Nasser expressed it beautifully, a team that could win in any pitch condition against any opponent should be the champion. And cricket means not only batsmans, there should be something to bowlers and fielders.
As an Aussie, watched this game with the exception of Quinton DeKock and maybe Brook. Everyone could of batted a little better. But the fielding from both sides in this was exceptional.
England have issues on slow pitches and spinners. Maharaj and Markram 2/29 from 5 overs. They struggled against Indian spinners at 2023 WC as well as the Afghanistan spinners. Their batting style works on fast flat decks. The right decision was to bat first for a day game on dry wicket. England have an over reliance on batting second. Shoutout to Rashid for his skillful bowling.
2 bowl 1st decisions nearly puts out off WT20 vs Aussies bowled first conceding 200+ fail to chase & yesterday once again bowls 1st & lost But in Kensington oval in 2010 India played 2 matches both the times they bowl 1st & lost now vs Afghanistan India rectify that mistake & opted to bat 1st.....
I have to admit, I've been having trouble seeing Wood as a positive for a while. They like his pace and he does give it all but, as you say, he has little variation so the batter gets used to his pace. One of the reasons that Archer is such a threat is that he does have variation and his pace can come out of nowhere. If they wanted the extra bowler in this game, it seems that they would have been better served by Jordan. If they trust his spin, having Jacks as the extra batter could be a plus too and quite possibly would have been in this game.
It's nice seeing England loose was literally pissed by morgan commentary during the match he was calling that pitch a flat deck and was telling that score scored by sa below par
After it seemed that England had mended their ways....Buttler and Mott reverted to their dumb decision making. You simply DO NOT bowl 1st in a day game. The wickets get slower and slower as the game progresses. This England team seems replete with analysts, coaches and backroom staff. How is it that not one of them told them that in day games, batting first is the likeliest way to win.?
I cannot understand how can the wicket go slow in 20 overs of bowling. In test cricket, things change after 2 days and now in T20 we say the pitch has slowed down even after 10 overs of the game....cannot wrap my head around it
@@saikrishna8211 Yes indeed. Amazing isn't it? I am no curator, but I have a suspicion that there is not enough moisture in these surfaces. When the sun starts beating down on them, they start to disintegrate. And a softer ball adds to the apparent slowness. In night games, with lowered temperatures, the moisture in the air settles on the pitch and makes it zip through. I guess Test match pitches (not those in India though) are watered, to ensure that they can hold it together for as long as possible. That's why one sees a 'Green' top of Day 1...and with every subsequent day, the grass gets drier.
It’s good. There was a real battle. A game should be go like that. Isn’t it,bowlers,batsmen,fielders all 3 departments should have the advantage of the pitch and ground.
It was a good pitch. 170-180 par. Some buttler magic restricted sa then a mix of good bowling and poor batting let them off the hook. Should've seen the job home with 26 from 18 needed
@@vaibhavsingh5287not batting well or actually for once the bowlers having a pitch that offers them a little bit of help. I feel with the way that the IPL has gone recently that people have forgotten that bowlers can restrict runs which is what SA did exceptionally well this match
INDIA WC CHAMPIONS IN HOCKEY 1975, CRICKET 1983, 2011, T20 WC CHAMPIONSHIP 2007, BENSON & HEDGES CUP 1985, BILLIARDS WORLD CHAMPION 11 TIMES, SNOOKER WORLD CHAMPS 4 TIME , Thomas Cup Winners.
Did you watch the game? I'm guessing not, or else you're just really bad at analysis. SA should have won by more but they bowled poorly for a stretch and allowed England back into it. It was also poor bowling that allowed SA to get away in the first place, so both teams were guilty of letting the opposition batters score more than they should. On that pitch, full and fast was definitely not the way to go and when bowlers observed that, the batters had trouble scoring. England could be excused to some degree, given that they were bowling first and took a while to understand the pitch, but SA really had no excuse. They were well ahead and then Baartman had a shocker and tried to go full and bowled an over of full tosses and let England back in. Rabada was a little lucky to get Livingstone off a full toss but SA bowled much better after that and that's really why they won.
