[Cricket] ICC Cricket World Cup 2023- Final- India v Australia

[Eeyore]

Apparently responsible for all their defeats for 9 years.

Makes the NSC ref threads look like a love in.

 

[PeterT]

It really is only a game, high up on the list of non-important things sure but ultimately only a game. I feel the ups and downs of losses as much as anyone but can put it all into context ultimately, which some seem unable to do.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Apparently responsible for all their defeats for 9 years.

Makes the NSC ref threads look like a love in.

Was it Richard Kettleborough who gave them the (should have been) crucial wicket of Steve Smith - given lbw outside the line?

I'm embarrassed for them. They clearly thought the fairy tale was all destined to come true. The ICC certainly did their best to lay it all on a plate for them, and STILL they choked on it. the knobs.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Although even AFTER India got destroyed yesterday, the ICC still couldn't let go of pretending it was ALL about them :

ICC Team of the Tournament for ICC World Cup 2023
Rohit Sharma (captain), IND
Quinton de Kock (wicketkeeper), SA
Virat Kohli, IND
Daryl Mitchell, NZ
KL Rahul (wicketkeeper), IND
Glenn Maxwell, AUS
Ravindra Jadeja, IND
Jasprit Bumrah, IND
Adam Zampa, AUS
Mohammed Shami, IND
Dilshan Madushanka. SL

 

[Audax]

Although even AFTER India got destroyed yesterday, the ICC still couldn't let go of pretending it was ALL about them :

ICC Team of the Tournament for ICC World Cup 2023
Rohit Sharma (captain), IND
Quinton de Kock (wicketkeeper), SA
Virat Kohli, IND
Daryl Mitchell, NZ
KL Rahul (wicketkeeper), IND
Glenn Maxwell, AUS
Ravindra Jadeja, IND
Jasprit Bumrah, IND
Adam Zampa, AUS
Mohammed Shami, IND
Dilshan Madushanka. SL

To be fair, across the whole tournament, I think that's not far off being a fair reflection.

On the bowling side: Shami was the top wicket taker (and only played 7 games), Bumrah was 4th, and in a very high scoring tournament both had economy rates less than 6 (Bumrah near enough to 4). Jadeja was 8th and an economy of 4.25. Zampa and Madushanka were 2nd and 3rd for wickets.

On the batting side: Kohli and Sharma the top 2. de Kock 3rd. I'd argue Ravindra unlucky to miss out. Maybe he could have been instead of Maxwell, whose 400 runs was good enough for 13th most runs scored, but got 201 of them vs Afg and another 106 vs the Dutch. Rahul ahead of Ravindra maybe needs questioning as well - 8th on the list of run scorers, but if you've picked de Kock you already have a 'keeper so you can afford to look at Ravindra, Iyer, or Warner.

All up, I'd say that 5 Indian's in the team of the tournament is absolutely fair. That they've arrived at 6 can be debated, but it's a debate where you're splitting hairs really - all of the Indian's picked had outstanding tournaments and the fact they got done by the Aussies in the final doesn't change that.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Was it Richard Kettleborough who gave them the (should have been) crucial wicket of Steve Smith - given lbw outside the line?

No, that was Illingworth (who's presumably not in on the conspiracy).

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Although even AFTER India got destroyed yesterday, the ICC still couldn't let go of pretending it was ALL about them :

ICC Team of the Tournament for ICC World Cup 2023
Rohit Sharma (captain), IND
Quinton de Kock (wicketkeeper), SA
Virat Kohli, IND
Daryl Mitchell, NZ
KL Rahul (wicketkeeper), IND
Glenn Maxwell, AUS
Ravindra Jadeja, IND
Jasprit Bumrah, IND
Adam Zampa, AUS
Mohammed Shami, IND
Dilshan Madushanka. SL

Where are all the Eng…………….. oh

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

To be fair, across the whole tournament, I think that's not far off being a fair reflection.

On the bowling side: Shami was the top wicket taker (and only played 7 games), Bumrah was 4th, and in a very high scoring tournament both had economy rates less than 6 (Bumrah near enough to 4). Jadeja was 8th and an economy of 4.25. Zampa and Madushanka were 2nd and 3rd for wickets.

