The 2023 Cricket World Cup

First topic message reminder :

After the drama-free finish to the 2019 Cricket World Cup, the 2023 Cricket World Cup will finally get under way on the 5th October, having been initially delayed by Covid and then threatened by a Pakistani boycott.

England are the defending champions, and they're also the reigning T20 World Champions. Doubleplusgood, eh? They're looking to be the first nation to win consecutive ODI World Cups since the Aussie vintage of 1999-2007. Biggest adversaries to that are likely to be India, who haven't won a major global competition since the 2013 Champions Trophy, but will no doubt be heartened by the knowledge that the last three ODI World Cups have been won by a host nation.

Five-time winners Australia can never be ruled out, while Pakistan are fueled by a burning motivation to win the World Cup in the homeland of their greatest rivals. New Zealand have made the last two finals - losing the last on boundary count, would you believe? - and will hope to make the final step this year.

South Africa will presumably think they're due to win something, as they've not won a global competition since the 1998 Champions Trophy, while the Afghans will believe they can spin anyone into submission. Bangladesh will be hoping to make a sizable impact at the ODI World Cup for the first time.

Sri Lanka breezed through qualifying and will be encouraged by making the recent Asia Cup final, even if they did get hammered in said final. The Netherlands round off the ten teams after performing minor miracles in qualification, which of course means the West Indies, the winners of the first two ODI World Cups, will be missing out on this tournament for the very first time.

The ten-team format for the World Cup remains as simple as ever. Ten teams all play each other once, and the top four teams in the group at the end of it go through to the semi-finals, where it becomes a straight knockout. 48 matches total. There will be reserve days for the three knockout matches and, if necessary, Super Overs. But you can't win games on boundary count anymore...

Fixtures:

Tournament Odds:

Squad Lists (Teams have until the 28th September to finalise their squads):

Not really sure I'd say anything went wrong tactically, as such, it's just a collection of highly-talented players arrived out of form and looked very tired. There's also been a lot of upheaval with the captaincy and coaching changes quite late in the 19-23 cycle, which couldn't have helped things. England also haven't played enough ODIs with a first team available in the last four years.

In the ODI arena it's time to move on from Bairstow, Malan, Stokes, Moeen, Woakes, Willey, Rashid and Wood. This was likely to be their last World Cup anyway, but hopefully England don't drag their feet and include these players for future ODIs, only to see them retire in 2025 and realise that development time has been wasted for other players for 2027.

Question marks also over Root, Buttler and Livingstone. Root would be 36/37 at the next World Cup, Buttler 36/37 and LL 33/34. They might still make 2027.

England still have many promising talents coming through, of course they do, but we need to see the 2027 generation given enough ODI games where the strongest XI is available. A new captain, also, is paramount. Buttler's one of the finest limited-overs batsmen this country has ever had, but he's certainly not one of the finest captains. And The Hundred needs to be scrapped, not expanded. It is the cause of every ill. Get a proper domestic OD competition back on the calendar, and get England playing in August again. Build the ODI team back up, starting in December (I think) in the Caribbean, and have a tilt at the 2025 Champions Trophy with the new XI.

I'd say only two white-ball trophies between 2016 and 2023, out of six contested, is actually a disappointing return for this group of players. Especially as 2023 might be the worst World Cup in English cricketing history. But while it is all over in the ODI sequence for much of this group, or at least it should be, many will still be there for the T20 World Cup next year. That 2024 T20 World Cup will represent the actual end of the era, I think.

Hopefully on a high...

Anyway it would be churlish not to congratulate Sri Lanka . They have come out determined and totally outplayed England : for about the fifth time in a row in World Cups, I believe !

Well played Sri Lanka

This defeat is one of the worst I've ever seen. An utterly garbage Sri Lanka team, made to look like prime Australia. Outright humiliation.

England are brown bread, me old china. And somehow they have to pick themselves up for four games, to try and salvage some pride.

In terms of the World Cup as a whole, it's up to Pakistan now to save the Indian World Cup. Pakistan have to beat South Africa tomorrow. Have to. If they don't then the semi-final race will be virtually over, barring some minor miracles from Afghanistan. Then this miserable World Cup will have nothing going for it until the KO stages in nearly three weeks time.

And some drama would be nice tomorrow. You know, Pakistan need 13 to win off the last over, two wickets remaining. Something exciting.

Yes, this has been an absolutely awful world cup. I don't care much for the shock results, because they're unlikely to lead anywhere for the teams that made them. I think there's a lot of romance about this format because of 1992, but it really is not great when there's a few front runners

Sri Lanka up to 5th in the table on run rate while England drop to 9th.   Fortunately for England, Netherlands utter shellacking at the hands of South Africa Australia means Netherlands will finish bottom - unless they can get a few more wins.

