If WI beat India, then of course it is just a straight up match b/w India and Aus which will decide the second semi finalist.
But if India beat WI (more likely scenario, considering how strong India are at home and the possible absence of Lara), then it will be really quite unfair to WI. All they can do is to beat England. They can't worry too much about the margin of victory since their priority has to be get the win first and foremost. They CAN'T risk losing the match trying to achieve a bigger margin
This would leave Aus in the situation where they would know *exactly* by how much they have to beat India to go through to SF. So for them, the victory target would not be just winning the match, but the actual target. Unlike WI, they CAN and would risk losing the match going for the target - because it would be pointless to win the match but not have the required NRR.
India would also be in a comfortable position. Even if they lose, all they have to do is avoid losing by any margin which would put their NRR at the bottom of the 3 teams.
It really would be a win win situation for both Aus and India. The match could even be "arranged", but it doesn't have to be done delibrately or in an under handed way. Both teams know what they want, and in case of India, they don't even need to win the match - just play the run rate game.
All because the last 2 matches are not being held at the same time - and India being the host and having the financial clout, gets to have the last match.
Nothing can be done about that really. No matter how you schedule the tournament that can happen all you have to do is win all your matches and they can't deny you your spot.
I would just point out that since you have been able to work this out today, so can the West Indies.
What is to stop them from going hammer and tongs for an English target, especially if they lose to India today.
If they lose, then they know they HAVE to reply on NRR....
I take your point that Australia can risk everything to go for the NRR, since they know that just winning would be pointless.
But theres nothing to stop the West Indies from showing the same attitude.
Teams have "managed" their NRR in the during a round robin stage before - most famously Australia who spent 40 overs chasing the West Indies total of just over 100 during the 1999 world cup, in order to manage the NRR situation.
As for India playing their last 2 round robin games this late in the tournament, theres only 1 reason for that:
The longer the hosts stay in the tournament, the greater the viewer interest.
It has nothing to do with financial "clout" - if you mean that they've been able to buy themselves a favorable schedule.
In fact, id argue that the schedule has been ridiculous for India with 11 days between their first and second games, all because they had to be alive in the tournament for as long as possible.
Originally posted by Kartikeya: Very good points 12thman....
I would just point out that since you have been able to work this out today, so can the West Indies.
What is to stop them from going hammer and tongs for an English target, especially if they lose to India today.
If they lose, then they know they HAVE to reply on NRR....
I take your point that Australia can risk everything to go for the NRR, since they know that just winning would be pointless.
But theres nothing to stop the West Indies from showing the same attitude.
Contradicting yourself there, Karti. Since you already see the point that Aus can risk everything, but the WI can't. For WI, the first and foremost is to win the match. They cannot risk losing that in order to get a better NRR. Australia DO have that luxury.
it's very simple for all the teams, win 2 games and you're in
not so. if ind bt wi but lose to aus and wi bt eng then aus, wi and ind are all on 2 wins and it will come down to r/r. so you could go out even if you win 2 games which i think was the point initially made by 12th man
What does the result of WI India match has to do with the validity of the potential unfair situation for WI? It is to the credit of WI that they avoided it. It is to the discredit of the tournament organizers that such an unfair situation existed
Originally posted by 12thman: What does the result of WI India match has to do with the validity of the potential unfair situation for WI? It is to the credit of WI that they avoided it. It is to the discredit of the tournament organizers that such an unfair situation existed
Sporting tournaments which involve groups of 4 teams normally finish the group phase in 3 days (plus whatever rest days are deemed necessary).
Only when the tournament has TV coverage does this get stretched out.
The main reason for the ICCCT is to make money from TV. The question of fairness is only secondary so there was never going to be any consideration given to staging two matches on the same day.
Originally posted by 12thman: What does the result of WI India match has to do with the validity of the potential unfair situation for WI? It is to the credit of WI that they avoided it. It is to the discredit of the tournament organizers that such an unfair situation existed
Originally posted by 12thman: What does the result of WI India match has to do with the validity of the potential unfair situation for WI? It is to the credit of WI that they avoided it. It is to the discredit of the tournament organizers that such an unfair situation existed
Unfortunate situations cannot be avoided - we've been on the receiving end of a few, especially in the CWC. So have other teams, at times. However, a set of rules necessarily predertermines what happens under particular circumstances, and if it has unfortunate consequences for a particular team, so be it.