On the batting side: Kohli and Sharma the top 2. de Kock 3rd. I'd argue Ravindra unlucky to miss out. Maybe he could have been instead of Maxwell, whose 400 runs was good enough for 13th most runs scored, but got 201 of them vs Afg and another 106 vs the Dutch. Rahul ahead of Ravindra maybe needs questioning as well - 8th on the list of run scorers, but if you've picked de Kock you already have a 'keeper so you can afford to look at Ravindra, Iyer, or Warner.

All up, I'd say that 5 Indian's in the team of the tournament is absolutely fair. That they've arrived at 6 can be debated, but it's a debate where you're splitting hairs really - all of the Indian's picked had outstanding tournaments and the fact they got done by the Aussies in the final doesn't change that.

If you can't put Travis Head in, having been man of the match in both the semi final and final, as well as scoring a group stage hundred against the third semi finalists, something is wrong.

Head and Rachin for Rahul and Jadeja for me.

 

[Simster]

I remember us posting 500 odd in Adelaide in 2006 and Australia being 65-3 in response. We're back !

Oh...

Shudder. That game is the only time I have been genuinely angry at a cricket match. Collingwood double century, Pieterson daddy hundred and 551/6 declared - and we still f##king lost.

It bothered me for years and years until that Ben Stokes knock at Headingly 4 or 5 years ago felt like some sort of payback.

 

[tedebear]

If you can't put Travis Head in, having been man of the match in both the semi final and final, as well as scoring a group stage hundred against the third semi finalists, something is wrong.

Head and Rachin for Rahul and Jadeja for me.

Agreed, and to be honest I'd query Sharma against Cummins. Cummins has taken some serious flack in Australia in the press, but his tactics have been significant, the decision to send India in first on the weekend was startlingly correct. To come back from the first two losses, to such a win is a testament to his captaincy. Sharma had the crowds with him all the way as 13th man...Maybe room for both of them...

 

[Audax]

If you can't put Travis Head in, having been man of the match in both the semi final and final, as well as scoring a group stage hundred against the third semi finalists, something is wrong.

Head and Rachin for Rahul and Jadeja for me.

Fair shout on Head - think he misses out initially having played fewer matches, but I agree that's a bad call. I'm not so sure Jadeja should be the one to miss out to get Head in, though - he offered a lot for India with the ball.

Ravindra definitely has to be in that squad: if Mitchell gets picked, Ravindra should get picked. On a like-for-like basis, that means dropping Rahul IMO.

So how do we get Head in? You mentioned dropping Jadeja. For me, that weakens the bowling side of things a lot. Jadeja kept things tight and took wickets. I'd bring Maxwell into the mix. 2 excellent innings, but that was it and against lesser sides than those that Head scored his runs against. Similar to Jadeja, Maxwell bowled tight - but didn't take the wickets. So in a "take two from those three" type of decision, I'd say Head beats Maxwell on the batting side, and Jadeja beats Maxwell on the bowling side, so it is Maxwell who misses out. You lose the "Big Show" X factor that he offers where he can single-handedly win a game, but do you really need that in an All-Nations World Cup XI that features the batting quality of Kohli, Sharma, de Kock, Mitchell, Head, Ravindra ... I'd suggest probably not.

The only thing I would say if you go down that route is it is a very top-heavy batting line up. But I think most of those batters have the flexibility to bat anywhere in the line up (Head in particular).

 

[Guinness Boy]

If you can't put Travis Head in, having been man of the match in both the semi final and final, as well as scoring a group stage hundred against the third semi finalists, something is wrong.

Head and Rachin for Rahul and Jadeja for me.

So you prefer Head to Kock?

 

[ManOfSussex]

In The Times today, Steve James went for this:

R Sharma
T Head
Q de Kock
V Kohli
D Mitchell
G Maxwell
R Jadeja
P Cummins (c)
J Bumrah
A Zampa
M Shami

He argued Head had to be in the team, so de Kock drops to 3 to allow him in and has the gloves as Rahul batted too slowly in the final. He wouldn't have Sharma as captain, so Madushanka makes way for Cummins as the final showed his courage and acumen by bowling first.

 

[Audax]

In The Times today, Steve James went for this:

R Sharma
T Head
Q de Kock
V Kohli
D Mitchell
G Maxwell
R Jadeja
P Cummins (c)
J Bumrah
A Zampa
M Shami

He argued Head had to be in the team, so de Kock drops to 3 to allow him in and has the gloves as Rahul batted too slowly in the final. He wouldn't have Sharma as captain, so Madushanka makes way for Cummins as the final showed his courage and acumen by bowling first.

