Super Eight

[Matt79]

well i hope so, but the way they've been trampling over opponents, it's 2003 all over again(so far...)....

I know Beautiful isn't it?

Such a long list of people who assured us all Australia was on the way out after the '05 Ashes and the CB series in Oz...

 

[Steulen]

I'm touched at the RTD loving going on a few pages back. You guys surely know your cricket.

There's still room in the RTDAS, you know.

 

[Anil]

I know Beautiful isn't it?

yeah...i guess there is a beauty to the kind of clinical efficiency with which they finish off opponents...

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Once the semi's come its anyones game.

And how can people say that Aussie are trampling over EVERYONE?
They havent played Sri Lanka or New Zealand yet! The only real game they have had was against South Africa. So only ONE game of note.

Yes, Aussie have raked up high score after high score, but thats only because they have batted first against the minnows.

Anywho, this thing is anything from over, I think we are gonna have two great semi-finals.

 

[Swervy]

If Pietersen doesn't fire against Bangladesh, I can see them beating us with some ease, tbh.

lets not over play the Bangladesh thing..sure they arent as bad as a lot of people initially thought, and they have UPSET to major teams. In fact though, England still SHOULD beat Bangladesh quite easily.

Lets remember that England actually competed against Australia much more than South Africa did. For me, if England get the team selection right, which they quite blatently havent all tournament long, they can get through to the semis with three wins vs SA, B'desh, and WIs.

 

[Steulen]

Presumably you mean promoting a few big hitters up the order? I'm not convinced that would work. The England batsmen all have the individual quality to play a match-winning innings once every while, but as a team they have less quality than Aus, SA, SL and NZ, and their bowling is definitely a weak suit compared to especially the varied SL and NZ attacks.

Still, they're in with a chance as they should definitely beat Bangladesh and are capable of beating both Windies (a 50/50 game I'd say), and SA (60/40 SA?)

 

[marc71178]

SAF, Eng and WI have already played against Ireland and Bangladesh haven't. That's significant.

Equally significant IMO is that SA haven't yet played NZ.

If they win that game then I can't see anyone else getting in the semis ahead of them.

If the Black Caps do us all a big favour it's game back on...

 

[marc71178]

I'd say Sri Lanka and NZ pose realistic threats to Australia, especially if Watson doesn't recover and they risk playing Hodge rather than a proper fifth bowling option again.

10 overs from Symonds / Clarke / Hussey, Ponting & Hodge if really struggling >>>>>>>>>> a tail that starts at 7.

 

[Prince EWS]

10 overs from Symonds / Clarke / Hussey, Ponting & Hodge if really struggling >>>>>>>>>> a tail that starts at 7.

Not with the current Australian batting and bowling lineups respectively, no.

 

[marc71178]

For me, if England get the team selection right, which they quite blatently havent all tournament long, they can get through to the semis with three wins vs SA, B'desh, and WIs.

So what team in what order should they be putting out then?

 

[PhoenixFire]

Pietersen needs 87 runs in his next innings and he will be the 3rd fastest player to 2000 ODI runs.

 

[Prince EWS]

Presumably you mean promoting a few big hitters up the order? I'm not convinced that would work. The England batsmen all have the individual quality to play a match-winning innings once every while, but as a team they have less quality than Aus, SA, SL and NZ, and their bowling is definitely a weak suit compared to especially the varied SL and NZ attacks.

Still, they're in with a chance as they should definitely beat Bangladesh and are capable of beating both Windies (a 50/50 game I'd say), and SA (60/40 SA?)

I think he means selecting Plunkett over Mahmood. I'd almost be tempted to pick Dalrymple ahead of Strauss, too, ITBT.

 

[Prince EWS]

So what team in what order should they be putting out then?

Quite obviously, the continued selection of Mahmood is just ridiculous - 4 expensive wickets against Sri Lanka or not. It's not quite as bad now that Lewis has gone home I suppose, but Plunkett is still a better option in the eyes of most on this forum.

 

[marc71178]

Not with the current Australian batting and bowling lineups respectively, no.

No side should play with the likes of Hogg at 7 followed by a load of bowlers who aren't particularly strong with the bat.

It only takes one morning start against an attack on form to find them 5 down with not a lot of batting to come.

With a bit of smart thinking and juggling of the bowlers, the 10 overs can be spread out to not cause that much disruption (ie yesterday the shoving Clarke on very early meant that come the later stages he only had to fit 2 overs in later on)

 

[Prince EWS]

No side should play with the likes of Hogg at 7 followed by a load of bowlers who aren't particularly strong with the bat.

It only takes one morning start against an attack on form to find them 5 down with not a lot of batting to come.

With a bit of smart thinking and juggling of the bowlers, the 10 overs can be spread out to not cause that much disruption (ie yesterday the shoving Clarke on very early meant that come the later stages he only had to fit 2 overs in later on)

And it only takes one specialist bowler to have an off day and a batsman to take the part-timers for you to have 20 overs go for 130. Hodge didn't even bat against England (hell, Hussey didn't even get out there!) and Watson didn't get dismissed in the whole tournament.

Australia's bowling attack getting taken to is a hell of a lot more likely than it's top 6 getting knocked over IMO.

And Johnson, despite his stats, is quite a useful lower order batsman.

 

[Salamuddin]

lets not over play the Bangladesh thing..sure they arent as bad as a lot of people initially thought, and they have UPSET to major teams. In fact though, England still SHOULD beat Bangladesh quite easily.

Lets remember that England actually competed against Australia much more than South Africa did. For me, if England get the team selection right, which they quite blatently havent all tournament long, they can get through to the semis with three wins vs SA, B'desh, and WIs.

Oh please.....please desist with talking up England's chances.
If they qualify for the semis from here, I will doff my hat off to them.

But i doubt that because England are a very, very average ODI outfit.
And if you're not going to overplay Bangaldesh's achievments here, then let's not overplay England achievement in winning the VB Series.

Because there is nothing to suggest that that wasn't anything other than a complete flash in the pan.

 

[Salamuddin]

For me, if England get the team selection right, which they quite blatently havent all tournament long, .

I've been hearing this excuse for so long now...its not even funny ?

What's this top class ODI side that England have been hiding for so long ? Do tell, the suspense is killing .......

 

[Jamee999]

My attempt at an England team:

Bell
Joyce
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bopara
Flintoff
Nixon+
Dalrymple
Broad
Tremlett
Anderson

 

[PhoenixFire]

Not sure about Joyce, yet I know that he looked better than Vaughan atm. His dismissal against SL was dire.

 

[Pratters]

My attempt at an England team:

Bell
Joyce
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bopara
Flintoff
Nixon+
Dalrymple
Broad
Tremlett
Anderson

I wonder how much it has changed from the one you put out during the Champions Trophy for interests sake.

I would like Broad to play as well..