T20 World Cup: Live Matches Discussion

First topic message reminder :

Hi all,

I've set up our very own 606v2 T20 World Cup SuperBru tipping competition for anyone who is interested.

http://www.superbru.com/worldt20/player_home.asp

First game is Sri Lanka v Zimbabwe on Tuesday, September 18 at 19:30 (local time) in Hambantota.

The full list of fixtures is here:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/world-twenty20-2012/content/series/531597.html?template=fixtures

The pool code for 606v2: playsacs

Everyone is welcome.
Enjoy the matches and best of luck to your team.

Who do you think will win?

191 at the end of 20 overs, a fine batting effort from the West Indies, now the bowlers will have to back it up.
Job really cut out for the Australians. The openers are going to be key.

are points carried forward into the round of 8 ?

Very strange selection from Australia... only 3 specialist bowlers (I accept that Watson would usually bowl his 4 anyway). Surely McKay would be more valuable than Christian batting at 8? And I can't believe they've left Dave Hussey out - a far better player than Cameron White or the captain.

Gayle showed again why he's the best T20 batsman in the world. I'm impressed with Samuels, who, after the success in England, seems to have rediscovered the free-flowing side of his game seen in his early career. I still think WI's batsmen apart from Gayle will struggle against the top bowling sides - SA, England and Pakistan.

Will be interested to see how Narine goes. Australia were pretty hopeless against him earlier this year, and can't afford to just play out 4 overs in pursuit of 191.

KP_fan wrote:are points carried forward into the round of 8 ?

no

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

msp83 wrote:The farce game is just getting over but the other one is starting soon.
West Indies have gone for Johnson Charles over Andre Russell. Poor call from the management.

can you remind me what exactly Russel has done to deserve a place in the side? His record in domestic and international T20s is woeful. You may say stats dont tell the whole story but seriously theres a huge difference on the bowling side between sammy and russel. I know you hate Sammy, but Andre Russel is not a good player in this format who has a terrible record, Sammy is not a good player but has a good record all the same.

Russell's ODI strike rate is 123 at an average of 36, his T-20 sr is 151 at an average of close to 20. He has played only 5 T-20Is, don't think that is good enough to judge him.
Sammy has done well with the ball though. But Charles or for that matter Smith for Russel? not good for me.

CF wrote:

KP_fan wrote:are points carried forward into the round of 8 ?

no

thanks...
too bad.....then these big gun games i.e SA-SL, Ind-Eng will prove no more mid torunament warm up games

Warner is taking the attack right to the WI camp, and a few more overs of him, 191 would look rather low.

Great start from Warner ! Watson just a spectator so far...

Some right old rubbish from Rampaul ...

But Edwards gets his man !

Fidel does for Warner, Australia 30-1.

Warner very unhappy with that decision...he may have a point. Umpire had no doubt but it doesn't look like an edge on replay...

Narine on in the PP...thought this might be on.

Had to get Rampaul off anyway...

Some pretty average bowling from the WI seamers... I'm shocked that they left Roach out of the squad.

Australia looking good here, West Indies need a wicket.

Yeah Shelsey, surprised not see Roach in there.
They need Russell in there for the next game in place of Rampaul, Smith or Charles.

Australia very much in charge, Smith dropping Watson in the last over didn't help.

disappointed that even in this format we have to have so much DL, what is tha all aboot hey?

Disappointing day then, SA beat Sri Lanka in a 7 over bash - nothing can really be gauged from that - and an exciting finish in the other game was halted due to the weather. The weather is looking OK for the England game tomorrow though, so fingers crossed.

Not much to learn from today's games (judging from the scorecards anyway).

Can't really say much about the 7 overs bash, as we've seen T20 generally gives you a bit of time to get going, 7 overs doesn't. De Villiers looks in form, and the South African fast bowlers also.

Australia conceded a big score mainly thanks to Gayle and Samuels. We know if the West Indies get going this is a powerful line-up, the question marks are really about consistency and whether their bowling/fielding is up to much. For Australia I would rather McKay in for Christian, there's enough batting already; we know their top 3 are excellent players, although the West Indies missed a trick by not opening with spin to Warner, which allowed him to get away early.

