Best WC in a long time?

[thierry henry]

I've absolutely loved it. It's beyond me why the CWC constantly gets so much stick.

We include the minnows and everyone complains about the one-sided matches, despite the fact that (a)the minnows have close contests with each other, and (b) Ireland and Bangladesh beat England, Canada almost beat Pakistan, the Netherlands put up a big score against England, etc. The competitiveness of the minnows is actually quite amazing, yet seems to be totally under-appreciated.

On the other hand, if we excluded the minnows we would be completely defeating the purpose of having a World Cup, and people would still complain.

It's beyond me why the CWC gets such a bagging when the Rugby World Cup features far more minnows, far more low quality play, far more ridiculous thrashings, and has nowhere near the same likelihood of a minnow tipping over a top side. It also features clearly fewer teams capable of winning the competition (e.g. there are so-called "competitive sides" in the RWC who have NEVER beaten the All Blacks in 100 years ffs!). And yet everyone acts like the whole thing is wonderful and the minnow v minnow games pack out stadiums.

We really need to work on positive thinking and promoting ourselves as a sport. Rugby union is a good comparison as they are a sport of a similar size which is distinctly less internationally competitive, and yet their World Cup is seen as this big event, for no apparent reason other than they've kept on saying it is.

**** Rugby Onion btw

[Jono]

I agree with you. But the Cricket World Cup cops a bashing because a one-sided game often finishes in 8 hours. So people complain.

[Himannv]

Originally Posted by thierry henry

I've absolutely loved it. It's beyond me why the CWC constantly gets so much stick.

We include the minnows and everyone complains about the one-sided matches, despite the fact that (a)the minnows have close contests with each other, and (b) Ireland and Bangladesh beat England, Canada almost beat Pakistan, the Netherlands put up a big score against England, etc. The competitiveness of the minnows is actually quite amazing, yet seems to be totally under-appreciated.

On the other hand, if we excluded the minnows we would be completely defeating the purpose of having a World Cup, and people would still complain.

It's beyond me why the CWC gets such a bagging when the Rugby World Cup features far more minnows, far more low quality play, far more ridiculous thrashings, and has nowhere near the same likelihood of a minnow tipping over a top side. It also features clearly fewer teams capable of winning the competition (e.g. there are so-called "competitive sides" in the RWC who have NEVER beaten the All Blacks in 100 years ffs!). And yet everyone acts like the whole thing is wonderful and the minnow v minnow games pack out stadiums.

We really need to work on positive thinking and promoting ourselves as a sport. Rugby union is a good comparison as they are a sport of a similar size which is distinctly less internationally competitive, and yet their World Cup is seen as this big event, for no apparent reason other than they've kept on saying it is.

**** Rugby Onion btw

People dont have issues with Rugby simply because its a better sport.

[GingerFurball]

I think the format's worked, by and large. It's given the associates plenty of exposure, and while with the notable exception of Ireland, they've been thoroughly outclassed, they've all had their wee moments here and there.

The last couple of rounds of games have been really good IMO.

[thierry henry]

Originally Posted by Jono

I agree with you. But the Cricket World Cup cops a bashing because a one-sided game often finishes in 8 hours. So people complain.

I think really that is the underlying issue, but if that's your complaint, it's not a complaint so much about the World Cup as it is about the sport of cricket generally. Therefore it's invalid.

[thierry henry]

Originally Posted by Himannv

People dont have issues with Rugby simply because its a better sport.

GTFO of the forum

[vcs]

I think Group B has been the saviour of this tournament so far. If it had panned out similar to the way Group A did, we'd be saying this tournament was a damp squib as well..

[GingerFurball]

Originally Posted by vcs

I think Group B has been the saviour of this tournament so far. If it had panned out similar to the way Group A did, we'd be saying this tournament was a damp squib as well..

You can't tell me a 19 year old Canadian belting the Australian pace attack around for a few overs, Canada holding Pakistan for 184, Taylor's assault on Pakistan, all of Pakistan's matches against fellow Test teams, the Sri Lanka-Australia match before the rain or Murali spinning knots around New Zealand on one leg hasn't been good watching.

[Jono]

awta so much.

Group A hasn't been as bad as people (and Ponting apparently) think it was.

SL vs. Pakistan was absolute quality.

[thierry henry]

Again, I just don't get why cricket fans so, so despise watching games which aren't particularly close. It's a phenomenon not present in any other sport to this sort of extent. Personally I just like watching cricket. If it's too long for you then follow another sport ****s.

