23th Match - West Indies v Bangladesh

[James]

West Indies v Bangladesh
17th June
County Ground, Taunton

 

[Beamer]

Just like Southampton was the worst place for us to face England with those small boundaries, I think Bangladesh will be cursing playing us at such a small venue.

Still, Bangladesh have the wood on us and if we play that badly again it won't matter.

 

[marc71178]

Just like Southampton was the worst place for us to face England with those small boundaries, I think Bangladesh will be cursing playing us at such a small venue.

Still, Bangladesh have the wood on us and if we play that badly again it won't matter.

You do realise that there is literally no ground being used that is bigger than the Southampton ground?

 

[Bijed]

You do realise that there is literally no ground being used that is bigger than the Southampton ground?

Think he meant big, and typed the opposite by accident tbf (going by the end of the sentence)

 

[TestMatch]

WI almost don't deserve to win this. Russell, Hetmeyer, Carlos, even Holder in the last game, keep playing irresponsible shots.

If Gayle and Lewis fail again, this might be a tight low scoring game, with Bangla winning it through sheer grit.

I'd probably let Pooran open with Hope and stick Lewis and Gayle lower down the order, and drop Russell, whose body seems to be falling apart.

 

[Howe_zat]

23th?

 

[cnerd123]

Big opportunity for BD here. Beat more or less this same team 3 times in a row a couple of weeks ago. Would be great to keep that form going when it matters.

 

[Beamer]

Think he meant big, and typed the opposite by accident tbf (going by the end of the sentence)

Yep this. Apologies!

 

[turnstyle]

23th?

Think he meant 23rd, and typed the opposite by accident tbf (going by the end of the sentence)

 

[NUFAN]

Haha yep, when he wrote Taunton you could tell he meant 23rd.

Im looking forward to this im-going-to-go-with cracking contest.

Cottrell v Tamin, Shakib v Hetmyer, Thomas v Shakib, DRuss v himself will be good fun.

I know Bravo has stunk so far and he is rubbish vs. Spin, but id probably like to see him come in at 3 and replace Brathwaite. I just think that you want Pooran and Hetmyer coming in a little bit later and id go Hope at 4 as he is struggling this tournament and will probably benefit from not batting with Gayles lack of running between wickets. Of course gayle might still be in..

Gayle Lewis Bravo Hope Pooran Hetmyer Holder Russell Cottrell Thomas Gabriel.

 

[NUFAN]

I think youd like Gayle Lewis Pooran Hetmyer Holder Russell batting 30 overs each game and going at a minumum of 7 per over (210) and ideally Bravo and Hope face the other 120 going at around 5 (100 runs). That would be by blue print, so 310 plus a few extra 315-320 and if one of the bigger hitters goes crazy, the scores lifts some more.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Is it too soon to say it is a must win game for Windies?

The top 4 are beginning to open up a gap and still have lots of winnable games to game so those chasing can't afford to drop points. Just hope the weather doesn't intervene again.

 

[Bahnz]

Weather forecast for tomorrow is good thankfully. Please, please let this be a good game. Asides from the 1st hour of SL's chase against Aus, the tournament has really stalled (both literally and figuratively) since the end of the first week.

 

[mr_mister]

Is it too soon to say it is a must win game for Windies?

The top 4 are beginning to open up a gap and still have lots of winnable games to game so those chasing can't afford to drop points. Just hope the weather doesn't intervene again.

They have to win every game from here on out id think

 

[NUFAN]

Is it too soon to say it is a must win game for Windies?

The top 4 are beginning to open up a gap and still have lots of winnable games to game so those chasing can't afford to drop points. Just hope the weather doesn't intervene again.

Its without doubt a must win for both teams. If they lose and then win the last 4 games, theyll finish on 11 which wont be enough OR will go to NRR if they are lucky. South Africa and Pakistan are already in a position where they must win all of their remaining games.

Its a problem that there are only 4 good teams.

 

[mr_mister]

4 out of 10 teams advancing is pretty rough yeah when the top 4 are light years ahead of the chasing pack

8 out of 12/14 was too many though, the group stages were only existing to eliminate minnows

Honestly I think 12/14 teams then Super sixes, like in '99, was actually a good format. I know it had flaws but they weren't an issue in '99 like they were in '03 when the location of the cup was the bigger problem

 

[morgieb]

4 out of 10 teams advancing is pretty rough yeah when the top 4 are light years ahead of the chasing pack

8 out of 12/14 was too many though, the group stages were only existing to eliminate minnows

Honestly I think 12/14 teams then Super sixes, like in '99, was actually a good format. I know it had flaws but they weren't an issue in '99 like they were in '03 when the location of the cup was the bigger problem

Yeah the main problem with 03 was insisting on playing games in places that weren't 100% safe. Otherwise England and South Africa make the next stage instead of Zimbabwe and Kenya, and the tournament looks a lot better.

Rain was also a problem (it robbed the West Indies for example, and possibly Pakistan)

Personally I'd do a 4x4 group stage, quarter finals (or a Super 8's thing but with 4x2 pools) and semis, then finals.

 

[Bahnz]

The biggest problem with the super-6 is the quirky outcomes that can come from teams only carrying forward the points earned from their fellow qualifiers (i.e. Zimbabwe carrying 4 points through in 1999 - compared to 2 for SA and 0 for India - despite finishing below them in the group phase) and the nasty incentives that can create for teams at the back-end of the group-phase (e.g. Australia trying to knock NZ so that they could carry through the points they won against WI).

I agree that 6 teams progressing helps to best balance the competing interests of keeping the group phase competitive whilst giving the lower-mid tier teams a sniff. But I think I'd prefer the top 2 teams going straight through to the semi's, with 3-6 playing off a repechage round first.

 

[Prince EWS]

Personally I'd do a 4x4 group stage, quarter finals (or a Super 8's thing but with 4x2 pools) and semis, then finals.

I'd do this but get rid of quarter finals. That'd make sure the groups games really meant something and weren't just effectively a series of warmups that you just had to avoid losing to minnows in, especially since one group would've got 9th placed West Indies as their first "minnow" this time, which would've been particularly unfair.

There's no real chance of this actually happening though as the World Cup is treated as a cash cow first and anything else second, and having fewer games played by high-rating sides as this would certainly provide isn't going to wash. Even your version with that extra game per side isn't going to fly IMO,

 

[mr_mister]

The biggest problem with the super-6 is the quirky outcomes that can come from teams only carrying forward the points earned from their fellow qualifiers (i.e. Zimbabwe carrying 4 points through in 1999 - compared to 2 for SA and 0 for India - despite finishing below them in the group phase) and the nasty incentives that can create for teams at the back-end of the group-phase (e.g. Australia trying to knock NZ so that they could carry through the points they won against WI).

I agree that 6 teams progressing helps to best balance the competing interests of keeping the group phase competitive whilst giving the lower-mid tier teams a sniff. But I think I'd prefer the top 2 teams going straight through to the semi's, with 3-6 playing off a repechage round first.

What if carry points were just decided on table position?(1st brings through 4, 3rd brings 0) or done away with completey? But your idea is good too. I think the Shute Shield and possibly even the NBL used to do something similar