The opening with spin thing hasn't been used that much in this tournament. That is probably because the pitches have been relatively quick, but I still think against quite a few openers it is the way to go - certainly against England, Australia, SA, NZ and even WI for those teams that don't have very strong pace attacks.

Shelsey93 wrote:the pitches have been relatively quick

Indeed. If the pitches remain similar then for me England and South Africa become the favourites ahead of India, Sri Lanka and the mercurial Pakistan.

Having said that, if I were captain/coach of any team other than South Africa I would open up with spin against Warner. Didn't have to be Narine, Samuels would have been a decent option as well. By opening with medium pace West Indies allowed Australia to get to 30/0 off 2.

True Australia got a flying start - but Warner was a whisker away from being bowled in the first over. That very poor over from Rampaul allowed Warner to race away , but you'd be a brave man to let Samuels try his luck after watching the over he bowled later in the innings ! I think I'd prefer Narine , if you're going down that route , and that might be worth a try.

Pity it rained - Australia were apparently cruising , but there was still a long way to go , Narine had two overs left , as did Edwards , and if Watson and/or Hussey got out things may have changed. It might have given us the first close finish of the event.
Hope the weather is fair for the Super eights , which seem certain to feature the Usual Suspects , and the tournament really begins.

It's a flawed format this world cup also:

1) Going from 4 groups down to 2...results are pretty much guaranteed.
so that makes it a notional first round....forced to accomodate minnows.

2) then the points between the 2 heavy weights of first round don't carry into the second round.
which makes games between big sides such as Ind-Eng or SL-SA meaningless.

3) so it's down to 3 real games only to decide semi-final slots....that's too few game to decide the world cup semi/finalists.

I think a lot of it has to do with force acocodation of Afganistan and Ireland type teams in a constrained amount of time.

i agree with 1. its a ridiculas concept and imagine a top team ws knocked out on a one off game. that is gonna ruin the tourny and kill alot of expected support.

I don't agree with point 1 at all. How do you expect cricket in those countries to improve if they aren't accommodated at global events? They are the best of the lesser nations and all in this tournament had some realistic hope of causing an upset.

I also disagree with point 3. One of the best things about the WT20 is that, as compared to the World Cup, it is relatively short. This helps maintain interest.

I agree with point 2. A system needs to be found to stop these potentially enticing fixtures becoming totally meaningless - carrying the points scored against the other team that qualified forward could work.

I wont them in there- just not as a one of knock out. It seems ridiculas. Start off with groups, not a knock out before a group

Shelsey93 wrote:I don't agree with point 1 at all. How do you expect cricket in those countries to improve if they aren't accommodated at global events?

how do you expect the sponsors to give their money when he first week of the tournament is made of meaningless games not having a bearing on the w'cup result.

for example take the games of reigning champion Eng....1st was a notional joke ........and 2nd game might be intereting today but irrelevant.
think from a sponsor and paying customer's POV

we needa RWC points system in place..

Therefore we could accomodtae minnows into groups, however if the seeded team wins by alot then it gets extra points and the games are not irrelevant. Also by allowing the minnow teams more games they will also improve,,

job done on both counts..

Well, as you said, carrying points forward is a good idea to give more relevance to group games.

Its not all about the sponsors - its also important to provide opportunities to the better emerging nations. There are plenty of matches in this tournament which are good for the sponsors.

I do think they made an error in going seven games before a Top 8 v Top 8 fixture. The opening game should have been SA v SL. However, given that the crowds in SL only come in at the weekend you can sort of understand why the more enticing games have been scheduled over the weekend.

KP-Fan, I don't think Ireland would agree with you about it being a notional first round. A win for them tomorrow against West Indies and they progress to the last eight. Ireland are not the favourites for tomorrow's match but they should never be written off. An intriguing fixture and one I'm looking forward to ....

Shelsey93 wrote: Well, as you said, carrying points forward is a good idea to give more relevance to group games.

Its not all about the sponsors - its also important to provide opportunities to the better emerging nations. There are plenty of matches in this tournament which are good for the sponsors.

I do think they made an error in going seven games before a Top 8 v Top 8 fixture. The opening game should have been SA v SL. However, given that the crowds in SL only come in at the weekend you can sort of understand why the more enticing games have been scheduled over the weekend.

