Women's T20 World Cup 2020

[bigfluffylemon]

Sri Lanka had their chances, if they'd held them, it could have been different.

Australia's depth helps, but they don't look like hot favourites...

[alfie]

Hard to pick a winner at this point.

India have started well but the knock out games will still be the ones that really count. Certainly Australia are well capable of turning it on - if they get there. Trouble is , given their shaky recent form , there must be a good chance the Kiwis could eliminate them early ?
England don't look any sort of a chance at the moment but I suppose they have several players who could click at some point . And SA and West Indies ? Consistency might be a problem but I reckon anyone who actually makes the semis must have some chance.
I wouldn't be putting money on anyone yet.

[Alviro Patterson]

Quite bemused with Tammy Beaumont and Lauren Winfield batting at 7/8 on Sunday, when they previously opened for England in T20s before.

Thing with women's cricket as a whole is there are teams who rarely have strength in depth and it's the same core of people who bat and bowl. For example there is van Niekirk and Kapp batting in the top 3 and bowling 4 overs each. Straight away there are two players who are glorified sub-fielders, which is not ideal in a scenario where 9+rpo is needed in the last 5 with 3-4 wickets in hand.

[bigfluffylemon]

Quite bemused with Tammy Beaumont and Lauren Winfield batting at 7/8 on Sunday, when they previously opened for England in T20s before.
.

You're not the only one. I read on TMS that in a T20, batting at 7 you face an average of 7 deliveries. Complete waste of someone like Beaumont's talents.

Anyone batting outside the top 4 (or maybe 5) in a T20 needs to be able to clear the ropes from ball 1, but anyone capable of playing a big innings is probably wasted there. It's a challenge for team balance.

[bigfluffylemon]

Oh Thailand. You don't bowl first at Manuka oval if you win the toss.

[bigfluffylemon]

See.

Thailand never in the chase. Sigh of relief for England after the South Africa game, but tougher challenges await.

[GarlicJam]

Pakistan's Bismah has the highest bowling delivery of anyone I can remember.

Very slow.

[mikesiva]

Pakistan beat the West indies by eight wickets!

[Durhamfootman]

Pakistan hand England a get out of jail free card

unless they then beat England, of course

[bigfluffylemon]

India-New Zealand looked closer than it was. NZ were never really up with the rate. An amazing penultimate over pushed it a little, but they still needed 16 off the last over. India's spinners did very well.

Comfortable win for Australia. Healy finally fires. Still, Australia need to beat New Zealand on Saturday to guarantee progression along with India. NZ/Aus becomes a virtual quarter final (assuming NZ will beat Bangladesh...).

[GarlicJam]

England playing Pakistan this evening, in Canberra.

Some well-timed viewing for me.

I am assuming that Fluffy will be going. Should be a good match, with both teams coming off strong wins. A tight group this one.

[Durhamfootman]

after losing to SA, pretty much every game is a knock out match for England (as it has been for Australia)

nowt like putting yourself under pressure

this is the beauty of short, sharp tournaments imo

no wonder the men's teams like to play as many matches as possible...... can't afford to stuff up otherwise (although they then complain about player burn out.... hey ho.... want it all ways)

[bigfluffylemon]

This format's way better than the 'everyone plays everyone' nonsense of the men's world cup. It's a world cup. Every match should count. I like the short sharp nature - two weeks only, rather than an interminably long group stage that everyone gets bored of by the end.

I feel that the ICC was so burned by India tanking out early in 2007 that they've done everything they can to rig the format to ensure the big teams get lots of games and can recover if they stuff up. It's insane that there were over 50 matches in the men's 50 over cup, but only 10 teams. 4 pools of 4, then QF, SF and F for 16 teams is only 31 games, but then there might not be an India-Pakistan, or England-Australia game. Heaven forbid.

One quirk of this women's T20 format though, which is a result of there being an odd number of teams in each pool, is that the timetable of matches is a bit skewed between teams. South Africa played their first match as the opener of group B on Sunday, then have had a five day break until their second game today. Australia will play their 4th game tomorrow, when South Africa will just have completed their second, then assuming Australia make the semis, they'll have a five day break until the semi, while South Africa play 3 games in 5 days (and 4 in 7 if they make the semi). Up to a point it can't be helped, as with an odd number one team has to sit out each round.

England-Pakistan is shaping up to be a crucial game. If England lose, they can only qualify in a very unlikely set of circumstances involving winning their final game v West Indies, and either Thailand beating either South Africa or Pakistan, or Pakistan and West Indies both beating South Africa. In either case England will then have to squeeze through on NRR in a two or even three-way points tie. If England win, Pakistan will need to beat South Africa to progress (I'm assuming both South Africa and Pakistan will beat Thailand), or hope West Indies beat England.

[Durhamfootman]

if England don't beat Pakistan, they won't deserve to progress. Pakistan are a poor side. England should beat them 99 times out of 100. No excuses. The WIndies were shockingly bad in their loss to them, apparently

[bigfluffylemon]

England playing Pakistan this evening, in Canberra.

Some well-timed viewing for me.

I am assuming that Fluffy will be going. Should be a good match, with both teams coming off strong wins. A tight group this one.

I was going to go, but I've been a bit sick this week. Too tired, sadly. I'll have to catch it on TV.