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

Criticised Hope for this the other day, and now it's Amla's turn. Took 83 balls for his 55 and goes without converting to a big score. Even in a low-scoring game (as this would have to be for SA to win), you'd want him to bat a bit further, get to 80 from 100 and put a bit more of a platform down.

Miller is South Africa's only real hope now. Get somewhere near 180-200 in the 40th and hope he can come in and play a game-changing knock.

Get to atleast 170 in 40 overs without losing a wicket and then go for broke

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

robbo277 wrote:

msp83 wrote:Nearly half way into their innings, South Africa aren't even able to score at 4 an over. The pitch is demanding and need batsmanship beyond slogging abilities, but the South African batsmen have made it look laborious and difficult out there.

Back when he was playing KP used to talk about 100 after 15 overs. I still see that as a bit of a benchmark when I'm checking in on England games I can't watch. A glance at the score, if we're 100 after 15 then a score north of 350 is on the cards, especially if we don't have a few down.

To only cross 100 in the 26th over isn't very smart from South Africa. The pitch may not be flat and you might say par would be 280-300, but that will require them to go at nearly 8s from here. It's a long way out to bat at that type of rate up on a pitch like this. Especially with New Zealand's primary pacers to come back on.

Yeah there's being cautious, and then there's plodding, and SA are plodding. The very least international batsmen should do is be able to rotate strike and put some intensity in running between the wickets, SA haven't even looked like doing that. Poor imo

Look at how Root played yesterday - he got to 50 in 54 balls with only 2 4s, and ended up with 88 in 82 balls with iirc 4 4s and a 6. I haven't checked but I bet he had about 20% dot balls in his innings. Just nudge the ball into gaps and take a single, then put away the bad ball and you can go at 5 or 6 an over with little fuss.

Its an innings that's not really gone anywhere.

I understand SA's approach to a degree. Their batsmen are short of form and confidence, the pitch isn't easy to bat on (though I'm not sure it's as hard as they're making it look), and NZ have a strong bowling attack. So they're probably thinking of getting to some sort of score to give their bowlers a chance. Thing is, even getting to 240 from here will require some good batting, and anything less than that I'm nor sure will be competitive.

As Olly said, there's caution and there's plodding, and this is more the latter than the former.

South Africa not being helped by set batsmen not scoring big. After Amla and Faf, Markram too failed to go big. At 152-4, a wicket will let NZ restrict them.

I just did a little research....  

City - annual rainfall in mm - (inches) - No. rainy days/year

Dubai 94 (3.7) 25
Kimberley 435 (17.1) 50
Cape Town 505 (19.9) 68
Adelaide 546 (21.5) 83
London 557 (21.9) 109
Hobart 569 (22.4) 91
Canberra 597 (23.5) 69
Melbourne 603 (23.7) 93
Bridgetown 617 (24.3) 133
Christchurch 618 (24.3) 84
Port Elizabeth 630 (24.8) 69
Birmingham 680 (26.8) 125
Johannesburg 705 (27.8) 91
Perth 725 (28.5) 82
Dunedin 726 (28.6) 114
Queenstown 741 (29.2) 97
Basseterre 772 (30.4) 139
Napier 776 (30.6) 88
New Delhi 790 (31.1) 52
Hyderabad 803 (31.6) 64
Kingston 812 (32.0) 93
Manchester 829 (32.6) 143
Bangalore 905 (35.6) 76
Gros Islet 998 (39.3) 215
Durban 1010 (39.8) 89
Chandigarh 1063 (41.9) 60
Hamilton 1108 (43.6) 125
Cardiff 1152 (45.4) 149
Brisbane 1158 (45.6) 89
Auckland 1211 (47.7) 136
Wellington 1215 (47.9) 122
Sydney 1223 (48.1) 98
Wollongong 1278 (50.3) 100 (for Flipper)
Port of Spain 1407 (55.4) 166
Chennai 1541 (60.7) 76
Kolkata 1800 (70.9) 102
Darwin 1811 (71.3) 96
Cairns 1986 (78.2) 119
Colombo 2348 (92.4) 188
Mumbai 2373 (93.4) 77
Cherrapungi 11777 (463.7) 170 (foothills of the Himalayas... obviously not suited for World Cups)

Make of it as you wish...

