• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Group B - Pakistan, South Africa, New Zealand, Sri Lanka

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
SA paying generously to top their group considering Pak will have no Inzy and the Younis debacle as well.
 

Poker Boy

State Vice-Captain
Jono said:
SA paying generously to top their group considering Pak will have no Inzy and the Younis debacle as well.
But South Africa don't usually do well in Asia and remember Sri Lanka could be in this group too....
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
True, but SA drew 2-2 with India in ODIs last year (or was it early this year) when India were in red hot ODI form as well.
 

Great Birtannia

U19 Captain
Perm said:
I'd think that Sri Lanka would qualify but the major question is, can they qualify above the West Indies? That will decide what pool they are in if I understand correctly, so if they are the top qualifier they are in Group A and if they are the 2nd ranked qualifier they are in Group B. I think NZ will be able to progress through with wins over South Africa and the 2nd Qualifier (probably Sri Lanka) but I think Pakistan might beat them.
http://wwwc1.cricinfo.com/iccct2006/content/series/232694.html?template=schedule

I think this group gets qualifier 1 and the thread titles are around the wrong way. I would be backing Sri Lanka to get through this group with South Africa if they qualify ahead of the West Indies.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
NZTailender said:
Would be the most entertaining group to watch, surely...
How exactly? Most of the exciting star names would be in the other group - KP, Flintoff, McGrath, Symonds, Ponting, Lara, Gayle, Tendulkar, Dhoni.and so on.

The hypothetical group B has a few Pakistan players and a couple of individuals from the rest (Murali and Bond). That's it.
 

Steulen

International Regular
Scaly piscine said:
How exactly? Most of the exciting star names would be in the other group - KP, Flintoff, McGrath, Symonds, Ponting, Lara, Gayle, Tendulkar, Dhoni.and so on.

The hypothetical group B has a few Pakistan players and a couple of individuals from the rest (Murali and Bond). That's it.
No. You would have four teams with an about equal chance of progressing.

The other group has a minnow in England, two hot-and-cold teams in India and Windies, and Australia who'll always qualify.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
We're on about the most entertaining group to watch, not the most competitive.

Regardless for all anyone knows either group could be cut and dried after 2 games each, since there are two qualifiers any of the 8 could make it anyway. We don't know which games will be exciting either, the only known elements are the players which are decided more exciting in that hypothetical Group A.
 

_Ed_

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Scaly piscine said:
The hypothetical group B has a few Pakistan players and a couple of individuals from the rest (Murali and Bond). That's it.
You don't consider Jayasuriya, McCullum, Boucher, Gibbs, Nel, Kemp or Ntini exciting to watch?
 

Retox

State Vice-Captain
Scaly piscine said:
We're on about the most entertaining group to watch, not the most competitive.
The games being competitive doesn't make them entertaining?
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Both groups once those sides play very well will be equally entertaining, you really cant seperate - (spelling check).
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
_Ed_ said:
You don't consider Jayasuriya, McCullum, Boucher, Gibbs, Nel, Kemp or Ntini exciting to watch?
Compared to KP, Flintoff, McGrath, Symonds, Ponting, Lara, Gayle, Tendulkar, Dhoni?

No chance.
 

shortpitched713

International Captain
Scaly piscine said:
The point is we don't know which is going to most competitive til they're played out anyway.
On the same token we don't know which players will be exciting to watch until the games are played either. McGrath, Tendulkar, Lara, and co. might just play rubbish.

The whole arguments pretty stupid really since whatever you or I consider entertaining is totally subjective.

Especially midget ***. I don't know how the heck you get off to that **** Scaly.
 

_Ed_

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Scaly piscine said:
Compared to KP, Flintoff, McGrath, Symonds, Ponting, Lara, Gayle, Tendulkar, Dhoni?

No chance.
Fair enough but I wasn't comparing them to players in Group A, I was replying to your comment that Group B only has "a few Pakistan players and a couple of individuals from the rest (Murali and Bond). That's it."
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
You've got to have a cut-off point somewhere otherwise you would say every international cricketer was exciting. Mine is just a bit higher because it's OD cricket, McGrath v Tendulkar? Nice. Nel v McCullum... meh.
 

Tim

Cricketer Of The Year
The difference there is that Tendulkar is an opening batsman, McCullum bats #7 or #8 for NZ!!! you can't really compare that match-up.
 

Top