What's new

ICC CT 2017 : Group A - New Zealand [291] vs Australia [53/3] - No result

And there are too many diverse venues in India, it's like a world of it's own. South, East, North, West... All venues with a different flavor and crowd.

Yeah, that's awesome. Probably a bit of a pain for foreigners travelling to watch a game of cricket if the match is held some remote town because of how hard/expensive it might be for them to get there compared to get to somewhere like Bombay or Delhi.
 
Don't understand the need behind a major tournament being held in a country where daily rainfall is the norm. I can still tolerate the Champions Trophy being a rain-affected affair however, England better start investing in some retractable-roof stadiums for the World Cup in 2019 because having the entire World Cup washed out would certainly be a pity.

Daily rainfall isn't the norm but scheduling a tournament in early June is asking for trouble.

ICC tournaments in England should be scheduled in late June-early July. Re-schedule England's two home international series on either side of that tournament.
 
English wickets are roads and every second game is rain affected.

But, the ground size is decent - at least top edges don't land in 2nd tier of crowd:19:

These days too much cricket is played, hence English calendar is distorted, which is resulting more rain interruption. In olden days, season used to start at Birmingham in 1st week of June, then to Lord's in 3rd week & ends at Oval in August. After that, the ODI's in AUG/SEP, when weather normally is safer. First 3 WC was 2.5 weeks long & the Final was played on 4th Sunday of June, a day before Wimbledon starts & none of the KO matches were rain affected much. Now, they have even pushed Wimbledon to July start, to accommodate more tournaments after French Open.
 
Yeah, that's awesome. Probably a bit of a pain for foreigners travelling to watch a game of cricket if the match is held some remote town because of how hard/expensive it might be for them to get there compared to get to somewhere like Bombay or Delhi.

But ICC Tournament matches aren't held in small venues, even B tier cities don't get to host any World Cup matches.

Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata ( Eden), Bangalore, Mohali, Chennai , Ahmadabad are some of the fixed venues for high profile matches where transport is very efficient and smooth.
 
Last edited:
Yes let's host in India where they are nil crowd for non India games and guess what? The whole qualifying group B matches were rained out
 
India is the best place to host LOI cricket. Great crowds, good coverage, suitable weather for cricket (it does get very hot however) and reasonably well ambiance. The only problem is getting visas to watch a game.

Yep exactly. If teams were willing to tour Pakistan I would have added Pakistan to the list as well. It's quite unfortunate to not have tournaments there.
 
Daily rainfall isn't the norm but scheduling a tournament in early June is asking for trouble.

ICC tournaments in England should be scheduled in late June-early July. Re-schedule England's two home international series on either side of that tournament.

I spent a summer in Manchester and daily rainfall was the norm for most part of my visit. However, you're probably right. Poor scheduling on behalf of the ICC then, I suppose. Overall, it could've been planned better, be it the schedule or the venue.
 
Yep exactly. If teams were willing to tour Pakistan I would have added Pakistan to the list as well. It's quite unfortunate to not have tournaments there.

Its a travesty and the world really is missing out on some good quality cricket however, I remember we didn't really have jam packed stadiums even when cricket was played regularly. The obsession and craziness in India is on another level and that is good for the future of cricket.
 
But ICC Tournament matches aren't held in small venues, even B tier cities don't get to host any World Cup matches.

Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata ( Eden), Bangalore, Mohali, Chennai , Ahmadabad are some of the fixed venues for high profile matches where transport is very efficient and smooth.

I see. Well, that's better then. I suppose that should be the case too if there is an Indo-Pak series?
 
I got the first reference to YK but what decision of the ECB in mid-90's are you talking about bro?

They limited foreign players in English County to max 2, probably 1 to play - i think, it was 1997 or 1998. At one point, it was almost unlimited with 4 to play in playing XI.

Take out 70s, 80s & 90s - PAK's record is inferior to SRL & NZ.

Take out County from 70s to 90s - Imarn won't have been better than Anwar Ali, Wasim - JK, Waquar - Sami, Zaheer - Umar, Mazid - MoHa, Sarfraz - Gul, Wasim Raza - Saad Nasim, Mushtaq - Asad Azhar Ali, Javed - Misbah, Asif - Asad Shafiq, Salim Maliq - Fawad Alam .....................................................
 
Daily rainfall isn't the norm but scheduling a tournament in early June is asking for trouble.

ICC tournaments in England should be scheduled in late June-early July. Re-schedule England's two home international series on either side of that tournament.

