View Poll Results: Semifinalists for WC'07

Voters
48. You may not vote on this poll
  • Australia- India-SA-WI

    1 2.08%
  • Australia-India-SA-NZ

    8 16.67%
  • Australia-India-WI-SA

    1 2.08%
  • Australia-India-Eng-SA

    4 8.33%
  • Australia-India-NZ-WI

    3 6.25%
  • NZ-WI-SL-India

    1 2.08%
  • Australia-SA-Pak-NZ

    10 20.83%
  • Australia-India-SA-Pak

    20 41.67%
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 64

Thread: Semifinalists for WC '07!!

  1. #31
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    96
    process of elimination:

    sri lanka - heavily dependent on vaas and murali, sangka. they will perform well the in world cup but not good enough for a spot in the semis;
    west indies- all sorts of internal problems, lara not in gud form no chance for the semis
    minnows - perhaps bangladesh could cause a few dissappoints
    australia- will be favourites should be in the semis
    pakistan- tough team, unpredictable at times, should make it semis, either pak or sa.
    sa- solid team either pakistan or rsa to be in the semis
    ind- should be favourites, after chappell and ganguly droppped have unleashed some young talent look promising
    eng- should be favourites, flintoff excellent form, best pace attack currently, easily should be in the semis

    therefore
    aus
    ind
    pak
    eng
    to be the in the semis.
    Battrick

    And working on a Battrick Noob Guide-still a fair way to go.

  2. #32
    Banned Blaze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NZ
    Posts
    5,124
    Did NZ miss their flight?

  3. #33
    International Coach adharcric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Posts
    10,898
    Quote Originally Posted by bumpuss
    eng- should be favourites, flintoff excellent form, best pace attack currently, easily should be in the semis
    Go get some sleep mate. You're a little mistaken there, this is not test cricket.

  4. #34
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Anil
    a fully fit england team can put up a strong challenge, i would think...a batting lineup containing trescothick, vaughan, pietersen, collingwood, the powerful flintoff and their support cast and a bowling attack combination of of jones, harmison, flintoff, hoggard, giles et al is not to be scoffed at....even the windies at home can be a force although their batting especially is really in the doldrums right now....
    There's plenty to scoff at at an attack of Jones, Harmison, Hoggard, Giles. None are proven ODI-standard bowlers. Indeed, to date there's considerable evidence to the contrary.
    Equally - Vaughan is utterly useless in ODIs and Collingwood isn't anywhere near as good as most would have us believe.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006


  5. #35
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by bumpuss
    eng- should be favourites, flintoff excellent form, best pace attack currently, easily should be in the semis
    Sorry, what? This is excellent form? It's far from it. Nor is this quite as good as we've come to expect.
    As for best pace attack currently... not remotely close. Only Flintoff is a proven ODI bowler of those currently in the picture.

  6. #36
    Cricketer Of The Year Anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    9,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    There's plenty to scoff at at an attack of Jones, Harmison, Hoggard, Giles. None are proven ODI-standard bowlers. Indeed, to date there's considerable evidence to the contrary.
    Equally - Vaughan is utterly useless in ODIs and Collingwood isn't anywhere near as good as most would have us believe.
    ok have it your way...i was just trying to cheer you up.....
    Quote Originally Posted by FRAZ View Post
    very very close friend of mine is an Arab Christian and he speaks Arabic too and the visible hidden filth shows the mentality which may never change .....
    Quote Originally Posted by FRAZ View Post
    AAooouchh !!!!!
    I still remember that zipper accident of mine when I was in kindergarten ..... (Thing is OK I repeat thing is OK now )!!!

  7. #37
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Well, if they actually did something it might cheer me up...
    But the last thing I want is to kid myself we're better than we are.
    That'll just lead to REAL disappointment at the event.

  8. #38
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    There's plenty to scoff at at an attack of Jones, Harmison, Hoggard, Giles. None are proven ODI-standard bowlers. Indeed, to date there's considerable evidence to the contrary.
    Ignore the fact that Jones is untried and Giles has an ER of 4.34 then.

    Please tell of this considerable evidence in their 2 cases...
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  9. #39
    School Boy/Girl Cricketer
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    96
    and is that why england? somehow thumped australia in the odis? odi bowlers? wtf nowadays the pitches dont even consider the bowlers its all batsman. i have stay england have the best pace attack. whether they are odi bowlers or not is irrelevant. as for nz i dont think they will make semis, too dependent on astle. BOnd is awesome, but one bowler is not enough. vettori i dont know if he spin up there, specially against the subcontinent batsman.

  10. #40
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by marc71178
    Ignore the fact that Jones is untried and Giles has an ER of 4.34 then.

    Please tell of this considerable evidence in their 2 cases...
    Jones has a very poor domestic record.
    Giles' ER is 4.45 against ODI-standard sides. Which is hardly that impressive given the stage of innings at which he almost invariably bowls, and how much ODI cricket he's missed.

  11. #41
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by bumpuss
    and is that why england? somehow thumped australia in the odis? odi bowlers? wtf nowadays the pitches dont even consider the bowlers its all batsman. i have stay england have the best pace attack. whether they are odi bowlers or not is irrelevant.
    Err, sorry, how are the fact that they are ODI bowlers irrelevant? When the World Cup happens to be played in... oh... ODIs?
    For your information - pitches don't "consider" anything, they're inanimate objects.
    Good bowlers bowl well - regardless of how the pitch plays.

  12. #42
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    Jones has a very poor domestic record.
    Jones also has a terrible FC record, but how many people wouldn't pick him in Tests?


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard
    Giles' ER is 4.45 against ODI-standard sides. Which is hardly that impressive given the stage of innings at which he almost invariably bowls, and how much ODI cricket he's missed.
    No, 4.45 is a very good ER in modern ODI cricket.

  13. #43
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by marc71178
    Jones also has a terrible FC record, but how many people wouldn't pick him in Tests?
    So? Just because he managed to do well in Tests (1 series so far) without doing anything at the domestic-First-Class level why on Earth does that make him (or anyone) likely to do the same in the one-day game?
    No, 4.45 is a very good ER in modern ODI cricket.
    It's not. 4.45 is pretty average for someone bowling exclusively in the middle-overs. You'd expect it to be close to 4. 4.45 would be OK for someone who bowled at the death often.

  14. #44
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,686
    No, 4.45 in the death overs would be superb.

    4.45 in the middle overs is at worst about par for the course because the game is so much more batsman-orientated.

  15. #45
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    It's no more batsman-orientated than it was 13 years ago.
    4.45 regularly bowling 3 or 4 in the death overs would be pretty good - bowling near exclusively in the middle it's pretty average.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •