ICC Cricket World Cup - Part 2

First topic message reminder :

Table

New Zealand	5	9	1.591
England	5	8	1.862
Australia	5	8	0.812
India	4	7	1.029
Bangladesh	5	5	-0.27
Sri Lanka	5	4	-1.778
West Indies	5	3	0.272
South Africa	5	3	-0.193
Pakistan	5	3	-1.933
Afghanistan	5	0	-2.089

Pool Fixtures

Thu, May 30 
10:30 England vs South Africa  (The Oval)

Fri, May 31 
10:30 West Indies vs Pakistan (Trent Bridge)

Sat, Jun 1 
10:30 New Zealand vs Sri Lanka (Cardiff)
13:30 Afghanistan vs Australia (Bristol)

Sun, Jun 2 
10:30 South Africa vs Bangladesh (The Oval)

Mon, Jun 3 
10:30 England vs Pakistan (Trent Bridge)

Tue, Jun 4 
10:30 Afghanistan vs Sri Lanka (Cardiff)

Wed, Jun 5 
10:30 South Africa vs India (Southampton)
13:30 Bangladesh vs New Zealand (The Oval)

Thu, Jun 6 
10:30 Australia vs West Indies (Trent Bridge)

Fri, Jun 7 
10:30 Pakistan vs Sri Lanka (Bristol)

Sat, Jun 8 
10:30 England vs Bangladesh (Cardiff)
13:30 Afghanistan vs New Zealand (Taunton)

Sun, Jun 9 
10:30 Australia vs India (The Oval)

Mon, Jun 10 
10:30 South Africa vs West Indies (Southampton)

Tue, Jun 11 
10:30 Bangladesh vs Sri Lanka (Bristol)

Wed, Jun 12 
10:30 Australia vs Pakistan (Taunton)

Thu, Jun 13 
10:30 India vs New Zealand (Trent Bridge)

Fri, Jun 14 
10:30 England vs West Indies (Southampton)

Sat, Jun 15 
10:30 Australia vs Sri Lanka (The Oval)
13:30 Afghanistan vs South Africa (Cardiff)

Sun, Jun 16 
10:30 India vs Pakistan (Old Trafford)

Mon, Jun 17 
10:30 Bangladesh vs West Indies (Taunton)

Tue, Jun 18 
10:30 England vs Afghanistan (Old Trafford)

Wed, Jun 19 
10:30 New Zealand vs South Africa (Edgbaston)

Thu, Jun 20 
10:30 Australia vs Bangladesh (Trent Bridge)

Fri, Jun 21 
10:30 England vs Sri Lanka (Headingley)

Sat, Jun 22 
10:30 Afghanistan vs India (Southampton)
13:30 New Zealand vs West Indies (Old Trafford)

Sun, Jun 23 
10:30 Pakistan vs South Africa (Lord’s)

Mon, Jun 24 
10:30 Afghanistan vs Bangladesh (Southampton)

Tue, Jun 25 
10:30 England vs Australia (Lord’s)

Wed, Jun 26 
10:30 New Zealand vs Pakistan (Edgbaston)

Thu, Jun 27 
10:30 India vs West Indies (Old Trafford)

Fri, Jun 28 
10:30 South Africa vs Sri Lanka (Edgbaston)

Sat, Jun 29 
10:30 Afghanistan vs Pakistan (Headingley)
13:30 Australia vs New Zealand (Lord’s)

Sun, Jun 30 
10:30 England vs India (Edgbaston)

Mon, Jul 1 
10:30 Sri Lanka vs West Indies (Riverside Ground)

Tue, Jul 2 
10:30 Bangladesh vs India (Edgbaston)

Wed, Jul 3 
10:30 England vs New Zealand (Riverside Ground)

Thu, Jul 4 
10:30 Afghanistan vs West Indies (Headingley)

Fri, Jul 5 
10:30 Bangladesh vs Pakistan (Lord’s)

Sat, Jul 6 
10:30 India vs Sri Lanka (Headingley)
13:30 Australia vs South Africa (Old Trafford)




Knock Out Fixtures


To Follow

Pal Joey wrote:Yeah, has to be Plan B. Go for broke.

They appear to have been doing that for the last four years

Gooseberry wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:Robbo getting to 40 overs is looking a struggle for them, at that time they will think of chucking the bat. But even batting conservatively theyve lost wickets. Fernando was brave and did well, but the team simply isnt good enough to do that. 
At least we might get to watch 50 overs of one innings this way.

Mathews certainly just isnt capable of fast scoring anymore. Look back at his record, even when hes made runs its been slow (by modern standards) for years.

