Talk:2009 ICC World Twenty20

Groups A&B

What is the source of Ireland being in group A and the Netherlands in group B?--217.93.237.168 (talk) 18:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:FLAG

To all IP address contributors. Please make sure this article complies with WP:FLAG. Do not litter it with space consuming icons that add no value whatsoever. Any edit that violates WP:FLAG will be reverted. BlackJack | ^{talk page} 09:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay....but then how does that square with the line in the WP flag policy that the flags were originally intended for use in lists and tables (especially for sporting events etc)? Shouldn't that mean then that flags should be used alongside the list of participating teams and in the points tables? And since when are all cricketing articles including the brief scorecard forbidden from using flags?72.27.83.218 (talk) 21:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

You know, for a contributor who seems to be bothered about flags, it's a bit odd that you can't even answer questions when they are raised.72.27.80.147 (talk) 06:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Groups

Wow - whoever came up with these groups should be shot! Massive disparities in the strength of each group! 58.178.6.165 (talk) 06:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

The grouping takes in consideration of the last year T20 World cup Match results.As India finished first its put in the group with two weaker teams. -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 04:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I guess you would be equally happy if - given India failed to get to the Super 8's in the ODI world cup the same thing happened there? Its a shocking draw and its pretty obvious it was rigged. 58.178.30.85 (talk) 03:36, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Lol , that was done by ICC and Not me  :) -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 14:40, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I request to restore the group stage matches to a expanded version and delete the show/hide tab.Since they are a part of the main draw of the event, it is necessary to show them unlike the warmup matches.61.2.84.134 (talk) 05:16, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Agreed and done, there is a contents bar at the top of the page if readers wish to only see the super eights and the page isn't particulary long. --Jpeeling (talk) 19:04, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Split Events

I propose put the matches information in two diferents articles one for men and one for women, and maintain an article for all the event with the summary of both tournaments.

Phósphoros (talk) 22:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Squads

A separate page was set up for the squads for the 2007 Cricket World Cup and I propose that a similar page be created for this tournament.

The Australian squad has been picked so I'll start things off with them. I'll link to that page out of this one.--Perry Middlemiss (talk) 23:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

What are these number for ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2009_ICC_World_Twenty20&diff=294647449&oldid=294646567 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.152.7.167 (talk) 06:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Its for the points table -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 14:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

And If you are asking about the number in the Brackets After each team , its the world Ranking of Teams -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 15:04, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Tables for Leading Run Scorers and Wicket Takers

It would be better if tables are added for Leading Run scorers and Wicket Takers . Looking Forward to your reply guys -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 16:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Tables should be added for stats. Have a look at the 2009 Indian Premier League page. This is a encyclopedia and it is a major part of the tournament. (Jonathanburger (talk) 12:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC))

Yup thanks for the reply ! -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 15:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Statistics

Batting (Most Runs)

Player	Team	Matches	Innings	Runs	Balls	Strike Rate	Average	HS	100s	50s	4s	6s
xxxxx	y tem	12	12	572	395	144.81	52.00	89	0	5	60	22
{3232	3232	16	16	495	325	152.30	30.93	85	0	3	54	29
2323	3232	15	13	465	355	130.98	51.66	105*	1	3	39	12
{32323	323	14	14	434	308	140.90	31.00	98	0	2	37	21
23232	2323}	14	13	418	341	122.58	41.80	67*	0	4	42	13

Bowling (Most wickets)

Player	Team	Matches	Overs	Wickets	Economy Rate	Average	Strike Rate	Best Bowling
xxx	y team	16	59.4	23	6.98	18.13	15.5	4/22
dfdf	dfd	16	59.1	21	5.86	16.52	16.9	5/5
dfdfd	dfdf}	13	51.0	19	6.78	18.21	16.1	3/27
dfdfdf	dffd	13	49.3	18	6.30	17.33	16.5	3/11
fdfdfd	dfdfd	15	53.3	18	6.50	19.33	13.2	3/21

A simple Layout table. For statistics -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 04:48, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

warm up matches

I don't really see the point in having these warm-up match mini-scorecards on this page. They don't really contribute anything and take up far too much space. I'd suggest either getting rid of them, or making a separate article in which to include them. At the very least, creating a "minimise" box around them so that they can be hidden from view. As I don't know how to do the latter and don't want to do either of the former without consensus, this is open for discussion. DJR (T) 00:57, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I do agree with you. I have made the change and i have added up the minimize option on it.Warm Up matches Occupy extra space and has many red links(links to Uncreated articles) -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 03:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