Even places with a low number of rainy days can have wet ones. Similarly, places with very high rainfall can have 'dry seasons'.

Pal Joey wrote:I just did a little research....  

City - annual rainfall in mm - (inches) - No. rainy days/year

Dubai 94 (3.7) 25
Kimberley 435 (17.1) 50
Cape Town 505 (19.9) 68
Adelaide 546 (21.5) 83
London 557 (21.9) 109
Hobart 569 (22.4) 91
Canberra 597 (23.5) 69
Melbourne 603 (23.7) 93
Bridgetown 617 (24.3) 133
Christchurch 618 (24.3) 84
Port Elizabeth 630 (24.8) 69
Birmingham 680 (26.8) 125
Johannesburg 705 (27.8) 91
Perth 725 (28.5) 82
Dunedin 726 (28.6) 114
Queenstown 741 (29.2) 97
Basseterre 772 (30.4) 139
Napier 776 (30.6) 88
New Delhi 790 (31.1) 52
Hyderabad 803 (31.6) 64
Kingston 812 (32.0) 93
Manchester 829 (32.6) 143
Bangalore 905 (35.6) 76
Gros Islet 998 (39.3) 215
Durban 1010 (39.8) 89
Chandigarh 1063 (41.9) 60
Hamilton 1108 (43.6) 125
Cardiff 1152 (45.4) 149
Brisbane 1158 (45.6) 89
Auckland 1211 (47.7) 136
Wellington 1215 (47.9) 122
Sydney 1223 (48.1) 98
Wollongong 1278 (50.3) 100 (for Flipper)
Port of Spain 1407 (55.4) 166
Chennai 1541 (60.7) 76
Kolkata 1800 (70.9) 102
Darwin 1811 (71.3) 96
Cairns 1986 (78.2) 119
Colombo 2348 (92.4) 188
Cherrapungi 11777 (463.7) 170 (foothills of the Himalayas... obviously not suited for World Cups)

Make of it as you wish...

Even places with a low number of rainy days can have wet ones. Similarly, places with very high rainfall can have 'dry seasons'.

I know the SA innings hasn't exactly been riveting, but not sure it was so boring this was a better alternative PJ!

in between all the struggles, this fellow van der dussen seems to be a fine prospect for SA.

More content to avoid getting thrashed than try to win. Sad.

Just added Mumbai FYI, Olly.

All ok... I'm right in front of the TV. Feel like I'm at the game.

First 6 and 10 off the over in over 42 - best of the innings so far.

Just emphasises how plodding the innings has been to date.

I like this one:
Himal Dangal: South Africa reach 148, but 144 balls slower than Eoin Morgan.

In Amla's case, and really Makram too it seems, they just aren't capable of batting at close to run a ball rate it seems. But for the whole team to just plod at 1990s rates is depressing. Theyve tried to pack the batting depth with the all rounders but played like theyd be all out at 6 down.

Goose - you're being harsh

On the 1990s

Miller with a few lusty blows, and 250 looking back on. Gone now though, slashing a wide bouncer to third man, Ferguson with another wicket.

SA need plenty from these last four overs here you feel.

This is boring. Even that dynamic top three of Cook, Bell and Trott wouldn't be happy with this effort

Miller has gone downhill fast since 2015... like the SA team as a whole. The psychological damage from that semi final must have been huge. Must still haunt them. (watched the highlights again a few hours ago... the look on ABdV's face as that game slipped away... it was a bit sad really)

NZ on the other hand (who also lost a couple of good/great players since 2015) have replaced them well and maintained their good form.
They must feel they really have the wood on SA these days.

What on earth is Phehlukwayo doing? Should surely be giving Van der Dussen - who's gone to a good fifty - the strike rather than swinging himself off his feet and missing everything. And now he mis-hits a rank full toss straight to mid-off. End of a dreadful innings. Three wickets for Ferguson now.