But what's the point of batting through the 50 for 240ish if it's not going to be a match-winning score?

Plan A: Bat sensibly. Aim to get 250. Chance of getting 250 - 50%. Chance of defending 250 - 5%. Win chance - 2.5%.
Plan B: Go for it. Aim to get 300. Chance of getting 300 - 5%. Chance of defending 300 - 50%. Win chance - 2.5%.

I've set the percentages so that both have the same win percentage. But are we saying it would be harder for them to make 300 batting first than it would be to defend 250? I'd say they have no hope of defending 250, so really Plan B is better.

Because they wouldnt make 300 even if they batted like they were trying, but could end up all out. 
Its all risk reward. 250 almost certainly will lose, but it has a better chance than 200. 300 of course is better of course. 
Losing two wickets for 3 runs doesnt really leave you a choice to try and build a platform then hope to accelerate if that works out. Instead fernando showed off a bit and got out without adding enough to change the game. mathews simply cant score at run a ball rate anymore and has tried to build with mendis. that didnt work and they got out. 
Now its just desperation time where every run matters. Chucking away wickets trying to get fairy tales is an option but theyve gone for the slow grind. 

There is always a chance that England will panic and flail against their bowling. Increasingly small of course. 
their talk pre game was to limit England to under 300 to have a chance, so they wouldve been looking at a score 300 or less from the start unless things had gone really well for them. 

Ultimately the problem with not being very good is that you arent very good and whatever you do it tends to leave you exposed to not being very good.

I think this is the key. They're on a bit of a hiding to nothing either way. But as others have eluded to, they have nothing to lose really and it would be good to see them try and do something special to put pressure on England in the second innings. They'll need either 300 or 3 wickets in the powerplay, and they're unlikely to get either tbh.

Gooseberry wrote:Interviewer: Jimmy Anderson which do you prefer hitting the winning run in a game or taking a winning wicket?
Jimmy Anderson: I dont ever remember having hit a winning run
Interviewer : How about batting out to save a game like you did in Cardiff with Panesar. Is that almost as good as taking the winning wicket? 
Jimmy Anderson: No you haven't won
....
Jimmy Anderson: I didnt actually hit a ball in the whole 2007 world cup

That was a quite amusing exchange.

I kind of get what he was saying. But if Jimmy had ever hit the winning run coming in at number 11, then that's going to be a one-wicket win and surely that winning a close one would be amazing? Probably the equivalent of Harmison in the 2005 Ashes Edgbaston test. I'm not sure if taking the last wicket in a win by an innings and 100 runs would have the same buzz to be honest.

Riding their luck a bit...last two attempts at big shots have nearly yielded wickets. No surprise they have been tentative

Mathews is trying to hit and failing

Can't blame Sri Lanka trying to scramble what they can after the rotten start , and later quick loss of two wickets : they had no hope of getting anything like 300. As it is they might yet reach 250 - though I doubt it.
Not to worry : according to KP_fan theory defending 250 is more or less the same as 300 , isn't it ? 'Cos the chasing team will subconsciously aim to get there slower , or something

alfie wrote:Can't blame Sri Lanka trying to scramble what they can after the rotten start , and later quick loss of two wickets : they had no hope of getting anything like 300. As it is they might yet reach 250 - though I doubt it.
Not to worry : according to KP_fan theory defending 250 is more or less the same as 300 , isn't it ? 'Cos the chasing team will subconsciously aim to get there slower , or something

250 is the new 450 Alfie!

Well sri Lanka are clearly hoping that by batting so badly for the first 40 overs England will stop trying in the last 10 and they can score 500

#kpflogic

Talking about the tournament structure on TMS, the IPL play-off style has got a mention and is an interesting prospect.

Semi-final A: 1st place vs 2nd place
Elimination game: 3rd place vs 4th place

Semi-final B: Loser semi-final A vs winner Elimination game

Final: winner semi-final A vs winner semi-final B

Would that increase interest for the latter pool games?

robbo277 wrote:Talking about the tournament structure on TMS, the IPL play-off style has got a mention and is an interesting prospect.

Semi-final A: 1st place vs 2nd place
Elimination game: 3rd place vs 4th place

Semi-final B: Loser semi-final A vs winner Elimination game

Final: winner semi-final A vs winner semi-final B

Would that increase interest for the latter pool games?

