What's new

What's the fairest way for qualification to the semi-finals in the ICC Cricket World Cup?

What's the fairest way for qualification to the semi-finals in the ICC Cricket World Cup?

  • Total voters
    53
This is all sour grapes. Thing is Pakistan is a middling mediocre team that no one outside of some deluded Pakistani fans thought would even make it into the semis.

the four semi finalists are what was predicted by most before the cup.

Pakistan has played EXACTLY according to ranking.
 
ak619 said:
SL smashed WI, the same team that finished their match against PAK in 13 overs. So I don't know where you are getting this impression that PAK would have surely beaten SL if the game wasn't a washout.
Click to expand...

Westinides is smash by every other team baring pakistan so your logic is flawed buddy .Pakistan have beaten much stronger nz ,england and sa and you are telling me pak would have lost the match against sl .Seems you are fortune teller last 6 odis pakistan have won all against them
 
I Don't Remember exact tournaments, whether that was ICC tournament or Triangular/Quadrangular Series, Most probable it was Asia Cup. H2H as a first tie breaker criteria then NRR was used in those tournaments. But it was discontinued considering it would not be appropriate to give more weight-age to a single match against performance in entire tournament.
 
Captain caveman said:
I have explained it several times in my posts above!
Very briefly, the teams tied on the same points, should be differentiated on their performances against each other and not by other teams and their players performances, because these teams are not tied on the same points!
You are deciding between the teams tied on points, you are NOT deciding on every team performance!
Click to expand...

And like I said, every team plays every team in this current format.

So why should it matter which team won which game?

Everyone has been given equal chances. Then why should the final 4 be decided based on a subset of the original 10 teams?
 
saeed5646 said:
Westinides is smash by every other team baring pakistan so your logic is flawed buddy .Pakistan have beaten much stronger nz ,england and sa and you are telling me pak would have lost the match against sl. Seems you are fortune teller last 6 odis pakistan have won all against them.
Click to expand...

Before the WC in the last 4 ODIs between England and Pakistan, Pakistan lost all 4 matches. But they beat them in the WC, right?

So your point about SL losing last 6 matches against PAK doesn't mean anything.

And seems like you are the fortune teller because you are so sure Pak would have won against SL. I'm saying that they could have lost also. There was no guarantee that Pakistan would win.
 
Last edited:
ak619 said:
And like I said, every team plays every team in this current format.

So why should it matter which team won which game?

Everyone has been given equal chances. Then why should the final 4 be decided based on a subset of the original 10 teams?
Click to expand...
Not the final 4!
Only teams tied on equal points!
Because you are trying to distinguish between the tied teams and not ALL the teams in the competition!
I am not going to explain it any further, as i think you are trolling!
E-mail icc and ask them why have they chosen h2h as the 2nd criteria(after nrr)to sort out teams who are on level points!!
 
Captain caveman said:
Not the final 4!
Only teams tied on equal points!
Because you are trying to distinguish between the tied teams and not ALL the teams in the competition!
I am not going to explain it any further, as i think you are trolling!
E-mail icc and ask them why have they chosen h2h as the 2nd criteria(after nrr)to sort out teams who are on level points!!
Click to expand...

Please also ask them why they havent chosen h2h as first choice incase points are same,because when you talk hypothetical,you have to have other options in place when once in a lifetime scenario like having exact same NRR happens.
Even they know none who are alive on earth right now will see a wc where teams will have same NRR points thus no need to use meaningless H2H.

What isnt good to be used as first choice isnt good to be used at all.but for sake of argument they have to fill the forms
 
saeed5646 said:
Westinides is smash by every other team baring pakistan so your logic is flawed buddy .Pakistan have beaten much stronger nz ,england and sa and you are telling me pak would have lost the match against sl .Seems you are fortune teller last 6 odis pakistan have won all against them
Click to expand...

Yes and india have won all the wc matches vs pakistan since the birth of wc,so lets send pakistan home whenever there is indVpak match in a WC
 
Captain caveman said:
Not the final 4!
Only teams tied on equal points!
Because you are trying to distinguish between the tied teams and not ALL the teams in the competition!
I am not going to explain it any further, as i think you are trolling!
E-mail icc and ask them why have they chosen h2h as the 2nd criteria(after nrr)to sort out teams who are on level points!!
Click to expand...

