Cricket match prediction discussions

[Haunebu]

What about recruiting random people who are not the citizens? That is the point here.

I was only referring to people from different countries who were citizens of the country for which they wished to play for. On the other hand, foreigners could also be included in the minority while the majority should comprise of their citizens.

Panesar and Ali are not good examples IMO as they both were born in England.

This is exactly my point. They should be included in the squad as long as they are citizens basically.

If someone can't get a chance to represent India or Pakistan, then it means that they don't have the necessary quality to take part in top quality cricket. Such players won't do any good even if they move to other teams.

Have to disagree here. There are so many quality Indian and Pakistani players who never get a chance to play in the national squad primarily because of corruption etc.

[Tony116]

We are not talking about any major players here. We are talking about the players who generally don’t get any chance to play in the Indian national team and they are good to some extent and that’s why they get the chance of flying far from the teams which are not very good.

And why are we still talking about Nepal? It was just used as an example and any similarity of it with the real world is absolutely coincidental.

If someone can't get a chance to represent India or Pakistan, then it means that they don't have the necessary quality to take part in top quality cricket. Such players won't do any good even if they move to other teams. They will only steal the chances of hardworking native players. In case of the GCC nations, it is understandable. Without the foreign players, they won't be having a playing XI. But that is not the case with teams such as Kenya and Nepal, because the latter group do have a lot of natives playing cricket.

The problem is if a player is not good enough by the standards of India he can still be good enough by the standards of other countries where the standard is actually very low compared to India.

so it is very possible for those players to play for those countries. Nepal and Kenya have a lot of native players. But if teams like England and  UAE can play a lot of foreign players, why are they not going to be able to do that? But that does not mean I support doing that. I am just saying the rules should be equal for everyone.

[Sithara007]

The problem is if a player is not good enough by the standards of India he can still be good enough by the standards of other countries where the standard is actually very low compared to India.

so it is very possible for those players to play for those countries. Nepal and Kenya have a lot of native players. But if teams like England and  UAE can play a lot of foreign players, why are they not going to be able to do that? But that does not mean I support doing that. I am just saying the rules should be equal for everyone.

I don't think that England has ever included anyone without a British passport to their squad. The case of UAE is different, but their experiment is not very successful. They may win against weaker teams such as Nepal and Papua New Guinea, but teams such as Oman and UAE can't compete against the stronger associate nations like Scotland and Namibia. Only those players who are sure that they don't have any chance at all to represent India/Pakistan will make the move to GCC nations. And with these low quality players, the teams that hire them won't be very successful at international level. 

[Tony116]

The problem is if a player is not good enough by the standards of India he can still be good enough by the standards of other countries where the standard is actually very low compared to India.
so it is very possible for those players to play for those countries. Nepal and Kenya have a lot of native players. But if teams like England and  UAE can play a lot of foreign players, why are they not going to be able to do that? But that does not mean I support doing that. I am just saying the rules should be equal for everyone.

I don't think that England has ever included anyone without a British passport to their squad. The case of UAE is different, but their experiment is not very successful. They may win against weaker teams such as Nepal and Papua New Guinea, but teams such as Oman and UAE can't compete against the stronger associate nations like Scotland and Namibia. Only those players who are sure that they don't have any chance at all to represent India/Pakistan will make the move to GCC nations. And with these low quality players, the teams that hire them won't be very successful at international level. 

England does not have anyone without a passport or citizenship, at least that’s what I know. If all the countries just follow that, it is going to be good and I don’t think people are going to have any problem with it. But that’s not what they are doing. They are basically just getting random people from another country to play in the national team.

And I also agree that this has not been very successful for UAE. But they are obviously winning against the weaker opponents. Those opponents generally have on local players in the team. So, those teams are hurting in the long run.

[Sithara007]

~~~
And I also agree that this has not been very successful for UAE. But they are obviously winning against the weaker opponents. Those opponents generally have on local players in the team. So, those teams are hurting in the long run.

Well.. that is very obvious. UAE is mostly comprised of Indian and Pakistani players who can't even qualify for the domestic teams. How can you expect these players to defeat the regular teams of India or Pakistan, when they play against each other? But these players may be having a lot of experience, and that comes handy against inexperienced teams such as Kenya and Nepal. It is a lose-lose situation. ICC will end up giving more funds to low-quality teams, which will never improve their quality in the future.

[BobK71]

~~~
And I also agree that this has not been very successful for UAE. But they are obviously winning against the weaker opponents. Those opponents generally have on local players in the team. So, those teams are hurting in the long run.

