Doesn’t Group B depend on what happens in Sri Lanka’s games against South Africa and the West Indies??
Depending on the results in those matches any of the top five teams can get through:
[list=1]
[li]Sri Lanka wins both: Sri Lanka (20), Kenya (16) and NZ (16)qualify.[/li][li]Sri Lanka loses both: West Indies (18) and two of South Africa, Kenya and NZ (all 16) qualify (based on net run rates)[/li][li]Sri Lanka beats West Indies but loses to South Africa: three of South Africa, Sri Lanka, Kenya and New Zealand (all 16) qualify.[/li][li]Sri Lanka loses to the West Indies, but beats South Africa: West Indies (18) and two of Sri Lanka, Kenya and NZ (all 16)qualify[/li][/list=1]
NB: This assumes there are no more upsets from the minor nations or washed out games.
I’m desperately hoping that NZ’s last two matches aren’t washed out…
Group A is almost as convoluted, although Aussie looks a dead cert. Anyone know what the permutations are there?
Keep in mind that Kenya has wins over Sri Lanka and NZ, so they’d be through in these situations. In the second, SL would be through too. Actually, I think SL would go through in the first situation, too.
My money is currently on Kenya, SL and SA from Pool B.
Fortunately Pool A is pretty much dependent on what happens in the last couple of rounds to work out what happens with the Poms and the Indians, but I think they’d both be tipped to go through at the moment, with the Pakis going home early due to their loss to England.
Gyan: If India loses today, they can qualify by beating Pakistan. (They would hold the tiebreaker if they, Zimbabwe and Pakistan finish level on points, as they would have beaten Zim and Pak.) If India wins today, they’re guaranteed a place in the Six.
At last count, India were 60/1 (Sehwag) batting first.
“If India wins today, they’re guaranteed a place in the Six.”
I don’t think so. If Pakistan beats India and England beats Australia all three will have four wins each. Then in head-to-head there will be a cycle: P beats I beats E beats P so it will down to net run rate.
Hmmm, looks like you’re right, Cyber. Although I’d have to say it would be pretty difficult for India to miss out even in the unlikely event (I mean, England beating Australia?) of I, P, and E finishing tied on points, as India have the best run-rate of the three. England hardly looks well-placed to improve its RR against Australia, while Pakistan also has Zimbabwe to face, and they’ve had their problems against the Zims in the past.
So, once again, it looks like England is counting on someone else (this time, Pakistan v India) to lose to be able to advance. Sound familiar. 'Course, the worst result of all would be for Zimbabwe and England to be level on three wins and three losses, because England will fail to advance because of the forfeit.
Surely, you meant Australia playing Namibia. Neither team would take on the other, for separate reasons.
It’ll be sad for one minnow in each Pool when they fail to win the match against the other minnow.
One thing, I don’t get is why don’t these batsmen go out trying ? They aren’t exactly in umm, contention for anything. And they get out for meagre totals as it is.
australia made 301 lehman takign 4-4-6-4-4-6 of the last over
namibia had a bright start 1-12 after 1 over
mcgrath tightened though to get 6-3 of his next 5 overs
lee bowled 158.8 his fastest for the tournament
bring on england
i believe against a moderately stronger side australia will come out a bit harder and should easily get 300+ if batting first
There’s an unintentionally hilarious article in today’s Wall Street Journal (the website is by subscription, so I won’t link to it) about former ICC president Jagmohan Dalmiya. The author seems to have a, say, tenous grasp on cricket.
Obviously the author is not Australian, or it would have been “the player who bowls, or throws if his name is Murali…”
I think I’ve got a way to pitch the game to my fellow Americans now…change the name to “English stickball.”