Gooseberry wrote:In Amla's case, and really Makram too it seems, they just aren't capable of batting at close to run a ball rate it seems. But for the whole team to just plod at 1990s rates is depressing. Theyve tried to pack the batting depth with the all rounders but played like theyd be all out at 6 down.

Was that Cook's issue? Maybe I'm forgetting as he hasn't played in a while. But he was very capable of hitting a bad ball for 4, wasn't busy enough in between. He also didn't have the range of shots to just get in and tee off like some others might.

Nice innings from Van der Dussen, who looks like a very decent player, just about lifts SA past the 240 mark as he ends with a 6 and a 4 to somewhat spoil Ferguson's figures.

That feels a bit below par to me, I reckon 260-270 would have put them in the game, but this is quite a bit below that. SA will need Rabada and Ngidi (presumably) to make inroads up front.

A good effort right at the end, but scoring under 5 per over simply isn't good enough in 2019. It might be a slow wicket, but bowlers simply can't build scoreboard pressure and defend a meagre 241.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Nice innings from Van der Dussen, who looks like a very decent player, just about lifts SA past the 240 mark as he ends with a 6 and a 4 to somewhat spoil Ferguson's figures.

That feels a bit below par to me, I reckon 260-270 would have put them in the game, but this is quite a bit below that. SA will need Rabada and Ngidi (presumably) to make inroads up front.

They definitely will need too, as messers Guptill and Munro certainly won't hang about!

Pal Joey wrote:Miller has gone downhill fast since 2015... like the SA team as a whole. The psychological damage from that semi final must have been huge. Must still haunt them. (watched the highlights again a few hours ago... the look on ABdV's face as that game slipped away... it was a bit sad really)

NZ on the other hand (who also lost a couple of good/great players since 2015) have replaced them well and maintained their good form.
They must feel they really have the wood on SA these days.

SA have lost good players too which has affected them further. ABDV is not easily replaced in this format. Steyn injured, Morkel retired, Philander hasnt played an ODI since 2015 and is old. Amla and Tahir have faded with age. The players who have come in really arent very good , Makram disappointingly so given his impact in tests. 
2015 may have contributed to AB's issues but the side as a whole has suffered from a lack of quality coming through. These guys arent burnt by 2015, they are just rubbish.

Gooseberry wrote:

Pal Joey wrote:Miller has gone downhill fast since 2015... like the SA team as a whole. The psychological damage from that semi final must have been huge. Must still haunt them. (watched the highlights again a few hours ago... the look on ABdV's face as that game slipped away... it was a bit sad really)

NZ on the other hand (who also lost a couple of good/great players since 2015) have replaced them well and maintained their good form.
They must feel they really have the wood on SA these days.

SA have lost good players too which has affected them further. ABDV is not easily replaced in this format. Steyn injured, Morkel retired, Philander hasnt played an ODI since 2015 and is old. Amla and Tahir have faded with age. The players who have come in really arent very good , Makram disappointingly so given his impact in tests. 
2015 may have contributed to AB's issues but the side as a whole has suffered from a lack of quality coming through. These guys arent burnt by 2015, they are just rubbish.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Huge retirements, injuries, form slumps, replacements not coming to fruition... but also definitely burnt by 2015 and some of the ones before that. It's like some sort of curse.

To get so close to a few finals when they had their all time greats and then come away with nothing. That burns. I can assure you.
Unlike Australia - who've basically only failed twice in World Cups since the modern era began... say post '92.

Having said all that.. NZ still have to see off this opening spell. Doesn't look so easy with Rabada and Ngidi keeping things tight.

Until that last ball.

Feels like dealing in cliches but Aus do seem to have a more relentless drive than others. Thryvvhad some rough moments and looked good but bounce back quickly. Last year try looked awful but have turned up switched on. They responded to losing the ashes by ruining England in the reverse fixture.
The immortals side were equally relentless and never cruised. Typically English sports teams tend to win something then dine out on it. There just isnt the fire to keep going, perhaps also why English cricketers tend to retire young. SAs big names arent really delivering here either, it does seem like they've

Gift of a wicket for SA with Guptil hitting his own wicket.

