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?

I think the fact Bangladesh were handed Full Member status muddies the water. They arguably should not have been given it, haven't really improved and now Ireland could claim to be better than them they begin to ask why not us as well? Add the whole Zimbabwe thing into that and it just further adds to their dismay I would imagine.

mystiroakey wrote:Also i think we haver to consider that we cant realistically just let ireland in without Afganistan as well.

We can. Cricketing wise the sides are of similar ability, but administratively Afghanistan aren't even an Associate yet. They are of course badly handicapped by the fact that it is, for obvious reasons, very difficult to properly organise cricket in Afghanistan. But, unlike Ireland, their board wouldn't be able to do things like setting up a FC structure.

As I say I think they need to move away from the pie-system. I'm no expert on exactly how this works, so can't really offer an alternative, but it isn't a healthy situation where the game is run by the 'haves' who don't let the 'have nots' in. There simply has to be a set pathway towards Full Member status and ultimately the rewards on offer for it.

What Shelsey said. Twice.

Particularly about moving away from the pie system. Which I can tell you about in great detail if anybody's particularly interested. But essentially it means uniform funding from the ICC depending on your status. So full members get x, associates y and affiliates z.

Your status depends on fulfilling a list of requirements: e.g. for full membership this includes a full first class structure (added recently, when Ireland made noises about getting full membership), for associates it has stuff like employing a General manager and national high performance director, minimum number of grounds, teams, junior teams, women teams (unless you're Jersey - ooops), and various other admin stuff. Affiliate (the base entry) requires I think 8 senior teams and 4 juniors, which is already imo prohibitive, because junior teams depend often on ressources, which you will only get from the ICC or your government if you're an ICC member. A bit of chicken and egg situation.

Afghanistan have nowhere near the structures in place which Ireland do yet. Ireland have been a force for a few years more, partly from having their development program in place and performing so well.

Who's gonna be the star of the super 8's guys in your opinon?

CF wrote:Who's gonna be the star of the super 8's guys in your opinon?

An individual player? I'll go for Jayawardene

I'll go for Chris Gayle, the coolest man in cricket if not the world.

I'll back AB de Villiers to be the man of the next round before SA's inevitable semi final exit.

Watson is in good form.

Time for Narine to shine?

CF wrote:Who's gonna be the star of the super 8's guys in your opinon?

1) Gayle
2) AB De Villiers
3) Luke Wright
4) Narine
5) Naser Jamshed....watch out for this guy
6) MccUllum
7) Gambhir......he will play the anchor
8) Pathan.....allrounder
9) Hussey

Mike Selig wrote:

The simple fact is that you're a very sad person who gets off on getting a rise out of people. Well with me you've succeeded so have a nice w@nk over it if you please. This board used to be a very good place to come and debate and talk cricket and you're doing your best to ruin it. I do wish you would f@ck off or that the mods would grow a pair and ban you. You have nothing useful to contribute. You obviously have no knowledge of cricket either judging on your perception of Panesar as a more attacking bowler than Swann and thinking Brett Lee played a crucial role in Australia winning in India (he didn't play a test).

For now, I'm done.

Ha Ha Ha...I just read this...and am not angry...but only amused...
and am reminded...of the following:

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned

Now please do not ask.....who is the woman scorned here
regards

Moving on....

One curiosity from Women's World Cup is that Sri Lanka had five players run out (and another stumped) - all while still failing to reach 80. Sounds like a fair degree of panic set in.....

Deandra Dottin, the female Chris Gayle? Smashed a few against England, now an unbeaten 58 off 42 balls to see off New Zealand.

Favourites England and Australia start their tournaments tomorrow - will be interesting.

My doctor's occasionally concerned about my blood pressure...

West Indies women are rather like the men's team - some star names (Taylor, Dottin), hit more sixes than anyone else but don't necessarily score more runs than anybody else in the final analysis, and lack in bowling.

That makes them dangerous though, as England found last time out.

I'm a little disappointed that Sky won't be going to be showing any of the women's games until the semi finals. I really enjoyed the games they showed against the Windies and I can't wait to see Lydia Greenway play again, she really is fantastic.

Shelsey93 wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:Also i think we haver to consider that we cant realistically just let ireland in without Afganistan as well.

We can. Cricketing wise the sides are of similar ability, but administratively Afghanistan aren't even an Associate yet. They are of course badly handicapped by the fact that it is, for obvious reasons, very difficult to properly organise cricket in Afghanistan. But, unlike Ireland, their board wouldn't be able to do things like setting up a FC structure.

As I say I think they need to move away from the pie-system. I'm no expert on exactly how this works, so can't really offer an alternative, but it isn't a healthy situation where the game is run by the 'haves' who don't let the 'have nots' in. There simply has to be a set pathway towards Full Member status and ultimately the rewards on offer for it.

