Cricket Season Thread

[happy_tiger]

Creepiest Cricket Fan Ever *PSYCHO EDITION*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAAPQ_pwZZw&feature=related

May have been the same look Sheensy had when he found out Lui was out for 6 weeks ??

 

[tig_prmz]

Would love to hear the silence go around Mumbai, I would feel sorry for Sachin but at the same time if India win the World Cup, if you think the BCCI are powerful enough now, I'd hate to think how powerful and also how cocky the Indians will be if they win this tournament on their own soil.

Indians are not cocky? :frowning:

Also I would hate BCCI to be powerful, ICC is there for a reason, and they need to take control.

And finally, Mumbai is Sachin's home ground, would hate to see him lose there :frowning:

 

[Jazza]

Creepiest Cricket Fan Ever *PSYCHO EDITION*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAAPQ_pwZZw&feature=related

May have been the same look Sheensy had when he found out Lui was out for 6 weeks ??

I love how he just pops onto the screen haha.

 

[Jazza]

Would love to hear the silence go around Mumbai, I would feel sorry for Sachin but at the same time if India win the World Cup, if you think the BCCI are powerful enough now, I'd hate to think how powerful and also how cocky the Indians will be if they win this tournament on their own soil.

Indians are not cocky? :frowning:

Also I would hate BCCI to be powerful, ICC is there for a reason, and they need to take control.

And finally, Mumbai is Sachin's home ground, would hate to see him lose there :frowning:

Nah I didnt mean all Indians, I meant more the BCCI and because of their power, thinking they can do whatever they want.
The problem with the ICC is the countries on the board will follow India's lead so that they don't upset them, as that could lead to massive financial losses if the BCCI decide to stop India from playing a certain country.

 

[tig_prmz]

WHATTA FINAL!!

Zaheer's figures of 5-3-6-1 changed to 10-3-60-2

Dhoni what an inspiration. Gambhir's coolness and don't forget Jaywardene's century. Three of the Indian team members had tears of joy in their eyes. Quite upset though that Channel Nine felt like showing Alvin and the Chipmunks instead of the final. Cricket is starting to die out in Australia?

Anyways, wonderful World Cup. Brilliant.

 

[Marshall_magic]

Amazing final, many great moments. Sri Lanka lost it in their early overs, where they took far too long to get going and lost a few wickets. Another 20-30 runs and they probably win it. Good to see Sachin win the cup though, one of the true sporting greats. Dhoni who was disappointing in the early stages of the tournament also really stood up when it mattered.

 

[Marshall_magic]

My fearless world cup predictions

Winners: Sri Lanka
Runners Up: India
Semi final losers: Australia and South Africa
Dark Horse: Pakistan
Flops: England
Most runs: Sangakara
Most wickets: Steyn
Player of the tournament: Dhoni
Australian player of the tournament: Watson

Had my finalists around the wrong way, didn't count on South Africa falling apart, and overrated the Aussies. I'll claim my Pakistan call as dark horses, and England were flops but not the biggest (that honour goes to the Saffas). Sanga was 3rd in the runs but Steyn struggled with taking wickets. Dhoni was pretty ordinary but stepped it up int he final. The Aussies had no real standout.

 

[stryker]

I remember you posting this and I thought it sounded pretty on the money…funny how things turn out lol.

 

[Juro]

Awful decision by the ICC to limit the 2015 World Cup to 10 nations. Far worse decision to limit it to the full member nations!

Ireland are currently ranked 10th in the ICC ODI rankings, ahead of Zimbabwe, but they have no chance of even trying to qualify. IT'S JUST NOT CRICKET!!!

 

[alien]

how many countries were in the world cup this year

 

[Jazza]

There were 14 teams.
I thought they could of went with 12 teams to include the Irish.
However that would probably force the organisers to abandon the one group format that they have decided to go with as it would mean the finalists would play 13 matches (11 group games plus the semis and the final).
At the same time if it was split into 2 groups, there wouldnt be enough matches unless the format is the same as what we just had, which we dont want.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

There were 14 teams.
I thought they could of went with 12 teams to include the Irish.
However that would probably force the organisers to abandon the one group format that they have decided to go with as it would mean the finalists would play 13 matches (11 group games plus the semis and the final).
At the same time if it was split into 2 groups, there wouldnt be enough matches unless the format is the same as what we just had, which we dont want.

