Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Groups:

Group A: England, Australia, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, New Zealand, Afghanistan and Scotland

Group B: South Africa, India, Pakistan, West Indies, Zimbabwe, Ireland and UAE

Fixtures:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/icc-cricket-world-cup-2015/content/series/509587.html?template=fixtures


Top 4 teams from each group will proceed to the Quarter final round.

Nice group for us as we have avoided matches with Australia,New Zealand and England.

I to am quite happy with our group. We should qualify if we play to our best.

I reckon England will struggle to get out of the group stage, especially if they lose to a minnow like they did last time.

from_the_stands wrote:I reckon England will struggle to get out of the group stage, especially if they lose to a minnow like they did last time.

You never know with England. The kiwi's are our biggest threat. Must admit, they will take the 'dark horse' role again, and have a good ODI side.

Looks like a pretty soft first round for most of the big teams. Group B is a lay down for SA , India , Pakistan and WI , while Group A is likely to see a bit of a tussle , as five into four won't go.
Still even with home advantage , will Bangladesh really be able to oust one of the majors ? Only if someone has a bad tournament I would think...but upsets are not unknown...

Regarding my earlier post.

Forgot to say that the aussies are clear favourites, and that NZ are our main threat for second place. Can the two test playing sub continent teams do well in Aus?

That said, maybe the Aussies will do a 1992, and buckle under the pressure?

alfie wrote:Looks like a pretty soft first round for most of the big teams. Group B is a lay down for SA , India , Pakistan and WI , while Group A is likely to see a bit of a tussle , as five into four won't go.
Still even with home advantage , will Bangladesh really be able to oust one of the majors ? Only if someone has a bad tournament I would think...but upsets are not unknown...

Haha ...I got mixed up with the T20

Of course , Bangaldesh , without any advantage , have no hope. So the first round is essentially a waste of time...

Dr Robert wrote:I to am quite happy with our group. We should qualify if we play to our best.

The biggest problem with the whole format is that the top 8 seeds are highly likely to qualify, meaning there are 42 matches to work out who-plays-who in the QFs!

Even if one of the big 4 in each group lose a match to a minnow, then are still 2 good chances for them to go through at the expense of the team that they lost to:

1. Beat one of the other seeds themselves.
2. The team they lost to get beaten by another of the minnows.

IMO, not very satisfactory at all

ianp1970 wrote:

Dr Robert wrote:I to am quite happy with our group. We should qualify if we play to our best.

The biggest problem with the whole format is that the top 8 seeds are highly likely to qualify, meaning there are 42 matches to work out who-plays-who in the QFs!

Even if one of the big 4 in each group lose a match to a minnow, then are still 2 good chances for them to go through at the expense of the team that they lost to:

1. Beat one of the other seeds themselves.
2. The team they lost to get beaten by another of the minnows.

IMO, not very satisfactory at all

Yeah but what is the alternative , Ian ? Either go straight to semi finals from the groups of seven , or just exclude all but the top eight teams in the first place.

Neither option going to be popular...

alfie wrote:

ianp1970 wrote:

Dr Robert wrote:I to am quite happy with our group. We should qualify if we play to our best.

The biggest problem with the whole format is that the top 8 seeds are highly likely to qualify, meaning there are 42 matches to work out who-plays-who in the QFs!

Even if one of the big 4 in each group lose a match to a minnow, then are still 2 good chances for them to go through at the expense of the team that they lost to:

1. Beat one of the other seeds themselves.
2. The team they lost to get beaten by another of the minnows.

IMO, not very satisfactory at all

Yeah but what is the alternative , Ian ? Either go straight to semi finals from the groups of seven , or just exclude all but the top eight teams in the first place.

Neither option going to be popular...

3 groups of 5

ianp1970 wrote:

Dr Robert wrote:I to am quite happy with our group. We should qualify if we play to our best.

The biggest problem with the whole format is that the top 8 seeds are highly likely to qualify, meaning there are 42 matches to work out who-plays-who in the QFs!

Even if one of the big 4 in each group lose a match to a minnow, then are still 2 good chances for them to go through at the expense of the team that they lost to:

1. Beat one of the other seeds themselves.
2. The team they lost to get beaten by another of the minnows.

IMO, not very satisfactory at all

wait until 2019.

with the ECB/BCCI/CA triumvirate in charge, there will probably be 5 groups of 3

A) Eng/Zim/minnow
B) Aus/minnow/minnow
C) India/minnow/minnow
D) SA/WI/Pak
E) SL/NZ/Bang

Top 2 teams in pools A-C plus top team in pools D and E to go through to Q/Fs

A1/B2
B1/C2
C1/A2
D1/E1

England will still probably end up meeting India in the Q/F's by virtue of finishing second in their group after losing their opening group game against Afghanistan trying to keep wickets in hand in a match that is later shortened to 10 overs after a terrible downpour

That's pretty good, DFM. The tournament should attract a huge tv audience throughout.

Every time a world cup comes round, the same issues crop up: Too many matches. mismatches and inclusion.

Personally I'd like to see four groups of four into quarter and semi finals.

Making_Splinters wrote:Every time a world cup comes round, the same issues crop up: Too many matches. mismatches and inclusion.

Personally I'd like to see four groups of four into quarter and semi finals.

Too risky. Can't have India not making it out of the groups, as happened in 2007.