2022 T20 World Cup thread

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

We're now just over a fortnight out from the qualifying round, and team news is ever changing around the teams in the tournament.

Unfortunately today Jasprit Bumrah has been ruled out of the tournament (and a while after) with a back injury. Big blow to India that one, and a World Cup with no Archer/Bumrah (arguably the two best t20 fast bowlers in the world) is a huge shame

[Duty281]

Just saw that news. A mammoth blow for India and a big loss for the competition as a whole.

It's a really wide open competition this one.

[Duty281]

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/t20-world-cup-2022-shimron-hetmyer-dropped-from-west-indies-world-cup-squad-over-missed-flight-1337990

Hetmyer will also miss the tournament. After missing many games due to failing fitness tests, he's now missing the World Cup because he didn't catch a flight. Hmmm...

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/t20-world-cup-2022-shimron-hetmyer-dropped-from-west-indies-world-cup-squad-over-missed-flight-1337990

Hetmyer will also miss the tournament. After missing many games due to failing fitness tests, he's now missing the World Cup because he didn't catch a flight. Hmmm...

Read this yesterday after seeing the initial "tweet" and thinking that seems a bit harsh - but actually think I side with Cricket WI here...sounds like Hetmyer is just quite unprofessional. At some point you have to draw a line in the sand

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

https://twitter.com/WisdenCricket/status/1577581886641143808?s=20&t=eQSj85tCAXt_qpL0jy4pXw

This might be the greatest shot I've ever seen

[Duty281]

Tournament starts in under nine days and preparations are in full swing. Australia have beaten the West Indies 2-0 in a T20 series at home. Australia will now play England in a three-game series before the competition starts, Australia likely to be weakened for at least one game of that series. And after an exhausting seven game series v England, Pakistan are partaking in an old-fashioned tri-series of the T20 variety, alongside Bangladesh and New Zealand - Pakistan won the first game v Bangladesh earlier today. India also defeated South Africa 2-1 in a T20 series at home, although (somewhat bizarrely) that tour is winding down with a three-match ODI series.

And after all these matches there are the 15 official tournament warm-up games to follow. England playing one such game against Pakistan on the 17th.

Truly, if you're a T20 fan this is a blessed time to be alive.

[king_carlos]

These T20i's crammed in before a World T20 are actually the ones I'd want in my international calendar so I am sort of enjoying it!

As mentioned a lot recently I think almost all bilateral T20is are futile as the teams are so depleted it's often below the standard of the better franchise leagues. In my ideal world I'd get rid of all T20is except for just before a tournament so teams can find their best XI.

My big frustration is that we are going to be missing several of the best bowlers in T20 cricket. Already Jof and Bumrah. Probably the two best seam bowlers in T20s and in the top 3 bowlers of any kind alongside Rashid Khan. Shaheen Afridi, probably the best PP bowler to watch, has yet to make his return. Jadeja has had knee surgery. It's frustrating heading into the tournament.

Mitchell Starc is looking in very good before going into a home tournament though. I expect we may see some match winning individual Starc performances with the new ball in this tournament.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Last time round I picked out Bangladesh as my "dark horse" team for them to be absolute rubbish - but we go back to the well again...and this time I think I am picking Sri Lanka as said team!

Just won the Asia Cup, which I appreciate is distinctly different conditions to what they will face in Aus, but they have some interesting young talent which could show up and enjoy it I think.
A lot does rest on Chameera being fit to play, and Kumara being fit would be handy too - Chameera is an exceptional t20 bowler with his pace/ability to change pace, and Kumara could enjoy Aus with his express pace too (albeit he's a bit more wild). In Hasaranga they have one of the premier all rounders in t20 cricket, who I think will go very well, and the batting is ok.
They have some decent biffers in the middle/lower middle order in Shanaka and Hasaranga, I haven't seen him play but hear Rajapaksa is similar - some good firepower.
The top order is the weakest area of the team, and the main worry/probably downfall for this "pick".

Excited to see how they go in the qualifying games - expecting them to breeze it past their group with Namibia, Dutch and UAE.
The other group with WI/Ireland/Scotland/Zimbabwe is the one to really watch - with two going through you'd think West Indies *should* make it, but its no sure thing. Zimbabwe are a solid side, and I think both Ireland and Scotland have dangerous players, the Irish in particular.