Ireland and the Dutch exceeded expectations for mine.

India, Sri Lanka, NZ, South Africa, Windies, Australia, England, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands.

 

[happy_tiger]

There were 14 teams.
I thought they could of went with 12 teams to include the Irish.
However that would probably force the organisers to abandon the one group format that they have decided to go with as it would mean the finalists would play 13 matches (11 group games plus the semis and the final).
At the same time if it was split into 2 groups, there wouldnt be enough matches unless the format is the same as what we just had, which we dont want.

Ireland and the Dutch exceeded expectations for mine.

India, Sri Lanka, NZ, South Africa, Windies, Australia, England, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands.

Why not have a proper world cup which each team plays each other to make it fair . We were punished with wash out in the end Not that we were guaranteed of winning SL game . Also all games must end in a result in the future . That used to be a world cup rule up to even 1991 world cup .

 

[Yossarian]

There were 14 teams.
I thought they could of went with 12 teams to include the Irish.
However that would probably force the organisers to abandon the one group format that they have decided to go with as it would mean the finalists would play 13 matches (11 group games plus the semis and the final).
At the same time if it was split into 2 groups, there wouldnt be enough matches unless the format is the same as what we just had, which we dont want.

Ireland and the Dutch exceeded expectations for mine.

India, Sri Lanka, NZ, South Africa, Windies, Australia, England, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands.

Why not have a proper world cup which each team plays each other to make it fair . We were punished with wash out in the end Not that we were guaranteed of winning SL game . Also all games must end in a result in the future . That used to be a world cup rule up to even 1991 world cup .

The ICC are proposing that everyone plays each other in 2015\. The 1991/92 World Cup had a few no result games. I understand before that they had reserve days to cover rain (in fact, and I could be very wrong, I believe you could play a game over 2 days).

For me the number of teams isn't the issue, it's the lack of qualification. If Zimbabwe and Bangladesh deserve a spot ahead of the Dutch and Irish, let them prove it. At a time when other sports are trying to be inclusive, the ICC takes a giant leap backwards… Personally I like watching the minnows play.

 

[Jazza]

There were 14 teams.
I thought they could of went with 12 teams to include the Irish.
However that would probably force the organisers to abandon the one group format that they have decided to go with as it would mean the finalists would play 13 matches (11 group games plus the semis and the final).
At the same time if it was split into 2 groups, there wouldnt be enough matches unless the format is the same as what we just had, which we dont want.

Ireland and the Dutch exceeded expectations for mine.

India, Sri Lanka, NZ, South Africa, Windies, Australia, England, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands.

Why not have a proper world cup which each team plays each other to make it fair . We were punished with wash out in the end Not that we were guaranteed of winning SL game . Also all games must end in a result in the future . That used to be a world cup rule up to even 1991 world cup .

The ICC are proposing that everyone plays each other in 2015\. The 1991/92 World Cup had a few no result games. I understand before that they had reserve days to cover rain (in fact, and I could be very wrong, I believe you could play a game over 2 days).

For me the number of teams isn't the issue, it's the lack of qualification. If Zimbabwe and Bangladesh deserve a spot ahead of the Dutch and Irish, let them prove it. At a time when other sports are trying to be inclusive, the ICC takes a giant leap backwards… Personally I like watching the minnows play.

I like watching the minnows play as well if they play top cricket, like Ireland and the Dutch in the recent World Cup. I like 12 teams in the World Cup but then with that many teams I dont like how the finalist will have to play 13 games. They could maybe re-introduce the 1999 format with 2 groups of 6 and then the super 6s but they wont want that in case the subcontinental teams get knocked out.

