Fixed spots in Super Eights

[ZexyZahid]

Some people not might know it, but in the Super Eights countries will be given a fixed spot. For example if India and Bangladesh qualify from Group A and Bangladesh end up higher, India still will be A1 and Bangladesh A2.

It's actually written here:
Why Australia, Sri Lanka and West Indies are in one group | Cricket News | ICC World Twenty20 2009 | Cricinfo.com

So based on this story, the top four of previous Twenty20 tournament will be placed on number one. So I am trying to figure out if these are rightfully spots assigned:

Group A: India (A1) and Bangladesh (A2)
Group B: Pakistan (B1) and England (B2)
Group C: Australia (C1) and Sri Lanka (C2)
Group D: New Zealand (D1) and South Africa (D2)

If all the fixed assigned countries qualify, the Super Eights groups will be like this:
Group E: India (A1), England (B2), Australia (C1) and South Africa (D2)
Group F: Bangladesh (A2), Pakistan (B1), Sri Lanka (C2) and New Zealand (D1)

So it is like this way or not? These fixed spots were given, because of logistical reasons. But I want to know if these are right or not, so I can plan ahead my own agenda (and so can other people). Here are the total fixtures: Fixtures, Schedule | ICC World Twenty20 2009 | Cricinfo.com

P.S.: If this is the right way, check out Group E! I think many people haven't realised yet, that if they qualify, Australia, South Africa, India and England will be paired into one group!

 

[aussie1st]

Sohum posted something about it in the group thread but that was more on why India got an easy group.

This tournament structure isn't favouing us at all, first we are in the group of death and then next round we also hit the group of death. Also means we will lose one of our 3 tournament favourites. NZ and Pakistan on the other hand will be licking their lips with their group.

 

[ZexyZahid]

With this way even Bangladesh has a chance. New Zealand and Sri Lanka took a while to win their warm-up match against them, so there are some positive signs for Bangladesh. India and South Africa must hope that Australia won't qualify, because that will mean they will face West Indies. But I've got a feeling that won't happen.

Just for convenience I've figured out, when these top 3 countries in Group E will meet each other, if they qualify:

Fri Jun 12 16:30 GMT 16th Match, Group E - TBC v TBC (India v Australia)
Sat Jun 13 12:30 GMT 17th Match, Group E - TBC v TBC (Australia v South Africa)
Tue Jun 16 16:30 GMT 24th Match, Group E - TBC v TBC (South Africa v India)

Check out Australia's scheduling. After 3 hours their match with India will finish and after 17 hours they will have to face South Africa! :laugh Great scheduling.

 

[SaiSrini]

Sounds interesting. If all go according to plan, Group E is going to be one hell of a group with atleast one of India, Australia and South Africa ready to exit (England looks the best team to exit from that group).

I feel the Super Eights seedings should be connected to the team's performance in the group stages which include the net run rate and those stuff. But the organisers are more intent upon knowing the fixtures well in advance which will help them in ticket sales and other financial stuff (also bookies will find it helpful).

 

[Insomniac]

I wonder if those 2 games (Ind v Aus and Aus v SA) are at the same or different venue

zMario added 2 Minutes and 21 Seconds later...

The thing about the scheduling is that in a country like the West Indies, you do need this type of schedule so fans do know where their country will be playing so necessary visa / travel arrangements can be made.

However in England, it is alot easier and possibly more productive to reseed each team based on its standing after the group stages simply because The Oval and Lord's are a train ride away - the only exception this time being is Trent Bridge, but even then, a few more train rides from London, and you're there.

This system will probably have to be implemented at the 2011 WC (unless its moved to Australia and NZ) since it will be staged in 4 countries, one of which is inaccessible to Pakistani fans (based historically).

 

[ZexyZahid]

It's the same with England. They will also play a match after 17 hours and within 20 hours two matches. :laugh

Sun Jun 14 16:30 GMT 20th Match, Group E - TBC v TBC (India v England)
Mon Jun 15 12:30 GMT 21st Match, Group E - TBC v TBC (England v Australia)

I thought the England organisors would help the England team. This isn't helping them at all.

ZexyZahid added 3 Minutes and 55 Seconds later...

I wonder if those 2 games (Ind v Aus and Aus v SA) are at the same or different venue

They will be played at Lord's and the next one at the Oval.

England's double bill within 20 hours will be played at Lord's.

Somebody should post this link to the England organisors. How dumb can they be of letting face their team against the ODI champions and Twenty20 champions within 20 hours. I've figured it out, why can't they? I'm sure when time comes, there will be some critic about this.

 

[irottev]

With this way even Bangladesh has a chance. New Zealand and Sri Lanka took a while to win their warm-up match against them, so there are some positive signs for Bangladesh.

It's a positive sign for sure, but New Zealand omitted most of their batsmen for that game. No McCullum, Ryder or Taylor. We batted to 4 with all-rounders below. Pretty funny batting line up really.