[Duty281]

My predictions were absolute quality for the last World T20, as I wrote off Australia and NZ's chances and then watched them contest the final!

In my defence the tournament was, in my view, seriously undermined by the immense power of winning the toss, and I don't think either of those poor teams that made the final would have done so had they lost the toss in the semi-finals. Let's hope the toss is less important for this World Cup. Here come my highly accurate, take-it-to-the-bank, predictions:

Spoiler:

South Africa are around 8/1, so I'll help myself to that. Of course, it's T20 so we all know it's pretty wide open!

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Predicting South Africa to win an ICC Event - you on the sauce tonight Duty mate?

[alfie]

England and Australia game one in Perth sees Jos Buttler off to a bright start : four boundaries off Green in the first over ! Not a bad start in his return to action

Hales with the job at the other end.

Might be a bit high scoring , this one.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Sorry Alfie didn’t realise you were over here - a good score from England and despite it not working today, like that they showed flexibility with the middle order and shifted Malan around

Should be able to defend that score really, especially considering they’ve gone with the extra bowler

[Duty281]

Predicting South Africa to win an ICC Event - you on the sauce tonight Duty mate?

Yep, they've never made a world final before, 50-over or T20, but it has to change sometime! This time is as good as any.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Marsh has been playing Adil Rashid for what, near a decade or something?

I don't think he's picked Rashid's googly once in that time

[alfie]

Ha ...Olly , I see we are switching threads again

Good wicket that for Rashid. Warner hitting well but the run rate is getting away a bit from them . Only singles off Stokes so far...

[alfie]

Good fifty for Warner...but good work from Curran and Buttler to run out Finch

Rashid a bit expensive : this game is still on at the moment , especially if Warner stays in. England a few too many wides I'm afraid - Stokes a culprit.

Needing just under eleven per over so quite possible...

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

This has been a woeful bowling performance from England so far

[alfie]

Yeah it's all gone bad since about the eighth over. Wood and Rashid are supposed to be the locks but they're getting hammered...

Though as I type Malan takes a fine catch to see Stoinis off - and a welcome wicket for Wood.

If the wickets last Australia should win from here : but another wicket or so and who knows ?

[alfie]

And here's another one as David holes out to Hales at mid wicket...

Two for Wood in that over..But Warner is still in.

Moeen bowling ? Not sure about this.

[alfie]

I am sure now though...a Bad Call : easy 11 off the over and they will need some amazing death bowling or this is gone.

[Duty281]

Wood was clearly obstructed on that. Should have appealed.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

How is that not obstructing the field?!?!

[alfie]

Now : is this Wade guilty of Obstructing the Field ? No appeal apparently but that would be a bit controversial in a WC match I think...

Wood came back with a bang...gets Warner with his very last ball and finishes with 3/34 !

Need 36 off the last three , just Wade and the bowlers to get 'em. Interesting finish.

[Pal Joey]

Not sure I like that action of Wade obstructing Wood for a possible catch. That might be OK in another sport but we don't want to see that sort of thing in cricket.

Warner holes out. We're in for an interesting finish.

I still think England were heading for a much larger total than what they got. They were on course for at least 230 runs... at one stage I thought it might have been an even higher score.

[alfie]

Ah...Curran spoiled a good over with a pie last ball that went for six. Advantage Australia needing 22 from two...

Couple of big moments there : Sam really should have got a run out but his football skills let him down

[alfie]

Sams gone now as this game won't die...

Up to Wade really ; need 16 off seven balls.

[alfie]

Sixteen off six now...

Good work from Topley that over.

Curran to bowl the last : no pressure , Sam

[alfie]

Wade gone : is that the match ?

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

This has been a woeful bowling performance from England so far

Great work to turn it round in the 2nd spells from Wood/Topley/Curran - thought Curran bowled pretty well at the end there, are they considering him as the death option for this tournament?

[Duty281]

Solid win for England. Probably confirms what we already know - the batsmen will have to consistently score at least 20-30 ahead of 'par' to make up for the shortcomings of the bowling attack, and that England will prefer to chase in almost all instances.

Looks like Hales will start over Salt. And this looks to be the balance that England are favouring, although it may change if Livingstone returns from injury.

