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

Gooseberry wrote:Wood back on as predicted. 

Top edge ctach. Make me captain 

Nah...some of us would have had him back earlier ...you just joined the bandwagon

Think I will leave it to Morgan anyway he doesn't do too badly...

robbo277 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Rashid will be feeling frosty towards Chris Woakes after that drop followed by two sixes from Russell.

Russell has hurt himself with that second six though. A real shame if he has to go off.

This partnership is the remaining threat for the Windies batting.

After the roasting Woakes gave Wood earlier too! 
Both bowlers havent had much luck at all in the cup so far, but managed to look dangerous at times. 


Russell looks like he can hardly walk ...not sure we will see him bowl. Fielding might be a stretch for him.

And gone.

If Russell can't bowl, they need 50 from Gabriel, Thomas, Cottrell, Brathwaite and Holder. Can anyone else chip in? Any part time spin?

Still a bowling job to do for England, but if England can ride the opening barrage then West Indies don't have loads of options.

With West Indies ,the main danger is falling to 60/5 early on...if , as you say , they avoid early damage , it should be a simple task. But one is always wary of a collapse...

Rashid back on again ? They are really giving him a lot of chances...

Not in favour of this ,myself. Should be going for the throat.

That should get him a hat trick

Bl...y H..l. Now Morgan is injured !

Did someone shoot an albatross ?

Nice to see Atherton highlighting Bairstow's outfielding in commentary. People often overlook boundary but Bairstow has turned himself into a specialist out there in one day cricket. Such an accurate arm and very quick over the ground.

Oh no Morgans hurt now...so woakes 5 plunket 6? Yikes.....

king_carlos wrote:Nice to see Atherton highlighting Bairstow's outfielding in commentary. People often overlook boundary but Bairstow has turned himself into a specialist out there in one day cricket. Such an accurate arm and very quick over the ground.

Its also been one of the justifications for having Buttler as the keeper in ODIs.

Ouch, Morgan does not look comfortable at all there. If Roy and Morgan are both down the order I'd just push the rest up one.

1.Bairstow
2.Root
3.Stokes
4.Buttler

Root plays the short ball well and bats excellently in partnership with Bairstow.

alfie wrote:Bl...y H..l.  Now Morgan is injured !

Did someone shoot an albatross ?

Yikes...and this really doesn't look good for Morgan, can barely walk. Concerned what this could mean for the future...only Vince who can come in really.

Holder and Russell at 6 and 7 are definitely at least a spot too high. There's the makings of a decent team in this Windies line-up, but the balance isn't quite right.

Problems for England though - Morgan's just pulled up with a hamstring injury too...

Is this caught behind ? Review ...

Yeah that's out !

Drs two , Dharmasena nil

Good innings Pooran but the innings is failing fast...

Gooseberry wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Nice to see Atherton highlighting Bairstow's outfielding in commentary. People often overlook boundary but Bairstow has turned himself into a specialist out there in one day cricket. Such an accurate arm and very quick over the ground.

Its also been one of the justifications for having Buttler as the keeper in ODIs.

Buttler's keeping has always been much better in white ball cricket with the ball moving less to be fair. It also gives England one of their best tactical brains and leaders in a position to see everything that's going on.

I'm somewhat of a keeping zealot (i.e. I still lament Michael Bates being lost to county cricket as a sporting tragedy) but I will admit that Buttler has improved his keeping no end in the shorter formats.

No salute Cottrell ... A bad miss.

Archer on a hat trick...

alfie wrote:No salute Cottrell ... A bad miss.

Archer on a hat trick...

More shocked Dharmasena got one right!

alfie wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Rashid will be feeling frosty towards Chris Woakes after that drop followed by two sixes from Russell.

Russell has hurt himself with that second six though. A real shame if he has to go off.

This partnership is the remaining threat for the Windies batting.

After the roasting Woakes gave Wood earlier too! 
Both bowlers havent had much luck at all in the cup so far, but managed to look dangerous at times. 


Russell looks like he can hardly walk ...not sure we will see him bowl. Fielding might be a stretch for him.

And gone.

