Topic: Cricket World Cup 2023

[rawcusk8]

Surprised to see no thread for this.

Four years on from the crazy game, holders England open up against runners up New Zealand. Hard to see past hosts India but if anyone is going to stop them then you’d fancy it to be England. Not expecting much from Pakistan, they’ll go from the sublime to the ridiculous in no time. Aussies will likely be there or there abouts and perennial chokers South Africa will surely find a way to balls things up (sorry Chakan).

Some of my predictions below,

Winners - India
Most runs - Babar
Most wickets - Bumrah

So, what are your thoughts folks, get your predictions in nice and early.

[Crosby Nick]

Last four: India, England, Australia Pakistan

Winners: England

Leading run scorer: Malan

Leading wicket taker: Harris Rauf

Not sure I believe that but will mix it up a bit! 5 Asian teams out of 10. Think we will definitely see a few upsets but in this format there is some margin for error and the best sides will probably make it through. A few of the warm up games seem to have been rain affected though. Could that be a problem?

Good game to start tomorrow. NZ always a threat and will probably make my predictions look silly as usual. South Africa seem quite fancied this time as we. Should be a good tournament.

[gerrardisgod]

Time starts are we looking at? Am I having to get up before work? Or are they conveniently work timed?

[Crosby Nick]

Time starts are we looking at? Am I having to get up before work? Or are they conveniently work timed?

Perfect for working hours really. Tomorrow’s game starts at 9.30. Does India span a few time zones? I bet they’ll all be day nighters so should all start at a good time for UK TV viewing.

[Chakan]

Bloody 4:30am starts for me, 1am if there are 2 games on at the same time.

FFS

I'm hoping for the best but expecting the worst.

[Flaccido Dongingo]

A World Cup of 10 teams is a bit shit isn't it?

[Crosby Nick]

A World Cup of 10 teams is a bit shit isn't it?

It’s a bit crap in terms of growing the game. Can feel like a closed shop although the West Indies failed to qualify. As have Ireland who made the few. The Netherlands made it this time although 9 games as probably whipping boys might lose its appeal. Afghanistan will be looking to build from the last WC.

Bit damned if you do, damned if you don’t. People are complaining about the rugby World Cup having 20 teams and there being loads of boring one sided games. If you chucked in more countries here you’d probably get that too.

I can see both sides of the argument. I do quite like this format in that you can afford a couple of defeats so not every game feels like if you make one mistake you could be going home.

[CheshireDave]

I bet they’ll all be day nighters so should all start at a good time for UK TV viewing.

You're right. Most games are D/N so 9:30am GMT start with the odd game starting at 6:00am GMT. then towards the end of the tournament they'll all be 8:30am GMT start I think because our clocks change at the end of October.

Full list of fixtures here - https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/icc-cricket-world-cup-2023-24-1367856/match-schedule-fixtures-and-results

[CheshireDave]

Bit damned if you do, damned if you don’t. People are complaining about the rugby World Cup having 20 teams and there being loads of boring one sided games. If you chucked in more countries here you’d probably get that too.

I agree. Especially for the 50 over version. Have a larger pool of teams for the T20 version as there is more of a genuine chance of an upset. Regarding the Rugby World Cup I have tried to take an interest but now I am very much just wake me up when it gets to the knockout rounds. I mean who really takes much enjoyment from watching lesser teams like Romania, Portugal and Australia getting a whipping?

[Crosby Nick]

Bowling Dave.

[Nick110581]

Looking forward to this.

Think we can win it.

[CheshireDave]

Looking forward to this.

Think we can win it.

We definitely can. I suspect the bookies have us 2nd favourites behind India. Assuming we don't suffer any major injuries it is hard to see any glaring weaknesses in our side. Perhaps we don't have an elite spinner. But we do have a few slow bowlers who can make an impact in the right conditions. We also have players outside of the first 11 which can certainly contribute. It is nice to actually have some genuine competition for places in the side...something which certainly wasn't the case in years gone by!

Another point in favour of England and indeed the likes of SA, Aus, NZ and co is that India is no longer a scary unfamiliar place to play cricket, as their squads are made up of players who played a decent amount of limited overs cricket in those conditions now.

[Crosby Nick]

Just looking at a BBC preview and England have a pretty old side. I don’t think it’s an issue but made me realise this might be the last World Cup for quite a few stalwarts of the side.

[Yorkykopite]

No West Indies. How the mighty have fallen.

[Elzar]

Not the fullest ground. How much are they charging for a ticket?

Should be getting these stadiums full in a country that is obsessed with cricket.

[gerrardisgod]

I’m assuming this crowd will grow as the day goes on?

This looks embarrassing for a tournament opener.

[Trump's tiny tiny hands]

Big crowd 

[CheshireDave]

England should be getting a massive score against this bowling line up. Very little quality in it.

I am not convinced bowling first was the correct option here. Especially as if any swing will come it will be later in the day.

[Nick110581]

Not the fullest ground. How much are they charging for a ticket?

Should be getting these stadiums full in a country that is obsessed with cricket.

Don’t think it’s in a cricketing centre but must be more to it.

[Garrus]

The only reason for playing the opening game here is political.

They should have opened at a smaller ground on a Saturday.

[CheshireDave]

Weird innings from Malan. Never settled. Never moved his feet.

