What's new

Last 3 World Cups (2015, 2011, 2007) Winners - only one thing in common!

W63L35

W63L35

Post of the Week winner
Joined
Feb 6, 2006
Runs
27,335
Post of the Week
9
Winners of the last three World Cups (2015/Aus, 2011/Ind and 2007/Aus) had one thing in common. They all had the BEST batting S/R of that tournament.

I think, same will be the case this time...... I predict that the team with the best S/R will win this year's WC..... unless the pitches are very bowler friendly.


Color Coding:
Yellow - Winner of the WC.
Blue - Runner Up.
Green - Losing Semi-Finalists


WC2007.jpg

WC2011.jpg

WC-2015.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even in 2003 WC the winners (Aus) had the 2nd best S/R. South Africa had the best S/R in that WC.


WC2003.jpg
 
Pakistan's S/R in comparison to the winners of the last 4 World Cups.

4-25-2019 7-21-58 PM.jpg
 
interesting!

How significant is the strike rate batting first vs. second?
how does the strike rate compare for the winning team in batting first vs. second?
 
Well one thing is certain Pakistan don't have chance against big teams in 320+ scores.

275 - 300. Is what Pakistan's ideal high scoring game is. Just like CT17
 
You live in a delusional World if you think Umar Akmal could have made a difference. He could even field a straight ball in PSL final and similarly Rizwan is a no stroke wonder. He will not do anything on pacy english tracks. The fact is if Pakistan want to win the cup then the bowlers have to play a major role while the batsmen will supporter's role.
I think end of the day these stats dont mattter as WC is won or lost in knockout matches and the team which plays best in knockouts wins.
Pakistan just have to somehow qualify for semis . And just peak at the right time then they can win
 
Lol at Pakistan's strike rate. People used to mock Afridi style batting but look at the strike rates of the vast majority of batsmen. Mohd Wasim blames the domestic cricket coaches and structures where batsmen coming through are encouraged to play safe, to play safe shots and arent encouraged or rewarded for improvising. Maybe the time has come to get rid of all these old out dated coaches and get some international coaches in domestic coaches.
 
You need the ability to score at least the par score for a wicket and Pakistan traditionally fall well short of that majority of the times. Pakistan's bowling helped them to restrict teams under par totals in CT17 and it will be difficult for that to happen in a long tournament like the world cup. A team which has the ability to score 300+ regularly on a flat track and are also able to defend such totals will be the one who will win this WC.
 
NoBallZombie said:
Can someone please share this with Mickey and Co? :ba
Click to expand...

Great point...... I mean, if an average cricket fans like us can see this ..... why can't cricket coaches, selectors and full time team analysts see that?
or
May be they see that but "parchies" are to strong!
 
W63L35 said:
Great point...... I mean, if an average cricket fans like us can see this ..... why can't cricket coaches, selectors and full time team analysts see that?
or
May be they see that but "parchies" are to strong!
Click to expand...

It is not a new thing. If you stay at wicket strike rate will automatically increase, throughout 50 overs or in last 10 if you have enough wickets in hand. But if wickets started to crumble how can you expect to maintain good strike rate and if you try to do that that will eventually lead to fall of another wicket unless you are much superior batsman.
So all in all wickets in hand matters the most. But one thing can make a difference...power hitting. If you have enough power hitters you are bound to score more runs on a flat deck than other team with less power hitters.
Another thing which is imp is strike rotation. Whichever team has more good strike rotaters that will score few more runs than another one with less good strike rotaters.
 
J-Essence said:
interesting!

How significant is the strike rate batting first vs. second?
Click to expand...

In last 4 World Cups - 72 ODIs:

Batting first: 5.38
Batting 2nd: 4.99


J-Essence said:
how does the strike rate compare for the winning team in batting first vs. second?
Click to expand...

