Does anyone think that....

[Mr. Wicket]

I might be off key for saying this but i have a sneaky suspicion that the England vs Pak match MAY have been a bit of a fix?? i say tht cuz because if they hadnt won it would;ve been bad business for the bookies and considering England are hosting the event possibly bad business for the venues!! If england had lost out that match then not many "english" people would bother going again! Afterall match fixing is not unheard of!!

Whole lot of unsubstantiated nonsense. Please try and understand a few facts. 1. England have hosted plenty of other multi-national tournaments and been KOed early on. Interest hasn't flagged. When England got embarrassed in the 1999 World Cup were the stands empty when India played Australia or Pakistan played South Africa? 2. The ICC revenue here doesn't come from gate venues. This isn't 1930. TV, sponsorships and advertisements bring in the 'business'. 3. The bookies who'd care were the ones based in India and Pakistan. More money's turned over in a major game featuring India or Pak than several featuring England. 4. Blatantly obvious here. Pakistan are not that good a team. If you stack a side with players like Salman Butt and Afridi and have them under the brilliant inspiring captaincy of Eunice Khan, you're hardly dealing with world class matchwinners who're favourites in most games.

[EnterTheVoid]

*sigh* I think its a good habit to avoid getting wound up by unsubstantiated nonsense.

[Chandan]

There were too many chit chat posts here. So transferred them to CG's thread on chit chat. Please discuss only cricket on Cricket talk!

[DomainK]

Stop these conspiracy theories guys. If you look for it, you will find that 90% matches have reasons to be fixed. That does not mean they are fixed.

[Texy]

Pakistan knew if they get knocked out of group matches, they could have lost their coach to an accident fall in his hotel bathroom and break his neck.

[CricketGirl]

alright alright i'm not claiming to be an expert here was just a thought!!