World Cup 2015

First topic message reminder :

Warm Up game between Ind and Aus ongoing...
it's an official ODI...though after so much cricket why do these sides need a "warm-up"

India's bowling in melt-down and the two most dangerous guys in Aus side Warner and Maxwell get 100s

Looks like Ind will be chasing 375

My favorite freakster went mad yet again. On a normal day, he's difficult to handle for any bowling sides, and if he gets anywhere close to his freaking best, then it will be total carnage.
It well and truly was an outstanding effort from AB, but it has been absolutely awful from the West Indies overall.

Might we see the first properly good game between two full member sides tonight?

Really not a fan of this ground, boundaries are like a kids game for crying out loud

80/1 to 96/5 - are Australia actually England in disguise?

Or maybe, just maybe, New Zealand are the champions in waiting.

And if India bat first on the express pace wicket in Perth, can they smash 500+ against the UAE, one wonders?

Oh six down!

England look comparatively better for it.

Just passed 123 runs... and 9 down. Next target 151, their 2nd lowest WC score.

Told you I had a feeling it would be a disappointing result like '92. A shambles!

Credit to NZ and especially Trent Boult. From 80/2 to this.... 7 wickets for 45 odd runs. They've only used 3 bowlers too!

Oh well, pick up the pieces and try and make some amends in the rest of the group matches.

To think they scored 15 runs off the first over. NZ (via McCullum) should knock (whatever the final total is) in around 12 overs.

This is brutal. New Zealand just on a separate tier to everyone at the moment. Damn.

Thought they were good heading into the tournament, and then I got a little worried when I saw Boult and Southee toy with the Sri Lankan team... Now it's full on concern. Don't seem to be peaking either, just a very good team hitting it's groove.

50 more runs and Australia could have made a real fist of it. Clarke and Mccullum offensive minded.

Jesus, 145-7. Three wickets Australia need. Seven runs New Zealand need.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a match like this ICC.

Oh my days . I just woke up and am confused .


Two wickets in 2 balls.

These teams can bowl.

Jesus.

Not convincing at all.

Aus-NZ, a very high quality game......with the ball bothg teams were outstanding....Michel Starc Superb....as he has been all through the tri-series.
The best bowler in the world on current form.

The teams that have had potency about their bowling  are the ones looking best so far...NZ, Aus and surprisingly India so far.

Aus lacks proper batsmen...too many bowling allrounders and Clarke back with no form and shaky fitness

This game was also fantastic because it realigned my world cup predictor again.

Highlight for me was on the TMS broadcast Vic Marks leaving his microphone on during the post match interviews and complaining over Kane Williamsons victory interview that "it ruined my bloody coffee".



Again its evenly matched sides that produce the good games, be that top or bottom. Meanwhile India are making mincemeat out of the Pakistan Exiles XI
These two have to be  the favourites, but at the same time there is some vulnerability that South Africa could exploit if their quicks have a good day.

All in its not actually been as bad a world cup so far as it looked like it might be, but theres a hell of a lot of games to drag through yet many of which wont have this drama.

Its all about the bowling- And england need to just forget about any short fix to aid our batting- just go bowling heavy. Its something he have..

India did not get to bat first so Rohit misses out on an easy double hundred for the taking

India bowling has suddenly and surprisingly found teeth. Ashwin bamboozled every side so far with his variations

Aus, Ind nd NZ all stand out Aus has the most superior bowling and Ind the best top order and an outstanding spinner.

SA the other top side has not shone with the ball.....both INd and even Zim creamed them off for 300 each nearly

SA's bowling has been aided by what we have allways thought of as a bit of a part time spinner(zahir)

Fair play to him. But all the same.

I think England need to add Tredwell to our seem attack and ali and forget about a batsman

Aus play 3 specialist bowlers, new zealand 4, SA 4. In this game it was one bowler for each side who really did the damage, supported by one other. Add to that the way England bat recently they will need to bowl sides out in under 40 overs making a 5th bowler completely redundant anyway.


Englands best 4 bowlers arent delivering, what makes us think the 5th best getting a load of overs will suddenly improve them?

Its the front line guys who need to to step up and actually do what they are paid for in both batting and bowling for England. Morgan, Broad, Woakes, Anderson, Bell, Root, Taylor etc are not underperforming against decent opposition because Tredwell or Jordan arent holding their hands. Its because they arent that good, arent utilising best tactics, and as a team are lacking confidence and in panic mode.