If Russell can't bowl, they need 50 from Gabriel, Thomas, Cottrell, Brathwaite and Holder. Can anyone else chip in? Any part time spin?

Still a bowling job to do for England, but if England can ride the opening barrage then West Indies don't have loads of options.

With West Indies ,the main danger is falling to 60/5 early on...if , as you say , they avoid early damage , it should be a simple task.  But one is always wary of a collapse...

The good thing is it looks like we won't have to go too hard too early. Although we may be 0/2 already, depending on Roy and Morgan.

Well the rate these wickets are going down we dont need to worry too much about the batting depth but if Morgans injured badly enough to miss a game or more that is a serious THING.

Crikey, England falling apart with all these injuries. Wood, Rashid, Morgan, Roy, Buttler the last game.

Highly polished performance in the field, in spite of all that. Clear gulf in class between the two teams. England were always strong favourites in this one.

Can probably handle a game or two with one of the bats missing. Lose both would be a problem.
And of course if the injury were serious and long term...don't want to think about that...

Replay of the Pooran wicket ? Not again ...nah he's missed that by a mile.
Poor review. Got overexcited.

Both teams have now lost their reviews so Dharmasena is now safe to err as he likes

Mid-term (and let's not look too far ahead) we could bring Vince in for Roy and Moeen in for Morgan to bat at 6. So we could tide over for a couple of games like that.

The real issue is this game. 210-8 needs to become 220a.o. or WI will finish with their tails up a little bit and fancy it against a weakened batting line-up.

Apparently Thomas has never lasted more than 4 balls in a T20 or ODI. 8 already against England (for no runs!)

211-9 with 10 and 11 out there. Need to wrap this one up.

Gabrielle and Thomas...the worst batting pair in modern limited over cricket!

(expect them to add 100)

Sounds like another umpiring mistake that they cant review....Cotterel isnt going to be popular

Brathwaite unlucky there...another Dharmasena mistake !

Blame Cotrell for wasting their review. Though I see a suggestion now it might have kissed bat edge as well ?

Archer won't care. He found the right length to bowl to Brathwaite that over anyway.

211/9

Thomas couldnt score in a "gentlemans club" with 50 quid tucked in his underpants

All over. Poor lad...at least he lasted a while! 

Now a stand alone record holder for the most innings without scoring in ODIs

Wood ends it...all out 212

Wood deserved that. 3/18 .He's been the pick of the bowlers today

Should be a fairly straightforward chase. Need to just play sensibly.

I never count chickens though.

Yeah bat within themselves at let the west indies tire themsleves out bowling wides. They only need a shade over 4 an over so staying in matters most with Roy and Morgan ideally not being required. 

The West Indies have no reserve bowling if as assumed Russell who struggled to walk wont bowl. 


Woakes and Plunkett are hardly mugs with the bat, and england 11 would bat 8 or 9 for the west indies.

It may be worrying that our two best bowlers today were our fastest guys, considering the makeup of the West Indian attack.

England need big partnerships, not fast ones. 220 should be manageable, easy in fact, but given the rejig it won't be as straight-forward.

No wickets after 10 should be the target. Runs are incidental.

39 overs - 200-6. Next 5.4 overs yielded 12 runs and 4 wickets, 6 of the runs coming in one shot.

Shows that you still need some batting ability down the order

Wow! Only just joined to see the end of the Windies innings.

With 2 middle order wickets it obviously worked well but was there any particular rationale for Root bowling when he did? Thought the 5 frontline bowlers plus Stokes would have been all that was needed by England today. Interested in any thoughts there, cheers.

That KP documentary looks good

robbo277 wrote:It may be worrying that our two best bowlers today were our fastest guys, considering the makeup of the West Indian attack.

England need big partnerships, not fast ones. 220 should be manageable, easy in fact, but given the rejig it won't be as straight-forward.

No wickets after 10 should be the target. Runs are incidental.

Bit unfair on Woakes who was brilliant and unlucky not to be 2 fer bowling at the actual batsmen.
And Root whos spell changed the game.  

