14th June - 1st Semi-final - England v Pakistan

[stephen]

Led Zeppelin were amazing though so it's totally worth fighting over.

 

[mr_mister]

Sharjeel and Fakhar together at the top of the order would be cool

 

[vic_orthdox]

"England's year" at ICC tournaments is cricket's "Liverpool's year".

How bad is Morgan bitching about the pitch and complaining because it was a used surface which his team couldn't adjust to? What a crock.

Not here to pile in, but I'm sure Morgan would like a second go at this quote:

""I don't think there was any home advantage," Morgan said. "We knew that we were going to play on a used wicket at some stage in this tournament. Having watched the game against Sri Lanka, we actually didn't think it was that bad. But certainly today, coming from Edgbaston, it was obviously a big jump in pace and bounce, and too much of an ask for us to adjust to, really."

 

[harsh.ag]

One reason for England's loss could be the difference between wanting others to think of you as good and wanting to become champions. Different mindsets. Have been through the first phase where you do things to make others think you're good but aren't truly interested in becoming great as such. There is nothing wrong with this per se, but teams like Australia 1999-07 wanted to become champions more than anything else and that really came across in how they lifted their performance always.

 

[SL Bada]

What a win for PAK

 

[Shri]

Na, they'd have to play each other for it to be a rivalry.

Like once every two years?

 

[vcs]

I think their batsmen had a collective bad day at the office at the worst possible time (like India in the WT20 2014). This was also partly caused by Pakistan's bowling and executing their plans perfectly. Did England come into the knockout match a little undercooked, since things had been a bit too easy for them in their group? Anyway, you can't do anything about that.

They should be annoyed that they didn't make Pakistan work harder to chase it. But a loss is a loss I suppose, 211 was never going to be enough anyway. Buttler's missed stumping of Hafeez was a bad one and summed up their day.

 

[Black_Warrior]

One reason for England's loss could be the difference between wanting others to think of you as good and wanting to become champions. Different mindsets. Have been through the first phase where you do things to make others think you're good but aren't truly interested in becoming great as such. There is nothing wrong with this per se, but teams like Australia 1999-07 wanted to become champions more than anything else and that really came across in how they lifted their performance always.

Not sure I buy that. Pretty sure England wanted to be champions too. They obviously still have some flaws, such as inability of their power batting to adapt against a different standard of bowling yesterday, and but don't think it had anything to do with not wanting to be champions.

I think a lot of this late analysis has to do with people reading the scorecard and making and assessment. England tried to lift their performance just as much as anyone would in a match like that, but when you have a player like Stokes playing 64 balls for 34 runs and no boundaries, maybe the narrative is not about England not lifting their performance and wanting to be great, maybe the narrative lies with the opposition and how they just outplayed you.

 

[91Jmay]

"England's year" at ICC tournaments is cricket's "Liverpool's year".

How bad is Morgan bitching about the pitch and complaining because it was a used surface which his team couldn't adjust to? What a crock.

Yeah, who does he think he is? Steve Smith?

 

[harsh.ag]

Not sure I buy that. Pretty sure England wanted to be champions too. They obviously still have some flaws, such as inability of their power batting to adapt against a different standard of bowling yesterday, and but don't think it had anything to do with not wanting to be champions.

I think a lot of this late analysis has to do with people reading the scorecard and making and assessment. England tried to lift their performance just as much as anyone would in a match like that, but when you have a player like Stokes playing 64 balls for 34 runs and no boundaries, maybe the narrative is not about England not lifting their performance and wanting to be great, maybe the narrative lies with the opposition and how they just outplayed you.

Everyone wants to be champions, of course. That's not the point.

I agree that too much hindsight analysis has been going on wrt this game, and I hadn't made any such arguments, but after reading Morgan's statement, I was forced to think if this England team is ready for the greatness that could be theirs.

 

[Pratters]

Morgan criticism was valid. It was a slow dry wicket. It should have been seaming to support English.

 

[honestbharani]

I just think Morgan was upset at the loss. I am sure he did under rate the Pak side and hopefully would have learned his lesson now. I really dont think this much of over analysis is requried. I have seen captains get away with much worse post match comments after an especially hurting loss. Its bad that it has happened but it happens all the time in sport really, when you dont rate your opponent and then they wipe the floor with you.

 

[Scaly piscine]

The ICC rule that you're not allowed fresh pitches for a semi final is utterly farcical - do they want attractive cricket for the biggest games, or do they want arguably the best all-rounder in the world to be scoring 30odd off 60odd balls and unable to hit a single boundary? That'll spread the game won't it.

I'm not surprised the ECB decided to go with the useless ovine botherers as one of the three grounds, despite every other Test (or suspended Test) ground being a cut above. Without England playing there it is empty and devoid of atmosphere. Playing at the Ashes-stealing venue is a sure way to provide as little home advantage as possible as it is never a quick pitch conducive to high quality cricket, and at its worst it's a horrible tired dog of a wicket, as England found out yesterday. But they should have known to expect that, because the Ashes-stealing venue is consistently and predictably shite.

 

[cnerd123]

The ICC rule that you're not allowed fresh pitches for a semi final is utterly farcical - do they want attractive cricket for the biggest games, or do they want arguably the best all-rounder in the world to be scoring 30odd off 60odd balls and unable to hit a single boundary? That'll spread the game won't it.

I'm not surprised the ECB decided to go with the useless ovine botherers as one of the three grounds, despite every other Test (or suspended Test) ground being a cut above. Without England playing there it is empty and devoid of atmosphere. Playing at the Ashes-stealing venue is a sure way to provide as little home advantage as possible as it is never a quick pitch conducive to high quality cricket, and at its worst it's a horrible tired dog of a wicket, as England found out yesterday. But they should have known to expect that, because the Ashes-stealing venue is consistently and predictably shite.

Pakistan scored at a run rate of 5.78 and didn't even break a sweat

The pitch wasn't that bad. Pakistan just bowled very well.

 

[harsh.ag]

The ICC rule that you're not allowed fresh pitches for a semi final is utterly farcical - do they want attractive cricket for the biggest games, or do they want arguably the best all-rounder in the world to be scoring 30odd off 60odd balls and unable to hit a single boundary? That'll spread the game won't it.

How come the Pakistan batsmen were able to score at almost 6 RPO then?

 

[Pratters]

Pakistan scored at a run rate of 5.78 and didn't even break a sweat

The pitch wasn't that bad. Pakistan just bowled very well.

The pitch did play a role. Shadab looked like a beast for example.

 

[cnerd123]

The pitch did play a role. Shadab looked like a beast for example.

not my point but okay

another quality post from Pratters

 

[Scaly piscine]

England were chasing the game. Having quicker/taller bowlers was a disadvantage, a number of edges went for 4 or 6. Once you've a significantly below par score you've pretty much lost as you can't chase the game or force the pace when it's such a dead, tired pitch. That sort of game is the antithesis to Stokes.

 

[MW1304]

England were chasing the game. Having quicker/taller bowlers was a disadvantage, a number of edges went for 4 or 6. Once you've a significantly below par score you've pretty much lost as you can't chase the game or force the pace when it's such a dead, tired pitch. That sort of game is the antithesis to Stokes.

Then he needs to learn.

 

[honestbharani]

If England are not going to play well on tracks that do not suit "one" of their players, they are not going to win much at all, tbh.