Planet Rugby Forum

Biffer29 wrote:

A5D5E5 wrote:

clydecloggie wrote:

A5D5E5 wrote:

clydecloggie wrote:Cricket is the example of what rugby could become if World Rugby goes down the wrong path: a stale, closed-shop niche event where the same teams play each other over and over again.

This is the first time in ages I couldn't care less about the CWC - used to follow it avidly but the 10-team format and exclusion of teams like Ireland, Scotland and The Netherlands has just killed it for me.

I hate to break this to you, but international rugby has already reached this point. The teams that England play this year will be pretty much the same as the ones they played last year (give or take a couple of differences). And it was pretty much the same the year before. And the year before that. And the year before that. And every year for the 15 years before that. World cups sometimes add a couple of new teams to the mix, but honestly does playing Uruguay or Namibia really make any difference.

By contrast, there is far more variation in the teams that England play at cricket each year.

Cricket actively took steps to close its shop. Rugby is expanding its RWC. Yes, rugby is similar to cricket but it's nowhere near as bad. Yet. And probably won't be unless India suddenly becomes a rugby world power.

There are 12 test playing cricket nations of which 8 might be reasonably described as top level.

There are 10 rugby nations across the 6N and 4N of which 9 might reasonably be described as top level.

I don't like what is happening within international cricket, but that doesn't change the fact that international rugby is already more repetitive.

Each year England's rugby team typically play about 7 or 8 of the same teams. Each year England's cricket team typically play perhaps 4 or 5 of the same teams, and at test level, fewer than this. Adding a few new teams to be beaten by 60 points doesn't (at least to me) alter this.

Over the last four years, which England team has played more different opponents?

I have no idea and I'm really not bothered enough to do the research. The fact is, every year England play the 6N and at least two of Australia, South Africa, NZ and Argentina. Chucking in a couple of games against cannon fodder doesn't alter the fact that England play pretty much the same teams every single year.

Based on the Eng vs Animals ODI series happening now, this is going to be a bowlers hell and a batsman’s paradise of pitches in the RWC. Runs are very easy to come by at every ground this month.

Roy and Bairstow are major obstacles for every team.

handyman wrote:Roy and Bairstow are major obstacles for every team.

Yeah, but shithouse Pakistan batsman are getting 100s too. These pitches are roads.

Sandstorm wrote:

handyman wrote:Roy and Bairstow are major obstacles for every team.

Yeah, but shithouse Pakistan batsman are getting 100s too. These pitches are roads.

They are, but our bowlers are awful. Trent Bridge is also a place where lots of runs get scored regularly.

Beaver_Shark wrote:

OomPB wrote: South Africa
Faf du Plessis (capt), Hashim Amla, Quinton de Kock (wk), JP Duminy, Aiden Markram, David Miller, *Chris Morris, Lungi Ngidi, Andile Phehlukwayo, Dwaine Pretorius, Kagiso Rabada, Tabraiz Shamsi, Dale Steyn, Imran Tahir, Rassie van der Dussen.

* Chris Morris replaced Anrich Nortje on 7 May

The main concerns for me:
1. Our batting looks very fragile. Amla, JP and Miller need to turn up here. And Markram got good runs domestically, but his away record is not very good so far in his career.
2. Our fast bowling is superbly talented and capable, but I fear Ngidi and Steyn might break down during the tournament.
3. Do we only go with 5 bowling options or do we make space for Morris as the 6th option? If yes, which batsman gets the chop?


This is the side I would play against England in the opener:

QdK, Amla, Markram, Faf, Vd Dussen, Miller, Phehlukwayo, Rabada, Steyn, Ngidi, Tahir

Tahir, QdK Faf & Ngidi match winners for us

OomPB wrote:

Beaver_Shark wrote:

OomPB wrote: South Africa
Faf du Plessis (capt), Hashim Amla, Quinton de Kock (wk), JP Duminy, Aiden Markram, David Miller, *Chris Morris, Lungi Ngidi, Andile Phehlukwayo, Dwaine Pretorius, Kagiso Rabada, Tabraiz Shamsi, Dale Steyn, Imran Tahir, Rassie van der Dussen.