I am sad to see my tournament favorite Eng beaten and bowing out.....as well as Pak is as good as out as I wrote yesterday.
Both these sides are well below their peak and lost it mentally

It was the Variant-2 Pitch i.e not bound by green grass, slightly looser black soil...ball stops a bit and grips a bit....and about 275ish is par for good sides.
Eng picked the right team....i.e batting down to 11 and all kind of slow and seam options
BUT
they went gung-ho with 2019 mind....we will smack the daylight out of Lankans and do what Aussies and Saffies did and post 400.
Well yet again they missed the opportunity to recalibrate to the pitch, the current era and play normal cricket and post 275ish


On Lanka

They looked like a good side in Asia cup....started here lacking intensity, are a bit happy go lucky all friendly no strong leader figure, and had one bad game vs Pak
BUT
As I Saw them closely in Asia cup just before the world cup and they have skills...more than all subcontinent teams bar India....and then it seemed at par with pak....now Pak seemed to have fallen apart.

They have 2 games vs BD & Afg and the the 2 or 3 or 4 slow bowlers that these sides will throw at Lanka will not bother them......a primed and running Lanka will overhaul them....they play spin well

Then they need to beat one of NZ or India
or
bcci can "arrange" to let them win the India game and get them as No. 4 qualifier and Ind's semifinal opponent.

No name Bertie wrote:Sri Lanka up to 5th in the table on run rate while England drop to 9th.   Fortunately for England, Netherlands utter shellacking at the hands of South Africa means Netherlands will finish bottom - unless they can get a few more wins.

Australia you mean. South Africa got ambushed by the Neds. Remember?

Well, so that is that then for England at this CWC. An extremely dismal showing, one of the worst I have seen from an England side and especially since they were the defending champions.

Well done Sri Lanka and I would not write them off to be making the semi finals just yet.

England will do well to avoid the wooden spoon as right now, I can see Nederlands beating them.

KP_fan wrote:It was the Variant-2 Pitch i.e not bound by green grass, slightly looser black soil...ball stops a bit and grips a bit....and about 275ish is par for good sides.
Eng picked the right team....i.e batting down to 11 and all kind of slow and seam options
BUT
they went gung-ho with 2019 mind....we will smack the daylight out of Lankans and do what Aussies and Saffies did and post 400.
Well yet again they missed the opportunity to recalibrate to the pitch, the current era and play normal cricket and post 275ish

Your insistence that 275 is par on near enough every wicket, it seems, isn't borne out by reality.

We've seen 300+ scores posted in 9 out of 25 games so far, by the team batting first, including 367 at this venue by Australia v Pakistan. 8 wins from those 9 games for the team batting first.

But teams who have made under 300 batting first have lost 11 out of 16 times.

275 doesn't cut it in the current era. And you're forgetting the other side of the equation, which is England's weak and out of form bowling. Partially the reason why they adopted this new style in 2015. If England had crawled to 275, batting like it was 2007/2011, the bowling would have been highly unlikely to defend it.

The game has moved on. 300+ is what teams need out there, not contenting themselves with 275.

On the bright side at least it's over. No having to talk yourself into whatever a wild series of results happened

A sad end to a group that produced epic results

GSC wrote:On the bright side at least it's over. No having to talk yourself into whatever a wild series of results happened

A sad end to a group that produced epic results

Hold on a minute.

If England win their last four games, and if Australia lose three or more of their last four, and if Pakistan/Sri Lanka/Afg all lose two or more of their last four, and if Bangladesh/Netherlands both lose one or more of their last four....then England are through!

Admittedly, England winning just one of their last four games seems a big hurdle at the moment.

Duty281 wrote:

GSC wrote:On the bright side at least it's over. No having to talk yourself into whatever a wild series of results happened

A sad end to a group that produced epic results

Hold on a minute.

If England win their last four games, and if Australia lose three or more of their last four, and if Pakistan/Sri Lanka/Afg all lose two or more of their last four, and if Bangladesh/Netherlands both lose one or more of their last four....then England are through!

Admittedly, England winning just one of their last four games seems a big hurdle at the moment.

We've still got the Netherlands to play, so should start slight favourite for that one. Otherwise, it's not looking too good...

How has such a good team become so bad so fast?

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:It was the Variant-2 Pitch i.e not bound by green grass, slightly looser black soil...ball stops a bit and grips a bit....and about 275ish is par for good sides.
Eng picked the right team....i.e batting down to 11 and all kind of slow and seam options
BUT
they went gung-ho with 2019 mind....we will smack the daylight out of Lankans and do what Aussies and Saffies did and post 400.
Well yet again they missed the opportunity to recalibrate to the pitch, the current era and play normal cricket and post 275ish

Your insistence that 275 is par on near enough every wicket, it seems, isn't borne out by reality.

We've seen 300+ scores posted in 9 out of 25 games so far, by the team batting first, including 367 at this venue by Australia v Pakistan. 8 wins from those 9 games for the team batting first.

