CWC 2023: The Ratings

[noducksallowed]

Hello folks!

I thought I'd start a thread about rating the CWC teams...each team being rated will have completed their journey in the tournament so far, so basically India, SA, Aus and NZ will not be rated until they are knocked out.

I will be looking at the top 3 positives (bright side of life), top 3 negatives (some teams have far more) and an entertainment factor, then providing a rating A-F based on how I feel because my subjective opinion is more important than anyone elses.

Although feel free to follow the same format for your own ratings.

So let's start with bottom of the pile:

Netherlands

Positives

1. THAT win over South Africa, full of fire, passion and professionalism. It showed that there is real class in this side, some burgeoning talent that isn't only former South African and it almost upset the apple cart early on and that's always good for the tournament.
2. A solid, well constructed win over Bangladesh. The latter is a side that makes the perfect argument for cricket having a relegation system because there are other teams, namely the Dutch and the Afghans who are making a case to be afforded the opportunities that Bangladesh have had for far too often.
3. Aryan Dutt - at barely 20 years of age, the offy has made a name for himself with some consistent performances and spin that those bowlers from more traditional cricketing nations havent been able to replicate. If he was from a more fashionable nation he would be all the rage.

Negatives

1. Consistency...or lack of. The Netherlands came into the tournament not wanting to be labelled as associates or minnows but failed to win over that argument, as their drubbings at the hands of Pakistan, the Kiwis, Australia and England showed their wins were upsets or the dreaded..."fluke"...and teams not wanting to be labelled as minnows better not be labelled as such. In each of those losses their quality dropped something fierce in the face of quality bowling and batting.
2. Finishing bottom of the table...need I say more?
3. A lack of batting depth. Yes the team has plenty of go-getters and hackers, but where's the guy who can consistently bat through the innings? Is there anyone who could be built to that level? From what I've seen, it doesn't seem like it.

Entertainment Factor: 6/10
The win over South Africa will live long in the memory, as will Vikramjit Singh's flowing shots, Dutts loops and turn and the general passion of the bowlers as they tried their hearts out!

Overall Rating: 4/10


To be continued...

 

[pillowprocter]

You can't say their wins were "full of fire, passion and professionalism" and "solid, well constructed" while also calling them flukes

 

[wasteyouryouth]

Two wins, including one against a semi-finalist (something only one other side achieved) and they only get 4/10?



I think you need to judge them relative to realistic expectations.

They outplayed South Africa and Bangladesh. Suffered some heavy defeats in the tournament but I think most teams had at least one drubbing.

Finishing last a negative? I'd say for every other team it would be. Finishing last with two wins is probably above what most people expected from the Dutch.

 

[noducksallowed]

You can't say their wins were "full of fire, passion and professionalism" and "solid, well constructed" while also calling them flukes

I said that's the label and its true. It stil ldoesnt negate the fact they played with latino heat against South Africa!

Post automatically merged: Nov 13, 2023

Two wins, including one against a semi-finalist (something only one other side achieved) and they only get 4/10?



I think you need to judge them relative to realistic expectations.

They outplayed South Africa and Bangladesh. Suffered some heavy defeats in the tournament but I think most teams had at least one drubbing.

Finishing last a negative? I'd say for every other team it would be. Finishing last with two wins is probably above what most people expected from the Dutch.

Finishing last is a positive and does great work for their standing on the global scale

 

[noducksallowed]

Sri Lanka

Positives

1. Dilshan Madhushanka is left arm and more than just nippy, his 5-for against India and an exceptional spell against Australia were one of the few bright spots in a team lacking just about everything.
2. The batting, when it clicks is good fun to watch and had shaed of the great swashbucklers of Sri Lanka's past. The problem is they didn't click enough.
3. Beating World Champions England handily...which was done by a lot of teams admittedly but for a struggling, weakest of all time Lankan side it was a great achievement.

Negatives

1. 55 all out is the type of statistic no one wants. It's even less desirable in a world cup and outright outrageous when tail enders hit double figures but actual batsmen didn't.
2. The land of great spinners...no longer even has a spinner that could break into the local village impaired XI. What a sad state of affairs for a country that seemed to produce more mystery spin and mystery wrist ailments than anyone else. What happened here?
3. Kusal Mendis...batsman and captain extraordinaire started off with a bang and then fell away about as weakly as any top player in the tournament did. He looked clueless by the close of play.

