Previously, in Part One of this roundtable discussion, our in-house cricket heads spoke about the first group stage of the World Cup, which starts on October 16th, and who they expect to progress to the Super 12 stage to meet the tournament favourites Australia, England and India.
Here, in Part Two, they continue the conversation and talk about who they think will progress out of the Super 12 stage and into the semi-finals, who might win the tournament, and which players will make an impact along the way.
For the uninitiated - the tournament is divided into two separate group stages. The first stage sees two groups of four nations playing in a round-robin of three matches each.
Group A contains Sri Lanka, Namibia, the Netherlands and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Group B contains West Indies, Ireland, Scotland and Zimbabwe.
The top two teams from each group progress to the second group stage - the Super 12 - where two groups of six teams play another round-robin of five matches apiece.
In the second stage, Group 1 contains hosts Australia, England, New Zealand, and Afghanistan, plus the winner of Group A and runner-up in Group B. Group 2 contains India, Pakistan, South Africa, and Bangladesh, plus the winner of Group B and runner-up in Group A.
The top two teams from those groups then progress to the semi-finals, followed by the final on November 13th at the colossal MCG in Melbourne.
World Cup Roundtable Part Two
Flashcore's Senior News Editor Joshua Donaldson led the chat, beginning Part Two by looking at the tournament's second group stage.
JD: Let’s move on to the Super 12 stage of the competition, this is where the big guns come in. The likes of England, Australia, India and… even Bangladesh have somehow not had to qualify through the first stage.
Looking at the biggest matches in this stage, you can’t look much further than Australia versus England (Group 1) and then India versus Pakistan (Group 2). Two huge games that will have massive attendances and will be big for the tournament in terms of who progresses to the semi-finals. Let me get the ball rolling by just asking - who do you think will win the tournament?
Tolga Akdeniz: Australia.
JD: Ok, why?
TA: I’m not overly confident, because anything can happen in sports, especially Twenty20 (T20) cricket. But I’m struggling to look past them. They’ve got that mentality, they know how to win. When they won the World Cup last year, no one thought they had a chance. I can remember through the tournament no one thought they could do it - everyone was writing them off.
In the semi-final against Pakistan, they said Pakistan would win and even in the final it was the same. In the end there, with Marcus Stoinis and Matthew Wade, they showed they know how to finish games, they know how to get over the line in these types of tournament games and now they’re in their own backyard.
They’ve got the fast bowlers in Mitchell Starc, Pat Cummins and Josh Hazelwood, and their batters will be even better suited to these conditions. Last year in the UAE, it was mostly just David Warner and Mitchell Marsh scoring the runs and the bowlers did the business. But now with their other batters acclimatised to the pitches, I think they really stand out as the favourites, I can’t look past them.
JD: You look through their squad list and there’s some great experience in there. The squad can still change (at the time of recording) of course - and the big one that might still happen is Cameron Green coming in for someone.
It’s worth talking about Tim David because he’s the biggest change from the team that won last year and now he seems nailed on to play in that lower-middle order. Interesting story as well because he seemed to prioritise franchise cricket over Australia for a while - is he the missing piece that Australia needed to get even better?
Pat Dempsey: That’s an interesting question. It seems like they’ve identified him to be the specialist finisher which they seemingly didn’t have before the last World Cup but then Wade stepped in and performed that role excellently, despite having largely been written off before that. Maybe David has been cast as the missing link but that’s not exactly what was weak about the team previously.
TA: Yeah I agree totally. David has proven himself at franchise level and he’s a brilliant finisher but how many times have we seen them finish games from improbable situations recently thanks to Wade and Stoinis too? He will add a different type of six-hitting, for sure, but they weren’t crying out for him desperately and maybe that’s why he’s taken so long to break in. He will add something with that effortless power nonetheless.
PD: Let’s say he improves the team.