Mishit hook, slightly off balance and then as he set off to run, he lost his footing and his foot slid back into the stumps

You’ll do well to see two softer dismissals than those two

Suddenly NZ in big trouble. A couple of soft/fortunate dismissals, but that's a fine delivery from Morris to get rid of Latham.

A lot resting on Williamson's shoulders now.

Wow, three wickets for nine runs. Guptill's departure was quite extraordinary.

Puts the game back in interesting territory. But the Kiwis bat fairly deep and the RRR isn't a big issue, so I'd still back them for now, especially while Williamson remains.

Who knew Martin Guptill standing on his stumps would be the thing that kept the group stages interesting

As I was saying SA are dangerous when cornered and not out of this yet *cough*

Well we have a close game. Neesham out just as he was guiding his side to safety.

99 needed from 97 with five wickets left. Doesn't look like de Grandhomme wants to hang around.

Well Miller's missed three half-chances in the field, and New Zealand are relieved to see Tahir off without losing a wicket.

My, my, it appears Williamson nicked one behind, but South Africa didn't properly appeal or review.

Just been reading that morgans excuse for hitting all the sixes was that he was worried running would aggravate his back. Ridiculous.

59 from 10 with 5 wickets should be a win for NZ but it's not over

It's been a funny innings at times from NZ TBH. At times when they've gotten on top it's almost like they've been hesitant to really put the foot down. I wonder if partly they've talked themselves into thinking the pitch is harder than it actually is. The four first overs of the last ten were all a bit weird, as was Williamson happy to pat full tosses from Tahir to long-on for a single without even looking for the gap.

They should still win mind, with now 35 needed off 32, but IMO they've made slightly heavier work of it than perhaps they could have.

Guess they are also concerned about their tail. And what I put on the tipping competition

More awful South African fielding. New Zealand may have gifted their opposition a chance with cheap wickets, but the opposition have declined to take it.

8 needed off the final over. No drama, Williamson launches one into the stand to effectively win the game and bring up his century. Fantastic innings to see his side home. Excellent effort by de Grandhomme, too, who injected much-needed tempo into the innings.

The gap between the top four and the rest grows.

Williamson in the end finding the boundaries when he needed them, and a very well deserved century to him. I still don't think they should have let it get to 12 off 7 mind, but job done in the end.

SA confirmed as all but out, barring an absolute freak run of results.

Bangladesh vs Australia tomorrow the last chance of any excitement in the group stage, at least in terms of the semi-finalists.

Fine innings from Kane Williamson. He had his moments of fortune, but it was a knock under pressure, and against a pretty decent bowling lineup. And in the end, he looked as cool as MS Dhoni! A good , interesting game. Tahir bowled well but New Zealand did well to deny him a wicket, and that played a big role in them getting over the line.
South Africa look a lost side. They need to do some serious restructuring... Amla, Duminy, and their best spinner at 40 Imran Tahir will have to go, and even Faf should at least be relieved of the captaincy. David Miller is a shadow of the player he once was and they need to find a new finisher.
Who are the prospects? Do they have another Graeme Smith in the making?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Williamson in the end finding the boundaries when he needed them, and a very well deserved century to him. I still don't think they should have let it get to 12 off 7 mind, but job done in the end.

SA confirmed as all but out, barring an absolute freak run of results.

Bangladesh vs Australia tomorrow the last chance of any excitement in the group stage, at least in terms of the semi-finalists.

Yeah I thought NZ were going to have the royalist of royal c0ck ups there - shouldn't ever have really let it get that close, but ultimately got home relatively comfortably, considering half their wickets were self inflicted nonsense too.

Who are the upcoming South African batting talents? Remember seeing Kaya Zondo in the India series, he had a half-decent knock or 2 but didn't look all that convincing. The other young talent on show was Markram, while he has done really well in test cricket and despite a solid limited overs domestic record, he hasn't got himself going at ODI level. A player who looked very promising was Heinrich Klaasen. He seems to have gone down the pecking order for some reason. Think they certainly should give him a decent run after the WC...

