Red_Ink_Squid
Global Moderator
Yep!Cheers.
By later game, you mean the 16.30 kick off UK time, right?
Yep!Cheers.
By later game, you mean the 16.30 kick off UK time, right?
it doesnt matter a jot. in the vast majority of cases the scores won't be level.Surely in the case of a tie in these matches they should have as many super overs as it takes
rather than count 6s or 4s. Is there a scenario that sees England play OZ in the SF?
As many super overs as required is now the ruleSurely in the case of a tie in these matches they should have as many super overs as it takes
rather than count 6s or 4s. Is there a scenario that sees England play OZ in the SF?
Haha what the ****bc the first team to qualify is one that has won only 4 games out of 6. One that has won 6 out of 6 is hanging by a thread.
They invented the format, so it's fair....and of all teams it just had to be England too
agreedThey invented the world, so it's fair.
Too arbitrary. If anything can change it can be carry over of all group stage pointsA - 3/3 wins
B - 2/3 wins
C - 2/3 wins
D - 0/3 wins
D's results against others should not be considered when calculating NRR
the best performing team out of B and C will go through based on newly calculated NRR
this kills my semiSo looks like an India vs England semi
Don't feel that's fair either. It just means that you counted one win for one team and ignored one win for the other team. NRR is very fair IMO.First tiebreaker really should be h2h. Would be more fair.
That's good. At least one of them will be eliminated come the final (hopefully england)#1 South Africa, #2 England
So looks like an India vs England semi
If Aus beat India by essentially 20% or more (40 runs in a 200 game, or chase target down in 16 overs), they would have a better NRR and move above them in the table.Surely in the case of a tie in these matches they should have as many super overs as it takes
rather than count 6s or 4s. Is there a scenario that sees England play OZ in the SF?