* Chris Morris replaced Anrich Nortje on 7 May

The main concerns for me:
1. Our batting looks very fragile. Amla, JP and Miller need to turn up here. And Markram got good runs domestically, but his away record is not very good so far in his career.
2. Our fast bowling is superbly talented and capable, but I fear Ngidi and Steyn might break down during the tournament.
3. Do we only go with 5 bowling options or do we make space for Morris as the 6th option? If yes, which batsman gets the chop?


This is the side I would play against England in the opener:

QdK, Amla, Markram, Faf, Vd Dussen, Miller, Phehlukwayo, Rabada, Steyn, Ngidi, Tahir

Tahir, QdK Faf & Ngidi match winners for us

Yip. Amla doesn't even deserve to be at the WC. I guess the selectors bottled it by not choosing Hendricks.

Same for the match day starting 11s at the tournament. Somebody needs to have the courage to drop Amla if he doesn't score and promote Markram to open with Duminy coming in.

Though it wouldn't surprise me if Van Der Dussen gets dropped to make way for Duminy.

Beaver_Shark wrote:

OomPB wrote: South Africa
Faf du Plessis (capt), Hashim Amla, Quinton de Kock (wk), JP Duminy, Aiden Markram, David Miller, *Chris Morris, Lungi Ngidi, Andile Phehlukwayo, Dwaine Pretorius, Kagiso Rabada, Tabraiz Shamsi, Dale Steyn, Imran Tahir, Rassie van der Dussen.

* Chris Morris replaced Anrich Nortje on 7 May

The main concerns for me:
1. Our batting looks very fragile. Amla, JP and Miller need to turn up here. And Markram got good runs domestically, but his away record is not very good so far in his career.
2. Our fast bowling is superbly talented and capable, but I fear Ngidi and Steyn might break down during the tournament.
3. Do we only go with 5 bowling options or do we make space for Morris as the 6th option? If yes, which batsman gets the chop?


This is the side I would play against England in the opener:

QdK, Amla, Markram, Faf, Vd Dussen, Miller, Phehlukwayo, Rabada, Steyn, Ngidi, Tahir

Markram is due a big one. He's consistently playing well but the luck doesn't seem to ever go his way and he seems to get out in bizarre fashion. I'm a bit concerned about Miller, too. He has the power to go big and to worry bowlers, but he's been having a few soft dismissals. Amla deserves another chance, but I rather fear he's a bit of a spent force.

Going to be interesting. I'm not expecting us to beat England on May 30th, but I think we can give them a scare.

Fenman wrote:

Big Nipper wrote:I think Saint mentioned on another thread that if you play England you better pray to the coin Gods that you win the toss and put the plums in to bat 1st, they can chase 350+ no problem

Your logic is reasonably sound, but don't forget the last time the Crims were over, Eng scored something like 481 batting first. It's a racing cert that England will be all out for under 100 in one of the games, but there's no way of predicting which one it will be.

The problem for us is that, batting first, we probably won't get to 250.

Our batting is notoriously flakey and our tail starts very high. Markram and van der Dussen have added a little stability, but if Amla goes early and QdK holes out to the leg trap, we'll need them to graft. Faf is also capable of runs, but very prone to lapses in concentration.

I can't remember the last time we scored 300.

Rinkals wrote:

Beaver_Shark wrote:

OomPB wrote: South Africa
Faf du Plessis (capt), Hashim Amla, Quinton de Kock (wk), JP Duminy, Aiden Markram, David Miller, *Chris Morris, Lungi Ngidi, Andile Phehlukwayo, Dwaine Pretorius, Kagiso Rabada, Tabraiz Shamsi, Dale Steyn, Imran Tahir, Rassie van der Dussen.