But teams who have made under 300 batting first have lost 11 out of 16 times.

275 doesn't cut it in the current era. And you're forgetting the other side of the equation, which is England's weak and out of form bowling. Partially the reason why they adopted this new style in 2015. If England had crawled to 275, batting like it was 2007/2011, the bowling would have been highly unlikely to defend it.

The game has moved on. 300+ is what teams need out there, not contenting themselves with 275.

w.r.t the underlined you're  putting words in my mouth
I have explained 2 variants of pitches the  loose black soil ones, negligible grass resulting in slower, drier, holding, spinning a bit...worth 275  as par
the other one combination of red & black soil , good green cover of grass, hard and only assist semaers if they are able to operate with zero error margin in hitting good length.
These are between 330 and 370 odd pitches

Almost all grounds have both variants of pitches .

Re: Eras...I think you are stuck in past eras where all ODI pitches and conditions were deemed uniformly 330 as safe par.

This world cup as well has the Asia cup we saw before the world cup clearly had 2 types of pitches offering mid size and large sized totals

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Beginning to accept we might not win this World Cup now...

What a shame that this is how this white ball generation look set to bow out. Of course some will stick around for a while yet, but feels like for the majority this might be the end of the road.

Have given me the most sustained success, and entertainment of any England sporting team in my lifetime since Morgan took over after the 2015 World Cup. Two white ball World Cups, couple of close runs in other white ball tournaments, numerous incredible moments in bilateral cricket and series wins too. Was really hoping they had one more run in them, but it's a step too far barring a miracle here unfortunately.

Agreed. I really didn't enjoy ODI cricket for most my cricket loving life. Largely because England were dismal at it. Not just poor but most often way behind the tactics. It felt like a slow team in every way. Test stars with no white ball ability so often picked. Vaughan played 86 ODIs, averaged 27 at a SR of 68. It makes Cook and Strauss' records look excellent. It was so demoralising to try to support.

It may seem shallow to say that I couldn't appreciate a format as a kid because England were rubbish at it. That's the ODI cricket I had access to though. I wasn't streaming Ponting or Tendulkar's innings live on crichd in noughties!

My interest in white ball cricket kicked off with T20. There earliest years of it. My dad worked in London, had a flat minutes from the Oval. I started watching T20 during those earliest days and it was great fun. I still remember the first finals day at Trent Bridge vividly. It wasn't just shiny, it was interesting cricket. Adam Hollioake, Azhar, Saqlain, Ali Brown opening the batting. Then I started attending the County List-a stuff. At first it was a 45 over comp. Then it was a 40 over comp. Which I really loved and still feel is a better format for domestic List-A than 50 overs.

Off the back of that I became more interested in ODI cricket but largely following other teams. Still not England. It wasn't until the Morgan era that I actually enjoyed watching the team I supported play white ball cricket.

I hoped the batting power might pull them through but the bowling and fielding, which we both mentioned pre tournament, still worried me. I never expected this though. It feels like all the worries have come through in the worse way. Can Jonny do what he used to before the leg break? Can Malan replicate his bilateral class consistently in India? Can Stokes move? Do England have the middle overs or death bowling? Can we balance our side without Stokes bowling? Can the bowlers available last a long tournament?

All the obvious questions seem to have fallen the wrong way. Plus things I didn't question on top. I know Root hadn't played much ODI cricket since 2019 but he's such a terrific player and knows the conditions. Buttler has looked fried. Woakes can't hit a length. Even with the lack of ODI prep in the last 4 years I wasn't expecting those 3 things.

It all feels rather sad to watch at this point.

Looking onward to England's next game and it isn't pretty. A very good India side, in top form, at home and with pitches rigged to order. Whilst England are in disarray.

1.Bairstow 2.Brook 3.Malan 4.Root 5.Stokes 6.Buttler 7.Livi 8.Woakes/Willey 9.Carse 10.Rashid 11.Atkinson

I think I'd be tempted to do something like that. Brook up the order to try to add some impetus early. Carse for the middle overs. Back Livi to bowl 10 overs. Give Atkinson the new ball. That's where his performances at domestic level that got him picked came from. Top and tail bowling. PP and death.

I'd leave Stokes out now, what's the point in crippling him further now this is as good as over. Bat Wood at 5 for comedy purposes

England could use the remaining games to experiment.

No name Bertie wrote:England could use the remaining games to experiment.

How different would that be from what they've already been doing?

Considering it's such an old and small squad they can't really experiment even. The side I've offered above is about all they can do. Give Brook a chance up the order. Atkinson with the new ball. Try Carse in the Plunkett role.

There's not that much obvious experimentation to try with the older guys. Buttler opening is about the only thing I can think of? Even then, Jos looks very out of form and has got out in an very similar way 4 times now.

Maybe try Surran in a batting role with more responsibility? Lots of people who know his game, including Alec Stewart, maintain his batting might end up the stronger suit. He's had success up the order in the IPL. That currently feels a huge stretch in ODIs though.

