**2007 World Cup**

[marc71178]

What, no chance of winning a one-off Quarter final?

Like we had no chance in a one-off Semi Final in the CT!

 

[Langeveldt]

I fully expect South Africa to get absolutely nowhere, England and Aus to do very well, and Bangladesh and the West Indies to spring a couple of surprises..

 

[Zinzan]

They are the best in the world of that there is no doubt. I'm merely pointing out that it would be good to see how they fare on bouncy tracks against a quality attack i.e Harmison, Flintoff etc, people who can extract bounce. I feel some may come unstuck.

By that rational ...I even more confused by your comments. No team in the world plays better on Bouncy wickets than Australia at the moment (and the windies in the 80s). Just look at their success at Perth. I couldn't imagine even W.Indies wickets will have as much bounce as Perth.

 

[Zinzan]

What, no chance of winning a one-off Quarter final?

Just to clarify, I didn't mean absolutely "NO chance". I just believe IMO that 5-6 other teams have a better chance. Sorry my opinion differs from yours

 

[Neil Pickup]

Just to clarify, I didn't mean absolutely "NO chance". I just believe IMO that 5-6 other teams have a better chance. Sorry my opinion differs from yours

I can accept that, I'd just like to know the basis on which you rate India and in particular, Sri Lanka, over us!

 

[Zinzan]

Who mentioned anything about Harmison or England being "great"?

WI pitches will suit Flintoff and Harmison as much as any other bowler out there, you wouldn't expect much help for spin bowlers this again suits England. England are one of the few teams who've (comfortably) beaten an Australian side when it mattered in an ODI in the last year - WI is the only other side I can see doing likewise in WI. India's bowling is simply too weak, Pakistan fall apart spectacularly when it matters, SL just aren't suited to pitches in WI, NZ have had a golden spell but I can only see them getting worse and they only beat Aus because they played a weakened team, SA have too many poor players.

Very selective observations. England may have beaten Aust in the ICC knock-out, but you failed to mention the fact that NZ easily won the Natwest series against WI's and England winning every game easily !!!!!!. All within a 2 month period. So it can't be that great an English. You can't just rely on 1 good game to win the world-cup. You need to be consistent. I don't see England as a oneday outfit as being consistent. m

I don't think you can downplay NZ's 1-1 ODI series with Aust recently. Admittedly in the first game they were without Mcgrath...but apart from that were full strenght. Mcgrath was back for the second game and I still believe if it wasn't for Umpire "Fatty Parker's" terrible decision against Mccullum when it was close, NZ would have won that game. Anyway enough could-of,and would-ofs.

Also consider this 1- 1 series scoreline was playing Aust at home. It's interesting that NZ have won 4 out of the last 6 ODI's against Aust in Aust. Now thats being selective isn't it .

That why NZ are ranked no 2 in ODI's. They are consistent. I don't see why you see them Getting worse?? I can see them only getting better.

 

[Zinzan]

I can accept that, I'd just like to know the basis on which you rate India and in particular, Sri Lanka, over us!

Sri-lanka??
If you'd read my previous post that had my predictions for the 2007 W.C. You would have seen that of the main 8 cricket sides, I gave Sri lanka the worst chance, below england. As I personally feel they may decline in the next 3 years.

India, IMO are slightly more likely to do better than eng in 2007, due to the fact i believe they are a much better oneday cricket side. Again thats just my opinion.

 

[Blaze]

England have a decent chance of winning the world cup. They have got the players to do it with but I am yet to be convinced that they have the tactics and the working together as a unit sorted out. They have a long time to sort it out but if a world cup was to be staged next month I wouldn't give them much of a chance just because they don't convince me that they have got a full grasp on the one day game yet

 

[Scaly piscine]

Very selective observations. England may have beaten Aust in the ICC knock-out, but you failed to mention the fact that NZ easily won the Natwest series against WI's and England winning every game easily !!!!!!. All within a 2 month period. So it can't be that great an English. You can't just rely on 1 good game to win the world-cup. You need to be consistent. I don't see England as a oneday outfit as being consistent. m

I don't think you can downplay NZ's 1-1 ODI series with Aust recently. Admittedly in the first game they were without Mcgrath...but apart from that were full strenght. Mcgrath was back for the second game and I still believe if it wasn't for Umpire "Fatty Parker's" terrible decision against Mccullum when it was close, NZ would have won that game. Anyway enough could-of,and would-ofs.

Also consider this 1- 1 series scoreline was playing Aust at home. It's interesting that NZ have won 4 out of the last 6 ODI's against Aust in Aust. Now thats being selective isn't it .

