Sport Cricket World Cup

[tonyw]

Sooooo......anyone getting excited? Less than 24 hours to go now!

The structure of this year's competition is the very definition of a marathon, not a sprint (the group stage starts tomorrow, has one or two games on every single day, and still doesn't end until November 12th, 45 matches later) but unlike some previous iterations (cough.....South Africa 2003.....cough), we can be pretty sure that the last four teams in the semis are going to be the best four teams.

Almost certainly India will be one of them. Would hope that England would be as well - but whilst our batting lineup is clearly going to score a shedload of runs, our bowling attack feels more functional than fear-inducing. And then Australia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, South Africa? Gonna be a closely contested tournament.

Timing is not as bad as I feared, as the Day/Night matches will start at 4:30am here......and most of the big games are being played D/N too. Bring it on!

 

[Sarge]

is it on terrestrial tv ?

 

[ZeroTheHero]

is it on terrestrial tv ?

Is it f**k.

I'm quite looking forward to it. It's not Test Cricket and I'm not convinced as yet that there won't be at least an element of 'win the toss, win the game' due to the dew. Or dew to the due. But it's better than 20Twenty or the Hundred and it's something to watch/listen to during the day. England v NZ starts at 9.30 am tomorrow in the UK.

The length of the competition is going to be a bit of a slog, but it will be better than the Rugby Union WC, where there seems to be about three games a week and it will finish at about the same time the sun goes supernova.

 

[Sarge]

Is it f**k.

I'm quite looking forward to it. It's not Test Cricket and I'm not convinced as yet that there won't be at least an element of 'win the toss, win the game' due to the dew. Or dew to the due. But it's better than 20Twenty or the Hundred and it's something to watch/listen to during the day. England v NZ starts at 9.30 am tomorrow in the UK.

The length of the competition is going to be a bit of a slog, but it will be better than the Rugby Union WC, where there seems to be about three games a week and it will finish at about the same time the sun goes supernova.

its a b****r its not on terrestrial tv

 

[MJB]

is it on terrestrial tv ?

The final will be if England make it.

 

[SteMerritt]

Can't really see past India on home turf, with England, Australia, and South Africa nipping at their heels.

 

[IsleofWightYellow]

is it on terrestrial tv ?

There’s highlights on Channel 5. Tomorrow at 7pm for England vs NZ

 

[tonyw]

The length of the competition is going to be a bit of a slog, but it will be better than the Rugby Union WC, where there seems to be about three games a week and it will finish at about the same time the sun goes supernova.

I guess they decided for safety reasons that rugby players can't play more often than once a week (unlike cricketers), and so they're just playing the games over weekends. But still, from what I can tell there's been zero games played that will meaningfully influence who advances in the tournament between Wales beating the the Aussies on Sept 24th and Scotland vs. Ireland on Oct 7th (if that's even a game - maybe you'd say it's Japan vs. Argentina on Oct 8th). Every other game seems to have been either David vs. Goliath (which Goliath always seems to win in rugby) or minnow vs. minnow.

It's a good thing I don't care about actually watching the egg-chasing otherwise it might have been annoying!

No such worries with the cricket. The nature of the tournament means there's a humdinger between genuine contenders every 2-3 days at most.......

 

[Scotchegg]

is it on terrestrial tv ?

www.fawanews.com should be a pretty good place to find games

 

[ZeroTheHero]

Both rugby union and cricket suffer (to a lesser extent) with the 'World Series' problem in that they really are not worldwide games and so have few 'top' teams. The cricket WC has I think, 10 teams with possibly three of them being 'development' countries so we should see some decent match ups early in the competition. The rugby WC has 20 teams of whom I think you'd call only 7 or 8 genuine contenders - too many teams, which means the contest is too long and many of the early group stage games are completely uncompetitive.

 

[tonyw]

Both rugby union and cricket suffer (to a lesser extent) with the 'World Series' problem in that they really are not worldwide games and so have few 'top' teams. The cricket WC has I think, 10 teams with possibly three of them being 'development' countries so we should see some decent match ups early in the competition. The rugby WC has 20 teams of whom I think you'd call only 7 or 8 genuine contenders - too many teams, which means the contest is too long and many of the early group stage games are completely uncompetitive.