@@wunnellyes, that over of baartman brought England back into the game. South Africa should've won by more than what they did. It's actually disappointing seeing them constantly do this
I think after SA's powerplay, England actually pulled the game back really well to stop them at 160 something. Eng depends a lot on Butler and Salt. If they don't fire, they are under concern. My view is: England will win this world cup. Butler and Salt will not give another chance of not playing well.
I think that England are still as a good a chance as anyone. Games like this, you'd rather win than lose but they don't necessarily tell you too much about the future. Both teams played well for the most part and any one small thing could have swung the game one way or the other.
England almost took that game from a losing position when they were down 3 wickets with only 60ish odd runs after 10 overs I think England don’t need an extra bowler in Curran or Wood and probably would be better served filling that with an extra batsman
I thought we just lacked intent in the power play but the pitch played quite slow which made run scoring difficult only de kock and miller were able to find rhythm and sa pacers used there exper and skill and bowled that length into the surface
If WI wins against SA and Eng wins against USA, three teams will be on 4 points and net runrate will decide the outcome in which SA might get knocked out.
What the heck is this “winning games”, “picking players on merit” thing?!? Everyone knows losing games and being an embarrassment while upholding the values of quota and BEEE is what really matters 😂
Buttler and Mott keep having these brain-farts. Having said that, don't you lot start getting all smug. You lot got nearly beaten by a 3rd-class Pakistan team, and needed a dropped catch to get past Associate member US. You lot haven't played against a proper team yet.
@@Evil_Clown-eh6jz LOL.. and what exactly has England done against a proper team... Only notable thing they've done is win against Namibia and US... such typical of your mindset.
What a terrible decision by Curran to decline a single with 2 balls to go after archer would have had a free hit. Very very poor absolutely lost us the match without a fight at the end there every ball and run counts so why not believe in your teammate to hit a six!
I disagree. It's all very well saying that Archer had a free hit but so did Curran and, having actually faced a few balls already, Curran was right to think that he had the better chance of actually connecting. England basically needed two boundaries and I think that, under the circumstances, Curran definitely had the better chance to hit them. Archer had a free hit on the last ball and got nothing but air. I can't say for sure that Atcher wouldn't have hit those last two balls to the boundary but Curran thought that the odds of him doing so were higher. I agree and I'm pretty sure that the whole England team (other than maybe Archer) would have agreed.
Used to be fan of moeen Ali but he’s a liability in the team. When last time he has ever played a vital innings with the bat. He’s not good enough to be in team just as a bowler
I know England would've won if Liam Livingstone hadn't got out but I will never understand why England captains choose to bowl first on good pitches in hot conditions! It's pure speculation but I really do think England would've won if they'd chosen to bat first today.
@@Baz502 The other game was under lights, rather than a blazing late morning energy-sapping sun, so you can't say conditions were exactly the same. I actually think England still would've won on Wednesday night if they'd batted first. Having watched cricket for many years, I know that if the teams are fairly-evenly matched and the pitch doesn't dictate that there's a big advantage in bowling first, the team batting first will win more often than the team batting second.
33 off 17 is a shocker, or are you just talking about the dismissal? That was certainly a turning point - a wicket and no runs rather than 6 or 4 - but he probably just misjudged it fractionally and got it lower one the bat than intended. Pressure is pressure for a reason.
That's a silly comment. The batters who weren't there at that stage were more to blame than the one who was. The wickets of Livingstone and Brook both obviously hurt England at that stage but England were only in the game at all because of those two. The main reason that England lost was because the batters who came before left those two with too much to do.
@@wunnell No not really, Brook slowed down as he approached hi 50 and after that when it was a done deal couldn't strike the ball, it was his responsibility to take England over the line
Not really. The pitch wasn't easy to score on if the bowler got their lengths right. SA should have won by more but, for some reason, they forgot how to bowl for a brief period - particularly Baartman. They remembered again in time though, and were able to stem the flow of runs at the end. Livingstone's dismissal was probably the turning point and that was a full toss, so that was a costly mistake, but he was a big reason that England got back in the game in the first place, so it would be unfair to blame him for the loss.
