Best WC in a long time?

[smash84]

So which was the team that really challenged India in the knockout stage? Aus, Pak, or SL?

 

[Xuhaib]

looking at it had we held our catches we looked like the only team that could touch them though I still believe SA was the best team in the cup though thats discounting their choke factor.

 

[social]

looking at it had we held our catches we looked like the only team that could touch them though I still believe SA was the best team in the cup though thats discounting their choke factor.

Pakistan would've walked the semi final if they could catch a cold

SA - urgggh

 

[smash84]

looking at it had we held our catches we looked like the only team that could touch them though I still believe SA was the best team in the cup though thats discounting their choke factor.

that is what I thought.........we seemed like the only team that really troubled India's batting

 

[smash84]

Pakistan would've walked the semi final if they could catch a cold

haha......so true

 

[vcs]

SL easily (the most challenging opponents). The quality of cricket was outstanding today and SL would have won if the match had been played in their country, or the dew hadn't set in. Their total was also more down to excellent batting by Mahela, Sanga and the lower order than poor bowling (granted India could have bowled more yorkers at the death).

Pakistan's bowling troubled India (mainly Wahab and Ajmal), but it was a wicket where the ball wasn't coming on like today, so India still managed to put up an excellent score, and had the match won by the 40th over when they were fielding.

Today's match had much finer margins than it looked in the end, I reckon if Dhoni had not made his ground by millimeters with 30 odd runs to get, India could have easily lost.

 

[smash84]

Pakistan's bowling really troubled India and had it not been for the 4 dropped catches off Tendulkar things would have been much much different IMO.

 

[vcs]

From what I have seen.
92
99,11
96
03
07

I would put '99 on top by a fair margin TBH. Australia, SA and Pakistan all had teams worthy of being champions and could easily have won if they time-travelled to '96 or 2011 IMO. All had fabulous attacks. Don't remember the quality in '92 that clearly, was too young at the time to judge.

 

[Xuhaib]

yeah but still catching is a discipline in cricket though I don't agree with vcs post and his post has good reason to it since his own team was involved in the run chase so he must have been hell of a lot nervous but from a neutral perspective India was cantering to victory from 30 overs onwards none of the bowlers looked like picking up a wicket barring an odd over from Malinga.

 

[smash84]

yeah.........the SL attack looked quite toothless bar Malinga tbh

 

[vcs]

I think you have to cut the spinners and fielders a bit of slack with the dew.. the wicket looked really good for batting under lights. Maybe SL could have attacked Zaheer a bit more in his first spell, but that's in hindsight. They made a bad error giving Kulasekara the 47th over.

 

[Howe_zat]

I think you have to cut the spinners and fielders a bit of slack with the dew.. the wicket looked really good for batting under lights. Maybe SL could have attacked Zaheer a bit more in his first spell, but that's in hindsight. They made a bad error giving Kulasekara the 47th over.

They did but there wasn't really much else to turn to given that Murali was half dead. Sri Lanka bowled poorly across the board after Malinga's first spell, which is not something we've had from them all world cup. No idea why they brought Randiv in straight off the plane, Mendis and Herath were both bowling well all tournament.

Still a top batting performance from India, but Sri Lanka really should have made it harder for them.

 

[smash84]

agrere with howe zat

 

[vcs]

Murali was disappointing, yes, but I thought Randiv bowled pretty well. Their seamers bar Malinga are a bit like India's backup to Zaheer, not good enough to make things happen on their own without assistance from the wicket against a world-class batting lineup.

 

[shankar]

Murali was disappointing, yes, but I thought Randiv bowled pretty well. Their seamers bar Malinga are a bit like India's backup to Zaheer, not good enough to make things happen on their own without assistance from the wicket against a world-class batting lineup.

Randiv's first 4 overs were really good - he was getting better bounce and turn than Murali. They really should have brought him back much earlier. Also Sanga could have had a Silly point or Short leg for him at the beginning of his spell.

 

[Blaze 18]

Fantastic World Cup (not least because India won ).

At the start of the World Cup, I thought the duration of the World Cup would make it slightly boring, but I was wrong. It was a very exciting tournament throughout (except matches involving Kenya) and the standard of cricket was generally excellent. Australia, England, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Pakistan, New Zealand and India were all involved in a few thrillers and high quality matches. West Indies and Bangladesh were disappointing though, very disappointing.

 

[ankitj]

I would put '99 on top by a fair margin TBH. Australia, SA and Pakistan all had teams worthy of being champions and could easily have won if they time-travelled to '96 or 2011 IMO. All had fabulous attacks. Don't remember the quality in '92 that clearly, was too young at the time to judge.

Agree with that. 99 WC had some real high quality cricket.

 

[Himannv]

What WC? :P

 

[cnerd123]

Hell yea.
Was only 8 during the 1999 one, don't remember anything. 2003 was epic till the harrowing end, 2007 was awful, 2011 is by far the best WC I've witnessed.

 

[Sanz]

Best since 92 in my opinion.
.

Best since 1983, TBH