Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Night_wolf
what we could have done, would have happened has no pedigree unless we do it, i am talking about tests only
and us saying pak are bipolar is funny..yes they can lose to anybody and win against anybody, but still they haven't lost to us right?..untill that happens we can't say this like beating pak isn't that of a big achievement as they can lose anytime
|
Hypotheticals are certainly valid if you think Zim should be leading the current series 2-0 because they beat Pak last year. Or that Zim should be 9th cuz they lost to the 10th ranked side. Yes, that makes sense.
If Zim deserved to be 9th they would have beaten us plain and simple. They didn't even beat us at home...series drawn 1-1. On what basis should they be 9th? And why stop at 9? Why not say Zim should be #1? See I can be silly too.
Zim won 1 test by the smallest of margins. 25 runs. We drew 4 tests recently, one overseas.
If Zim were better they'd have drawn a few as well. That's how you know the win was a fluke. Tiny margin, no draws.
And speaking of silly, your signature is out of context.
We lost to Kenya when we were ourselves Associates. Kenya qualified for a world cup before we did, they are supposed to beating us even today. Canada also qualified for a world cup 20 years before we did. Just to make it clear, imagine 30 years from now Papua New Guinea loses to us in a Test match...well its not going to be humiliating for them because we were always ahead of them.
Ireland already beat a Pakistan before they beat us. Same with Netherlands who beat England in T20 and beat us in T30. So you can't count them. Afghanistan beat us when we were missing 4 players : Shakib batsman, Shakib bowler, Tamim, Mashrafee. Might as well count A team women's cricket losses too then.
Only HK and Scotland should qualify as first time Associate losses who never beat any Test team nor qualified for WC before us with full strength side.