Could throw all the names in a hat and raffle spots at present... maybe now they are effectively finished they will relax and just play and we will see a decent showing against India ; but I wouldn't count on it.

I'd caution against over reacting to the whole dreadful business though.  There is another t20 WC coming quite soon so England will still need to make sure the white ball squad contains a proper mix of experience and innovation. Sure , you could just say "sack the lot of 'em ! " on these performances but that wouldn't be much help to anyone. Will need to look at all options when the dust clears (which may include the leadership : having the t20 win under his belt Mott has credit in the bank but the apparent confusion around selection and tactics here doesn't reflect well on him. Is his partnership with Jos Buttler (who has looked totally frazzled on and off the field lately - really felt sorry for him trying to make sense of it all in the post-match interview  ; he looked as if he was trying to recover from concussion , even if it was only "virtual") working ? Buttler will surely continue as skipper - unless he doesn't want to - but might he need a different off-field collaborator ?

As for the players : well they've contracted a lot - including all but one of the current squad (what has Willey done to annoy them ? !) for the next year or three so plenty of options. Will be interesting to see how they deal with it all given the crowded International programme makes a lot of demands on multi-format players. Still other teams (who admittedly tend to have slightly less crowded schedules than England) seem to be dealing with it better. Need to get it right : if the qualification for next WC were arranged like this one England might be struggling to make it

king_carlos wrote:Agreed. I really didn't enjoy ODI cricket for most my cricket loving life. Largely because England were dismal at it. Not just poor but most often way behind the tactics. It felt like a slow team in every way. Test stars with no white ball ability so often picked. Vaughan played 86 ODIs, averaged 27 at a SR of 68. It makes Cook and Strauss' records look excellent. It was so demoralising to try to support.

Looks like you did not watch nor follow ODIs before mid 90s
Eng was a top One-Day side the originator of it and for quite a long time tactical pioneer
I saw as a kid Ind go past them in semis in 83 world cup where Eng had a decent run
& then as barely a teen with sadness remember us  fall to Eng in semis in 87 home world cup in what's still remembered the most brilliant ODI inning on a spinning track and that was by Gooch .
Even to date that innings of Eng would be  par score that would challenge the current Indian team on that pitch
Eng  fell in the final short by 7 runs to a dubious run out

1992 Eng was on course in the final to chase down Pak's total until that mercurial reverse swing over  by Akram  and his terrific mini spell plucking Lamb & Lewis knocked the wind out of their sails

And the 1979 final that I did not have the privilege to watch even in highlights but read amply about. Inpite of that final being remembered for Viv's inning....it was Garner who produced a blistering 5-for to crumble Eng from 180-2 to 190ish a.o when Eng were quite on track in chase of 280ish

That Period from 1979 to around 1993 was an era when Eng was a Solid ODI team second only to WI and ahead of Aus in consistency.

Mediocrity came when Gooch, Gower, Gatting,Lamb, Botham were gone and Artherton, Nassir, Strauss type Suave sounding, stylish English speaking defensive minded conservative, mediocre cricketers starting leading English cricket

KP_fan wrote:

king_carlos wrote:Agreed. I really didn't enjoy ODI cricket for most my cricket loving life. Largely because England were dismal at it. Not just poor but most often way behind the tactics. It felt like a slow team in every way. Test stars with no white ball ability so often picked. Vaughan played 86 ODIs, averaged 27 at a SR of 68. It makes Cook and Strauss' records look excellent. It was so demoralising to try to support.

Looks like you did not watch nor follow ODIs before mid 90s
Eng was a top One-Day side the originator of it and for quite a long time tactical pioneer
I saw as a kid Ind go past them in semis in 83 world cup where Eng had a decent run
& then as barely a teen with sadness remember us  fall to Eng in semis in 87 home world cup in what's still remembered the most brilliant ODI inning on a spinning track and that was by Gooch .
Even to date that innings of Eng would be  par score that would challenge the current Indian team on that pitch
Eng  fell in the final short by 7 runs to a dubious run out

1992 Eng was on course in the final to chase down Pak's total until that mercurial reverse swing over  by Akram  and his terrific mini spell plucking Lamb & Lewis knocked the wind out of their sails

And the 1979 final that I did not have the privilege to watch even in highlights but read amply about. Inpite of that final being remembered for Viv's inning....it was Garner who produced a blistering 5-for to crumble Eng from 180-2 to 190ish a.o when Eng were quite on track in chase of 280ish

That Period from 1979 to around 1993 was an era when Eng was a Solid ODI team second only to WI and ahead of Aus in consistency.

