Group 2 (Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Netherlands)

[Everton Seymour]

Like I said earlier this World cup is being run like a Mickey mouse competition, SA and Zimbabwe aren't the big names of this WC so nobody will really care , but can you imagine if this sort of crap happened for the India vs Pakistan game ?

Delayed starts because the tournament format demands two teams playing on the same ground within 4 hours of each other , once a game goes below 10 overs per side for playing time , it should go straight to 5 overs a side when a match resumes which is the minimum needed to constitute a t20 game because obviously time is limited if you can't play more than 10 overs per side . If you add up all the wasted time in between actual play you could have easily gotten 5 overs in .

 

[MW1304]

The real joke is the nation of Australia's climate. Embarrassing.

 

[grecian]

The real villain is de Kock, keeping hitting the ball to the boundary wasted loads of time.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Total farce.
Sorry if I'm simplifying things, but why not award the points to SA? Common sense should prevail. They needed 13 off 4 overs with 10 wickets in hand

If I'm in the South African camp I'm absolutely filthy at that decision

 

[Heboric]

why are they not getting on with the game ? everybody is just standing doing nothing

Yeah I noticed after when they came back everybody was just standing around doing nothing

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Should've bowled Zimbabwe out in 5 overs, would have given them plenty of time.

 

[Kirkut]

Yeah my cousins watching with me were all having a go at Rauf. I told them sometimes you just stand up and applaud greatness when it's happening infront of you.

The only thing I will suggest to Rauf is stick to his full pace in aus the true nature of pitches here means his cutters variation will sit up and end up being 120 kmph medium pace which batsman can bash anywhere hopefully he learns was still gun for 95% of the game

Don't know man...Had Rauf bowled a pacy short ball, Kohli would have hooked it for six, a pacy full delivery may have been sent for a six as well with his trademark flick towards mid wicket.

Kohli loves pace, he gets unsettled by medium pace lateral movement, so a short ball at a slower speed was not a bad thinking at all from Rauf, in fact a clever one if he understood Kohli's game.

What baffles me is how did he swat a slow short ball with a tennis shot down the ground for six runs, defies logic......seriously!!

 

[Socerer 01]

If they lost 5 wickets in the next over then it would maybe change the required DLS score... so have to play out minimum overs, as unlikely as that is.

I thought this was sarcastic until your next post. But South Africa had already got the revised DLS target for 5 overs the bare minimum to declare a result which was 46 by three overs as stats heads on twitter have revealed so all of this five wicket loss hypothesis is moot and South Africa were robbed off a win plain and simple

If that did not make sense South Africa would have been declared the winners if they did come back to bat in the game without facing a single ball because they had already got what would have been the revised DLS target

 

[honestbharani]

I thought this was sarcastic until your next post. But South Africa had already got the revised DLS target for 5 overs the bare minimum to declare a result which was 46 by three overs as stats heads on twitter have revealed so all of this five wicket loss hypothesis is moot and South Africa were robbed off a win plain and simple

If that did not make sense South Africa would have been declared the winners if they did come back to bat in the game without facing a single ball because they had already got what would have been the revised DLS target

I am not sure about this and there are plenty of Math nerds who get this better than me probably, but my understanding is that the DLS par score and the DLS target is not the same thing.

 

[Bolo.]

I have seen scoring imbalances like De Kock (47*) and Bavuma (2*) before.

Can't remember anything like De Kock 47 and Bavuma facing only 2 balls before. Close, but not with a top order bat

 

[Bahseph]

I thought this was sarcastic until your next post. But South Africa had already got the revised DLS target for 5 overs the bare minimum to declare a result which was 46 by three overs as stats heads on twitter have revealed so all of this five wicket loss hypothesis is moot and South Africa were robbed off a win plain and simple

If that did not make sense South Africa would have been declared the winners if they did come back to bat in the game without facing a single ball because they had already got what would have been the revised DLS target

 

[anil1405]

I have seen scoring imbalances like De Kock (47*) and Bavuma (2*) before.

Can't remember anything like De Kock 47 and Bavuma facing only 2 balls before. Close, but not with a top order bat

PAK vs SL Cricket Scorecard, Final at Singapore, April 07, 1996

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get Pakistan vs Sri Lanka Final, cricket scorecard, Singer Cup 1995/96 dated April 07, 1996.

www.espncricinfo.com

Kalu was the first wicket to fall (for a duck) when the score was 70. Balls wise not much amusing but contrast in batsmen's score sure was.

 

[Bolo.]

PAK vs SL Cricket Scorecard, Final at Singapore, April 07, 1996

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get Pakistan vs Sri Lanka Final, cricket scorecard, Singer Cup 1995/96 dated April 07, 1996.

www.espncricinfo.com

Kalu was the first wicket to fall (for a duck) when the score was 70. Balls wise not much amusing but contrast in batsmen's score sure was.

Ya, that was ridiculous. Worst I remember in terms of scoring. Kalu faced 11 balls though. Long way from 2.

Anyone remember anything worse in terms of balls faced?

 

[ankitj]

How unlucky are SA ?

 

[honestbharani]

I think I can safely say, having rewatched the India chase, Virat has now comfortably played the two greatest shots in my time of watching cricket.

That EA Sports style flick for 6 off Woakes in India in a 2016 ODI, and that shot off Haris Rauf yesterday at 18.5. Literally what seem to be impossible shots and especially the one off Rauf to clear a 80m boundary... ?

 

[Socerer 01]

I am not sure about this and there are plenty of Math nerds who get this better than me probably, but my understanding is that the DLS par score and the DLS target is not the same thing.

They are not. The former is based on the situation at that time in the match and the latter is based on the number of overs to get the target. But in this instance the latter would be five overs at which point they needed to score 46 runs which they had already scored. So what would have happened is that the umps would have called everyone back on to the field, placed the bails and then called South Africa winners which is why this whole thing is a farce

 

[Fuller Pilch]

SA have the score needed for dl after 5 overs. But it doesn't count. Totally unexplainable...

They could have lost wickets.

 

[StephenZA]

They are not. The former is based on the situation at that time in the match and the latter is based on the number of overs to get the target. But in this instance the latter would be five overs at which point they needed to score 46 runs which they had already scored. So what would have happened is that the umps would have called everyone back on to the field, placed the bails and then called South Africa winners which is why this whole thing is a farce

Yes but placing those bails on the stumps is important… I always wondered what the smallest amount of time required to go from restarting play to winning could be…

 

[artvandalay]

Saf can feel hard done by but i don't think Zim would have batted first if they had an inkling of this kind of weather. it's always an advantage to field first in such truncated encounters so that it may not be such a bad idea to do the toss again if necessary keeping in mind that it will be a 9 over game now.

 

[kevinw]

How unlucky are SA ?

It's not an international tournament without something going wrong for South Africa!