There is something in it for seamers, but West Indies will be head hunting and not getting the best of those conditions. Raw pace is a problem for anyone, but Englands top order can afford to play on merit and wont be easily intimidated unlike the tail enders we saw get blown away by pace.

guildfordbat wrote:Wow! Only just joined to see the end of the Windies innings.

With 2 middle order wickets it obviously worked well but was there any particular rationale for Root bowling when he did? Thought the 5 frontline bowlers plus Stokes would have been all that was needed by England today. Interested in any thoughts there, cheers.

Think Stokes was going for a few and there were two left handers at the crease. Possibly more of a hunch than anything.

king_carlos wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Nice to see Atherton highlighting Bairstow's outfielding in commentary. People often overlook boundary but Bairstow has turned himself into a specialist out there in one day cricket. Such an accurate arm and very quick over the ground.

Its also been one of the justifications for having Buttler as the keeper in ODIs.

Buttler's keeping has always been much better in white ball cricket with the ball moving less to be fair. It also gives England one of their best tactical brains and leaders in a position to see everything that's going on.

I'm somewhat of a keeping zealot (i.e. I still lament Michael Bates being lost to county cricket as a sporting tragedy) but I will admit that Buttler has improved his keeping no end in the shorter formats.

Hi Carlos - hope all is good. As regards you lamenting, you might want to have a look at the last 2 posts on the ''Surrey v Someset'' CC thread. Apologies for going wide of the wicket there, folks.

just a back spasm for morgan...he has to sit out the length of time he was off the field (38 minutes)

guildford, a few reasons I can think of.

Rashid was getting a bit of tap, and Stokes's last over had gone for a few. Two left-handers in, so the off-spinner a good idea. Hetmeyer and Pooran were building a good partnership (I think they'd put on about 70 at the time), and England were a little flat, so try something a bit different (I suspect the idea was that Hetmeyer might try something silly). Maybe the old-fashioned hunch.

A fine bowling performance from England, well marshalled by Morgan and then Buttler.

Injuries a concern. Morgan's a back spasm apparently, which hopefully shouldn't be too bad, while the talk of Roy batting down the order also suggests he's not too badly affected (again, hopefully).

Two absolutely key players, so if they're only going to miss a couple of games or so, England will keep them in the squad and I suspect soldier on with Vince and Moeen coming in.

king_carlos wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Nice to see Atherton highlighting Bairstow's outfielding in commentary. People often overlook boundary but Bairstow has turned himself into a specialist out there in one day cricket. Such an accurate arm and very quick over the ground.

Its also been one of the justifications for having Buttler as the keeper in ODIs.

Buttler's keeping has always been much better in white ball cricket with the ball moving less to be fair. It also gives England one of their best tactical brains and leaders in a position to see everything that's going on.

I'm somewhat of a keeping zealot (i.e. I still lament Michael Bates being lost to county cricket as a sporting tragedy) but I will admit that Buttler has improved his keeping no end in the shorter formats.

Don't we all, carlos, don't we all.

Gooseberry wrote:

robbo277 wrote:It may be worrying that our two best bowlers today were our fastest guys, considering the makeup of the West Indian attack.

England need big partnerships, not fast ones. 220 should be manageable, easy in fact, but given the rejig it won't be as straight-forward.

No wickets after 10 should be the target. Runs are incidental.

Bit unfair on Woakes who was brilliant and unlucky not to be 2 fer bowling at the actual batsmen.
And Root whos spell changed the game.  

There is something in it for seamers, but West Indies will be head hunting and not getting the best of those conditions. Raw pace is a problem for anyone, but Englands top order can afford to play on merit and wont be easily intimidated unlike the tail enders we saw get blown away by pace.

Possibly. But in terms of wickets, our express pace bowlers took 6-48 off 15.4. Yes, those wickets are propped up by a few tail-enders, but both bowled well first up as well.

robbo277 wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Wow! Only just joined to see the end of the Windies innings.

With 2 middle order wickets it obviously worked well but was there any particular rationale for Root bowling when he did? Thought the 5 frontline bowlers plus Stokes would have been all that was needed by England today. Interested in any thoughts there, cheers.

