Legendary American Football coach Duffy Daugherty once described a tie as ‘like kissing your sister’. I shudder to think what he would have made of events at Bangalore.
Trying to rank one day internationals, or even World Cup matches, is largely pointless, since beauty (or tension) is in the eye of the beholder. In this case I’m not a neutral so I don’t have a particularly objective view of proceedings, but this must be among the best games ever played in the World Cup. While it lacked the creeping tension, not to mention the importance, of the epic Australia v South Africa semi-final in 1999 or the sheer improbability of the West Indies’ one wicket win over Pakistan at the Oval in 1975 it was, nonetheless, an utterly compelling game of cricket.
Things didn’t start well for England. First of all Stuart Broad, by some distance their best one day seamer, reported sick, then they lost the toss and then Jimmy Anderson endured the sort of over that would have any bowler seeking immediate psychiatric treatment. Quite how Virender Sehwag was still there at the end of it is anyone’s guess, but Anderson can’t have imagined that his day would get any worse. Unfortunately he’d have been wrong. With Ajmal Shahzad betraying nerves at the other end, Sehwag looked as though he would capitalise on his early good fortune, but the impressive Bresnan induced a firm footed waft that was well held by Prior before causing Gambhir problems early on.
While all this was going on, however, Sachin Tendulkar was just beginning yet another masterpiece at the other end. I first saw him on a cricket field in 1990 in the game at Lord’s in which Graham Gooch made a triple century. I had just turned twenty two – it seems incredible that now, in my early forties with grey hair and a rather less athletic figure than was the case then, that Tendulkar is not only still playing but that he looks exactly the same. This was his ninety-eighth international century, a record that doesn’t become any less mind-boggling with repetition. Just as no-one will ever surpass the marks set by Wilfred Rhodes, Jack Hobbs or Don Bradman, so it is impossible to imagine another Sachin Tendulkar.
Here he started slowly, allowing Sehwag to indulge in his own unique take on opening the innings, but once he was into his stride he was unstoppable. A six over long off from Paul Collingwood looked utterly effortless, while the two in a single over from Graeme Swann showed greater ferocity and intent. His hundred had a sense of inevitably about it, to the extent that his dismissal, to a tame leading edge, was easily the most surprising aspect of it. Still, he had laid the platform for an assault that would surely carry India past 350 and into clear water.
Except that it didn’t really come. England, and especially Michael Yardy, bowled well in the batting powerplay, and then Bresnan produced the kind of over that stays with a player for ever. I must confess to being a Bresnan fan – he looks like a rugby player, but he is quicker than he looks, moves the ball a bit, and is intelligent enough to make the utmost of his talent. He bowled superbly at Melbourne and Sydney and looks to have kept his form, for he was the pick of the England bowling even before his 49th over heroics. To finish with figures of 5-48 when the opposition have wracked up 338 is some going.
India, then, were thirty runs or so short of where they would have hoped to be, but they were still ahead of the highest score ever successfully chased in India, which is 325, so they must have been confident. Their bowling, however, was quickly under pressure as Strauss and Pietersen took the innings to them. Andrew Strauss only has six ODI hundreds, but three of them have been in excess of 150 and he batted remarkably. His range of stroke has impressed since he came back into the ODI in the West Indies in 2009 and this was further evidence that he is now a very accomplished one day batsman.
Pietersen fell to a freakish catch by Patel and Trott failed for once, but Strauss found his ally in Bell and they set about making the total look very ordinary. With nine overs left they required sixty-one and looked to be in the box seat. Then came the powerplay.
A lot of wise after the event nonsense has been talked about this decision. England have generally not made great use of the batting powerplay, but in the past they have been criticised for not taking it early enough and for waiting until the established batsmen have gone. It was easy to see the logic, but with Ian Bell falling to a poorly conceived shot and Strauss falling to a beauty straight afterwards it seems only natural for the commentators, who had predicting an easy England win, to point the finger at the powerplay. In fact, I was responsible: having spent the afternoon keeping up to date with the innings on my phone I finally managed to switch on the radio only for two wickets to fall to the first two balls that I heard.
