Group E - England, India, South Africa, West Indies

[Dissector]

England were marginally hard done by D/L but the idea that they "outplayed" the Windies is ludicrous. If the Windies had 20 overs they would have batted differently and it's unlikely they would have been 45 for 5. And over the course of the tournament they were the better team; quite competitive in their defeats and without an embarassment like the Netherlands game. England wasn't really semi-final material.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Colly's fault for choosing to bat.

I really hope they sort the DL out in future though. The better team lost today.

Definitely, I've said throughout that England should bowl first. But that would just have meant West Indies got cheated out of a contest instead.

I vaguely remember a stat that the team batting 2nd wins 60% of games. Dunno if someone cricket-stats-site-savvy can confirm.

Oh ffs TMS going on about England being big favourites during the chase. England were NEVER even favourite let alone heavy favourite.

 

[Smith]

What a ****ing ridiculous post. You don't have to be an one-eyed England supporter to think that the D/L target was unfair. Your suggestion that England should have pulled out of the tournament because D/L is less than perfect is idiotic.

Well, why don't you kindly suggest the alternative then? Why don't you pinpoint why 80 off 9 overs is unfair ? What should have been then the ideal score?

Genuine questions.

 

[S Chanderpaul]

Only positives from this is hopefully the likes of Collingwood and Wright will never be selected again.

 

[Uppercut]

Definitely, I've said throughout that England should bowl first. But that would just have meant West Indies got cheated out of a contest instead.

I vaguely remember a stat that the team batting 2nd wins 60% of games. Dunno if someone cricket-stats-site-savvy can confirm.

Oh ffs TMS going on about England being big favourites during the chase. England were NEVER even favourite let alone heavy favourite.

Good point this. Would sit equally badly with me personally whoever it was that got ****ed over by D/L.

All I can say is i hope they sort it out in future.

 

[Adamc]

Well, why don't you kindly suggest the alternative then? Why don't you pinpoint why 80 off 9 overs is unfair ? What should have been then the ideal score?

Genuine questions.

I've posted earlier in the thread as to why I think D/L predictions for Twenty20 matches are inaccurate.

 

[Lostman]

This was a joke, they cant find a window to bowl 20 overs!?!
Hell, playing in the rain would have made this game better.

 

[King Pietersen]

What a surprise. Hussain straight onto the Mascheranas bandwagon at the end of the game. Correct by questioning the non-selection of Napier. He really should have been in the side. Better T20 bowler than Anderson, and a better batsman than Mascheranas. Amazed he didn't get a game.

 

[GIMH]

I don't really get why we have to end a game by 9.15 in England in June tbh, but that's the way it's written in the rules

 

[westindiangirl]

Yessss

Thank God West Indies did it again......now its to improve because it doesn't get easier from here!!!!!!!!....but anywayz Great Job guys!

 

[roseboy64]

Oh well who cares. Water under the bridge. WI in the semis along with RSA. That's it. Anyone who thinks they don't deserve it can sod off. Maybe England should have tried having hitters in their lower middle order to push the total.

 

[Smith]

I've posted earlier in the thread as to why I think D/L predictions for Twenty20 matches are inaccurate.

No, you surmised that ODI totals are taken as base for determining par score in T20s. I am not sure that is correct.

 

[kingkallis]

I think the D/L was a bit low tbh

That comes to our mind ONLY when D/L screws our team

 

[GIMH]

He said that it was either that, or that they used previous T20 data and that either way is inadequate

 

[Smith]

Oh well who cares. Water under the bridge. WI in the semis along with RSA. That's it. Anyone who thinks they don't deserve it can sod off. Maybe England should have tried having hitters in their lower middle order to push the total.

True. It did not help that English middle order went 8 overs in a T20 without a single boundary, that too towards the end.

 

[Uppercut]

No, you surmised that ODI totals are taken as base for determining par score in T20s. I am not sure that is correct.

No he didn't. He said that EITHER they used ODI totals OR they used T20i totals. In either case, it would be inaccurate because there's not enough data on T20is available.

 

[GIMH]

Oh well who cares. Water under the bridge. WI in the semis along with RSA. That's it. Anyone who thinks they don't deserve it can sod off. Maybe England should have tried having hitters in their lower middle order to push the total.

You've been better than us in the tournament for sure. don't think anyone is taking issue with the fact that you've gone through, just the way it's gone down

 

[shivfan]

Oh well who cares. Water under the bridge. WI in the semis along with RSA. That's it. Anyone who thinks they don't deserve it can sod off. Maybe England should have tried having hitters in their lower middle order to push the total.

Well said!

These rules were made before the tournament started. Nobody had a problem with them then, or even when Dyson made a hash of DL in the Caribbean....

It was a silly decision by Colly to bat first. Even I knew that rain was going to affect the game.

 

[Adamc]

I don't really get why we have to end a game by 9.15 in England in June tbh, but that's the way it's written in the rules

Could be wrong, but I'd guess that finishing times have more to do with the whims of broadcasters than anything else. Doesn't seem to be any real reason why half an hour of rain should curtail a twenty over match otherwise.

 

[Smith]

He said that it was either that, or that they used previous T20 data and that either way is inadequate

Instead of saying it is inadequate, kindly let us know why it is inadequate?