* Chris Morris replaced Anrich Nortje on 7 May

The main concerns for me:
1. Our batting looks very fragile. Amla, JP and Miller need to turn up here. And Markram got good runs domestically, but his away record is not very good so far in his career.
2. Our fast bowling is superbly talented and capable, but I fear Ngidi and Steyn might break down during the tournament.
3. Do we only go with 5 bowling options or do we make space for Morris as the 6th option? If yes, which batsman gets the chop?


This is the side I would play against England in the opener:

QdK, Amla, Markram, Faf, Vd Dussen, Miller, Phehlukwayo, Rabada, Steyn, Ngidi, Tahir

Markram is due a big one. He's consistently playing well but the luck doesn't seem to ever go his way and he seems to get out in bizarre fashion. I'm a bit concerned about Miller, too. He has the power to go big and to worry bowlers, but he's been having a few soft dismissals. Amla deserves another chance, but I rather fear he's a bit of a spent force.

Going to be interesting. I'm not expecting us to beat England on May 30th, but I think we can give them a scare.

You wouldn't give us a chance against Taranaki's u9 girls team

Rinkals wrote:

Fenman wrote:

Big Nipper wrote:I think Saint mentioned on another thread that if you play England you better pray to the coin Gods that you win the toss and put the plums in to bat 1st, they can chase 350+ no problem

Your logic is reasonably sound, but don't forget the last time the Crims were over, Eng scored something like 481 batting first. It's a racing cert that England will be all out for under 100 in one of the games, but there's no way of predicting which one it will be.

The problem for us is that, batting first, we probably won't get to 250.

Our batting is notoriously flakey and our tail starts very high. Markram and van der Dussen have added a little stability, but if Amla goes early and QdK holes out to the leg trap, we'll need them to graft. Faf is also capable of runs, but very prone to lapses in concentration.

I can't remember the last time we scored 300.

Here you go, you absolute fuckwhit

363/7 50.0 7.26 1 won v Sri Lanka Pallekele 5 Aug 2018 ODI # 4029
320/5 50.0 6.40 1 won v Australia Hobart 11 Nov 2018 ODI # 4069
331/5 50.0 6.62 1 won v Sri Lanka Durban 10 Mar 2019 ODI # 4112

We scored 300 in our last game

England are rightly favourites for the tournament but I don't think they'll win it. Unfortunately they have a batting disaster in them every dozen games or so. If it comes in the knockout stages then it's all over. Hopefully it doesn't come in the West Indies match @ The Rose Bowl as I've got tickets for that.

The Ginger Jedi wrote:England are rightly favourites for the tournament but I don't think they'll win it. Unfortunately they have a batting disaster in them every dozen games or so. If it comes in the knockout stages then it's all over. Hopefully it doesn't come in the West Indies match @ The Rose Bowl as I've got tickets for that.

Their bowling is a major concern, but even with a paper thin attack it is difficult to defend 350+

Big Nipper wrote:

The Ginger Jedi wrote:England are rightly favourites for the tournament but I don't think they'll win it. Unfortunately they have a batting disaster in them every dozen games or so. If it comes in the knockout stages then it's all over. Hopefully it doesn't come in the West Indies match @ The Rose Bowl as I've got tickets for that.

Their bowling is a major concern, but even with a paper thin attack it is difficult to defend 350+

Agree with that sentiment.
You would imagine the curators have been told to prepare tracks that are roads for England. I would be confident that they could chase down ~400 unless they have the aforementioned batting disaster.
Australia will be strong second favourites for me if the tracks are prepared like that.

Big Nipper wrote:

Rinkals wrote:

Beaver_Shark wrote:

OomPB wrote: South Africa
Faf du Plessis (capt), Hashim Amla, Quinton de Kock (wk), JP Duminy, Aiden Markram, David Miller, *Chris Morris, Lungi Ngidi, Andile Phehlukwayo, Dwaine Pretorius, Kagiso Rabada, Tabraiz Shamsi, Dale Steyn, Imran Tahir, Rassie van der Dussen.