 

[icyman]

It was this way during the last World Cup too.
Remember India and Pak both qualified with the same no of points. And actually Pak should have been in India's place in the Super 8 on basis of their Group position.
.
I think this trend of pre-seeding the teams is good and will continue for some time now,or atleast in the T20 format

 

[sifter132]

Wow, I can't believe they've done this.

Firstly for viewership reasons. Surely India and England are the most important teams to keep in the tournament from an interest/ratings/crowds point of view, yet they are most likely going to be facing Australia and South Africa - arguably the strongest 2 nations that could have been picked.

And secondly for fairness. I know in theory that it's seed 1,3,5 and 7 in Group E so it doesn't look too bad that way. But India, Australia and South Africa are the 3 FAVOURITES according to the bookies. Why have it so at least one of them is definitely not going to make the semis?

This is why they should have had the tournament in groups of 4, even 5. The teams have been in England for a week or two already playing warmups. They should have turned one or even both of those warmups into part of the main tournament. That way there are more REAL games for fans and TV to enjoy and there is less chance of an important team getting blindsided in the first round.

 

[SaiSrini]

Wow, I can't believe they've done this.

Firstly for viewership reasons. Surely India and England are the most important teams to keep in the tournament from an interest/ratings/crowds point of view, yet they are most likely going to be facing Australia and South Africa - arguably the strongest 2 nations that could have been picked.

And secondly for fairness. I know in theory that it's seed 1,3,5 and 7 in Group E so it doesn't look too bad that way. But India, Australia and South Africa are the 3 FAVOURITES according to the bookies. Why have it so at least one of them is definitely not going to make the semis?

India are defending champions and the tournament's biggest favorites (due to their IPL experience and recent exploits in all formats). So why should the organisers feel that they are risking India's future by placing them in a group with Australia and South Africa (I feel Australia should be more worried because after England, they look most likely not to make the semifinal spot since they are most likely to be placed in that big group E).

I do agree that losing one of those three teams would be tragic for the tournament because they are the top three teams of the format and the top three favorites. I doubt if either of them would lose out of the Super eights spot (very very highly unlikely) so we might see a scenario where we lose one of these teams for the semifinals.

 

[Insomniac]

India are defending champions and the tournament's biggest favorites (due to their IPL experience and recent exploits in all formats). So why should the organisers feel that they are risking India's future by placing them in a group with Australia and South Africa (I feel Australia should be more worried because after England, they look most likely not to make the semifinal spot since they are most likely to be placed in that big group E).

I do agree that losing one of those three teams would be tragic for the tournament because they are the top three teams of the format and the top three favorites. I doubt if either of them would lose out of the Super eights spot (very very highly unlikely) so we might see a scenario where we lose one of these teams for the semifinals.

Well its not exactly the organizers' fault when one of the top 8 test teams don't make it past the group stages of the T20 WC (West Indies in 2007).

Thats the reason this has happened, the Windies are being treated as Bangladesh normally would, and Bangladesh have taken the position of the West Indies.

And since there is no official T20 table that is sanctioned by the ICC, the only way to "fairly" seed the teams is by the position they came in in the 2007 edition of the tournament (which is what happened).

And while we can talk about the ODI rankings all we want, they really have no reflection (technically speaking) of the T20 competition, so honestly, to retain "fairness", the drawings had to come out this way.

And sifter, if we start having tournaments and giving teams with more viewers, supporters, and sponsors an advantage in every tournament, and possibly handing them the cup along with that, all for the sake of money... well India would be world champions by now. That's a big flaw in your idea there.

And anyone who feels that we should hand India the cup everytime for the sake of money... well thats just sick. Of course, it would work - ICC would be rich already, but is that even ethical?

 

[King Cricket]

After some minnow bashing in the group stage, we will have to face a group of death in the Super-Eights. *sigh* Still, we are very lucky- at least we have got an easy group stage. But the Aussies, poor chaps! Whichever opponent they will face in this tournament- everyone will be equally dangerous. Ponting an co will have a really hard time out there. But you never know Australia.......

 

[Gurjot95]

If it really happens then Group E will be that group where every match will be very important to reach semis. Each lose in this group will step forward to out of tournament and in the other hand Pakistan and New Zealand will again reach semis.

 

[Aoun13]

If Pakistan will some how able reach semi,then i am sure they will also be in finals as they have one of the most conversion rate of semi into finals.English crowd know that their team is not one the best so losing England will not be a great shock,but if India will not be able to qualify for semi it would be a shock for everybody because their players are superb match fit after IPL.I am disappoint with Lalit Modhi attitude who didn't give Pakistani Players a chance in the IPL.I think this was the plot made by BCCI for winning T20 WC,May God fails them in their pot.

 

[Gurjot95]

If Pakistan will some how able reach semi,then i am sure they will also be in finals as they have one of the most conversion rate of semi into finals.English crowd know that their team is not one the best so losing England will not be a great shock,but if India will not be able to qualify for semi it would be a shock for everybody because their players are superb match fit after IPL.I am disappoint with Lalit Modhi attitude who didn't give Pakistani Players a chance in the IPL.I think this was the plot made by BCCI for winning T20 WC,May God fails them in their pot.

As far I know PCB rejects pakistan player to play in IPL.