Comments on: New Zealand’s World Test Championship and the fallacy of fairness

By: Aditya

Aditya — Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:25:17 +0000

A bit late, but India lost the match after lunch on the 5th day, when they let NZ get away from 162-6 to score 249. The moment NZ got that kind of lead, with the time and overs left, India were always going to be trying to save the game.

By: King Cricket

King Cricket — Fri, 25 Jun 2021 10:33:59 +0000

In reply to King Cricket. Obligatory reference to Nathan Lyon's Mekon head...

By: North by West

North by West — Fri, 25 Jun 2021 10:28:29 +0000

He was saying something similar before the game about the final not really deciding the best Test team. I think he was partly setting up this argument in case India lost, so as not to lose domestic momentum after their Australian triumph.

But it also reflects an attitude that is pretty typical in cricket as a whole, which is why we ended up with a 10-team round-robin World Cup.

By: A P Webster

A P Webster — Fri, 25 Jun 2021 09:49:09 +0000

In reply to King Cricket.

Just imagine having some sort of cricket based card game that didn’t make sense of work properly……

There are rules online, although they all seem to be YouTube videos I can’t watch at the moment.

The main (only?) positive thing is that the name Cricket Attax! makes it sound a bit like Mars Attacks! I would pay good(ish) money to see a film based on Earth being invaded by international cricketers from Outer Space

By: King Cricket

King Cricket — Fri, 25 Jun 2021 07:59:03 +0000

In reply to A P Webster. They have a number/score for bowling, batting and runs. Presume it's some sort of rating, but what on earth is runs? Benny Howell is 28. Heather Knight is 24. Kagiso Rabada is 17. Andre Russell is 31. What does it mean?

By: A P Webster

A P Webster — Fri, 25 Jun 2021 07:13:43 +0000

Whilst making my way around Regent Road Sainsbury’s yesterday teatime I was stopped in my tracks by this sight: https://ibb.co/Bq0bYbn

Where are the County Championship trading card games, eh?

By: Ged Ladd

Ged Ladd — Thu, 24 Jun 2021 15:04:16 +0000

I totally agree with you, KC.

Cricket is (indeed, all interesting sports and games are) about asymmetrical contests that cannot be “totally fair”.

I didn’t see Kohli’s speech, so cannot opine on its level of churlishness – one or two off-colour phrases do not constitute a full-tilt sulk. But the notion that you cannot have a one-off final at the end of a tournament seems to me to be contrary to the custom and practice of tournaments of all kinds throughout the ages.

“Best of three?” as a phrase reminds me of the sore loser in the school playground. Not a great thought.

By: Gareth

Gareth — Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:01:48 +0000

Yup. It’s always a bit embarrassing when someone complains about the conditions of play after a loss, when they knew exactly what the conditions of play were when they signed up. You also have to suspect old VK wouldn’t have been feeling such a pressing need for a best of 3 final if India had won that match. Contrast this attitude with NZ not complaining about how they eventually lost the World Cup final (a far more “technicality-based” outcome than an 8 wicket defeat).

By: King Cricket

King Cricket — Thu, 24 Jun 2021 13:17:06 +0000

In reply to Marees. That still wouldn't qualify as 'impartial'.

By: Marees

Marees — Thu, 24 Jun 2021 13:06:25 +0000

To be fair to Kohli, he couldn’t openly say that a best of 3 match series has more chance for sunny days thus amplifying India’s strengths in comparison to New Zealand, couldn’t he ?