Mediocrity came when Gooch, Gower, Gatting,Lamb, Botham were gone and Artherton, Nassir, Strauss type Suave sounding, stylish English speaking defensive minded conservative, mediocre cricketers starting leading English cricket

Not sure if they were ahead in terms of consistency. I practically watched every ball during that period, either live on TV or at the SCG when they played each other here. True, they were very evenly matched over that 14-year period but of the 46 matches played, Australia had their necks just in front. 24-20 with 1 tie and 1 no result. Both teams won games they should have lost and lost games they should have won. My memory though is that it was all quite intense stuff (for the 80s) and the 'animosity' between fans out at the ground was possibly even more fierce than it is today. There was far less security back then too. Walking across The Hill was like walking through a boiling cauldron!

The team I feared most was the West Indies of course. It seemed like we won only a handful of matches against them during the same 14-year period but according to cricinfo it was a bit closer (I'm guessing most of our wins were after a series was already lost) yet it was still so demoralising for fans like myself. 64 matches played, 24-38 and also 1 tie and 1 no result. I'm telling you it felt more like 12-50-1-1 at the time!

Always felt as though Australia had India's measure during that same period. A few shock defeats but in reality it was 40 matches, 24-13-0-3. India's fielding in particular let them down. It wasn't until towards the turn of the century when that began to improve after the Aussies (too kindly and generously, imo) sent our specialist fielding coaches over to help your guys out in the sub-continent. That's like giving away your tactical battle plan to your 'enemy'. That was really quite silly of us but it saved some a lot of further embarrassment and improved the quality of the matches all round.

Pakistan carried the greatest fear factor for Australian white ball cricket (and for me personally) from 1979-1993 - after the West Indies of course. Over 37 matches it was tied 17-all with 1 tied match and 2 no results. In fact, even after 30 years since that time there is still a heavy trace of that 'fear' or more accurately 'respect' for their potential mercurial ability to play out of their skins. Some truly special talent there but like India used to have - there are some question marks on their fielding. Sometimes great but at other times it's verging on the comical. We all saw a few examples of this only just the other day.

SA has only recently overtaken us in ODIs (2021?) and are currently leading 51-55-3-1. That period when they returned after 1992 was also very intense competition. The stakes always seemed so high. With the WI beginning to tail off at around the same time, it was those matches v SA which seemed the most important. Always fairly even contests with good doses of controversy added to the mix. The miracle of '99 must have knocked them back a bit along with the sad Hansie Cronje tragedy. But they've always been a relatively strong and consistent side for the last 30 years. All teams have those lean periods when things don't go so well and some great players retire but it feels that SA are definitely getting their confidence back with a good bunch of skilled and robust performers... right about now. The Neds match was just an anomaly or a careless loss of focus. They were simply caught off-guard. They're already back with a vengeance.

Do think we can tend to overreact to simple poor performance/loss of form, to request massive structural changes (As is being seen online at the moment). None of the international players really play domestic 50 over stuff anymore...every team has played less ODIs in this cycle compared to the 2019 cycle (England albeit a bit less than others, but still).

I tend to just think we've massively snowballed an initial bad performance, and I do think the coach/captain need to take some blame. Constant chopping and changing of the XI, while trying to find players in form does make some sense...but it doesn't make sense when you're also then totally changing the structure and balance of your XI. We've gone from batting heavy, to all rounder heavy, to seam heavy and long tail...we've only played 5 games! I think Mott/Buttler have got totally spooked by that initial NZ loss. I also question the squad structure, did we really need all these seamers?
I think they should have landed on a XI balance, and stuck with it. You're going to have a few poor performances in 9 games of group stuff...

Also hasn't helped that essentially all of our supposed best players have failed to show up - batters have as a collective been woeful, and our "banker" bowlers outside of maybe Rashid, have been awful too.

I'd imagine it is the end of the road for some of them, but as Alfie and Duty have pointed out a home t20 world cup is on the horizon...so most are likely to stick a bit longer yet.

NB - How ludicrous is this ICC major tournament every year, seemingly forever, thing actually proving to be? Begins to lose meaning I think when you have a WC every year basically imo

Pal Joey wrote:

Not sure if they were ahead in terms of consistency. I practically watched every ball during that period, either live on TV or at the SCG when they played each other here. True, they were very evenly matched over that 14-year period but of the 46 matches played, Australia had their necks just in front. 24-20 with 1 tie and 1 no result. Both teams won games they should have lost and lost games they should have won. My memory though is that it was all quite intense stuff (for the 80s) and the 'animosity' between fans out at the ground was possibly even more fierce than it is today. There was far less security back then too. Walking across The Hill was like walking through a boiling cauldron!

The team I feared most was the West Indies of course. It seemed like we won only a handful of matches against them during the same 14-year period but according to cricinfo it was a bit closer (I'm guessing most of our wins were after a series was already lost) yet it was still so demoralising for fans like myself. 64 matches played, 24-38 and also 1 tie and 1 no result. I'm telling you it felt more like 12-50-1-1 at the time!