Think Stokes was going for a few and there were two left handers at the crease. Possibly more of a hunch than anything.

Thanks, Robbo. Still a bit surprised as Stokes was really the sixth bowler and didn't need to have his allocation made up. Anyway, always handy to throw a (partial) surprise at your opponents from time to time. As I said, it certainly worked.

robbo277 wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Wow! Only just joined to see the end of the Windies innings.

With 2 middle order wickets it obviously worked well but was there any particular rationale for Root bowling when he did? Thought the 5 frontline bowlers plus Stokes would have been all that was needed by England today. Interested in any thoughts there, cheers.

Think Stokes was going for a few and there were two left handers at the crease. Possibly more of a hunch than anything.

Stokes and Rashid were getting salughtered. They just followed the standard England script of bringing on an offie to partner Rashid. It worked a dream. 
Not sure so much a hunch as more following the established plan and trusting Root. 
It does lay a serious question about Moeens place when his batting has been more of a hindrance than a help as hes scratched around wasting balls down the order. Leaving him out has proven to be the right call.

robbo277 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

robbo277 wrote:It may be worrying that our two best bowlers today were our fastest guys, considering the makeup of the West Indian attack.

England need big partnerships, not fast ones. 220 should be manageable, easy in fact, but given the rejig it won't be as straight-forward.

No wickets after 10 should be the target. Runs are incidental.

Bit unfair on Woakes who was brilliant and unlucky not to be 2 fer bowling at the actual batsmen.
And Root whos spell changed the game.  

There is something in it for seamers, but West Indies will be head hunting and not getting the best of those conditions. Raw pace is a problem for anyone, but Englands top order can afford to play on merit and wont be easily intimidated unlike the tail enders we saw get blown away by pace.

Possibly. But in terms of wickets, our express pace bowlers took 6-48 off 15.4. Yes, those wickets are propped up by a few tail-enders, but both bowled well first up as well.

Yeah Im not disputing that, just its wrong to think this was a pure pacemans pitch. Stokes bowled as fast as weve seen him (topping 90 more than once) but wasnt effective. Woakes was more effective than Archer when they bowled in tandem, and Gayle showed you can score off the quicks if youre good. 
Rashid shouldve had 2 wickets and Woakes another that were taken by the quicks later. 
Really it was an all round bolwing performance from a balanced attack. The West Indies dont have that, they have gone all out with raw pace. Theres not even a part time spinner or honest county medium pacer. With Russsel borked that means they all have 10 overs, and a fair chance one will have a bad day and or an injury. That alone should make England pretty comfortable. They can duck the short stuff and live off wides and leg byes if they want.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:guildford, a few reasons I can think of.

Rashid was getting a bit of tap, and Stokes's last over had gone for a few. Two left-handers in, so the off-spinner a good idea. Hetmeyer and Pooran were building a good partnership (I think they'd put on about 70 at the time), and England were a little flat, so try something a bit different (I suspect the idea was that Hetmeyer might try something silly). Maybe the old-fashioned hunch.

A fine bowling performance from England, well marshalled by Morgan and then Buttler.

Injuries a concern. Morgan's a back spasm apparently, which hopefully shouldn't be too bad, while the talk of Roy batting down the order also suggests he's not too badly affected (again, hopefully).

Two absolutely key players, so if they're only going to miss a couple of games or so, England will keep them in the squad and I suspect soldier on with Vince and Moeen coming in.

Thanks as well, MfC. Rashid getting tap as well as Stokes adds to the explanation. Hunch probably came into it too as Robbo also said. Nothing wrong with going with a hunch, just need not to overdo them.

I was also going to ask about Morgan and Roy. Roy retired hurt in a Surrey RL 50 earlier this season and came back late on to tonk a few. He never wants to sit anything out and is always very keen to be involved. I would expect him to insist on batting some time today if needed at all.

Not sure how anyone can fret about 213 in this day and age. An absolute cruise.

The last chance, I think, of any team other than the established four getting into the semis lies with Pakistan on Sunday. They simply must beat India, otherwise I think the group phase is over as a meaningful contest.