JD: Looking at the Australian squad, it’s very hard to pick out a weakness. For me, the only big weakness is maybe the openers, assuming Green isn’t added in. Aaron Finch’s form in the last two years, we wrote a piece on it, it’s absolutely tragic. He’s barely scored a run in two years. Obviously, he’s the captain and that plays a part in securing his spot in the team. Eoin Morgan was the same for England for about three years where he could barely get it off the square but captained the side really well and successfully. Do you think the selectors are being too sentimental with Finch?
PD: I want to say, yes, probably they have been. What was really fascinating against the West Indies in the warmup matches recently was seeing him drop further down the batting order and them opening with Green instead, who isn’t even in the squad. That made it seem like now even Finch isn’t confident that he should open.
JD: That was interesting, you’d imagine that Green will be the man to eventually replace him permanently given his exploits in India recently, scoring two fifties in that series against one of the best bowling attacks in the world. He’s probably going to come in for Finch sooner or later but probably not at this tournament.
And while that’s understandable to an extent, I think they are being too sentimental in sticking with Finch. Yes, he has the chance to lift the World Cup in his home city and the story writes itself but sports is a results game and it's ruthless. In a World Cup, especially in a home World Cup, I wonder, is he their best chance to win the tournament?
TA: No.
PD: Probably not. But they’ve run out of time to drop him. What they need is a new scandal, like the Tim Paine episode, to emerge and then they can get rid of him before the tournament!
Jokes aside, I think his recent ODI retirement read as a signal of saying - don’t worry guys, I am leaving. It actually, in a way, took some heat off him but it made people think - look, he knows he’s in terrible form. I think this is his one last hurrah.
Back to your original point - is this the one weakness in the team? I think it is Finch, yeah. If he starts soaking up lots of balls at the top of the order, it could be a real problem and people are going to get restless and say, hey, get Marsh, Glenn Maxwell or Stoinis in ahead of him in the order.
JD: My other question for Australia is, is Steve Smith in their first XI?
TA: I don’t think he should be.
JD: I think he takes up too many deliveries, I don't think he’s powerful enough. If you have Warner and Finch opening and they do well and strike at 160 in the powerplay, you have no need for Smith. If they start well, you’ve got so much firepower to come that you can just go at that rate for the rest of the innings.
That’s how it feels to me. But, just to argue against myself here, the only argument for having in the team, for me, is if you want someone to rotate the strike in Australia with its big, big outfields, he’s your guy. He’s always going to get bat on ball and can put it anywhere. That’s the argument for having him in there.
TA: There might be a small case for him though, because if they are not trusting of the openers in the first place and then you’ve got Maxwell and Stoinis coming at 4 and 5 and then David at 6, you’re running a risk. Maxwell is Maxwell - one day he’ll win you a match, the next day he’ll get out for a duck. His recent form in this format has been dire too. So if you lose your openers early, you’ve then got Marsh and potentially Maxwell, Stoinis and David coming to the crease quite early and you run the risk of losing a lot of quick wickets. So there’s a lot of pressure on the openers when you’re not using Steve Smith.
PD: Smith gives you that variety if he plays because the other guys are all blasters, aren’t they? I feel like, on a perfect day, if every batsman is firing, maybe you don’t need him in the team but, as Tolga says, he’s good on the day that they collapse early and they need to rebuild around him as an anchor.
JD: Good point. For brevity, I think we can gloss over Australia’s bowling and just agree that it’s really good.
JD: Pat, who do you think will win the tournament?
PD: Hard to look past the hosts for those reasons we’ve just discussed but, at least for the sake of diversity, I’m going to say India.
JD: Why do you say that?
PD: Batting-wise, Suryakumar Yadav is just on fire. His statistics this year are unreal. Not only is he the highest run scorer this year in T20Is, but his strike rate is also 185 for the year, it’s insane! I think he’s probably the best T20 batter in the world right now. Hardik Pandya is on fire too. They’re the kind of players who can win matches on their own.
And I think this might be one of Virat Kohli’s last big tournaments, he’s probably got one more ODI World Cup in him but this might be his last T20 World Cup. He’s hitting his straps nicely going into the tournament and I think with the three of them, their batting is looking really dangerous.
