World T20

First topic message reminder :

The ICC have run some poor events in yesteryear but this is already taking the biscuit


No tickets on sale still, reports Delhi are pulling out as a host and Pakistan might not even be allowed to play. Oh and Australia have already announced their squad

But everything is "progressing smoothly" according to the latest ICC press release...

I agree with the notion that its at the home sides discretion what tracks they want to play on.

It is a bit different when its an international tournament though Imo.

guildfordbat wrote:

Strings Philander wrote:That was heart racing stuff - well done England for pulling through. A crazy qualification campaign but they've made it and shown great resolve throughout. Strangely proud of those lads.

Hats off to Angelo Matthews for making a real game of it.
Even more hats off to Willey, Jordan and Stokes for that bowling at the death
A whole hat stand off to Jos Buttler.

I can't decide whether Morgan getting Rashid and Ali's overs out of the way when he did was good captaincy or not. It put the side under real pressure, but maybe it was better that Willey, Jordan and Stokes knew what they had to do with their final overs - rather than Sri Lanka knowing what they would need to plunder off the spinners if they were left to the end? Because they would have fancied any target wouldn't they, especially if Matthews was still in - it was easy pickings? I'm going to give Eoin the benefit of hindsight that a semi final place deserves.

My reaction to the catch from Root must have been heard three streets away!

For me, the tournament is now officially a success, regardless of what happens next. (I'm going to make sure I remember this during the New Zealand game and just enjoy it!)

Hi Strings and all - as Olly suggested, I would have been inclined to bring one of our spinners on a little earlier. However, in the euphoria now of post match victory and a semi-final place assured, we shouldn't overlook that neither Moeen or especially Rashid bowled well. That certainly relates to today but probably also through the whole of the tournament so far where I reckon / guess their figures (runs conceded and almost definitely wickets taken) compare poorly with the spinners of most other nations. That imo needs to come under the microscope more than Morgan's captaincy.

Today there were a few too many half-volleys and full tosses from our two slow men but even ignoring those deliveries, insufficient variation for my liking. They need to mix up the flight and pace more - properly utilise Buttler as a wicket taking ally and bowl at times with the aim of a stumping. I've seen the Australian leggie Zampa in particular push the odd ball through quicker and wider with success. Too many of Rashid's balls seemed to be floated up with the hoped for aim of a boundary catch - taking nothing away from Matthews' great hitting and even greater willpower but that's a dangerous game and almost proved fatal.

Just caught up with a recording of Sky's The Verdict programme on the England v Sri Lanka game.

Willis in reply to Colvile's assertion that the spinners ''seemed to float up the same ball the whole time and Angelo kept whacking it for six'' - ''That was the naivety of it, wasn't it ... there was no real change of pace. They were sort of willing the batsman to mis-hit one up in the air but even an Angelo Mathews mis-hit will sail out of the Delhi ground. So that was poor from Ali and Rashid''.

Butcher was of a similar view - ''Spinners have got variation of pace, variation of flight and they've got variation of length and for those twelve balls [each] that got Sri Lanka right back into the contest, all those things seemed to disappear. It was the same ball, ball after ball and Angelo who had a dodgy hamstring didn't even have to get out of his crease to come down and hit them. They just kept landing almost in a drop kick area and he kept drop kicking them out of the park''.

To be fair to Ali and Rashid and the pundit himself, Willis also added that, ''on other occasions, they've bowled well''. I agree they've definitely been tidier and clearly more economical in the other games. However, I'm still disappointed that they - Rashid, in particular - haven't been more of a wicket taking threat to date.

Eh I'll cut them some slack, Matthews was in the zone and they've been our only consistent bowlers this tournament so far so one bad game I'll give them.

Intrigued to see how they do against a NZ batting line up which hasn't exactly set the world alight yet

I would prefer NZ over Eng in the final.

I think it will be a England/West Indies final. Think I'll have a bite of the 5/1 that is available for that particular double.

Of course, that's reliant on England actually (as the cliche goes) firing on all cylinders for once!

Here's a fun quiz question: what's unique about the following match?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/412683.html

(it's not the fact that the final over of Australia's innings was a maiden in which FIVE wickets fell...)

KP_fan wrote:I would prefer NZ over Eng in the final.

So you can get on with bashing England?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Here's a fun quiz question: what's unique about the following match?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/412683.html

(it's not the fact that the final over of Australia's innings was a maiden in which FIVE wickets fell...)

Only match where all the wickets for both teams? fell in t20?