>>a good old-fashioned game of limited over cricket...that confirmed 270 runs on board allows a team with decent bowling attack to compete on pitches that have a shade of some support to bowlers.

in 1990s this total used to be 250

>>SA had only 240 & were in the game and there may be many iffs and buts.....but the better team won.

Or should we say the team that messed up less won....or was it just that Kane Williamson's inning was vastly superior to Van Der Drussen ad that was the difference?

SA has in my view leadership issues....FAF does not come across as a cut-throat-dying-to-win captain....but rather casual...and there may be internal team spirit issues also

>>NZ is one game away from assured semi-final berth....but twice in a row stuttered in sub-250 chase....and were lucky to collect a point vs India.
Neesham & Gradhomme do not exude solidity...inspite of their runs

They have to win a game vs Pak, Aus or Eng
and if Pak beat SA, then the Pak-NZ game would be a BIG one.

KP_fan wrote:>>a good old-fashioned game of limited over cricket...that confirmed 270 runs on board allows a team with decent bowling attack to compete on pitches that have a shade of some support to bowlers.

in 1990s this total used to be 250

>>SA had only 240 & were in the game and there may be many iffs and buts.....but the better team won.

Or should we say the team that messed up less won....or was it just that Kane Williamson's inning  was vastly superior to Van Der Drussen ad that was the difference?

SA has in my view leadership issues....FAF does not come across as a cut-throat-dying-to-win captain....but rather casual...and there may be internal team spirit issues also

>>NZ is one game away from assured semi-final berth....but twice in a row stuttered in sub-250 chase....and were lucky to collect a point vs India.
Neesham & Gradhomme do not exude solidity...inspite of their runs

They have to win a game vs Pak, Aus or Eng
and if Pak beat SA, then the Pak-NZ game would be a BIG one.

Are you still clinging to the belief that SA are as good a side as NZ (or as you had it previously a considerably better one?
Im not even convinced Steyn injury argument anymore, hes only played 10 games for them since 2016 and not against any decent opposition. The wins they have had and ranking theyve "earnt" wasnt down to him, but was down to mugging off team like Aus, Stri Lanka and Pakistan when they were over ranked.

I do agree to some extent that they were lucky with the point against India, but frankly it suited both teams. Do I think NZ are as good as India? Nope, but they are on a par with Australia and capable of beating England and India "on their day". Keep on writing them off as lucky, but its pretty clear once you delve into their record over the recent past and this world cup that they are a solid professional all round unit. This was a stuttering performance but aside from that brief crazy period they never looked out of second gear and cruised gently to the win without any fireworks. Dont underestimate their batting, its maybe one superstar short but they are capable of big totals, following your own previously postulated theory it seemed like they got themselves in a pickle here chasing a low score and not wanting to mess it up...its a cliche but also sometimes a truism. The professionalism and nerve of Williamson showed at the end, a mature batting performance to see it through.
NZ are streets ahead of SA, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Maybe not so uch in raw ability but certainly calmness, confidence, morale and professionalism. Thats maybe more than anything whats setting the top 4 apart, they trust that they are better and can win by careful play and power hitting as needed, or by trusting their bowlers to take wickets and limit other teams.

I hate to break it to you but NZ also have a game against the West Indies. They are currently 3 wins and massive NRR ahead of Pakistan. Even if Pakistan will all their remaining fixtures ( which they wont) if NZ beat the West Indies (which they probably will) they probably would still go through. Even the Aus and India games are winnable for them.
Pakistan do have pretty easy fixtures aside form NZ left but could easily lose to SA and Bangladesh. Realistically they need to win all 4 of these, and sure yes they shocked England but that would be a hell of a thing if they did win all those games. And on top of that for NZ to lose to the West Indies and not get a shock themselves? Nope.

Gooseberry wrote:

KP_fan wrote:>>a good old-fashioned game of limited over cricket...that confirmed 270 runs on board allows a team with decent bowling attack to compete on pitches that have a shade of some support to bowlers.

in 1990s this total used to be 250

>>SA had only 240 & were in the game and there may be many iffs and buts.....but the better team won.

Or should we say the team that messed up less won....or was it just that Kane Williamson's inning  was vastly superior to Van Der Drussen ad that was the difference?