Thats the problem. You cant think of an alternative to the situation. The only alternative i can see is to have different pies, differnt rules for different forms of the game. IE for full member stautus to odi's- This is not what the ICC want because it would create calender issues and could spell the end of test cricket. It is a complete mess at the moment and I nor the ICC can see a way around it. So at present we have to either stick with it and hope ireland fullfull there test obligations.l or change up cricket from its roots

"We can. Cricketing wise the sides are of similar ability, but administratively Afghanistan aren't even an Associate yet. They are of course badly handicapped by the fact that it is, for obvious reasons, very difficult to properly organise cricket in Afghanistan. But, unlike Ireland, their board wouldn't be able to do things like setting up a FC structure."

This is the point- you mention that ireland can realistically set up a FC structure. The point is they havent. therefore as you mentioned previously we should just allow Irelnad in on ability, by that rationale we should also allow afganistan in on ability. So we either say teams dont need to have an FC structure in place to get test stautus or we keep it as it is. There is good reason for saying teams need to meet a minimum standard and that is so obvious. If the team cannot bring money into the game- why should they be entitled to some of the pie, But if we say our ultimate goal is to bring cricket to the world (fine by me) we cant just pick and choose teams based on politics and there economies

JDizzle wrote:I'm a little disappointed that Sky won't be going to be showing any of the women's games until the semi finals. I really enjoyed the games they showed against the Windies and I can't wait to see Lydia Greenway play again, she really is fantastic.

The host broadcaster's fault rather than Sky but I agree - it would be nice to see at least some of the group games.

It's not only the FC structure (which interestingly enough wasn't a requirement when Bangladesh got awarded test status), it's about ANY structure. In terms of number of coaches they employ, development program, regional performance centres, etc. Ireland are far more advanced than Afghanistan. In short they have a structure in place which should mean they should be able to produce players of a similar level of ability even once this current crop have retired (already we're seeing Dockrell and Stirling who are arguably as good as anything else Ireland has produced). Afghanistan frankly don't. They are reliant on finding natural talent with similar passion and desire.

You need major cashflow to run a FC structure. As Shelsey says that can only happen realistically in several ways:
- government funding: usually reserved for national sides and fairly negligeable in the scheme of things (France gets 25,000 euros, which covers half of our national team costs - scarcely going to help set up a 4 or 5 team professional championship is it?).
- fans: Ireland have plenty (cricket is amongst the top 5 most popular sports in Ireland), but gate receipts won't fund a first class set-up in any country.
- sponsorship: the main one of course, except there are heavy restrictions placed on it (one logo per item of clothing, no sponsor who is a competitor of an ICC sponsor). And of course sponsorship is far less easy to get if you aren't playing the major tournaments (or even the qualifiers, as happens to a lot of countries), because cricket isn't an olympic sport, and if you don't play the prestige format (which you can't, because you're not a full member, because you don't have the money required to run a first class system, because you can't find the sponsors... oh wait a minute, we've come a full circle).
- ICC funding: Bangladesh receive $12M which is enough to run a first class competition on (particularly given lower salaries); Ireland receive $1M which is not (based on 20 players at at least $30,000 you could run one first class team on that).

I don't like the argument that the ICC can't think of a solution. Frankly the ICC don't want a solution. India don't want Ireland to become a full member because they think they'll side with England; England (and Wales) don't want it for a host of reasons including keeping pinching the best players (but by no means the only one - with England currently the only full member in Europe they have a lot of power here). With the voting system as it currently is (I won't go into it, anyone interested can read a host of articles we have already had on this forum) that means that any change to the status quo won't happen. Because those who gain from it are those who decide what happens. All the power at the ICC is in the hands of the full members, so naturally they keep making decisions in their interests rather than in the interests of the global game.

I have an obvious solution:

1) do away with all this status thing. No other sport has it. Why is a match between France and Germany not an ODI? It has become a stigma rather than an aspiration. Allow any two willing countries to play themselves in any format, and call the game what it is.

2) Test cricket: 2 divisions of 8 teams, with promotion/relegation every 2 years. Eventually a 3rd division should be added.

3) World cups: every team should have to qualify, whether by ranking or through a tournament. The world cup should be your prestige event, so every country should at least have the chance of qualifying if they want to. Each world cup should have 16 teams in 4 groups of 4, with quarter finals from there. Cricket should stop its phobia of the surprise result - shocks happen in sport, live with them.

4) Funding: funding should be attributed on a needs basis. England don't need the funding they get from the ICC, and frankly it is negligeable compared to the funding they get from Sky. Ditto India. PNG don't need as much as they get because it costs them 25 times less to employ someone than a european country like Italy (similar standards). Afghanistan could certainly do with a boost, as could Holland and most European countries.

