England's bowling in the last 10 overs has been dreadful for years now. They have obviously come up with a 'masterplan' of the bowlers bowling slower ball bouncers/short deliveries. It's not as if they're trying to bowl it full and failing, they just seem to be following orders and not doing it at all. Whether it's the bowlers that set those orders is probably another question, but Morgan and Moores have to be stronger and change tactics because it's blatantly obvious it's not working.
Letting Cook blunder around in the one day side for 12 months longer than he should have done is really paying off now. Excellent planning, as ever.
Disappointing for Taylor. Pity they didn't listen to him when he kept stating that it was a dead ball.
I thought at one point that they would have to turn around and go back on if their mistake was pointed out by another official?
I don't understand how two highly experienced officials couldn't know such a simple rule. The commentary team were all convinced it was a dead ball.
England's bowling in the last 10 overs has been dreadful for years now. They have obviously come up with a 'masterplan' of the bowlers bowling slower ball bouncers/short deliveries. It's not as if they're trying to bowl it full and failing, they just seem to be following orders and not doing it at all. Whether it's the bowlers that set those orders is probably another question, but Morgan and Moores have to be stronger and change tactics because it's blatantly obvious it's not working.
Letting Cook blunder around in the one day side for 12 months longer than he should have done is really paying off now. Excellent planning, as ever.
I saw many county one day games in the eighties and nineties and from 70-3 more often than not batting sides would struggle to get 250-even 200. The psychology of Cricket seems to have changed, back then the balance was slightly more in bowlers favour-either taking wickets or containment leading to batting frustration and daft shots(the art of containment and miserly bowling seems to have been lost somewhere along the line). I do think bowlers/captains generally have to ask themselves a few questions when batsmen are bludgeoning 6's all round the ground these days and getting hundreds from hardly any balls.
I think this World Cup should be pretty good. Judging by the two opening matches (albeit involving home teams), there should be big crowds, matches played in nice big stadia, plenty of atmosphere. I do think though ODIs would be even better if they were 40 overs a side. I personally think 50 overs goes on for too long. 40 overs is long enough to maintain the rhythm and subtleties of the 50 over game but condense it into a more reasonable match length, by cutting almost two hours off the game (including a shorter innings break).
First things first, I think the umpires were a disgrace in making the error over the dead ball/run-out that never was and should be punished accordingly by being dropped from the next round of games.
OK, it wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference to the end result but aside from virtually depriving James Taylor of making a ton at the MCG, it could cost England dear if the final group standings go down to net run rate.
The fact that Botham - who, let's face it, has never been the quickest on the uptake in the commentary box - called it correctly mere seconds after it happened tells you just what an elementary error the umpires made.
In a situation like that, though, why can't the third umpire radio down to the on-field guys and tell them they've made a mistake? Have the ICC abandoned their ethos of all three umpires working together as a team?
As for England, I can see their campaign in this World Cup following exactly the same pattern as it did in 1996, namely losing to all the recognised countries in the group stage but scraping through after beating the minnows - then being thrashed by another of the big guns in the first round of the knockout phase.
By the way, I do think they have to make the minimum distance to any boundary 75 metres. This will ensure sixes have to be very cleanly hit or risk getting caught on the boundary. I think some boundaries being only 65 metres is an absolute joke. This will make good bowlers come into the game more, as batsmen won't be able to take liberties by targeting short boundaries. If you look at footage from Australia from the 80s or even 90s boundaries were fairly big, quite often 90 metres, but sadly even the MCG is now fairly short on one side. I think the stands have encroached the playing surface over the years with redevelopment of stands.
I've had a few quid on NZ, they've got home advantage until the final and they're strong in all disciplines. Can't see beyond them, SA or Australia.
I hope NZ do well, they've shown glimpses of being a good team for a while now, and it's only in the last year or so that they've started to bring it all together.