Okay I'll shoot them a mail, like you suggested. But you should also email ICC and ask them why they chose to keep NRR as the first criteria. :ashwin
 
DeadlyYorker said:
Please also ask them why they havent chosen h2h as first choice incase points are same,because when you talk hypothetical,you have to have other options in place when once in a lifetime scenario like having exact same NRR happens.
Even they know none who are alive on earth right now will see a wc where teams will have same NRR points thus no need to use meaningless H2H.

What isnt good to be used as first choice isnt good to be used at all.but for sake of argument they have to fill the forms
Click to expand...
I email them!
 
Captain caveman said:
I will eail them to swop it around, i'm sure they will oblige!
Click to expand...

Looking forward to the new format rules for 20WC in 2020.

Maybe you should have listened to [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] and opted for team rankings to be the tie-breaker. Would have worked out well for the no 1 T20I team in the world. :ashwin
 
ak619 said:
Looking forward to the new format rules for 20WC in 2020.

Maybe you should have listened to [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] and opted for team rankings to be the tie-breaker. Would have worked out well for the no 1 T20I team in the world. :ashwin
Click to expand...
Rankings are one of the criteria to differentiate between teams level on poinrs in this wc as well, i beieve, but its down the list after nrr, h2h etc!
 
Hawkeye said:
Yes, only if it suits us, our fans will say head to head is better.

It's about what benefits us, ultimately.

Trust me, if our NRR was better and we were leaving NZ out, our fans would have preferred NRR.
Click to expand...

Basically this.

NRR is here to stay. We need to ensure we adapt to it and don't get in this situation again.
 
DeadlyYorker said:
Yes and india have won all the wc matches vs pakistan since the birth of wc,so lets send pakistan home whenever there is indVpak match in a WC
Click to expand...

what it had do with what i said ?

Typical indian fan want to drag india every where .
 
All this talk about scoring 500 runs, NRR, H2H & you guys are yet to play bangladesh & win the match. Why all this talk before the game
 
India would still have a game aganist srilanka with 12 points so they wouldnt have to worry about anything
 
H2H is more important than NRR in tournament cricket. It will spice up the matches between equal teams, they will play harder. Plus in tournament cricket wins should be more valued than stats.

In case of three or four way tie( which would be rare btw), then use NRR.

Ranking is another thing, that should not matter, WC is about performing in the moment, under pressure, that is entertains and what matters in tournament sports. Consistency is again helps a lot to prepare for pressure moments, but not the other way around.
 
A lot of debate on whether Pakistan should be in such a hopeless position even though they have beaten some of the top teams in the tournament, including some of the semi-finalists.
 
Net run rate is completely fair, Pakistan were unlucky in that their game against SL and NZ's against India got washed out. Rain is rain though - nothing you can do about it in today's age without reserve days.
 
Number of wins first.
After that, NRR.
After that, head-to-head.
After that, whoever played more fairly.
After that, coin toss.
 
NRR is the correct rule. If you can't be consistent then you don't deserve to fluke your way to the top. Quality of the tournament is maintained this way too.
 
saeed5646 said:
what it had do with what i said ?

Typical indian fan want to drag india every where .
Click to expand...

He said pak could have lost to sl,your response," are you telling me pak could lose to sl,they have won last 6 fixtures"
If you suggest just because you won past encounter means you will win next then same applies to indvpak encounters,but there you start arguing about how pak will win before match and dont want to argue same for other teams,thus shows your double standards.

Yes for pakistan fans they find out everything pakistan in indvEng match and NzvEng match,indian fans can atleast do 20% of that ;-)
 
ak619 said:
Looking forward to the new format rules for 20WC in 2020.

Maybe you should have listened to [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] and opted for team rankings to be the tie-breaker. Would have worked out well for the no 1 T20I team in the world. :ashwin
Click to expand...

Would be really sad if #1 team will have to rely on tie breaker to even qualify
 
yasir said:
H2H is more important than NRR in tournament cricket. It will spice up the matches between equal teams, they will play harder. Plus in tournament cricket wins should be more valued than stats.

