Twenty 20 WC winner

[The Outsider]

Who do guys reckon has the best chance of winning the championship. The format offers many more chances of an upset than ODIs and certainly test cricket. Australia are going in the tournament as the bookies' top picks, as they do in everything they play. I think South Africa have a good chance to take the trophy. West Indies and England with their domestic experience are also capable of making it through till the end. So, who is your pick?

[MundaPakistani]

Pakistan

[zubinpepsi]

I voted for Pakistan.. ps. jus to jinx them.... :D

[Predator_05]

After seeing how the Saffies obliterated Australia in the warm-up, i think i'll go for them. I think Pakistan could do very well. By the time the tourney begins, they would have played 4 or 5 warm-ups and their players would be accustomed to this form of the game. Besides, their hit and giggle style of cricket will serve them well in Twenty20.

[yoda]

Had to go with the team I hate the most.

[veer]

voted for India.. where there is no expectation.. we play well..

[MundaPakistani]

Had to go with the team I hate the most.

India?

[Holysmoke]

SA for me!

[yoda]

India?

Australia.

[Gambit]

Gone for the Saffies. Like Polly said, 3 hours is too little time for even them to choke.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Mr. Wicket]

Pollock is wrong. In the last World Cup, they needed just one ball to choke. 1 needed off 1 ball to make the Super Sixes, and they failed. Boucher blocked instead of taking a run. In the 99 World Cup, they choked similarly on two fatal balls - Donald almost running himself out one ball, and then getting the job done a minute later. Unless we distill cricket down to less than a ball per game, South Africa will still find ways to choke. I'll gamble and say the West Indians take it. Powell's a handy new ball bowler in helpful conditions, Bravo's got the variety to be handy at the death, and Samuels/Gayle's darts could be fairly hard to hit if they get it right in the middle overs. And they've got lots of batting depth, and in Dwayne Smith, Gayle and Samuels, some serious hitting power.

[King]

I voted for Australia. Although I would like to see NZ or India win it I have chosen the realistic option. I don't know how Aussies can't win the Twenty20 even if it a format that Aussies aren't used to. I think West Indies stand a fair chance. They are used to playing Twenty20 in the local Stanford tourney and they are more adept at this format of the game.

[Mr. Wicket]

Australia are the more realistic option, but here the odds will be a lot tighter given the format of the game. Australia's strength in all other forms is that they can have 20 bad overs in an ODI or even one bad day in tests, and still rebound brilliantly in a manner that sets them apart from just about every other side in the game. Remember games like the WC matches against New Zealand or England back in 03, when they looked like losing after the first 25/70 overs for each game, and turned things around - or the Adelaide test against England last year. Here, what evens it up for all other teams is that the time format's so much more cramped that even ten bad overs can be fatal for a side. If a side dominates Australia for 10-15 overs in one of the knockouts with something akin to a great Bond spell, a Gayle/Samuels blitz or some Afridi pyromaniacs, even a side that talented will struggle to come back in the match in so little time.

[Ram]

Windies for me... watch out for them..

[King]

Australia are the more realistic option, but here the odds will be a lot tighter given the format of the game. Australia's strength in all other forms is that they can have 20 bad overs in an ODI or even one bad day in tests, and still rebound brilliantly in a manner that sets them apart from just about every other side in the game. Remember games like the WC matches against New Zealand or England back in 03, when they looked like losing after the first 25/70 overs for each game, and turned things around - or the Adelaide test against England last year. Here, what evens it up for all other teams is that the time format's so much more cramped that even ten bad overs can be fatal for a side. If a side dominates Australia for 10-15 overs in one of the knockouts with something akin to a great Bond spell, a Gayle/Samuels blitz or some Afridi pyromaniacs, even a side that talented will struggle to come back in the match in so little time.

I go for Australia simply because they are good with the bat, ball and their fielding is top class. I think for a team to be consistent these three ingredients are pretty much a necessity. I haven't really looked at the draws yet but I think Australia is one team that can be ruthlessly consistent in every department. To win a world cup you need a team that has to be consistent through out. I think Australia stands first as for consistency is concerned and I hope they don't win it for the sake of some competition. Australia are so good they are bad for the sport.

[King Tendulkar]

INDIA:isalute:

[Anakin]

OZs unfortunately

[King Tendulkar]

well if i had to put my life on it, it would be the aussies. But as my life is not on the line India will win. To be honest the whole thing is a lottery

[ludhianvi]

Logic says Australia 2nd chance says Newzealand Heart hopes India