JD: What about their bowling, though?
PD: There is a problem there, having lost Jasprit Bumrah to injury and maybe Mohammed Shami won’t be fit either.
JD: I can go through their pace options, which will be their more important ones, you’ve got Bhuvneshwar Kumar, who is more of a swing bowler than pure pace, have they named the replacement for Bumrah?
TA: Not yet, no.
PD: Arshdeep Singh is in there too and he probably will start.
JD: Yeah you’ve got him, who is relatively inexperienced at international level.
TA: His numbers aren’t great if you look at how he’s started his international career.
JD: And then you’ve also got Harshal Patel?
TA: Yeah, he’s a death bowler as well.
JD: And then you’ve got your spin options of Axar Patel, who I think could do a job in Australia.
TA: He’s done very well so far, yeah.
PD: He’s very economical. And you’ve got Yuzvendra Chahal in there, the leg-spin bowler, who’s dangerous.
JD: Ravichandran Ashwin is in the Squad as well, which is quite interesting. And Hardik will cover some overs, as well, as the extra paceman. But I think their bowling just lacks that someone who is really quick, you know?
PD: Yeah that is a weakness for sure and Bumrah is the one, of all their bowlers, who they would really want in Australia but they do still have a lot of craft and a lot of skill in that bowling attack to make up for that.
TA: I think the main issue is the death bowling. It’s a huge problem for them. Bhuvneshwar with the new ball is quality but his death bowling has fallen off a cliff in the last few years. Shami, if he does come in, will do a job as a new-ball bowler as well, Hardik has proven himself to be quite wily with the ball and you’ve got the spinners who will do their job.
But look at their recent results and how many runs they’ve leaked against South Africa, it’s terrible. Harshal, Bhuvneshwar and Arshdeep - if that’s the frontline three, it’s a big, big issue. I don’t think they can win the World Cup with those guys covering the death bowling. I mean, they’ve got good players but I just think that’s a major fault.
JD: In terms of my favourite, I don’t want to just say England, even though they are up there, because I think it’s a bit too obvious to just talk about the top three nations in the world. So I’m going to talk about South Africa a bit because I think they’re really interesting. I like the make-up of the squad, they’ve got someone in every department that, if not quite world-class, will do a job. Opening up they could have Rilee Rossouw, who hit a huge hundred just the other day in India, different conditions, sure, but he’s in great touch. And Quinton De Kock will surely open up with him in what could be a frightening partnership.
PD: Haven’t they been opening with Temba Bavuma, though? And almost waiting until he gets out for Rossouw to come in.
TA: That’s the problem - they have been opening with Bavuma because he’s the captain.
JD: I think that might change for the World Cup.
PD: He's been in terrible form. He really is the albatross around their neck, they’ve got to get him out of the team.
JD: I think they need to bat Bavuma lower down at five or something. Below De Kock, Rossouw, with David Miller floating.
TA: They've got Aiden Markram as well.
JD: I don’t really rate Markram.
TA: Markram has a great record in Twenty20, though.
JD: He just never seems to deliver in the big moments, for me. Their bowling attack looks really tasty, however. Kagiso Rabada and Marco Jansen have really proven themselves. Dwaine Pretorius has just been ruled out which is a shame but Anrich Nortje bowling bombs at 95mph is going to scare a lot of teams. Lungi Ngidi is good at T20 level as well and the spin options are pretty good in Tabraiz Shamsi and Keshav Maharaj. They really have everything covered there.
I think South Africa have a good chance of going quite deep in the tournament. The batters have played in Australia a bit and have a lot of franchise experience, they will have come across the other bowling attacks before. It’s just a matter of whether it all comes off in one go. They don’t have the same depth as Australia or England, the same batting depth as India, that’s the conundrum they face. If it all clicks, though, they could be really dangerous.
PD: Do you think they can win the tournament?