ShahenshahG wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Here's a fun quiz question: what's unique about the following match?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/412683.html

(it's not the fact that the final over of Australia's innings was a maiden in which FIVE wickets fell...)

Only match where all the wickets for both teams? fell in t20?

yup. Surprisingly both teams getting bowled out has only happened once in T20 internationals...

Momentum thing I suspect. Not surprising that Pakistan would be involved in such a mad match.

Heart would like England-India.

Head thinks NZ-India

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Here's a fun quiz question: what's unique about the following match?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/412683.html

(it's not the fact that the final over of Australia's innings was a maiden in which FIVE wickets fell...)

Only match where all the wickets for both teams? fell in t20?

yup. Surprisingly both teams getting bowled out has only happened once in T20 internationals...

Also surprised - didn't twig even when I looked at the scorecard. Good question, MfC.

I agree with GSC

I can't see the West Indies causing India too many problems and New Zealand have just been too good so far this tournament and think they'll just pip us

Gooseberry wrote:

KP_fan wrote:I would prefer NZ over Eng in the final.

So you can get on with bashing England?

Eng are a far bigger threat.....have many more match winners than NZ
Stokes, Root, Morgan and Butler.......4 guys who can turn the game on the head with the bat.

and their bowling is the type that Indian top order doesn't like fast..... to fast medium...hit the deck hard....everyone other than Kohli is struggling with the bat,...and it would be too much of an ask for Kohli to expect to play another blinding match winner.

It would help India's cause if Yuvraj remains unfit and Rahane or Pandey plays in his stead.

If Eng are wise and observant...they would bring someone else in place of leggie Rashid........a fast bowler or a seam bowling allrounder or a pure batsman.

even the less capable and out of form Indian batsman would be able to get after Rashid

In the ind-WI game ...ind are the definite favorites . Superior organization, planning and intensity of purpose should see India through.
Against NZ:
Eng would be favorites .....they bat deep, have more match winners and a superior all round bowling attack.
Unless the BCCI prepares a spinning pitch to favor kiwi spinners and help India avoid Eng in the finals....and then prepares a belter Patta for the finals.
Too much scheming ....but if I was India captain...i would quietly hint that to my board

KP_fan wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:

KP_fan wrote:I would prefer NZ over Eng in the final.

So you can get on with bashing England?

Eng are a far bigger threat.....have many more match winners than NZ
Stokes, Root, Morgan and Butler.......4 guys who can turn the game on the head with the bat.

and their bowling is the type that Indian top order doesn't like fast..... to fast medium...hit the deck hard....everyone other than Kohli is struggling with the bat,...and it would be too much of an ask for Kohli to expect to play another blinding match winner.

It would help India's cause if Yuvraj remains unfit and Rahane or Pandey plays in his stead.

If Eng are wise and observant...they would bring someone else in place of leggie Rashid........a fast bowler or a seam bowling allrounder or a pure batsman.

even the less capable and out of form Indian batsman would be able to get after Rashid

Always get twitchy when KP_f and myself are on or close to the same page.

On a training course this afternoon so missing the game - cmon England!

guildfordbat wrote:

KP_fan wrote:
...
If Eng are wise and observant...they would bring someone else in place of leggie Rashid........a fast bowler or a seam bowling allrounder or a pure batsman.

even the less capable and out of form Indian batsman would be able to get after Rashid

Always get twitchy when KP_f and myself are on or close to the same page.

Further doubts about our spin attack raised below before quickly scuttling back.

''England may think about switching one of their spinners for a seamer, but will likely abandon the thought. The XI that defeated Sri Lanka is likely to take the field again.'' - Andrew Fidel Fernando (nope, me neither ) in his ESPN cricinfo preview.

To be fair, I'm not actually wanting one of our spinners to be dropped. Just for them both to bowl better and be more effective.

I think both will play. Moeen is also potentially a key batsman and has already won a game for us with the bat. With Stokes in there we have 4 pace options already. Wouldn't Topley have to come is if we wanted 5 seam options? He was really poor and rightly dropped for Plunkett

VTR - yes, you're right. The cricinfo preview suggests there are seam options [plural] to consider bringing in but there is actually only one - Topley who was mighty disappointing in his two games.

All in all, I don't think a change will be made or should it. However, [SPOILER ALERT FOR BL**DING OBVIOUS] both Ali and Rashid will need to be a lot more on the money than when they were bowling against Sri Lanka.

Guildford how dare thee be against Adil/Moeen - shame on you good sir (they have had only one bad game on a non helpful wicket tbf to the lads)

But yeah obviously everyone will need to play well today

Get back to your course, Olly!