As Geoffrey Boycott is fond of saying, always add two wickets to the score and see how good it looks then (although he seemed to have forgotten that maxim in his commentary on Sunday afternoon). The new batsmen, unsurprisingly, struggled and with two overs to go the same commentators who had so confidently (and prematurely) heralded an England victory just half an hour or so before were sharpening their knives.
They had forgotten two crucial things, however. The first was that England’s tailenders are no mugs, and the second was that Zaheer Khan had finished his spell and so the last two overs were to be entrusted to Chawla and Patel. Perhaps taking that powerplay early and forcing Dhoni’s hand with regards to Zaheer hadn’t been so stupid after all. Even so, it is hard to imagine a side coming close in those circumstances before Twenty20 made anything seem possible.
Swann and Bresnan duly went after Chawla, each smiting him for a legside six, but Bresnan’s dismissal to the final ball of the over seemed to be the final blow. We had reckoned without Ajmal Shahzad.
Swann started the final over positively, playing characteristic shots to the first two balls of the over, but it was the third ball that turned the game on its head. Facing his first ball Shahzad, standing deep in his crease, produced a shot that he will bore his grandchildren with, a glorious strike into the advertising hoardings at long on. Suddenly England believed again. A rapidly taken bye and a two from Swann left them needing two to win, but the single brought a tie and a pretty fair result.
Both sides will be concerned about their bowling and India should also worry about their fielding, which was awful at times. MS Dhoni will also need to be more positive in the field, but their batting remains astonishingly good. As for England, they will have taken a lot of heart from the way that they set up a strong position and then showed great character in fighting back at the end of each innings. Stuart Broad cannot come back soon enough, mind you.
As for those who were lucky enough to be there, many will have gone to the game hoping to see a hundred from Sachin and an Indian win. They didn’t quite get all that they wished for, but they witnessed an extraordinary game of cricket and you can guarantee that there weren’t many sisters being kissed in Bangalore on Sunday night.
Monday 28 February 2011
Coming to Life
If the game between England and the Netherlands had shown what was possible from the World Cup, the Bangladesh v Ireland game sparked it into life, confirming the suspicion that low scoring matches are often more entertaining than those in which bat dominates ball. Certainly the best ODI that I’ve seen in the flesh was the tie between England and Australia at Lord’s when both sides made just 196, but I digress.
Ireland are unusual among the minnows in that their bowling is often stronger than their batting. In Trent Johnston they have a canny seamer with a history of success in ICC competitions, Boyd Rankin is regularly playing first class cricket in England, although the conditions didn’t suit him in Mirpur and they have a credible trio of spinners the pick of whom, eighteen year old George Dockrell, may well find himself snapped up by England in the fullness of time. The batting has its moments – the captain William Porterfield, Niall O’Brien and, of course, Ed Joyce, are all handy performers – but the suspicion is that if they are to beat a test playing nation then it will be by bowling them out cheaply and then gradually overhauling the total. It’s what happened against Pakistan in 2007 and for a time it looked as though it might happen again here.
Certainly, Bangladesh will be concerned by their failure to get more than 205. Tamim got them off to a flying start but once he had departed, making the score 68-3 at better than a run a ball, the rest of the batting stagnated in the face of accurate but hardly devastating bowling. Shakib briefly threatened to take the innings away from Ireland, but once he had been snared by Botha the rest of the innings was a bit of a struggle, as can be seen from a quick glance at the strike rates of the Bangladeshi batsmen.
Ireland’s reply threatened a shock for a long time – at both 75-2 and 151-5, with time on their side, they were favourites, but Shafiul Islam delivered a devastating spell that caused the last five wickets to fall for just twenty seven, leaving the Irish twenty seven runs short of what would have been a famous victory. The game may have lacked the spectacular hitting of the opening game, but it was deeply absorbing. Bangladesh will feel relieved that they have their first win of the tournament and will look forward to the challenges that await while Ireland will see it as a chance missed, although it will have done their confidence the world of good. They may yet have a say in how this group pans out.
Saturday brought another good game, and this time the favourites weren’t able to turn things round. As I said in the preview it is a longstanding cliché that Pakistan are somewhat unpredicatable but here, inspired by Misbah Ul Haq and Shahid Afridi, the two men who have been charged with turning Pakistani cricket around, they recorded a memorable victory.