Has the climate in Britain changed so much in the last two decades? The 1999 World Cup was held from May through June and I only remember the India-England encounter being interrupted due to rain .
 
They limited foreign players in English County to max 2, probably 1 to play - i think, it was 1997 or 1998. At one point, it was almost unlimited with 4 to play in playing XI.

Take out 70s, 80s & 90s - PAK's record is inferior to SRL & NZ.

Take out County from 70s to 90s - Imarn won't have been better than Anwar Ali, Wasim - JK, Waquar - Sami, Zaheer - Umar, Mazid - MoHa, Sarfraz - Gul, Wasim Raza - Saad Nasim, Mushtaq - Asad Azhar Ali, Javed - Misbah, Asif - Asad Shafiq, Salim Maliq - Fawad Alam .....................................................

Ohk thanks. I'd forgotten about that.
 
Will's decision is going to back fire now, in a 40 overs game, I presume.
 
Pak vs India would be a sell out even on the North Pole.
What about SL vs SA? Will it be a sell out in India? The answer is no.ICC wants to earn gate money and they can't have India playing every other match in tournaments in India.Even the final of last year WC wasn't a sell out
 
46 overs, so it's not all disaster. Slower out field'll cost some runs though.
 
India started the dynamic of flat pitches during 2013 Australia series in which Rohit Sharma scored 200 and then Australia and NZ followed the suit in WC 2015
 
Match resumed, enough of this venue debate. We are in for some entertainment. After the rain can we anticipate a little help for the bowlers?
 
Williamson should bat through the innings. Ronchi could take the game away from the Australians if he bats for another 10 overs or more.
 
So much for the famed Aussie bowling battery LMAO :ashwin
 
Cummins is a big talent, but he is a batsman's dream on a flat pitch with no swing. Bowls the ideal pace and length to hit the ball as hard as you can, and has no variations whatsoever.
 
Cummins is a big talent, but he is a batsman's dream on a flat pitch with no swing. Bowls the ideal pace and length to hit the ball as hard as you can, and has no variations whatsoever.


Maybe Pattinson should have played today . Or even Zampa.
 
Don't understand Australia's obsession with Hastings. Every time I've seen him bowl, he has been absolute cannon-fodder. Faulkner is a better option.
 
I think Australia will still back themselves to chase 300 on this wicket. Warner and Smith are gun LO batsmen on flat tracks.
 
Good decision by Smith to bring Starc on here. If he gets a wicket or two, the Aussies will be in control of the game.
 
Looks like Kiwis have set cat among the pigeons. NZ is a team, if they get a good start, they have plenty of arsenal for later stages, particularly, if it's a bit shorter game & their fielding adds 7-10% with whatever batsmen posts.

It's going to be a tight finish. Kiwi attack'll swing it better than the Aussies.
 
Looks like Kiwis have set cat among the pigeons. NZ is a team, if they get a good start, they have plenty of arsenal for later stages, particularly, if it's a bit shorter game & their fielding adds 7-10% with whatever batsmen posts.

It's going to be a tight finish. Kiwi attack'll swing it better than the Aussies.


If they get to 300, we will have a close game.
 
This is a perfect pitch for ODI cricket, as was the one yesterday. Hats off to the curators.
 
Yesterday Jack Ball, today Cummins - I feel this tournament in not flat-out express bowling; probably BK/Amir type bowler should do well.

That indicates, PAK must play Wahab in all 3 matches - he is fast, experienced & senior..............
 
Yesterday Jack Ball, today Cummins - I feel this tournament in not flat-out express bowling; probably BK/Amir type bowler should do well.

That indicates, PAK must play Wahab in all 3 matches - he is fast, experienced & senior..............

Bowlers with variations will do well. Swing/seam and express pace bowlers unlikely.
 
Yesterday Jack Ball, today Cummins - I feel this tournament in not flat-out express bowling; probably BK/Amir type bowler should do well.

That indicates, PAK must play Wahab in all 3 matches - he is fast, experienced & senior..............

Thank you for your expert opinion.


Wahab Riaz is injured.

:salute
 
After 15 years of professional cricket, Taylor still hasn't understood the concept of timing the ball.
 
Majority of the cricket viewers prefer high-scoring ODI matches. The era of 250 scores is outdated now.

That's because it's artificial embedded into viewers mind. Cricket isn't for slog feast - it's a contest between bat & ball.

