• 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.

Bad feeling England just might get lucky again.

prakesh

Banned
It seems ricockulous that they should even still be in with a chance, seeing as they've lost to every proper side they've faced & failed to do a an emphatic job on ANY of the minnows...but the way these other results are going so outrageously in favor of them...

I'm beginning to sweat & fart a bit that they may fluke another CB by just managing to hang in there, and then effectively turn it into a 3 game world cup, where on the day they might get lucky.

By the annoying way they keep winning the toss in this tournament too...I can just see them inserting SA and the game being decided on that, like todays was against NZ.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
It seems ricockulous that they should even still be in with a chance, seeing as they've lost to every proper side they've faced & failed to do a an emphatic job on ANY of the minnows...but the way these other results are going so outrageously in favor of them...

I'm beginning to sweat & fart a bit that they may fluke another CB by just managing to hang in there, and then effectively turn it into a 3 game world cup, where on the day they might get lucky.

By the annoying way they keep winning the toss in this tournament too...I can just see them inserting SA and the game being decided on that, like todays was against NZ.
England haven't played well but neither have South Africa, have they? Name one side which deserves to get to the semis ahead of England IF England defeat South Africa..
 
Last edited:

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
England haven't played well but neither have South Africa, have they? Name one side which deserves to get to the semis ahead of South Africa IF England defeat South Africa..
South Africa haven't played well, but they've played far better than England. They've dispatched the minnows they've faced with ease (Bangladesh is not a minnow side), shown good spirit against Australia, and held their nerve against Sri Lanka. As mentioned above, England have lost by easy margins to the big teams and struggled to dominate the small teams (except Sri Lanka, who they struggled against for more than half the game).

Neither team has played champion-worthy cricket, but the best four teams of the tournament deserve to be in the semi-finals. Australia, Sri Lanka and New Zealand are clearly the top three. South Africa is the best of the rest. It doesn't matter what England do against South Africa, it's pretty clear which has been the better side in this tournament to date.
 

Swervy

International Captain
South Africa haven't played well, but they've played far better than England. They've dispatched the minnows they've faced with ease (Bangladesh is not a minnow side), shown good spirit against Australia, and held their nerve against Sri Lanka. As mentioned above, England have lost by easy margins to the big teams and struggled to dominate the small teams (except Sri Lanka, who they struggled against for more than half the game).

Neither team has played champion-worthy cricket, but the best four teams of the tournament deserve to be in the semi-finals. Australia, Sri Lanka and New Zealand are clearly the top three. South Africa is the best of the rest. It doesn't matter what England do against South Africa, it's pretty clear which has been the better side in this tournament to date.
so even if England slaughter SA ( I have seen stranger things), and eventually go through to the semis thanks to a far superior run rate, you will still think SA have been the better team.

the thing is though we know England actually have another gear to slip into (as proved by the recent one day success vs both NZ and Australia in Australia), do we really know if SA can step it up, or are they playing at their level?
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
If, and its a bif IF, England go through it will be virtue of beating the teams they have had to.

They obviously still have to beat South Africa and possibly WI.

If they do that they clearly deserve to go through. If they lose to WI and squeeze through on NRR then they still obviously deserve to go through by virtue of the rules.

I still expect SA to qualify, but if they dont they can look at the Bangladesh game as the reason. As bad as England have played so far they would have to be seen as above SA in peoples recogning as a) they beat SA and b) SA were defeated by Bangladesh
 

pskov

International 12th Man
England ans SA haven' had all that different World Cup performances so far if you look at it by the common teams they have faced.

vs Australia: England were in it for about half their innings batting well but a tame finish backed up by some average bowling meant a comfortable loss. SA bowled medicorely, then had a right go but fell well short batting. Result: Even

vs Sri Lanka: England bowled and fielded very well and batted very well until the halfway mark and still nearly scraped out a win. About as well as a team could perform in a loss. South Africa bowled and fielded very well yet nearly threw it away chasing, just holding their nerve for a narrow win. Result: Edge South Africa

vs New Zealand: England batted first and made hard work of it posting a poor total. Early wickets on a pitch doing something for the bowlers gave them a chance but NZ were calm and finished it off comfortably. SA made even harder work than England and also got some wickets but drops and missed opportunites made it more comfortable for NZ. Result: Slight edge England

vs Ireland: England made hard work of it but were never in any danger of not winning. SA won comfortably without blowing Ireland away. Result: Slight edge South Africa

vs Bangladesh: England cleaned them up in the field but got home awkwardly. SA were ok in the field but were a bit sloppy before batting very poorly indeed. Result: Edge England

