Talk:2010 ICC World Twenty20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Olympic Year[edit]

Is this a possible attempt to line the tournament up with Olympic years to make scheduling easier if cricket is accepted as an Olympic Sport? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crictv69 (talk • contribs) 05:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who knows - no specific intention. Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 05:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What sport is this?[edit]

I realize that the info box does mention cricket, but until I happened to notice that, I did not know what sport was being talked about. Perhaps a mention in the lead sentence? 159.169.242.3 (talk) 16:44, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion, I have added cricket to the lead sentence. --Jpeeling (talk) 16:57, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warm-up matches?[edit]

Should these matches really be included on this page? They are not part of the tournament, and most of them do not count as full T20Is or even T20s and therefore wouldn't be included in players' career stats. Therefore, I believe we should either delete them or create a separate article for the warm-ups with full international status (e.g. 2010 ICC World Twenty20 warm-up matches). Thoughts? – PeeJay 10:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps that's why a hidden template is used for the warm-up games, I don't think we need a separate article.--Managerarc(talk) 08:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe that is enough. The only relation these matches have to the competition is that teams use them as preparation for the tournament. You wouldn't expect to see friendlies played prior to the 2010 FIFA World Cup to be included in that article, would you? – PeeJay 16:37, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Would you? – PeeJay 08:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to create a separate article, then go ahead!--Managerarc(talk) 13:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan[edit]

some mention of the non-test teams and their special status (Al Jazeera did a special on the Afghan team, it could feature here. Maybe External links?)

India in Group F and Seeding of Teams in General[edit]

Just a quick note to explain that India are scheduled to play in Group F. Despite the fact that India will finish top of group C, they will retain the C2 seeding they had at the start of the tournament. This will mean that they will play in group F for the Super 8 section of the competition. I believe that this was done so that fans booking tickets would have more certainty of which games teams would be playing in the Super 8. It also means that Australia will probably get the A2 seeding from Bangladesh and play India in the first Super 8 match. Cheers Matt5AU (talk) 03:22, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These websites discuss the seeding of teams and the Super 8 Cricinfo and NDTV Cricket Matt5AU (talk) 03:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, now I understand. I assumed that the X1 and X2 seedings referred to the teams' positions at the end of the group stage. I can't say that this method makes more sense, but at least you've explained it. – PeeJay 07:11, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed it to your edit, but perhaps you can add the sources to a rules/background part for hos this works.Lihaas (talk) 07:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Lihaas for fixing it for me. I have added an explanation to the main article, which will hopefully explain it. In 2-3 days the group stage will be finished and then all the main cricket webpages will be showing the correct fixture. Matt5AU (talk) 07:49, 3 May 2010 (UTC) Matt5AU (talk) 06:35, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

missing group stage games[edit]

What happened to the group stage games? 210.9.66.213 (talk) 22:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, article should be semi-protected.--Managerarc(talk) 06:08, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree that it should be semi-protected, it would eliminate some of the work required to maintain the page in the correct state. I'm relatively new here, how does one request semi-protected status? Matt5AU (talk) 06:25, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One goes to WP:RFPP - but it only gets protected against true vandalism. Can I ask why the West Indies team is not being mentioned using the Windies cricket flag beside their name? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:54, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The flag is copyrighted, see the discussion at Template talk:Country data West Indies--Managerarc(talk) 10:02, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's two separate discussions going on there: the first has to do with the flag for the old West Indies Federation, the second has to do with the Windies flag that appears on the Windies cricket article already ... the second has no place on that page, as it will not be used in that template, but I'll look further... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:13, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection[edit]

This morning I have reverted 3 instances of vandalism and 2 instances of information being filled in for future rounds prior to first round completion by IP addresses. I have added anonymous page protection to the article to prevent this type of vandalism and incorrect information. I am watching this talkpage, and the article itself. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. We were all getting tired of people advancing teams to next round, making the page unreliable source. Now if you can somehow fix the Irish flag not showing up too —Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.119.168.192 (talk) 16:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neither the Irish nor the Windies flags meet copyright issues right now, based on some unique non-free image rules. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:10, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Aamer's final over against Australia[edit]

