Aren';t most teams now playing more the english style anyway. Somewhat conservatively playing the first 35 keeping wickets in hand knowing that with the powerplay and only men allowed outside the ring in general you can score an obscene amount in the last 15 with wickets in hand.
So looking at the record breaking India v Australia series last October, with all the huge scores you'd think the side had been flying out the blocks right? Well, I looked at the first 10 overs of each game and compared it to the final scores.
Pune: 50/0 and 43/1 - 304/8 and 232
Jaipur: 49/0 and 69/0 - 359/5 and 361/1
Mohali: 60/2 and 64/0 - 303/9 and 304/6
Ranchi: 40/3 - 295/8
Nagpur: 44/1 and 56/0 - 350/6 and 351/4
Bangalore: 64/0 and 46/1 - 383/6 and 326
And that's in India where you'd expect the early overs to be much more profitable than in England or Australia and New Zealand. Australia played a pretty similar style to England with a grafter (Hughes) and biffer (Finch) opening but a middle and lower order of Bailey, Maxwell, Voges and Fualkner who could all score quickly, which isn't that different to Root, Morgan, Buttler and Bopara/Stokes.
With two new balls and only four men allowed outside the ring it's so hard to stop a team from going huge at the end unless you take early wickets. It annoys me when England get labelled as playing backwards cricket when the likes of Australia basically play what we try to do. In conditions where the ball spins we struggle because we're so bad at playing spin but you'd not expect spin to be as prominent in the World Cup as it was in the last two world T20s, World Cup and Champions Trophy, so despite everyone being so down I think we might do OK.