Well.. that is very obvious. UAE is mostly comprised of Indian and Pakistani players who can't even qualify for the domestic teams. How can you expect these players to defeat the regular teams of India or Pakistan, when they play against each other? But these players may be having a lot of experience, and that comes handy against inexperienced teams such as Kenya and Nepal. It is a lose-lose situation. ICC will end up giving more funds to low-quality teams, which will never improve their quality in the future.

It is true that UAE basically led by Indian and Pakistani players but they could not do well according to the expectation. Maybe it will take longer time. Afghanistan is ahead in this regard. I think they are now qualified enough to play with the big countries. After all, i think there is no any comparison between Indian and Pakistani players in the cricket world. They are exceptional.

[jostorres]

UAE is mostly comprised of Indian and Pakistani players who can't even qualify for the domestic teams. How can you expect these players to defeat the regular teams of India or Pakistan, when they play against each other? But these players may be having a lot of experience, and that comes handy against inexperienced teams such as Kenya and Nepal. It is a lose-lose situation. ICC will end up giving more funds to low-quality teams, which will never improve their quality in the future.

We already discussed this many times and after this all I am feeling it's not going to happen through ICC because if they want to do this then surely they prepare for Olympics which is not happening as it's not in favor of their few big countries just because of this now this topic is useless and have nothing more to talk.

With this rule is currently having very beneficial for mostly Indian and Pakistani community and if they end this biggest loser will be guys from this region which is also having some bad for them even Kenya, Nepal and few other countries with native players are suffering, but it's not having any trouble for ICC, so they will be going ahead with this all for some more time.

[Sithara007]

jostorres mentioned about the Olympics, so I thought that I could speak on a related topic. Women's cricket is included for this year's Commonwealth Games. The Games will start by the end of this month, and a total of 8 countries will be taking part. The only surprise is that West Indies can't participate, since they are a group of independent countries. Barbados will be representing the WICB. None of the associate nations are taking part and surprisingly this time India has also sent a squad. Among the tier-1 test nations, only Bangladesh is missing.

[YinShuiSiYuan]

jostorres mentioned about the Olympics, so I thought that I could speak on a related topic. Women's cricket is included for this year's Commonwealth Games. The Games will start by the end of this month, and a total of 8 countries will be taking part. The only surprise is that West Indies can't participate, since they are a group of independent countries. Barbados will be representing the WICB. None of the associate nations are taking part and surprisingly this time India has also sent a squad. Among the tier-1 test nations, only Bangladesh is missing.

Australia, Newzealand, England, India, Barbados ( west indies), Srilanka, Pakistan and South Africa will take part in women's cricket event of commonwealth games that are starting from 27 July 2022. Last time these teams meet in women worldcup and Australia won the worldcup without losing a single match.