In last 4 World Cups - 72 ODIs:

Batting first in wins: 6.21
Batting 2nd in wins: 5.48
 
Good stat.Can you pull similar stats for CT 17 as i feel that although not a WC may be an exception here
 
people in pakpassion appear to have too much free time on their hands. hence such threads are created.

India would NEVER have won the world cup 2011, if it werent for tendulyas 4 drop catches, and our genius plan of playing the likes of misbah, shafiq and younus khan in an odi world cup.

Australia was a juggernaut team in 2007, won every game without breaking a sweat. was head and shoulders above every other team in every category: bowling batting fielding. But of course, the ONLY reason they won was because they scored at a strike rate. I am sure the like of Glenn Mcgrath, Andy Bichel, Shane Warne, Brett Lee et all, had NO impact on their world cup wins WHATSOEVER.


Also, I am pretty sure Mitchell starc was man of the series in 2015. No doubt he was man of series because he scored lots of runs at a HIGH STRIKE RATE.
 
warcry said:
people in pakpassion appear to have too much free time on their hands. hence such threads are created.

India would NEVER have won the world cup 2011, if it werent for tendulyas 4 drop catches, and our genius plan of playing the likes of misbah, shafiq and younus khan in an odi world cup.

Australia was a juggernaut team in 2007, won every game without breaking a sweat. was head and shoulders above every other team in every category: bowling batting fielding. But of course, the ONLY reason they won was because they scored at a strike rate. I am sure the like of Glenn Mcgrath, Andy Bichel, Shane Warne, Brett Lee et all, had NO impact on their world cup wins WHATSOEVER.


Also, I am pretty sure Mitchell starc was man of the series in 2015. No doubt he was man of series because he scored lots of runs at a HIGH STRIKE RATE.
Click to expand...

Slow, timid batsmen would off-set good bowling more often than not.

More so in modern ODIs where ball hardly swing/spins, and the main source for bowlers to take wickets is opposition batsmen playing aggressively.
 
Those stats only show half the picture and that is why the OP's analysis are completely flawed. Those teams went on because they were as good with their bowling as their batting. To assume that you can win a World Cup on the strength of your batting alone is totally baseless. Never been the case and never will be. Infact bowling is even more important than batting in winning a tournament and contrary to popular belief has assumed greater importance in a time where the game has become all about batting. The aphorism "batting wins you matches and bowling wins you tournaments" is completely true and can easily be supported by statistics.

If you had run the same query for bowling that you did for batting you would've realized that all those teams were also at the top of the table with their bowling stats

2007: Australia, SriLanka, NZ and South Africa had the best averages, SRs and picked up the most wickets.

2011: Here your analysis has some merit as the Champions had a lower average and S/R than other teams but they did take the third most wickets per match (69 in 9 matches). Also Pakistan, Sri Lanka and NZ were 2nd, 4th and 5th in bowling terms. Interestingly, of the top three scorers in the tournament, 2 were Sri Lankan while one was Indian. On the other hand Sri Lanka had no bowler in the three. Moreover, both Pakistan and New Zealand did not have a single batsman in the top ten run-scorers but Shahid Afridi, Southee and Gul were the 1st, 3rd and 8th best bowlers. England had two batsman in the top 10 and better overall S/R than both Pakistan and NZ but failed to qualify.

2015: Top four teams had the best averages and strike rate

Again these are not detailed analysis and I am not saying that bowling is more important than batting but to say that S/Rs alone can explain success is extremely simplistic if not totally incorrect.
 
amvbfm said:
Those stats only show half the picture and that is why the OP's analysis are completely flawed. Those teams went on because they were as good with their bowling as their batting. To assume that you can win a World Cup on the strength of your batting alone is totally baseless. Never been the case and never will be. Infact bowling is even more important than batting in winning a tournament and contrary to popular belief has assumed greater importance in a time where the game has become all about batting. The aphorism "batting wins you matches and bowling wins you tournaments" is completely true and can easily be supported by statistics.