Entertainment Factor: 5/10
A great innings against Pakistan and entertaining in a Laurel and hardy kind of way against India but there was little here for cricket fans or Lankan fans to cheer about, feel excited for or look forward to.

Overall Rating: 3/10
Worse than Netherlands I hear you say? Well, that 55 all out is embarrassing and being flummoxed by every part of the game (batting, bowling, fielding) by the end of the tournament makes it worse for what used to be one of ODI crickets heavyweights.

 

[noducksallowed]

Next up, we have the Bad Boys of Cricket, or the BBCs:

Bangladesh

Positives

1. Mahmudullah, the man averaging over 50 and striking at almost 92 has been one of the few stand out performers for the BBCs of this world cup. His century against SA is one of Bangladesh cricket's highlights, not just in this world cup but across tournaments.
2. The never ending grit and passion for the game of Mushfiqur Rahim. The little man with the big heart had to show it again and again.
3. Not finishing bottom...kind of says it all.

Negatives

1. THAT appeal...THAT wicket....THAT controversy. Shakib, the bookies favourite, was at the heart of yet another distasteful session of cricket and later at the press conference spoke about cricket being "war"...enter yet more distaste at the real world problems we are tuning in to currently. Angelo Mathews was irate, the comms box was flummoxed, the world witnessed a first and the BBCs ended their tournament with nothing but this to talk about.
2. Shakib Al Hassan in general.
3. 4 years of decent progress, of decent build and yet Bangladesh played throughout the tournament like they usually do, but this time minus even at least one iconic win.

Entertainment Factor: 0/10
No fiery pacers, no last gasp wins or truly entertaining games, no mystery spin and little to talk about with the bat. If the BBCs were playing, I was switching over to watch paint dry.

Overall Rating: 3/10


Now we're into the big boys...sort of...a team that was once considered champions:

England

Positives

1. Winning the last game of the tournament, where the batting showed some of the super powers that had made them so formidable between 2015-2019, and at times in the T20 world cups that followed. Form ost of the tournament that toned power had gone missing but here it was again.
2. David Willey...no matter how much England did NOT want him, he showed just how good he was and how more often he should have played. A wiley old left arm, pace off style bowler with brilliant cutters and that quicker ball, Willey showed all his tricks. And then promptly retired.
3. Dawid Malan was much the same as Willey, kept out of England's plans for so long and yet here he was, top scoring and at times, looking like a serious threat. At 36 this is likley his last chance and it ends with a team whimper although people may still remember the individual.

Negatives

1. Losing 5 in a row, including to Afghanistan and Sri Lanka. The loss to Afghanistan would have hurt the most as they rolled over without a fight. Butler's watery eyes almost moved grown men to tears and then we all realised his a multimillionaire who doesn't deserve the excuse of playing too much.
2. The excuses, mainly that English players were playing too much cricket, although nothing but bags of money was forcing them.
3. A lack of fight with bat or ball, particularly succumbing to a mediocre Indian performance on a placid pitch.

Entertainment Factor: 5/10
Somewhat better than the others, you could probably stay tuned while England played, if only to see how bad the car crash was to be.

Overall Rating: 4/10
For world champions to bow out and not even be in contention so early into the tournament is a shambles.

 

[pillowprocter]

Next up, we have the Bad Boys of Cricket, or the BBCs:

I didn't even read the review, I was too put off by this opening line

 

[noducksallowed]

I didn't even read the review, I was too put off by this opening line

Whats wrong with it?

The Bangladesh team are currently BBC!

 

[noducksallowed]

So we're progressing into the upper end of the table now and next up:

Afghanistan

Positives

1. The whole tournament really...from October to November of 2023 will be regarded as Afghanistan's greatest ever cricketing period. They hold wins over England, Pakistan and Sri Lanka and still somehow finished only 6th.
2. The spinners, in a tournament where other teams have struggled to produce their best spin magic, Afghanistan have been a class apart. Saying that about a side that plays little cricket at the highest level shows you how far they have come and how much these conditions have suited them.
3. THAT performance against Pakistan, the bowling was superb and the batting ruthless. It got to a stage where the win looked inevitable and it was if Australia were playing Namibia.