I like Yoss idea of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe playing sides like Ireland and the Dutch to qualify, whats the harm in that, plus the ICC can make more money by broadcasting those matches, etc.

The reason why there were a couple of no result games in 1992 was because channel 9 (The host broadcaster) didnt want the matches played the next day. Which in reality affected the World Cup result as England would beaten Pakistan after they were bowled out for 72 I think, meaning Pakistan would of been knocked out and Australia would of been the semi finalist instead.

 

[alien]

they could just make it 12 countries (2 groups of 6). the top 4 teams from each group go to the quarter finals. the winners of the 4 quarter finals matches go to semi finals and the winners of the semis go to the grand final. simple. the teams that make it to the grandfinal would only play 7 games before they make it to the grandfinal (they only play each team from their group once before the quarter finals)

 

[happy_tiger]

There were 14 teams.
I thought they could of went with 12 teams to include the Irish.
However that would probably force the organisers to abandon the one group format that they have decided to go with as it would mean the finalists would play 13 matches (11 group games plus the semis and the final).
At the same time if it was split into 2 groups, there wouldnt be enough matches unless the format is the same as what we just had, which we dont want.

Ireland and the Dutch exceeded expectations for mine.

India, Sri Lanka, NZ, South Africa, Windies, Australia, England, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, Ireland, Netherlands.

Why not have a proper world cup which each team plays each other to make it fair . We were punished with wash out in the end Not that we were guaranteed of winning SL game . Also all games must end in a result in the future . That used to be a world cup rule up to even 1991 world cup .

The ICC are proposing that everyone plays each other in 2015\. The 1991/92 World Cup had a few no result games. I understand before that they had reserve days to cover rain (in fact, and I could be very wrong, I believe you could play a game over 2 days).

For me the number of teams isn't the issue, it's the lack of qualification. If Zimbabwe and Bangladesh deserve a spot ahead of the Dutch and Irish, let them prove it. At a time when other sports are trying to be inclusive, the ICC takes a giant leap backwards… Personally I like watching the minnows play.

Yoss if you check my comment it says up to 1991 world cup

 

[tig_prmz]

IPL started.. too much cricket for me.

 

[Marshall_magic]

they could just make it 12 countries (2 groups of 6). the top 4 teams from each group go to the quarter finals. the winners of the 4 quarter finals matches go to semi finals and the winners of the semis go to the grand final. simple. the teams that make it to the grandfinal would only play 7 games before they make it to the grandfinal (they only play each team from their group once before the quarter finals)

Why should 4th out of 6 go through? basically saying 2 wins 3 losses is good enough to go through. 2 pools of 6 is correct, finals should work out like this:

Semi Finals
A2 vs B3 (SF1)
B2 vs A3 (SF2)

Prelims
A1 vs winner of SF2
B1 vs winner of SF1

Final
Winner of prelims.

Pool A
Australia (host)
Sri Lanka
Pakistan
England
Bagladesh
Holland

Pool B
New Zealand (host)
India
South Africa
West Indies
Ireland
Zimbarbwe

 

[alien]

they could just make it 12 countries (2 groups of 6). the top 4 teams from each group go to the quarter finals. the winners of the 4 quarter finals matches go to semi finals and the winners of the semis go to the grand final. simple. the teams that make it to the grandfinal would only play 7 games before they make it to the grandfinal (they only play each team from their group once before the quarter finals)

Why should 4th out of 6 go through? basically saying 2 wins 3 losses is good enough to go through. 2 pools of 6 is correct, finals should work out like this:

Semi Finals
A2 vs B3 (SF1)
B2 vs A3 (SF2)

Prelims
A1 vs winner of SF2
B1 vs winner of SF1

Final
Winner of prelims.

Pool A
Australia (host)
Sri Lanka
Pakistan
England
Bagladesh
Holland

Pool B
New Zealand (host)
India
South Africa
West Indies
Ireland
Zimbarbwe

Yeah that's good too. It gives the best team from each group a bit of a rest.