5) the expat question. People often bring up Eoin Morgan switching to England, but less often that the two best dutch batsmen are South African and Australian.
First of all, make it fair - currently if Morgan decides he wants to play for Ireland again he has to wait 4 years, if Dockrelly wants to (and England pick him) he can play for England tomorrow. That is so obviously unfair and ridiculous it barely needs saying that the same rules should apply both ways. 4 years is good, because it means you have to make a genuine commitment to that country (potentially miss a world cup).
Secondly, reward those who pick homegrown players with more funding. Incentivise development programs. For local (e.g. European, Asian, African) tournaments, have a minimum number of players who are either born in the country, have been a national for x years, or played age-group representative cricket for that country.

6) the language: currently the only language any RDO (regional development officer) has to speak is English. This is unhelpful in places like Francophone Africa or latin America. French/spanish speaking countries have governments who will usually insist on things being done in their language. Instead of dividing the world geographically, more effort should be made to have bilingual RDOs to help their members get through the paperwork.

I could go on for a while, but feel we're moving away from the subject, so:

7) the big one: make the voting system fair and transparent (so publish minutes of meetings - do you know the ICC executive committee don't have to publish their minutes (and don't)? Ridiculous? I thought so...).

Dananjaya plays for Sri Lanka. He was discovered in the nets by the Sri Lankan team a few months ago, has never played a FC match and wasn't selected for the U19 World Cup.

an excellent post from Mike, as usual, but we are straying somewhat

back on topic, England's women began their bid to regain the world T20 title with a very comfortable 43 run win over Pakistan. England will feel they should have made more than 133 though after a century opening stand between Laura Marsh and Charlotte Edwards, the world's best T20 batsman Sarah Taylor having a rare failure with the bat. Pakistan never looked like getting the runs though and were bowled out in the final over for 90, with spinner Holly Colvin running through the middle and lower order to end with four wickets. Just a shame we're not allowed to watch the matches...

In today's other match, Australia, expected to be England's main rivals for the trophy, picked up regular wickets through the second half of the innings to restrict India to 104-8. In reply, they're 17 without loss after three overs.

Shelsey93 wrote:Dananjaya plays for Sri Lanka. He was discovered in the nets by the Sri Lankan team a few months ago, has never played a FC match and wasn't selected for the U19 World Cup.

Right, I've just picked NZ in the SuperBru comp.

We're doomed.

Mendis looks short of fitness for me. Good start from NZ this...

with the start they have NZ already looking favourites to me.
just stuck in some money on Kiwis...the rturn rate was an attractive 2.37

and that McCullum and Taylor are still to come

Mad for Chelsea wrote:an excellent post from Mike, as usual, but we are straying somewhat

back on topic, England's women began their bid to regain the world T20 title with a very comfortable 43 run win over Pakistan. England will feel they should have made more than 133 though after a century opening stand between Laura Marsh and Charlotte Edwards, the world's best T20 batsman Sarah Taylor having a rare failure with the bat. Pakistan never looked like getting the runs though and were bowled out in the final over for 90, with spinner Holly Colvin running through the middle and lower order to end with four wickets. Just a shame we're not allowed to watch the matches...

I have it on very good authority that Holly Colvin looks every bit as good in real life as she does on TV.

McCullum out, that's a big wicket to Sri lanka.

Mendis taken to the cleaners in that over. The game's moved on a bit since his debut, and he'll need to vary his flight and length a bit more on the flatter wickets.

What's the pitch looked like? New Zealand should really get close to 190 from here (at least).

Mike Selig wrote:Mendis taken to the cleaners in that over. The game's moved on a bit since his debut, and he'll need to vary his flight and length a bit more on the flatter wickets.

What's the pitch looked like? New Zealand should really get close to 190 from here (at least).

give credit where due....i.e Rob Nicol has batted well......lessons for Broad on how to handle these guys later in the group game

Meanwhile the otehr tiny off break bowler with a Muralisque action Dhananjay is bolwing well.

Perfect batting wicket, Mike. Very dry for the last 8 months apparently.

Dananjaya gets his 2nd wicket on debut. 137/3 after 15.4 overs
Rob Nicol 58(40).

and the odds on NZ winning have dropped to 1.8 ......my bet is well placed that means

KP made a point in commentary that Luke Wright had benefitted from play in IPL and Big Bash.
Today Cameron White and Gayle also said the same.....their sides benefir a lot from IPL exposure

and we can see how Kiwis are comfortable in this form.....having played a lot of IPL

Thanks Line.

Last 3 overs vital then. Anything under 180 SL will be pleased. New Zealand will want that 190+.

Taylor out, another key wicket, nice slower ball from Kulasekara.

Oram... brainless.

New Zealand throwing it away here.

Taylor's record in T20Is isn't as good as it should be, averages 23 SR of 120 or so.

Mike good post pal. However the fact remains that we either allow teams in who dont fullfill the requirements or we dont , or we make the requirments easier. If we let in ireland we need to let in others - or make the minimum requirement level at irelands current level!