* Chris Morris replaced Anrich Nortje on 7 May

The main concerns for me:
1. Our batting looks very fragile. Amla, JP and Miller need to turn up here. And Markram got good runs domestically, but his away record is not very good so far in his career.
2. Our fast bowling is superbly talented and capable, but I fear Ngidi and Steyn might break down during the tournament.
3. Do we only go with 5 bowling options or do we make space for Morris as the 6th option? If yes, which batsman gets the chop?


This is the side I would play against England in the opener:

QdK, Amla, Markram, Faf, Vd Dussen, Miller, Phehlukwayo, Rabada, Steyn, Ngidi, Tahir

Markram is due a big one. He's consistently playing well but the luck doesn't seem to ever go his way and he seems to get out in bizarre fashion. I'm a bit concerned about Miller, too. He has the power to go big and to worry bowlers, but he's been having a few soft dismissals. Amla deserves another chance, but I rather fear he's a bit of a spent force.

Going to be interesting. I'm not expecting us to beat England on May 30th, but I think we can give them a scare.

You wouldn't give us a chance against Taranaki's u9 girls team

I rate our bowling.

It's the batting which I feel is flakey.

re your subsequent post: Thanks. So that's 3 games where we have scored over 300? When last did England score less than 300? actually, I think it was against Ireland, but there's bound to be an aberration in a limited overs game occasionally. Generally, England tend to get to 300 quite regularly. Whereas we don't. Which was my point.

That said, our bowling attack is such that we have been able to retain our position at the top (or near the top) of the ODI table in spite of this.

Rinkals wrote: I rate our bowling.

It's the batting which I feel is flakey.

re your subsequent post: Thanks. So that's 3 games where we have scored over 300? When last did England score less than 300? actually, I think it was against Ireland, but there's bound to be an aberration in a limited overs game occasionally. Generally, England tend to get to 300 quite regularly. Whereas we don't. Which was my point.

That said, our bowling attack is such that we have been able to retain our position at the top (or near the top) of the ODI table in spite of this.

Amla scored a ton against Pakistan in PE earlier this year and effectively lost the game for SA. Countless nudges and nurdles, it was like watching England 10 years ago.

Rowdy wrote:

Rinkals wrote: I rate our bowling.

It's the batting which I feel is flakey.

re your subsequent post: Thanks. So that's 3 games where we have scored over 300? When last did England score less than 300? actually, I think it was against Ireland, but there's bound to be an aberration in a limited overs game occasionally. Generally, England tend to get to 300 quite regularly. Whereas we don't. Which was my point.

That said, our bowling attack is such that we have been able to retain our position at the top (or near the top) of the ODI table in spite of this.

Amla scored a ton against Pakistan in PE earlier this year and effectively lost the game for SA. Countless nudges and nurdles, it was like watching England 10 years ago.

I watched that game live in PE, no amount of luke warm Castle Light could make watching it bearable

After yesterday, I am retiring and watching only.

THis handy statistical analysis of my season will indicate why...

Big Nipper wrote:

The Ginger Jedi wrote:England are rightly favourites for the tournament but I don't think they'll win it. Unfortunately they have a batting disaster in them every dozen games or so. If it comes in the knockout stages then it's all over. Hopefully it doesn't come in the West Indies match @ The Rose Bowl as I've got tickets for that.

Their bowling is a major concern, but even with a paper thin attack it is difficult to defend 350+

They bat so deep that those collapses just don't seem to happen now. The last collapse was against Ireland - but that was without Roy, Bairstow, Buttler and Stokes. England by far have the best batting line up of all the teams

Roy
Bairstow
Root
Morgan
Buttler
Stokes
Ali

Their bowling isn't as bad as some think - Woakes, Willey, Curran, Archer and Stokes with Ali and Rashid.....that's not actually that bad.

They are also red hot in the field.

They are in home conditions and are regularly posting 300+ scores.....it would be a monumental surprise if they didn't win it. Maybe India or the West Indies (the cricket version of French rugby - shite until the world cup) could spring a surprise.......but I doubt it.