They weren’t without their moments of farce, mind you. The run out of Mohammed Hafeez was one of the more cretinous pieces of cricket that you’re likely to see and some of the fielding was execrable, allowing Sri Lanka to get closer than they should. Kamran Akmal is the epitome of this side – at times he looked liked the cymbal toting seal who kept wicket in England last summer, but he also pulled off two smart stumpings, one of which finally tilted the game Pakistan’s way.
The star, though, was Shahid Afridi, who took his tally of wickets to nine in two matches. Murali had earlier given a masterclass in parsimony on a decent pitch, but Shahid was a force of nature. When the muse is with him he can be devastating, and this was undoubtedly one of his good days. If he can sustain his form then Pakistan will be a force to reckon with, while Sri Lanka look slightly short of the quality that has made them strongly fancied. It will be fascinating to see how the two sides develop over the next few weeks.
Ireland are unusual among the minnows in that their bowling is often stronger than their batting. In Trent Johnston they have a canny seamer with a history of success in ICC competitions, Boyd Rankin is regularly playing first class cricket in England, although the conditions didn’t suit him in Mirpur and they have a credible trio of spinners the pick of whom, eighteen year old George Dockrell, may well find himself snapped up by England in the fullness of time. The batting has its moments – the captain William Porterfield, Niall O’Brien and, of course, Ed Joyce, are all handy performers – but the suspicion is that if they are to beat a test playing nation then it will be by bowling them out cheaply and then gradually overhauling the total. It’s what happened against Pakistan in 2007 and for a time it looked as though it might happen again here.
Certainly, Bangladesh will be concerned by their failure to get more than 205. Tamim got them off to a flying start but once he had departed, making the score 68-3 at better than a run a ball, the rest of the batting stagnated in the face of accurate but hardly devastating bowling. Shakib briefly threatened to take the innings away from Ireland, but once he had been snared by Botha the rest of the innings was a bit of a struggle, as can be seen from a quick glance at the strike rates of the Bangladeshi batsmen.
Ireland’s reply threatened a shock for a long time – at both 75-2 and 151-5, with time on their side, they were favourites, but Shafiul Islam delivered a devastating spell that caused the last five wickets to fall for just twenty seven, leaving the Irish twenty seven runs short of what would have been a famous victory. The game may have lacked the spectacular hitting of the opening game, but it was deeply absorbing. Bangladesh will feel relieved that they have their first win of the tournament and will look forward to the challenges that await while Ireland will see it as a chance missed, although it will have done their confidence the world of good. They may yet have a say in how this group pans out.
Saturday brought another good game, and this time the favourites weren’t able to turn things round. As I said in the preview it is a longstanding cliché that Pakistan are somewhat unpredicatable but here, inspired by Misbah Ul Haq and Shahid Afridi, the two men who have been charged with turning Pakistani cricket around, they recorded a memorable victory.
They weren’t without their moments of farce, mind you. The run out of Mohammed Hafeez was one of the more cretinous pieces of cricket that you’re likely to see and some of the fielding was execrable, allowing Sri Lanka to get closer than they should. Kamran Akmal is the epitome of this side – at times he looked liked the cymbal toting seal who kept wicket in England last summer, but he also pulled off two smart stumpings, one of which finally tilted the game Pakistan’s way.
The star, though, was Shahid Afridi, who took his tally of wickets to nine in two matches. Murali had earlier given a masterclass in parsimony on a decent pitch, but Shahid was a force of nature. When the muse is with him he can be devastating, and this was undoubtedly one of his good days. If he can sustain his form then Pakistan will be a force to reckon with, while Sri Lanka look slightly short of the quality that has made them strongly fancied. It will be fascinating to see how the two sides develop over the next few weeks.
Friday 25 February 2011
Bouncebackability?
On the evidence of the opening week predicting the result of the long awaited clash between India and England on Sunday should be a no-brainer. India were impressive in their defeat of Bangladesh (although Bangladesh’s struggles against Ireland suggest that they are weaker than I, for one, thought), while England were deeply unimpressive, especially with the ball, in their narrow win over Holland. India by a comfortable margin seems to be the only sensible call.
