Reviews and ranking of Team

Reviews and ranking of 2007 World Cup team:
(1) Australia: More convincing winners than in 2003 and very clear in their own class . As in 2003, their dominance reduced the spectacle of the tournament, but it wasn't their fault that no-one could challenge them.It is very clear that the rest of the cricketing world must learn from their individual brilliance, mental strength and the resources that are put into the game in Australia.
(2) Sri Lanka: It is very clear that Sri Lanka is the second best side in the tournament, but didn't really compete with Australia, It can be the bad luck also that it started raining and it became dark when they were batting .
(3) New Zealand: The eternal bronze medalists- New Zealand always put together competitive sides that draw on team strengths.They looked promising for much of the tournament until the batting collapsed twice at the end.
(4) South Africa: You can say that the positives will be an improvement from 2003 and an ability to win most of the matches that counted. The negatives were centering on lack of bowling variety, especially spinners. According to the record 1999 still be remembered as the year South Africa was a dropped catch or a misheard run call away from the World Cup.
(5) England: Very clear 5th place, but when you start thinking that they are the one who started playing cricket first then you can say instead of going front they are going back.England were basically hampered by the inability of the top order to make runs quickly.
(6) West Indies: Started well, but it took the Super 8s to put West Indies group performance into context. They didn't play as a team, now starting to show worrying signs of becoming a more terminal decline.
(7) Bangladesh: They were the worst team in 2003, now from 14th to 7th place improvement is huge, Also if you look at Sri Lanka in 1992 and 1996, and Bangladesh continue improving at this rate, they may be a good early outside bet for 2011.
(8) Ireland: Simply wow you can say for them. Enthusiasm was everything for them, and although the wheels came off a few times at the end, they showed they could compete with, and sometimes beat, the best. It feels like son is defeating in the game to father the moment he learned how to play.
(9) India: They lost two games out of three in this group, and no-one can argue that they deserved to progress.
(10) Pakistan: The defining incident of the tournament,sadly linked to Bob Woolmer's murder, troubled preparation turned into a nightmare tournament, but they can't use the green Sabina Park wicket against Ireland as an excuse -in simple word they deserved their early exit.
(11) Kenya: Instead of going forward they went backward since 2003, but potential remains, as their efficient dispatching of Canada showed.
(12) Zimbabwe: "Cricketing realities in the tragic country"Being reasonably competitive against the West Indies was hardly a commendation.
(13) Netherlands: Heavy defeats against South Africa , but whacked the Scots. Remember the tournament most for the simple sum that six times six equals thirty-six.
(14) Canada: Gave England a few brief scares, but lost heavily against Kenya, which was a big disappointment for them. Although best against the Kiwis.
(15) Scotland: There must be something about Scotland and World Cups. It was thrashed by South Africa and Australia, also thrashed by the Dutch.
(16) Bermuda: you can say the worst side at the World Cup. But in their side, Dwayne Leverock, meant that they were happy to stay for 3 games.