Negatives

1. Not knowing how to lose...what does that mean? I hear you say. Well the wins were good but the losses were worst, heavy, flaccid defeats that affected the teams overall NRR massively. Afghanistan have graduated from producing big moments to big matches but need to learn how to maintain consistency.
2. The fielding was a mixed bag. There was a lot of effort, a lot of passion but it fell short of the mark and leaked too many runs at times.
3. The pace bowlers are certainly quick but they lack consistency and the ability to bowl on the right spot more often than not and resulted in being taken down several times throughout the tournament.

Entertainment Factor: 7/10
A fun team to watch throughout the tournament with a series of big wins! Worth the views.

Overall Rating: 9/10
In terms of what Afghanistan have ever managed in their cricketing history, this has been their biggest ever moment.

 

[noducksallowed]

Sorry dear fellows, I've been a bit slow for this but no time like the post world cup analysis to carry on with my ratings:

Pakistan

Positives

1. Abdullah Shafique & Mohammad Wasim Jr...Pakistan, even at their lowest ebb, have a way of finding some diamonds in the rough and yet again they did so here. Strictly speaking neither man was found in the tournament but they both showed that they should be regulars rather than replacements. Shafique played a terrific hand at least twice in the tournament and Wasim Jr showed pace and reverse swing unlike any of the Pakistani bowlers all tournament.
2. Rizwan showed that he was one of the best keeper bats in the world yet again with a century in a record breaking chase and several moments where he showed more intent than a lot of the Pakistan players.
3. The Fakhar Zaman come back and THAT win against the Kiwis. He was patient then brutal, which is usually how the best Zaman innings pan out. If only he hadn't lost form at the wrong time and then hadn't gotten himself injured.

Negatives

1. The loss to Afghanistan was an embarrassment. Pakistan batted as if they needed to be par, showing a lack of respect for their opponents. The bowling unit then topped it off with arguably their worst performance all tournament. No fight, no guts, no glory.
2. Captaincy...I preface this by saying I'm a fan of Babar the batsman, he truly is a modern great but his captaincy verged on average at best and utterly clueless at worse. The worst part is, no one else looked willing to help. Th every best captains have a good support staff around them, Babar was left to struggle on his own.
3. The Pakistani ex-cricketers and social media...the attacks on the team ,in particular Babar, Rizwan and later the PCB's own chief selector was a self afflicted black eye. It was horrendous to watch and even more horrifying to watch as the players fell away under the pressure of the very people that were supposed to help them. Shocking and outright disgraceful.

Entertainment Factor: 8/10
The match v Sri Lanka was the first good game of the tournament and the match against South Africa was an instant classic.

Overall Rating: 5/10
An average performance by a team that individually is capable of so much more and yet they couldn't gel as players or as a group with the same goal in mind. Excruciating to watch at times.

 

[noducksallowed]

New Zealand

Positives

1. Ravindra is clearly the find of the tournament and the variety and power of his strokes was one thing, the elegance just something else. We have to see how he goes on more competitive pitches and larger grounds but here and now, Ravindra is one to watch.
2. Mitch Santner...oh boy at his absolute peak, just enough turn, just enough bonce, all accuracy, all juicy left arm spin goodness! Always the bridesmaid and never the bride, Santner took his moment and is possibly one of the players of the tournament (more deserved than Kohli! jeez lueez).
3. Daryl Mitchell showed again he is one of the best batters and one of the best hitters in the limited overs game. The ease with which he took on so many bowlers was just exceptional to watch.

Negatives

1. Losing yet another big game, in yet more similar fashion to the other ones, a bit too timid, a bit too mid. It sounds harsh considering how good they have done but shall we quietly whisper..."chokers"?
2. What to do with Kane Williamson? People may think this is blasphemous but he was out of the tournament for roughly 50% of the time, came back in and played some consistent innings and just one which really took the game by the scruff of the neck. Do the Kiwis need a harder hitting batsman in that position?
3. Trent Boult...likely his last ODI tournament. This was a lion in the winter, slowly fading away.

