[Girish]

[Girish]

I know there aren't a lot of cricket enthusiasts around these parts, but what the hell, it's the World Cup after all.

So, what are your thoughts on this? Who do you think will win this WC? Use this topic to discuss anything related to the ICC Cricket WC 2011.

The format's been changed; they have gone back to the one that used in the 1996 WC, which I think is a good move by the ICC. It throws the cup open to a lot of teams. The competition's also pretty tough this year. My bets are on either India or South Africa, but Australia and Sri Lanka cannot be forgotten either. Like India, Sri Lanka have the home advantage too.

This post has been edited by girishb on Wednesday, Feb 16 2011, 21:34

[LanceVanceDance07]

I'm not really a cricket fan, but I did get a nice souvenir from the Cricket World Cup in 2007 in the West Indies.

Hoping Canada wins at least one game...as for who I think can win, India's got a home advantage, so I think they are gonna win.

[AussieDude]

Geez, Give Australia atleast some competition.. I didnt even know Kenya played cricket O_O

I guess New Zealand and Sri Lanka could pose a moderate threat.

[Jay]

Still too long in between games for countries. This is going to take forever to finish.

Australia will play like sh*t because they're hellbent on jamming a square peg into a round hole, going into each game with as many pace bowlers as possible and then remarkably failing to chase down totals, or set totals that are high enough.

India won't win by virtue of the hex I have put on them, which leaves Sri Lanka and South Africa. And we know how South Africa go in major tourneys.

Kumar to lift the cup.

[Girish]

QUOTE (Jay @ Feb 17 2011, 19:28)

India won't win by virtue of the hex I have put on them

hahahahaha...

Lanka have already lifted the cup once the last time it was held in the sub-continent. It's India's time now. After that, Bangladesh.

[Jay]

Fat, bald-headed ftb.

I swear I am the only person in the world who thinks Virender Sehwag is a crock of sh*t. He manages to swan around at the highest level by virtue of natural talent alone, no skill or anything.

[Girish]

Nah, I'm pretty sure there are a few other Aussies who think so too.

The only thing that has bothered me about Sehwag is his inconsistency. But when he gets going, he really gets going. Natural talent or not, he's scoring runs by the heaps and that is all that matters for India right now. I think he has worked on his batting though. Two years ago, I wouldn't bet on him getting past 150 in a one-day match. He seems to have brought over some of his Test batting skills to the 50 over format.

[Jay]

QUOTE (girishb @ Feb 20 2011, 22:13)

his Test batting skills

Hah.

He plants his feet and swings at everything like a f*cking child. The only reason he isn't playing against children in the streets of Delhi is because of his impeccable (and god-given) co-ordination. He's not a role model, he's not a hero, and the sooner he is retired and forgotten, the better. Leave the idolising to someone who deserves it like, idk...

[Girish]

QUOTE (Jay @ Feb 20 2011, 18:27)

Leave the idolising to someone who deserves it like, idk...

Andrew Symonds? Yeah, sure...

And I highly doubt one can score two triple hundreds, six double hundreds whilst maintaining an average of over 50 by just swinging their bat around like a child. I guess you would have something similar to say about Shahid Afridi, the only other guy to have a strike rate of above 100. But, Sehwag is miles ahead of Afridi. Mind you, I'm not a Sehwag fan but there's a very good reason why he's still in the Indian team and why he is still one of the most dangerous batsman in the world. You can argue about his unorthodox style of playing, but remember, one can have the best skills and technique but if they don't have the runs to show it, they are no good. Sehwag's got the runs.

[Jay]

Alluding to SRT again, really.

It's true that he has the scores to offset his style of play, something that genuinely frustrates me as it is detrimental to my "he sucks" train of thought.

Only thing I can think of is that playing style lends itself to big scores every now and again. Explains Chris Gayle's top scores. There's been some pretty rubbish players with scores of 300+, and genuine legends who only manage to score 250 against Bangladesh.

[Girish]

I just wanted to mock some Australian player, that's all.

Sehwag is more consistent than Gayle though. But yeah, both are risky players. And I really don't know which genuine legend you're referring to in your last statement.

[Jay]

SRT.

Always.

[TommyMufc-Champs]

Kenya got destroyed today by New Zealand. What a shock

[Girish]

@Jay: You rounded off his highest score. It's 248*. So, you can't blame me for not getting that one.

I didn't expect Kenya to go down so meekly. At least, Canada crossed the 100 mark against SL. Looking at the names of the Canadian players, it seems to be a cocktail of Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi players, along with a few Canadian names here and there. Seems like no one else is bothered taking cricket seriously over there.

Also, what's your view on the ICC wanting to drop minnows from future World Cups and play with only the top 10 teams?

[Jay]

QUOTE (girishb @ Feb 21 2011, 11:20)

Also, what's your view on the ICC wanting to drop minnows from future World Cups and play with only the top 10 teams?

Makes sense.

The Champions Trophy (which will be scrapped long before the WC) was much more streamlined with less nations. There'll be less pathetic walkovers like what's happened in just the past 24 hours. Sure, it wouldn't be so much of a 'world' event, but anyone outside the full test playing nations bar Ireland, Kenya, Netherlands to an extent and Afghanistan have teams completely full of expatriate players. The Canadian team discuss tactics in Urdu ffs.

I'd like to see Ireland and Afghanistan in the next WC. Maybe top 12.

[Girish]

Sounds reasonable. What about the format? I say two groups of 5 teams each, with every nation playing the other nation twice, then the quarterfinal, semifinal and the final. I hope we never see the Super Six/Eight stage again. The traditional format is much better.


A pretty good bowling show by Zimbabwe, btw. Did not let Australia off the hook, at all.

[Warlord.]

While I'm supporting Sri Lanka, I highly doubt they'll be able to take the cup home. Mostly because the current dictator of the country is trying to push the team to role model status rather than push them to win games.

After Sri Lanka, I support Bharat. Kinda have a feeling they'll take the cup.

[Girish]

QUOTE (Warlord. @ Feb 23 2011, 00:05)

After Sri Lanka, I support Bharat. Kinda have a feeling they'll take the cup.

Provided we don't mess up at the most important moment only for those darn Aussies to run away with the Cup again. And even if we do mess up, lets hope that South Africa doesn't choke again. Seriously, 3 world cups on the trot is enough. Would really like to see a new champion.

[Girish]

Wow, our bowling really sucks. Big mistake going in with only 4 bowlers. The extra batsman didn't ruffle any feathers. I think we are going to fall a good 30-40 runs short. England are well on course for a victory.


Edit: Holy crap, what a match! England almost cracked under pressure. Still, they should be disappointed not to win. Zaheer pulled India back into the match and then Chawla & Patel almost handed it back to England.

This was the kind of match the WC was missing.

This post has been edited by girishb on Sunday, Feb 27 2011, 17:07