What happened to Australian cricket fans and lunatic Robert Henderson?

Australia is in WC2023 finals but not a peep from alvey, will sutton,
Hamish, jack fredricks.

England fan Robert Henderson disappeared for a while too.

In message <ujadh6$3ans1$1@dont-email.me>, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
<FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com> writes
>
>
>What happened to Australian cricket fans and lunatic Robert Henderson?
>
>Australia is in WC2023 finals but not a peep from alvey, will sutton,
>Hamish, jack fredricks.

Alvey and Jack Fredricks seem to have been absent for quite a while. I
hope they are both OK. I've seen one or two posts from Hamish and Will
over the last week or two.

>
>England fan Robert Henderson disappeared for a while too.
>

I'm not sure I'd call him a fan, exactly, as there's rarely any praise
but almost always criticism. But yes, he has been quieter than usual
recently.
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk> wrote in news:ednt+qBQRQWlFw92
@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk:

> In message <ujadh6$3ans1$1@dont-email.me>, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> <FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com> writes
>>
>>
>>What happened to Australian cricket fans and lunatic Robert Henderson?
>>
>>Australia is in WC2023 finals but not a peep from alvey, will sutton,
>>Hamish, jack fredricks.
>
> Alvey and Jack Fredricks seem to have been absent for quite a while. I
> hope they are both OK. I've seen one or two posts from Hamish and Will
> over the last week or two.
>
>>
>>England fan Robert Henderson disappeared for a while too.
>>
>
> I'm not sure I'd call him a fan, exactly, as there's rarely any praise
> but almost always criticism. But yes, he has been quieter than usual
> recently.

some are still lurking....

On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 12:17:29 AM UTC+11, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> What happened to Australian cricket fans and lunatic Robert Henderson?
>
> Australia is in WC2023 finals but not a peep from alvey, will sutton,
> Hamish, jack fredricks.
>
> England fan Robert Henderson disappeared for a while too.

it the rabid posts from scammers or whatever that fill the page that turns you off

Australia won but India was the best team throughout the tournament

On 11/19/2023 1:32 PM, wlsut...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, November 19, 2023 at 12:17:29 AM UTC+11, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> What happened to Australian cricket fans and lunatic Robert Henderson?
>>
>> Australia is in WC2023 finals but not a peep from alvey, will sutton,
>> Hamish, jack fredricks.
>>
>> England fan Robert Henderson disappeared for a while too.
>
>
> it the rabid posts from scammers or whatever that fill the page that turns you off
>
> Australia won but India was the best team throughout the tournament
>

I think World Cup Finals both in T20s and ODIs should be BEST OF THREE
like it used to be in Benson and Hedges tournament in Australia, because
one game doesn't really tell who is the best.

Not taking away anything from Australia which I was wary of for the last
three weeks because I knew Australia prepares for finals the best in
world cricket than ANY other team, which is why they WON 6 ODI World Cup
titles.

In message <f99c1c8a-e2a1-4583-b41e-736e70ad1d12@america.com>,
FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com>
writes
>I think World Cup Finals both in T20s and ODIs should be BEST OF THREE
>like it used to be in Benson and Hedges tournament in Australia,
>because one game doesn't really tell who is the best.
>
>Not taking away anything from Australia which I was wary of for the
>last three weeks because I knew Australia prepares for finals the best
>in world cricket than ANY other team, which is why they WON 6 ODI World
>Cup titles.

The fairest way to find the best team would be not to have semi-finals
and final but just to go by the results of the group stage (assuming
that it's a complete round robin). But of course that would deprive the
tournament of a showpiece final, so is never going to happen.

Yes, a best-of-three final would be fairer than the current system. The
main snag would be that if the first two matches were won by the same
side it would make the third match rather meaningless. As all the
tickets would have to be sold in advance, you couldn't just cancel it.
Having a best-of-three final would also make an already very long
tournament even longer.
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

On 11/20/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
> On Monday, 20 November 2023 at 08:47:33 UTC, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <f99c1c8a-e2a1-4583...@america.com>,
>> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com>
>> writes
>>> I think World Cup Finals both in T20s and ODIs should be BEST OF THREE
>>> like it used to be in Benson and Hedges tournament in Australia,
>>> because one game doesn't really tell who is the best.
>>>
>>> Not taking away anything from Australia which I was wary of for the
>>> last three weeks because I knew Australia prepares for finals the best
>>> in world cricket than ANY other team, which is why they WON 6 ODI World
>>> Cup titles.
>> The fairest way to find the best team would be not to have semi-finals
>> and final but just to go by the results of the group stage (assuming
>> that it's a complete round robin).
>
> Yes, 'cup' competitions are not a reliable way of finding the best team - but is that what the World Cup is for? It seems to me that the more the format increase the chances of the best team winning, the less exciting the tournament becomes.