[alfie]

Good death bowling from Curran and that's the game...eight runs to spare .

Result of this doesn't really matter , of course ; but England will be pleased to have pulled that back after looking like they'd blown it. And I think Australia won't be too bothered either to get so close with the second string attack.

Warner was excellent. Wood , Curran and Topley all had good games in the end. Bit of concern with Rashid , perhaps ? Is his old injury troubling him ?

[Duty281]

This could be Rashid's last tournament. Truth be told he's been struggling for a while and he didn't even have the best World Cup in 2019, possibly due to injury.

His ODI average for the last two years is around 56 and his economy is around 6. Contrast that to his best years, around 2016-2018, when he averaged under 30 and his economy was under 5.5.

He's also played 16 T20s this year and is averaging over 30 with an economy near 8. This is his worst year in that format since 2016.

He'll be 35 in February and I think it's difficult to see him going on until next autumn for the 50-over World Cup, although the prospect of spinning conditions may entice him to try and string it out until then.

[alfie]

This could be Rashid's last tournament. Truth be told he's been struggling for a while and he didn't even have the best World Cup in 2019, possibly due to injury.

His ODI average for the last two years is around 56 and his economy is around 6. Contrast that to his best years, around 2016-2018, when he averaged under 30 and his economy was under 5.5.

He's also played 16 T20s this year and is averaging over 30 with an economy near 8. This is his worst year in that format since 2016.

He'll be 35 in February and I think it's difficult to see him going on until next autumn for the 50-over World Cup, although the prospect of spinning conditions may entice him to try and string it out until then.

It is a big worry for me , re this WC. To be honest I can't see England winning it - or probably even reaching the final - without Rashid performing. The pace bowling options are OK - actually looking a bit better than I expected leading in to the event ; but a bit short of "devastating". Reckon they'll need spin contributions ; and Moeen seems less and less a true bowler in this lately so a lot on Rashid's shoulders.

The batting is capable of big scores , though the death hitting options are a little inconsistent now Morgan has gone and so they are more reliant on Buttler + someone else going early and going big. Feel they rather fell away in this match and left ten-fifteen runs out there that might have been fatal. Was interesting to see the order switch after the great start that saw Malan sat aside in favour of promoting the power hitters : but I wonder if it actually did more harm than good in this case ? Good to experiment in meaningless matches , I guess ; but now a question of whether you'd repeat the move in a WC game under similar circumstances. Hard to decide on one sample but I personally would be inclined to stick to the normal order rather than shuffle about. Perhaps we will get another chance to see how the England management feel during the remaining lead up games.

[Mind the windows Tino.]

Was interesting to see the order switch after the great start that saw Malan sat aside in favour of promoting the power hitters : but I wonder if it actually did more harm than good in this case ? Good to experiment in meaningless matches , I guess ; but now a question of whether you'd repeat the move in a WC game under similar circumstances. Hard to decide on one sample but I personally would be inclined to stick to the normal order rather than shuffle about. Perhaps we will get another chance to see how the England management feel during the remaining lead up games.

I was also interested in that, alfie, but go the other way to you.

I like the flexibility they showed. I'm also fairly certain this place (and others) would have been absolutely lighting up had Malan come in at 130 odd for 1 and scored 18 off 23 balls! Clearly in test cricket and, almost always ODI matches, you don't d*ck around with the order but 20/20, although described as cricket, is essentially a standalone sport and Malan has a clearly defined role in coming in at 3 if an early wicket goes. He has shown the capability to go through the gears but we know he is a 'slow' starter compared to some others. It relies on the skipper and coach and bit of gut feel depending on score, pitch, venue and overs but moving him around if the openers get off to a flyer and bat 10+ overs is fine with me.

When you've guys like Brook, Stokes (albeit scratchy yesterday), Livingstone (assuming fit) and Mo who can go from the off, I like the idea of someone like Malan floating around a little. I have zero stats for this (Soul will probably be able to correct me!) but I would assume it is rare that openers go to 10 overs and beyond in T20i cricket so Malan will invariably be playing the role he is there for but having that flexibility seems like a good idea to me.

