20/20 world cup

Lumb Has made a nice start for England.

30/0 3 overs Lumb has 27

********, Lumb out

Lol. Pieterson in. Come on then.

Just put the mockers on him, out for 28

Oh dear a collapse happening 87-4

Oh dear a collapse happening 87-4

England, the team ( along with Hants as well now) who specialise in collapses of all kinds !

115/4 wright seems to be trying to play a test match innings, dropping the anchor:rolleyes:

Everytime I comment the opposite happens, wright now flying.

He's doing alright now though. 151-4 after 17 overs.

That was just Huge!

What a shot.

Good total this

LOL Wright loses his bat.

191-5 after the 20.

Good score.

115/4 wright seems to be trying to play a test match innings, dropping the anchor:rolleyes:

191/5 off 20. Wright the slow coach 45* off 27 balls, not good enough !

191/5 off 20. Wright the slow coach 45* off 27 balls, not good enough !

I did say he'd speeded things up c*cklebreath.

Yes but not before saying "115/4 wright seems to be trying to play a test match innings, dropping the anchor !" you dim brain !

Yes but not before saying "115/4 wright seems to be trying to play a test match innings, dropping the anchor !" you dim brain !

Shhh!!!!

You still here nipper !!!

are people ITK still thinking D/L method is the fairest method for adjusting rain affected games? Am thinking it may be for 50 over games but not so 20/20?

Hopefully that wont dent the teams confidence, fantastic batting display.

Giving Broad the final over though? To defend 8 runs? Was never going to happen. Why didnt Collingwood or Wright bowl? I saw Wright defend something like 7 or 8 in a limited overs game for England before, he's got it in his locker for sure...

are people ITK still thinking D/L method is the fairest method for adjusting rain affected games? Am thinking it may be for 50 over games but not so 20/20?

 

Hopefully that wont dent the teams confidence, fantastic batting display.

 

Giving Broad the final over though? To defend 8 runs? Was never going to happen. Why didnt Collingwood or Wright bowl? I saw Wright defend something like 7 or 8 in a limited overs game for England before, he's got it in his locker for sure...

D/L is a farce even for 50 overs, in 20/20 it really does give the team batting 2nd a huge advantage. That said the game was effectively lost in the first over bowled by Sidebottom which went for 15 runs, he didn't bowl again and when the rain arrived WI were 30-0 off 2.2. I had no problem with giving the last over to Broad who along with Swann is easily our best ODI bowler IMO. It was nigh on impossible to defend 8 runs.

I've not really got an issue using Duckworth/Lewis to set a total, but to allow the chasing team their full quota of wickets is absolute nonsense as it allows them to just go out there and slog from ball one without the worry of how many wickets they've got left.

Take yesterday's game as an example, 60 from 6 overs wasn't a particularly unreasonable target, but if the number of wickets allowed were to be reduced proportionally in line with the number of overs to be bowled (i.e. 20 divided by 6 = 3.33, round it up to 4), it would have made it a more realistic game. With only 4 wickets to play with, it would be much riskier to slog from ball one.

Sidearse's 15-run over was the key, though, ultimately.

rain forecast for tonight as well, so Maybe England should bat second if win toss.

I've not really got an issue using Duckworth/Lewis to set a total, but to allow the chasing team their full quota of wickets is absolute nonsense as it allows them to just go out there and slog from ball one without the worry of how many wickets they've got left.

 

Take yesterday's game as an example, 60 from 6 overs wasn't a particularly unreasonable target, but if the number of wickets allowed were to be reduced proportionally in line with the number of overs to be bowled (i.e. 20 divided by 6 = 3.33, round it up to 4), it would have made it a more realistic game. With only 4 wickets to play with, it would be much riskier to slog from ball one.

 

Sidearse's 15-run over was the key, though, ultimately.

Indeed and yet had the game continued and reached a point where a result was possible without any more play the number of wickets taken DID affect the total needed. Does that make sense to anyone as it doesn't to me !

South Africa Out!

England beat NZ to finish clear top, Pakistan go through on net run rate after they, NZ and SA all finished on 2 points. England now play runners up in the other group in the semis and it could ( I believe) still be any one of Australia, Sri Lanka, Windies or India.

England beat NZ to finish clear top, Pakistan go through on net run rate after they, NZ and SA all finished on 2 points. England now play runners up in the other group in the semis and it could ( I believe) still be any one of Australia, Sri Lanka, Windies or India.

Think the sensible money has to be on Oz finishing top and I think with the net run rates India have to bet SL by a fair amount to go threw second (assuming of course Gale does not inspire WI to beat Oz).