I hope the pitches step up a little though. Not sure how enjoyable it will be seeing teams regularly scorch 350.

This has got ABs 2007 written all over it

This guy doesn't half talk a lot of shit:

https://www.sport24.co.za/Cricket/Proteas/cwc-maybe-proteas-opener-isnt-date-from-hell-20190520

However, I kind of agree that we won't be expected to win against England so it won't be a big deal if we lose. England are expected to win, so if they lose, they will start feeling the pressure. Even if they win, only a complete thrashing will satisfy the expectations. It's quite possible they will hand out a thrashing, of course, particularly if we get put in to bat and we fail to get beyond 200.

But I'm reasonably confident we can make it difficult for them.

Good God almighty, the ticketing website is shite.

I'm trying to log in to put some tickets back on resale but it just kicks out an error message, and FAQs and contact webform don't want to work either.

Still, got tickets for Aus/SA, so expecting a few songs about sandpaper to brighten up proceedings.

Someone already mentioned - if the pitches are roads it brings Australia heavily into play.

If you actually have to bat on green seamers, it nullifies Australia alot.

If the weather holds this format means every match will be a battle. One big team always bombs in big tournaments​ and this won't be any different. If we take the big 3 to be Ind, Eng and Aus, Eng are the most vulnerable because they have a very poor Bowling lineup and the batsman can't bail them out every​ time. So my SF are Ind, Aus, NZ and WI. Ind to win

inactionman wrote:Good God almighty, the ticketing website is shite.

I'm trying to log in to put some tickets back on resale but it just kicks out an error message, and FAQs and contact webform don't want to work either.

Still, got tickets for Aus/SA, so expecting a few songs about sandpaper to brighten up proceedings.

Let's hope the camera men will be alert to players altering the state of the ball.

Masterji wrote:If the weather holds this format means every match will be a battle. One big team always bombs in big tournaments​ and this won't be any different. If we take the big 3 to be Ind, Eng and Aus, Eng are the most vulnerable because they have a very poor Bowling lineup and the batsman can't bail them out every​ time. So my SF are Ind, Aus, NZ and WI. Ind to win

OK - I'm not getting this?!?

You have Stokes and Archer and Woakes bowling good pace and Wood (if fit) is proper rapid. Curran seems to be the golden boy at the moment - taking wickets for fun. Then England also have Ali and Rashid (and possibly Dawson??) - both can be expensive but both take wickets - but when you're defending 350 or chasing 300 it doesn't matter that they are going for 50-60 runs if they are picking up 3 fors and 4 fors.

Where does this 'weak' bowling line come from? And can't that be leveled at most teams - the game is so far weighted towards batters that any of the top 6 teams attacks look a bit 'smashable'.

Just read that to get into the semi's, you need to win 5 out of 9 matches. For SA, those wins (hopefully) should come from beating 5 of Bangladesh, West Indies, Afghanistan, New Zealand, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. We might take 1 victory of India, England and Australia.

Looking at that, I'm hopeful that we can make the semi's.

Gazzamonster wrote:

Masterji wrote:If the weather holds this format means every match will be a battle. One big team always bombs in big tournaments​ and this won't be any different. If we take the big 3 to be Ind, Eng and Aus, Eng are the most vulnerable because they have a very poor Bowling lineup and the batsman can't bail them out every​ time. So my SF are Ind, Aus, NZ and WI. Ind to win

OK - I'm not getting this?!?

You have Stokes and Archer and Woakes bowling good pace and Wood (if fit) is proper rapid. Curran seems to be the golden boy at the moment - taking wickets for fun. Then England also have Ali and Rashid (and possibly Dawson??) - both can be expensive but both take wickets - but when you're defending 350 or chasing 300 it doesn't matter that they are going for 50-60 runs if they are picking up 3 fors and 4 fors.

Where does this 'weak' bowling line come from? And can't that be leveled at most teams - the game is so far weighted towards batters that any of the top 6 teams attacks look a bit 'smashable'.