[Soul Requiem]

Was interesting to see the order switch after the great start that saw Malan sat aside in favour of promoting the power hitters : but I wonder if it actually did more harm than good in this case ? Good to experiment in meaningless matches , I guess ; but now a question of whether you'd repeat the move in a WC game under similar circumstances. Hard to decide on one sample but I personally would be inclined to stick to the normal order rather than shuffle about. Perhaps we will get another chance to see how the England management feel during the remaining lead up games.

I was also interested in that, alfie, but go the other way to you.

I like the flexibility they showed. I'm also fairly certain this place (and others) would have been absolutely lighting up had Malan come in at 130 odd for 1 and scored 18 off 23 balls! Clearly in test cricket and, almost always ODI matches, you don't d*ck around with the order but 20/20, although described as cricket, is essentially a standalone sport and Malan has a clearly defined role in coming in at 3 if an early wicket goes. He has shown the capability to go through the gears but we know he is a 'slow' starter compared to some others. It relies on the skipper and coach and bit of gut feel depending on score, pitch, venue and overs but moving him around if the openers get off to a flyer and bat 10+ overs is fine with me.

When you've guys like Brook, Stokes (albeit scratchy yesterday), Livingstone (assuming fit) and Mo who can go from the off, I like the idea of someone like Malan floating around a little. I have zero stats for this (Soul will probably be able to correct me!) but I would assume it is rare that openers go to 10 overs and beyond in T20i cricket so Malan will invariably be playing the role he is there for but having that flexibility seems like a good idea to me.

Roy and Buttlers average opening stand was 32, high of 95, so you're probably looking at Malan coming in after 3/4 overs in general.

[Duty281]

Malan seems to have improved beyond his reputation of being a slow-starter, but I'd still be inclined to agree that I'd hold him back if England were, say, 98/1 after ten overs.

[Mind the windows Tino.]

Was interesting to see the order switch after the great start that saw Malan sat aside in favour of promoting the power hitters : but I wonder if it actually did more harm than good in this case ? Good to experiment in meaningless matches , I guess ; but now a question of whether you'd repeat the move in a WC game under similar circumstances. Hard to decide on one sample but I personally would be inclined to stick to the normal order rather than shuffle about. Perhaps we will get another chance to see how the England management feel during the remaining lead up games.

I was also interested in that, alfie, but go the other way to you.

I like the flexibility they showed. I'm also fairly certain this place (and others) would have been absolutely lighting up had Malan come in at 130 odd for 1 and scored 18 off 23 balls! Clearly in test cricket and, almost always ODI matches, you don't d*ck around with the order but 20/20, although described as cricket, is essentially a standalone sport and Malan has a clearly defined role in coming in at 3 if an early wicket goes. He has shown the capability to go through the gears but we know he is a 'slow' starter compared to some others. It relies on the skipper and coach and bit of gut feel depending on score, pitch, venue and overs but moving him around if the openers get off to a flyer and bat 10+ overs is fine with me.

When you've guys like Brook, Stokes (albeit scratchy yesterday), Livingstone (assuming fit) and Mo who can go from the off, I like the idea of someone like Malan floating around a little. I have zero stats for this (Soul will probably be able to correct me!) but I would assume it is rare that openers go to 10 overs and beyond in T20i cricket so Malan will invariably be playing the role he is there for but having that flexibility seems like a good idea to me.

Roy and Buttlers average opening stand was 32, high of 95, so you're probably looking at Malan coming in after 3/4 overs in general.

Knew I could rely on you, champ!

[Mind the windows Tino.]

Malan seems to have improved beyond his reputation of being a slow-starter, but I'd still be inclined to agree that I'd hold him back if England were, say, 98/1 after ten overs.

Interesting graph that, Duty. Thanks.

One would assume that is a conscious effort rather than just him getting 'better' at the format as he is approaching his previous high strike rate and has been playing this format for a while now.

[JDizzle]

Yeah, I agree with the messing about of the order too. When your bowling is as weak as England’s is, you need to try and maximise every run you can when batting. As we saw 208 was only just (and perhaps shouldn’t have been from the position Aus were) enough.

I wouldn’t promote Stokes though. I think his T20 batting is a tad overrated and he is, like Malan and like he is in ODIs these days, more of an anchor. Brook/Livingstone or Moeen, dependent on whether you are playing a spin heavy or pace heavy attack.