@@SUBASHKUMAR-wz8zx, and if you had seen the game up to that point then you'd know that big shots were not easy to play on that pitch when the bowlers got it right.
For me Curran had to take the risk against Jansen to lift some pressure on Brook but Curran played the selfish way and put too much pressure on the final over
Curran had only faced four deliveries when Brook got out. I could be wrong but, given that Brook was in full flow at the time, Curran's job would have been to get him back on strike. SA were bowling better lengths by the time Curran came out and it was harder to score, so he could have easily eaten up dot balls going for big shots. I'm inclined to think he did the right thing. It was just unfortunate that Brook misjudged that slower ball from Nortje.
@@Airyed, looking at the commentary, Curran faced 18.4 and 18.6. He pulled the former but only got a single and he gave himself room but Jansen followed him and he got two on the latter. I don't think he was just dinking it around, as you seem to be suggesting. There was no point him just throwing his wicket away with a wild shot - we'd be hearing about that if he had, just as others have been accused of throwing their wickets away - but I do think he was trying to score a boundary if he could. He just wasn't able to under the circumstances.
@@Airyed, are you aware that, under the current rules, it doesn't matter whether the batters cross while the ball is in the air when a batter is caught? The new batter will be on strike regardless. It seems to me that you think that, if Curran played a big shot and was caught on the boundary, that Brook would be on strike because the batters would have crossed. That rule was changed some time ago. What you're saying is true of the last ball of the over, because Brook would be on strike for the first ball of the next over, but it's not true of the rest of the over.
It's not a must win for England against US. If WI beat US and lose to SA then Eng, US, and WI are all on 2 points. Assuming it's a small loss to US and the WI win and loss are about the same then Eng goes through with SA on run rate. If US beat WI today, then it is a must win.
Since Windies thrashed US, England only need to beat US to qualify. South Africa's NRR isnt great so if England beat US by 20 runs or 2 overs to spare, they are through
It wasn't an easy pitch to score on if you got your length right. England took a bit too long to work that out and SA seemed to forget it part way through, but remembered in time. The turning point was probably Livingstone's wicket. If he got 4 or 6 off that full toss then England probably win. A bit of luck for SA and a costly mistake for England. Still, you can't really blame a loss on a single mistake, especially when Livingstone was a big reason that England got back into the game in the first place. That's just the way it goes. Both teams played well for much of the game but made some mistakes.
Ali struggles to middle his hits. They need a striker at 3 and someone who can build an innings if they fail at 5 or 6. Buttler Bairstow Salt Jacks Root Stokes Livingstone Ali Curran Archer Rashid would be ideal.
england must need to adjust ducket in playing 11 the way he plays spin in the middle overs has got every shot vs spin saw in t20 series against pakistan nd Against india at Rajkot
naseer hussain is one of the unbiased commentator , his insights are just brilliant
Nasser expressed it beautifully, a team that could win in any pitch condition against any opponent should be the champion. And cricket means not only batsmans, there should be something to bowlers and fielders.
Exactly
It is same shitty person who sarcastically said "good luck defending that total" to markram.
As an Aussie, watched this game with the exception of Quinton DeKock and maybe Brook.
Everyone could of batted a little better.
But the fielding from both sides in this was exceptional.
I loved the little moment of the actual human beings recognising that they enjoy talking to each other before the cricket reporting :)
Did someone ask for your opinion?
It's open space. You can have your opinion. It's nothing to piss about.
@Baz502 what a bizarre question 😂 its literally the comments section
What else can one give or expect here?
@@Baz502Well nobody asked yours...🤷♂️🤷♂️
England have issues on slow pitches and spinners. Maharaj and Markram 2/29 from 5 overs. They struggled against Indian spinners at 2023 WC as well as the Afghanistan spinners. Their batting style works on fast flat decks.