In case of three or four way tie( which would be rare btw), then use NRR.

Ranking is another thing, that should not matter, WC is about performing in the moment, under pressure, that is entertains and what matters in tournament sports. Consistency is again helps a lot to prepare for pressure moments, but not the other way around.
Click to expand...

How would H2H be more important if team lost in group stages can go and win the trophy on a trot,that is why NRR is best method for qualification
 
It should always be about how many top teams you have won.

I personally feel a win against top 4 ranked teams in ICC rankings should be awarded bonus 1 point.

Rewarding a win against Afghanistan/Bangladesh and India/England with same points isn’t fair at all.

Pakistan beat two of the top 4 ranked teams this World Cup, in my opinion that alone should bring them to 11 points currently with a match to go against Bangladesh, having the opportunity to win it and get to 13 points overall.

NZ does not have a single win against a top ranked team this World Cup.
 
Points gained as normal, then Number of wins followed by H2H. The current system has NRR in place of H2H.

Once you put in NRR as a criterion, you might as well not have any other options because it seems so remote a possibility that two teams be tied on the same NRR.

If two teams are fighting for the 4th spot, it usually means they've been the poorest among the potential semifinalists. If you consider NRR, it means you're not allowing for a crazy one-off which might not necessarily be due to a crazy team playing but rather due to the conditions. Not saying this was what happened with Pak but generally speaking.

When you start going beyond the points and number of wins collected, you're really looking at the worst of the best and not trying to find the most consistent team that never had a shocker. So it would make better sense to look at H2H and if there is a tie there, then consider NRR.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
It should always be about how many top teams you have won.

I personally feel a win against top 4 ranked teams in ICC rankings should be awarded bonus 1 point.

Rewarding a win against Afghanistan/Bangladesh and India/England with same points isn’t fair at all.

Pakistan beat two of the top 4 ranked teams this World Cup, in my opinion that alone should bring them to 11 points currently with a match to go against Bangladesh, having the opportunity to win it and get to 13 points overall.

NZ does not have a single win against a top ranked team this World Cup.
Click to expand...

Then should a loss against a weaker team be penalized as well.
 
This format is exactly the same format as that of 1992, where Pakistan won their only world cup title. If the format was fair at that time, then it is fair this time as well.
 
NRR is the fairest. It’s just sour grapes from Pakistani fans. Your team ain’t good enough, bruv.
 
geraltofrivia said:
Then should a loss against a weaker team be penalized as well.
Click to expand...

If you are a top 4 team, your loss is the 1 bonus point you conceded.

No penalty if you are out of top 4 already and already belong to the second tier club.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
It should always be about how many top teams you have won.

I personally feel a win against top 4 ranked teams in ICC rankings should be awarded bonus 1 point.

Rewarding a win against Afghanistan/Bangladesh and India/England with same points isn’t fair at all.

Pakistan beat two of the top 4 ranked teams this World Cup, in my opinion that alone should bring them to 11 points currently with a match to go against Bangladesh, having the opportunity to win it and get to 13 points overall.

NZ does not have a single win against a top ranked team this World Cup.
Click to expand...

Rewarding points based on strength of team will suggest that top4 are more deserving and incase whenever there is tie breaker case with top4 and other team,top4 team will qualify since they are more deserving by that logic

All tournamnets have players and teams start a race from the same starting line for equality ,your suggested idea would make sport just like old times of indian cast system
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Michael Holding "Pakistan should be in the semi-finals if they beat Bangladesh. NRR should be the last thing to consider. If points & wins are equal then the result between both teams should be deciding factor. Since Pakistan beat New Zealand they should be in semi-finals" <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/cwc19?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#cwc19</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1147049647409696768?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 5, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Whatever the case, the rules were set before the tournament not that they suddenly did that way.
 
Would all these stupid polls and questions about NRR vs HTH etc be happening if it worked in Pakistan's favour?

We all know the answer to that question.... Of course not

Pakistan weren't good enough, get over it.
 
I didn't see any of these complaints before the start of the WC. As soon as its affecting Pakistan, we need to find another way. :))) :)))

Delusional fan base.
 
War breaking out between Australia and New Zealand.

PM Jackie Ahern institutes national service for all males aged 18 and over.
 