Not really.

India and Australia are almost EQUAL in talents in this WC2023 and hence
a BEST OF THREE would have been appropriate.

Best of three would still be EXCITING because nobody knows which team
will triumph between India and Australia.

>
>> But of course that would deprive the
>> tournament of a showpiece final, so is never going to happen.
>>
>> Yes, a best-of-three final would be fairer than the current system. The
>> main snag would be that if the first two matches were won by the same
>> side it would make the third match rather meaningless. As all the
>> tickets would have to be sold in advance, you couldn't just cancel it.
>> Having a best-of-three final would also make an already very long
>> tournament even longer.
>
> ... and of course the first two matches would be much less of a showpiece.
>
> Also, the best team could almost as easily lose in the semi-finals as in a one-off final, unless they made the semi-finals best-of-3 as well, or replaced them with a second round-robin.

Making semifinals best of three will be too boring and NOT worth it.

Semis are TOP FOUR and hence there is NO NEED to play best of three.

On 11/20/2023 12:44 AM, John Hall wrote:
> In message <f99c1c8a-e2a1-4583-b41e-736e70ad1d12@america.com>,
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com> writes
>> I think World Cup Finals both in T20s and ODIs should be BEST OF THREE
>> like it used to be in Benson and Hedges tournament in Australia,
>> because one game doesn't really tell who is the best.
>>
>> Not taking away anything from Australia which I was wary of for the
>> last three weeks because I knew Australia prepares for finals the best
>> in world cricket than ANY other team, which is why they WON 6 ODI
>> World Cup titles.
>
> The fairest way to find the best team would be not to have semi-finals
> and final but just to go by the results of the group stage (assuming
> that it's a complete round robin). But of course that would deprive the
> tournament of a showpiece final, so is never going to happen.
>
> Yes, a best-of-three final would be fairer than the current system. The
> main snag would be that if the first two matches were won by the same
> side it would make the third match rather meaningless. As all the
> tickets would have to be sold in advance, you couldn't just cancel it.
> Having a best-of-three final would also make an already very long
> tournament even longer.

If a team wins the first two, the third game can be cancelled.

They can sell Game 3 tickets AFTER the conclusion of game 2, and they
will STILL BE SOLD OUT anyway.

Which fan wouldn't want to watch Game 3 of World Cup Finals with teams
tied at 1-1 in the first two games.

In fact it will be a mouth-watering game 3.

In message <c958d299-76e8-42fa-920f-0158512c94af@america.com>,
FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com>
writes
>On 11/20/2023 12:44 AM, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <f99c1c8a-e2a1-4583-b41e-736e70ad1d12@america.com>,
>>FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com>
>>writes
>>> I think World Cup Finals both in T20s and ODIs should be BEST OF
>>>THREE like it used to be in Benson and Hedges tournament in
>>>Australia, because one game doesn't really tell who is the best.
>>>
>>> Not taking away anything from Australia which I was wary of for the
>>>last three weeks because I knew Australia prepares for finals the
>>>best in world cricket than ANY other team, which is why they WON 6
>>>ODI World Cup titles.
>> The fairest way to find the best team would be not to have
>>semi-finals and final but just to go by the results of the group stage
>>(assuming that it's a complete round robin). But of course that would
>>deprive the tournament of a showpiece final, so is never going to happen.
>> Yes, a best-of-three final would be fairer than the current system.
>>The main snag would be that if the first two matches were won by the
>>same side it would make the third match rather meaningless. As all the
>>tickets would have to be sold in advance, you couldn't just cancel it.
>>Having a best-of-three final would also make an already very long
>>tournament even longer.
>
>
>
>If a team wins the first two, the third game can be cancelled.
>
>They can sell Game 3 tickets AFTER the conclusion of game 2, and they
>will STILL BE SOLD OUT anyway.