[Tony116]

~~~
And I also agree that this has not been very successful for UAE. But they are obviously winning against the weaker opponents. Those opponents generally have on local players in the team. So, those teams are hurting in the long run.

~
ICC will end up giving more funds to low-quality teams, which will never improve their quality in the future.

I think giving fun to the local quality team is obviously going to have some effect on that team trying to get better. But that will happen if they actually try to find genuine talent and not depend on players from another country who are not isn’t a citizen to do the work. I suggest that weaker teams should not be so fond of ease and they should try to find talent in the country and do some talent hunt instead of just bringing players from another region or another country to do that playing for them. That is actually going to improve the quality of cricket in those countries.

[Sithara007]

Australia, Newzealand, England, India, Barbados ( west indies), Srilanka, Pakistan and South Africa will take part in women's cricket event of commonwealth games that are starting from 27 July 2022. Last time these teams meet in women worldcup and Australia won the worldcup without losing a single match.

Last time we had cricket in commonwealth games was in 1998. Back then, there were a total of 16 participants, including India and two from the WICB (Barbados, and Antigua and Barbuda). Associate nations such as Kenya, Scotland and Ireland also participated. Back then, South Africa won the gold, by defeating Australia in the final match (New Zealand won the bronze medal). This time under pressure from the ICC, they cancelled the men's event and scheduled a 8-team women's event. It makes no sense to have a tournament with just 8 teams.

[jostorres]

Australia, Newzealand, England, India, Barbados ( west indies), Srilanka, Pakistan and South Africa will take part in women's cricket event of commonwealth games that are starting from 27 July 2022. Last time these teams meet in women worldcup and Australia won the worldcup without losing a single match.

Last time we had cricket in commonwealth games was in 1998. Back then, there were a total of 16 participants, including India and two from the WICB (Barbados, and Antigua and Barbuda). Associate nations such as Kenya, Scotland and Ireland also participated. Back then, South Africa won the gold, by defeating Australia in the final match (New Zealand won the bronze medal). This time under pressure from the ICC, they cancelled the men's event and scheduled a 8-team women's event. It makes no sense to have a tournament with just 8 teams.

For me this all is totally useless and waste of time because if you are accepting pressure from ICC about men event and having only 8 women teams even you can arrange more than stop this all and just go ahead with your crap policies don't waste time with this all.

If ICC is ever having any positive attitude through this game then surely they try to work with them and arrange under 19 or under 23 teams from men as well which bring some good and interesting matches with only native players allowed to participate because this is also very important right now, but they are pressuring for no men and only eight women which mean they are never having any solid policy for these games and trying to follow their own agenda.

[posi]

Australia, Newzealand, England, India, Barbados ( west indies), Srilanka, Pakistan and South Africa will take part in women's cricket event of commonwealth games that are starting from 27 July 2022. Last time these teams meet in women worldcup and Australia won the worldcup without losing a single match.

Last time we had cricket in commonwealth games was in 1998. Back then, there were a total of 16 participants, including India and two from the WICB (Barbados, and Antigua and Barbuda). Associate nations such as Kenya, Scotland and Ireland also participated. Back then, South Africa won the gold, by defeating Australia in the final match (New Zealand won the bronze medal). This time under pressure from the ICC, they cancelled the men's event and scheduled a 8-team women's event. It makes no sense to have a tournament with just 8 teams.

For me this all is totally useless and waste of time because if you are accepting pressure from ICC about men event and having only 8 women teams even you can arrange more than stop this all and just go ahead with your crap policies don't waste time with this all.
If ICC is ever having any positive attitude through this game then surely they try to work with them and arrange under 19 or under 23 teams from men as well which bring some good and interesting matches with only native players allowed to participate because this is also very important right now, but they are pressuring for no men and only eight women which mean they are never having any solid policy for these games and trying to follow their own agenda.

I see where your frustration is coming from but right now a certain process is going on. It is going to be hard work to change the process overnight.

It is possible to change the process. But obviously, it is going to take a lot of time because once something has stated its power it is hard to dethrone them. I am obviously talking about the power of the big three over the ICC.

Even if ICC is having a positive attitude toward this game it is quite impossible to improve as a sports body for ICC because of the big three. so after all it comes down to only one thing. the people in power don't want to lose control. and another thing is  ICC also has problems.  one-sided love is never successful if you know what I mean.

[YinShuiSiYuan]

Last time we had cricket in commonwealth games was in 1998. Back then, there were a total of 16 participants, including India and two from the WICB (Barbados, and Antigua and Barbuda). Associate nations such as Kenya, Scotland and Ireland also participated. Back then, South Africa won the gold, by defeating Australia in the final match (New Zealand won the bronze medal). This time under pressure from the ICC, they cancelled the men's event and scheduled a 8-team women's event. It makes no sense to have a tournament with just 8 teams.

The real issue is if women cricket is included in commonwealth then why not men cricket is there? ICC clearly has no intentions of taking cricket to larger levels like Olympics. Let more countries join in and play the cricket that's the only way associate counties can improve there crikcet.

