**2007 World Cup**

[FaaipDeOiad]

well from what i've seen hes either going to bowl complete garbage or fairly well. which is what happens with anyone who has his slingy action.

That's a bit of a generalisation. I'd agree that people who sling it are often inaccurate (Jeff Thomson being the classic example), but there's been slingers in the past who were basically metronomes in the McGrath/Ambrose/Bedser/Davidson tradition. I don't think slinging the ball means you can't be consistently accurate.

 

[Blaze]

Punch Above their Weight ? I think that would be a apt description for Sri Lanka Who has played Test Cricket for a relatively much shorter time in addition to being a third world country- Yet they won the WC in 1996 which NZ has not done so far.

Dont Kid yourself they were not the best side in 1992 ..... look at the record's ...Pakistan Was !

NZ are never fancied to make it past the group stage at world cups.. apart from maybe 03

In 92 they were in an absolute shambles when the world cup came round. Yet they lifted themselves and won 7/8 group matches. They were the best team at the tournament despite what the records say (that is a naive way to look at things). If Martin Crowe had been able to take the field and captain the side then they would have come very close to beating Pakistan.

I am not claiming that they are world beaters when the world cup comes around but unlike some sides they play their best cricket at world cups.

 

[Legglancer]

NZ are never fancied to make it past the group stage at world cups.. apart from maybe 03

In 92 they were in an absolute shambles when the world cup came round. Yet they lifted themselves and won 7/8 group matches. They were the best team at the tournament despite what the records say (that is a naive way to look at things). If Martin Crowe had been able to take the field and captain the side then they would have come very close to beating Pakistan.

I am not claiming that they are world beaters when the world cup comes around but unlike some sides they play their best cricket at world cups.

Oh Pleeeeezz ..... NZ team played very good cricket and used the familier conditions very well in 1992. .... But the fact is Pakistan Beat them Twice consecatively in that WC.in fact if I remember right Pakistan thrashed NZ in one of them comprehensively !

And dont give these lame excuses about Crow being Injured ..... In that case Every team that did not make it can find some key player who was injured or was carrying one.

Bottom Line is when the "crunch time" came New Zealand could not stand the heat ..... Pakistan did !

 

[Blaze]

Oh Pleeeeezz ..... NZ team played very good cricket and used the familier conditions very well in 1992. .... But the fact is Pakistan Beat them Twice consecatively in that WC.in fact if I remember right Pakistan thrashed NZ in one of them comprehensively !

And dont give these lame excuses about Crow being Injured ..... In that case Every team that did not make it can find some key player who was injured or was carrying one.

Bottom Line is when the "crunch time" came New Zealand could not stand the heat ..... Pakistan did !

In the first match yes you are right Pakistan thrashed NZ.

As for the semi I don't think you understand how important Martin Crowe was to that team. Without him in that tournament NZ wouldn't have come close to making the semis. It was his captaincy that was missed when NZ failed to defend a total that they should have.

Can I ask you if you have actually seen that semi final? Or read any of Martin Crowes books?

 

[Legglancer]

In the first match yes you are right Pakistan thrashed NZ.

As for the semi I don't think you understand how important Martin Crowe was to that team. Without him in that tournament NZ wouldn't have come close to making the semis. It was his captaincy that was missed when NZ failed to defend a total that they should have.

Can I ask you if you have actually seen that semi final? Or read any of Martin Crowes books?

Like I already said NZ played very good cricket in the WC in 1992. Martin Crowe led the team beautfully, but Pakistan played better not only because they beat NZ comprehensively, Back to Back, With or Without Crowe, In addition to having to adjust to conditions Vastly differant from their home.

Yes I watched most of the England/ NZ/ Australia/pakistan matchers.

 

[meatspx]

NZ was quite clearly the better team in the round robin stages. no doubt about it. They lost their last match against Pakistan but that was a dead rubber for them.

Pakistan was incredibly lucky to make to the semis but they deserved their win, as ODI cricket is about performing on the day.

 

[marc71178]

Dont Kid yourself they were not the best side in 1992 ..... look at the record's ...Pakistan Was !

The same Pakistan who only made the semis because of rain?

 

[Hazza]

I think that Pakistan will have a good chance, along with the other Asian countries.

 

[Duncan]

The same Pakistan who only made the semis because of rain?

"Pakistan was incredibly lucky to make to the semis but they deserved their win, as ODI cricket is about performing on the day."

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Schedule for the 2007 World Cup is now out. The good news is that no matches will be called off for rain (unless there is exceeding amounts of bad luck) - as reserve days are scheduled for every match and weather usually is fine in the West Indies, Guyana excepted. The bad news for me is that it goes from March to April, smack bang in the middle of uni terms. Gotta love it.

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/WORLD_CUPS/WC2007/match_schedule.html

 

[aussie]

well it seems that the super 8 will be extremely competitive which is good. At this stage the top 3 for me to win the WC are Australia, England & Pakistan

 

[BoyBrumby]

Schedule for the 2007 World Cup is now out. The good news is that no matches will be called off for rain (unless there is exceeding amounts of bad luck) - as reserve days are scheduled for every match and weather usually is fine in the West Indies, Guyana excepted. The bad news for me is that it goes from March to April, smack bang in the middle of uni terms. Gotta love it.

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/WORLD_CUPS/WC2007/match_schedule.html

You mean to say the ICC didn't consult with you, Norway's leading cricket authority, before announcing the schedule?! I'm both shocked & appalled!

I feel a strongly worded, badly spelled letter coming on

"Dear Mr Mani....."

 

[Magrat Garlick]

You mean to say the ICC didn't consult with you, Norway's leading cricket authority, before announcing the schedule?! I'm both shocked & appalled!

I feel a strongly worded, badly spelled letter coming on

"Dear Mr Mani....."

Too right.

I just need to get the Norwegian state's oil fund behind me, and it'll be quietly moved to June without anyone noticing.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I still think Australia, England and WI are the teams with the best chance. Pakistan not too far behind. SA will just bottle it again, India are rubbish, SL are rubbish away from home and NZ don't rise for the right occasion - a bit like their rugby team.

 

[kendall]

dont know how you have the west indies ahead of Pakistan or India and it is 2 years away yet and a lot will have changed

 

[sledger]

i would rate pakistan higher than england tbh, not sure where india would rank, but probs above west indies.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Not sure how anyone can rank India above any of the other main teams, they're ranked 7th in the ratings, only just above WI - but WI are hosts and won the CT.

 

[sledger]

the ratings system is pretty flawed though, cant base everything on stats,

 

[Neil Pickup]

You won't win a WC without a bowling attack that suits the conditions. There is no way either India or SL are getting close. At present, for me it's Australia or England.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

You won't win a WC without a bowling attack that suits the conditions. There is no way either India or SL are getting close. At present, for me it's Australia or England.

Shoaib, Rana, Shabbir, Umar Gul could be an interesting proposition on West Indian pitches too.