2023 ICC Cricket World Cup (50 over version)

South Africa possess a dynamic batting line-up and everything clicked today as they racked up 428-5 against some indifferent bowling from Sri Lanka. de Kock, van der Dussen and Markram all scored centuries. Markram recorded the fastest World Cup hundred off 49 balls, beating the 50-ball ton by Kevin O'Brian against England in Bengaluru in 2011.

^^ SA won by 102 runs

^ To be honest Booms, with the Rugby world cup, I didn't see much of this match. I did though look at the SA total and give a rolling eyes sigh 'not again??..another carpet??'

From your comments though, it appears that SL bowling was way off? Even so, I am not convinced that scores like this - yes SL fell well short which often happens after the run around in the field - do limited overs cricket any favours.

A clinical performance from India with a comfortable 6 wicket win, chasing down a target of 200 in 41.2 overs Rahul (97 no) and Kohli 85 added 165 for the 4th wicket, after both openers and Shreyas Iyer fell for ducks. 30 overs of spin were bowled for a combined 104-6, the best being Jadeja with 3-28. The 2nd wicket partnership of 69 between Waner (41) and Smith (46) was the only highlight, but India looked in control throughout.

(08-10-2023 17:06 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  A clinical performance from India with a comfortable 6 wicket win, chasing down a target of 200 in 41.2 overs Rahul (97 no) and Kohli 85 added 165 for the 4th wicket, after both openers and Shreyas Iyer fell for ducks. 30 overs of spin were bowled for a combined 104-6, the best being Jadeja with 3-28. The 2nd wicket partnership of 69 between Waner (41) and Smith (46) was the only highlight, but India looked in control throughout.

^ Not the start the Aussies wanted! They seemed to labour to the total of 200, not knowing whether to 'stick or twist' Better scores and a true contest match like this one though, than a run spree versus a run spree

Australia seemed to be short of at least 1 batsman, with wicketkeeper Alex Carey coming in at no6.

The team seems to be set up with 3 no rounders in Marsh, Maxell and Green.
Marsh isn't an opening batter, Green's not international class and Maxwell thinks he's good with a bat and ball, but just looks past it.

Surely they must have some up and coming batsman who could open the innings with Warner. Preferably they have another batsman to replace Maxwell.

They do however have a great set of quick bowlers. Both Cummins and Starc have performed with both bat and ball, and Hazelwood was excellent in taking some quick Indian wickets.

But knowning Australia they'll probably bounce back, they done it before.

(08-10-2023 20:45 )Charlemagne Wrote:  Australia seemed to be short of at least 1 batsman, with wicketkeeper Alex Carey coming in at no6.

The team seems to be set up with 3 no rounders in Marsh, Maxell and Green.
Marsh isn't an opening batter, Green's not international class and Maxwell thinks he's good with a bat and ball, but just looks past it.

Surely they must have some up and coming batsman who could open the innings with Warner. Preferably they have another batsman to replace Maxwell.

They do however have a great set of quick bowlers. Both Cummins and Starc have performed with both bat and ball, and Hazelwood was excellent in taking some quick Indian wickets.

But knowning Australia they'll probably bounce back, they done it before.

They are far from out of it for sure!! This format gives the higher ranked nations more than one opportunity to bounce back from a defeat, and still progress - witness 2019 and NZ/Eng

I personally do not like the format, as it is stacked in favour of the top nations! The best World Cup for me was in '07 in the Caribbean, with 16 teams in 4 groups of four. Real jeopardy from the get go, and permutations within matches to determine teams fate! For some reason, large parts of the media were against it??

^^ A round robin format will ensure that the best teams progress more often than not and make an upset less likely. It isn't stacked to favour of any side. Having only 3 group games can easily put a top side out if rain affects one game which I don't like. A more exciting format than what we now have which is fairer but less fun.

A workmanlike performance saw the Kiwis beat the Netherlands by 99 runs.

(09-10-2023 17:21 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  ^^ A round robin format will ensure that the best teams progress more often than not and make an upset less likely. It isn't stacked to favour of any side. Having only 3 group games can easily put a top side out if rain affects one game which I don't like. A more exciting format than what we now have which is fairer but less fun.

Exactly, and that can't be right! The cricket match at play should be the only determining factor about whether or not there is or is not a 'shock' result! I get the point about rain, but that cant be helped sometimes (you could mitigate against it though by proper scheduling of the WC when you know that - particularly in the sub - continent - there are obvious rainy/monsoon seasons - in England there is never a guarantee!

The current format allows - as I think I pointed out originally - particularly the 'big boys' to fall over multiple times, and still progress, that is not right!