Atherton just clarified that NRR is preferred because if three teams end up with same points then straight wins cannot come in to play
 
MenInG said:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Michael Holding "Pakistan should be in the semi-finals if they beat Bangladesh. NRR should be the last thing to consider. If points & wins are equal then the result between both teams should be deciding factor. Since Pakistan beat New Zealand they should be in semi-finals" <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/cwc19?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#cwc19</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/1147049647409696768?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 5, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

Looks like Holding uncle desperately wants a PSL commentator job :ashwin
 
NRR is the fairest way. The rules are known before hand so nobody has an excuse now. Head to head between two teams is a stupid way to determine qualification anyways because then you are basing qualification on whoever just had 1 good day. Qualification needs to be dependent on how you've played over 9 games, not just 1. NRR is the fairest.
 
Whats more fairer than this - play each other and every team. If you cant win enough matches, you get found out and back home you go.

For those looking for an easy way to get to semis, there is something calle a BYE where you get fast-tracked to next round without playing. Could be a revolutionary concept.
 
someone21 said:
ThisICC 2019 was the best format, just that matches have to be scheduled better....
Click to expand...

The format was best though I agree with Holding about the wins. NZ will be in the semi without a victory against any of the top 5 finishers. Where as the rest in the top 5 have at least 2 victories. Though Its our own fault for losing to WI so badly that we lost out. In the next World Cup they should put head 2 head result before run rate.
 
Couch Cricketer said:
The format was best though I agree with Holding about the wins. NZ will be in the semi without a victory against any of the top 5 finishers. Where as the rest in the top 5 have at least 2 victories. Though Its our own fault for losing to WI so badly that we lost out. In the next World Cup they should put head 2 head result before run rate.
Click to expand...

That hindsight. NRR allows average of all matches whereas h2h is one match, obvious former is fairer
 
There should've been 3 points on each win and 1 on tie or no result. That way you have better and fair look at the table.
 
Net run rate tbh. People are only moaning cos it's going against Pakistan, but it's fair. As Atherton said on comms, h2h can get confusing if it's THREE teams tied on points, as team x could beat team y who beat team z but team z beat team X. Also, in this format, consistency is a good measure so I do feel NRR is fair. However, the one flaw on NRR is that a game can be close in terms of wickets remaining but not overs left, but NRR wouldn't reflect this. There hasn't been any such games this tournament, but remember the 2015 WC game between Aus and NZ or the 2013 CT game between WI and Pak, which were both thrillers but as low scoring games, NRR was improved hugely as lots of overs to spare, but not many wickets.
 
I have no problem with NRR, but I personally feel Pakistan's overall performance was better than New Zealand and we deserve to be in the semis more than they do, but I guess not caring about NRR catches up to you eventually and New Zealand seem to have been pretty good with that so good on them.
 
ak619 said:
Suppose the IND vs NZ game had happened and NZ win that.

And then suppose right now IND, PAK and NZ were all at 11 points each.

So IND beat PAK
PAK beat NZ
NZ beat IND

3 teams fighting for 2 SF spot.

Now tell me how H2H will be the tie-breaker in this case?
Click to expand...

In this case NRR will be tie breaker.
 
I never liked NRR, because all matches are not equal, there are high scoring matches & low scoring thrillers. So NRR should be the last tie breaker.
But it was always going to hurt when a weaker team gets thru New Zealand was an inferior side.

But it is Pakistan's Fault for not selecting their Best combination till more than half the World Cup was over Not selecting Shaheen their best strike bowler (and persisting with Hasan Ali ) and Not selecting their in form Batsmen Haris sohail (& playing the rubbish Useless player Asif Ali)
 
latecut said:
This format is exactly the same format as that of 1992, where Pakistan won their only world cup title. If the format was fair at that time, then it is fair this time as well.
Click to expand...

NO! it is not.
Back then we didn't even had Duckworth lewis.
in 1992 there was only one white ball (not 2 White Balls) So reverse swing was a huge factor (back then only Pakistan knew how to reverse )
 
It doesn't matter what is the best way, as long as rules are laid out before the tournament and everyone agrees to them, case closed.
 