SA has in my view leadership issues....FAF does not come across as a cut-throat-dying-to-win captain....but rather casual...and there may be internal team spirit issues also

>>NZ is one game away from assured semi-final berth....but twice in a row stuttered in sub-250 chase....and were lucky to collect a point vs India.
Neesham & Gradhomme do not exude solidity...inspite of their runs

They have to win a game vs Pak, Aus or Eng
and if Pak beat SA, then the Pak-NZ game would be a BIG one.

Are you still clinging to the belief that SA are as good a side as NZ (or as you had it previously a considerably better one?
Im not even convinced Steyn injury argument anymore, hes only played 10 games for them since 2016 and not against any decent opposition. The wins they have had and ranking theyve "earnt" wasnt down to him, but was down to mugging off team like Aus, Stri Lanka and Pakistan when they were over ranked.

I do agree to some extent that they were lucky with the point against India, but frankly it suited both teams. Do I think NZ are as good as India? Nope, but they are on a par with Australia and capable of beating England and India "on their day". Keep on writing them off as lucky, but its pretty clear once you delve into their record over the recent past and this world cup that they are a solid professional all round unit. This was a stuttering performance but aside from that brief crazy period they never looked out of second gear and cruised gently to the win without any fireworks. Dont underestimate their batting, its maybe one superstar short but they are capable of big totals, following your own previously postulated theory it seemed like they got themselves in a pickle here chasing a low score and not wanting to mess it up...its a cliche but also sometimes a truism. The professionalism and nerve of Williamson showed at the end, a mature batting performance to see it through.
NZ are streets ahead of SA, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Maybe not so uch in raw ability but certainly calmness, confidence, morale and professionalism. Thats maybe more than anything whats setting the top 4 apart, they trust that they are better and can win by careful play and power hitting as needed, or by trusting their bowlers to take wickets and limit other teams.

I hate to break it to you but NZ also have a game against the West Indies. They are currently 3 wins and massive NRR ahead of Pakistan. Even if Pakistan will all their remaining fixtures ( which they wont) if NZ beat the West Indies (which they probably will) they probably would still go through. Even the Aus and India games are winnable for them.
Pakistan do have pretty easy fixtures aside form NZ left but could easily lose to SA and Bangladesh. Realistically they need to win all 4 of these, and sure yes they shocked England but that would be a hell of a thing if they did win all those games. And on top of that for NZ to lose to the West Indies and not get a shock themselves? Nope.

You forgot England too.
That is also a winnable match for NZ... just as much as the Australia and India matches. On any day (not just "on their day") as you say above.
You mention it once but then conveniently seem to overlook it in the part I've highlighted in bold.

Pal Joey wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

KP_fan wrote:>>a good old-fashioned game of limited over cricket...that confirmed 270 runs on board allows a team with decent bowling attack to compete on pitches that have a shade of some support to bowlers.

in 1990s this total used to be 250

>>SA had only 240 & were in the game and there may be many iffs and buts.....but the better team won.

Or should we say the team that messed up less won....or was it just that Kane Williamson's inning  was vastly superior to Van Der Drussen ad that was the difference?

SA has in my view leadership issues....FAF does not come across as a cut-throat-dying-to-win captain....but rather casual...and there may be internal team spirit issues also

>>NZ is one game away from assured semi-final berth....but twice in a row stuttered in sub-250 chase....and were lucky to collect a point vs India.
Neesham & Gradhomme do not exude solidity...inspite of their runs

They have to win a game vs Pak, Aus or Eng
and if Pak beat SA, then the Pak-NZ game would be a BIG one.

Are you still clinging to the belief that SA are as good a side as NZ (or as you had it previously a considerably better one?
Im not even convinced Steyn injury argument anymore, hes only played 10 games for them since 2016 and not against any decent opposition. The wins they have had and ranking theyve "earnt" wasnt down to him, but was down to mugging off team like Aus, Stri Lanka and Pakistan when they were over ranked.