It would be a terrific rush, as I imagine there would only be about
three days between the second and third game. The organisers would also
have to book all the stewards and catering in advance, as there wouldn't
be time to do that between games, which would leave them out of pocket
if the match didn't take place. Also I don't think the broadcasters
would be happy not knowing whether or not the match would take place
until a few days beforehand.

>
>Which fan wouldn't want to watch Game 3 of World Cup Finals with teams
>tied at 1-1 in the first two games.
>
>In fact it will be a mouth-watering game 3.
>

I can see the site selling tickets online collapsing under the huge
rush. That's certainly happened a few times when tickets went on sale in
the UK for highly popular events.

Another way of reducing the luck factor would be to have only day games
rather than day-night games, ideally throughout the tournament but at
least for the final, so that luck with the toss was a lot less
important. Unfortunately it's never going to happen, as it wouldn't suit
the broadcasters.
--
John Hall
"Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
from coughing."
Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

On Monday, 20 November 2023 at 08:47:33 UTC, John Hall wrote:

> Yes, a best-of-three final would be fairer than the current system. The
> main snag would be that if the first two matches were won by the same
> side it would make the third match rather meaningless. As all the
> tickets would have to be sold in advance, you couldn't just cancel it.
> Having a best-of-three final would also make an already very long
> tournament even longer.

Or when you've dragged out a tournament as interminably long as this one, just give it to the group winners which admittedly is an anti-climax.

India the first home team not to win their World Cup since Windies in 2007...having utterly fervent home support is great, but that pressure.....

Richard

On Monday, November 20, 2023 at 7:47:33 PM UTC+11, John Hall wrote:
> In message <f99c1c8a-e2a1-4583...@america.com>,
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com>
> writes
> >I think World Cup Finals both in T20s and ODIs should be BEST OF THREE
> >like it used to be in Benson and Hedges tournament in Australia,
> >because one game doesn't really tell who is the best.
> >
> >Not taking away anything from Australia which I was wary of for the
> >last three weeks because I knew Australia prepares for finals the best
> >in world cricket than ANY other team, which is why they WON 6 ODI World
> >Cup titles.
> The fairest way to find the best team would be not to have semi-finals
> and final but just to go by the results of the group stage (assuming
> that it's a complete round robin). But of course that would deprive the
> tournament of a showpiece final, so is never going to happen.
>
> Yes, a best-of-three final would be fairer than the current system. The
> main snag would be that if the first two matches were won by the same
> side it would make the third match rather meaningless. As all the
> tickets would have to be sold in advance, you couldn't just cancel it.
> Having a best-of-three final would also make an already very long
> tournament even longer.
> --
> John Hall
> "Acting is merely the art of keeping a large group of people
> from coughing."
> Sir Ralph Richardson (1902-83)

adopt the British Soccer scenario .......end of the season whoever is on top wins, not finals at all

I wonder if they made that still the Big trophy that counted , what would happen if they had a final series for the top 5 with the other 4 playing a knockout to challenge for the CHALLENGE CUP

On Tuesday, November 21, 2023 at 3:19:03 AM UTC+11, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 11/20/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
> > On Monday, 20 November 2023 at 08:47:33 UTC, John Hall wrote:
> >> In message <f99c1c8a-e2a1-4583...@america.com>,
> >> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com>
> >> writes
> >>> I think World Cup Finals both in T20s and ODIs should be BEST OF THREE
> >>> like it used to be in Benson and Hedges tournament in Australia,
> >>> because one game doesn't really tell who is the best.
> >>>
> >>> Not taking away anything from Australia which I was wary of for the
> >>> last three weeks because I knew Australia prepares for finals the best
> >>> in world cricket than ANY other team, which is why they WON 6 ODI World
> >>> Cup titles.
> >> The fairest way to find the best team would be not to have semi-finals
> >> and final but just to go by the results of the group stage (assuming
> >> that it's a complete round robin).
> >
> > Yes, 'cup' competitions are not a reliable way of finding the best team - but is that what the World Cup is for? It seems to me that the more the format increase the chances of the best team winning, the less exciting the tournament becomes.
> Not really.
>
> India and Australia are almost EQUAL in talents in this WC2023 and hence
> a BEST OF THREE would have been appropriate.
>
Disagree, I think in India , India is clearly the top side. I think the wicket suited Australia bowlers especially with the toss and find it strange they prepared a wicket like that.

But I wouldnt be against a best of 3 with 2 matches played back to back on Sat and Sun and if a 3rd required ..that would be 2 or 3 days later