• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

2015 Cricket World Cup Australia/ New Zealand

Ireland deservedly won the game, but the lack of application shown by some of the West Indian players was not acceptable. I know that there are many problems surrounding their domestic cricket, and this has spilled over onto the International team. Some players clearly would rather be anywhere other than at the world cup. It is sad to see West Indian cricket in such a shambolic state.
 
The West Indies seem to have got steadily worse ever since I started following cricket. Since Ambrose and Walsh they've not had much bowling to shout about and only Chanderpaul has been consistent for the batting side since Lara retired. They have/had good players over the years but never seem to get a consistent run. Can't help that their pitches are horrible slow/low dust bowls these days
 
The West Indies seem to have got steadily worse ever since I started following cricket. Since Ambrose and Walsh they've not had much bowling to shout about and only Chanderpaul has been consistent for the batting side since Lara retired. They have/had good players over the years but never seem to get a consistent run. Can't help that their pitches are horrible slow/low dust bowls these days

Agreed, but it does not help that a lot of the players just do not seem too interested in representing their country.
 
Its strange that they don't want countries like Ireland, Netherlands and Afghanistan who are making strides to progress and increase the sports appeal, I read somewhere that since the last world cup Ireland has played only 9 1-day internationals against test playing countries in the last 4 years (2 of those were against England, who played them under duress), the Aussies and Pakistan are the only ones who seem to show a bit of encouragement.

The next world cup is cut down to 10 teams, top 8 ranked plus 2 others, you can't get ranking points unless you are playing the top teams even if Ireland were to win the world cup this year we wouldn't have enough points to make the top 8. It is a closed shop where the top 8 don't want anyone else, given the chance they would ditch Zimbabwe.

Thirty years ago Rugby and Cricket had similar global appeal 8 or so nations who took it seriously, since then compare rugby's attitude, introducing Italy/Argentina to regular top class competition, the 7's series going round the world (this week was in Las Vegas), Commonwealth games/Olympic participation, regular matches with weaker nations (even if only fielding second strings), 20 team world cups.

You can argue that its hasn't all worked and still not enough teams are competitive at the highest level but at least they are trying and encouraging the smaller nations.

You can keep Morgan!!!
In some ways the ICC can't win though. They get criticised for a bloated elongated tournament that goes on for nearly 2 months like this one and then get criticised for cutting it down. A 10 team tournament with 2 teams qualifying from a pool seems the right way to go to me. Maybe put the 2 lowest ranked from the Top 8 into qualifying as well and the Top 4 go through.
 
http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-cricket-world-cup-2015/content/story/833045.html

I like George Dobell but I don't buy this thing that Morgan was the only alternative. Averaging 16 over 18 games should have automatically disbarred him from consideration, I don't see him as a long term option anyway as he'll get dropped at some point (I don't see him turning his form around to any meaningful degree, everyone knows how to bowl at him now and he has no answers) plus ODI captaincy is really not that taxing, it is captaincy by numbers for the large part. Although we tend to do it in the most obvious and detrimental way, so much of it is pre-planned in any case. You know who'll be bowling when for the most part and there are only so many permutations with field placings given the restrictions.

Given that he is obviously going to be in the side for this tournament at least then I think it is critical that we move him to six. There is absolutely no way he should be above Taylor in the order.

I am going to steal "Eoin M0000rgan" though.
 
In some ways the ICC can't win though. They get criticised for a bloated elongated tournament that goes on for nearly 2 months like this one and then get criticised for cutting it down. A 10 team tournament with 2 teams qualifying from a pool seems the right way to go to me. Maybe put the 2 lowest ranked from the Top 8 into qualifying as well and the Top 4 go through.

I don't know why they can't just do 4 groups of 4 followed by QF, sf and final. That adds two extra 'associates' and would be a total of 31 matches - easily doable in a month, no?
 
Yes.

Just been watching Sky World Cup classics on their dedicated channel. Just showed the semi between New Zealand and Pakistan from 1992. What a different world. New Zealand in first and John Wright was out first (I think) for something like 17 from 23 balls, and the commentators said, it was a great start, as the last thing you want is to get out of the gate sluggishly. After 23 overs NZ were something like 69/2, and that was considered a good start. Seems weird to compare it to the game in the modern era.
 
