2014 Cricket World Cup - Official Thread
Discussion
Commentators talking again about the reduced teams for the next WC might even mean the tournament lasts longer than it does now.
If I could organise it it'd be 12 teams, in 4 groups of 3, winner of each group plays in the semi-finals, winners to the final. Maximum number of games a team might play is 4. One week for the 3 games of each group starting on Sunday-Friday (2 per day), the next week for semis (Weds), final on the final Sunday. Tournament completed in 15 days. Even if you spread the group games out for an extra week it'll still only be as long as a football world cup (3 weeks).
If I could organise it it'd be 12 teams, in 4 groups of 3, winner of each group plays in the semi-finals, winners to the final. Maximum number of games a team might play is 4. One week for the 3 games of each group starting on Sunday-Friday (2 per day), the next week for semis (Weds), final on the final Sunday. Tournament completed in 15 days. Even if you spread the group games out for an extra week it'll still only be as long as a football world cup (3 weeks).
Edited by FourWheelDrift on Wednesday 4th March 12:45
I can't help thinking how other teams would have got on defending 300 against SL ...
Aus, India ... would SL have lost just ONE wkt - I doubt it ... would they have got 300 as easily, I doubt it ... would they have won - difficult to say. I just think the more modern approach (and talent) of for sure Aus at the moment when fielding would have taken a few more SL wkts than we did, which changes the nature of the chase completely.
So 300 was enough maybe - but not for the current England XI to defend ...
Balance has got to go - for sure - so Hales comes in - with Ali, then Bell at three? We need a Pietersen-type player who can go for it from the off - someone who just bludgeons the f
k out of the bowling - and I can't think of anyone we have who plays that kind of game. Buttler can, but he's much better slightly lower down. We need someone at 4 or 5 - we have Root I know but we need someone at the other end to Root. Taylor is a decent player but there must be better ones in this format.
A Scotty Styrus type - a Gilchrist type ... plays who can play decent cricket shots but with the emphasis on putting the ball OVER the rope - not nudging it for a single.
England don't seem to have worked out yet HOW to disrupt the opposition's plans. They are far too easy to play against - as everyone knows what the tactics are. Everyone knows what the Kiwis' tactics are - but you really have to think as a fielding team HOW you are going to combat the onslaught. McCullum will make a single figure score at this WC I am sure - it'll be interesting to see what NZ do then.
Aus, India ... would SL have lost just ONE wkt - I doubt it ... would they have got 300 as easily, I doubt it ... would they have won - difficult to say. I just think the more modern approach (and talent) of for sure Aus at the moment when fielding would have taken a few more SL wkts than we did, which changes the nature of the chase completely.
So 300 was enough maybe - but not for the current England XI to defend ...
Balance has got to go - for sure - so Hales comes in - with Ali, then Bell at three? We need a Pietersen-type player who can go for it from the off - someone who just bludgeons the f
k out of the bowling - and I can't think of anyone we have who plays that kind of game. Buttler can, but he's much better slightly lower down. We need someone at 4 or 5 - we have Root I know but we need someone at the other end to Root. Taylor is a decent player but there must be better ones in this format.A Scotty Styrus type - a Gilchrist type ... plays who can play decent cricket shots but with the emphasis on putting the ball OVER the rope - not nudging it for a single.
England don't seem to have worked out yet HOW to disrupt the opposition's plans. They are far too easy to play against - as everyone knows what the tactics are. Everyone knows what the Kiwis' tactics are - but you really have to think as a fielding team HOW you are going to combat the onslaught. McCullum will make a single figure score at this WC I am sure - it'll be interesting to see what NZ do then.
Gargamel said:
London424 said:
Can't we all just keep it simple and pick KP?
" No, happiness in the dressing room is more important than winning " Peter Moores 2014. 
Funny that isn't it...guess what happens next.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/internati...
el stovey said:
At least England won't set them such a big chase.
Even at present non-performance levels I think England are likely to be competitive with Bangladesh.It always amuses me that in both football and cricket people always bring up the difficulty of Englands group but...you'd hardly say, in cricket, a group with SA and India is going to be easier to navigate than Australia and NZ would you?
hornetrider said:
And the Bangles successfully chase a target of 319. Amazing eh Gargs
Flat tracks and rubbish bowling. Historically this doesn't happen often. Could you see this happening on Indian pitches? or in England in seam/swing conditions. If I am bored over the weekend I will have another good at stats guru.
I would guess that more successful 300+ chases have happened in the last three years than the rest of ODI's.
Something needs to be changed to rebalance things IMO. Why would any youngster want to be a bowler these days?
Just as there have been advances in bat manufacturing, how about a better effort on the ball front. Using a different ball at each end isn't enough. The Kookaburra needs to give the bowlers a bit more, whether it be seam, swing or grip.
Just as there have been advances in bat manufacturing, how about a better effort on the ball front. Using a different ball at each end isn't enough. The Kookaburra needs to give the bowlers a bit more, whether it be seam, swing or grip.
Leithen said:
Something needs to be changed to rebalance things IMO. Why would any youngster want to be a bowler these days...
That's easy. This needs to change:MCC laws of cricket (Appendix E):
Length and width-
(a) The overall length of the bat, when the lower portion of the handle is inserted, shall not be more than 38 in/96.5 cm.
(b) The width of the bat shall not exceed 4.25 in/10.8 cm at its widest part.
http://www.lords.org/assets/Agenda-item-11.3-size-...
Don't hold your breath waiting though.
