The World Cup....

[rod_rooster]

time difference couldnt be worse.

however its the 1st time they have got the format right since 1992 where all 9 played each other.

this time it will be all 8 decent sides playing each other providing no minnows get through the round robin stage. What a farce in 03 when kenya made the semis

Not sure about that dasher. Kenya played some excellent cricket and from my point of view deserved to be in the semis.

[Booney]

What would be more benefit to us on the small Carribean grounds?

Brad Hoggs "china-men",or Cameron Whites big hitting? Methinks we need some who can hit 50 off 20 balls.Clarke can bowl tweakers and White can throw some wrong'uns down if needed,but his hitting ability will be sorely missed.

Watson=trash bowling,hit'n'miss batting.

[scoob]

Interesting points booney, will the small grounds play a big part do you think? the likes of peiterson, gibbs, gilchrist could tear them apart, think the smaller grounds will produce some upsets, as stated before only takes 1 individual innings.

Also think the windies are decent roughies, on their home grounds and if they get their confidence up early could see them go a long way...chris gayle will also be a highlight IMO.

[rod_rooster]

Interesting points booney, will the small grounds play a big part do you think? the likes of peiterson, gibbs, gilchrist could tear them apart, think the smaller grounds will produce some upsets, as stated before only takes 1 individual innings.

Also think the windies are decent roughies, on their home grounds and if they get their confidence up early could see them go a long way...chris gayle will also be a highlight IMO.

The Windies are a big show IMHO. Any side with a guy like Gayle is always a chance. They also have a chap by the name of Brian Charles Lara who seems to have some talent

Lara is the best batsman i have seen and if he has a big tournament the Windies will be tough to beat. People say that one individual performance can win a one day game but not Test matches. Lara is the exception. He has won Test matches on his own. One of the greats.

[blink]

Some more final 15 squads:

Pakistan

Inzamam-ul-Haq (capt), Younis Khan (vice-captain), Mohammad Hafeez, Imran Nazir, Mohammad Yousuf, Shoaib Malik, Abdul Razzaq, Shahid Afridi, Kamran Akmal, Shoaib Akhtar, Mohammad Asif, Umar Gul, Danish Kaneria, Rana Naved-ul-Hasan, Rao Iftikhar Anjum

Bangladesh

Habibul Bashar (capt), Shariar Nafees, Tamim Iqbal, Aftab Ahmed, Saqibul Hasan, Mohammad Ashraful, Mushfiqur Rahim (wk), Mohammad Rafique, Abdur Razzak, Mashrafe Mortaza, Shahadat Hossain, Tapash Baisya, Syed Rasel, Rajin Saleh, Javed Omar

[-]

time difference couldnt be worse.

however its the 1st time they have got the format right since 1992 where all 9 played each other.

this time it will be all 8 decent sides playing each other providing no minnows get through the round robin stage. What a farce in 03 when kenya made the semis

Not sure about that dasher. Kenya played some excellent cricket and from my point of view deserved to be in the semis.

When I find time Il go back and show you they were lucky. Last world cup they got a forfiet in the minor round. In the super 6's u carry through results from teams u played in that super 6 during the minor round in their case 2. The other 3 u play. Somehow they got another forfiet in the 6's and made the semi. joke

[-]

one need only cast their mind back to 1992 to see what happened with nz on home soil

[rod_rooster]

time difference couldnt be worse.

however its the 1st time they have got the format right since 1992 where all 9 played each other.

this time it will be all 8 decent sides playing each other providing no minnows get through the round robin stage. What a farce in 03 when kenya made the semis

Not sure about that dasher. Kenya played some excellent cricket and from my point of view deserved to be in the semis.

When I find time Il go back and show you they were lucky. Last world cup they got a forfiet in the minor round. In the super 6's u carry through results from teams u played in that super 6 during the minor round in their case 2. The other 3 u play. Somehow they got another forfiet in the 6's and made the semi. joke

Yeah, but one day cricket is a bit of a lottery anyway. They took their chances and produced some good cricket when they had to. The biggest joke is that Bangladesh got granted Test status and Kenya didn't. Neither IMHO should have but surely Kenya should have been the first of those 2. Seriously the South Australian side would have no trouble accounting for Bangladesh so how in hell can Test records be taken seriously with them involved. Same goes for Zimbabwe since guys like Streak, Flower, Flower, etc. stopped playing for political reasons. They were a handy side before that and were becoming more and more competitive but they are just a joke now.

[-]

time difference couldnt be worse.

however its the 1st time they have got the format right since 1992 where all 9 played each other.

this time it will be all 8 decent sides playing each other providing no minnows get through the round robin stage. What a farce in 03 when kenya made the semis

Not sure about that dasher. Kenya played some excellent cricket and from my point of view deserved to be in the semis.