New Zealand looking ominously good. They've got Scotland 12/3 already. Even allowing for the low standard of opposition in this one they're going to be so tough to beat in home conditions, their team really does have everything.

Edit: Make that 12/4
 
Scotland all out for 142 in the 37th over... New Zealand sneak home by 3 wickets at 146 for 7
 
Why did New Zealand try to win the game in a record time. That could have backfired on them.
 
In some ways the ICC can't win though. They get criticised for a bloated elongated tournament that goes on for nearly 2 months like this one and then get criticised for cutting it down. A 10 team tournament with 2 teams qualifying from a pool seems the right way to go to me. Maybe put the 2 lowest ranked from the Top 8 into qualifying as well and the Top 4 go through.

They are looking to put the two lowest ranked sides (presumably Bangladesh and Zimbabwe) in with the top associate sides to get the two additional qualifiers.

I wouldn't agree with what you are saying, but can see where you are coming from if the tournament was indeed streamlined and quality improved. But this is the ICC and their paymasters cricket India we are talking about and their ability to flog a horse until it is really really dead.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/oth...umph-to-underline-icc-injustice-30997788.html

According to this (I have taken it from the Irish Independent but I think its originally from the London version), next world cup 10 teams and they want to guarantee India 9 matches.

So 10 teams and we need to guarantee 9 matches for a side, what format could we possibly use???
 
It'd be the same format as the 1992 World Cup I imagine where the group stage was a mass round robin of everyone playing everyone once.

They won't go with CD's idea of 4 groups of 4 because it increases the probability of what happened in 2007, India going out early if they have a shocker of a match in the group stage.
 
James Taylor has been awarded an increment England contract for 2014-15 after his exploits for the one-day team.
 
James Taylor has been awarded an increment England contract for 2014-15 after his exploits for the one-day team.

He has done well Frank but the contract award is automatic due to the amount of games he has played.
 
They are looking to put the two lowest ranked sides (presumably Bangladesh and Zimbabwe) in with the top associate sides to get the two additional qualifiers.

I wouldn't agree with what you are saying, but can see where you are coming from if the tournament was indeed streamlined and quality improved. But this is the ICC and their paymasters cricket India we are talking about and their ability to flog a horse until it is really really dead.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/oth...umph-to-underline-icc-injustice-30997788.html

According to this (I have taken it from the Irish Independent but I think its originally from the London version), next world cup 10 teams and they want to guarantee India 9 matches.

So 10 teams and we need to guarantee 9 matches for a side, what format could we possibly use???
My mistake, I naively assumed less teams equalled less games and a shorter tournament.
 
Morgan has just stated that Taylor will stay at five or six as three isn't his best position. I hope this is a very short captaincy.
 
How many hits on the England World Cup Bingo tonight?

- Cheap wickets falling in first 15 overs
- Bowled out well inside 50 overs
- Morgan to score under 5
- Have opposition three or four down for not many but allow middle order to rebuild
- Slower ball bouncers during death overs
- Conceding 90+ in final 10 overs
 
Moores has said we have reappraised our death bowling, so we will see. Anderson and Broad bowling the last 6 with mainly yorkers, but some variation, is the way we should approach it. I know that a slightly misjudged full ball can be ramped in the modern game, but don't get why that leads to a desire to almost completely ignore trying to bowl that type of delivery. The death bowling against the Aussie's made us look like a bunch of Dernbach impersonators
 
There was something on Cricinfo the other day that said the best teams so far are averaging about 60 in the first 10 overs and 105 in the final 10 overs. We keep getting bowled out well within the allocation lately (something like 5 out of our last 8 innings I think) so that kind of scuppers that for us! As ever we seem to be about eight years behind the curve.
 
First 5 games the team batting first got 300+. We will still look to set a platform and get 260. We have failed to understand the impact of the new fielding restrictions, particularly in the last 10 overs. Despite the rhetoric to the contrary we don't have the destructive batting line up that the likes of Australia, NZ, SA and India do.
 
Back
Top