If you had run the same query for bowling that you did for batting you would've realized that all those teams were also at the top of the table with their bowling stats

2007: Australia, SriLanka, NZ and South Africa had the best averages, SRs and picked up the most wickets.

2011: Here your analysis has some merit as the Champions had a lower average and S/R than other teams but they did take the third most wickets per match (69 in 9 matches). Also Pakistan, Sri Lanka and NZ were 2nd, 4th and 5th in bowling terms. Interestingly, of the top three scorers in the tournament, 2 were Sri Lankan while one was Indian. On the other hand Sri Lanka had no bowler in the three. Moreover, both Pakistan and New Zealand did not have a single batsman in the top ten run-scorers but Shahid Afridi, Southee and Gul were the 1st, 3rd and 8th best bowlers. England had two batsman in the top 10 and better overall S/R than both Pakistan and NZ but failed to qualify.

2015: Top four teams had the best averages and strike rate

Again these are not detailed analysis and I am not saying that bowling is more important than batting but to say that S/Rs alone can explain success is extremely simplistic if not totally incorrect.
Click to expand...

I second that SR alone wont win a world cup, but it is definitely the single most important factors in this year's WC, in an age where teams with best strikers (England, India, Australia with Warner+Maxwell) have excelled the most.
 
KyoOne said:
I second that SR alone wont win a world cup, but it is definitely the single most important factors in this year's WC, in an age where teams with best strikers (England, India, Australia with Warner+Maxwell) have excelled the most.
Click to expand...

Certainly the weight of runs and those scored quickly is undeniable, yet without a potent bowling attack to defend those runs you cannot expect to win. Pakistan's CT win, inspite of its "flash in the pan" nature demonstrated how you CAN win in English conditions (although England is fast becoming the home of stick cricket conditions) through good bowling. I was simply pointing out that the original analysis was rather lazy and flawed as it was drawing a conclusion based on just one side of the picture.
 
amvbfm said:
Those stats only show half the picture and that is why the OP's analysis are completely flawed. Those teams went on because they were as good with their bowling as their batting. To assume that you can win a World Cup on the strength of your batting alone is totally baseless. Never been the case and never will be. Infact bowling is even more important than batting in winning a tournament and contrary to popular belief has assumed greater importance in a time where the game has become all about batting. The aphorism "batting wins you matches and bowling wins you tournaments" is completely true and can easily be supported by statistics.

If you had run the same query for bowling that you did for batting you would've realized that all those teams were also at the top of the table with their bowling stats

2007: Australia, SriLanka, NZ and South Africa had the best averages, SRs and picked up the most wickets.

2011: Here your analysis has some merit as the Champions had a lower average and S/R than other teams but they did take the third most wickets per match (69 in 9 matches). Also Pakistan, Sri Lanka and NZ were 2nd, 4th and 5th in bowling terms. Interestingly, of the top three scorers in the tournament, 2 were Sri Lankan while one was Indian. On the other hand Sri Lanka had no bowler in the three. Moreover, both Pakistan and New Zealand did not have a single batsman in the top ten run-scorers but Shahid Afridi, Southee and Gul were the 1st, 3rd and 8th best bowlers. England had two batsman in the top 10 and better overall S/R than both Pakistan and NZ but failed to qualify.

2015: Top four teams had the best averages and strike rate

Again these are not detailed analysis and I am not saying that bowling is more important than batting but to say that S/Rs alone can explain success is extremely simplistic if not totally incorrect.
Click to expand...

You totally misunderstood the stats and totally missed the point in the OP.

Of course batting alone will not win you the WC......
If a team scores 350 runs in the first innings, the bowling HAS to have capability to get the team to restrict below 350 to win.


The two points in the OP are ......
1. a very high batting S/R is a MUST (prerequisite) to win the World Cup.
2. batsmen like Malik and Imam will not get you that S/R.
 