Rules are rules.
Never personally liked the NRR factor ever, even when it favored us (2010 and 2012 wt20)

When you have so many washed out games, no of wins should be the deciding factor IMO. Should be looked into for the next tournaments. NZ had a washed out game against Ind, and Pak had it against SL, India is clearly a stronger team than SL and NZ got the benefit from that.
 
BunnyRabbit said:
Rules are rules.
Never personally liked the NRR factor ever, even when it favored us (2010 and 2012 wt20)

When you have so many washed out games, no of wins should be the deciding factor IMO. Should be looked into for the next tournaments. NZ had a washed out game against Ind, and Pak had it against SL, India is clearly a stronger team than SL and NZ got the benefit from that.
Click to expand...
According to mickey arthur -

Wins > h2h >nrr

But wins would be eliminated if their was a resereve day for washed out matches( as a point for no results will virtually be eliminated and therefore to be on the same points, you must have won the same number of games)
So it would be h2h > nrr!
Just like i said!
 
The answer to your poll:- None of them.
In a tournament like this its simple. Make sure every side plays against every opposition
 
Did Pakistanis not read the rules before arriving at the tournament ? The rules are same for everyone. Just because Pakistan failed to qualify does not mean that the rules were unfair. It is in the exactly the same format that Pakistan won their only World cup title back in 1992. So it cannot be that the same rules were fair in 1992 but they became unfair in 2019.

Get a life. There is more to life than qualifying for the semifinals of world cup cricket. South Africa, ranked higher than Pakistan and a strong favourites also missed out on semi finals, but they are not moaning or whingeing like this.
 
TheNightWatchman said:
The answer to your poll:- None of them.
In a tournament like this its simple. Make sure every side plays against every opposition
Click to expand...

THAT IS A MUST!
Have 3 days set aside between the group stage and the next stage, where teams can play any washed out games!
HOWEVER,
you still may get teams level on points!
Top two teams(if more than two teams)on nrr should play an eliminator, can be played in the three days set aside, and the winner qualifies for the next stage!
SIMPLE!
 
latecut said:
Did Pakistanis not read the rules before arriving at the tournament ? The rules are same for everyone. Just because Pakistan failed to qualify does not mean that the rules were unfair. It is in the exactly the same format that Pakistan won their only World cup title back in 1992. So it cannot be that the same rules were fair in 1992 but they became unfair in 2019.

Get a life. There is more to life than qualifying for the semifinals of world cup cricket. South Africa, ranked higher than Pakistan and a strong favourites also missed out on semi finals, but they are not moaning or whingeing like this.
Click to expand...

There was no tied teams for the qualification to the semis in 1992!
You can always improve things for future tournaments! Maybe next time your team could be in a similar situation and then you may appreciate a fairer system!
 
Captain caveman said:
There was no tied teams for the qualification to the semis in 1992!
You can always improve things for future tournaments! Maybe next time your team could be in a similar situation and then you may appreciate a fairer system!
Click to expand...
Rain was the reason Pakistan got through in 92 and rain is the reason they're out in 2019.

People can complain about NRR/H2H all they like, but the reason this was even a factor was because NZ-India was washed out while Pakistan-SL was also washed out.
 
Last edited:
cricketAXEpert said:
I never liked NRR, because all matches are not equal, there are high scoring matches & low scoring thrillers. So NRR should be the last tie breaker.
But it was always going to hurt when a weaker team gets thru New Zealand was an inferior side.

But it is Pakistan's Fault for not selecting their Best combination till more than half the World Cup was over Not selecting Shaheen their best strike bowler (and persisting with Hasan Ali ) and Not selecting their in form Batsmen Haris sohail (& playing the rubbish Useless player Asif Ali)
Click to expand...

It's not about high scoring or low scoring matches. It's about the difference in run rate in the margins of victory/loss.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hadi123 said:
However, the one flaw on NRR is that a game can be close in terms of wickets remaining but not overs left, but NRR wouldn't reflect this. There hasn't been any such games this tournament, but remember the 2015 WC game between Aus and NZ or the 2013 CT game between WI and Pak, which were both thrillers but as low scoring games, NRR was improved hugely as lots of overs to spare, but not many wickets.
Click to expand...

