|
Jul 2019
10:32pm, 3 Jul 2019
21,100 posts
|
Maclennane
England and Australia are the most complete sides in the tournament. India rely on Kohli and Bumrah and NZ on Williamson
|
|
Jul 2019
10:35pm, 3 Jul 2019
2,216 posts
|
ThorntonRunner
Off to the women's odi tomorrow 
|
|
Jul 2019
11:09pm, 3 Jul 2019
18,388 posts
|
flanker
It seems farcical to me that Pakistan's potential to progress will be dictated by the toss. I hope whoever came up with the NRR system is suitably embarrassed.
|
|
Jul 2019
11:52pm, 3 Jul 2019
11,015 posts
|
Badger
We were just talking about that. It is nuts that an equally devastating win batting second can't have the same effect on your NRR.
|
|
Jul 2019
6:19am, 4 Jul 2019
113,117 posts
|
GregP
Enjoy ThoRu.
|
|
Jul 2019
6:51am, 4 Jul 2019
28,290 posts
|
SPR
Luckily it's pretty impossible for Pakistan, but I agree.
|
|
Jul 2019
7:05am, 4 Jul 2019
2,176 posts
|
FenlandRunner
Really Mac? Take away Starc from Aus and they'd lose 26 wickets....?
|
|
Jul 2019
8:27am, 4 Jul 2019
387 posts
|
Deinonychus
Don’t really have a problem with NRR. It’s probably the fairest way of separating teams on the same points. It only throws up bizarre scenarios like this when the chances of one team overhauling the others run rate are very slim. It takes into account the teams performance over the whole group stage, so the more successful teams know that, and play for run rate.
The obvious alternative is head to head, which would mean Pakistan would only have to equal NZ’s points to go through.
|
|
Jul 2019
8:32am, 4 Jul 2019
22,239 posts
|
fetcheveryone
The issue was the way in which NZ appeared to pull up the drawbridge yesterday though.
I wondered whether the team batting second could be awarded a number of run-rate points, for every over in which they exceed the required run rate. Thoughts?
|
|
Jul 2019
8:35am, 4 Jul 2019
11,016 posts
|
Badger
It’s not the concept, Deinonychus, it’s the implementation I’m quibbling with.
Maybe something riffing off the DLS method, to give a predicted 50 over total?
|