The list is also incomplete —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crictv69 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, can someone please correct the result for the warm up match between India and New Zealand (June 1st, 2009). I believe the correct result is NZ won by 9 runs. Pawnjabi (talk) 14:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Crictv69 can you mention the area at which the list is incomplete, Is it about the appearance or the match info. -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 14:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Pawnjabi , the match result data has been corrected , thank you -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 14:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Ireland

Please can people stop using the {{cr|IRL}} template for Ireland and instead use the {{cr|IRE}} template. Usage of the Republic of Ireland flag for a team that represents the whole of Ireland is not accurate, and in any case doesn't represent the flag that the team themselves play under. Andrew nixon (talk) 09:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Request this page be locked due to vandalism

I thought i had missed the England Pakistan game due to vandalism. Pinster2001 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinster2001 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I second that request, I also thought I'd missed it. The India vs Bangladesh score had been changed as well ★Sunny_bacon★ (talk) 16:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree -- Halo2 ^Talk 23:49, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

On what basis have you guys made changes to the Super eights table? How do you know that England will come second or South Africa will come first in their group? Pradeep90 (talk) 7 June 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 01:30, 8 June 2009 (UTC).

The Group seedings will be carried on to the next round as a result Team Pak/Net can qualify as C1 even if they finish the group as second. So England Qualifies as C2, NZ as D1 and SA as D2. -- Chockalinga Ayyappan ^Talk 02:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Hang on... surely if Netherlands qualify, they're seeded below England so Eng will qualify as C1? --FleetfootMike (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Surely not, in fact: and I quote from the playing conditions, just to clear it all up:

The Super Eight series will consist of eight teams divided into two groups of four based on their seedings in the Group stage ... If the top two seeded teams do qualify they will be seeded in position 1 and 2 as specified regardless of whether they finish first or second in their group, unless they are knocked out by team 3 in their group. In this instance, team 3 replaces the position of the team they knock out.

--FleetfootMike (talk) 13:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Seedings

From what i remember Bangladesh had a seeding of 8 (as having finished 8th in the last tournament) and West Indies were 9. Not the other way round as in the article. Therefore Bangladesh were placed in an easier group as compared to West Indies --Crictv69 (talk) 23:33, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Net run rate

I think the net run rate calculations made are wrong for England and Scotland. I thought the calculation of net run rate (total runs scored)÷(total overs faced) – (total runs conceded)÷(total overs bowled)? This isn't the same as working out the net run rate for individual matches and adding them together. Nmcc89 (talk) 23:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This has now been corrected. dbalsdon (talk) 12:58, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Irish cricket flag

http://wapedia.mobi/nl/Bestand:Flag_of_the_Irish_cricket_team.svg

This right here is the Irish cricket flag: why instead do we have that awful question mark instead? --Differentgravy (talk) 00:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

There was actually a version on Wikipedia of that flag here. However, I have uploaded a newer, clearer version of the flag with a less confusing filename which can be found here. I will change the template {{cr|IRE}} to include this image, and the changes shall soon appear in this article. Please settle any disputes here. Thanks, timsdad ^(talk) 12:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes, of course. I keep forgetting... As the image is fair-use, it cannot be used in the flagicon template. For anyone that wishes to know more information about this specific flag and why it cannot be used, more discussions can be found here, here, here and here. --timsdad ^(talk) 13:14, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Super Eights

Can we actually guarantee (for example) that England will finish top of their group? I don't see that any of the Super 8 placings and fixtures are guaranteed yet. --FleetfootMike (talk) 10:52, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

And the S8 table now shows England in the B2 position, 2nd in the group. The placements for D1 v D2 aren't decided yet either. Robert Ullmann (talk) 11:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure there was an explanation of this in the article before, but here goes. The teams are seeded in each group. To take the example of Group D, New Zealand are seeded first, South Africa second and Scotland third. Whatever happens in the group, New Zealand go through as D1 and South Africa go through as D2. If Scotland had qualified instead of New Zealand, they'd be D1, if they qualify instead of South Africa, they'd be D2. To take the example of Group B, England are seeded second. They have qualifed to the Super 8, but as they are seeded second will be given the B2 slot even if they win the group. Hope this clears it up. Andrew nixon (talk) 11:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Might be worth noting in the article, if you can find a reference. I've failed, so far :D --FleetfootMike (talk) 12:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Here you go: [1] —Raven42 (talk) 15:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

How about the possibility of Pakistan beating the Netherlands with a very high run rate? This would put England in 3rd knocking them out. 82.16.187.137 (talk) 19:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

