Best WC in a long time?

[Bun]

With Australia's defeat to Pakistan, all teams have been beaten in this WC. So really, no favorites. And also, what was initially prophesiced to be a dull initial round, has in fact proven to be wrong atleast in group B, thanks in no small measure to England

Group A was a disappointment, the only games really taking it to the brink being SL vs Pak and Aus vs Pak. SL vs Aus promised much but was cut short.

But Group B has been a different story. England has been Pakistanesque, burning into cinders when shining bright, and rising from the ashes pheonixlike when everyone had written them off. Windies have been quite an enjoyable package and have been much better than their previous versions in the last decade's world cups. India has been India, chugged along exposing their frailities but equally amplifying their strengths as well. SA has been a revealation, with a "complete" array of spinners and batsmen who can actually play in the subcontinent.

I would say this WC so far has been really enjoyable, perhaps the most enjoyable in my viewing history. No juggernauts, no walkovers, etc. Even the minnows have pulled in their upsets as well and made it interesting, without really affecting the mood or following of the tournament as a whole.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Best since 92 in my opinion.

Been too many dull games but the good games haven't just been good they have generally been brilliant matches and i guess it helps the way you feel about the competition when your team is involved in most of the best games.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah I've been fairly oblivious to Group A as the games have generally been when I couldn't watch, prior to today which I enjoyed. Group B has epic, really enjoyed it. Sure it's produced the result we expected, but what a journey.

 

[Teja.]

Indeed.

 

[Jarquis]

Best for at least 4 years at any rate

 

[Howe_zat]

It's the best I've ever seen by some distance. Can't begrudge the Aussies for it but them being obviously the best by miles got boring after a while.

 

[vcs]

Been excellent so far. Hopefully we get a few more crackers in the knockout rounds (not involving India).

 

[blahblahblah]

yes, some exciting line ups we have here

 

[social]

The format is horrible, the standard is pretty low plus it's been oh so predictable who would qualify

Look at England - fall across the line against the Dutch, lose to Ireland and Bangladesh but hey ho, qfs here we come

However, the ICC will be delighted as we've had about fifty (yep, 5 - 0) meaningless matchess producing hundreds of millions in ad revenue when, in reality, the quarter finalists could've been selected from the rankings 2 years ago

It's a joke

 

[M0rphin3]

Yep, despite the dire format.

 

[smash84]

despite the dire format this is the best WC since 99. Has had a lot of thrillers in group B.

 

[Shri]

Not as good as the 2003 WC which we won in an alternate universe.

 

[morgieb]

Probably the best since 99 despite the ******** format, yeah. Mind you, that's largely because of England.

 

[Jono]

The format is horrible, the standard is pretty low plus it's been oh so predictable who would qualify

I wonder if you were saying it was predictable when WI needed 32 to win against England with 4 wickets in hand and Sarwan at the crease.

 

[stephen]

There have been some good games, but the format has been dire:

1) No reserve day meant that Australia effectively went two weeks without getting to bat.
2) Not enough top 8 games vs each other.
3) Too many minnow games (seriously, did we really need to see Canada get thrashed by four different top 8 countries?).
4) Group stage for group A has left an unsatisfying feeling of not really knowing where Australia and Sri Lanka are at at the moment
5) Quarter finals instead of a super-X series is very lame, particularly when we've spent a month watching top 8 nations thrash minnows.

 

[Athlai]

Canada almost beat Pakistan at one stage.

 

[tooextracool]

Actually thought this one was a pretty good advertisment for the minnows. There are a number of players that made a name for themselves this tournament (Baidwan, Balaji Rao, Kevin O'brien, William Porterfield, George Dockrell, Pieter Seelaar, RTD to name a few). If anything, this world cup has shown that the gap between the minnows and the top of the pile has narrowed considerably. Granted there were still disappointments and the top 8 did scrape through but I have no problem with a group stage involving several minnows. What I dont want to see is a month long group stage that is absolutely meaningless, which is kind of what happened this time. Basically these teams played for a month only to tell us what we already knew, that the top 8 teams in world cricket are South Africa, Australia, England, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand and West Indies.

 

[tooextracool]

On topic, is this the best world cup in a long time? Yes, best since 1999, but that has almost entirely to do with how even the top 8 are and England being quite generous and nothing to do with the format or the quality of play.

 

[Somerset Chops]

I think its been a top WC.

I like the format to , the only thing i would change is having 2 matches played per day every day throughout the group stages.

 

[stephen]

Group B has been quite good, but apart from NZ vs Pakistan there really wasn't any good games in group A.