W63L35 said:
Winners of the last three World Cups (2015/Aus, 2011/Ind and 2007/Ind) had one thing in common. They all had the BEST batting S/R of that tournament.

I think, same will be the case this time...... I predict that the team with the best S/R will win this year's WC..... unless the pitches are very bowler friendly.


Color Coding:
Yellow - Winner of the WC.
Blue - Runner Up.
Green - Losing Semi-Finalists


View attachment 90765

View attachment 90766

View attachment 90767
Click to expand...

Australia won the 2007 edition not India lol

In 2015 its true that Australia had a good baying Sr but their bowling was also superior others around and the tournament itself wasn't as high scoring as people thought it would be.

In England you are right, it will be all about the batting because the pitches here are unbelievably flat but if a side can turn up the bowling, like Pakistan in 2017, anything can happen.
 
Chokli said:
Well if it's across four World Cups then it is enough of a sample size to determine we're just not good enough as a batting side and never will be.
Click to expand...

Well, if you were a young cricketer on the verge of the being selected for Pakistan ODI team..... and see that;

1. Pakistani batsmen with S/R in 70s are consistently getting selected for ODI team in the name of "anchoring the innings", "stabilizing the inning", holding one end"..... etc etc


2. Batsmen with S/R of 80s/90s/100+ consistently being bashed for "throwing away their wicket", "being rash", etc .....

How would you bat to get selected and stay in the team? Won't you bat with a S/R of 75 to stay in the team - because that's what permanent members of our ODI team have been batting like for the last 8-9 years?
 
From 2011 WC to 2015 WC, when I see those strike rates - first thing that comes to mind is:

THANK YOU MISBAH LOL
 
I dont think its going to change now. We will continue at these rates broadly, and hope the bowling bails us out. And we will hope that we have a good batting day on one of the important games...like the CT final.
 
What was Pakistan's SR during CT 2017 and how does it compare to how it to the rest of the teams and the general trend? I'm curious. [MENTION=2344]W63L35[/MENTION]
 
Excellent thread.

Hope Fakhar will give us better starts and Hafeez can hit a few in the middle.

I doubt though if Pak will be regularly scoring 300 plus.

Our best bet is to pick 5 proper front line bowlers who can defend 280 odd.
 
W63L35 said:
Where did I say 2007 Cup was won by India? I will ask Mods to fix that.
Click to expand...

"Winners of the last three World Cups (2015/Aus, 2011/Ind and 2007/Ind)"

That is taken from your first post but I assume it is just a fast typing error.
 
W63L35 said:
Well, if you were a young cricketer on the verge of the being selected for Pakistan ODI team..... and see that;

1. Pakistani batsmen with S/R in 70s are consistently getting selected for ODI team in the name of "anchoring the innings", "stabilizing the inning", holding one end"..... etc etc


2. Batsmen with S/R of 80s/90s/100+ consistently being bashed for "throwing away their wicket", "being rash", etc .....

How would you bat to get selected and stay in the team? Won't you bat with a S/R of 75 to stay in the team - because that's what permanent members of our ODI team have been batting like for the last 8-9 years?
Click to expand...

Imam has an ODI SR of 80, Babar Azam of 85 and Fakhar Zaman of 96, along with Malik (82), Hafeez (76) and Sarfraz (87).

So of the core batting unit, only one batsman has a SR of 70 something yet you claim "Pakistani batsmen with S/R in 70s are consistently getting selected for ODI team".

Who are the other batsmen? Those that MAY play, Abis strives at 93 and Sohail at 83.

Not quite sure where you got your facts from?
 
The average ODI SR of the Top 8 who are playing against Kent today is 87.

That's no where near the highest SRs we have seen in the last few world cups, or ever the 2017CT for that matter, however, seems significantly better than Pakistan's SR during the last 4 WCs
 
barah_admi said:
Imam has an ODI SR of 80, Babar Azam of 85 and Fakhar Zaman of 96, along with Malik (82), Hafeez (76) and Sarfraz (87).