The right decision was to bat first for a day game on dry wicket. England have an over reliance on batting second. Shoutout to Rashid for his skillful bowling.
😊😊😊
Eng hav won one WC in West indies..
2 bowl 1st decisions nearly puts out off WT20 vs Aussies bowled first conceding 200+ fail to chase & yesterday once again bowls 1st & lost
But in Kensington oval in 2010
India played 2 matches both the times they bowl 1st & lost now vs Afghanistan India rectify that mistake & opted to bat 1st.....
Was Nasser in a jail holding room or being interrogated when he was interviewed? Looked like a cell of some sort :D
England should replace Curran with Will Jacks ......
Wood needs replacing, no variation and expensive. Bring back Jacks
I have to admit, I've been having trouble seeing Wood as a positive for a while. They like his pace and he does give it all but, as you say, he has little variation so the batter gets used to his pace. One of the reasons that Archer is such a threat is that he does have variation and his pace can come out of nowhere. If they wanted the extra bowler in this game, it seems that they would have been better served by Jordan. If they trust his spin, having Jacks as the extra batter could be a plus too and quite possibly would have been in this game.
It's nice seeing England loose was literally pissed by morgan commentary during the match he was calling that pitch a flat deck and was telling that score scored by sa below par
Lots of chat experts out when England lose a game 😂
Archer way too expensive. Thrown away by rubbish batting, tossing up catches.
What about wood? Been expensive all tournament
Archer is class. He's gonna go for runs sometimes. Remember he's been out for so so long and still is our best pace bowler by miles.
No way Archer was good especially at the end plus he got De Lock out! Wood is the problem
I feel Archer is bowling well but can't say the same for Woody 😔
Not Archer... It was Quinton who destroyed him in just one over.
Sun out ,day match ,bat first as the wicket gets slower..
The Rashid family is very proud of Adil. God bless him always 🙏🏼🤲🏼
Did someone ask for your opinion?
@@Baz502who do you think you are
@@benbrown5868 Did someone ask for your opinion?
Ask him to put a ball in the pavilion end
@@Baz502 did someone ask for your opinion?
After it seemed that England had mended their ways....Buttler and Mott reverted to their dumb decision making. You simply DO NOT bowl 1st in a day game. The wickets get slower and slower as the game progresses.
This England team seems replete with analysts, coaches and backroom staff. How is it that not one of them told them that in day games, batting first is the likeliest way to win.?
I cannot understand how can the wicket go slow in 20 overs of bowling. In test cricket, things change after 2 days and now in T20 we say the pitch has slowed down even after 10 overs of the game....cannot wrap my head around it
@@saikrishna8211 Yes indeed. Amazing isn't it?
I am no curator, but I have a suspicion that there is not enough moisture in these surfaces. When the sun starts beating down on them, they start to disintegrate. And a softer ball adds to the apparent slowness.
In night games, with lowered temperatures, the moisture in the air settles on the pitch and makes it zip through.
I guess Test match pitches (not those in India though) are watered, to ensure that they can hold it together for as long as possible. That's why one sees a 'Green' top of Day 1...and with every subsequent day, the grass gets drier.
@@Evil_Clown-eh6jz they keep selling some bullshit to us. Cricket has gone to the dogs. I feel like I am watching WWF, everything predecided.
Seems like one semi is going to be SA vs India. Battle of the two best CHOKERS. CHOKE de India !!
Yep South Africa winning their group and India being second in the other. SA will win that.
@@Dawood.PervezIndia won't finish at 2,India will defeat aus in super8(we defeat them always except in knockouts).And India will face wi/eng
South Africa won't make it to the semis, they will go home after one defeat against the windies in true South African style
That one was good! Lol choke de india 😂😂!
Let England first qualify for Semis. We will see you there.
Micheal Atherton says england threating teams
except RIcky all the pundits were saying it is a great pitch.. they all got it wrong no one holds them accountable
Man the pitch was good definitely it was worth 170-180 runs but both the sides didn’t bat well
It’s good. There was a real battle. A game should be go like that. Isn’t it,bowlers,batsmen,fielders all 3 departments should have the advantage of the pitch and ground.