[Soul Requiem]

Was interesting to see the order switch after the great start that saw Malan sat aside in favour of promoting the power hitters : but I wonder if it actually did more harm than good in this case ? Good to experiment in meaningless matches , I guess ; but now a question of whether you'd repeat the move in a WC game under similar circumstances. Hard to decide on one sample but I personally would be inclined to stick to the normal order rather than shuffle about. Perhaps we will get another chance to see how the England management feel during the remaining lead up games.

I was also interested in that, alfie, but go the other way to you.

I like the flexibility they showed. I'm also fairly certain this place (and others) would have been absolutely lighting up had Malan come in at 130 odd for 1 and scored 18 off 23 balls! Clearly in test cricket and, almost always ODI matches, you don't d*ck around with the order but 20/20, although described as cricket, is essentially a standalone sport and Malan has a clearly defined role in coming in at 3 if an early wicket goes. He has shown the capability to go through the gears but we know he is a 'slow' starter compared to some others. It relies on the skipper and coach and bit of gut feel depending on score, pitch, venue and overs but moving him around if the openers get off to a flyer and bat 10+ overs is fine with me.

When you've guys like Brook, Stokes (albeit scratchy yesterday), Livingstone (assuming fit) and Mo who can go from the off, I like the idea of someone like Malan floating around a little. I have zero stats for this (Soul will probably be able to correct me!) but I would assume it is rare that openers go to 10 overs and beyond in T20i cricket so Malan will invariably be playing the role he is there for but having that flexibility seems like a good idea to me.

Roy and Buttlers average opening stand was 32, high of 95, so you're probably looking at Malan coming in after 3/4 overs in general.

Knew I could rely on you, champ!

I understand very little of modern cricket outside of statistics.

[king_carlos]

I honestly saw the order change there as less tactical and more just getting Stokes some time in the middle. Malan isn't short of T20 match practice but Stokes is was my take.

If England were promoting a hitter to attack from a big opening platform in the tournament I'd expect it to be Mo or (if fiit) Livingstone depending on the opposition bowling options.

I agree with others that I'd be surprised if England won this tournament. Due to the batting they will be in that mix but I think a side with better PP and death bowling will take it. Bumrah's absence is gigantic there for India. If Shaheen returns then Pakistan will be very dangerous in the PP. Australia and the Proteas have very good pace attacks backed up by IMO underrated T20 spinners in Shamsi and Zampa. Australia have very good PP bowling but less at the death. I have a feeling Mitch Starc will have a very good tournament though.

[king_carlos]

I understand very little outside of modern cricket outside of statistics.

I'm a bit like that but with previous eras. Due to being a stats nerd growing up I have an at times disconcerting recall of stats from previous eras but find some less numerical aspects, such as certain sides and eras being retrospectively viewed as greater than they maybe should, utterly boggling.

Splice our minds together and we'd have a complete cricketing brain consistently at war with itself over how to view the game!

[alfie]

I can see I am in the minority here... fair enough but let me elaborate.

First off I am not violently opposed to the "push up the hitters " move ; just think it sounds better in theory than it often (not always) actually works in practice. Certainly didn't work last night with just 43 runs off the last five overs despite having eight wickets in hand.
Reasons for that  , of course : Stokes (understandably rusty and anyway not really a "hit the first ball for six" type in the white ball game) probably not the best one to promote - but if he's going to bat four in the WC he needed the practice , I suppose. And losing him and Hales quickly left two new bats together and the acceleration never really came - thank heavens for Woakes at the end. So not to say it won't work on another occasion.

However : you all seem to be assuming that Malan would have come in and scratched around like an elderly fowl : is this necessarily fair ? True he normally plays himself in (though in truth so does Jos by his own admission , recently - though not this game , and he goes ballistic quite early anyway so no problem there) ; but that is normally his job since he often comes in one down early ...how often has he come in at 132/1 ? He didn't have to come in and immediately hit sixes - just turn the strike over to the well set Hales and take boundaries when he could ... as he did rather well in that last game in Pakistan. As it was , Stokes made 9 from 9 (with a fair slice of luck) yet the score advanced by 33 in 20 balls thanks to Hales. Would it have been worse with Malan ?