So of the core batting unit, only one batsman has a SR of 70 something yet you claim "Pakistani batsmen with S/R in 70s are consistently getting selected for ODI team".

Who are the other batsmen? Those that MAY play, Abis strives at 93 and Sohail at 83.

Not quite sure where you got your facts from?
Click to expand...


Pakistani batsmen against top 5 teams since 1/1/2018.


4-27-2019 7-27-23 AM.jpg


World batsmen with top S/R against the same teams and same time frame....

4-27-2019 7-33-53 AM.jpg
 
Dispels the myth that bowling wins you a tournament alone. If we are to do anything in this tournament, we need our batters to step up.
 
barah_admi said:
"Winners of the last three World Cups (2015/Aus, 2011/Ind and 2007/Ind)"

That is taken from your first post but I assume it is just a fast typing error.
Click to expand...

Thanks.... yes, typing mistake.... because I did highlight Aus in yellow on the stats chart.
 
If only Pak management and coaches did this kind of research. After 4 years, Mickey has realized Pak batsmen need to play quicker but not the players. Mickey is all talk no show. I can predict Pak putting up scores of 230-250 even after Babar scoring a hundred.
 
saeedhk said:
If only Pak management and coaches did this kind of research. After 4 years, Mickey has realized Pak batsmen need to play quicker but not the players. Mickey is all talk no show. I can predict Pak putting up scores of 230-250 even after Babar scoring a hundred.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure they have much more than this.
 
Leaving out Umar Akmal is going to cost us big time.

Just because of ego.

Very unfair treatment with him, when players far worse are getting selected, prime example being Shoaib Malik.

Umar was our hope.
 
2003 WC Aussie team had a SR of 85 while Pakistan WC15 team’s SR was 77 🤦🏽*♂️, but I think the BEST BOWLING attack will win the WC
 
W63L35 said:
Pakistani batsmen against top 5 teams since 1/1/2018.


View attachment 90814


World batsmen with top S/R against the same teams and same time frame....

View attachment 90815
Click to expand...

So now batsmen can only be selected on how they play against 5 teams (only since 2018 lol), so how do you expect players do be selected from the domestic circuit?

ANd if we are to use your criteria, Imad is better than Kohli.

We can play this micro stat game all day long but you were wrong. Most of Pakistan's batsmen, as I quoted, strike at above 80 and are not selected by striking at 70 or less as you stated. Honestly, this kind of thing is really pathetic.
 
W63L35 said:
You totally misunderstood the stats and totally missed the point in the OP.

Of course batting alone will not win you the WC......
If a team scores 350 runs in the first innings, the bowling HAS to have capability to get the team to restrict below 350 to win.


The two points in the OP are ......
1. a very high batting S/R is a MUST (prerequisite) to win the World Cup.
2. batsmen like Malik and Imam will not get you that S/R.
Click to expand...

Point taken and I agree about Pakistan. I hadn't figured that this was more like a "why Pakistan cant win the WC with its present batting lineup" sort of post then a general analysis attempting to find the correlation between strike rates and success.
 
Hawkeye said:
Leaving out Umar Akmal is going to cost us big time.

Just because of ego.

Very unfair treatment with him, when players far worse are getting selected, prime example being Shoaib Malik.

Umar was our hope.
Click to expand...

Umar was my hope for the Australian series too.

He let me down, why Umar why :(
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A different kind of World Cup Trophy <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CWC19?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CWC19</a> <a href="https://t.co/wCqjBGjhuS">pic.twitter.com/wCqjBGjhuS</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1123646633747599362?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 1, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
50 partnership just came in the 2nd ODI vs England.....

This is what will win you the World CUp....
This is what Pakistan has extremely RARELY been able to bat.......


1. 10.34 runs per over in the partnership of 50 in 4.5 overs.
2. Only 4 dot balls in last 3 overs.
3. Only 1 six in last the partnership.