I think the view has been that when you look at the bowlers averages, in complete isolation from what the batsmen are racking up, then frankly they look more than a bit poor. The thing is though that if England are scoring 350+, it's probably a bit unrealistic to expect the bowlers to be able to keep the opposition down to 250. While the English batting lineup is pretty awesome, it's not 100+ runs better than the opposition (that would make this WC insanely predictable), and at the same time, teams go into a match against England knowing that they're going to have to throw the bat to stand a chance. if you throw the bat on a flat track the chances of an international quality lineup not getting to at least 300 are pretty remote.

I would agree that the English batting is stronger than their bowling, but the idea that the bowling is actually poor is a bit of a joke. It's just that the batting is pretty incredible

Saint wrote:

Gazzamonster wrote:

Masterji wrote:If the weather holds this format means every match will be a battle. One big team always bombs in big tournaments​ and this won't be any different. If we take the big 3 to be Ind, Eng and Aus, Eng are the most vulnerable because they have a very poor Bowling lineup and the batsman can't bail them out every​ time. So my SF are Ind, Aus, NZ and WI. Ind to win

OK - I'm not getting this?!?

You have Stokes and Archer and Woakes bowling good pace and Wood (if fit) is proper rapid. Curran seems to be the golden boy at the moment - taking wickets for fun. Then England also have Ali and Rashid (and possibly Dawson??) - both can be expensive but both take wickets - but when you're defending 350 or chasing 300 it doesn't matter that they are going for 50-60 runs if they are picking up 3 fors and 4 fors.

Where does this 'weak' bowling line come from? And can't that be leveled at most teams - the game is so far weighted towards batters that any of the top 6 teams attacks look a bit 'smashable'.

I think the view has been that when you look at the bowlers averages, in complete isolation from what the batsmen are racking up, then frankly they look more than a bit poor. The thing is though that if England are scoring 350+, it's probably a bit unrealistic to expect the bowlers to be able to keep the opposition down to 250. While the English batting lineup is pretty awesome, it's not 100+ runs better than the opposition (that would make this WC insanely predictable), and at the same time, teams go into a match against England knowing that they're going to have to throw the bat to stand a chance. if you throw the bat on a flat track the chances of an international quality lineup not getting to at least 300 are pretty remote.

I would agree that the English batting is stronger than their bowling, but the idea that the bowling is actually poor is a bit of a joke. It's just that the batting is pretty incredible

You lads cannot be beat, I think they should just hand over the trophy at the opening ceremony and then play a couple of exhibition games whilst being bussed from game to game in an open top bus

Big Nipper wrote:

Saint wrote:

Gazzamonster wrote:

Masterji wrote:If the weather holds this format means every match will be a battle. One big team always bombs in big tournaments​ and this won't be any different. If we take the big 3 to be Ind, Eng and Aus, Eng are the most vulnerable because they have a very poor Bowling lineup and the batsman can't bail them out every​ time. So my SF are Ind, Aus, NZ and WI. Ind to win

OK - I'm not getting this?!?

You have Stokes and Archer and Woakes bowling good pace and Wood (if fit) is proper rapid. Curran seems to be the golden boy at the moment - taking wickets for fun. Then England also have Ali and Rashid (and possibly Dawson??) - both can be expensive but both take wickets - but when you're defending 350 or chasing 300 it doesn't matter that they are going for 50-60 runs if they are picking up 3 fors and 4 fors.

Where does this 'weak' bowling line come from? And can't that be leveled at most teams - the game is so far weighted towards batters that any of the top 6 teams attacks look a bit 'smashable'.

I think the view has been that when you look at the bowlers averages, in complete isolation from what the batsmen are racking up, then frankly they look more than a bit poor. The thing is though that if England are scoring 350+, it's probably a bit unrealistic to expect the bowlers to be able to keep the opposition down to 250. While the English batting lineup is pretty awesome, it's not 100+ runs better than the opposition (that would make this WC insanely predictable), and at the same time, teams go into a match against England knowing that they're going to have to throw the bat to stand a chance. if you throw the bat on a flat track the chances of an international quality lineup not getting to at least 300 are pretty remote.

