the Ozzies winning chances just yet, after a thorough analysis of where their wheels fell off they'll correct their errors and regroup. One of Stoinis or Coulter Nile will be dropped and either Jason Behrendorff and Jhye Richardson will be the replacement. Zampa will come in for attention as well after an ordinary bowling effort.
Oh, you again(sigh)
You won't find a related article because there isn't one, it's a figure of speech considering the way they lost......kapeesh?
Oh alright, I hear what you say, that said I thought my post was plain english about the underdogs who suffered an enormous setback in a loss against the favorites. Let's not forget that less than 6 months ago the Ozzies were a fat zero hope of winning the WC.
Oh you poor lost Sookie, up your 20 year old stale comments......desperate for a pop huh?..........6/1 favourites 6 months ago.....man you're a laugh.
When it's coming from you, a total cricket ignoramus, then I have nothing to worry about.
Denny, 6 months ago the Aussies didnt have Smith and Warner, so naturally their chances would deminish.
Its the same as saying that without Kohli and Sharma, the Indians wouldnt stand a chance.
We all knew Smith and Warner would be back, so I dont really know who said they didnt stand a chance.
Rooi, why do people call Denny Dense? Does that mean anything? or is it his real name?
Chippo, less than 6 months ago the Ozzies were being beaten by the Proteas. The Ozzies are also the current world champs and on that basis should have been favorites.
Koosie has nicks for the posters he most despises, the nicks is his starting point for putting his enemies down. Challenge him enough and you'll get one.
"Challenge him enough and you'll get one."
That would imply that you're some kind of "challenge" for me or anyone else, not so?
LMAO!
You're not a challenge, Dense. You might like to think you are but trust me, you're not.
"Chippo, less than 6 months ago the Ozzies were being beaten by the Proteas"
But Dense, we havent played Australia in the past 6 months?
And, to my point...
6 months ago they didnt have Smith and Warner.
Sorry, don't mean to pick you out, but try to not make false statements.
@Rooinek, when do I qualify for a ridiculous nick? Or are they only awarded to people that make bizarre statements?
ohhh yes
Of course.
ok.. but promi se to only use it if I make dense statements?!?!?!
ah to be honest...
i dont really mind.
I dont take things too personally on here.
I actually come here to have a bit of fun... a bit of a laugh... and talk sport from time to time.
I like to think that I am level headed and fairly knowlegable when it comes to Rugga and Cric...
Im a bit different to the rest of the mob here as I dont "hate" any players and I am pretty objective to others opinions.
Unlike smartmichael and moz and BEENO!! Im happy to admit when I am proven wrong and to acknowledge others opinions..
So back to your answer... I couldnt really care much.
"Denny, 6 months ago the Aussies didn't have Smith and Warner, so naturally their chances would deminish."
Maybe so but they lost to India in Australia without Warner and Smith if my memory serves me right(2-1)
But then they beat India in India 3-2 without Warner and Smith.
And once again, if my memory serves me right they beat Pakistan in the UAE without them as well.
They lost to the Proteas in Australia and while I'm slightly off with my dates( Nov series 2018/19 ) the surprising thing is that it is most unusual for them to lose on home turf, and it was mainly this series that spiraled the doubts about their WC hopes.
So with or without Warner and Smith there's a mixed bag of results, suit yourself how you argue that one.
Tx Rooiknob for reviving ouChippo's oh so revealing ole post. Hehehe.
"For the rest... Most teams relied on a few good players mixed in with one or two outstanding players."
Very well put, spot-on.......couldn't have said it any better myself.
Which then takes us to the next question of which team will dominate the '20's?
I think it will come out of possibly three teams, England, India or Australia with the Windies lurking as a dark horse. Trouble with India is that they're great on home soil but not so away from home, England have the players and they would be the probables, Australia is in a rebuilding stage and probably need quite a few years to reestablish themselves as a dominant force, that said the upcoming Ashes series might give away some pointers. There is also the possibility that the days of a dominant team are over.
Stepping into the breach I'm saying England. The benchmark for dominance though has been set at 15 years winning both home and away series.
Well put flashman.
not much to argue with there at all.
How good have Oz looked though?
So solid.
Smith is just quality on top of quality.
The lack of swing at this WC is allowing him to step across his stumps without fear.
He's been their best player for me. Counter punched nicely at a high strike rate with big contributions.
If anything, t heir bowling is their weakness.
They've yet to settle on a starting lineup and play their best game.
They've looked good Denny. Warner's one slow innings was all that's kept them from a perfect score this far.
I got a feeling India is gonna wobble at a crucial stage. Just a hunch , against my better judgement.
England also have a frailty about them.
On paper the Ozzies are the underdogs, compared to England and India they're just a little underdone. You'd have to think England with an awesome batting lineup and an equally great bowling lineup with Jofra Archer leading the charge as the winners.
But cricket is a funny game, winning the toss, nerves and a bit of luck could all play a part. The thing I like about the Ozzies is that they know how to win and that they're smart. Don't let them sniff a win, collectively they'll swarm and seize the opportunity like no other team.