Who are we going to have at #4 and #5..... Hafeez or Malik? Ha!!!!!




.
F1.jpg
 
Let's see if the trend holds. So far.... as of today;

dddd.jpg
 
I don't think just SR is the right indicator look at the number of runs scored and centuries as well for the winning teams and others. It is just a deserving team with overall batting and bowling power winning the World Cup.
 
dhump said:
I don't think just SR is the right indicator look at the number of runs scored and centuries as well for the winning teams and others. It is just a deserving team with overall batting and bowling power winning the World Cup.
Click to expand...

This is what I said in post # 28 above;


"Of course batting alone will not win you the WC......
If a team scores 350 runs in the first innings, the bowling HAS to have capability to get the team to restrict below 350 to win.


The two points in the OP are ......
1. a very high batting S/R is a MUST (prerequisite) to win the World Cup.
2. batsmen like Malik and Imam will not get you that S/R."
 
Look at the top 4 batting position of the last three WC winners, they were just better than others quality wise. It's the only way to do well. Neee solid players with sound technique at top to face world class bowlers.
 
shah_1 said:
Look at the top 4 batting position of the last three WC winners, they were just better than others quality wise. It's the only way to do well. Neee solid players with sound technique at top to face world class bowlers.
Click to expand...

Even of you look at the top 4, the winners of last 3 WCs have the best S/R - same as if you take the whole team's S/R that I posted in OP.
No difference.

2007 WC
D07.jpg



.
2011 WC
D11.jpg




.
2015 WC
D15.jpg
 
W63L35 said:
Even of you look at the top 4, the winners of last 3 WCs have the best S/R - same as if you take the whole team's S/R that I posted in OP.
No difference.

2007 WC
View attachment 92338

.
2011 WC
View attachment 92339

2015 WC
View attachment 92340
Click to expand...

They were quality thats why. . You need to look at Pak loses since CT, and majority of the game our top order had collapsed in first 15 overs.

Why we won the match aganst India(CT final) and england game because our top order clicked.

Pakistan can only be consistent with solid top 4 players that have good defensive technique yet attack whenever they want.
 
At the end of group stages in WC 2019..... the pattern still holding. Three teams with the best are in the semi-final. NZ just jumped ahead of Pak and BD.... even though Pak and BD were playing much better cricket than NZ.

.

2019-07-08_10-34-31.jpg





P.S. this is also for the posters here who thought Misbah's ODI average mattered waaaay more important than his S/R of 69-70 or so!
 
W63L35 said:
At the end of group stages in WC 2019..... the pattern still holding. Three teams with the best are in the semi-final. NZ just jumped ahead of Pak and BD.... even though Pak and BD were playing much better cricket than NZ.

.

View attachment 93601




P.S. this is also for the posters here who thought Misbah's ODI average mattered waaaay more important than his S/R of 69-70 or so!
Click to expand...

My dear friend W63, great analysis, the trend holds true for semi finalists too this time but I hope India will be able to dodge the two hard hitting teams above and win the cup.

It’s sad. We used to be best ODI batting unit comfortable from 2004-2011 but now we are lagging so far behind.

Really miss someone like Yuvraj Singh. I don’t think people of Sofia have respected or valued his contributions enough.

How many nations out there would pick Yuvraj at #5 today?
 
freelance_cricketer said:
My dear friend W63, great analysis, the trend holds true for semi finalists too this time but I hope India will be able to dodge the two hard hitting teams above and win the cup.

It’s sad. We used to be best ODI batting unit comfortable from 2004-2011 but now we are lagging so far behind.

Really miss someone like Yuvraj Singh. I don’t think people of Sofia have respected or valued his contributions enough.

How many nations out there would pick Yuvraj at #5 today?
Click to expand...

I think losing Shikhar has cost about 15-20 runs in each match to you (KL was always very slow). If you add another 100 runs, I don't think you will be far behind.