Yesterdays match was one of the most boring one - not because it was one sided, because the wicket didn't offer any trade-off. Let me explain - BD put a decent total, but not match winning & the wicket was absolute belter. Now, what ENG did was play around 360 & kept asking around 6.5 all through. Had Mash brought his fielders in - there was only one way traffic, Poms would have won it inside 45 overs, may be losing couple more. This is because with his attack Mash had no other option to try choking ENG on such wickets.

Take, same match on a different surface - based on one good innings of 91 (127), BD posts 245/9 with wicket offering something for the bowlers. Now, Mash can play a trade-off - bring 6 men it & try to get batsmen out. ENG still can go after the bowling, but with a risk of suddenly 151/7, because it's not a one way traffic.

What ICC has done these days is, they have taken out "Come-back" from ODI game, which has made this boring in terms of contest, by artificially distorting the taste of audience. 90% of todays' matches are done inside 50 overs, sometimes even earlier. Teams starting on absolute belter, starts with a predetermined total & they go after ball 1 - if it clicks, they'll post 350 & most times, chasing side is out of the game (though, they also might end at 340). Or, to do so, team batting first ends up at 60/3 or 90/4 - still they'll reach 270 ............and most days will lose inside 45 overs.

This is where "come-back" is associated with he balance of the contest. In 90s, most the the even contest ended in nail biters, simply because the condition offered something to make a come-back - you bat first & end up 50/4 in 15 overs, still your set batsman can guide the tail to 222 & then your bowlers can fight it out on what is still a helpful wicket. Or, batting side is at 140/1 - Captain brings his spearhead, put attacking fielding & knocks down couple - it's 147/3, chip around one more - 153/4 - you are back in the game & can restrict batting side to say 234/9.

The trade-off in the game is how much risk Captain is ready to take a wicket, which is ultimate key. After 15 overs, regulation was only 4 fielders, still great Captains put 6 inside for a trade - off. Most famous one I can recall in IND-AUS WC match at Mumbai '96. India was cruising, when Taylor brought Shane & he actually put a Test match field in 41st over, when asking was around 5.5 - Shane did get Manji, caught at slip to win the contest.

I don't think viewers prefer high scoring matches - they prefer close contest.
 
That's because it's artificial embedded into viewers mind. Cricket isn't for slog feast - it's a contest between bat & ball.

Yesterdays match was one of the most boring one - not because it was one sided, because the wicket didn't offer any trade-off. Let me explain - BD put a decent total, but not match winning & the wicket was absolute belter. Now, what ENG did was play around 360 & kept asking around 6.5 all through. Had Mash brought his fielders in - there was only one way traffic, Poms would have won it inside 45 overs, may be losing couple more. This is because with his attack Mash had no other option to try choking ENG on such wickets.

Take, same match on a different surface - based on one good innings of 91 (127), BD posts 245/9 with wicket offering something for the bowlers. Now, Mash can play a trade-off - bring 6 men it & try to get batsmen out. ENG still can go after the bowling, but with a risk of suddenly 151/7, because it's not a one way traffic.

What ICC has done these days is, they have taken out "Come-back" from ODI game, which has made this boring in terms of contest, by artificially distorting the taste of audience. 90% of todays' matches are done inside 50 overs, sometimes even earlier. Teams starting on absolute belter, starts with a predetermined total & they go after ball 1 - if it clicks, they'll post 350 & most times, chasing side is out of the game (though, they also might end at 340). Or, to do so, team batting first ends up at 60/3 or 90/4 - still they'll reach 270 ............and most days will lose inside 45 overs.

This is where "come-back" is associated with he balance of the contest. In 90s, most the the even contest ended in nail biters, simply because the condition offered something to make a come-back - you bat first & end up 50/4 in 15 overs, still your set batsman can guide the tail to 222 & then your bowlers can fight it out on what is still a helpful wicket. Or, batting side is at 140/1 - Captain brings his spearhead, put attacking fielding & knocks down couple - it's 147/3, chip around one more - 153/4 - you are back in the game & can restrict batting side to say 234/9.

The trade-off in the game is how much risk Captain is ready to take a wicket, which is ultimate key. After 15 overs, regulation was only 4 fielders, still great Captains put 6 inside for a trade - off. Most famous one I can recall in IND-AUS WC match at Mumbai '96. India was cruising, when Taylor brought Shane & he actually put a Test match field in 41st over, when asking was around 5.5 - Shane did get Manji, caught at slip to win the contest.

I don't think viewers prefer high scoring matches - they prefer close contest.

yess most of the peoplei have asked here are of the opinion that these matches are boring..
 
Williamson goes big. Could this be the day where he produces a clutch icc tournament knock?
 
Back
Top