That why NZ are ranked no 2 in ODI's. They are consistent. I don't see why you see them Getting worse?? I can see them only getting better.

As I've said many times before - England have been trying out their Test players in the one-day side for quite a while now so any results when you've got the likes of Key in the ODI side need taking with a pinch of salt (NZ also won some key tosses in that triangular with WI & England with conditions that were helpful for NZ's bowlers who need lateral movement to be effective). When it came to a tournament with some importance (ie the Champions Trophy) England stopped faffing around and played their perceived strongest side that was available and cruised to the final. All the Asian sides disappeared early on - I don't see how they're going to improve on this when the World Cup comes around because the teams are unlikely to change much, but England will have gotten much needed experience and added the odd player since the CT like Pietersen.

Another thing is the World Cup is that it's far more of a mental game than your average ODI because of the pressure - this is another reason why England should be strong.

 

[Blaze]

As I've said many times before - England have been trying out their Test players in the one-day side for quite a while now so any results when you've got the likes of Key in the ODI side need taking with a pinch of salt (NZ also won some key tosses in that triangular with WI & England with conditions that were helpful for NZ's bowlers who need lateral movement to be effective). When it came to a tournament with some importance (ie the Champions Trophy) England stopped faffing around and played their perceived strongest side that was available and cruised to the final. All the Asian sides disappeared early on - I don't see how they're going to improve on this when the World Cup comes around because the teams are unlikely to change much, but England will have gotten much needed experience and added the odd player since the CT like Pietersen.

Another thing is the World Cup is that it's far more of a mental game than your average ODI because of the pressure - this is another reason why England should be strong.

Any game playing for your country is important. Maybe thats why NZ won all those game in the Natwest series because they put 100% in all the time regardless of the opposition or the tournament they are in.

Mate you are one of the most biased guy on this forum. England are an average one day side at the moment. Nothing more nothing less. They have the potential to be a good one day side but at the moment they are not in the top three.

Remind me again of Englands results in the previous two world cups? Yeah there mental game must be pretty solid with those results in the One Day game.

They are an awesome Test side but their One Day cricket leaves a lot to be desired and there is a thing called national pride but sometimes it pays to take a step back and take an objective view

 

[Zinzan]

Any game playing for your country is important. Maybe thats why NZ won all those game in the Natwest series because they put 100% in all the time regardless of the opposition or the tournament they are in.

Mate you are one of the most biased guy on this forum. England are an average one day side at the moment. Nothing more nothing less. They have the potential to be a good one day side but at the moment they are not in the top three.

Remind me again of Englands results in the previous two world cups? Yeah there mental game must be pretty solid with those results in the One Day game.

They are an awesome Test side but their One Day cricket leaves a lot to be desired and there is a thing called national pride but sometimes it pays to take a step back and take an objective view

Here Here...Couldn't agree more.

 

[vic_orthdox]

are the west indies pitches back to being really bouncy and fast bowler friendly? i just remember that when australia was last there, the pitches were slow low and flat, with nothing in it for bowlers. has it changed back to the traditional caribbean decks since then?

 

[Zinzan]

As I've said many times before - England have been trying out their Test players in the one-day side for quite a while now so any results when you've got the likes of Key in the ODI side need taking with a pinch of salt (NZ also won some key tosses in that triangular with WI & England with conditions that were helpful for NZ's bowlers who need lateral movement to be effective). When it came to a tournament with some importance (ie the Champions Trophy) England stopped faffing around and played their perceived strongest side that was available and cruised to the final. All the Asian sides disappeared early on - I don't see how they're going to improve on this when the World Cup comes around because the teams are unlikely to change much, but England will have gotten much needed experience and added the odd player since the CT like Pietersen.

Another thing is the World Cup is that it's far more of a mental game than your average ODI because of the pressure - this is another reason why England should be strong.

By that rational, Are you suggesting England are a better one-day Team than NZ at the moment? By reading between the lines of the above, it seems that is what you are suggesting. Which is about as silly a suggestion as saying NZ have a better test side than England at the moment.

Like the previous post suggests. Just face facts and don't be so biased. England are a good test at the moment, but only an average oneday side.

 

[Tim]

I really only think Tuffey depends on swing in our ODI bowling line-up.
Perhaps Mills does, but I think he can also bowl line & length if required.

 

[Choora]

Australia to win would be my prediction, with England runners up (again) much to the anger and disappointment of all the English on CW.

Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe don't even get close to advancing into the super six.