It isn’t a foregone conclusion, though. One of the features of England’s cricket has been their ability to put past performances behind them and move on to the next challenge, and there can be no doubting their basic ability. They lost to the West Indies and struggled for a while against Ireland in the group stages of the World Twenty20 and yet came away with the trophy and the debacles at Cardiff, Headingley, the Oval and Perth were immediately followed by comprehensive wins. Granted, none of these examples were in fifty over cricket, but it gives an indication of the mental strength of the group. It may be that the performance against the Dutch might be what they needed to shake themselves from their torpor (although, equally, it may have been a sign of things to come, but let’s keep this optimistic).
Do I expect England to win on Sunday? No I don’t, but I don’t expect it to be an Indian procession either. England will be desperate to do well and if they can put India under pressure then who knows what might happen. It is, as Saint and Greavsie would doubtless point out, a funny old game.
It isn’t a foregone conclusion, though. One of the features of England’s cricket has been their ability to put past performances behind them and move on to the next challenge, and there can be no doubting their basic ability. They lost to the West Indies and struggled for a while against Ireland in the group stages of the World Twenty20 and yet came away with the trophy and the debacles at Cardiff, Headingley, the Oval and Perth were immediately followed by comprehensive wins. Granted, none of these examples were in fifty over cricket, but it gives an indication of the mental strength of the group. It may be that the performance against the Dutch might be what they needed to shake themselves from their torpor (although, equally, it may have been a sign of things to come, but let’s keep this optimistic).
Do I expect England to win on Sunday? No I don’t, but I don’t expect it to be an Indian procession either. England will be desperate to do well and if they can put India under pressure then who knows what might happen. It is, as Saint and Greavsie would doubtless point out, a funny old game.
How The Mighty Have Fallen
It’s not that long since I watched New Zealand and the West Indies play at Lord’s in the final of a triangular one day tournament from which they had eliminated England. For all of England’s travails against the Dutch the other day it is hard to imagine that happening today, such as has been the fall from grace of these two sides. Admittedly they both found themselves up against decent sides, but even so the manner of the defeats will not have filled their supporters with any great hope.
New Zealand in general has bigger fish to fry than the performances of its one day side and the players, particularly those from Canterbury, could be forgiven for having half a mind at home, but after their demolition of a weak Kenya side in the first game their return to earth was rapid. Once the top order had capitulated to the pace of Tait and Johnson they were engaged in a damage limitation exercise. Nathan McCullum and Vettori showed a lot of application to take the score to respectability, but the main part of New Zealand’s problem is that their batting from number five to number ten could appear in pretty much any order, which is good for the tail enders but less good for the batsmen. Once Australia had got off to a good start through Watson and Haddin the game was up and, in spite of Ponting’s early departure to a brilliant piece of work from Brendon McCullum, they were never really in any danger. I said in the preview that New Zealand were lucky to be in the weaker group and there was nothing here to suggest anything different.
The West Indies, on the other hand, had spells of their innings, especially when the richly talented Darren Bravo was batting, when it looked as though they might make a big enough score to put South Africa under pressure. The dismissal of Bravo Senior, however, precipitated a collapse which included a first baller for everyone’s favourite hit and miss batsman Kieron Pollard. Although South Africa lost Amla and Kallis early there was no answer to the irrepressible AB DeVilliers whose hundred showcased all of his talent. The West Indies have batsmen in Gayle, Darren Bravo and Sarwan who should be abel to make the kind of scores required to win one day internationals but their bowling lacks penetration and their long losing run must be preying on their minds.
So, what have we learned? Firstly, both Australia and South Africa look in good shape, although sterner tests await and, particularly for Australia, better players of pace bowling. South Africa looked impressive, with Imran Tahir making the kind of impact that had been hoped for and DeVilliers looking in good form. Sterner tests await them as well, though, and they will need their spinners to bowl consistently well As for New Zealand and the West Indies, it’s early days but neither look destined to make a significant mark on the competition.