JD: I think about six teams can win it. It’s such an odd, paradoxical tournament, the T20 World Cup because it's the tournament you can prepare for the best for in terms of every scenario, because you can micro-manage the team to such an extent, with match-ups, how and when the bowlers are used, field placings, all the captaincy aspects which can win and lose games. But, of all the cricket formats, it’s also the tournament where you can luck yourself to the title.
I suppose a good example of how T20 can be like that, even in recent weeks, is Sri Lanka winning the Asia Cup. We haven’t even spoken about Sri Lanka yet but they are technically the best team in Asia, if you go off recent tournament success. But they didn’t play India in the final, who you would’ve expected to beat them handily, and then Pakistan dropped a lot of catches to essentially gift them the tournament. That’s what I mean by it being a very open brand of cricket where anything can happen. And I hate that phrase, but you know what I mean.
PD: Of course, that’s why it’s so difficult to answer that question - who will the tournament?
JD: Who do I think will win? Honestly, I think Australia will win. They have the best chance.
PD: They do have the best chance it seems but looking at the tournament they don’t have the easiest run to the final, no one does. Assuming they get out of their group, they’ll have to play either India, South Africa or Pakistan who are all tough opponents.
JD: Looking at the groups and who progresses to the semis, you think it’s probably England and Australia from Group 1, right?
PD: Yeah.
JD: In Group 2, I think it’ll be South Africa and Pakistan. I don’t see India making it out of the group.
PD: Just on Pakistan, they're a funny team. They have one of, if not the best, opening partnerships in the world in terms of consistency in Babar Azam and Mohammad Rizwan but just not much to follow them up.
JD: Their pace attack is really good though, especially if they can get Shaheen Afridi back from injury in time. And they are well suited to pacey Australian pitches, that's one reason I fancy them over India.
TA: Are we writing off New Zealand, by the way?
PD: We should talk about New Zealand. I think New Zealand is a little underrated at the moment. We shouldn’t forget that they made it to the last two finals, the T20 and ODI, and they’ve basically still got the same core group of players.
JD: I think they play the smartest cricket, by a mile. They play Moneyball cricket.
TA: Unquestionably, yeah. That’s why they always do well at major tournaments.
JD: They don’t luck their way through. They play smart, not conservative, but pragmatic cricket, certainly. And they’ve got some power in there.
TA: Jimmy Neesham is a great finisher.
JD: Yeah, Neesham can turn up. Their top order looks strong - Martin Guptill brings experience, Devon Conway and Finn Allen have a lot of power. And in the middle, Daryl Mitchell has come through and proven himself at this level, at the last World Cup he showed a lot, making up for captain Kane Williamson's loss of form.
The bowling lineup is still pretty strong, too. The old guys of Trent Boult and Tim Southee are still going for one last dance, as well. They’ve got some absolute wheels with Lockie Ferguson, not necessarily the most consistent bowler but bowls very quick. They are just not the most attractive of teams, stylistically. There’s no star power.
TA: Yeah they aren’t great to watch, that’s the thing. But they don’t care. It’s results cricket with them.
PD: Also their new kit looks a bit rubbish so they won’t look good in that respect either but as you say, Tolga, it doesn’t matter. One thing that does play into their hands, and that’s also very New Zealand, is that people aren’t talking about them much this time around because maybe it does feel a little stale, being more or less the same team as last time. And that’s why I think they could maybe spring a little surprise.
PD: Going back to Australia being the favourites, I look at their group as a fan and think - that’s a tough group. They have to play England and New Zealand who will both be fired up to beat the Aussies in their own backyard, and potentially Sri Lanka as well. I just don’t think it's so straightforward.
JD: And depending on how the groups go in the first stage, you could have both West Indies and Sri Lanka going into one of the Super 12 groups together.
TA: Wow, that’ll be tough if that happens.
JD: That’s going to be really interesting to see how that plays out because you could end up with one incredibly tough group. It could be basically the Asia Cup and South Africa all in one group if they both end up in Group 2, for example.
PD: That just throws up so many possibilities in terms of one of the big dogs missing out on the semi-finals.
