Cricket World Cup group stages, May 30 - July 6

[Arthur Crabtree]

I would imagine we would see the return of Mo in the next round or even a surprise apperance from Curran.

Six right arm pace bowlers! That would feel like a tribute attack to all England's previous WC failures.

[backfootpunch]

Looks as though England have finally stumbled across their best side. A side everyone else knew from the start

I'm still not overly confident with Rashid - and more to the point Rashid doesn't look confident in himself.

I would imagine we would see the return of Mo in the next round or even a surprise apperance from Curran.

Rashid has a shoulder injury, hes been having injections all summer

I suspect it's why hes been bowling a lot less googlies

it says a lot about our spin options that a half fit rashid is still our best spinner

[bigfluffylemon]

Never in any doubt?

You have to say well done to England. A week ago many of us (me included) were resigned to another world cup humiliation, but they've responded to the pressure in the best possible way and produced their two best performances of the tournament against two other top 4 sides. Batting first and having Roy back has certainly helped, but given the haplessness of New Zealand's opening pair, would the result have been different if the Kiwis had batted first? England certainly look a different side when they have a solid opening platform, and Plunkett is not the flashiest player, but England do tend to win with him in the side.

It's not just England that have had problems chasing - I read that 12 of the last 14 games have been won by the side batting first. If this continues into the finals it will be a real shame - it's not right that the marquee tournament finals will be decided by the toss of a coin. I don't know if it's the standards the ICC have been preparing pitches to, the rain or the pressure of chasing in a big tournament, or a combination of the three, but surely it behoves the ICC and the groundsmen to provide wickets that provide a fair opportunity to both sides regardless of the toss (that doesn't necessarily mean roads, just ones that don't deteriorate too much).

Vaughan reckons that the side that wins two tosses in the finals will win the thing. I hope he's wrong. England still won 14 out of 17 chasing in the last two years prior to this tournament, they have the depth of batting and we've seen them chase over 300. They should be able to win chasing. But I guess we'll see.

Still, minimum performance expectation just about met, although if England go out in the semis, I think their campaign will still be judged a failure given three losses (two that they really should have won) in the group stage. But it will be a failure by the high standards they have set themselves over the last four years, rather than the abject failure of previous outings over the last 20 years. This is England's first semi since 1992, and our batsmen have scored more hundreds in this tournament alone than England teams combined in the last five tournaments put together.

So something to celebrate, at least.

[bigfluffylemon]

Looking ahead, it's a pleasant surprise that games have been live for this long. Two weeks ago, had England beaten Sri Lanka and New Zealand beaten Pakistan, we could have been facing ten dead rubbers in a row. As it is, qualification has remained live until now, and we only have four low-to-zero stakes games at the end. And even then, technically three of the four games are still live for one of the sides involved - Pakistan-Bangladesh is mathematically still a live game, although I read that it could die the moment of the toss if Bangladesh win and bat first, and even if Pakistan bat first, they would have to score 400 and then bowl Bangladesh out for around 80 to overtake New Zealand on NRR. But Australia-South Africa and India-Sri Lanka still matter to determine the winner of the group stage.

Looks like it will be England-India at Edgbaston and Australia-New Zealand at Old Trafford. It's hard to see the Kiwis coming back and beating Australia. Their opening pair is shot, they're overly reliant on Williamson, and their fast bowling, usually their strength, has been a bit undercooked. But as demonstrated in the group stage, any of England, India or Australia can beat each other on the day. Both India and Australia have similar limitations - they're very reliant on their top order for runs, and while they have a couple of good quicks, their back-up bowling isn't so amazing. Given how England have won two on the bounce on the back of strong opening partnerships only to fall away in the middle, you could argue the same for them, but for me England have greater strength in depth in batting and the bowling is much better than expected - when you've got Wood and Plunkett coming in first and second change, that's solid, and they bat down to 10. What's more, England have had contributions from nearly everyone in their squad at some point (only Rashid hasn't really fired, and Buttler has been largely anonymous since the Pakistan game). India and Australia are carrying passengers. They are both beatable. Plus Buttler's due a score. And when he gets one, England rarely lose.

Of course England can implode - India and Australia have experience of the big game situation, and England have wilted under pressure in the past.

Best of all, I'm going to be in England for the finals - not going to any games, but at least I can watch England in a final series gam not in the middle of the *modding* night.

[bigfluffylemon]

Stats nerd alert of the day. Bairstow and Roy now have 10 century partnerships together, and are the highest averaging opening partnership in ODIs ever for pairs that have opened together in 20 or more games:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... s;type=fow

Also, the Bairstow-Root and Root-Roy partnerships for the second wicket both average over 60, and have 11 century partnerships between them too. And the only England pair to have more century partnerships than Bairstow-Roy's 10 is 12 for the pairing of Root and Morgan. Is it any wonder England win when our top 4 is exactly those four players?

(As a side note, Dharwan-Kohli and Sharma-Kohli have similarly impressive stats. Dharwan's loss for India, while not perhaps quite as significant as Roy's for England, is still a significant blow).

[bigfluffylemon]

What a difference four years makes:
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/803 ... up-2014-15
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/803 ... d-cup-2019

2015: Tim Southee takes 7-33 off 9
2019: Same bowler takes 1-70 off the same 9

[The Professor]

Top posting BFL.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Yes, excellent stuff.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Doesn't feel that obvious why Brathwaite is still in the side.

[yuppie]

Gayles WC now over other than some fielding.

Time to move on and just concentrate on t 20.

[Arthur Crabtree]

311 for WI. Seems about a par score for batting first at the moment.

[Arthur Crabtree]

In spite of losing all their games (probably) it hasn't been a bad WC for Afg. Especially against India and Pakistan.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Not bad today as well.

Good WC for Roach, when able to play.

[bigfluffylemon]

Thanks for the compliments fellas.

It's been a strange old tournament for West Indies. They've had some great moments, but ultimately been too inconsistent to follow through, which really is the story of their last 20 years.

I do feel that they need to move on from Gayle. His presumption to play on is arrogant, and they should be looking to build to the future. Between Roach, Hope, Pooran, Heymeyer, Holder and Thomas, they have a core of talented looking young players they could build a strong team around.

Meanwhile, Afghanistan's tournament was probably better than 9 losses from 9 suggests. They ran some good sides close, but didn't have the quality to finish games out. They'll be winning world cup games in the not too distant future, I am confident.

[yuppie]

For Afghanistan its a world cup of what could have been.