Entertainment Factor: 8/10
Some of those big scores and ALMOST chasing 380+ against Australia added some danger and daring do to the group stages.

Overall Rating: 8/10
Yet another very good tournament for yet another good NZ tournament side.

 

[noducksallowed]

South Africa

Positives

1. The batting unit, particularly in the first half of the tournament were racking up runs like Modi racks up votes, with ease and 6 at a time. It was just remarkable how hard some of these batters were going, the flat pitches and small grounds obviously helped but no one really compared in those early stages and just for a brief moment Saffer fans dreamed.
2. The bowling unit barely put a foot wrong all tournament. Jansen was exceptional, Rabada and Ngidi were as good as they usually are and the spinners were an absolute surprise. They also showed passion and aggression which added hilarity to some of those wicket celebrations.
3. The ground fielding...oh boy. IU know Australia were outstanding in the final but for sheer consistency, every time I tuned in, the South African fielders were saving 20-30 runs per game, if not more. Teams like Pakistan, England, Sri Lanka need to get in touch with the guys over there and copy their training approach.

Negatives

1. Soft runs..so I just bigged up the batting but there were so many soft runs in there, particular by QDK who did not stand up a single time they needed him the most, which is probably the story of his career, on or off field. The middle order showed some grit though so there is something to learn from.
2. The chase...how could a team that was so good batting first be so bad trying to chase. It comes down to the soft runs again...and the soft nature in general in the big moments seems to be a repeating theme for South African cricket.
3. Dare I say it...choking in the big moments. They were the second best side in the tournament right up until the semi and then they folded for 212 in the biggest game of their careers. Same old, same old?

Entertainment Factor: 9/10
Those big muscled scores and an instant classic against Pakistan.

Overall Rating: 7/10
By the standards they themselves had set, they would feel let down in the tail end of the group stage and the semi-final.

 

[Bevab]

South Africa

Positives

1. The batting unit, particularly in the first half of the tournament were racking up runs like Modi racks up votes, with ease and 6 at a time. It was just remarkable how hard some of these batters were going, the flat pitches and small grounds obviously helped but no one really compared in those early stages and just for a brief moment Saffer fans dreamed.
2. The bowling unit barely put a foot wrong all tournament. Jansen was exceptional, Rabada and Ngidi were as good as they usually are and the spinners were an absolute surprise. They also showed passion and aggression which added hilarity to some of those wicket celebrations.
3. The ground fielding...oh boy. IU know Australia were outstanding in the final but for sheer consistency, every time I tuned in, the South African fielders were saving 20-30 runs per game, if not more. Teams like Pakistan, England, Sri Lanka need to get in touch with the guys over there and copy their training approach.

Negatives

1. Soft runs..so I just bigged up the batting but there were so many soft runs in there, particular by QDK who did not stand up a single time they needed him the most, which is probably the story of his career, on or off field. The middle order showed some grit though so there is something to learn from.
2. The chase...how could a team that was so good batting first be so bad trying to chase. It comes down to the soft runs again...and the soft nature in general in the big moments seems to be a repeating theme for South African cricket.
3. Dare I say it...choking in the big moments. They were the second best side in the tournament right up until the semi and then they folded for 212 in the biggest game of their careers. Same old, same old?

Entertainment Factor: 9/10
Those big muscled scores and an instant classic against Pakistan.

Overall Rating: 7/10
By the standards they themselves had set, they would feel let down in the tail end of the group stage and the semi-final.

Gotta disagree with the choke assessment. That was more down to the Aussies bowling and the conditions, calling it a choke feels lazy.

 

[noducksallowed]

Gotta disagree with the choke assessment. That was more down to the Aussies bowling and the conditions, calling it a choke feels lazy.

But they choked out of several big moments in the tournament, including a humiliating loss to the Netherlands.

 

[Bevab]

But they choked out of several big moments in the tournament, including a humiliating loss to the Netherlands.

Does a loss to Netherlands really qualify for a big moment when it made no difference to their final place though?

Their approach to chases was extremely poor and maybe influenced that disastrous decision to bowl first but I still just think they were outplayed by the Aussies and did well to even challenge them till the end, especially in comparison to how India wilted.