Im listening to this too. Indeed it would add a little more spice but make the tournament even longer. 
Broken record on this but whats made the issue with this format stand out is that the top 4 are so far ahead in quality from the rest, and the rain having affected things in a way of making it harder for the bestoftherest to crash the party. even the order of the games has affected things, if England had started with the Pakistan loss then had India Aus New Zealand they could be looking in all sorts of trouble but making a late charge. Its not always going to be like this. 
But I do agree the above could add some more excitement.

I see some talk earlier re Morgan and his (non) rotation theory. In fact of course they have done some rotation already in that they've played an extra seamer in a couple of games and a full book of spinners in others...
To be honest I'd rather they were rotating the fast bowlers , as I think the reserve options are well capable of getting the job done anyway. But as long as they are cemented in the semis early enough I guess they can do some tactical resting in the last coupe of "dead" games.

Only thing with that is it would surely be advisable to win against Aus NZ and India rather than concede any psychological advantage before the knock outs...
M
Never mind. As again I think any bowling combination they put up is capable of winning as long as the powerful batting lineup turns up.

And if that sounds a bit overconfident - well on recent form they should be confident. Which is not to say they're unbeatable : the big worry is that they do have occasional total bating collapses. Just hoping none of them are happening over the next few weeks !

Gooseberry wrote:

robbo277 wrote:Talking about the tournament structure on TMS, the IPL play-off style has got a mention and is an interesting prospect.

Semi-final A: 1st place vs 2nd place
Elimination game: 3rd place vs 4th place

Semi-final B: Loser semi-final A vs winner Elimination game

Final: winner semi-final A vs winner semi-final B

Would that increase interest for the latter pool games?

Im listening to this too. Indeed it would add a little more spice but make the tournament even longer. 
Broken record on this but whats made the issue with this format stand out is that the top 4 are so far ahead in quality from the rest, and the rain having affected things in a way of making it harder for the bestoftherest to crash the party. even the order of the games has affected things, if England had started with the Pakistan loss then had India Aus New Zealand they could be looking in all sorts of trouble but making a late charge. Its not always going to be like this. 
But I do agree the above could add some more excitement.

Yeah, if there were 3 runaway teams 3 contenders or 2 runaway teams and 3 very good teams then this format would work. This does seem to be a perfect storm to make the format look bad.

Meanwhile Sri Lanka are getting ruined.

Jeez - overs 40 to 45, SL have advanced from 171-5 to 197-6 - 26 runs in 30 balls. No ambition to set a total.

200 up after 45.3 and a wicket falls the next ball...

alfie wrote:I see some talk earlier re Morgan and his (non) rotation theory. In fact of course they have done some rotation already in that they've played an extra seamer in a couple of games and a full book of spinners in others...
To be honest I'd rather they were rotating the fast bowlers , as I think the reserve options are well capable of getting the job done anyway. But as long as they are cemented in the semis early enough I guess they can do some tactical resting in the last coupe of "dead" games.

Only thing with that is it would surely be advisable to win against Aus NZ and India rather than concede any psychological advantage before the knock outs...
M
Never mind. As again I think any bowling combination they put up is capable of winning as long as the powerful batting lineup turns up.

And if that sounds a bit overconfident - well on recent form they should be confident. Which is not to say they're unbeatable : the big worry is that they do have occasional total bating collapses. Just hoping none of them are happening over the next few weeks !

Whilst they do have those batting collapses, they are becoming few and further apart (watch one happen today...). Currently on a run of making 300 in 8 of the last 9 games, and the only game they didn't was against the WIndies when they chased 210 with only 2 wickets down and 16 overs left despite being two frontline batsmen down!

Perera goes...and with him you'd think so do hopes of Sri Lanka getting anything remotely defendable. Good catch by Rashid, and more wickets for Archer

alfie wrote:I see some talk earlier re Morgan and his (non) rotation theory. In fact of course they have done some rotation already in that they've played an extra seamer in a couple of games and a full book of spinners in others...
To be honest I'd rather they were rotating the fast bowlers , as I think the reserve options are well capable of getting the job done anyway. But as long as they are cemented in the semis early enough I guess they can do some tactical resting in the last coupe of "dead" games.

Only thing with that is it would surely be advisable to win against Aus NZ and India rather than concede any psychological advantage before the knock outs...
M
Never mind. As again I think any bowling combination they put up is capable of winning as long as the powerful batting lineup turns up.

And if that sounds a bit overconfident - well on recent form they should be confident. Which is not to say they're unbeatable : the big worry is that they do have occasional total bating collapses. Just hoping none of them are happening over the next few weeks !

Yeah it's only really the bowlers. With Roy missing these games and potentially Australia as well (no official word or anything and he is on drinks today) Vince will have had a few knocks. Plunkett has had a couple of games as well in for Moeen.

