Will luck determine the winner of the World Cricket Cup?

As I mentioned the other day the toss is an important factor in determining who wins. But only if you field first on winning the toss. If winning the toss is such a strong factor - is the rest of the game a WOMBAT?

In the Super Eight matches (as at 19 April)  where the winner has been the team that won the toss - that’s 12 times, on 10 occasions they’ve chosen to field first.

For the other two, New Zealand batted first and beat Bangladesh as expected (regardless of who batted first)  and the upset was Ireland choosing to bat first and beating Bangladesh.

So, as noted previously - for semifinals and the final, the team winning the toss puts themselves at great disadvantage if they bat first.

What odds that the winners of those three matches will be the teams that win the toss (and choose to field first)?

Finally, why did England choose to bat first against South Africa? They must have known the odds.

2 Responses to “Will luck determine the winner of the World Cricket Cup?”

  1. Malcolm Says:

    The England decision was yet another stupidity on their way to leaving early. Incidentally, their coach has just resigned - no loss there. Perhaps they’ll be able to find some unemployed Kiwi to take over (John Wright seems to be available but may be destined for Pakistan. Of course, this assumes he has totally lost his marbles during his time in India!! :) )

  2. Mike Says:

    They made the right call against the Windies today and this time fielded first! Looked dodgy for a while there - but they did get over the line.

    As for Australia vs NZ - the Aussies won the toss and a batted first - and won. It was a meaningless game in many ways. I don’t think they’ll bat first when Bond is back. I suspect they were practising batting first (in case they have to) and trying to send a message (and succeeding!!) that it doesn’t matter if you put us in, we’ll still win.

Leave a Reply