I think it's a bit harsh to still call Bangladesh a development country, given that they've been full ICC members for more than 20 years now!
Granted, they're not expected to reach the semis, but they've got some good players and will be tough to beat in Indian conditions. Reckon they'll win at least one game that they're not expected to.

Netherlands and Afghanistan, maybe. But even then - both of them qualified ahead of the Windies, and if they were in the tournament, we wouldn't be describing them as a development team.

But agreed on the general point. The rugby World Cup would be much better (if less global) if it was just two groups of five and the top teams butting heads more regularly.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

Yes, probably harsh on Bangladesh - and both the Netherlands and Afghanistan are relatively much stronger in the cricket world cup than Uruguay, Namibia, Tonga, Romania and Chile (and probably more) are in the rugby equivalent.

Not that I have been watching the rugby - I find it very dull stuff.

 

[Northstandboy]

Is it being shown on Sky?

 

[Pompeyyellows]

Wearing my tin hat now, i actually prefer the Rugby to the cricket. I do get where your all coming from with the total miss matches that you get in the group stages in Rugby. They can be quite boring hence the stronger teams give game time to the squad players. All the top teams basically have 2 complete teams in a squad, and they can use the players how they feel fit.
When it gets to the knock out stages thats when it really vamps up in terms of excitement. Ireland vs Scotland has the potential to being 1 of the best games. Ireland should win but Scotland are good enough to cause the major problems. The Japan vs Argentina game will be interesting as well as there is a lot to play for for both sides.
The Mighty Yellows vs The Gas is the highlight of the weekend though, and depending on that result is whether i have a good weekend or not.
Sorry i've gate crashed your cricket thread as i know a lot of you love your cricket.

 

[m]

Wearing my tin hat now, i actually prefer the Rugby to the cricket. I do get where your all coming from with the total miss matches that you get in the group stages in Rugby. They can be quite boring hence the stronger teams give game time to the squad players. All the top teams basically have 2 complete teams in a squad, and they can use the players how they feel fit.
When it gets to the knock out stages thats when it really vamps up in terms of excitement. Ireland vs Scotland has the potential to being 1 of the best games. Ireland should win but Scotland are good enough to cause the major problems. The Japan vs Argentina game will be interesting as well as there is a lot to play for for both sides.
The Mighty Yellows vs The Gas is the highlight of the weekend though, and depending on that result is whether i have a good weekend or not.
Sorry i've gate crashed your cricket thread as i know a lot of you love your cricket.

I save time and worry by not giving a s**t about either.

I too should not be on this thread.

 

[holdsteady]

If the Rugby world cup would just of had 16 teams in 4 groups then it would of been done over 6 weekends, would of had mix of bigger sides, mid sized and a couple of plucky minnows (Portugal have been entertaining) so would of been much better entertainment. The decision to have 5 team groups has really devalued the group stage, not the biggest rugby fan but will probably enjoy the knock out stage. Just like FIFA and UEFA though they ignored the optimum team size for the competition (16 for a Euros and 32 for a world cup in footballs case) to try and generate more cash.

This cricket world cup has the strange format of everyone playing everyone so while its only ten teams it means a s**t load of games, probably would of been more interesting if they had split it into two groups and had the top two go through from each but as the other two more games generate more cash and that's what these tournaments are to the organisations that run them.

 

[SteMerritt]

NZ win the toss, and put England in to bat.

Team: Bairstow, Malan, Root, Brook, Buttler, Livingstone, Ali, Curran, Woakes, Rashid, Wood.

Some serious batting in that line-up, but question marks over the attack.

 

[Northstandboy]

Attendance looks poor!

 

[Foley]

Bairstow hits Boult for 6, second ball!

 

[Foley]

NZ win the toss, and put England in to bat.

Team: Bairstow, Malan, Root, Brook, Buttler, Livingstone, Ali, Curran, Woakes, Rashid, Wood.

Some serious batting in that line-up, but question marks over the attack.

Yes agree.
I am a little surprised Topley isn't playing.
Woakes and Curran as 2 of the 3 seamers?
Moeen and Livingstone will have to bowl at least 10 between them.
We need a lot of runs!