For Australia (or the one after) we could be back to our strongest batting line-up and then maybe give Archer and Wood a game off each and give Curran a couple of games? Not sure what I'd do about Dawson, Ali and Rashid are bowling themselves into a nice bit of form and I'd probably let them stay on.

Do you remember when pundits were wondering whether Archer's inclusion would upset the morale in the camp? He's now equal top wickettaker in the tournament so far, and will possibly have two more overs today against 9, 10 and 11 to add to that total.

Couple of very good catches from Root and Rashid have Sri Lanka just about out on their feet at 200/7 now.
Matthews may not be fast but if it were not for his innings this would likely be a very early finish ...

Archer has his three wickets again...it will be interesting to see how he goes against Australia , who are perhaps less bothered by pace and bounce.
Also good to see Rashid with a couple of scalps : I was off air when he took them : skilled bowling or lucky wrist spin flukes ?

Wood gets number eight..easier catch for Root this time.

Innings sinking fast...

dummy_half wrote:Jeez - overs 40 to 45, SL have advanced from 171-5 to 197-6 - 26 runs in 30 balls. No ambition to set a total.

200 up after 45.3 and a wicket falls the next ball...

There is some, they just keep missing or miss hitting and getting out. 

Now 8 down 

Im feeling like a total goose for putting this down as an E!

alfie wrote:Couple of very good catches from Root and Rashid have Sri Lanka just about out on their feet at 200/7 now.
Matthews may not be fast but if it were not for his innings this would likely be a very early finish ...

Archer has his three wickets again...it will be interesting to see how he goes against Australia , who are perhaps less bothered by pace and bounce.
Also good to see Rashid with a couple of scalps : I was off air when he took them : skilled bowling or lucky wrist spin flukes ?

Wood gets number eight..easier catch for Root this time.

Innings sinking fast...

Rashid bowled much better today I thought (albeit I don't think he's been *bad* this tournament, just a bit off his best). Was getting some nice flight and turn

Gooseberry wrote:

dummy_half wrote:Jeez - overs 40 to 45, SL have advanced from 171-5 to 197-6 - 26 runs in 30 balls. No ambition to set a total.

200 up after 45.3 and a wicket falls the next ball...

There is some, they just keep missing or miss hitting and getting out. 

Now 8 down 

Im feeling like a total goose for putting this down as an E!

I've gone England - T. Hoping for a nice 20 from Vince before the two Yorkshire boys get unbeaten tons on their home ground to win by 9 wickets. I think E might be favourite to be honest, if Sri Lanka can eek out 2 wickets.

Wood did as I'd been rather expecting and cleaned up Malinga with the basic three ball trick...short , short ,leg stump Yorker...usually good for a rabbit at that pace
Would like to see the bowlers use that a bit more often ...it's an old trick but a good one.

As others have said, it is unfortunate that this WC has come at a time where there is a sizeable gap in quality between the best 4 teams and the rest - Bangladesh put up a spirited fight yesterday and probably are the best of the rest, but looking at the others:
South Africa - definitely at the bottom of a cycle, struggling to replace retired or aged quality players
Pakistan - the definition of inconsistent. Lack a bit of quality batting in particular
West Indies - Are about half way to a decent side, but far to easy to get their heads down.
Sri Lanka - desperate failure to replace quality in both batting and bowling,
Afghanistan - I understand there have been some off-field issues and political interference, but certainly the side they have brought is a bit short of quality to compete at this level in English conditions.

232/9. Bit of a lone hand by Matthews . Shouldn't think it will be too challenging for England.
Missed a bit of the action in the middle but from what I saw the bowling was pretty good (although arguably a bit flattered by some inept stroke selection) and the fielding too : no drops ? You could debit Buttler for missing one standing up but that would be harsh as it was under edged below his knee.
So you'd say England are keeping their minds on the job well. Trust the batsmen will do so after lunch...