Gooseberry wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

robbo277 wrote:It may be worrying that our two best bowlers today were our fastest guys, considering the makeup of the West Indian attack.

England need big partnerships, not fast ones. 220 should be manageable, easy in fact, but given the rejig it won't be as straight-forward.

No wickets after 10 should be the target. Runs are incidental.

Bit unfair on Woakes who was brilliant and unlucky not to be 2 fer bowling at the actual batsmen.
And Root whos spell changed the game.  

There is something in it for seamers, but West Indies will be head hunting and not getting the best of those conditions. Raw pace is a problem for anyone, but Englands top order can afford to play on merit and wont be easily intimidated unlike the tail enders we saw get blown away by pace.

Possibly. But in terms of wickets, our express pace bowlers took 6-48 off 15.4. Yes, those wickets are propped up by a few tail-enders, but both bowled well first up as well.

Yeah Im not disputing that, just its wrong to think this was a pure pacemans pitch. Stokes bowled as fast as weve seen him (topping 90 more than once) but wasnt effective. Woakes was more effective than Archer when they bowled in tandem, and Gayle showed you can score off the quicks if youre good. 
Rashid shouldve had 2 wickets and Woakes another that were taken by the quicks later. 
Really it was an all round bolwing performance from a balanced attack. The West Indies dont have that, they have gone all out with raw pace. Theres not even a part time spinner or honest county medium pacer. With Russsel borked that means they all have 10 overs, and a fair chance one will have a bad day and or an injury. That alone should make England pretty comfortable. They can duck the short stuff and live off wides and leg byes if they want.

Fair enough. West Indies are definitely lacking variety, which is why it's so important for the openers (and Root will be one of them) to see off the new balls, see of the barrage and give the middle order some confidence that it can be done. If the openers pick up one each and then the change bowlers come steaming in as well, it could get ugly quickly.

guildfordbat wrote:Wow! Only just joined to see the end of the Windies innings.

With 2 middle order wickets it obviously worked well but was there any particular rationale for Root bowling when he did? Thought the 5 frontline bowlers plus Stokes would have been all that was needed by England today. Interested in any thoughts there, cheers.

In truth at the the time Root came on Rashid wasn't going too well...not rubbish ; but neither threatening nor economical. As it happened Rashid improved when paired with Root (as Goose highlighted above ) so rather than replacing him the two bowled together.
Can be argued the quicks (who all bowled pretty well) might have done the job anyway.  But I guess the variety thing paid off today.

Edit : ha ...I didn't look , see now everyone has already answered

Should be said, Root opening is not too unsurprising - he was in third ball of the whole world cup after all!

alfie wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Wow! Only just joined to see the end of the Windies innings.

With 2 middle order wickets it obviously worked well but was there any particular rationale for Root bowling when he did? Thought the 5 frontline bowlers plus Stokes would have been all that was needed by England today. Interested in any thoughts there, cheers.

In truth at the the time Root came on Rashid wasn't going too well...not rubbish ; but neither threatening nor economical. As it happened Rashid improved when paired with Root (as Goose highlighted above ) so rather than replacing him the two bowled together.
Can be argued the quicks (who all bowled pretty well) might have done the job anyway.  But I guess the variety thing paid off today.

Edit : ha ...I didn't look , see now everyone has already answered

Thats fine, at least you read the post you were responding to 



Couple of near chances given, its certainly not comfortable so far.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Should be said, Root opening is not too unsurprising - he was in third ball of the whole world cup after all!

I think Root opening is probably fine in a 213 chase. We don't need to take advantage of the power play or be up to 100 by 15 overs. He can just get in and bat through with Bairstow, Stokes and Buttler at the other end. Even a 70 from 90 for Root and we'll probably win this one.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Should be said, Root opening is not too unsurprising - he was in third ball of the whole world cup after all!

True. I am hearing my suggested opener - your man Woakes - is in line to bat high up the order ?

Hopefully these two can get a good start. But there is some risk in Stokes Buttler 3 and 4 with two crocks and the bowlers all that's left to follow...