Hypothetical , sure. But the other point is that this England side isn't overburdened by death maestros now , with Morgan gone , Buttler at the top of the order , and Bairstow injured. I reckon the last four overs in a t20 are usually the ones that can turn a very good score into a great one so I generally like to ensure the right men are available for those overs. Brook was excellent in Pakistan but is still new to this - and to Australia ; I would suggest Moeen is the most likely to strike at 200 at the death if he gets in at the right time but anyone can hole out first ball ... You can't of course know in advance when wickets will fall , etc so it isn't an exact
science . Which means that either approach might be successful on a given day , no ?

So : I am OK with flexibility ; but I am not sure changing the order at 132/1 off 11 is the % play. If it were , say , three overs later , different story. But as Soul's stats suggest , not likely to happen too often

[Duty281]

I wouldn't be surprised if England won this tournament. They've got the batting to beat anybody and can't be ruled out, especially in T20. I'd put them behind South Africa and Aus in favourability, but probably joint 3rd favourites alongside (or maybe just ahead) of India.

Plus England have landed in a pretty nice group - beat NZ, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and one of Ireland/Zimbabwe/Scotland and they're in the semis. The other group is tougher. The NZ game on the 1st November could effectively be a QF.

T20 isn't a lottery, but is it a format with a lot of randomness and unpredictability, hence why there is no dominant team and a big reason for why no team has managed to defend the title successfully.

[JDizzle]

I wouldn't be surprised if England won this tournament. They've got the batting to beat anybody and can't be ruled out, especially in T20. I'd put them behind South Africa and Aus in favourability, but probably joint 3rd favourites alongside (or maybe just ahead) of India.

Plus England have landed in a pretty nice group - beat NZ, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and one of Ireland/Zimbabwe/Scotland and they're in the semis. The other group is tougher. The NZ game on the 1st November could effectively be a QF.

T20 isn't a lottery, but is it a format with a lot of randomness and unpredictability, hence why there is no dominant team and a big reason for why no team has managed to defend the title successfully.

It would never happen because of time constraints and I don’t think anyone would enjoy it - but you’d only find the best T20 side by running it like the MLB play offs with BO5 and BO7 series. Which I think I actually would be intrigued to see once, but would quickly go stale as a WC format!

[Soul Requiem]

I understand very little outside of modern cricket outside of statistics.

I'm  a bit like that but with previous eras. Due to being a stats nerd growing up I have an at times disconcerting recall of stats from previous eras but find some less numerical aspects, such as certain sides and eras being retrospectively viewed as greater than they maybe should, utterly boggling.

Splice our minds together and we'd have a complete cricketing brain consistently at war with itself over how to view the game!

The word of my original post is horrendous!

I do a lot of pub quizzes (speed quizzing), 3/4 a week sometimes. The guy who writes them all is a big cricket fan so there's normally a couple of cricket stats that come up and no matter how obscure we normally get it right, often to cries of cheat as if we're Australian!

Cricket from before my time I have no nuanced knowledge of but from about 1994-2010 i'm pretty strong, the advent of T20 with knuckle balls, wobble seam etc. has me at a real loss.

[James100]

I honestly saw the order change there as less tactical and more just getting Stokes some time in the middle. Malan isn't short of T20 match practice but Stokes is was my take.

If England were promoting a hitter to attack from a big opening platform in the tournament I'd expect it to be Mo or (if fiit) Livingstone depending on the opposition bowling options.

I agree with others that I'd be surprised if England won this tournament. Due to the batting they will be in that mix but I think a side with better PP and death bowling will take it. Bumrah's absence is gigantic there for India. If Shaheen returns then Pakistan will be very dangerous in the PP. Australia and the Proteas have very good pace attacks backed up by IMO underrated T20 spinners in Shamsi and Zampa. Australia have very good PP bowling but less at the death. I have a feeling Mitch Starc will have a very good tournament though.

I'm probably forgetting someone, but with Bumrah and Archer out, Pakistan have the best seamer in the tournament by a distance - Shaheen - and I think you could argue the second best too in Haris Rauf. At the least I'd probably have him as the only other seamer above average in all three phases. Their middle order probably isn't good enough to win it all, but if the openers do well and they promote Shadab to hit spin then they could have a better shot than people seem to think.

[alfie]

Predicting South Africa to win an ICC Event - you on the sauce tonight Duty mate?

Yep, they've never made a world final before, 50-over or T20, but it has to change sometime! This time is as good as any.