No. There's no way for the Netherlands to lose and finish ahead of England on NRR. —Raven42 (talk) 20:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Error in the fact

in the warm up matches data, the match between INDIA and New Zealand was won by new zealand by 9 runs and not India by 6 runs —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwanion (talk • contribs) 15:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes ! the vandal edits are reverted now -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 07:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

no flag for Ireland

all the teams have a flag before their name while in a group table ireland doesn't —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwanion (talk • contribs) 15:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Its due to ongoing discussion as the flag of Ireland doesn't represent the whole cricket association of Ireland. The cricket team of Ireland has a different flag -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 02:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Irish flag

In all fairness if we are going to remove the Republic of Ireland flag (because it doesn't represent the Northern Irish component of the team representing the Irish Cricket Union) we should also remove the English flag (as it does not represent the Welsh component of the team representing the England and Wales Cricket Board). After all, its the same concept. 58.178.30.85 (talk) 20:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Group B final run-rates

Should be Pakistan +0.85 Netherlands -2.025 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haggis362 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

1 june warm up match

the match between india and new zealand was won by new zealand and not india, please correct in —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwanion (talk • contribs) 06:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Seems that edits were by some vandal. They have been reverted now -SubashChandran⁰⁰⁷ ׀ sign! 07:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Group B run-rates still wrong

Going to correct them then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haggis362 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

No offence, but is there something stopping you doing it? Andrew nixon (talk) 16:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

As far as I can tell the page is locked out from me editing. Is that right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haggis362 (talk • contribs) 22:49, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi final matchups

http://www.ecb.co.uk/news/world/icc-world-twenty20-2009/fixtures/

The semi final matches are mixed around: the first game at Trent Bridge will be E1 vs F2 and the second game at the Oval will be E2 vs F1. 90.194.254.198 (talk) 22:55, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Sri Lanka haven't advanced to the semis

Sri Lanka have not yet advanced to the semifinals, that is incorrect. If Pakistan beats Ireland and New Zealand beats Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka will be out of the tournament as it will have the worst NRR among the three teams. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.213.147.254 (talk) 15:05, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Fixed T. Moitie ^[talk] 15:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Pakistan going through is a mathematical certainty

Pakistan are through to the semi-finals. If Sri Lanka beat New Zealand, Pakistan will have more points than NZ. If NZ beat Sri Lanka, there will be a 3-way tie, but since Pakistan's NRR is better than SL, and SL's NRR will only get worse if they loose, Pakistan and NZ will go through. As such, after beating Ireland, Pakistan sealed a place in the semis. Please update the article to reflect that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.219.154 (talk) 01:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Match Summary for final

Hey people the article is looking great. I'm here to ask if one or more of the contributors would be able to add a small match summary in prose form, after the final tomorrow. The world twenty20 is listed as a recurring item for the ITN portal on the main page, however, there has to be a updated prose section relating to the news item in question in order for it to go up. I'd do it myself but I'm not that well vested with a knowledge of cricket and the article seems to have a lot of contributors anyway. Just thought I'd let you know in advance. Cheers --Daviessimo (talk) 10:33, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

On the frontpage it states 'world cup' but is that correct? It was made clear at the last tournament it wasn't a world cup but a world championship, is that still the case? --88.109.75.136 (talk) 08:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I have started it. Any help will be welcome.yousaf465'

mention in ITN

Still no mention when is it going to be mentioned on main page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.181.215 (talk) 17:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Because the article lacks a referenced prose update of the final. I left a message here on Saturday (see above) asking someone who has worked on the article to provide a small paragraph providing a match summary. Without it, the item cannot go up.--Daviessimo (talk) 17:37, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Please add refs. Thanks. –Howard the Duck 18:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Dishan

I was quite strange Dilshan was awarded man of the series after his 0 runs in the grand final. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Simpsons Fan100! (talk • contribs) 21:01, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/playing-conditions.html
  • In ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-04-23 17:02:28, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-04-24 04:28:23, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2007 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-05-26 02:49:56, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2007 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-05-27 15:07:36, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2007 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-06-15 14:26:35, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2009 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-06-17 14:27:58, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 14:29, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/icc_world_twenty20_playing_conditions_final.pdf
  • In ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-04-23 17:02:28, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-04-24 04:28:23, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2007 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-05-26 02:50:20, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2007 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-05-27 15:07:59, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2007 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-06-15 14:26:37, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2009 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-06-17 14:29:25, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 14:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2009 ICC World Twenty20. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080720113337/http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/playing-conditions.html to http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/playing-conditions.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080911035806/http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/icc_world_twenty20_playing_conditions_final.pdf to http://worldtwenty20.yahoo.com/abouttwenty20/icc_world_twenty20_playing_conditions_final.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.espnstar.com/cricket/icc-world-t20/news/detail/item284953/FINAL%3A-PAK-vs-SL%3A-Blow-by-Blow/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/407459.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:43, 18 June 2017 (UTC)