40/1

[Crosby Nick]

Malan gone. Rooty in. Don’t mind that in a way, keeps an accumulator in with a bigger hitter.

[Robinred]

Why is Stokes missing? (I haven’t been paying attention)

[gerrardisgod]

Hip injury, was getting put through his paces before the match, so reckon it’s not serious and they’re just trying to ease him in.

[Hedley Lamarr]

Why is Stokes missing? (I haven’t been paying attention)

A slight injury apparently.

[Nick110581]

Bairstow gone

[Nick110581]

Brook gone.

This is quite a poor start.

[Trump's tiny tiny hands]

That is all kinds of daft by Brook

[Nick110581]

That is all kinds of daft by Brook

He had scored 14 already but couldn’t help himself.

[Crosby Nick]

A bit hit and miss from Yorkshire so far. Hopefully Tim Bresnan can help them rebuild.

[Clint Eastwood]

Hmm.

[Nick110581]

Need a partnership here

[Scottymuser]

Perfect for working hours really. Tomorrow’s game starts at 9.30. Does India span a few time zones? I bet they’ll all be day nighters so should all start at a good time for UK TV viewing.

No - like China, there is "one" time zone in India - currently 4.5 hours ahead of us.  Of course, in terms of the actual "width" of the country, it "should" be spread across 2-3 time zones (it is about 1900 miles across - the US is 2800 and is spread across 4 time zones), but from memory it is basically the "centre" part of the country that it is measured from, so you are only really like 1 hour behind/ahead in terms of sun time, so the start times shouldn't need to vary

[Scottymuser]

England should be getting a massive score against this bowling line up. Very little quality in it.

I am not convinced bowling first was the correct option here. Especially as if any swing will come it will be later in the day.

Not sure why you think that a opening partnership of Boult (197 wickets at an average of 23.56, economy of 4.94) and Henry (130 wickets at 26.2, economy of 5.17) is "very low quality".  Southee is missing out, because of the location, and needing to pick 2 spinners - but his record is definitely not as good as the other two (214 wickets, but an average of 33.6 and economy of 5.47) but is still better than any bowler for England not named Woakes.  Santner vs Sodhi is close - Sodhi is more expensive, but takes more wickets  (Santner averages only 38.58 but with a pheonomenal economy of 4.94. whilst sodhi averages 35.6 but economy of 5.46), but Santner has the added string of being good with the bat; Neesham is a really underrated all rounder (definitely better than Ali - averages 4 more with the bat and 14 less with the ball in ODIs).  Only Ravindra (instead of Sodhi as the 2nd spinner) you could really question.

If you compare that to our bowling line up - our pace bowlers are all *considerably* worse than Boult/Henry (and 2 of them worse than Neesham!) - Woakes is our best bowler, but he only averages 30 with a Economy of 5.43  (Curran averages 36.8 at 5.89, Wood 37.9 and 5.42); Ali is *awful* at taking wickets but is ok economy wise; Rashid is comparable to Sodhi (who they didn't pick) figure wise. 

The main difference is more our batting line up is stronger - and we have better 6th/7th choice options in Root/Livingstone, in case someone takes some tap.

[CheshireDave]

Not sure why you think that a opening partnership of Boult (197 wickets at an average of 23.56, economy of 4.94) and Henry (130 wickets at 26.2, economy of 5.17) is "very low quality".

That's great for 20 overs. What about the other 30?

Southee is out because of an injured thumb.

Also, I wasn't making a comparison between NZ's bowling line up and England's. I am fully aware England's bowling isn't what makes the one of the best ODI teams in the world. I am not even convinced England know who their best bowling outfit is.

[Yorkykopite]

Not the fullest ground. How much are they charging for a ticket?

Should be getting these stadiums full in a country that is obsessed with cricket.

Maybe they are just obsessed with India?

[Crosby Nick]

Buttler gone for 43. Big blow. Could go either way from here. Could still push beyond 300 but a risk we hit out and get out and fall quite a way short.

[Scottymuser]

That's great for 20 overs. What about the other 30?

Also, I wasn't making a comparison between NZ's bowling line up and England's. I am fully aware England's bowling isn't what makes the one of the best ODI teams in the world. I am not even convinced England know who their best bowling outfit is.

But you said it had "very little quality" - 20 overs of bowling from 2 of the very best bowlers in the WC in this format is hardly having "very little quality".

And as I said - for the other 30 - Santner has a phenomenal economy (better than anyone in the England squad), so that's 10 more overs you are sorted for;  Neesham is pretty good too (average of less than 35, economy of about 6 - so better than Ali/Stokes with the ball for instance), so he is usually good for bowling his 10.  It is only the other 10 overs they are lacking - Ravindra is new and hasn't looked great (; but then again their second choice wicket keeper has taken a wicket in his only over today.

And we can look already at how good the main options are - after 33 overs , Boult/Henry/Santner have bowled 20 overs, and taken 2 wickets for only 94 runs - that is an economy of 4.7!   And Henry has just got our danger man, Jos out, so it's 3 wickets now.   Neesham has only gone for 7 as well - a little more than his average economy, but still very useful to supplement the other 3!

[Chakan]

Bad time to lose a wicket for England.

[Nick110581]

Buttler gone for 43. Big blow. Could go either way from here. Could still push beyond 300 but a risk we hit out and get out and fall quite a way short.

300 would be great.

Livingstone is a dangerous player.