View Poll Results: does the super 8 stage go to long

Voters
41. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    19 46.34%
  • no

    22 53.66%
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 91 to 102 of 102

Thread: does the super 8 go to long

  1. #91
    State Captain LA ICE-E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    1,973
    they are going to have two matches a day for the super 8, i think for the next one(exactly was my suggestion)

    http://content-www.cricinfo.com/wc20...ry/290096.html

  2. #92
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131
    I was thinking today that if we have the Super 8s and it being admitted that it goes too long, why not have it in a Group stage, going off the tables here:

    The way I have is that you have Group 1 and Group 2, with the winners of Group A and Group D top Group 2, then winners of Group B would be in Group 1 and winners of Group C go into Group 2 and then the runners up in Group A and B go into Group 2 and the runners up C and D go into Group 1 (Avoid teams playing each other twice especially after the round robin stage is over).

    So it would look like:

    Group stage:

    Group 1
    * Austalia
    * Sri Lanka
    * England
    * Ireland

    Group 2
    * West Indies
    * New Zealand
    * South Africa
    * Bangladesh

    Every team would play each team in the their respective Groups once and I would wipe the slate clean with no points carried over and Net Run Rate only applies if there is a tie or match abandoned and the Reserve Day is unplayable as well.

    Semi Finals:

    Semi Final 1: Winner Group 1 v Runner up Group 2
    Semi Final 2: Winner Group 2 v Runner up Group 1

    Final:

    Winner Semi Final 1 v Semi Final 2

    All games would have Reserve Days.

    So what do people think? Good or not, let me hear your feedback.
    Last edited by Craig; 14-04-2007 at 02:23 AM.
    Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick once and you suck forever...

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi, a true legend of CW

    Quote Originally Posted by Boobidy View Post
    Bradman never had to face quicks like Sharma and Irfan Pathan. He wouldn't of lasted a ball against those 2, not to mention a spinner like Sehwag.

  3. #93
    Global Moderator Matt79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Colll----ingggg---woooooodddd!!!!
    Posts
    17,426
    Yep - too long. Games every second day, on average, would be more appropriate than games every fourth day on average, which is the situation in this WC.
    Quote Originally Posted by Irfan
    We may not like you, your filthy rich coffers or your ratbag scum of supporters but by god do we respect you as a football team
    GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010

    Is Cam White, Is Good.

  4. #94
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79 View Post
    Yep - too long. Games every second day, on average, would be more appropriate than games every fourth day on average, which is the situation in this WC.
    Well for the West Indies had a space of 19 days between games. I mean it would get pretty boring, you can only train so much and surely any form/match fitness would start to drop from not playing all that often.


  5. #95
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,790
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt79 View Post
    Yep - too long. Games every second day, on average, would be more appropriate than games every fourth day on average, which is the situation in this WC.
    The only reason it's 1 game a day at the moment is because the ICC wanted rain days this time following the problems caused in SA by rain.

    We've been fortunate that there's not really been any major rain to disrupt it this time round (so far) but had they not provided for it, sods law dictates we'd have had a lot of rain!
    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.

  6. #96
    State Captain LA ICE-E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    1,973
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig View Post
    I was thinking today that if we have the Super 8s and it being admitted that it goes too long, why not have it in a Group stage, going off the tables here:

    The way I have is that you have Group 1 and Group 2, with the winners of Group A and Group D top Group 2, then winners of Group B would be in Group 1 and winners of Group C go into Group 2 and then the runners up in Group A and B go into Group 2 and the runners up C and D go into Group 1 (Avoid teams playing each other twice especially after the round robin stage is over).

    So it would look like:

    Group stage:

    Group 1
    * Austalia
    * Sri Lanka
    * England
    * Ireland

    Group 2
    * West Indies
    * New Zealand
    * South Africa
    * Bangladesh

    Every team would play each team in the their respective Groups once and I would wipe the slate clean with no points carried over and Net Run Rate only applies if there is a tie or match abandoned and the Reserve Day is unplayable as well.

    Semi Finals:

    Semi Final 1: Winner Group 1 v Runner up Group 2
    Semi Final 2: Winner Group 2 v Runner up Group 1

    Final:

    Winner Semi Final 1 v Semi Final 2

    All games would have Reserve Days.