I would agree that the English batting is stronger than their bowling, but the idea that the bowling is actually poor is a bit of a joke. It's just that the batting is pretty incredible

You lads cannot be beat, I think they should just hand over the trophy at the opening ceremony and then play a couple of exhibition games whilst being bussed from game to game in an open top bus

Anyone can be beaten in a knockout tournament. It would be a major shock for us not to make the semi finals, but then there's knockout matches. If the batting or the bowling fails to perform then we would likely be out - just as would the other 3 semi-finalists.

Big Nipper wrote:

Saint wrote:

Gazzamonster wrote:

Masterji wrote:If the weather holds this format means every match will be a battle. One big team always bombs in big tournaments​ and this won't be any different. If we take the big 3 to be Ind, Eng and Aus, Eng are the most vulnerable because they have a very poor Bowling lineup and the batsman can't bail them out every​ time. So my SF are Ind, Aus, NZ and WI. Ind to win

OK - I'm not getting this?!?

You have Stokes and Archer and Woakes bowling good pace and Wood (if fit) is proper rapid. Curran seems to be the golden boy at the moment - taking wickets for fun. Then England also have Ali and Rashid (and possibly Dawson??) - both can be expensive but both take wickets - but when you're defending 350 or chasing 300 it doesn't matter that they are going for 50-60 runs if they are picking up 3 fors and 4 fors.

Where does this 'weak' bowling line come from? And can't that be leveled at most teams - the game is so far weighted towards batters that any of the top 6 teams attacks look a bit 'smashable'.

I think the view has been that when you look at the bowlers averages, in complete isolation from what the batsmen are racking up, then frankly they look more than a bit poor. The thing is though that if England are scoring 350+, it's probably a bit unrealistic to expect the bowlers to be able to keep the opposition down to 250. While the English batting lineup is pretty awesome, it's not 100+ runs better than the opposition (that would make this WC insanely predictable), and at the same time, teams go into a match against England knowing that they're going to have to throw the bat to stand a chance. if you throw the bat on a flat track the chances of an international quality lineup not getting to at least 300 are pretty remote.

I would agree that the English batting is stronger than their bowling, but the idea that the bowling is actually poor is a bit of a joke. It's just that the batting is pretty incredible

You lads cannot be beat, I think they should just hand over the trophy at the opening ceremony and then play a couple of exhibition games whilst being bussed from game to game in an open top bus

Certainly.

A knighthood should also be part of the deal.

Rinkals wrote:

Big Nipper wrote:

Saint wrote:

Gazzamonster wrote:

Masterji wrote:If the weather holds this format means every match will be a battle. One big team always bombs in big tournaments​ and this won't be any different. If we take the big 3 to be Ind, Eng and Aus, Eng are the most vulnerable because they have a very poor Bowling lineup and the batsman can't bail them out every​ time. So my SF are Ind, Aus, NZ and WI. Ind to win

OK - I'm not getting this?!?

You have Stokes and Archer and Woakes bowling good pace and Wood (if fit) is proper rapid. Curran seems to be the golden boy at the moment - taking wickets for fun. Then England also have Ali and Rashid (and possibly Dawson??) - both can be expensive but both take wickets - but when you're defending 350 or chasing 300 it doesn't matter that they are going for 50-60 runs if they are picking up 3 fors and 4 fors.

Where does this 'weak' bowling line come from? And can't that be leveled at most teams - the game is so far weighted towards batters that any of the top 6 teams attacks look a bit 'smashable'.