That's a good selection. I can see the reasoning for Cummins coming in (to be captain). I'd still question picking Maxwell and leaving out Ravindra.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Although even AFTER India got destroyed yesterday, the ICC still couldn't let go of pretending it was ALL about them :

ICC Team of the Tournament for ICC World Cup 2023
Rohit Sharma (captain), IND
Quinton de Kock (wicketkeeper), SA
Virat Kohli, IND
Daryl Mitchell, NZ
KL Rahul (wicketkeeper), IND
Glenn Maxwell, AUS
Ravindra Jadeja, IND
Jasprit Bumrah, IND
Adam Zampa, AUS
Mohammed Shami, IND
Dilshan Madushanka. SL

I just had a crack at picking a team (tricky, given I didn't actually watch much of the tournament), and ended up with the below. Beyond seeing you'd posted it, I didn't actually read the ICC selection first.

1 Sharma
2 Head
3 Kohli
4 Ravindra
5 Rahul (w)
6 Maxwell
7 Jadeja
8 Zampa
9 Bumrah
10 Shami
11 Madushanka

Beyond no. 5 I've not paid much attention to the order I write them in.
If I were picking an actual team to go out and play I'd prefer a better batter at 8, but otherwise I'm not unhappy with it.
I make it 6 Indians as well. There's not much getting past the fact that they had the most successful two seamers, top scoring opener and no.3, and top scoring wicketkeeper.

 

[Audax]

top scoring wicketkeeper

de Kock would like a chat...

 

[Eeyore]

Although even AFTER India got destroyed yesterday, the ICC still couldn't let go of pretending it was ALL about them :

ICC Team of the Tournament for ICC World Cup 2023
Rohit Sharma (captain), IND
Quinton de Kock (wicketkeeper), SA
Virat Kohli, IND
Daryl Mitchell, NZ
KL Rahul (wicketkeeper), IND
Glenn Maxwell, AUS
Ravindra Jadeja, IND
Jasprit Bumrah, IND
Adam Zampa, AUS
Mohammed Shami, IND
Dilshan Madushanka. SL

That's pretty much based on the leading run makers and wicket takers. On that basis it's hard to argue against.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

de Kock would like a chat...

Yes you're right, I misremembered Rahul's much higher average (he finished not out 4 times, while de Kock was dismissed in every innings, unsurprisingly given he was opening) as being a higher aggregate.
I'd ideally pick Sharma and Head over de Kock as an opener because they either scored as many runs but faster (Sharma) or scored big runs in key matches as well as scoring faster (Head).
There's plenty of players I could justify picking over Rahul, but a) I had a convenient wicketkeeper shaped hole at no. 5 which is actually where he batted, b) I couldn't be bothered to spend my whole lunch break worrying about the best alternative to put there, and c) picking somebody else at 5 would mean dropping one of the openers I'd already decided I wanted.

 

[Audax]

Yes you're right, I misremembered Rahul's much higher average (he finished not out 4 times, while de Kock was dismissed in every innings, unsurprisingly given he was opening) as being a higher aggregate.
I'd ideally pick Sharma and Head over de Kock as an opener because they either scored as many runs but faster (Sharma) or scored big runs in key matches as well as scoring faster (Head).
There's plenty of players I could justify picking over Rahul, but a) I had a convenient wicketkeeper shaped hole at no. 5 which is actually where he batted, b) I couldn't be bothered to spend my whole lunch break worrying about the best alternative to put there, and c) picking somebody else at 5 would mean dropping one of the openers I'd already decided I wanted.

Fair approach. I'm looking at something along these lines:

R Sharma
T Head
Q de Kock
V Kohli
R Ravindra
D Mitchell
R Jadeja
P Cummins (c) [or Madushanka w/ Sharma (c)]
J Bumrah
A Zampa
M Shami

 

[PeterT]

Fair approach. I'm looking at something along these lines:

R Sharma
T Head
Q de Kock
V Kohli
R Ravindra
D Mitchell
R Jadeja
P Cummins (c) [or Madushanka w/ Sharma (c)]
J Bumrah
A Zampa
M Shami

You sound very knowledgeable and reasonable, are you sure you are Australian ?