If England were keeping Dale Steyn or Chuck Norris on the bench I could see the argument for "must play" but does anyone seriously think Jordan bowling wides or Tredwell serving up pies is suddenly going to transform this side into the 1970s west indies sides? Its not like either of them offer anything not already present in the bowling line up (right arm county fast medium seam and othordox county slow bowling is all England possess). Broad is still going to be pretty medium paced and obsessed with bumpers, Anderson will still be unable to generate the swing he gets at home, Woakes will still inexplicably be refused the new ball and finn will still be a shadow of the force he briefly was as a kid.

Give the front line guys a kick up the backside. get them playing to the best of their abilities. I dont see it as an issue with the make up of the side so much as a collective inability to deliver good cricket. And to be fair its damn good sides playing at the top of their game that have spanked them, through the tournament weve seen under these rules how momentum can really get on top of a side in batting or bowling and throw up some very one sided passages of play. The Aus NZ game was a rare example of both sides manages to shift that dramatically during the game.

The side they have is capable of beating Sri Lanka especially in seam friendly conditions. They are also well capable of losing if they let the likes of Malinga or Sangakara get on top of them. Good tie, bets on.



* just to add to that Tahir has a brilliant record in limited over internationals, its odd SA dont pick him more. tests hes absolute bobbins mind. Hes also not a regulation county offspinner, hes something very unusual which isnt so easy to plan for or that players are used to facing. Tredwell is does not offer significant variation on what Ali and Root serve up, albeit he is a slightly better option. With Buttler Broad and Woakes batting like tail enders I really cant see how they can drop a batsman.

mystiroakey wrote:Its all about the bowling- And england need to just forget about any short fix to aid our batting- just go bowling heavy. Its something he have..

Not really, not exactly like we have a Boult or Starc waiting in the wings. We need our current bowlers to pull there finger out

Starc was incredible even in defeat- No we dont have him. But i feel there is no reason why our front line cant start bowling a dam site better- I think Broad is getting better game on game. and if Anderson was playing on either pitch today(last night/this morning)- he could have done some damage.

If we are going to stick with the last kind of set up- Hales should come in for Ballance.

Shades of the Scotland match, just against much superior opposition. The damage was done by Boult this time but not enough praise can be given to Vettori who came on almost Dipak Patel like and contained the openers and got them to make mistakes.

Personally I'd be more worried if the NZ batsman were getting out cheaply with a much bigger total to chase down. The context of the game encouraged the cavalier approach. McCullum got them off to and the small total that was required after that saw many throw their wickets away to balls they didn't need to chase with so many overs left. Disappointing, for sure. Williamson provided the model to the recognised batsmen although I was fuming when he gave the 9 and 10 batsman the strike. Thankfully he learned the lesson and got the winning runs to the shortest boundary.

We avoided our run rate for being hammered by not batting out the allotted fifty overs. The Aussies will feel hard done by by their rate but don't get bowled out before the 300th ball is the obvious remedy.

This was a hugely important win for NZ. It wasn't convincing in the end but they got the points and can now try to get Taylor into some kind of form with Afghanistan and Bangladesh. He is the real concern because NZ will need somewhere along the way a big contribution from him. Williamson is the flour and eggs and McCullum is the icing but we still need some basic ingredients from Taylor in order to have our cake and eat it too.

NZ had to play as much as possible at home in the tournament. That looks likely now so mission accomplished. An exciting match and good to see bowlers dominating a match. Small totals have a lot more going for them than the score suggests.

Great fightback from NZ but thankfully NZ didn't implode with Williamson out there.

Cracking match - must admit this world cup much more interesting than I thought it would be so far.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:

Shades of the Scotland match, just against much superior opposition. The damage was done by Boult this time but not enough praise can be given to Vettori who came on almost Dipak Patel like and contained the openers and got them to make mistakes.

...

Hi Kia - I watched 'live' the first 16 overs, up to the first drinks break. Completely agree with you about Vettori. He brought an essential calmness to proceedings when Australia were threatening to run riot. In his 5 overs that I saw he reduced the run rate and took the oh so important wicket of Warner. Without that, I feel we would have been looking at a very different game.

I like McCullum's aggressive captaincy in this WC when New Zealand are bowling. Normally looking to bowl the opposition out. Very unusual but the right call as this match developed imo to use only 3 bowlers in the hunt for 10 wickets and almost bowl each of them out before bowlers 4 and 5 appeared. My concern for his side is the batting. New Zealand have again shown themselves susceptible to middle order wobbles. I do suspect you're going to have one game in this tournament where your bowling strength won't overcome that fragility.