I think the view has been that when you look at the bowlers averages, in complete isolation from what the batsmen are racking up, then frankly they look more than a bit poor. The thing is though that if England are scoring 350+, it's probably a bit unrealistic to expect the bowlers to be able to keep the opposition down to 250. While the English batting lineup is pretty awesome, it's not 100+ runs better than the opposition (that would make this WC insanely predictable), and at the same time, teams go into a match against England knowing that they're going to have to throw the bat to stand a chance. if you throw the bat on a flat track the chances of an international quality lineup not getting to at least 300 are pretty remote.

I would agree that the English batting is stronger than their bowling, but the idea that the bowling is actually poor is a bit of a joke. It's just that the batting is pretty incredible

You lads cannot be beat, I think they should just hand over the trophy at the opening ceremony and then play a couple of exhibition games whilst being bussed from game to game in an open top bus

Certainly.

A knighthood should also be part of the deal.

Sir Joffra Archer has a nice ring to it

England big leaders in the poll but I don’t think it’s that clear cut

Yes England deservedly the favourites but I think the aussies and Indians will be a huge threat in this competition

Just watched a few minutes of the 2015 WC with Rilee Rossouw being praised as the future of South African batting. Not even in the squad.

handyman wrote:Just read that to get into the semi's, you need to win 5 out of 9 matches. For SA, those wins (hopefully) should come from beating 5 of Bangladesh, West Indies, Afghanistan, New Zealand, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. We might take 1 victory of India, England and Australia.

Looking at that, I'm hopeful that we can make the semi's.

Don't forget it's England and the weather is certain to cause a couple of No Result/Shared Points occasions. You only need to win 4 to be in with a chance.

Justin Ontong asked about the England game: he says "the two teams are very even" (near the end of the clip).

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/ ... tice-venue

I'm sure that will come as a surprise to the England team!

Rinkals wrote:Justin Ontong asked about the England game: he says "the two teams are very even" (near the end of the clip).

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/ ... tice-venue

I'm sure that will come as a surprise to the England team!

Maybe you should just take a break from cricket threads - this is a world cup, in ODI format, where the outcome is never a foregone conclusion.

We have a bloody decent team, with possibly the best ODI bowling lineup we have ever fielded.

Big Nipper wrote:

Rinkals wrote:Justin Ontong asked about the England game: he says "the two teams are very even" (near the end of the clip).

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/ ... tice-venue

I'm sure that will come as a surprise to the England team!

Maybe you should just take a break from cricket threads - this is a world cup, in ODI format, where the outcome is never a foregone conclusion.

We have a bloody decent team, with possibly the best ODI bowling lineup we have ever fielded.

I can't disagree.

I think we are probably under the radar, which was the point I was making.

I'm not expecting us to win next Thursday (although, I'm hopeful), but I am expecting them to take England a lot closer than they expect. I think England are looking more closely at the games against India and Australia and won't be paying us much attention as they probably regard us as easybeats.

Gazzamonster wrote:

Masterji wrote:If the weather holds this format means every match will be a battle. One big team always bombs in big tournaments​ and this won't be any different. If we take the big 3 to be Ind, Eng and Aus, Eng are the most vulnerable because they have a very poor Bowling lineup and the batsman can't bail them out every​ time. So my SF are Ind, Aus, NZ and WI. Ind to win

OK - I'm not getting this?!?

You have Stokes and Archer and Woakes bowling good pace and Wood (if fit) is proper rapid. Curran seems to be the golden boy at the moment - taking wickets for fun. Then England also have Ali and Rashid (and possibly Dawson??) - both can be expensive but both take wickets - but when you're defending 350 or chasing 300 it doesn't matter that they are going for 50-60 runs if they are picking up 3 fors and 4 fors.

Where does this 'weak' bowling line come from? And can't that be leveled at most teams - the game is so far weighted towards batters that any of the top 6 teams attacks look a bit 'smashable'.

Archer is unproven and just like Burgess`s selection in the rugby WC, his selection could misfire badly, Stokes was poor in the IPL and was poor in the PK series, Woakes is the only one that is anywhere near good form.

Warm up match, SA against SL: 228 for 5 after 36. Looks like we won't be using our allotted 50 overs. Again. Or get to 300. Again.