It was a good pitch. 170-180 par. Some buttler magic restricted sa then a mix of good bowling and poor batting let them off the hook. Should've seen the job home with 26 from 18 needed
@@vaibhavsingh5287not batting well or actually for once the bowlers having a pitch that offers them a little bit of help. I feel with the way that the IPL has gone recently that people have forgotten that bowlers can restrict runs which is what SA did exceptionally well this match
England is an over hyped team. Be it Cricket, Football or Rugby .😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅
Eng is the only country which has won WCs in 4 major sports in the world..
Show Respect 🙏🏴🏴🏴
Couldn't agree more 😂😂😂😂
@@drfawad98 Really. Which four Major Sports? 🤔 to
INDIA WC CHAMPIONS IN HOCKEY 1975, CRICKET 1983, 2011, T20 WC CHAMPIONSHIP 2007, BENSON & HEDGES CUP 1985, BILLIARDS WORLD CHAMPION 11 TIMES, SNOOKER WORLD CHAMPS 4 TIME , Thomas Cup Winners.
Eng won 7 WCs in cricket , 1 in football , 1 in rugby , 13 times tennis grand slams.. 🏴
(7 WCs in cricket include men 3 WCs + 4 women WCs)
Three overs ,six wickets in hand ,twenty five odd runs...trust England to mess it up.Throwback to pre Morgan era....
Did you watch the game? I'm guessing not, or else you're just really bad at analysis. SA should have won by more but they bowled poorly for a stretch and allowed England back into it. It was also poor bowling that allowed SA to get away in the first place, so both teams were guilty of letting the opposition batters score more than they should. On that pitch, full and fast was definitely not the way to go and when bowlers observed that, the batters had trouble scoring. England could be excused to some degree, given that they were bowling first and took a while to understand the pitch, but SA really had no excuse. They were well ahead and then Baartman had a shocker and tried to go full and bowled an over of full tosses and let England back in. Rabada was a little lucky to get Livingstone off a full toss but SA bowled much better after that and that's really why they won.
@@wunnellyes, that over of baartman brought England back into the game. South Africa should've won by more than what they did. It's actually disappointing seeing them constantly do this
I think after SA's powerplay, England actually pulled the game back really well to stop them at 160 something. Eng depends a lot on Butler and Salt. If they don't fire, they are under concern. My view is: England will win this world cup. Butler and Salt will not give another chance of not playing well.
I think that England are still as a good a chance as anyone. Games like this, you'd rather win than lose but they don't necessarily tell you too much about the future. Both teams played well for the most part and any one small thing could have swung the game one way or the other.
England almost took that game from a losing position when they were down 3 wickets with only 60ish odd runs after 10 overs
I think England don’t need an extra bowler in Curran or Wood and probably would be better served filling that with an extra batsman
I thought we just lacked intent in the power play but the pitch played quite slow which made run scoring difficult only de kock and miller were able to find rhythm and sa pacers used there exper and skill and bowled that length into the surface
Did someone ask for your opinion?
If WI wins against SA and Eng wins against USA, three teams will be on 4 points and net runrate will decide the outcome in which SA might get knocked out.
What the heck is this “winning games”, “picking players on merit” thing?!? Everyone knows losing games and being an embarrassment while upholding the values of quota and BEEE is what really matters 😂
Just yesterday Atherton was claiming England are a threat 😂😂😂
He was right and they still are.
Buttler and Mott keep having these brain-farts.
Having said that, don't you lot start getting all smug. You lot got nearly beaten by a 3rd-class Pakistan team, and needed a dropped catch to get past Associate member US. You lot haven't played against a proper team yet.
@@Evil_Clown-eh6jz LOL.. and what exactly has England done against a proper team... Only notable thing they've done is win against Namibia and US... such typical of your mindset.
What a terrible decision by Curran to decline a single with 2 balls to go after archer would have had a free hit. Very very poor absolutely lost us the match without a fight at the end there every ball and run counts so why not believe in your teammate to hit a six!