My only worry with them is in their bowling. Their batsmen have shown that they can be destructive, but if they do come a cropper in this tournament it will be with ball in hand, giving their batsmen too much to do.
As for England, I can see their campaign in this World Cup following exactly the same pattern as it did in 1996, namely losing to all the recognised countries in the group stage but scraping through after beating the minnows - then being thrashed by another of the big guns in the first round of the knockout phase.
It certainly looks that way. We shall see....
We've got at least 3 big hitters not in the team who probably should be, 2 of them not even in the squad (Hales, Stokes, KP). The other big teams cram their line-up with these types, with just one or two George Bailey stayer/plodder types. Whereas it's the other way round with us.
Playing safe never worked in the past and it's unlikely to work now.
The bowling was pretty woeful again too.
Of course, I'll eat my words if we go on to win the whole thing, lol.
Aus have certainly got a belting team at the moment though.
6 big hitters, a couple of stayer/plodder types who can also hit big when needed, and an awesome pace attack.
With the likes of Clarke and Faulkner on the bench...
Aus & SA look like semi-final certainties to me, probably also NZ, with the 4th place up for grabs....
We've got at least 3 big hitters not in the team who probably should be, 2 of them not even in the squad (Hales, Stokes, KP). The other big teams cram their line-up with these types, with just one or two George Bailey stayer/plodder types. Whereas it's the other way round with us.
Playing safe never worked in the past and it's unlikely to work now.
The bowling was pretty woeful again too.
Of course, I'll eat my words if we go on to win the whole thing, lol.
Aus have certainly got a belting team at the moment though.
6 big hitters, a couple of stayer/plodder types who can also hit big when needed, and an awesome pace attack.
With the likes of Clarke and Faulkner on the bench...
Aus & SA look like semi-final certainties to me, probably also NZ, with the 4th place up for grabs....
Forgotten about Stokes. England do not have many big hitters in their squad and he can't do any worse than someone like Bopara, but at least he has the potential to be match winner with either bat or ball. England really should see him as a Mitchell Marsh type and try to develop his cricket. I really haven't understood what the selectors' obsession with Bopara is. He has never looked international class to me, though a very good county pro. I actually would have also had Cook. He is a class player and I think, for now at least, still a better ODI player than the likes of Ali and Ballance. I think there was a case for Carberry as well. He has done well Down Under in the Big Bash and held his own in the test series.
The fact that Botham - who, let's face it, has never been the quickest on the uptake in the commentary box - called it correctly mere seconds after it happened tells you just what an elementary error the umpires made.
In a situation like that, though, why can't the third umpire radio down to the on-field guys and tell them they've made a mistake? Have the ICC abandoned their ethos of all three umpires working together as a team?
By the way, I do think they have to make the minimum distance to any boundary 75 metres. This will ensure sixes have to be very cleanly hit or risk getting caught on the boundary. I think some boundaries being only 65 metres is an absolute joke. This will make good bowlers come into the game more, as batsmen won't be able to take liberties by targeting short boundaries. If you look at footage from Australia from the 80s or even 90s boundaries were fairly big, quite often 90 metres, but sadly even the MCG is now fairly short on one side. I think the stands have encroached the playing surface over the years with redevelopment of stands.
The problem is that few grounds could guarantee such a big boundary, especially in New Zealand.
South Africa are in a bit of strife against Zimbabwe - 83-4 in the 21st over after de Villiers falls to a terrific boundary-crossing catch from Craig Ervine.
Looks like Adelaide made the right decision in paying big bucks for this game and sacrificing one Australian game although they do get a quarter final involving Australia.
If you see the Umar decison, his bat and pad were no where near each other. His glove or bat did not hit his pad or any part of his body. There was clear daylight. So the tiny sliver of snicko could only have come from a delicate feather. Yes eh was out and a brave 3rd umpire too a brave decision.
Comments
Letting Cook blunder around in the one day side for 12 months longer than he should have done is really paying off now. Excellent planning, as ever.