You might get even better odds after today's game , Duty

[king_carlos]

I honestly saw the order change there as less tactical and more just getting Stokes some time in the middle. Malan isn't short of T20 match practice but Stokes is was my take.

If England were promoting a hitter to attack from a big opening platform in the tournament I'd expect it to be Mo or (if fiit) Livingstone depending on the opposition bowling options.

I agree with others that I'd be surprised if England won this tournament. Due to the batting they will be in that mix but I think a side with better PP and death bowling will take it. Bumrah's absence is gigantic there for India. If Shaheen returns then Pakistan will be very dangerous in the PP. Australia and the Proteas have very good pace attacks backed up by IMO underrated T20 spinners in Shamsi and Zampa. Australia have very good PP bowling but less at the death. I have a feeling Mitch Starc will have a very good tournament though.

I'm probably forgetting someone, but with Bumrah and Archer out, Pakistan have the best seamer in the tournament by a distance - Shaheen - and I think you could argue the second best too in Haris Rauf. At the least I'd probably have him as the only other seamer above average in all three phases. Their middle order probably isn't good enough to win it all, but if the openers do well and they promote Shadab to hit spin then they could have a better shot than people seem to think.

Starc is pretty close to Shaheen as a PP bowler and probably a better death bowler to be fair. I'd say they're the best two seamers in the comp with Bumrah and Jof out.

After them I'd take Rabada and Nortje ahead of Rauf as well.

Rauf is a very good bowler though to be fair. After the 4 bowlers above I'd have him in the next bracket with Wood, maybe Boult, probably still Bhuvi as well. Bhuvi of course used to to be in the Bumrah and Starc class but isn't there now. Hazlewood in a short period of time has turned himself into a very good T20 PP bowler as well to be fair.

Pakistan will have a really good attack if Shaheen can get fully fit though as you say. With their batting approach they need that firepower though.

[James100]

I honestly saw the order change there as less tactical and more just getting Stokes some time in the middle. Malan isn't short of T20 match practice but Stokes is was my take.

If England were promoting a hitter to attack from a big opening platform in the tournament I'd expect it to be Mo or (if fiit) Livingstone depending on the opposition bowling options.

I agree with others that I'd be surprised if England won this tournament. Due to the batting they will be in that mix but I think a side with better PP and death bowling will take it. Bumrah's absence is gigantic there for India. If Shaheen returns then Pakistan will be very dangerous in the PP. Australia and the Proteas have very good pace attacks backed up by IMO underrated T20 spinners in Shamsi and Zampa. Australia have very good PP bowling but less at the death. I have a feeling Mitch Starc will have a very good tournament though.

I'm probably forgetting someone, but with Bumrah and Archer out, Pakistan have the best seamer in the tournament by a distance - Shaheen - and I think you could argue the second best too in Haris Rauf. At the least I'd probably have him as the only other seamer above average in all three phases. Their middle order probably isn't good enough to win it all, but if the openers do well and they promote Shadab to hit spin then they could have a better shot than people seem to think.

Starc is pretty close to Shaheen as a PP bowler and probably a better death bowler to be fair. I'd say they're the best two seamers in the comp with Bumrah and Jof out.

After them I'd take Rabada and Nortje ahead of Rauf as well.

Rauf is a very good bowler though to be fair. After the 4 bowlers above I'd have him in the next bracket with Wood, maybe Boult, probably still Bhuvi as well. Bhuvi of course used to to be in the Bumrah and Starc class but isn't there now. Hazlewood in a short period of time has turned himself into a very good T20 PP bowler as well to be fair.

Pakistan will have a really good attack if Shaheen can get fully fit though as you say. With their batting approach they need that firepower though.

Yep I forgot Nortje! Starc's hardly played T20s the last couple of years and when he has he's been bad, so I wouldn't have the confidence to put him up that highly (tho wouldn't be surprised at all if he did turn it back on and dominated the WC) and Rabada's success has generally been taking wickets at the death which I don't value that highly. He did well with the new ball this latest IPL though so if he can continue that then that's huge for SA.

On Pakistan's batting firepower, has anyone seen much of Azam Khan? I often see him mooted as a potential solution to scoring quickly in the middle overs but haven't seen him bat myself at all.

[Sponsored content]