Technically speaking Bangladesh and West Indies can still qualify

[dass]

Hey i just realised today that Bangladesh and West Indies can still qualify for the semis,

for example

if south africa looses their last game against england they will have 6 points

If england wins over south africa but looses against West Indies they will have 6 points

If west indies wins both games that are left they will have 6 points too

also Bangladesh if they win the next two they will also have 6 points

so this scenrio can really happen and all these 4 teams will be tied on points, ofcourse then runrate will play a big factor.

[Perm]

Does this really deserve a thread? Surely it could have been posted in either the Super 8 or Semi-Finals thread. But as it is, it's very unlikely that Bangladesh or the West Indies will qualify for the next stage of the tournament, it'd be phenomenal if either of these two teams were able to progress.

[Raghav]

Originally Posted by dass

Hey i just realised today that Bangladesh and West Indies can still qualify for the semis,

for example

if south africa looses their last game against england they will have 6 points

If england wins over south africa but looses against West Indies they will have 6 points

If west indies wins both games that are left they will have 6 points too

also Bangladesh if they win the next two they will also have 6 points

so this scenrio can really happen and all these 4 teams will be tied on points, ofcourse then runrate will play a big factor.

I realised yesterday only...

[dass]

Originally Posted by Perm

Does this really deserve a thread? Surely it could have been posted in either the Super 8 or Semi-Finals thread. But as it is, it's very unlikely that Bangladesh or the West Indies will qualify for the next stage of the tournament, it'd be phenomenal if either of these two teams were able to progress.

i dont understand why u say its highly unlikely, ofcourse now Bangaldesh are out after they lost to ireland, but mathimatically speaking west indies still have a good chance.

South africa has to loose tommarow and some how west indies have to win the next two games, then each of these three will be tied on points. only net run-rate will be a factor then.

[dass]

and i dont understand onething, how come everyone has already labeled west indies out of the world cup, is there a reason for that?

[Perm]

Originally Posted by dass

i dont understand why u say its highly unlikely, ofcourse now Bangaldesh are out after they lost to ireland, but mathimatically speaking west indies still have a good chance.

South africa has to loose tommarow and some how west indies have to win the next two games, then each of these three will be tied on points. only net run-rate will be a factor then.

It's quite obviously highly unlikely that the West Indies will progress, it would require something special from England to beat South Africa. I don't think it's going to happen, but if Kevin Pietersen fires with the bat then it could go England's way.

In all likelihood I think West Indies should probably beat Bangladesh, although it wouldn't suprise me that much if they did end up losing. If they do win, then they also have to beat England to have any chance of progressing which I don't think they will be able to do, given how terribly they have looked.

Even if the West Indies do win both of their remaining matches and England upset South Africa, that still leaves the small matter of Net Run Rates which have to fall in the West Indies favour. Too much speculation and doubt IMO, I simply don't think West Indies have that much of a chance to get into the semi finals.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by dass

and i dont understand onething, how come everyone has already labeled west indies out of the world cup, is there a reason for that?

The fact that they have looked incredibly ordinary is one thing, the fact that they are highly unlikely to progress is another reason. Technically they still aren't out, but it would be a big suprise if they got through.

[dass]

Originally Posted by Perm

It's quite obviously highly unlikely that the West Indies will progress, it would require something special from England to beat South Africa. I don't think it's going to happen, but if Kevin Pietersen fires with the bat then it could go England's way.

In all likelihood I think West Indies should probably beat Bangladesh, although it wouldn't suprise me that much if they did end up losing. If they do win, then they also have to beat England to have any chance of progressing which I don't think they will be able to do, given how terribly they have looked.

Even if the West Indies do win both of their remaining matches and England upset South Africa, that still leaves the small matter of Net Run Rates which have to fall in the West Indies favour. Too much speculation and doubt IMO, I simply don't think West Indies have that much of a chance to get into the semi finals.

lol so ur basing your decision on just because west indies has performed poorly in the last 4 games. Damn man in cricket almost anyone can beat anyone and west indies are good team, they just need to fire. And England can also beat south africa tommarow.

[dass]

Originally Posted by Perm

The fact that they have looked incredibly ordinary is one thing, the fact that they are highly unlikely to progress is another reason. Technically they still aren't out, but it would be a big suprise if they got through.

well tommmrows game is a huge one for each of these 3, if england beats south africa, then the chances of west indies going through become good because i just checked their run-rate currently is not bad, they just have to bangladesh with a good run-rate and just beat england and i think they will go through

[Perm]

Originally Posted by dass

lol so ur basing your decision on just because west indies has performed poorly in the last 4 games. Damn man in cricket almost anyone can beat anyone and west indies are good team, they just need to fire. And England can also beat south africa tommarow.

Yes, technically speaking the West Indies can progress but I can't see it happening. I think it's pretty obvious that the likely scenario is Australia/Sri Lanka/New Zealand and South Africa being the 4 semi finalists and anything other than those four would be a bit of a shock.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by dass

well tommmrows game is a huge one for each of these 3, if england beats south africa, then the chances of west indies going through become good because i just checked their run-rate currently is not bad, they just have to bangladesh with a good run-rate and just beat england and i think they will go through

IF England beat South Africa, that's a big if mate. But if they do manage to upset the Saffies, then I will be a bit more positive on the outlook for the West Indies, however ATM I still think it's unlikely they will go through. Too many variables.

[dass]

Originally Posted by Perm

IF England beat South Africa, that's a big if mate. But if they do manage to upset the Saffies, then I will be a bit more positive on the outlook for the West Indies, however ATM I still think it's unlikely they will go through. Too many variables.

why though, England too is not a bad team, they have very good players.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by dass

why though, England too is not a bad team, they have very good players.

South Africa are a much better side than them, they have a superior bowling attack, batting lineup and their fielding is pretty damn impressive as well. Flintoff and Pietersen are the only two "very good" players and two players don't make a team...

[simmy]

Originally Posted by Perm

South Africa are a much better side than them, they have a superior bowling attack, batting lineup and their fielding is pretty damn impressive as well. Flintoff and Pietersen are the only two "very good" players and two players don't make a team...

I resent the superior bowling attack comment. I just don't think it's true.

Pollock admittedly is exceptional but there is no variety whatsoever.

[Perm]

Originally Posted by simmy

I resent the superior bowling attack comment. I just don't think it's true.

Pollock admittedly is exceptional but there is no variety whatsoever.

I think it's very true, Pollock and Ntini are two very good bowlers. Backed up by Langeveldt who has had a very good tournament, Nel who is always aggressive and Hall who keeps it pretty tight. Chuck in Kallis and Kemp and I agree that there is very little variety in their attack, all Right Arm Fast Medium bowlers.

Compare this to England who have two good ODI bowlers, Andrew Flintoff and James Anderson. Mahmood is tripe, Panesar isn't a very good ODI bowler and although Collingwood has been bowling well, he is just a dibbly dobbly seamer. To me, that attack is pretty rubbish with Flintoff and Anderson the only wicket taking bowlers, and generally only Flintoff that is keeping it constantly tight.