One concern I still have is Roy . Not sure how his recovery is going ? And he has had a couple of injury issues now this season : wouldn't want to see him sidelined when it gets to the big games.
Due respect to Vince but he's just not the same firecracker starter. And if a replacement wereto be needed eventually (Denly ? Malan ? Hales !?) he'd be coming in cold...
Hopefully Roy will be bouncing out to open next game

alfie wrote:One concern I still have is Roy .  Not sure how his recovery is going ? And he has had a couple of injury issues now this season : wouldn't want to see him sidelined when it gets to the big games.
Due respect to Vince but he's just not the same firecracker starter. And if a replacement wereto be needed eventually (Denly ? Malan ? Hales !?)  he'd be coming in cold...
Hopefully Roy will be bouncing out to open next game

I really hope Vince goes hard at it today. Sets his stool out. Gets to 30, gets past 30, hits a big 50+ score. It's only going to get more difficult if he plays any of the later games, so a big score here is needed to get his confidence up in case he needs to come in later.

alfie wrote:232/9.  Bit of a lone hand by Matthews .  Shouldn't think it will be too challenging for England.
Missed a bit of the action in the middle but from what I saw the bowling was pretty good (although arguably  a bit flattered by some inept stroke selection) and the fielding too : no drops ?  You could debit Buttler for missing one standing up but that would be harsh as it was under edged below his knee.
So you'd say England are keeping their minds on the job well. Trust the batsmen will do so after lunch...

As a former keeper, I can't call that any sort of chance - your hands are coming up with the ball, and you can't even see it at it is passing or below the bat face (similarly, anything that goes leg side is difficult when you're up to the stumps as you can't see the ball across the batsman's body). The under-edge taking the ball down again basically means the only way you're catching it is if you can volley it up first

robbo277 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

dummy_half wrote:Jeez - overs 40 to 45, SL have advanced from 171-5 to 197-6 - 26 runs in 30 balls. No ambition to set a total.

200 up after 45.3 and a wicket falls the next ball...

There is some, they just keep missing or miss hitting and getting out. 

Now 8 down 

Im feeling like a total goose for putting this down as an E!

I've gone England - T. Hoping for a nice 20 from Vince before the two Yorkshire boys get unbeaten tons on their home ground to win by 9 wickets. I think E might be favourite to be honest, if Sri Lanka can eek out 2 wickets.

Yeah I think it was of the back of someone pointing out how hard it was to get a T batting second and Vince being a thing. 
In reality its surely a thrashing on the cards. The biggest hope SL have is England trying to show off and getting in a pickle early then tied down against their negative slow bowling mid innings. But yeah I cant even see any straws for them to clutch at

A lot riding on Vince now if you backed a thrashing. Will need more than his 30 (25).

dummy_half wrote:

alfie wrote:232/9.  Bit of a lone hand by Matthews .  Shouldn't think it will be too challenging for England.
Missed a bit of the action in the middle but from what I saw the bowling was pretty good (although arguably  a bit flattered by some inept stroke selection) and the fielding too : no drops ?  You could debit Buttler for missing one standing up but that would be harsh as it was under edged below his knee.
So you'd say England are keeping their minds on the job well. Trust the batsmen will do so after lunch...

As a former keeper, I can't call that any sort of chance - your hands are coming up with the ball, and you can't even see it at it is passing or below the bat face (similarly, anything that goes leg side is difficult when you're up to the stumps as you can't see the ball across the batsman's body). The under-edge taking the ball down again basically means the only way you're catching it is if you can volley it up first

Well yes. Why I said would be harsh. Probably should have said very harsh

Though the Surrey Mafia will probably say Foakes would have taken it

Well not the start England (or the Yorkshire crowd) wanted...

Only just clipping leg but once it was given on field the odds were it wouldn't be overturned : at least they don't lose the review.

So the innings will have to do without the regulation fifty to one hundred start from Roy and Bairstow : just as well they aren't chasing 360 today...

Sedate start for England after the early loss of Bairstow, but the dots are fairly meaningless here.

A couple of 4s for Vince in the 7th over. His innings perhaps the most interesting today.

James Vince caught at slip driving at the ball outside off stump?

I am shocked. Shocked I tell thee

There goes Vince and the chance of a thrashing on the tipping contest.

England still red hot favourites, but if Vince can't make scores against Afghanistan and Sri Lanka in pool games you'd worry about him in a World Cup semi-final or an Ashes test.

https://www.606v2.com/t68849-icc-cricket-world-cup-part-3

*New thread alert*

I'm confused . Are we still on this thread or on Part Three ?

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:James Vince caught at slip driving at the ball outside off stump?

I am shocked. Shocked I tell thee

+1. Is he David Gower in disguise????

robbo277 wrote:There goes Vince and the chance of a thrashing on the tipping contest.

England still red hot favourites, but if Vince can't make scores against Afghanistan and Sri Lanka in pool games you'd worry about him in a World Cup semi-final or an Ashes test.

Vince not getting near Ashes Test I think. And I'm hoping Roy will be back up before semis !

alfie wrote:I'm confused . Are we still on this thread or on Part Three ?

Part Three I think. This one just needs to be locked I guess.

PART THREE FOLKS