World Twenty20 2016 Thread

Original post by SAhm95

wi u19 champs
wi women champs
wi men champs

world record champyaaaaaan!

I love watching them celebrate

Reply 1022

STLJA

12

YES WEST INDIES!!!! Killed them in that last over. My loyalties were split as I am British Caribbean, but I'm glad the WI won tbh, especially in the style they did.

Reply 1023

probable the most exciting finish to a match i have seen for a while, what do you think guys the return of the w.indian golden age?

Reply 1024

Original post by up the levs

probable the most exciting finish to a match i have seen for a while, what do you think guys the return of the w.indian golden age?

Haven't really been many consistent players in the tournament for them as they would have liked. Usually each match the person "winning it" was different. So idk about a returning golden age

Reply 1025

India may have been good at chasing this tournament but West Indies are the chasing team. Just look at their middle order batsman and the quality of the all rounders they have. England really needed at least 6 wickets by the 10th over to stand a chance against such a destructive line up

Reply 1026

Original post by Student403

Haven't really been many consistent players in the tournament for them as they would have liked. Usually each match the person "winning it" was different. So idk about a returning golden age

yeah true there was inconsistency in the west indian squad but i feel that even if the golden age doesnt return the board will be stupid to not get them more game time against opponents like india and australia who, at least in the short forms, are at the same level as the windies. still i get what your saying

Reply 1027

Original post by Student403

Haven't really been many consistent players in the tournament for them as they would have liked. Usually each match the person "winning it" was different. So idk about a returning golden age

Consistency isnt particularly important for the West indies. If one player fails they got 3 or 4 others that can back them up. They dont really rely on any single player.

Consistency isnt really that significant in the T20 format. In the long run, it would be good to have consistently good players but relying on certain individuals to do well is what will lead to a team failing to win, as shown by india.

Reply 1028

Original post by A$aprocky

Consistency isnt particularly important for the West indies. If one player fails they got 3 or 4 others that can back them up. They dont really rely on any single player.

Consistency isnt really that significant in the T20 format. In the long run, it would be good to have consistently good players but relying on certain individuals to do well is what will lead to a team failing to win, as shown by india.

Agreed - but I feel that the 4 sixes in the end, although very entertaining to watch, isn't something they can replicate on a daily basis.

They key to the success in their team is exactly what your saying - all their players have the potential to be match winners. But there have been a couple of games this tournament that could have gone the other way like this one and having more players turn up on the day instead of 2-3 (like in today's batting lineup) would be ideal

Reply 1029

cupcakes87

18

West Indies! :biggrin:

Reply 1030

Indeterminate

3

Turned on the TV to see WI needing 19 from the final over, at which point I was quite content. But Brathwaite had other plans! :adore:

Gotta feel for Ben Stokes! :redface:

It has to be said that both teams were rubbish with the bat since that was definitely a 180/190 wicket! :yep:

Samuels and Root played very well, though :biggrin:

Kohli got player of the tournament, and rightly so :biggrin:

His achievements speak for themselves :yes:

Overall the WT20 in India has been a huge success, and now we can look forward to going solo for the 2023 CWC :woo:

But it's all about the IPL for the next few weeks! :ahee:

Reply 1031

Original post by Student403

Agreed - but I feel that the 4 sixes in the end, although very entertaining to watch, isn't something they can replicate on a daily basis.

They key to the success in their team is exactly what your saying - all their players have the potential to be match winners. But there have been a couple of games this tournament that could have gone the other way like this one and having more players turn up on the day instead of 2-3 (like in today's batting lineup) would be ideal

Yeah I agree, having more players that perform is much better. But that is very difficult since you have to put together the ideal team, considering the form of players as well.
Chris Gayle for example is notorious for inconsistency, even on prime form. In that case, you really do need a little luck to win!

Reply 1032

Original post by A$aprocky

Yeah I agree, having more players that perform is much better. But that is very difficult since you have to put together the ideal team, considering the form of players as well.
Chris Gayle for example is notorious for inconsistency, even on prime form. In that case, you really do need a little luck to win!

True

When he performs.. he goes massive. But otherwise it's a waste of a slot just waiting for his big innings.

Reply 1033

Original post by A$aprocky

Yeah I agree, having more players that perform is much better. But that is very difficult since you have to put together the ideal team, considering the form of players as well.
Chris Gayle for example is notorious for inconsistency, even on prime form. In that case, you really do need a little luck to win!

i have to say that west indies had some luck today the two dropped catched were a reprieve in my opinion but at the end of the day you dont win a final without a tiny bit of luck

Reply 1034

Original post by Student403

True

When he performs.. he goes massive. But otherwise it's a waste of a slot just waiting for his big innings.

He doesnt do well under pressure, perhaps thats why he's better in domestic cricket. His test cricket and ODI is much better tbh, but even then his performance is varied

Reply 1035

Original post by A$aprocky

He doesnt do well under pressure, perhaps thats why he's better in domestic cricket. His test cricket and ODI is much better tbh, but even then his performance is varied

Really? I thought he did pretty well under pressure :dontknow:

Reply 1036

Original post by up the levs

i have to say that west indies had some luck today the two dropped catched were a reprieve in my opinion but at the end of the day you dont win a final without a tiny bit of luck

t20 nowadays average a score of 180 and more with so many boundaries and very high pressure, it seems inevitable that luck comes in to play. Guess that makes it more thrilling too

Reply 1037

Original post by Student403

Really? I thought he did pretty well under pressure :dontknow:

He's so inconsistent that its difficult to spot trends in his performance LOOOL. I think you're right in this case, i just thought he didnt do well under pressure in the last two games, which were also important games. He does do slightly better when hes batting in the first innings as opposed to the second innings

Reply 1038

Original post by A$aprocky

t20 nowadays average a score of 180 and more with so many boundaries and very high pressure, it seems inevitable that luck comes in to play. Guess that makes it more thrilling too

true this pitch was one of those high scoring piches so i guess credit to both sides bowlers, also i think that t20 is the one format that is almost always a thrilling game but odi is more skill + power and test is pure class. thats why, in my opinion, thrilling tests are the most beautiful form of the game

Reply 1039