New Zealand in general has bigger fish to fry than the performances of its one day side and the players, particularly those from Canterbury, could be forgiven for having half a mind at home, but after their demolition of a weak Kenya side in the first game their return to earth was rapid. Once the top order had capitulated to the pace of Tait and Johnson they were engaged in a damage limitation exercise. Nathan McCullum and Vettori showed a lot of application to take the score to respectability, but the main part of New Zealand’s problem is that their batting from number five to number ten could appear in pretty much any order, which is good for the tail enders but less good for the batsmen. Once Australia had got off to a good start through Watson and Haddin the game was up and, in spite of Ponting’s early departure to a brilliant piece of work from Brendon McCullum, they were never really in any danger. I said in the preview that New Zealand were lucky to be in the weaker group and there was nothing here to suggest anything different.
The West Indies, on the other hand, had spells of their innings, especially when the richly talented Darren Bravo was batting, when it looked as though they might make a big enough score to put South Africa under pressure. The dismissal of Bravo Senior, however, precipitated a collapse which included a first baller for everyone’s favourite hit and miss batsman Kieron Pollard. Although South Africa lost Amla and Kallis early there was no answer to the irrepressible AB DeVilliers whose hundred showcased all of his talent. The West Indies have batsmen in Gayle, Darren Bravo and Sarwan who should be abel to make the kind of scores required to win one day internationals but their bowling lacks penetration and their long losing run must be preying on their minds.
So, what have we learned? Firstly, both Australia and South Africa look in good shape, although sterner tests await and, particularly for Australia, better players of pace bowling. South Africa looked impressive, with Imran Tahir making the kind of impact that had been hoped for and DeVilliers looking in good form. Sterner tests await them as well, though, and they will need their spinners to bowl consistently well As for New Zealand and the West Indies, it’s early days but neither look destined to make a significant mark on the competition.
Wednesday 23 February 2011
Let's Not Peak Too Early...
Before Tuesday it had been a gentle start to the World Cup, test playing nations swatting aside the minnows with alacrity, but on Tuesday the tournament finally came to life with the threat of the first shock.
Nagpur is, appropriately, the orange city, and for much of the game the men in orange threatened to repeat their shock performance in the opening game of the 2009 World Twenty20. In the end Ravi Bopara and Paul Collingwood saw England home but all of the plaudits deservedly went to the Dutch and, in particular, the remarkable Ryan ten Doeschate.
Ten Doeschate, of course, is in a different class from most Associate players. He boasts a first class batting average of 48.05 and a one day international average of around seventy, but even so England will be deeply disappointed to have allowed him to make a career defining century that so nearly set up a remarkable win for his side. The bowling and fielding, for so long such a strength of England, was a shadow of its normal self, verging on the shambolic at times, and had Dirk Nannes still been playing for the Netherlands it might have cost England dearly. As it was they escaped thanks to a flurry of scoring from Ravi Bopara and, eventually, a crucial lack of quality and depth in the Dutch bowling.
England have been out of sorts since the one day series started in Australia. The ‘after the Lord Mayor’s Show’ feeling that permeated their limited over cricket then has been carried over into the World Cup and it is something that the management team need to address as a matter of urgency. The positive is that this group of players have generally bounced back well from adversity and that this may be the wake-up call that they need, but they are going to improve and do it fast if they are to make any kind of positive impression on this tournament.
We shouldn’t read too much into one game, though. Back in 1983, in the days of rather shorter World Cups, India found themselves 17-5 and all but out of the tournament at the hands of Zimbabwe. One week later they were World Champions.
Nagpur is, appropriately, the orange city, and for much of the game the men in orange threatened to repeat their shock performance in the opening game of the 2009 World Twenty20. In the end Ravi Bopara and Paul Collingwood saw England home but all of the plaudits deservedly went to the Dutch and, in particular, the remarkable Ryan ten Doeschate.
Ten Doeschate, of course, is in a different class from most Associate players. He boasts a first class batting average of 48.05 and a one day international average of around seventy, but even so England will be deeply disappointed to have allowed him to make a career defining century that so nearly set up a remarkable win for his side. The bowling and fielding, for so long such a strength of England, was a shadow of its normal self, verging on the shambolic at times, and had Dirk Nannes still been playing for the Netherlands it might have cost England dearly. As it was they escaped thanks to a flurry of scoring from Ravi Bopara and, eventually, a crucial lack of quality and depth in the Dutch bowling.
