Yeah Marc, I agree with you on the fact that they knew the no. of overs before the match.
Think about this: I would back Pakistan to win any worldcup played for 30 overs, much ahead of Australia or any other team. The teams that you are used to seeing perform in 50 over games wont do as well in shorter games, and viceversa. If, on the other hand, people are used to playing the game for 30 overs, the match will be a good indicator because they will know what to do, when to accelerate; they'll get the appropriate lineup, and order etc. That's why it is very irrelevant. If both teams play such shortened games many times, then a match between them will be reflective of their respective capabilities- in that format. I am NOT disputing the validity of the match.
BTW, India's long batting lineup of players capable of hitting centuries (as opposed to SA's longer 30s and 40s lineup) will be less valuable than the Iranis, and Flintoffs who incidentally can do a lot just playing their natural game. On the other hand, if the Iranis and Flintoffs did the same thing in the 50 overs game, England wouldnt bat out 40 of them.
A good 30 over game lineup for India: Ganguly, Sehwag, Sachin, Yuvaraj, Khurasia (or someone like him), Sodhi, Reuban Paul (wk; or someone like him), some bowlers who can use the long handle- like Agarkar and Zaheer would be two of them.
[Edited on 25/9/2002 by full_length]
[Edited on 25/9/2002 by full_length]