I do agree to some extent that they were lucky with the point against India, but frankly it suited both teams. Do I think NZ are as good as India? Nope, but they are on a par with Australia and capable of beating England and India "on their day". Keep on writing them off as lucky, but its pretty clear once you delve into their record over the recent past and this world cup that they are a solid professional all round unit. This was a stuttering performance but aside from that brief crazy period they never looked out of second gear and cruised gently to the win without any fireworks. Dont underestimate their batting, its maybe one superstar short but they are capable of big totals, following your own previously postulated theory it seemed like they got themselves in a pickle here chasing a low score and not wanting to mess it up...its a cliche but also sometimes a truism. The professionalism and nerve of Williamson showed at the end, a mature batting performance to see it through.
NZ are streets ahead of SA, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Maybe not so uch in raw ability but certainly calmness, confidence, morale and professionalism. Thats maybe more than anything whats setting the top 4 apart, they trust that they are better and can win by careful play and power hitting as needed, or by trusting their bowlers to take wickets and limit other teams.

I hate to break it to you but NZ also have a game against the West Indies. They are currently 3 wins and massive NRR ahead of Pakistan. Even if Pakistan will all their remaining fixtures ( which they wont) if NZ beat the West Indies (which they probably will) they probably would still go through. Even the Aus and India games are winnable for them.
Pakistan do have pretty easy fixtures aside from NZ left but could easily lose to SA and Bangladesh. Realistically they need to win all 4 of these, and sure yes they shocked England but that would be a hell of a thing if they did win all those games. And on top of that for NZ to lose to the West Indies and not get a shock themselves? Nope.

You forgot England too.
That is also a winnable match for NZ... just as much as the Australia and India matches. On any day (not just "on their day") as you say above.
You mention it once but then conveniently seem to overlook it in the part I've highlighted in bold.

Whoops yes I meant England not India! Not so much conveniently ignoring and just a straight up mistake, they dodged India.

The point doesnt change at all, NZ have 6 more points and a vastly superior NRR. They need to only win 1 from 4 games and Pakistan to win all theirs with some good margins to be overtaken.  
Even if you bought the theory that Pakistan are as good as New Zealand (which is daft) the chances of that happening are low.

New Zealand have the quality to beat most of the teams most of the time, and the very top teams some of the time. The probably are short of some batting fireworks, especially with Guptill and Taylor seemingly out of form, and have an attack that is very seam led. In fact their team is very similar to Australia, with the main difference currently being that their cross Tasman rivals have an opener in form.

I think that NZ entered this tournament ranked 3rd in the World. That certainly looks fair.

Agreed LT. They also seem quite calm and cohesive as a team, maybe not the most talented individuals but they are producing winning cricket consistently.

Today might be some disruption around lunch time from yet more weather. Quite incredible really.
Aus should be favourites but Bangladesh are another side that would fancy a top 6 spot. It's not beyond them to win, although the short boundaries will be in danger from the likes of Maxwell and Warner if he finds his confidence. Their part time spinners could easily get brutalised.
Aus still have some selection issues like where to put kwhaja and how to have 50 overs of adult bowling.
Bangladesh are the side closest to the top 4, and purely looking at the table breathing down Indias necks only points behind. They have that game to come too so if you follow the model of ignoring the improbabilities of it actually happening you could get excited about them a chance to crash the party if they win all their games by decent margins (and India or Aus loose another game or the top 2 loose 2 games somehow).
They will beat Afghanistan. They have a chance on this one. Beating India would be a big shock. I have them on a par with Pakistan. Make it about a 1 in 20 chance of happening...ie it wont.
But hey pretence of excitement!

It's quite true that NZ is the  favorite for a semifinal spot & quite sad with teams having played 4 to 5 games only ( i.e half way mark)....the tournament is not open to realistic upsets.
Pak & BD have outside chance requiring Pak to win all and BD to win all but one game....and am not sure even 11 points are sufficient right now.

The only upset is that SA is not even in the "outside chance" group

The sad reality emerging is that Lanka, Pak & WI have declined to the second tier.....and BD hasn't quite made it to the first tier....although they are clearly on the way up..... & in this tournament SA has not performed like a top tier side.