Regarding Pakistan, why do you think they won't even qualify for super six? Is it coz they have little talent or is it coz you think Woomer is doing a lowsy job as a coach?
The way i see, Pakistan is probably going to retain Woolmer till the 2007 cup and with him around there will be consistensy in selection of players. If Pakistan still doesn't qualify for the Super six then i think there must be something wrong with the powerful(having authority on selection matters) coach woolmer.


I think the team that will have most chances to lift the cup would be either Australia or India.

England is another team that can be very dangerous.

 

[twctopcat]

By that rational ...I even more confused by your comments. No team in the world plays better on Bouncy wickets than Australia at the moment (and the windies in the 80s). Just look at their success at Perth. I couldn't imagine even W.Indies wickets will have as much bounce as Perth.

Well first innings in perth this year they all had trouble against akhtar and co apart from langer and gilchrist, who i would rate as the aussies best players now. I know that the aussies have had great success on bouncy pitches but i'm saying that these performances haven't always been against great attacks. If they come across a good one, they may come unstuck.

 

[Zinzan]

Well first innings in perth this year they all had trouble against akhtar and co apart from langer and gilchrist, who i would rate as the aussies best players now. I know that the aussies have had great success on bouncy pitches but i'm saying that these performances haven't always been against great attacks. If they come across a good one, they may come unstuck.

Any team can lose 4 or 5 early wickets on a first day of a test. What you forgot to mention in your reply above is that Australia scored 370 or so in that first innings and won the match easily.

If they do play on a bouncy bowlers pitch suited to the "great world beaters" hamison and flintoff, then i shudder to think what Mcgrath, gillespie, Lee and Kaspa will do to England when they bat.

Surely your not suggesting the England bowling attack is stronger than Aussie?

 

[twctopcat]

Any team can lose 4 or 5 early wickets on a first day of a test. What you forgot to mention in your reply above is that Australia scored 370 or so in that first innings and won the match easily.

If they do play on a bouncy bowlers pitch suited to the "great world beaters" hamison and flintoff, then i shudder to think what Mcgrath, gillespie, Lee and Kaspa will do to England when they bat.

Surely your not suggesting the England bowling attack is stronger than Aussie?

You see i knew you would presume that. I don't actually say as much as that, all i'm trying to point out that perhaps the aussies won't prove so invincible against a half-decent pace attack that England has got at the moment.
As for perth that score was due to gilly and langer, and the pakistani attack isn't renowned for its consistency over a 5 day test match is it??

 

[Zinzan]

You see i knew you would presume that. I don't actually say as much as that, all i'm trying to point out that perhaps the aussies won't prove so invincible against a half-decent pace attack that England has got at the moment.
As for perth that score was due to gilly and langer, and the pakistani attack isn't renowned for its consistency over a 5 day test match is it??

I'm sorry to burst your bubble. But you'll need a lot more than a"Half decent pace attack" to ripp through and beat Australia. This is ODI's we are talking about, not test cricket. Unlike Mcgrath, Gillispie and co, Hamison isn't much of a oneday bowler (excellent test bowler though). I think Harmison would be the first to admit that he struggles at ODI's. Of the others in this "half decent" attack, Flintoff is the only one who seemed to have adapted to Oneday bowling. Hoggard wouldn't even be a dead-cert to make the side would he??

It amazes me that just because England have had a good run at test cricket recently. They are suddenly a "real" force in Oneday cricket. Please English fans. These are 2 different games. England are at best a "slightly above average oneday team. And thats at best !!

 

[twctopcat]

I'm sorry to burst your bubble. But you'll need a lot more than a"Half decent pace attack" to ripp through and beat Australia. This is ODI's we are talking about, not test cricket. Unlike Mcgrath, Gillispie and co, Hamison isn't much of a oneday bowler (excellent test bowler though). I think Harmison would be the first to admit that he struggles at ODI's. Of the others in this "half decent" attack, Flintoff is the only one who seemed to have adapted to Oneday bowling. Hoggard wouldn't even be a dead-cert to make the side would he??

It amazes me that just because England have had a good run at test cricket recently. They are suddenly a "real" force in Oneday cricket. Please English fans. These are 2 different games. England are at best a "slightly above average oneday team. And thats at best !!

I never said we would destroy, just that we could trouble you. At the back end of last year Harmison did turn into a very good ODI bowler actually. You don't have to jump to conclusions. All i was saying that for the first time in while, we will be able to consistently challenge the aussies, tests or ODI's, the CT semi final was testimony to that.