there's been a lot of good fielding though and also a double hattrick...but all these are overshadowed by empty stands and the death.I didn't say there hasn't been good cricket but to date there has been a depressingly small amount for what is meant to be the showcase of the one day game.
no but isn't any worse either and irish games in the beginning of the super 8's weren't one sided, only the last one or two.how is that a good thing?
Fair enough, but remember that ireland almost beat SA in the warm ups so they could have beaten pakistan even if they didn't "dramatically underperformed".Doing nothing of the sort. Ireland and Bangladesh earnt their way into the Super 8, and I'm not for one minute saying that they don't "deserve" to be there - you win you deserve to go through. All credit to Ireland and Bangladesh for that.
I am however certainly cricitising India and Pakistan for their pathetic showing in this tournament. The Cup would have undoubtedly been a better tournament and we would have seen more competitive and better standard of cricket IF India and Pakistan had played to anywhere near their potential. They didn't do so and were deservedly eliminated, but its a shame they couldn't produce the kind of cricket their squads should be capable of. I don't think you can argue that the tournament would not have been better if they had done so.
I think Ireland's performances since then have shown that Ireland are a game, committed team that their country should be proud of. That said, they were only able to beat Pakistan because Pakistan dramatically underperformed.
Well i wouldn't mind if australia won after a bowl-out! I would rather have people remember the wc as the 3rd in row for the aussies than how not to run a tournament. That said we need a bowl out in the final and every one would forget about the negatives...It would be good if this wasn't the 3rd WC in a row where Australia wins after their opponents fail to show up.
who's "BLE"?my wife just asked who "BLE" is and I explained. Her response "how sad would you have to be to get banned for being an idiot and then keep on rejoining and doing the same thing. I mean get a life".
Says it all really...
BingLeeElectric - the man of a thousand accounts. 999 of them are banned to date...LA ICE-E said:who's "BLE"?
Well if they win the next fourth matches in a row to win the Cup, they'll have to string together some decent performances against good teams, so in a sense they wouldn't be totally undeserving. In some ways it would be similar to Australia in the 99 WC, although a shorter winning streak. But yeah, to date they certainly don't deserve to be in the semis, let alone win the cup.Personally I actually think it'd be horrific if we won this World Cup. We'd only end up doing exactly what we did after winning the Ashes, which was allow the team to sit back for 3 months and do nothing, resulting in some shocking performances provoked by huge levels of complacency.
England's ODI side need a massive kick up the backside. If Duncan Fletcher won't deliver it, maybe it wouldn't be the worst thing if South Africa do on Monday.
it is like 20/20 is called pro20 sometimes...but is bowl-out used in any twenty20 match after a tie or just in knockouts?Always thought it was called a Bowl-off myself.
Any Twenty20 game I think, regardless of whether it is in a knockout competition or not.it is like 20/20 is called pro20 sometimes...but is bowl-out used in any twenty20 match after a tie or just in knockouts?
i think penalties are the best part of soccer, the rest is just boring; except some of the tricks but boring for the most part otherwise.Haha - pathetic! If its a tie, there should be a replay.
EDIT: because I've often thought that what cricket needs is some of the aspects of soccer that suck!
think of it like this. Nowadays it's the batman who gets most of the things, batting pitches, small grounds etc. so let the bowler have some glory and something that's a showcase just for them. A tribute to the modern bowlers with all these harsh treatment from the bat.Reducing either a 90 minute football match or a 100-over cricket match to the extent that the match is decided by some glorified target practice is an awful way to break a tie and a pretty hollow way to win (I mean, you're still happy to have won, but really, it doesn't compare to beating a team in normal time/overs whatever).
I agree with you in general about soccer btw, but that's off-topic and is going to get both of us into hot water.