@W63 - Great analysis. Looks like we are headed for India -> Eng final with Eng being the eventual winner.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
My dear friend W63, great analysis, the trend holds true for semi finalists too this time but I hope India will be able to dodge the two hard hitting teams above and win the cup.
Click to expand...
Thank you, my friend!


freelance_cricketer said:
It’s sad. We used to be best ODI batting unit comfortable from 2004-2011 but now we are lagging so far behind.
Click to expand...
You know, I would not ave guessed... India's S/R being the best from 2004-2011. You are 100% correct.

But notice the next two phases... 2012-2015 and 2016-2019.
India was/is still one of the best.

But notice the jump of 10 points in Pakistan's S/R right after Misbah quits. I am sure you remember how much slack I used to get from a lot of arm-chair "self proclaimed" cricket experts who were (and still are) obsessed with Misbah's useless 50s, ODI batting average and S/R of 70! :)



.
D1.jpg


.
D2.jpg



.
D3.jpg



freelance_cricketer said:
Really miss someone like Yuvraj Singh. I don’t think people of Sofia have respected or valued his contributions enough.

How many nations out there would pick Yuvraj at #5 today?
Click to expand...

Yes, he was a phenomenal player at the lower (5-7) order. But Dhoni was also in peak form during 2004-2014. See below.

D4.jpg




Another thing that has changed drastically of the late is that most top teams have extremely strong top 4 batters. Players like Hussey, Dhoni and Yuvraj were very critical but if you look at WC 2019, lower order (5-7) has seldom come into play. Busy right now but will post some stats - comparing let's say WC 2007/2011 and 2019 by batting position.
 
chuck said:
I think losing Shikhar has cost about 15-20 runs in each match to you (KL was always very slow). If you add another 100 runs, I don't think you will be far behind.

@W63 - Great analysis. Looks like we are headed for India -> Eng final with Eng being the eventual winner.
Click to expand...

Thank you!

Yes, Dhawan was a big loss for India. With him in the team, India was unstoppable.
 
If England wins... the pattern will hold! If NZ wins... then... ??


Stats after both semi-finals.

A1.jpg
 
This thread has the potential to be the ‘thread of the year’.
 
shah_1 said:
Look at the top 4 batting position of the last three WC winners, they were just better than others quality wise. It's the only way to do well. Neee solid players with sound technique at top to face world class bowlers.
Click to expand...

Great thread

Again I would say top 4 of England are miles ahead of other teams(India without Dhawan). Top 4 wins you the matches. India and Australia lost the match in the first 5 overs.
 
England are playing at home in conditions they’re comfortable in and magically got blessed with flat tracks so obviously SR will be higher then everyone else.

Home Advantage is becoming a major issue in Cricket and needs to be looked at!
 
QuickCrick said:
England are playing at home in conditions they’re comfortable in and magically got blessed with flat tracks so obviously SR will be higher then everyone else.

Home Advantage is becoming a major issue in Cricket and needs to be looked at!
Click to expand...

Today's pitch wasn't flat, Australia got obliterated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jamie smith fan
Was 2015 World Cup the best edition of Cricket World Cups?
Replies
9
Views
359
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
"Our team in 2007 ODI World Cup was best in the world. Even better than 2003 and 2011" : Virender Sehwag
2
Replies
95
Views
4K
sweep_shot
sweep_shot
Savak
Resume of the 90's team vs Resume of the 2003 team onwards
Replies
61
Views
2K
TheSultan
T
BouncerGuy
“We are eagerly looking forward to measure ourselves against South Africa, who have always been one of the top sides in the world": Shan Masood
Replies
5
Views
488
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
[PICTURES/VIDEOS] Inzamam-ul-Haq, Misbah-ul-Haq, Mushtaq Mohammad and Saeed Anwar named in the PCB Hall of Fame for 2024
2
Replies
106
Views
5K
RizwanT20Champ
R
Back
Top