When I find time Il go back and show you they were lucky. Last world cup they got a forfiet in the minor round. In the super 6's u carry through results from teams u played in that super 6 during the minor round in their case 2. The other 3 u play. Somehow they got another forfiet in the 6's and made the semi. joke

Yeah, but one day cricket is a bit of a lottery anyway. They took their chances and produced some good cricket when they had to. The biggest joke is that Bangladesh got granted Test status and Kenya didn't. Neither IMHO should have but surely Kenya should have been the first of those 2. Seriously the South Australian side would have no trouble accounting for Bangladesh so how in hell can Test records be taken seriously with them involved. Same goes for Zimbabwe since guys like Streak, Flower, Flower, etc. stopped playing for political reasons. They were a handy side before that and were becoming more and more competitive but they are just a joke now.

Wonder through here http://aus.cricinfo.com/link_to_databas ... PS/WC2003/ and you will see what happened. Zimbabwe made super 6 for same reason.

From memory kenya beat one top 8 side other than a forfiet. That alone is not good enough to finish top 3 of a 7 team pool.

The only time a non top 8 side has genuinely been competive was Zimbabwe at the 99 world cup where they genuinely qualified for the super 6's. At that stage there were 9 genuinely decent sides now there are 8.

I just hope nothing stupid happens and we get the top 8 in the super 8.

[-]

http://aus.cricinfo.com/link_to_databas ... 3/RESULTS/

this is the page we want

[-]

so kenya go 4-2 in pool matches.

beat canada and bangledesh. Forfiet from nz. Their one proper win v sl.

lost to wi and saf.

SRI NZ AND KEN GO THROUGH.

LUCKILY COS OF THE SYSTEM KENYA CAN FORGET THE WI AND SAF LOSS BUT CARRY THROUGH SL WIN AND NZ FORFIET.

Kenya didnt even have to win a super 6 match to progress as they finished comfortably 3rd out of the 6. They did beat zimbabwe however.

The way the system worked they were in the best position of any team from pool b going into the super 6.

[rod_rooster]

time difference couldnt be worse.

however its the 1st time they have got the format right since 1992 where all 9 played each other.

this time it will be all 8 decent sides playing each other providing no minnows get through the round robin stage. What a farce in 03 when kenya made the semis

Not sure about that dasher. Kenya played some excellent cricket and from my point of view deserved to be in the semis.

When I find time Il go back and show you they were lucky. Last world cup they got a forfiet in the minor round. In the super 6's u carry through results from teams u played in that super 6 during the minor round in their case 2. The other 3 u play. Somehow they got another forfiet in the 6's and made the semi. joke

Yeah, but one day cricket is a bit of a lottery anyway. They took their chances and produced some good cricket when they had to. The biggest joke is that Bangladesh got granted Test status and Kenya didn't. Neither IMHO should have but surely Kenya should have been the first of those 2. Seriously the South Australian side would have no trouble accounting for Bangladesh so how in hell can Test records be taken seriously with them involved. Same goes for Zimbabwe since guys like Streak, Flower, Flower, etc. stopped playing for political reasons. They were a handy side before that and were becoming more and more competitive but they are just a joke now.

Wonder through here http://aus.cricinfo.com/link_to_databas ... PS/WC2003/ and you will see what happened. Zimbabwe made super 6 for same reason.

From memory kenya beat one top 8 side other than a forfiet. That alone is not good enough to finish top 3 of a 7 team pool.

The only time a non top 8 side has genuinely been competive was Zimbabwe at the 99 world cup where they genuinely qualified for the super 6's. At that stage there were 9 genuinely decent sides now there are 8.

I just hope nothing stupid happens and we get the top 8 in the super 8.

yep, that Zimbabwe side in 99 was a very handy one. Some pretty handy players. I remember Neil? Johnson's 132 against Australia. Very, very impressive knock. He was originally from Scotland i think but couldn't get a game for England despite qualifying to play for them. Some of the names from Zimbabwe in 99 - Flower, Flower, Streak, Strang (bowled very nice leg breaks), Branddes, Whittall, Campbell, Johnson, Olonga. What a shame all the political strife in Zimbabwe has prematurely ended the careers of some fine players.

[scoob]

I just hope nothing stupid happens and we get the top 8 in the super 8.

I think that is the good thing about world cups, same as australia getting so far into the soccer world cup...people like seeing the little guys fighting out of their weight division...dont forget bangladesh have beaten australia!

[-]

Lets look at Zimbabwes qualification for the the super 6's.

BEAT, namibia, netherlands and ENGLAND on forfiet. Got a tie cos of rain versus pakistan.

lost to australia and india.

In effect 1 and a half wins they wouldnt have got.

Zimbabwe didnt quite get the same luck as kenya cos the other two teams who qualified were teams they lost to in aus and ind so hence they carried through no points.

[rod_rooster]

I just hope nothing stupid happens and we get the top 8 in the super 8.