Did someone ask for your opinion?
I disagree. It's all very well saying that Archer had a free hit but so did Curran and, having actually faced a few balls already, Curran was right to think that he had the better chance of actually connecting. England basically needed two boundaries and I think that, under the circumstances, Curran definitely had the better chance to hit them. Archer had a free hit on the last ball and got nothing but air. I can't say for sure that Atcher wouldn't have hit those last two balls to the boundary but Curran thought that the odds of him doing so were higher. I agree and I'm pretty sure that the whole England team (other than maybe Archer) would have agreed.
Agree.
G8 Anyalasis Legand Nasir Hussain
❤❤❤❤
Used to be fan of moeen Ali but he’s a liability in the team. When last time he has ever played a vital innings with the bat. He’s not good enough to be in team just as a bowler
I know England would've won if Liam Livingstone hadn't got out but I will never understand why England captains choose to bowl first on good pitches in hot conditions!
It's pure speculation but I really do think England would've won if they'd chosen to bat first today.
Did someone ask for your opinion?
@@Baz502 Yes, UA-cam did.
This is the comment section, where people are asked to give their opinions!
@@Ernest_Thesiger England chased 180 on the same pitch, so why would they choose to bat first? You're a very confused man
@@Baz502 The other game was under lights, rather than a blazing late morning energy-sapping sun, so you can't say conditions were exactly the same.
I actually think England still would've won on Wednesday night if they'd batted first.
Having watched cricket for many years, I know that if the teams are fairly-evenly matched and the pitch doesn't dictate that there's a big advantage in bowling first, the team batting first will win more often than the team batting second.
Baz 502 your a prat
Credit to SA but England must have won from that position
Livingstone played a shocker
33 off 17 is a shocker, or are you just talking about the dismissal? That was certainly a turning point - a wicket and no runs rather than 6 or 4 - but he probably just misjudged it fractionally and got it lower one the bat than intended. Pressure is pressure for a reason.
Sorry it's over for England.
Wood not good
Next defeat is england euro 2024 Slovak or 2nd round😅
Heartbroken 💔 for me as British citizens 🥹🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️😁
There's still a chance Brother.
Did someone ask for your opinion?
Yeah, WestIndies really in strong position and looks now dangerous which is making me so much confused
Hope for the best
Good analysis by Nasser “Saddam” Hussein
Brook made a fifty, but he was tge main reason england lost in the end.
That's a silly comment. The batters who weren't there at that stage were more to blame than the one who was. The wickets of Livingstone and Brook both obviously hurt England at that stage but England were only in the game at all because of those two. The main reason that England lost was because the batters who came before left those two with too much to do.
@@wunnell No not really, Brook slowed down as he approached hi 50 and after that when it was a done deal couldn't strike the ball, it was his responsibility to take England over the line
Just call it what it was choke job in last 3 overs by English team 😀
Not really. The pitch wasn't easy to score on if the bowler got their lengths right. SA should have won by more but, for some reason, they forgot how to bowl for a brief period - particularly Baartman. They remembered again in time though, and were able to stem the flow of runs at the end. Livingstone's dismissal was probably the turning point and that was a full toss, so that was a costly mistake, but he was a big reason that England got back in the game in the first place, so it would be unfair to blame him for the loss.
@@wunnell Last 18 balls England needed 25 runs with 6 wickets in hand with two set batter, it not matter how pitch played they needed just 3 big shots
@@SUBASHKUMAR-wz8zx, and if you had seen the game up to that point then you'd know that big shots were not easy to play on that pitch when the bowlers got it right.
England is a disgrace my honest opinion 25 from 20 with 6 wicket in hand lose all now I can't believe England lose from just unreal
Eng will reach semis..🏴🏴
South Africa and West Indies will reach semifinals and England will go home to play T10😂😂
@@srinisubbaratnam286true
Don’t think so
Windies need to get ahead of NRR...They need to beat USA handsomely but even a win against SA not likely@@srinisubbaratnam286
@@drfawad98 Newzealand out, otherwise in place of afg or Bangladesh they enter.
