Zimbabwe Emerging vs Namibia

[secretzimbo]

I think ‘nearly beat SA’ is a bit stretching the truth tbh.

How so? It was a drawn series as is, and the Irish were in a pretty strong position in the first ODI. They were en route to posting a 300 ish total which gives them a fighting chance at least. It was enough for them to win the 2nd ODI, so its 50-50 they could have done it in the first one.

Yeah. 50-50. That’s not ‘nearly won the series’ is it? It was a drawn series very conclusively.

Had their pants pulled down in all three T20Is as well.

[Kriterion_BD]

I think ‘nearly beat SA’ is a bit stretching the truth tbh.

How so? It was a drawn series as is, and the Irish were in a pretty strong position in the first ODI. They were en route to posting a 300 ish total which gives them a fighting chance at least. It was enough for them to win the 2nd ODI, so its 50-50 they could have done it in the first one.

Yeah. 50-50. That’s not ‘nearly won the series’ is it? It was a drawn series very conclusively.

50-50 for a game is close for a series win.

[secretzimbo]

How so? It was a drawn series as is, and the Irish were in a pretty strong position in the first ODI. They were en route to posting a 300 ish total which gives them a fighting chance at least. It was enough for them to win the 2nd ODI, so its 50-50 they could have done it in the first one.

Yeah. 50-50. That’s not ‘nearly won the series’ is it? It was a drawn series very conclusively.

Had their pants pulled down in all three T20Is as well.

50-50 for a game is close for a series win.

Well, if it was 50-50, then I could also say the opposite is true and that 'SA nearly beat Ireland'. Your logic doesn't work mate.

For what its worth I reckon Namibia are a similar standard team to Ireland currently tbh.

[Kriterion_BD]

Well, if it was 50-50, then I could also say the opposite is true and that 'SA nearly beat Ireland'. Your logic doesn't work mate.

For what its worth I reckon Namibia are a similar standard team to Ireland currently tbh.

Yeah SA nearly won the series too, but for SA to nearly beat IRE is a relative loss for them given their stature in the game.

I think you may have posted that ZIM nearly won the series against BD a few weeks ago. Ireland were considerably closer to beating SA than ZIM were of beating BD. You've got to be consistent.

Namibia are currently 17th or 18th in the rankings and Ireland are around about 12th. Fair gap between them.

[slcricfan1]

end of the day ireland will still be a good challenge for zim

[secretzimbo]

Well, if it was 50-50, then I could also say the opposite is true and that 'SA nearly beat Ireland'. Your logic doesn't work mate.

For what its worth I reckon Namibia are a similar standard team to Ireland currently tbh.

Yeah SA nearly won the series too, but for SA to nearly beat IRE is a relative loss for them given their stature in the game.

I think you may have posted that ZIM nearly won the series against BD a few weeks ago. Ireland were considerably closer to beating SA than ZIM were of beating BD. You've got to be consistent.

Namibia are currently 17th or 18th in the rankings and Ireland are around about 12th. Fair gap between them.

Lol....wait.....the men’s team rankings outside the top handful are bullshit, surely literally everyone knows and agrees this?! You can’t be using this haha.

Ireland are a pretty poor team with absolutely no depth at all. Relying enormously on Stirling and to an extent Balbirnie.

They won 1 out of 6 matches against South Africa and were very heavily beaten in 4 of them.
I stand 1000% behind my opinion that Namibia are currently a better team than Ireland, if you’ve actually ever spent any time watching either of them play in the last 1-2 years rather than looking at scorecards or the rankings table.

We’ll see what happens in the world T20. Ireland cricket has regressed significantly. They aren’t half the team they used to be.

[secretzimbo]

Also I hate to be pedantic or pull people up on their English mistakes. But '50-50' really does not mean 'nearly won'. I mean it really really doesn't, obviously by definition.


That is like losing the toss before a match but saying 'Oh I nearly won it'.

[Kriterion_BD]

Lol....wait.....the men’s team rankings outside the top handful are bullshit, surely literally everyone knows and agrees this?! You can’t be using this haha.