As repeatedly said (including before the tournament), I think England's best chance of doing well also depends on our taking 10 wickets before 50 overs are up. However, unlike New Zealand and other leading teams, we don't have sufficiently good / in form enough bowlers to pick only 4 front line ones. I would therefore play 5 including Tredwell plus Moeen. My approach is to bank on the variety and options that this attack would bring. One of the major weaknesses has been that our bowling has been too samey, especially in the middle overs; Tredwell's inclusion would at least change that. I would also seriously consider bringing in Jordan for Broad; I know better than most how hit and miss Jordan can be but he does possess pace and the capability to unruffle opponents.

The obvious risk - as previously acknowledged - is that we won't be able to score enough runs. However, even with the extra batsman, we've shown time and again that we are unable to set or chase down a daunting target. Lets try and prevent the opposition reaching a daunting score!

Gooseberry has said get the front line guys playing to the best of their abilities. Gooseberry is no fool (been waiting to use that line ). Whilst I agree with his comment which was aimed at our bowlers, it also applies to the batsmen. If the top six batters collectively fire (in my team, Ballance has been benched), we could still score enough.

That all said, I see little way we'll be serious contenders in this WC. We just don't have the strength in depth or proper balance (unless you're playing on paper in which case bring in Bopara!). However, despite a respectable result against Scotland, what we've done so far hasn't worked and something different needs to be tried.

Hey guildford.

One cannot overstate the importance of tying down batsman. His figures don't really represent what he did in the context of the game. The strike bowlers have been wayward in their first spells and both Southee and Boult have come back with a vengeance in their second spell. But they needed someone to steady the ship and get the batsmen frustrated. Vettori with his variation of flight and speed is the perfect foil for this. His experience gives this young side a lot more than what it appears.

I'd be inclined to agree with you about the middle order if there were more recent instances of them chasing big totals and getting out cheaply. I can think of more instances where the likes of Elliot, Ronchi and Anderson have made telling contributions.

That is not to say that those batting demons have been eliminated. It has traditionally been a glaring weakness. But in recent times, there are more people to make vital batting contributions. We are not so dependent on McCullum as the media like to portray. Like his bowling choices, he is more a player who can finish innings off quickly. Williamson is the glue and there are five or six players who can be counted on to get runs as opposed to the 1992 days where there was only a couple.

I suppose I'm more forgiving when there are batting failures and NZ still win. That to me shows the strength of having genuine wicket takers and what England are so desperately missing at the moment.

Australia failed with the bat and still made it a contest because they have strike bowlers who can get clusters of wickets in very few balls. That scoreboard pressure is worth its weight in gold in the one-day form.

NZ could've gone about that total in test mode. McCullum preferred to take advantage of only two fielders in the outer circle. I like that positivity. When the wickets start tumbling, it's very difficult to change that mentality especially when there are so few runs to get.

My big concern if NZ gets to the final is that they will be playing in Australia where bigger totals are more likely and they won't be adjusted to the different pacing of an innings that they've been playing at home.

However, qualifying first in the group is an important first step to securing those home knockout matches and giving ourselves the best chance of getting to the final.

NZ came back strongly against Scotland. They must do the same against Bangladesh and Afghanistan. Hopefully they bat first and set big targets each time. Building a long innings would go a long way to preparing them for the crunch games. They won't always be allowed to bowl out sides well before the 50 overs are up.

It is such a shame injury has blighted Vettori's career, such a canny bowler, genuine world class finger spin.

I have to disagree with Guildford here. I don't think bringing in Tredwell will do much for our quest for 10 wickets, he'll bowl tidy stuff but ultimately it's still upto the four seamers to go through sides

Olly - I don't see Tredwell coming in and bagging fourfers and fivefers. However, I do feel he might get something like 2/30 off 7 which would really help the team and particularly the guy bowling at the other end.

Anyway - NAME DROP WARNING - in the words of Alec Stewart to me, ''It's a game of opinions''.

guildfordbat wrote:Olly - I don't see Tredwell coming in and bagging fourfers and fivefers. However, I do feel he might get something like 2/30 off 7 which would really help the team and particularly the guy bowling at the other end.

Anyway - NAME DROP WARNING - in the words of Alec Stewart to me, ''It's a game of opinions''.

Indeed in Australia/New Zealand I see him as more of 1-50 off 9 type performer, basically not much difference to Moeen. I do like your suggestion of Jordan for Broad, who has been a little pants. Jordan offers more with the bat too

Although Tredwell does actually have a better ODI strike rate with the ball than Graeme Swann, Shane Warne and Muttiah Muralitharan! Lies, damned lies and statistics.