Always felt as though Australia had India's measure during that same period. A few shock defeats but in reality it was 40 matches, 24-13-0-3. India's fielding in particular let them down. It wasn't until towards the turn of the century when that began to improve after the Aussies (too kindly and generously, imo) sent our specialist fielding coaches over to help your guys out in the sub-continent. That's like giving away your tactical battle plan to your 'enemy'. That was really quite silly of us but it saved some a lot of further embarrassment and improved the quality of the matches all round.

Pakistan carried the greatest fear factor for Australian white ball cricket (and for me personally) from 1979-1993 - after the West Indies of course. Over 37 matches it was tied 17-all with 1 tied match and 2 no results. In fact, even after 30 years since that time there is still a heavy trace of that 'fear' or more accurately 'respect' for their potential mercurial ability to play out of their skins. Some truly special talent there but like India used to have - there are some question marks on their fielding. Sometimes great but at other times it's verging on the comical. We all saw a few examples of this only just the other day.

SA has only recently overtaken us in ODIs (2021?) and are currently leading 51-55-3-1. That period when they returned after 1992 was also very intense competition. The stakes always seemed so high. With the WI beginning to tail off at around the same time, it was those matches v SA which seemed the most important. Always fairly even contests with good doses of controversy added to the mix. The miracle of '99 must have knocked them back a bit along with the sad Hansie Cronje tragedy. But they've always been a relatively strong and consistent side for the last 30 years. All teams have those lean periods when things don't go so well and some great players retire but it feels that SA are definitely getting their confidence back with a good bunch of skilled and robust performers... right about now. The Neds match was just an anomaly or a careless loss of focus. They were simply caught off-guard. They're already back with a vengeance.

Wow PJ....you are that old
My qualitative memory...in the 1979-1993 era Aussies were not consistent in the world cups as Eng were....
Nor  did they  make it to the semis of the 7 nation B&H Cup of 1985 played at home.
that said I really started watching cricket 1983 onward......so prior to that its just statistical and reading

Aus had 2 peaks when it was a force in my view...mid 70s when ODIs had not yet taken off and then mid 90s onward....a very long one that finished 2015 .
The 1975 period of Lille, Thommo, Chappel Marsh etal  and they rightfully made it to world cup final they ran WI very, very close .
Aus was in decline in early 80s when their stars retired  and then started their rebuild phase where they surprisingly won the 1987 world cup with a bunch of youngsters.

Aus's world class consistency came from mid 90s under Taylor...made impregnable under Waugh....continued thru with Ponting and juts held on even in decline With Michael Clarke

Sadly England actually being good at the shorter stuff is rather the exception to the rule in my lifetime. Best to enjoy it while lasted

The calls to remove the tournament who shall not be named everytime England have a bad stretch are as inevitable as they are dull honestly. The preparation and lack of intense ODIs series hasn't really differed that much to anyone else. Just as Olly says a lot of key players just seem way out of form and as a group they seem to have lost some of the resiliency they had at their peak.

Be the end for a few, bowling attack probably much changed, probably Malans last tournament, Jos might feel happier handing over the captaincy. Wasn't a great look fielding an entire side over 30 yesterday

I don't know what but the ODI format does need something extra for the next cycle. It's a bit of an afterthought until a world cup comes around when there's a scramble to put together squads and warm ups. Even the organisation of this world cup has been a bit half baked at times. Take the point about the size of stadiums relative to England but the opener being in a massive stadium just compounded the problem that it looked mostly empty.

I also see the Champions Trophy is still on for 2025

Looks as though Pakistan are falling to defeat - 154/5 after 31. Semi-finals pretty much wrapped up if SA win here, with many, many games left.

Is the 2023 World Cup heading to be worse than the 2007 ODI World Cup, as well as the recent coin-tossing T20 World Cup? I'd say yes.

alfie wrote:Could throw all the names in a hat and raffle spots at present... maybe now they are effectively finished they will relax and just play and we will see a decent showing against India ; but I wouldn't count on it.

I'd caution against over reacting to the whole dreadful business though.  There is another t20 WC coming quite soon so England will still need to make sure the white ball squad contains a proper mix of experience and innovation. Sure , you could just say "sack the lot of 'em ! " on these performances but that wouldn't be much help to anyone. Will need to look at all options when the dust clears (which may include the leadership : having the t20 win under his belt Mott has credit in the bank but the apparent confusion around selection and tactics here doesn't reflect well on him. Is his partnership with Jos Buttler (who has looked totally frazzled on and off the field lately - really felt sorry for him trying to make sense of it all in the post-match interview  ; he looked as if he was trying to recover from concussion , even if it was only "virtual") working ? Buttler will surely continue as skipper - unless he doesn't want to - but might he need a different off-field collaborator ?