[eaLiTy]

~
If someone can't get a chance to represent India or Pakistan, then it means that they don't have the necessary quality to take part in top quality cricket. Such players won't do any good even if they move to other teams. They will only steal the chances of hardworking native players. In case of the GCC nations, it is understandable. Without the foreign players, they won't be having a playing XI. But that is not the case with teams such as Kenya and Nepal, because the latter group do have a lot of natives playing cricket.

Emirates Cricket Board is not hiring players by coming down to India or Pakistan and watching the domestic tournaments. The players that are in the team are expats who moved to GCC and then continuing on their passion of playing Cricket and if they are good enough to be selected they will be hired to play in the National team and there is a selection process for that for expats and once they get selected they would obviously get better perks than they used to get from their normal job and can resign from their designation or have an extended leave and play for the national team and this is how the process works.

[ilovealtcoins]

Last time we had cricket in commonwealth games was in 1998. Back then, there were a total of 16 participants, including India and two from the WICB (Barbados, and Antigua and Barbuda). Associate nations such as Kenya, Scotland and Ireland also participated. Back then, South Africa won the gold, by defeating Australia in the final match (New Zealand won the bronze medal). This time under pressure from the ICC, they cancelled the men's event and scheduled a 8-team women's event. It makes no sense to have a tournament with just 8 teams.

The real issue is if women cricket is included in commonwealth then why not men cricket is there? ICC clearly has no intentions of taking cricket to larger levels like Olympics. Let more countries join in and play the cricket that's the only way associate counties can improve there crikcet.

That is not going to happen. ICC is not going to give the associate countries good enough chances to improve at the game. and the teams are also not going to improve because of that. ICC just does not want to accept that cricket is not very popular All Around The World and they will have to make cricket popular in a lot of areas.  they just don't have any headaches about it.

[YinShuiSiYuan]

That is not going to happen. ICC is not going to give the associate countries good enough chances to improve at the game. and the teams are also not going to improve because of that. ICC just does not want to accept that cricket is not very popular All Around The World and they will have to make cricket popular in a lot of areas.  they just don't have any headaches about it.

Prime reason is that ICC these days is getting sufficient funds from IPL so they don't wanna do anything else. Already teams like Kenya and Zimbabwe are gone from international horizon but icc has no regret about that. As long as icc don't allow associate countries in big events like WC we won't see level of associate countries going up.

[savetheFORUM]

The real issue is if women cricket is included in commonwealth then why not men cricket is there? ICC clearly has no intentions of taking cricket to larger levels like Olympics. Let more countries join in and play the cricket that's the only way associate counties can improve there crikcet.

That is not going to happen. ICC is not going to give the associate countries good enough chances to improve at the game. and the teams are also not going to improve because of that. ICC just does not want to accept that cricket is not very popular All Around The World and they will have to make cricket popular in a lot of areas.  they just don't have any headaches about it.

ICC's treatment with Associates countries creating some serious confusion because I am feeling they are not interested to bring them into main stream, or they are confused about something so just because of this they are doing nothing for this all even they can do many things which can bring some good revenue and entertainment with this game in many parts of the world which is essential like we are watching FIFA is doing and bringing more quality and better infrastructure for their own main stream.

With this all they can ensure better media rights, and surely they could be able to have some more sponsors which are important but sadly right now B-4 in ICC having all focus on IPL.

[Sithara007]

For me this all is totally useless and waste of time because if you are accepting pressure from ICC about men event and having only 8 women teams even you can arrange more than stop this all and just go ahead with your crap policies don't waste time with this all.

If ICC is ever having any positive attitude through this game then surely they try to work with them and arrange under 19 or under 23 teams from men as well which bring some good and interesting matches with only native players allowed to participate because this is also very important right now, but they are pressuring for no men and only eight women which mean they are never having any solid policy for these games and trying to follow their own agenda.

This is something that I don't understand. In case of football, the governing body has allowed a U-23 competition for Commonwealth Games and Olympics. This serves two purposes at the same time. Emerging and young players get a chance to represent their country, and at the same time the star players can continue playing for their clubs. I am at a loss to understand why the ICC is against this idea? Even a U-19 competition would be mutually beneficial. It will give good exposure to a lot of young players who will represent the senior team in the future.

[CryptoYar]

The real issue is if women cricket is included in commonwealth then why not men cricket is there?

At least they have included it, as we have not seen cricket in Commonwealth Games since 1998. Therefore, it is a positive move and in the future, we may see men's cricket matches too.

ICC clearly has no intentions of taking cricket to larger levels like Olympics. Let more countries join in and play the cricket that's the only way associate counties can improve there crikcet.

ICC is turned into ICP (International cricket politics) Where conspiracies are hatched against small teams.