    So what do people think? Good or not, let me hear your feedback.
    yeah that be good too and is being used in the 20/20 wc, or quarter finals or having two games a day, couldn't they have reserve days even if it was two games a day? cause they had reserve days for the group stage and that was two a day.

  7. #97
    Global Moderator nightprowler10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Madhouse on Madison
    Posts
    14,259
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig View Post
    I was thinking today that if we have the Super 8s and it being admitted that it goes too long, why not have it in a Group stage, going off the tables here:

    The way I have is that you have Group 1 and Group 2, with the winners of Group A and Group D top Group 2, then winners of Group B would be in Group 1 and winners of Group C go into Group 2 and then the runners up in Group A and B go into Group 2 and the runners up C and D go into Group 1 (Avoid teams playing each other twice especially after the round robin stage is over).

    So it would look like:

    Group stage:

    Group 1
    * Austalia
    * Sri Lanka
    * England
    * Ireland

    Group 2
    * West Indies
    * New Zealand
    * South Africa
    * Bangladesh

    Every team would play each team in the their respective Groups once and I would wipe the slate clean with no points carried over and Net Run Rate only applies if there is a tie or match abandoned and the Reserve Day is unplayable as well.

    Semi Finals:

    Semi Final 1: Winner Group 1 v Runner up Group 2
    Semi Final 2: Winner Group 2 v Runner up Group 1

    Final:

    Winner Semi Final 1 v Semi Final 2

    All games would have Reserve Days.

    So what do people think? Good or not, let me hear your feedback.
    Not bad at all if they have to keep the super 8s. Personally I'd prefer they go back to the footy-like system they used in '96.
    RIP Craigos

  8. #98
    State Captain LA ICE-E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    1,973
    Quote Originally Posted by nightprowler10 View Post
    Not bad at all if they have to keep the super 8s.
    that's what i suggested before even the tournament started but some of there that i said, i changed my mind about but still that wouldn't be a bad format.
    Should Super 8 be divided into two groups?

  9. #99
    State Captain LA ICE-E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    1,973
    oh and you know how people are saying the current format is a bad one, and well the biggest critic of it- richard said this in the beginnings and a lot of people were saying this is the best format just like him and then you see all of a sudden it changes when the big moneys are out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I don't have any problem with the current format (I do have a problem with ANY game involving a non-ODI-standard team being classed ODI), I think it's impossibly better than those used in 1996, 2003 and 1999 - get the one-sided games out of the way first, even if it does mean having 8 substandard teams in the competition.

    There's no harm in having the substandard teams play up-to-standard teams if it's just making a quick, graceful exit and enjoying the time they spend there.

    This current format is the best used since 1992, as I've said more than a few times. The Super Eight and the 1 group-game involving ODI-standard teams in each group should be great viewing.

  10. #100
    State Captain LA ICE-E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    1,973
    looks like the next wc isn't going to be any shorter, but longer. 53 matches, now then what will be the format? because the current one has 51 not 53 so what possible formats could we have?I would prefer to have the same format with quarter finals or two groups for the super 8. Because if you have four groups then you could have a home team in each group and that gives you great crowds. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/****...ry/290430.html

  11. #101
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,790
    It can't be a super 8s if they don't all play all.

  12. #102
    State Captain LA ICE-E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    1,973
    Quote Originally Posted by marc71178 View Post
    It can't be a super 8s if they don't all play all.
    well that's what they are calling for the 20/20 wc and that's divided into 2 groups. It's like round of 16's in fifa wc they don't play all play all. Anyways what kind of format could have 53 games? cause the 2003 had 54 while this had 51 but the next one will have 53....

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. How will the super 8's work
    By brockley in forum World Cup 2007
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 09-02-2007, 06:22 PM
  2. Should Super 8 be divided into two groups?
    By LA ICE-E in forum World Cup 2007
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 06-02-2007, 01:04 AM
  3. 2006 Super Cheap Auto Bathurst 1000
    By Johnners in forum General Sports Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 08-10-2006, 07:33 AM
  4. Replies: 32
    Last Post: 16-09-2006, 07:09 PM
  5. The ICC Super Series
    By aussie in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 390
    Last Post: 04-07-2005, 06:30 AM

Posting Permissions

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