How can Aamer have bowled a five-wicket over if two of those wickets were run-outs? Surely he bowled a three-wicket over, plus two run-outs? – PeeJay 12:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the most interesting fact is that five wickets fell in the last over. How about the following wording..
Five wickets fell in the final over of Australia's innings. There were two runouts and Mohammad Aamer bowled a maiden and took three wickets.
I'm happy for you to do the change if you agree. Cheers Matt5AU (talk) 23:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I'm quite happy with the wording as it is. However, if we could find a way of making your suggestion a little more succinct, I would support that change. – PeeJay 00:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What about Five wickets fell in the final over of Australia's innings. Mohammad Aamer bowled a triple wicket maiden and there were two runouts? MC Rocks 00:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I'd be happy with that wording. Matt5AU (talk) 00:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Me too. – PeeJay 00:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done! MC Rocks 03:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I just made a slight tweak to the wording; I changed "triple wicket maiden" to "three-wicket maiden". – PeeJay 06:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Scott Styris also took three wickets in an over in the match against Zimbabwe.[1] Don't you think this should also be mentioned?--Managerarc(talk) 12:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

West Indies & Ireland flags[edit]

Why don't WI & Ireland have miniature flags displayed like the other teams? Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:12, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See above under "Page Protection" - short version: copyright issues. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. Axl ¤ [Talk] 13:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Points table updation for Group E at the end of NZ v Pak match[edit]

Hi. The points table for Group E has not been updated though the results of New Zealand vs. Pakistan match has been updated. New Zealand won the match by 1 run and are now placed at the third position in the points table (played 2; won 1; lost 1; points 2; NRR -0.3). Please update the page with this information. I am new to Wikipedia hence cannot edit semi-protected pages. --Muzam135 (talk) 18:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


How about updating Australia team in the semifinal game... ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.91.193.50 (talk) 10:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS, and indeed many articles are not even updated during their tournament at all (which is effectively how it should be). However, I'll peek into this; it will be a good test of the references. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:55, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Australia haven't officially qualified yet. If Sri Lanka and the West Indies both win by a significant amount, they could both overtake the Aussies. – PeeJay 12:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update de Statistics Section[edit]

If U will Update the Statistics of this Event then it will b very Good. Plz Update the 2010 ICC World Twenty20 statistics —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Shahid Alam (talk • contribs) 19:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 2.100.216.185, 16 May 2010[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}} Please correct the spelling of "before" in the last sentence of the very first paragraph as it is currently spelled incorrectly as "bevore":

"The tournament was organised in parallel with the women's tournament, with the men's semi-finals and final each being held bevore by the semi-finals and final from the women's event."

2.100.216.185 (talk) 19:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Welcome to Wikipedia, the typo is now fixed, thanks for pointing it out. jonkerz♠ 21:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Map[edit]

The most recent map addition seems a little poorly centred. Although a more attractive map than the previous, the cities involved should be more centred, similar to the original. Thoughts? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just had a look at the previous map, and it looked a little off-centre too. In fact, all three venues were smooshed right in the bottom right corner. – PeeJay 13:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Time and Timezone[edit]

As there's an editor who wished to add time information to the matches, and there seems to be conflict over the timezone issue, this thread is to discuss that addition to obtain consensus.

First, is it necessary/common to include time on already-played matches?

Second, if yes to both questions, then which timezone to use? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment, there is no separate field for time in Template:Limited Overs Matches. - M4nag3r(-)rC[Reply] 12:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have opened the discussion over at WP:CRICKET as well - IMHO, we start to violate things like WP:NOTNEWS - the time of the past match is not encyclopedic, unless it's somehow notable ("the first ever international cricket match to begin at midnight local time") (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can be persuaded either way, but there is the benefit of adding time to show if (a) the match was played under normal sun light, (b) the match was played under flood lights, (c) a combination of both. In T20, it could be any of the three, while in ODIs it's either (a) or (c) and for Tests, it's just (a) (at least for a few more months). As for the time zone, it should be local time zone as the info is dependent on that. —SpacemanSpiff 18:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link[edit]

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'
    • In 2010 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-06-18 13:58:47, 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) 13:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 2[edit]

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'
    • In 2010 ICC World Twenty20 on 2011-06-18 13:59:10, 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) 13:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2010 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:

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) 21:39, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_ICC_World_Twenty20&oldid=1196567874"