Oh and Trent Boult bowling in England this summer is gonna be majestic. What a bowler

I do like Mccullum's style of captaincy. It's completely polar opposite to mine, but so sensible in the modern game. Containment nowadays is really just a synonym for "keeping our beatdown until the final ten overs". In an era where a bowlers figures can start out as five overs one wicket for nine runs, and end up having gone for a hundred in his ten, the key is taking wickets. Constantly. Mccullum is always looking for wickets. It's a fantastic strategy, as no one scores at six an over while rebuilding.

By comparison, I must admit I haven't really sussed out what AB is doing, four years on. He certainly seems willing to take risks, bowling himself etc, but they all seem to be risks taken to ensure he doesn't have to take bigger risks later on.

Shane Warne was at his cringeworthy best last night too. Terrible scenes.

Big game for England tomoz. Not sure how big really, but I need them to lose to regain my predictor back to perfect alignment.

kingraf wrote:Big game for England tomoz.  Not sure how big really, but I need them to lose to regain my  predictor back to perfect alignment.

It be tonight young raf

Let's have a prediction on the side

Ali
Bell
Hales
Root
Morgan
Taylor
Buttler
Woakes
Broad
Anderson
Finn

Is what I reckon they'll do

thats my prediction olly.

hales for Ballanace

Just need two wins in the last three games to notch a quarter-final place.

I think England will beat Sri Lanka, tonight, and they will do it with Ballance still in the starting eleven.

It might put England second in the group as well, if only for a slight moment.

Eng did not too badly against Lanka in lanka.
and outside subcontinent ......I would back Eng 4 out 5 times to beat Lanka.
just that Eng seem short on confidence.....inspite having a very good seam attack.
their seamers need to fire and all will fall in place.
Except Ali opening as a pinch or whatever hitter ......has become outdated 10 years back.
although i liked tredwell when i saw him in Champions Trophy......now with Ali in....he does an equall job as a spinner.

Finishing 4th is not bad for Eng.....might give them ind as the QF opponent.....over whom they have some wood.

Yeah, I'd give England a good chance of winning. I hope you don't for the sake of my predictor (which despite being completely wrong on placing, seems just about on course match up wise), but this Lankan team is no great shakes.

It is our easiest of matches against the better sides in the group, but lest we forget they did beat us in the ODI series in the summer on our patch

Sri Lanka would need massive contributions from Sangakkara, Dilshan and Mahela with the bat and the Slinger with the ball if they stand a chance a gainst England. As KPF said, I'd back England more in away conditions against Sri Lanka.

Missed the 2 games yesterday as I was away the entire day.
Fabulous from New Zealand and Australia. The game is far more interesting when the ball is slightly on top....... Terrific from Boult, but equally important contributions from Vettori and Southee. Kane Williamson was brilliant, and McCullum has been very positive as batsman and leader. Brilliant from Starc too.
Yet another solid bowling performance from India led this time by Ashwin, and I find it very surprising that they've been able to maintain this successful patch this long. Rohit Sharma scored all those obvious runs waiting to come flying, he should feel harddone by because India didn't bat first.

I see Mitchell Johnson had figures of 6 1 68 0. Was he as awful as the figures suggest? Was it the 'he bowls to the left he bowls to the right' version who turned up after a long while?

Cometh the minnows...cometh the maaaaann...Rohit Sharma...

narrowly missed the double hundred.....had Dhoni called Heads and instead of tails and batted first

England unchanged, eugh

Blimey, England win the toss and bat.

Thought we would have bowled, given the high level of swing that New Zealand managed to elicit in the massacre all those days ago.

How many balls is Gary Ballance going to face to make his fourth consecutive 10 today? That's the big question.

JDizzle wrote:How many balls is Gary Ballance going to face to make his fourth consecutive 10 today? That's the big question.

It's a shame for Ballance all this because he's been thrown in the deep end, given literally no time in the middle beforehand and batting out of position. Theres not many who'd swim in that situation

"@swildecricket: England last ten matches batting first
LLLWLLLLLW"

Or alternatively LOOOOLLLLLLL

To be fair to the selectors, Ballance broke his finger so couldn't play in the build up. Should be in at 6 though, Taylor is the 3.

Olly wrote:"@swildecricket: England last ten matches batting first
LLLWLLLLLW"

Or alternatively LOOOOLLLLLLL

You cannot possibly mock our one-game winning run!

England are on an unstoppable march. #sixgamesfromglory