As for the players : well they've contracted a lot - including all but one of the current squad (what has Willey done to annoy them ? !) for the next year or three so plenty of options. Will be interesting to see how they deal with it all given the crowded International programme makes a lot of demands on multi-format players. Still other teams (who admittedly tend to have slightly less crowded schedules than England) seem to be dealing with it better. Need to get it right : if the qualification for next WC were arranged like this one England might be struggling to make it  

Yes, in terms of the T20 stuff, many of these players should stick around for the next global extravaganza in that format (about 7 months away), but the ODI rebuild needs to start in December with that series against the West Indies.

Fortunately England just need to be one of the best eight teams in the ODI rankings (minus SA/Zim) to make the next World Cup!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Do think we can tend to overreact to simple poor performance/loss of form, to request massive structural changes (As is being seen online at the moment). None of the international players really play domestic 50 over stuff anymore...every team has played less ODIs in this cycle compared to the 2019 cycle (England albeit a bit less than others, but still).

I tend to just think we've massively snowballed an initial bad performance, and I do think the coach/captain need to take some blame. Constant chopping and changing of the XI, while trying to find players in form does make some sense...but it doesn't make sense when you're also then totally changing the structure and balance of your XI. We've gone from batting heavy, to all rounder heavy, to seam heavy and long tail...we've only played 5 games! I think Mott/Buttler have got totally spooked by that initial NZ loss. I also question the squad structure, did we really need all these seamers?
I think they should have landed on a XI balance, and stuck with it. You're going to have a few poor performances in 9 games of group stuff...

Also hasn't helped that essentially all of our supposed best players have failed to show up - batters have as a collective been woeful, and our "banker" bowlers outside of maybe Rashid, have been awful too.

I'd imagine it is the end of the road for some of them, but as Alfie and Duty have pointed out a home t20 world cup is on the horizon...so most are likely to stick a bit longer yet.

NB - How ludicrous is this ICC major tournament every year, seemingly forever, thing actually proving to be? Begins to lose meaning I think when you have a WC every year basically imo

Agree about the balance of the XI being altered a lot causing problems. It seemed to indicate panic, and perhaps summed up the World Cup for England.

Not sure if a typo, but next year's T20 World Cup is in the Caribbean/USA.

Also agree that the ICC's stance on major tournaments is ludicrous. A T20 World Cup every two years, when there's buckets of franchise stuff, is foolish in the extreme. I wouldn't mind the Champions Trophy so much if it went back to its original purpose and was hosted by countries who are developing in the cricket world. Pakistan isn't the worst start, because they're getting back into being able to host cricket matches*, but maybe in 2029 it could be hosted by, say, Ireland and Scotland, or Zimbabwe and Namibia, perhaps the USA. Where's it actually being hosted in 2029? India.

We'll probably enjoy the 2025 Champions Trophy more than this World Cup from a format standpoint. Two groups of four, play each other once, top two in the semis, then a straight knockout. All done inside a few weeks, unlike this World Cup which will last forever.

*I imagine Pakistan hosting it will cause problems with India, however, so I wouldn't be surprised to see some games played in the UAE/Sri Lanka.

GSC wrote:I don't know what but the ODI format does need something extra for the next cycle. It's a bit of an afterthought until a world cup comes around when there's a scramble to put together squads and warm ups. Even the organisation of this world cup has been a bit half baked at times. Take the point about the size of stadiums relative to England but the opener being in a massive stadium just compounded the problem that it looked mostly empty.

I also see the Champions Trophy is still on for 2025

It's probably going to have a bit less for the next cycle, with the removal of the ODI Super League. There's growing talk of actually ending bilateral ODIs and only playing ODI cricket at World Cups every four years. Can't see that helping, to be honest.

At many stages of the game Pak looked like getting a lot more, but ended with 270
didn't manage to play out full 50

Something to bowl at.....and hope SA choke when chasing

270ao, after a bit of a fightback from Shakeel and Shadab. Unlikely to be enough.

Would expect SA to chase this without too much fuss.

Would be another blow to this tournament as Pakistan would join Bangladesh, England and the Netherlands in probably already effectively out. Would have to win their last 3 just to get to 5 wins. SL and Afghanistan with an outside chance with 18 games and over 2 weeks to go

Shadab off the field with what looks to be a real nasty head injury didn't move.for a while I doubt we will see him again tonight

Injury aside, not the best opening from Pakistans bowlers

Pakistan setting the tone for their defence of this target just like they did v Afghanistan - 30 off the first two overs! Game already over.

Obviously England being a disappointment has dominated the headlines, but Pakistan aren't too far behind either. Their spinners have carried little threat, Shaheen has been inconsistent and rarely backed up, and the batting has struggled, with only two centuries made by Pakistani batsmen in a tournament where centuries are being made almost routinely.

Pakistan should have done a lot, lot better than this, even if they were rocked by losing Naseem Shah on the eve.

Australia can pull the drawbridge up tomorrow if they beat NZ. That would give them a 4 point lead, with games v Eng/Afg/Ban to come. But a NZ win keeps the faintest of hopes alive for England, before they presumably get snuffed out v India on Sunday.