JD: It will be interesting to see how that unfolds. Ok, regardless, I think we’re all saying that Australia will reach the semi-finals. Who do we think will join them if you had to put money on it right now?
PD: For me, it’s India and South Africa from Group 2, I don’t think Pakistan will go through. And in Group 1, Australia and… England, I think. But I’m going to guess that Australia finish second in their group and then lose their semi-final.
JD: I’m slightly worried about England, I don’t know why exactly but I have a horrible feeling that they will get done over in Australia again, as they did in 2015 at the World Cup.
PD: That’s interesting because you guys both seem more confident about how Australia will do and I’m more confident about England than you are. I supposed that’s part of being a fan, you worry about your own chances more.
JD: I just look at England’s squad and I feel like it’s a bit of 2D cricket. They have something like four left-arm seamers in the squad who all bowl around 80mph. Do you need David Willey, Reece Topley, Sam Curran and Tymal Mills (who’s on standby) all in there? I think they could have left one of those out and brought in another batting option, maybe an opener. And I think England will miss Jonny Bairstow hugely.
TA: He definitely would have opened for them in the tournament if he hadn’t gotten injured.
PD: Where do you guys see England finishing at their group?
JD: I think they could finish third, maybe even behind New Zealand. I just think somebody could upset them. I really want to be confident about them, it’s a good squad and with Jos Buttler, he can win you games on his own but something just isn’t quite right. And the one player who really doesn’t fit for me is Ben Stokes, funnily enough. I don't think he bats quick enough and I don't think he bowls well enough.
TA: And he’s barely played any T20 cricket if you look at it.
JD: The thing is, you’ve got better bowling options in the squad if you look at it so they don’t really need him to bowl much. And he’s done quite well opening in franchise cricket but I don’t think he’s ever done that well at four, where they’ll probably use him.
TA: I agree, I would actually open with Buttler and Stokes but it’s not going to happen.
JD: I’d bat him at three and I probably wouldn’t pick Dawid Malan.
TA: Malan is good in Australia, though.
PD: It’s hard to drop him because his numbers are so good.
JD: Yeah but his numbers are only good because he bats for so long!
TA: I think he makes up for it when he’s not in the subcontinent. If you look at his T20 record in the subcontinent, it’s not great but elsewhere he’s been excellent, and he has done well in the Ashes in Australia.
PD: I think it’s a pretty exciting batting lineup. And that’s hard for me to say because as an Aussie, I hate England! They’ve got to figure out who’s going to open with Buttler, where to use Stokes, if they use him, but lower down Harry Brook is on fire, Liam Livingstone is blockbuster as well, and then they have Moeen Ali - he’s a terrific player. It’s a very strong lineup for me.
JD: I don’t think they have anyone apart from Buttler in the top five who can win them a game. I don’t see Phil Salt, Alex Hales (more on him here), Malan or even Stokes taking hold of a game and winning it with the bat.
TA: I only partly agree. I think Stokes is a match-winner. If Stokes turns up and decides to win a match he can do it. It doesn't matter what the format is. He’s just that good even in his weakest format.
JD: Don’t get me wrong, he’s an amazing cricketer, but when was the last time he won England a T20 game? When was the last time he played a T20 game?!
TA: That’s the issue, yeah.
JD: I understand the fascination with him, I love him as a cricketer and what he’s done with the test team is phenomenal and yet, it just feels like they’re crowbarring him in for no good reason.
PD: Would you even take him to the tournament if you were in charge?
JD: Part of me would say no. He’ll probably prove me wrong and have an incredible tournament. If we get a tournament without huge scores, with a lot of 160s and 170s, there will be a bit of needing to play around the field more, I think Stokes could do that role very well. But looking at his record a bit closer it begs the question, should he be there at all?
He’s only played one T20I in Australia (at the time of recording) so not much experience there, and he’s only played 34 T20Is in his whole career. His highest score is 47 not out, his career strike rate is 136. Looking at his bowling, his economy rate is 8.77. All I’m saying is - show me where the evidence is that he should be there!
