My understanding was its Australias run rate minus Afghanistans run rate. Australia got 168 = +8.44 so if Afghanistan get 145 = 7.25 it would be an Australia win with a NRR of +1.19 which just edges them above us?
Twitter suggesting 107.. not sure anyone knows.
That's pretty much the score mentioned on the Sky commentary. I thought they'd said 112 or maybe 116 as I wasn't paying sufficient interest, but it was certainly in the 11x ballpark.
Thing is Australia need to do more than just "edge ahead". They need to get far enough ahead to put pressure on England to not just win, but win with a solid buffer. It's also more complicated than you present it. They work out the NRR by looking at how many runs a team has scored, how many scored against them, and how many balls were available to be faced. So not quite as simple as saying "in game 1, NRR was -1, in game 2 it was +0.5, so now it's -0.5" - rain delays etc come into the calculations as well.
At least for the semi's they have reserve days in case of rain. Any match interrupted by rain can be picked up and completed the next day, so we should hopefully get the full 20 overs per side for the semis and the final.
Fair enough! It’s cricket, why would it be simple?
They're batting really well, definitely in with a shout of an upset win that sends England straight through.
Not if we lose to Sri Lanka!
Agreed.
If Australia lose, then England would have to be absolutely battered by Sri Lanka.
No, a Sri Lanka win takes them to 6 points with us on 5. NRR wouldn't come into it.
Ah yeah, missed that!
If the England game gets washed out then Australia will be above us with a point more (I think, assuming Australia win this game).
FFS, I'm having a 'mare today. Was still thinking in terms of if Aus were to lose. Still a possibility that Rashid Khan could nick it - 17 needed from 4 balls.
As long as we don’t re-sign Obed McCoy, I’m happy. Useless he was.
