Semi finalists and their equivalent WC winners (WC19)

[zen]

* Aus = Aus of 87. Had a few young players. Lost a game to Ind. Overall, gave solid performances 

 

* Eng = Ind of 11. Started out as overwhelming favorite. Had a few question mark over bowling esp. when Eng tied and SA chased 290 odd. Finally, put its act together to pull through 

 

* Ind = Ind of 83. Strong bowling performance. Batting was competitive. Ind in 80s also won the 1985 World Championship in Aus. The 80s side is probably many fans favorite Ind side 

 

* NZ = Pak of 92. Closest match that I could find though NZ won most of its games at the beginning, while Pak at the end. Both had some luck going their way 

Edited July 6, 2019 by zen

[zen]

There were tweets suggesting that Eng did not beat Aus, Ind, and NZ in WCs in 27 years. In this WC, Eng beat 2 out of 3, and could probably meet the Aus in the knockouts to try to change things with it too

Edited July 6, 2019 by zen

[Vijy]

2 minutes ago, zen said:

There were tweets suggesting that End did not beat Aus, Ind, and NZ in WCs in 27 years. In this WC, Eng beat 2 out of 3, and could probably meet the Aus in the knockouts to try to change things with it too 

I don't see them beating Oz. too much history there. however, they are easily capable of beating Ind in the SF is they bat first since scoring 350+ in edgbaston will be easy on that pitch. and we cannot score 350+ since we depend too much on rohit. Kohli will choke in the SF, Pant and Pandya will score attractive 30s and 40s at a good SR of 120+, KLR will score a jittery 30 off 50, DK or Jadhav will score an anonymous 15 off 10, Greybeard will tuk-tuk and then meaningless accelerate at the end to finish with a run-a-ball 50-odd which will be hailed by TM as far greater than kapil's 175 in 1983 WC.

 

However, if we bat first, there is some chance that we can pull off the win against Eng.

[Jimmy Cliff]

The other comparisons are valid but don't think India is anything like the '83 side. That was a classic "sum of the parts greater than the whole" team where the number 3 could pick up a 3-fer in the final, the no. 6 could make the highest individual score of the tournament and there were a bunch of players who could contribute with both bat and ball (Azad, Madan Lal, Binny, Shastri). More so, the current team were the 2nd favorites going into the WC whereas the 83 team were rank outsiders. 

[Vijy]

24 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

The other comparisons are valid but don't think India is anything like the '83 side. That was a classic "sum of the parts greater than the whole" team where the number 3 could pick up a 3-fer in the final, the no. 6 could make the highest individual score of the tournament and there were a bunch of players who could contribute with both bat and ball (Azad, Madan Lal, Binny, Shastri). More so, the current team were the 2nd favorites going into the WC whereas the 83 team were rank outsiders. 

yes, although we had beaten WI a couple of times immediately prior to the WC. But this was definitely a team of bits-and-pieces players who turned in crucial performances when it mattered - the best example was kirti azad who has horrible career stats, but played a vital role in one of the KO matches. roger binny was, however, excellent with the ball throughout.

Edited July 6, 2019 by Vijy

[Jimmy Cliff]

14 minutes ago, Vijy said:

yes, although we had beaten WI a couple of times immediately prior to the WC. But this was definitely a team of bits-and-pieces players who turned in crucial performances when it mattered - the best example was kirti azad who has horrible career stars, but played a vital role in one of the KO matches. roger binny was, however, excellent with the ball throughout.

I think it was just a solitary win in Berbice where Kapil played a crazy knock but apparently the team gained a lot of confidence from that win. Kinda similar to SL in that tri-series in Australia in 95-96 leading up to the 1996 WC.

[Vijy]

6 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

I think it was just a solitary win in Berbice where Kapil played a crazy knock but apparently the team gained a lot of confidence from that win. Kinda similar to SL in that tri-series in Australia in 95-96 leading up to the 1996 WC.

Yes, kapil smashed them in Albion (29 mar 1983) and then yashpal played a forgotten knock in the very same WC, where we beat them in the league stage (jun 9/10 1983) prior to WC final.

[sandeep]

1 hour ago, Vijy said:

I don't see them beating Oz. too much history there

If Botham lost to Bruce Reid, or a Stewart got out to McGrath, that has f-all to do with what a Roy will or won't do against Behrendorff.   History when it comes to sports teams is overrated.  

[Vijy]

7 minutes ago, sandeep said:

If Botham lost to Bruce Reid, or a Stewart got out to McGrath, that has f-all to do with what a Roy will or won't do against Behrendorff.   History when it comes to sports teams is overrated.  

you're right that old history won't have much to do with this WC. however, I had the 2015 WC match in mind. around 4-5 of the eng and oz teams were around in that match. no doubt much water has flown under the bridge, but the margin of defeat was quite a thumping one and it may weigh on some people's minds.

I'll admit I was overstating the importance of history, but it can't be set aside altogether. I think there are some cases where history does play an important role. choking became a self-fulfilling prophecy for SA (which threw away 1999,2003, and 2011 to name 3), our WC record vs pak even in the era where they were arguably as good or better, etc.