Quote Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda View Post
Perhaps you should try understanding things you quote rather than just picking up statistics off the internet. It would stop you looking like an idiot. (There is no such thing as a world championship in cricket, by the way). And just saying that a country has a smaller population really does overlook a lot of other factors. But you seem to revel in your ignorance so why should we bother trying to educate you
I'll add this to the 'Anaconda is a close minded etc etc

The cricket world championship I am referring to is the cricket world cup played in the ODI format, but I think you know this and are just being deliberately obtuse/difficult. And while it isn't the only factor in judging a nation's ability at cricket, it's a pretty good one. Or perhaps you would like to regale us with England's long history of dominance in the long form of the game?

And while having a larger population isn't the only factor, it's also a pretty good one. For years Canada and Russia dominated hockey and guess what? When you counted the number of amateur players in each country, guess which two came out on top? And on that note, The Times did an analysis of the number of amateur rugby union players in each country a few years back. Want to guess which two countries were far and away the leaders? That would be England and South Africa (the two most populated countries in the list BTW). At the time South African rubgy wasn't in disarray and they weren't losing many of their best players to foreign clubs and were very strong internationally with a consistent record of success.

What was England's excuse? Well, I think we know what the answer is.