start another badmouthing thread, and I’m preety sure you don’t want to talk to Spock.
[quote]
Originally posted by Asif_k:
**You loose two matches against them, win one when their main bowler can't bowl and still think you can beat Australia. Height of arrogance, that too on the basis of just one match.
**
[/quote]
Take this Scenario at the time Murali got injured lets say he did not got injured and he's to bowl next since all the lankan bowlers were beaten by Pak batsmen. So here comes Murali takes 5 or 7 wickets and lankan restrickt Pak to 150 runs or lets say 100 runs. Now its time for Pak to bowl(remember Murali is not a good BATSMAN he is a good BOWLER). What you think how Pak would have bowled knowing they need bowl out lankan within 100 runs?
Now the reality...Pak knew they had put a big total for lankan and they knew lankan has a pretty good batting line up and they should take it seriously even though having 295 runs on the board and they bowled out lankan for just 78 runs. Thats not even CLOSE. A team that has beaten Pak twice consectively loses in the final, not just loses but loses with a big defeat what a shame. Having won 2 matches lankan had the upper hand and they were damn confident that they can beat Pak in the final. Yeah right DREAM ON.
About Pak and Lanka(the only 2 good teams in the subcotinent)if they are given to play with each other on pitches like Australia, SA, Eng. and have a contest best of 5 ODI and if then they can beat Pak then surely I will say lankans are better than Pak. The reason I said if they play in Aus. SA, or Eng those pitches suites all kinda bowler, fast, mediu, googly, spin you name it. Now I am sure you gonna come up with some other excuse.
[This message has been edited by ehsan (edited April 18, 2002).]
[This message has been edited by Question (edited April 18, 2002).]