Obviously England haven't played the Windies yet but whose to say they won't smash a dejected team in similar fashion to the way South Africa did? I think basing the fact that SA have had a better tournament than England so far on the basis that SA annihilated a dreadful Netherlands team whereas England only comfortably beat a better Kenya side is a bit misguided. The whole point of this tournament's length schedule was to produce a fair reflection of who the best 4 teams for the semis are by everyone playing everyone else. I think it has worked perfectly fine.

To put simply, whoever wins when these two face each other deserves to be in the Semis. That's assuming that Bangladesh or WI don't sneak in....
 

LA ICE-E

State Captain
you know what though? this wc already had enough. This wc needs England to win against SA or the rest of the matches will all be dead matches after that.
 

PY

International Coach
It actually doesn't as much as it used to. South Africa appear to have lost their spark a little, I'm not saying they aren't still awesome but they are definitely struggling currently and would get thumped by Australia if the same set of circumstances occurred.
 

LA ICE-E

State Captain
An Australia vs South Africa semi final doesn't sound yummy to you?
yeah, it does and i do think that if anyone were to knockout australia in the semi's it would be SA but then '99 wc semi's comes to mind.:-O But also i wouldn't trade that with having dead matches and critics starting to talk about "how this wc bad and bla bla bla"
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
Plenty of people are already discussing how disappointing this WC has been. Bad atmosphere, lots of one-sided pastings, some shocking performances from supposedly good teams and a disappointingly small amount of good cricket. I predict it will be remembered from the Australian three-peat and otherwise as an example of how NOT to run a major tournament.

SA is the team I'd prefer Australia to face in the semis, rather than SL or NZ. With the two teams the way they are, I'm comfortable we can beat them 9 times out of 10 - especially in a semi-final or final.

Australia v. NZ would probably be the best final from point of view of a contest, although SL would provide a more entertaining match if they got going. I think its more likely to turn into a blow-out if SL is in rather than NZ however.
 
Last edited:

LA ICE-E

State Captain
Well it's been a dissappointing one out side of the field but not in it. but i don't agree that there's not been good cricket, and there's been the same amount of one-sided games as the other wc's have and you're taking away credit and critizing another team for the shocking results, which you should give credit and not take it away from them. It though was dissappointing with the crowds and bob woolmers death and nothing else but those are big factors which overshadows things a bit. So we don't need any dead matches now.

the best thing would be a bowl-out in the final!
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
People already doing that.

SA is the team I'd prefer Australia to face in the semis, rather than SL or NZ. With the two teams the way they are, I'm comfortable we can beat them 9 times out of 10 - especially in a semi-final or final.

Australia v. NZ would probably be the best final from point of view of a contest, although SL would provide a more entertaining match if they got going. I think its more likely to turn into a blow-out if SL is in rather than NZ however.
I wouldn't expect anything other than NZ getting thumped. NZ haven't shown any great quality yet apart from Bond obviously, scoring a couple of toss inspired wins against England and SA and beating a woeful WI side. England would have the best chance against Australia in a final given it'll likely be a pacy bouncy wicket, but it's highly likely that Australia would play SL or NZ in a final, if they get that far. Sri Lanka are mentally tough enough to beat Australia if they play well on the day, relying on a very good bowling performance.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
Well it's been a dissappointing one out side of the field but not in it. but i don't agree that there's not been good cricket
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.


there's been the same amount of one-sided games as the other wc's have
how is that a good thing?

and you're taking away credit and critizing another team for the shocking results, which you should give credit and not take it away from them.
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.

the best thing would be a bowl-out in the final!
It would be good if this wasn't the 3rd WC in a row where Australia wins after their opponents fail to show up.
 

Top