This may have been true 20 years ago, but not in the last decade plus. The World Cricket League system gave the top 40 teams outside of Test cricket (ie teams ranked 11th-50th aproximately) regular and constant cricket. That system has been done away with but now we have an equally good, if not better more streamlined structure in the WC League 2 and Challenge Leagues A and B.

These teams are playing regular cricket, and their most recent record in League 2, places Namibia at 4th in the table with Oman I think in first place. These are the teams below the 13 team Super League.

The rankings are not being generated arbitrarily...its based on actual games played.

Ireland are a pretty poor team with absolutely no depth at all. Relying enormously on Stirling and to an extent Balbirnie.

They won 1 out of 6 matches against South Africa and were very heavily beaten in 4 of them.
I stand 1000% behind my opinion that Namibia are currently a better team than Ireland, if you’ve actually ever spent any time watching either of them play in the last 1-2 years rather than looking at scorecards or the rankings table.

We’ll see what happens in the world T20. Ireland cricket has regressed significantly. They aren’t half the team they used to be.

You take Smith, Warner, Maxwell out of Australia's team and they get thrashed by Bangladesh. Does this mean Australia are suddenly a shitty side? Australia are still a top 4 side across formats even though they are reliant on 3-4 players.

Could Namibia progress to the Super 12s of the WC? I suppose so. But they have a tough draw with SL, IRE, and NED in their group. Ireland and Netherlands are probably on equal footing. I have no idea on what basis you've already got Namibia in the Super 12s, and then even winning a couple games in the 2nd round. You might as well argue that Namibia are a lock for semifinals at this point.

[Kriterion_BD]

That is like losing the toss before a match but saying 'Oh I nearly won it'.

A cricket match requires primarily skill. A coin toss relies entirely on probability.

[secretzimbo]

This may have been true 20 years ago, but not in the last decade plus. The World Cricket League system gave the top 40 teams outside of Test cricket (ie teams ranked 11th-50th aproximately) regular and constant cricket. That system has been done away with but now we have an equally good, if not better more streamlined structure in the WC League 2 and Challenge Leagues A and B.

These teams are playing regular cricket, and their most recent record in League 2, places Namibia at 4th in the table with Oman I think in first place. These are the teams below the 13 team Super League.

I thought you were the one talking about the world team rankings? So I don't see how any of this is specifically relevant.

The rankings are not being generated arbitrarily...its based on actual games played.

The rankings are an appalling system. You are mad if you base any of your cricketing judgements off of them.

You take Smith, Warner, Maxwell out of Australia's team and they get thrashed by Bangladesh. Does this mean Australia are suddenly a shitty side? Australia are still a top 4 side across formats even though they are reliant on 3-4 players.

Well, I mentioned 1 and to an extent 2 players for Ireland. So it's not a fair comparison anyway. But its even less of a reasonable comparison considering Australia's cricketing prowess and Ireland's. This point is a bit silly. Not sure what it is adding to our conversation tbh so I won't waste much time with it.

Could Namibia progress to the Super 12s of the WC? I suppose so. But they have a tough draw with SL, IRE, and NED in their group. Ireland and Netherlands are probably on equal footing. I have no idea on what basis you've already got Namibia in the Super 12s, and then even winning a couple games in the 2nd round.

I'd bet a fortune on my prediction if it was being held in SA I suppose. I guess the one variable we don't know about is how Namibia will adapt to the middle east conditions. We'll have to see. But you asked what basis? Because I've watched all of these teams. A lot. Even considering the conditions, I'm fairly confident Namibia will be into the Super 12.

One thing for certain; Ireland will definitely finish bottom of their group. Would be crazy to bet against that I think. Clearly we won't agree. But Ireland are quite shit and going backwards too. Their only hope is their 3 or 4 Saffers/Zimbos getting passports in the next 12-18 months and saving them a la Campher.

It will be very embarrassing if Zimbabwe aren't comfortable winners in the ODI series. This Ireland team is worse than a couple of years ago and we should be at full strength. Anything less than a convincing ODI series win and we should give up!

A cricket match requires primarily skill. A coin toss relies entirely on probability.

Err.......you can twist this how you like but this is literally just a case of quite basic English here. '50-50' does not and can not mean 'nearly won'. In any context. That's just the language at work there mate. 'Could have gone either way' is not equals to 'they nearly won'. In any situation