Of the four likely semi-finalists, I'd like it if NZ or SA can finally lift the big one. NZ six semi-finals and two runner-up finishes; SA four semi-finals but never made the final.

Bavuma needs to play a material inning

i am surprised to see Bavuma has an average of 51
I first thought its his SR

Surely Pakistan must have some more bowling reserves? Harris rauf is clearly in horrendous form, looks short on confidence and 3 balls into his spell bavuma hits him for 6...

Need wickets sharpish or SA are gonna monster this chase

SA's bowlers will have to mop-up the last 30 odd runs I sense

Think Pakistan need a few more in the next 10 overs if they're gonna have enough to put the lower order under pressure

Duty281 wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Do think we can tend to overreact to simple poor performance/loss of form, to request massive structural changes (As is being seen online at the moment). None of the international players really play domestic 50 over stuff anymore...every team has played less ODIs in this cycle compared to the 2019 cycle (England albeit a bit less than others, but still).

I tend to just think we've massively snowballed an initial bad performance, and I do think the coach/captain need to take some blame. Constant chopping and changing of the XI, while trying to find players in form does make some sense...but it doesn't make sense when you're also then totally changing the structure and balance of your XI. We've gone from batting heavy, to all rounder heavy, to seam heavy and long tail...we've only played 5 games! I think Mott/Buttler have got totally spooked by that initial NZ loss. I also question the squad structure, did we really need all these seamers?
I think they should have landed on a XI balance, and stuck with it. You're going to have a few poor performances in 9 games of group stuff...

Also hasn't helped that essentially all of our supposed best players have failed to show up - batters have as a collective been woeful, and our "banker" bowlers outside of maybe Rashid, have been awful too.

I'd imagine it is the end of the road for some of them, but as Alfie and Duty have pointed out a home t20 world cup is on the horizon...so most are likely to stick a bit longer yet.

NB - How ludicrous is this ICC major tournament every year, seemingly forever, thing actually proving to be? Begins to lose meaning I think when you have a WC every year basically imo

Agree about the balance of the XI being altered a lot causing problems. It seemed to indicate panic, and perhaps summed up the World Cup for England.

Not sure if a typo, but next year's T20 World Cup is in the Caribbean/USA.

Also agree that the ICC's stance on major tournaments is ludicrous. A T20 World Cup every two years, when there's buckets of franchise stuff, is foolish in the extreme. I wouldn't mind the Champions Trophy so much if it went back to its original purpose and was hosted by countries who are developing in the cricket world. Pakistan isn't the worst start, because they're getting back into being able to host cricket matches*, but maybe in 2029 it could be hosted by, say, Ireland and Scotland, or Zimbabwe and Namibia, perhaps the USA. Where's it actually being hosted in 2029? India.

We'll probably enjoy the 2025 Champions Trophy more than this World Cup from a format standpoint. Two groups of four, play each other once, top two in the semis, then a straight knockout. All done inside a few weeks, unlike this World Cup which will last forever.

*I imagine Pakistan hosting it will cause problems with India, however, so I wouldn't be surprised to see some games played in the UAE/Sri Lanka.

It wasn't a typo - I am sure I have read that it's highly likely the T20 World Cup will be moved to England next year, but it seems there is nothing official about that.

Pakistan running out of time now really. Now or never if they're gonna come back. Might as well bowl out Afridi

I'd guess if major league cricket is gonna get off the ground, the us can't lose this world cup

Just gave the scorecard a quick look...and what do you know? Close finish inbound, after SA lost 2 wickets in 6 balls.

Still need 15 with two wickets left. But Shaheen has bowled his ten.

Look away for 30 mins and it finally gets interesting

And the 9th! What a catch on the bowler's followthrough.

Still 11 to get.

South Africa win by one wicket! In the first close finish we've had.

Pakistan could have won it, but an 'umpire's call' decision went SA's way. And it was finished off by Nawaz bowling a dreadful delivery. Good fightback by Pakistan, but they had too much to do after a poor start with the ball and, before that, they didn't score enough with the bat.

Pakistan virtually finished off, with a 2-4 record. And SA virtually through, not even losing to the Dutch could stop them this time.

Two games tomorrow. The main one being Aus v NZ, where Australia can finish things off in the semi-final race with a victory. Or, maybe, NZ can win and keep England's faint hopes alive?

The power of the Par score of 275 was a full display
Black soil pitch, slow, stopping a bit....spinning for both wrist spinners...
Chokers SA almost choked.....or look at the glass  half full....came over choking....in a tight finish

What could Pak have done better?
scored 5 more runs to get to a par score
or
more seriously......should have had more close-ins saving singles for much longer
and 1 or two more catchers
Babar is an extremely unintelligent captain.
NZ or India or half the sides would have won defending this