Gargamel said:
hornetrider said:
And the Bangles successfully chase a target of 319. Amazing eh Gargs
Flat tracks and rubbish bowling. Historically this doesn't happen often. Could you see this happening on Indian pitches? or in England in seam/swing conditions. If I am bored over the weekend I will have another good at stats guru.
I would guess that more successful 300+ chases have happened in the last three years than the rest of ODI's.
zygalski said:
Leithen said:
Something needs to be changed to rebalance things IMO. Why would any youngster want to be a bowler these days...
That's easy. This needs to change:MCC laws of cricket (Appendix E):
Length and width-
(a) The overall length of the bat, when the lower portion of the handle is inserted, shall not be more than 38 in/96.5 cm.
(b) The width of the bat shall not exceed 4.25 in/10.8 cm at its widest part.
http://www.lords.org/assets/Agenda-item-11.3-size-...
Don't hold your breath waiting though.
I can see there being resistance to any reduction in hitting ability - the crowds love their sixes too much - which is why I would advocate ball changes.
There's been little incentive for advances as the balls are not supplied by the bowlers themselves... So here's an idea to shake things up - in an attempt to equalise things between batsman and bowler - allow each bowler to choose their own preferred ball. They would still have to be supplied via the Umpires, but it would give ball manufacturers a kick up the backside....
I was beginning to think bats were the problem and the one reason for these massive scores - but after listening to what mark Butcher said on TV the other night - I am not as sure as I was.
First of all, moving another fielder into the circle hasn't helped. It may not help sixes one way or another but only FOUR men now outside the circle - gives the bowler even LESS margin for error. I would like to see this changed back. All it has meant is that batsmen can go for the over the rope shots and stand less chance of being caught should they not connect right ...
What Butcher essentially said was that the whole way these specialist ODI players have of playing the game has changed beyond all recognition in the last few years. Players play with no fear, with better equipment I'll grant you but they try so many more shots now than they ever did. Teams still get out for 150 of course if they try and do it too much and come unstuck but that's the nub of the matter - they are not afraid to play with no fear. As someone on the Sky commentary said, ABdeV and McCullum bat as if they have no stumps! Some of these shots are outrageous and have no place in any coaching manual but that isn't the point - this ain't 1968 - this is the modern ODI game. So in short, these players are training themselves to play the game better, more efficiently and are reaping the rewards. The answer to combat this is: learn to fking bowl better!
When did the ball pitched up on someone toes cease to be the best ball to bowl when trying to stop people scoring runs? People have been doing it for years. Look at the success Malinga has enjoyed ... Ian Wotsit for Lancashire a decade or so ago - no pace but bowled at the death cos he could put it on the crease five balls out of six. Pitching it halfway down is only going to end one way the majority of the time I am afraid.
Totally different to how England play of course, we tend to retreat BACK INTO the crease to play as late as possible which is fine for the deflective shots and pulls maybe but not so good for putting it back over the bowler's head into the crowd. We just don't look like we're playing adventurously ...
Plus, in these other sides, you flail the bat, get out, no bother, carry on, you do that in the Eng set up and you're looking over yours shoulder at your position. Yet if you get out by being tentative that is considered okay.
We have a real chance to bang in a 350 against Banglasdesh in the next few days should we bat first. Trouble is, they might get them ... !
First of all, moving another fielder into the circle hasn't helped. It may not help sixes one way or another but only FOUR men now outside the circle - gives the bowler even LESS margin for error. I would like to see this changed back. All it has meant is that batsmen can go for the over the rope shots and stand less chance of being caught should they not connect right ...
What Butcher essentially said was that the whole way these specialist ODI players have of playing the game has changed beyond all recognition in the last few years. Players play with no fear, with better equipment I'll grant you but they try so many more shots now than they ever did. Teams still get out for 150 of course if they try and do it too much and come unstuck but that's the nub of the matter - they are not afraid to play with no fear. As someone on the Sky commentary said, ABdeV and McCullum bat as if they have no stumps! Some of these shots are outrageous and have no place in any coaching manual but that isn't the point - this ain't 1968 - this is the modern ODI game. So in short, these players are training themselves to play the game better, more efficiently and are reaping the rewards. The answer to combat this is: learn to f
king bowl better!When did the ball pitched up on someone toes cease to be the best ball to bowl when trying to stop people scoring runs? People have been doing it for years. Look at the success Malinga has enjoyed ... Ian Wotsit for Lancashire a decade or so ago - no pace but bowled at the death cos he could put it on the crease five balls out of six. Pitching it halfway down is only going to end one way the majority of the time I am afraid.
Totally different to how England play of course,
we tend to retreat BACK INTO the crease to play as late as possible which is fine for the deflective shots and pulls maybe but not so good for putting it back over the bowler's head into the crowd. We just don't look like we're playing adventurously ...Plus, in these other sides, you flail the bat, get out, no bother, carry on, you do that in the Eng set up and you're looking over yours shoulder at your position. Yet if you get out by being tentative that is considered okay.
We have a real chance to bang in a 350 against Banglasdesh in the next few days should we bat first. Trouble is, they might get them ... !
Edited by uk66fastback on Friday 6th March 14:17
uk66fastback said:
The answer to combat this is: learn to fking bowl better!
I've been very impressed by some of the bowling. In that NZ/Australia we saw both captains use bowling attacks (Vettori and Starc both heavily influenced the game at different points) and carefully managing field placing to get even top order players to buckle before they could do much damage (Warner and McCullum are no mugs). A captain has to constantly be looking to make the attack unpredictable and apply pressure, you can't just stand around hoping that something interesting happens.king bowl better!New management and an IPL style competition could really help drag the international team into the modern game in terms of skills and approach to playing. England has the resources and talent to be competitive.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff