[cite]Posted By: Chirpy Red[/cite]Sky TV had this sussed laast night but the BBC and their website will not take it on board. They list the Super 8 fixtures, name other teams but not England! England remain B2 regardless of the P v N match. ENGLAND ARE THROUGH!!!
WAKE UP BBC!!!!
sky did work it out but i never heard them explain exactly why we were through. They mentioned run rates but not in any detail. It seemed like the presenters didn't have a clue but the researchers knew why. It's only now you explain, chirpy, that i understand it.
We're destined to be in Group E with India, South Africa and West Indies. Any result between Netherlands and Pakistan cannot change it.
It makes the seedings look like a very silly idea if you ask me. It makes 3 of the last 4 first round games "dead" and the second round groups will end up looking like this:
E: India, England, West Indies, South Africa
F: Ireland, Netherlands/Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand.
[cite]Posted By: Callumcafc[/cite]We're destined to be in Group E with India, South Africa and West Indies. Any result between Netherlands and Pakistan cannot change it.
It makes the seedings look like a very silly idea if you ask me. It makes 3 of the last 4 first round games "dead" and the second round groups will end up looking like this:
E: India, England, West Indies, South Africa
F: Ireland, Netherlands/Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand.
I know which group I'd rather be in.
That can't be right surely as if Holland win today then we'd finish runner up and be B2 and therefore go into Group F?
And if Sri Lanka beat the Windies they'd win their group and go into Group E?
Or am i not understanding this qualification malarkey?
[cite]Posted By: BDL[/cite]Pickwick, I've been wondering about his action for years? At times the bowling arm was almost vertical.
Still, fun to see the Aussie's getting tonked! :-)
Doesn't matter what angle the arm is at (i.e. between vertical and brushing the ear, to horizontal and straight out from the shoulder), it's whether the arm is straight. Malinga is a bit of freak, generally speaking it's far far harder to bowl the way he does. With the arm vertical if you release the ball a fraction of a second early or late you are just changing the length and a change in length of a couple of feet isn't a huge issue. With the arm horizontal as Malinga bowls then you're talking about the line changing by a couple of feet, i.e. a straight ball become a wide outsdie off it you release even slightly late.
This is made even more difficult in Twenty20 where players are trying to vary their pace from ball to ball.
As a batsman though, Malinga's action is a nightmare as it's is far harder to pickup the line of the ball, and the nature of the action seems to lead to more swing, so doubly difficult.
It's similar to the argument that Peiterson shouldn't be allowed to "switch hit". It just happens Kev is exceedingly talented, statistics show that on average a batsmen is far more likely to lose his wicket when attempting the switch hit.
The horizontal style was the standard way of bowling until Women started playing the game (no idea when, but W.G. Grace from Bromley would have bowled horizontally). Randy is correct, it is legal and a far harder technique.
Netherlands need another 75 runs from 6 overs to qualify with only 2 wickets in hand..
[cite]Posted By: Chris_from_Sidcup[/cite]That can't be right surely as if Holland win today then we'd finish runner up and be B2 and therefore go into Group F?
And if Sri Lanka beat the Windies they'd win their group and go into Group E?
Or am i not understanding this qualification malarkey?
Group E: A1 (India), B2 (England), C1 (Australia), D2 (South Africa)
Group F: A2 (Bangladesh), B1 (Pakistan), C2 (Sri Lanka), D1 (New Zealand)
Eight of the twelve teams were given seedings based on the results of the Twenty20 World Cup two years ago before the start of the first round:
A1 - India, A2 - Bangladesh
B1 - Pakistan, B2 - England
C1 - Australia, C2 - Sri Lanka
D1 - New Zealand, D2 - South Africa
If any of the above teams qualify, no matter if it's first or second of their first round group, they enter the second round group into which they are seeded. In the case of West Indies and Ireland, they take the seeding of the team they have qualified at the expense of (Australia and Bangladesh).
Malinga's action is awful, it has gotten even worse over the last two years and I cannot see how it falls within the laws of the game.
On some deliveries the bloke stops at the popping crease, just before his delivery, and almost braces himself like a baseball pitcher before releasing the ball with a pitching action.
Sorry, but I think that's bullshit. There is no way he is "bowling" the ball in any proper manner and he has definitely gone from a "slingy" action to a more "chucky" action since his injury.
No wonder the batsmen can't pick the ball up from his deliveries!
That means with Murali, Mendi and Malinga that SL now have THREE dodgy bowlers!!!
[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Malinga's action is awful, it has gotten even worse over the last two years and I cannot see how it falls within the laws of the game.
On some deliveries the bloke stops at the popping crease, just before his delivery, and almost braces himself like a baseball pitcher before releasing the ball with a pitching action.
Sorry, but I think that's bullshit. There is no way he is "bowling" the ball in any proper manner and he has definitely gone from a "slingy" action to a more "chucky" action since his injury.
No wonder the batsmen can't pick the ball up from his deliveries!
That means with Murali, Mendi and Malinga that SL now have THREE dodgy bowlers!!!
Well I'm sure if any other nation agrees with you then the ICC will be asked to review his action. I've not seen more than 1 or 2 balls of him bowling since his return from injury so I can't really comment on whether or not his action is now more of a chuck than a sling.
You can spot a chucker a mile off? OK - explain to me exactly how Malinga's action is illegal? His arm is actually straighter than most quicks - with less elbow flexion than a 'traditional' pace bowler like Brett Lee, Shane Watson or Ryan Sidebottom. It just looks wrong to you because of the angle the delivery is coming from - there's nothing illegal about it whatsoever.
Don't get me started on Muralitharan - he's definitely a chucker - but Malinga's action is perfectly legal.
[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]You can spot a chucker a mile off? OK - explain to me exactly how Malinga's action is illegal? His arm is actually straighter than most quicks - with less elbow flexion than a 'traditional' pace bowler like Brett Lee, Shane Watson or Ryan Sidebottom. It justlookswrong to you because of the angle the delivery is coming from - there's nothing illegal about it whatsoever.
Don't get me started on Muralitharan - he'sdefinitelya chucker - but Malinga's action is perfectly legal.
I've always thought that about Malinga, the reason no other quicks bowl like that that play in England is they would of had a sharp slap in the tits from whoever was coaching them as a youngster, as would Pieterson if he tried a switch hit on someone. But it's something good to wind up Bhavi in the corner shop with. Malinga the slinga sounds quite good. And my word does he bite!!
Muralitharan is a bit of an unusual case he seems to have an elbow joint in the middle of his wrist or no wrist bone.
Right is it my imagination or did i catch a fielder running off the field jumping in the air throwing the ball back in play last night?? Did it count as a 6 or just runs.
the commentators were saying that when a batsmen hits it a few yards over the rope for what would be 6, is a fielder then allowed to run behind the rope , as the ball arrives, jump in the air , catch the ball , throw it back whilst in the air and therefore stop a 6!!
[cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]the commentators were saying that when a batsmen hits it a few yards over the rope for what would be 6, is a fielder then allowed to run behind the rope , as the ball arrives, jump in the air , catch the ball , throw it back whilst in the air and therefore stop a 6!!
If you catch it doesn't it count as a 6 as your feet are on the floor?
I think you are allowed to catch it in mid air and throw it to someone else whilst still in the air and if they catch it, THEN the batsman is out!
Comments
Still, fun to see the Aussie's getting tonked! :-)
"Edna Average".
Chirpy - can England actually win the group and finish as B1?
Pickwick/BDL - also wondered that about Malinga. He got 1 Aussie out with a full toss and the ball came from a near 90 degree angle!
sky did work it out but i never heard them explain exactly why we were through. They mentioned run rates but not in any detail. It seemed like the presenters didn't have a clue but the researchers knew why. It's only now you explain, chirpy, that i understand it.
It makes the seedings look like a very silly idea if you ask me. It makes 3 of the last 4 first round games "dead" and the second round groups will end up looking like this:
E: India, England, West Indies, South Africa
F: Ireland, Netherlands/Pakistan, Sri Lanka, New Zealand.
I know which group I'd rather be in.
That can't be right surely as if Holland win today then we'd finish runner up and be B2 and therefore go into Group F?
And if Sri Lanka beat the Windies they'd win their group and go into Group E?
Or am i not understanding this qualification malarkey?
Doesn't matter what angle the arm is at (i.e. between vertical and brushing the ear, to horizontal and straight out from the shoulder), it's whether the arm is straight. Malinga is a bit of freak, generally speaking it's far far harder to bowl the way he does. With the arm vertical if you release the ball a fraction of a second early or late you are just changing the length and a change in length of a couple of feet isn't a huge issue. With the arm horizontal as Malinga bowls then you're talking about the line changing by a couple of feet, i.e. a straight ball become a wide outsdie off it you release even slightly late.
This is made even more difficult in Twenty20 where players are trying to vary their pace from ball to ball.
As a batsman though, Malinga's action is a nightmare as it's is far harder to pickup the line of the ball, and the nature of the action seems to lead to more swing, so doubly difficult.
It's similar to the argument that Peiterson shouldn't be allowed to "switch hit". It just happens Kev is exceedingly talented, statistics show that on average a batsmen is far more likely to lose his wicket when attempting the switch hit.
Pakistan 156-4 off 18.
Group E: A1 (India), B2 (England), C1 (Australia), D2 (South Africa)
Group F: A2 (Bangladesh), B1 (Pakistan), C2 (Sri Lanka), D1 (New Zealand)
Eight of the twelve teams were given seedings based on the results of the Twenty20 World Cup two years ago before the start of the first round:
A1 - India, A2 - Bangladesh
B1 - Pakistan, B2 - England
C1 - Australia, C2 - Sri Lanka
D1 - New Zealand, D2 - South Africa
If any of the above teams qualify, no matter if it's first or second of their first round group, they enter the second round group into which they are seeded. In the case of West Indies and Ireland, they take the seeding of the team they have qualified at the expense of (Australia and Bangladesh).
Winner of Group E vs. Runner-up of Group F
Winner of Group F vs. Runner-up of Group E
Dutch all out for 93
6 wickets in hand....
On some deliveries the bloke stops at the popping crease, just before his delivery, and almost braces himself like a baseball pitcher before releasing the ball with a pitching action.
Sorry, but I think that's bullshit. There is no way he is "bowling" the ball in any proper manner and he has definitely gone from a "slingy" action to a more "chucky" action since his injury.
No wonder the batsmen can't pick the ball up from his deliveries!
That means with Murali, Mendi and Malinga that SL now have THREE dodgy bowlers!!!
Can't believe that SA defended a total of 128. NZ should've chased that down easily.
Well I'm sure if any other nation agrees with you then the ICC will be asked to review his action. I've not seen more than 1 or 2 balls of him bowling since his return from injury so I can't really comment on whether or not his action is now more of a chuck than a sling.
Going the Oval on Monday with JohnboyUK, Come on England !
AFKA, to be honest I'd had (more) than a few beers when I saw him bowl against the Aussies and I thought I was imagining it!
When I watched it again the next morning I realised that even when drunk I can spot a chucker a mile off.
Don't get me started on Muralitharan - he's definitely a chucker - but Malinga's action is perfectly legal.
I've always thought that about Malinga, the reason no other quicks bowl like that that play in England is they would of had a sharp slap in the tits from whoever was coaching them as a youngster, as would Pieterson if he tried a switch hit on someone. But it's something good to wind up Bhavi in the corner shop with. Malinga the slinga sounds quite good. And my word does he bite!!
Muralitharan is a bit of an unusual case he seems to have an elbow joint in the middle of his wrist or no wrist bone.
Only caught a snippett on sky with no sound
Whatever way you look at it though it was great bit of thinking!!
I think you are allowed to catch it in mid air and throw it to someone else whilst still in the air and if they catch it, THEN the batsman is out!
yep it would do but they were saying jump up in the air b4 it gets to you and pat it back to the boundary whilst in the air.... very dubious!!