Yes atleats let's carry forward point...that gives relevance to early group games.
providing opportunities to associate and non regular members is essential....but it doesn't have to be in and at the cost of taking sheen off the main world cup event.

that's what the pre-w,cup qualifiers are for.........and let the 9th and 10th ranked teams ( that will be generally Zim and BD) also play qualifiers.

Now as stated above IRE may still come and beat WI.......but that's a low probability rare occurence.

In 10 odd 50 over world cups, about 5 champions trophies and 5th edition of T20 world cup......20 odd events involving associates.......about half a thousand games......there have been barely 10 odd upsets where associates have won.........too small a percentage..

There are other ways of encourgaing asociates......instead of at the cost of attraction of a premier world cup event

Pakistan won the toss and are batting at Pallekele.
Pakistan
Hafeez, Nazir, Jamshed, K Akmal, U Akmal, Malik, Afridi, Arafat, Tanwir Ajmal, Gul.
New Zealand
Nicol, Franklin, B McCullum, Williamson, Taylor, Oram, Vetori, N McCullum, Southee, Mills, Milne.

Reading back the pages, saw Mike calling Harsha Bhogle a "clown". Sorry, whats wrong with Harsha?

gonna go with pakistan in this one- just!

I tipped Pakistan too. Feel like a bit of a traitor since my Mum is a Kiwi.

KP Fan, we hear what you're saying but just let it grow.... these games are a few and will soon be out of the way. It doesn't hurt watching them compared to a 50 over match, wouldn't you agree?

Also, even though the minnows have lost (so far) this time, we often forget that the gap between the best and say 10,11,12, etc... is diminishing.
(Oz just misses the cut-off)

Upsets have happened (and will continue to happen) and it would be a pity if we missed out on them.

I like to watch Afghanistan, Ireland, Bangladesh. Even if it was the Netherlands, UAE, Nepal or Canada I would still probably watch.

Just enjoy the pleasure of watching the sport being played and the sportsmanship of the players themselves (whether good or bad) rather than judging them against some 'ruthlessly high' performance indicator or benchmark set by a No.1 team.

Go with the flow and embrace the minnows!

Yep t20 especially should be about the 'minnows'...

Pakistain with a very decent start.. As I post NZ get a wicket. But not the end of the world. Good starting RR for Pak.

But I do think Ireland are better than being called a minow. I think they are gonna beat up WI !! you heard it here first. WI love bowling pies and ireland are gritty

Fantastic start for Pakistan, 180+ score coming up here.

gonna go with 210

Pakistan going along very nicely indeed. 50 for Nasir Jamshed!.

Franklin gets the breakthrough for NZ, Hafeez is bowled for 43.

NZ are getting right back in this game

Shelsey93 wrote:I don't agree with point 1 at all. How do you expect cricket in those countries to improve if they aren't accommodated at global events? They are the best of the lesser nations and all in this tournament had some realistic hope of causing an upset.

I also disagree with point 3. One of the best things about the WT20 is that, as compared to the World Cup, it is relatively short. This helps maintain interest.

I agree with point 2. A system needs to be found to stop these potentially enticing fixtures becoming totally meaningless - carrying the points scored against the other team that qualified forward could work.

Why should that matter? Why can't we just live with the good teams that we have?

"Why should that matter? Why can't we just live with the good teams that we have?"

because most of us would prefer a bigger sport, a more popular sport, more countriues involved in our sport.


However there is also the fact that if things dont evolve and progress they die to the competition- in this case other sports..

Gotta say this game has gone from Pak being big favs to 50/50 after 18 overs

Pakistan slipping with 4 wickets down. Perhaps they should have send Afridi in ahead of Malik? Surely Afridi's batting has always been hit or miss and it has fallen away over the last few years, but if he comes off then nothing like it.

NZ battled well there to restrict Pakistan to 177, if McCullum fires then NZ have got a chance.

NZ's chances resting on McCullum and Taylor.

mystiroakey wrote:"Why should that matter? Why can't we just live with the good teams that we have?"

because most of us would prefer a bigger sport, a more popular sport, more countriues involved in our sport.


However there is also the fact that if things dont evolve and progress they die to the competition- in this case other sports..

But none of the countries have really shown enough progress IMO.

Ireland ?

Williamson opening with Nicol, Franklin had done a good job in the last match.