Afghanistan vs Pakistan team
AFG: Prime minister = not curropt
Cricket board= not curropt
Players = not curropt
Pakistan ALL CURROPT
Hence result
Excuses Excuses Excuses.England not good enough.Stop blaming the conditions
Naseer,s anylsis is on the spot ❤
For me Curran had to take the risk against Jansen to lift some pressure on Brook but Curran played the selfish way and put too much pressure on the final over
Curran had only faced four deliveries when Brook got out. I could be wrong but, given that Brook was in full flow at the time, Curran's job would have been to get him back on strike. SA were bowling better lengths by the time Curran came out and it was harder to score, so he could have easily eaten up dot balls going for big shots. I'm inclined to think he did the right thing. It was just unfortunate that Brook misjudged that slower ball from Nortje.
@@wunnell it was two balls left in Jansen's over in my opinion he has to take the risk because Brook would still be in no matter what
@@Airyed, looking at the commentary, Curran faced 18.4 and 18.6. He pulled the former but only got a single and he gave himself room but Jansen followed him and he got two on the latter. I don't think he was just dinking it around, as you seem to be suggesting. There was no point him just throwing his wicket away with a wild shot - we'd be hearing about that if he had, just as others have been accused of throwing their wickets away - but I do think he was trying to score a boundary if he could. He just wasn't able to under the circumstances.
@wunnell I think he had nothing go lose go for the big shot because Brook would be on strike. I can see why you disagree, but the Jansen over was key
@@Airyed, are you aware that, under the current rules, it doesn't matter whether the batters cross while the ball is in the air when a batter is caught? The new batter will be on strike regardless. It seems to me that you think that, if Curran played a big shot and was caught on the boundary, that Brook would be on strike because the batters would have crossed. That rule was changed some time ago. What you're saying is true of the last ball of the over, because Brook would be on strike for the first ball of the next over, but it's not true of the rest of the over.
It's not a must win for England against US. If WI beat US and lose to SA then Eng, US, and WI are all on 2 points. Assuming it's a small loss to US and the WI win and loss are about the same then Eng goes through with SA on run rate.
If US beat WI today, then it is a must win.
West Indies is going to beat the USA and South Africa
Since Windies thrashed US, England only need to beat US to qualify. South Africa's NRR isnt great so if England beat US by 20 runs or 2 overs to spare, they are through
Didnt age well😂
Didnt age well😂
SA bowlers handed over the match to England with those full tosses.But England scored only on full tosses.
It wasn't an easy pitch to score on if you got your length right. England took a bit too long to work that out and SA seemed to forget it part way through, but remembered in time. The turning point was probably Livingstone's wicket. If he got 4 or 6 off that full toss then England probably win. A bit of luck for SA and a costly mistake for England. Still, you can't really blame a loss on a single mistake, especially when Livingstone was a big reason that England got back into the game in the first place. That's just the way it goes. Both teams played well for much of the game but made some mistakes.
In this match sa asked eng to win this match but eng refuse that they can't win this match sa you should win this match at the end sa won this match
Ali struggles to middle his hits. They need a striker at 3 and someone who can build an innings if they fail at 5 or 6. Buttler Bairstow Salt Jacks Root Stokes Livingstone Ali Curran Archer Rashid would be ideal.
England playng good cricket? How? They lost and are even lucky to be in the 8, what a silly thing to say.......hahahahahahahahaha
england must need to adjust ducket in playing 11
the way he plays spin in the middle overs
has got every shot vs spin
saw in t20 series against pakistan
nd Against india at Rajkot
Nasser u seem feeble physically sorry for being personal, take care dude
Also wood and Curran not good brought at all in t20
I dnt know if anyone noticed butler bats slow nowadays in the power play
Did someone ask for your opinion?
He has started slowly for ages. He lets Salt be the aggressor early on, going from ball one, but he warms up pretty quickly.
Replace curran and Mo
I like to see England in Semifinal along South Africa
England making the super 8, surviving Scotland was an upset.