Your soloution is tearing down the structure in place - and i am all for it..But is this gonna happen in our lifetimes?? It would be nice

Wheels starting to come off a bit now. 2 quick wickets.
159/5 less than 2 overs to go.

Good over there from Kulasekhara, Sri Lanka resting a bit of control there.
NZ 159-5 after 18.

159-5 after 18- decent stuff hey. My sky go has decided to break on my work PC!!!!

I imagine KP fan isn't quite so man sausage sure of a NZ win now.

With their lack of bowlers, this chase should prove relatively straightforward for Sri Lanka.

Lasith Malinga hasn't looked at his best ast yet in this tournament. But he has been good enough to return 1-30 in his 4 today. with a top last over, the 19th of the innings just going for 6 and also a wicket.
NZ finishes on 174-7 in their 20 overs.
Should be an interesting chase. Early wickets the key for NZ, if Lanka get off to a good start then they should win this one.

mystiroakey wrote:Mike good post pal. However the fact remains that we either allow teams in who dont fullfill the requirements or we dont , or we make the requirments easier. If we let in ireland we need to let in others - or make the minimum requirement level at irelands current level!

Thanks.

Well, they made the requirements harder to stop ireland so I doubt they'll make them easier again...

The issue is that full membership is tied in with test status, so the requirement to have a first class system is perhaps not unreasonable, and you could even argue it's learning from the mistake with Bangladesh. On the other hand does something have to be professional to be good? Ireland's 3 main provinces are quite strong teams.

mystiroakey wrote:Your soloution is tearing down the structure in place - and i am all for it..But is this gonna happen in our lifetimes?? It would be nice

Well, nothing's going to get better if the sensible people just cross their arms and do nothing. As I say, public pressure forced an ICC back down on changing the 2015 world cup to an invitational tournament. The Woolf review received submissions from an astonishing number of countries, and many of its findings echo what I think. But yes it's a massive uphill struggle. This is why it is so important for associates to stay involved in the public events, it keeps the battle in the public eye.

On one talks about Irish cricket more than at world cups...

Back to the cricket. New Zealand on a disappointing 174, a good 10-15 runs short of where they should have finished (only 41 off the last 5, despite having 8 wickets in hand is a poor poor effort). Sri lanka bowled well at the death and held their catches. It's still a challenging total, but I'd back them to chase it.

bet 365 are now showing SL as marginally favourite to win......but I think it's even....175 is never easy...the've gotta go at 9RPO from the start and NZ have runs already on the board.....Lanka still needs to get them.

Pitch has something in it for seamers.......a bit of bounce if you bend your back.

If they get 2 lankan big( any 2 of jaya, dilshan and sangkkara) guns cheaply...say less than 20...then NZ are throuhg

Thissara Perera hasn't had a bowl in the NZ innings. His bowling has come along well in the last few months, so a bit surprised to see that. Will he get a promotion in the batting order?

Dilshan has a look early on...

Feeling confident after that 1st over KP fan?

^ feel 15 euros slipping throuhg a hole in my pocket

Mike Selig wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:an excellent post from Mike, as usual, but we are straying somewhat

back on topic, England's women began their bid to regain the world T20 title with a very comfortable 43 run win over Pakistan. England will feel they should have made more than 133 though after a century opening stand between Laura Marsh and Charlotte Edwards, the world's best T20 batsman Sarah Taylor having a rare failure with the bat. Pakistan never looked like getting the runs though and were bowled out in the final over for 90, with spinner Holly Colvin running through the middle and lower order to end with four wickets. Just a shame we're not allowed to watch the matches...

I have it on very good authority that Holly Colvin looks every bit as good in real life as she does on TV.

I was lucky enough to see Holly bowl a bit in the nets a Durham last year, she was very, very good. Very talented...

Jayawardene is such a classy player isn't he?

Having said that, if ever there's been a top-heavy batting line-up this is it. Against sides with genuine quality pace up front (e.g. South Africa, or Australia if Cummins has a good day) a couple of quick wickets and you're really in with a chance.

Boom, serious hitting from the Sri Lankan openers.

Remind me never to take betting advice off KP fan

Sri Lanka are running away with it at the moment. New Zealand badly need a couple of wickets soon.

Fists of Fury wrote:Boom, serious hitting from the Sri Lankan openers.

Remind me never to take betting any advice off KP fan

There you go mate. ---> Just pulling your leg KP_Fan.

Australia have completed an easy win over India in the Women's event.

Sri Lanka just cruising, Sangakara joins in the fun now. I've always wondered why sides don't have 2 deep mid-wickets to Sanga for the SLA, he almost always goes in the arc between long-on and deep mid-wicket. Putting 3 fielders there rather than 2 could force him out of his comfort zone?