Chances of winning the 2019 WC on present form.

[The Speaker]

In 1992, the last time this format was used, there was one match in the last 10 that had no impact on the finals and it was Zimbabwe beating England in the second last match. Even the last round robin match between two sides who missed out - Aus vs WI - had an impact because if the WI won, the eventual champions would have missed the semis.

I’m not sure what the draw is like this time but more than likely, most matches will have some sort of impact on at very least the ranking of the top four, if not its composition

The ranking of the top four is irrelevant.

The biggest thing 1992 had going for it is that all the teams there were relatively even. As Ahmed Naqvi puts it:

When the tournament held in Australia and New Zealand came around, the mighty West Indies were in slow descent, while Australia, despite being defending champions, were not quite near their era of dominance. Indeed, Border's men were the only holders who didn't make it to the knockouts. England, and to a lesser extent Pakistan, both played sides that would make it to the final and end up influencing how both those teams approached ODIs for the next decade. More importantly, the two African outsiders (South Africa and Zimbabwe) punched well above their weight, and New Zealand had their greatest tournament ever. Even Sri Lanka went in with the core of what would become their greatest ever side.

In other words, there was a happy coincidence: none of the three title winners till then were playing too well, while almost all the other teams were not only evenly matched, they also featured many players who would go on to become legends. There is no doubt that having a format that got all the teams to play one another maximised the enjoyment, but that's about it

That simply is not the case today. It was the case at the WCQ, where the only team that appeared out of their depth was PNG, who still managed to finish above Hong Kong despite the latter having some excellent players. But of the teams at the WC, there are already four teams that should be considered odds-on to go through to the semis, two of which are well out in front.

Maybe the remaining six will put in all together by then, but if they do then the format still wouldn't have a claim to be significantly better than all the others. They could've still gotten their act together regardless of the format. But if they don't get it together, then we're in for a couple of weeks of snoredom in the middle. Seriously, the group stage goes from the 30th May to the 6th July. It's absurd.

 

[PhatBoy]

The ranking of the top four is irrelevant.

The biggest thing 1992 had going for it is that all the teams there were relatively even. As Ahmed Naqvi puts it:



That simply is not the case today. It was the case at the WCQ, where the only team that appeared out of their depth was PNG, who still managed to finish above Hong Kong despite the latter having some excellent players. But of the teams at the WC, there are already four teams that should be considered odds-on to go through to the semis, two of which are well out in front.

Maybe the remaining six will put in all together by then, but if they do then the format still wouldn't have a claim to be significantly better than all the others. They could've still gotten their act together regardless of the format. But if they don't get it together, then we're in for a couple of weeks of snoredom in the middle. Seriously, the group stage goes from the 30th May to the 6th July. It's absurd.

How is the ranking of the top four irrelevant?

If you’ve not beaten India in 11 attempts but have the wood on Australia, and a match effects whether you play one or the other in a semi final, are you suggesting it doesn’t matter?

 

[The Speaker]

How is the ranking of the top four irrelevant?

If you’ve not beaten India in 11 attempts but have the wood on Australia, and a match effects whether you play one or the other in a semi final, are you suggesting it doesn’t matter?

To the public? Not really. If they're going to watch, they'll watch regardless of hypothetical match-ups. If they're not going to watch, likewise.

 

[PhatBoy]

To the public? Not really. If they're going to watch, they'll watch regardless of hypothetical match-ups. If they're not going to watch, likewise.

So why not dispense with any afl match that effects only ranking within the finals?

 

[corbies]

So why not dispense with any afl match that effects only ranking within the finals?

Theres an advantage to finishing higher in the AFL finals be it home ground advantage or a double chance. 1 v 4 in the world cup get the same thing.

 

[western royboy]

Back on topic - very slim to absolutely ****ing none

 

[western royboy]

Back on topic - very slim to absolutely ****ing none

 

[Doodlesweaver]

Back on topic - very slim to absolutely ******* none

Certainly not in England.

 

[Wolfs]

I reckon Australia has a chance, a decent chance and the reason is why is somehow they come up for the WC.

England and India are easy favs

 

[Kram]

Australia will be a bit of an outsider but I can't believe people are writing us off.

 

[PhatBoy]

Australia will be a bit of an outsider but I can't believe people are writing us off.

This.
It will take at a guess 5-6 wins to make the semis, probably 6. Knock over Bangladesh, Afghanistan and the West Indies - all those teams CAN cause and upset but it’s unlikely - and that leaves them needing three against the rest. The way Sri Lanka have been going you’d assume they’d beat them. So suddenly snaring two against the other five isn’t out of reach. Once you make it you only need to string two good games together.

 

[cricketnut14]

Australia will be a bit of an outsider but I can't believe people are writing us off.

quite simple why people are writing us off - we are rubbish - with the current side we have been selecting in recent times.

we don't deserve to be faves, however write the aussies off at your own peril.

with our best side available we may still be a chance, although England, india, sa have taken the odi format to another level.

we only play a handful of games before the world cup comes round but we may well still have a few members about from the 2015 squad
(warner, finch, smith, Maxwell, starc, hazlewood and m.marsh and cummins also played a small part in 2015)

add carey as a lock and only 2 spots available in our best XI.
SHORT, LYNN, HEAD, STOINIS, AGAR, ZAMPA, AND SOME SECOND STRING QUICKS IN THE MIX.