I don't understand how two highly experienced officials couldn't know such a simple rule. The commentary team were all convinced it was a dead ball.
I saw many county one day games in the eighties and nineties and from 70-3 more often than not batting sides would struggle to get 250-even 200. The psychology of Cricket seems to have changed, back then the balance was slightly more in bowlers favour-either taking wickets or containment leading to batting frustration and daft shots(the art of containment and miserly bowling seems to have been lost somewhere along the line). I do think bowlers/captains generally have to ask themselves a few questions when batsmen are bludgeoning 6's all round the ground these days and getting hundreds from hardly any balls.
OK, it wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference to the end result but aside from virtually depriving James Taylor of making a ton at the MCG, it could cost England dear if the final group standings go down to net run rate.
The fact that Botham - who, let's face it, has never been the quickest on the uptake in the commentary box - called it correctly mere seconds after it happened tells you just what an elementary error the umpires made.
In a situation like that, though, why can't the third umpire radio down to the on-field guys and tell them they've made a mistake? Have the ICC abandoned their ethos of all three umpires working together as a team?
As for England, I can see their campaign in this World Cup following exactly the same pattern as it did in 1996, namely losing to all the recognised countries in the group stage but scraping through after beating the minnows - then being thrashed by another of the big guns in the first round of the knockout phase.
I hope NZ do well, they've shown glimpses of being a good team for a while now, and it's only in the last year or so that they've started to bring it all together.
My only worry with them is in their bowling. Their batsmen have shown that they can be destructive, but if they do come a cropper in this tournament it will be with ball in hand, giving their batsmen too much to do.
It certainly looks that way. We shall see....
We've got at least 3 big hitters not in the team who probably should be, 2 of them not even in the squad (Hales, Stokes, KP). The other big teams cram their line-up with these types, with just one or two George Bailey stayer/plodder types. Whereas it's the other way round with us.
Playing safe never worked in the past and it's unlikely to work now.
The bowling was pretty woeful again too.
Of course, I'll eat my words if we go on to win the whole thing, lol.
Aus have certainly got a belting team at the moment though.
6 big hitters, a couple of stayer/plodder types who can also hit big when needed, and an awesome pace attack.
With the likes of Clarke and Faulkner on the bench...
Aus & SA look like semi-final certainties to me, probably also NZ, with the 4th place up for grabs....
Forgotten about Stokes. England do not have many big hitters in their squad and he can't do any worse than someone like Bopara, but at least he has the potential to be match winner with either bat or ball. England really should see him as a Mitchell Marsh type and try to develop his cricket. I really haven't understood what the selectors' obsession with Bopara is. He has never looked international class to me, though a very good county pro. I actually would have also had Cook. He is a class player and I think, for now at least, still a better ODI player than the likes of Ali and Ballance. I think there was a case for Carberry as well. He has done well Down Under in the Big Bash and held his own in the test series.
This is the case in all forms of cricket. All umpires ( apart from the International elite) are taught this.
I would agree with this.
Yes he did. He would have had to see the match referee if he hadn't.
The third umpire was Silly Billy. Say no more.
The problem is that few grounds could guarantee such a big boundary, especially in New Zealand.
India batting
S.A. recovered well in Hamilton with JP and Miller adding 100+ so far
Agree re the catch that got AB . Brilliant
Spreads calling 297 - 300 from an opening quote of 275 - 285
Could see 600+ runs on what looks like a good pitch
They came together at 83/4 in the 21st over and have added 256 in just under 30 overs with both getting undefeated tons
Highest WC 5th wicket partnership as well as a SA WC best for all wickets
Time to hit the mute button.
Not sure about the 3rd umpire (again) in giving Umar out
They should surely agree to it after this game.
I liked the way the players celebrated when the decision came on the screen
It was like they had actually won the tournament:D
As you say, this may be the best way to get them to accept DRS;-)
Started with the Beatles i think. Shrieking for no reason, the fans not Beatles themselves.