TA: And yet, the funny thing is, if you asked any team at this tournament and said, hey you can have Ben Stokes, every team would take him.
JD: That’s what is so interesting because when I look at those numbers, on paper, I don't see anything that suggests to me that he’s anything other than average at international level. And when the tournament starts it will have been more than 18 months since he last played a T20 game. Why is he in the squad? Why is he batting four?
PD: What happens to the team if they don’t pick him?
TA: You move the whole order up one and bring in an extra bowling allrounder like Sam Curran in at seven.
In terms of his batting, I don't think Stokes has ever been the type of player to score runs in every match he’s played in. Even in test cricket, you expect him to go out and express himself and get out cheaply sometimes and then the next time he’ll play a heroic innings to save a match and then he’ll dip again. That’s just Stokes I think.
JD: And streakiness is fine in T20s but I just think it’s a risk batting him at number four and giving him all that responsibility.
PD: It will be interesting to see if they move him and down the order depending on the match situation, if it’s near the end of the innings they might prefer to bring someone with more explosiveness in ahead of him for example.
JD: I just look at his numbers for England in this format and I see someone who is a bit underwhelming. I think the cricket stats experts will probably be saying, why would you play him?
TA: The only thing to maybe add to that is that he hasn't had a proper run in the team in the last few years so it’s so hard to gauge his ability in a way.
JD: Ok let’s talk about breakout stars at the tournament. Who do you guys think could make a name for themselves at the tournament?
PD: Hmm, ‘breakout’ is a funny expression because it’s hard to find someone who hasn’t broken out at all and hardly played internationals. There are a few guys in the Sri Lankan team who I think could make bigger names for themselves, Maheesh Theekshana is a really interesting mystery spinner but he's quite well-established in the team already, having played 20-odd matches. Dilshan Madushanka is another Sri Lankan who did well at the Asia Cup. He’s a left-arm pace bowler who’s only played a handful of games. He’s really green and has stepped up to be one of their frontline bowlers due to injuries so he could be one to watch.
I think Harry Brook could have a standout tournament for England with the bat, he was really impressive in Pakistan recently. And I also think Tim David of Australia will be another one to break out, so to speak. There’s already been a lot written and said about him but he’s only just come into the team. The stars have aligned for him in the way that he’s walked into the team with a defined role as the finisher and he's in a great run of form. I think he could really take off at the tournament.
JD: Tolga, who do you think we’ll be talking about after the tournament?
TA: I’m looking at a few names here and this one isn’t so much a breakout, because he’s already played 44 T20Is incredibly, as he’s still only 24, but Glenn Phillips of New Zealand is one to watch, I think. He was in and out of the team for a while and now he’s into it properly and his numbers recently are better. I think he could make an impact with the bat. Michael Bracewell is another one to watch from New Zealand. They had a bit of a spin issue and they unearthed Bracewell this year to come in as a spin-bowling allrounder and he’s been great this year with both bat and ball.
JD: Ok, and I’m going to say Tristan Stubbs of South Africa is the one to watch. I saw him play a few times against England in the summer and just wow! He hits the ball hard, he’s got lots of runs in him, he strikes at 159 in T20s and he bowls pretty tidy off-breaks. He’s been picked up by Mumbai Indians and he played in the Hundred as well, that just suggests how highly rated he is. South Africa will probably bat him at six and he’ll bowl a few overs. There isn’t much pressure on him which helps and I think he’ll really stand out for them. He’s only played nine T20Is and he’s already striking at 191, that’s an impressive start! I think he will play a really big part for South Africa in this tournament.
So, just to wrap up our predictions then, we all expect Australia to get into the semi-finals, at least, it seems. Tolga and I both think they will go the whole way but Pat thinks they might fall at that hurdle, opening it up for an India versus England final, perhaps. Personally, I can see India and England both struggling to get out of their groups. Watch out for South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan. This really is an open tournament that all six of those teams can win.