[vcs]

Originally Posted by GingerFurball

You can't tell me a 19 year old Canadian belting the Australian pace attack around for a few overs, Canada holding Pakistan for 184, Taylor's assault on Pakistan, all of Pakistan's matches against fellow Test teams, the Sri Lanka-Australia match before the rain or Murali spinning knots around New Zealand on one leg hasn't been good watching.

Originally Posted by Jono

awta so much.

Group A hasn't been as bad as people (and Ponting apparently) think it was.

SL vs. Pakistan was absolute quality.

Originally Posted by thierry henry

Again, I just don't get why cricket fans so, so despise watching games which aren't particularly close. It's a phenomenon not present in any other sport to this sort of extent. Personally I just like watching cricket. If it's too long for you then follow another sport ****s.

In general, I agree with you. Close games can also be low-quality with plenty of choking. Would have liked to see more from the minnows in that group, even though they had their moments, as GF mentioned.

[GingerFurball]

Originally Posted by vcs

In general, I agree with you. Close games can also be low-quality with plenty of choking. Would have liked to see more from the minnows in that group, even though they had their moments, as GF mentioned.

I think everyone would have. But with the exception of the European associates, there's a lack of a really professional system in place for their development. Canada in particular also suffer because they don't have a full member side who are relatively close by so that teams can pop in after a tour and play a couple of ODIs.

I'm delighted that Sri Lanka are playing a tri-series in Scotland with us and Ireland after the ODI series against England - but it's only 1 game against each opponent. Teams who tour England really ought to be playing a mixture of ourselves, Ireland and the Netherlands at some point in the tour more regularly than they do. England themselves could also help more - I appreciate that their schedule is jammed and the fact that they're playing us and Ireland more in recent years is fantastic - but all the European associates need more regular home ODI series against full members, rather than a one off match here and there. South Africa do a great job supporting Zimbabwe in this respect - while the ECB do a great job with the 3 associates on their doorstep, they could maybe step it up a notch.

[smalishah84]

Originally Posted by Daemon

This is the first WC I have watched properly and with keen interest. Been awesome, loved all the minnow games including thrashing, got to see all the quality players in their sides. It's good to know that with effort, we might have a new "Bangladesh" in Ireland. On the other hand Kenya and Zimbabwe have really deproved over the years, not the players faults maybe but I think it's time to move on from them and focus on Netherlands and Ireland.

Love the fact that theres a game to watch everyday, and doing work is made so much less exhausting, albeit distracting, when you can follow a game at the same time. This tournament comes every four years, If we can spend a 20 days on a freaking 7 match ODI bilateral series, a month and a half ain't so bad.

From now on, it's just three wins to a World Cup, so pumped I can hardly wait. Can't pick a clear favourite, SA and India lost/tied against England who lost to two minnows. SL and Aus lost to Pakistan, who lost to New Zealand, who lost to the former two. WI have been impressive but lack batting depth. Got to thank England for all the nail biters too

Can't wait, this is going to be so ****ing awesome.

well said

Originally Posted by thierry henry

I've absolutely loved it. It's beyond me why the CWC constantly gets so much stick.

We include the minnows and everyone complains about the one-sided matches, despite the fact that (a)the minnows have close contests with each other, and (b) Ireland and Bangladesh beat England, Canada almost beat Pakistan, the Netherlands put up a big score against England, etc. The competitiveness of the minnows is actually quite amazing, yet seems to be totally under-appreciated.

On the other hand, if we excluded the minnows we would be completely defeating the purpose of having a World Cup, and people would still complain.

It's beyond me why the CWC gets such a bagging when the Rugby World Cup features far more minnows, far more low quality play, far more ridiculous thrashings, and has nowhere near the same likelihood of a minnow tipping over a top side. It also features clearly fewer teams capable of winning the competition (e.g. there are so-called "competitive sides" in the RWC who have NEVER beaten the All Blacks in 100 years ffs!). And yet everyone acts like the whole thing is wonderful and the minnow v minnow games pack out stadiums.

We really need to work on positive thinking and promoting ourselves as a sport. Rugby union is a good comparison as they are a sport of a similar size which is distinctly less internationally competitive, and yet their World Cup is seen as this big event, for no apparent reason other than they've kept on saying it is.

**** Rugby Onion btw

quality post from Theirry Henry.

This thread has had a lot of quality posts. Great discussion.

[Uppercut]

The group stages have been a hell of a lot better than they had any right to be, really.

[smalishah84]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

The group stages have been a hell of a lot better than they had any right to be, really.

This