PS Off topic and apologies for that but, Olly, keep your eyes peeled for the squad to be named later today for the Loughborough game - might be significant.

Don't get the calls for Topley to replace a spinner TBH. As pointed out Moeen played a key role with the bat in the Afghanistan match, and having one of Jordan/Willey/Rashid at 7 leaves a somewhat long tail IMO, you want a proper batsman at 7. Also Rashid bowled nicely in that game, and both spinners were our best bowlers in the SA match (Rashid coming back very well from a pasting early on). Have people forgotten how poor Topley was in his two matches? I'm a fan of the lad but he just didn't bowl well. Finally, 4+2 is surely a far far better balance than 5+1? Wasn't that long ago (two matches) we were talking about playing three spinners, now it's just one? crazy thoughts.

No, if the selectors really feel that Rashid isn't up to the job, and I doubt they do, they'll go with Dawson surely.

Anyone watching the women's match? Just switched it on, Aus made 132, decent score, but stuttered at the end looking at the scorecard (or England came back well). England's batting has been hit and miss so far, with Taylor not scoring any, so hope she can come good.

England ladies 74 - 1 in reply to Aussies 132 and almost up with the required run rate. Doing well so far, tho loss of Edwards was a big blow. Once wickets start to fall England ladies have a habit of folding quite quickly. So match still wide open.

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:England ladies 74 - 1 in reply to Aussies 132 and almost up with the required run rate.  Doing well so far, tho loss of Edwards was a big blow. Once wickets start to fall England ladies have a habit of folding quite quickly.  So match still wide open.

No surprise - England did indeed implode!

Congrats to Australia, who held their nerve, but poor batting from England, too many dot balls ultimately costing them. In particular, Knight and Sciver scored 1 off 9 balls between them. If they'd scored from just half those dots, the result could have been very different. This put too much pressure on the later players to find the big shots, which they just couldn't do.

Reading the scorecard in my lunch break - 69-0 chasing 130 odd - dreadful batting from the middle order really

If England win the toss they'll win the match, in reality toss is luck and pick has favoured nz, apart from the Pakistan match, pitch got awful in the second innings and became an impossible chase.

I honestly think new Zealand have had luck on their sides, with some poor umpiring and Williamson winning the tosses, reckon England are in a good position, pace attack is about the same as southee and Boult don't play and England got better spinners (debatable, really like rashid) and batting is way superior, only Williamson looks solid. Guptil is also dangerous.

That is if topley is kept away

good toss to win for England IMO. I know NZ say they'd have batted anyway, and defending totals has worked for them so far, but different conditions here you'd expect, with the dew making their spinners less effective. Think England are in general better at chasing, so they'll be very pleased with that.

Bring spinners on, munro looked clueless vs Shakib, I'd like to see rashid have a go

Say that and Plunkett gets hit with 3 4s...

Where's moeen or even root

God sake, Morgan is a crap captain. Bring the spinners on

Williamson out... Moeen comes on finally.. Poor captaincy... Came on far too late

Anderson can't play off spin or good slower balls from pacers

What's the pitch like folks? Twitter seems to think 180-200 is needed for NZ

Looks 180ish pitch

That's par am talking about

Cheers King - hoping I come out of my exam about 5ish with England well on top!

Probably they'll get 200+ and we'll be 62-3 tho

Just catching up on my laptop - thought that was a cracking catch by Moeen.

What's the bowling and fielding been like?

Fielding good, bowling poor start (3-10), spinners been good, Plunkett second over poor but been decent, stokes been poor/unlucky. Willey was good.

Moeen should have come on around 8th over, not 11th

Plunkett finishing poor

Not one slower ball to Anderson... The guy can't play them

Jordan pin point yorkers so far

I always rated this lad Jordan

And Stokes following up - overs 17 and 18 see NZ from 133-3 to 141-6. Big shift of momentum, as we've gone from looking at a score around 200 to more like 170

Think NZ's batting in the second half has been very poor. England have bowled OK, but a lot of the wickets have come from balls which could/should have been put away. Stokes was unlucky in his first spell to Munro, but has got lucky in his second spell for sure.

Fielding's been sharp though, a couple of excellent saves, and Moeen, Morgan with very good catches...

VTR wrote:I always rated this lad Jordan

I think I'll refrain from comment there, VTR. I do though like a man who speaks his mind - even if it is after the event!

Thanks for the updates, Ko-King. Just from the stats, it looks as if Moeen could have bowled more than his 2 overs - yes?