I think that is the good thing about world cups, same as australia getting so far into the soccer world cup...people like seeing the little guys fighting out of their weight division...dont forget bangladesh have beaten australia!

One day cricket caters for the little guy perfectly. Anyone on their day can win. All that is required is a bit of luck and Bangladesh beat Australia as you mentioned has happened. Test cricket (the real game) rarely has these types of scenarios.

[-]

I think one of the reasons the format has changed is the ridiculous situation that occured in 2003. This time if a minnow flukes it through due to rain or forfiets they can only carry one win maximum through and will have to play 6 decent sides and will have no hope of making semis.

A similar situation occured in 99 when zimb (deservedly) made the super 6's. However fortuatously the other two teams that made it from their pool they beat so they carried through 2 wins. Luckily for the health and credibility of the semis they lost all 3 super 6 matches and missed out. Howver had they won one of them they would have been in. Definately mixed it that tournament and were above a minnow but a semi was a bit above their ability i thought.

[MAY-Z]

we seem to have two issues arising here so i will try and address them seperately

1) minnows making it big

i think that it is great that the last 2 world cups have thrown these situations up. people say that kenya were lucky to get throught but isnt that what sport is about, taking your chances and making use of any luck that comes in your direction. as for zimbabwe in 1999 they were genuinely good enough to be there and a semi final berth would have been a good reward for a side that put in a lot of hard work at that time (obviously not anymore though).

2) 2007 and world cup

i would think that the semi finals should be made up of australia, south africa, india and possibly the west indies or sri lanka but the fourth spot is quite open.

the biggest chance i think is south africa as the pitches will be reasonably lifeless and the grounds are small. i think they have the best batting line up to succeed in those conditions with smith, gibbs, kallis, boucher, pollock, kemp and hall all capable of playing big quick innings in those conditions. they may get found out a little with the ball but with kemp back bowling recently it does give them another option.

based on what i have ssen in south africe pakistan wont be any good despite their batting depth as their bowlers are just not up to it and can concede scores very quickly with no ability to bowl yorkers.

sri lanka will also have to rely on their batting as their bowling gives 30 overs of very hittable deliveries- they would have easily won their last series in new zealand if someone other than vaas or murali could bowl effectively. new zealand and the west indies are very similar to this and will need to bat very well due to a lack of depth in the bowling- for that reason they cant win.

england may have turned a corner, but it wouldnt take much for teh old habits to resurface. with the addition of pietersen to the middle order it does give a good balance to the batting with a good mixture of hitters and accumulators. another team where the bowling could be an issue but if plunkett can continue to take early wickets that gives flintoff and panesar a good shot at the middle/lower order.

indias batting on paper looks ghood and they definately have the ability with a good balance to th eline up and they have bowlers who should be ably to back the powerful batting line-up up, although sehwag is out of form it only takes a moment for a player like him to get back to his best.

australia must be feeling real low right now and with some disruption to the early round sides inevitable it is probably lucky that south africa are the only challengers early. for a good side they seem to be the only team that doesnt know their best team which could be the downfall.

my tip is for south africa to beat india in the final.

[Dogwatcher]

fortuatously

Huh?

[Ecky]

we seem to have two issues arising here so i will try and address them seperately

1) minnows making it big

i think that it is great that the last 2 world cups have thrown these situations up. people say that kenya were lucky to get throught but isnt that what sport is about, taking your chances and making use of any luck that comes in your direction. as for zimbabwe in 1999 they were genuinely good enough to be there and a semi final berth would have been a good reward for a side that put in a lot of hard work at that time (obviously not anymore though).

Nothing against Kenya but what happened in 2003 was a ridiculous situation that demonstrated how flawed the competition rules were. It baffles me how often organisers of major sporting events come up with competition rules which can be exploited or are clearly biased towards certain teams/situations. All they need to do is consult a professional mathematician/statistician and they would immediately be able to see the problems and advise on fairer alternatives.

[MAY-Z]

we seem to have two issues arising here so i will try and address them seperately

1) minnows making it big

i think that it is great that the last 2 world cups have thrown these situations up. people say that kenya were lucky to get throught but isnt that what sport is about, taking your chances and making use of any luck that comes in your direction. as for zimbabwe in 1999 they were genuinely good enough to be there and a semi final berth would have been a good reward for a side that put in a lot of hard work at that time (obviously not anymore though).

Nothing against Kenya but what happened in 2003 was a ridiculous situation that demonstrated how flawed the competition rules were. It baffles me how often organisers of major sporting events come up with competition rules which can be exploited or are clearly biased towards certain teams/situations. All they need to do is consult a professional mathematician/statistician and they would immediately be able to see the problems and advise on fairer alternatives.

if the sporting world was fair then we wouldnt use umpires out on the ground we would get all decisions made from replays as im sure statistics would prove that australia would get more umpiring decisions in their favour than any other side at the moment