This is an excellent point, not made so far by anyone else. The other point that could be made is that the method can be unfair to the team that finishes its group matches first. It did not matter yesterday as the gap was hopelessly large for Pakistan to salvage. But had it been closer, it could be argued that it would have been unfair to New Zealand as Pakistan would have known exactly what they had to do by simple virtue of playing their match last.

In the end, though, there is no fair system per se when team are tied on points. Whatever is decided as a tie-breaker has its downsides. Luck matters in professional and personal lives in all sorts of ways and if on this occasion it feels that New Zealand were a little lucky to make it to the Semis (and it is not just some Pakistanis that feel this way) it is pointless to cavil against this.
 
The NRR equation is flawed because how can you go into a game (Bang vs Pak) and not have a chance of winning batting 2nd? If that is correct (based on what the commentators said) then it's highly flawed.

I have missed a lot of the cricket this week because of Wimbledon running at the same time and that the CWC has dead rubbers now. I love the straight knockout format of tennis, no b*tching or whining from even the top seeds if they get knocked out. It's straight home and prepare for the next one.

Maybe cricket needs to adopt this type of format because the current format is just so damn long and boring.
 
Seen on FB:


Whosoever thinks Pakistan did NOT deserve to be in the semis and New Zealand deserved the spot, have a look at the following:

Both teams finished on 11 points
NZ won against AFG, BAN, SA, SL and WI
PAK won against AFG, BAN, ENG, NZ and SA

NZ: Just 1 win against top 6 ODI sides i.e. SA
PAK: 3 wins against top 6 ODI teams like ENG, NZ and SA

H2H: Pakistan beat New Zealand

Washout:
NZ got 1 point against No.2 ranked ODI side
PAK got 1 point against No.8 ranked ODI team

New Zealand's first 4 matches out of the 6 were against AFG, BAN, SL and WI while Pakistan's first 7 matches did NOT have a match vs AFG or BAN.

Therefore, New Zealand is LUCKY enough to be in the semis despite close encounters with South Africa (de Kock did not take a review against Williamson), West Indies (Brathwaite's miscalculation) and Bangladesh (Musfiqur's missed run out).
 
NRR isn't good enough. It has a flaw. As [MENTION=57506]hadi123[/MENTION] mentioned above.

We need something else.
 
NRR is better than H2H because it takes into account the performance in the entire tournament. However, it requires a slight modification to consider opposition's strength.

Winning against stronger teams should improve NRR better than bashing weaker teams.
 
Captain caveman said:
Better solution if only 2 teams tied, what happens if more than 2 teams tied, how many games will you have to play to sort that out?
Click to expand...

Keep the current ranking (points/NRR) system and play the tie-breaker game only between #4 and #5 teams on the points table if they tied on points.
 
Manager101 said:
Good point, but atleast the commentator initiated an Idea which can be further refined by ICC in case they noticed it which is highly unlikely. :P
Click to expand...

The logistics and the off day separating the players game schedule will make it more harmful than a good idea
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BouncerGuy
  • Poll Poll
Pakistan Shaheens (135/9) slump to a 7-wicket defeat against Sri Lanka A (137/3) in the first semi-final of the ACC T20 Emerging Teams Asia Cup 2024
2
Replies
88
Views
3K
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
BouncerGuy
Pakistan U19s (155) through to the semi-finals with a narrow 5-run win over Bangladesh U19s (150) in their last Super-6 game of ICC U19 World Cup 2024
3 4 5
Replies
363
Views
13K
shamaan
S
FearlessRoar
India (205/5) comprehensively defeat Australia (181/7) by 24 runs to book their spot in the Semi-Finals of the ICC T20 World Cup 2024
19 20 21
Replies
2K
Views
27K
KingKhanWC
KingKhanWC
Cricket Warrior
ICC World Cup 2023: Australia (286) beat England (253) by 33 runs to boost their chances of reaching the semi-finals
2 3
Replies
207
Views
5K
160KPH
1
BouncerGuy
India (196/5) defeat Bangladesh (146/8) comfortably by 50 runs to pave their way for a probable Semi Final berth in the ICC T20 World Cup 2024
12 13 14
Replies
1K
Views
20K
kron
K
Back
Top