England have been out of sorts since the one day series started in Australia. The ‘after the Lord Mayor’s Show’ feeling that permeated their limited over cricket then has been carried over into the World Cup and it is something that the management team need to address as a matter of urgency. The positive is that this group of players have generally bounced back well from adversity and that this may be the wake-up call that they need, but they are going to improve and do it fast if they are to make any kind of positive impression on this tournament.
We shouldn’t read too much into one game, though. Back in 1983, in the days of rather shorter World Cups, India found themselves 17-5 and all but out of the tournament at the hands of Zimbabwe. One week later they were World Champions.
Tuesday 22 February 2011
Opening Salvos
I wonder what odds you could have got on Virender Sehwag hitting the first ball of the World Cup for four. After all of the build-up and amid the feverish anticipation of the home crowd there was something almost anti-climactic about his disdainful dismissal of the first ball that was bowled to him. Anti-climactic, that is, unless you’re Indian.
From there Sehwag went on his merry way. It was, in many ways, a typical Sehwag innings, full of strokes that defied explanation executed with the barest shuffle of the feet, unless he was opening up the off side and driving murderously through, or over, cover. Had his movements not been hampered late on it is not impossible that we might have seen a double century on the opening night of the tournament. There was only one true blemish: as it turned out the run out of Sachin Tendulkar was only an issue for the little master’s legion of fans, but on another day Sehwag’s indolent backing up and refusal to respond to the call may have been more expensive. It may seem churlish to point it out, but sterner challenges lie ahead of India if they are to become the first team to lift the trophy on home soil and they need to get all aspects of their game spot on.
That aside, though, it was a pretty satisfactory opening for the Indians. Bangladesh showed character and scrapped hard but were never really in the game once Sehwag and the underrated Virat Kohli had done their stuff. It wasn’t the most exciting opening imaginable to a World Cup but neither was it a stereotypically dull fifty over match and it bodes well for the rest of the tournament.
The games on Sunday were less of an advertisement for the World Cup in its current format. Kenya were shock semi-finalists in 2003 but those days seem long past now. Steve Tikolo, once widely acknowledged as the best non-test batsman in the world, looks a shadow of his former self and others such as Collins Obuya seem also to have declined. It’s a shame, but New Zealand made short work of them with a comprehensive ten wicket win. It is difficult to gauge where New Zealand stand after this, but it should certainly have done their confidence the world of good.
Later on Sunday, Canada offered a little more resistance to widely fancied Sri Lanka but, after a sluggish start, Sangakkara and Jayawardene showed their class and Canada, who had given England a scare in warm-up game, were never in the game in spite of flamboyant innings from Rizwan Cheema. As with the other major nations so far, Sri Lanka will face much tougher challenges than this but will be grateful for the work out.
Australia haven’t lost a match at the World Cup since 1999, and even then it didn’t stop them from winning the trophy, and it was never really likely that this would come to an end against a decent Zimbabwean side. Other sides may have noted the Australian top order’s reluctance to use their feet to the spinners, which resulted in a decidedly de-powered first powerplay, but Michael Clarke and Shane Watson played nicely (although Watson was noticeably more comfortable against the quicker bowlers) and the pace attack were too much for the Zimbabwean batting line-up. Whether they will be a challenge to the better sides in these conditions remains to be seen.
So it’s been interesting rather than explosive thus far, although England are doing their best to bring the tournament to life against the Netherlands as I write. With only one game a day there is a slight lack of momentum at the moment, but things are starting to build up and Thursday will bring the next clash of test playing sides when South Africa take on the West Indies. Bring it on.
From there Sehwag went on his merry way. It was, in many ways, a typical Sehwag innings, full of strokes that defied explanation executed with the barest shuffle of the feet, unless he was opening up the off side and driving murderously through, or over, cover. Had his movements not been hampered late on it is not impossible that we might have seen a double century on the opening night of the tournament. There was only one true blemish: as it turned out the run out of Sachin Tendulkar was only an issue for the little master’s legion of fans, but on another day Sehwag’s indolent backing up and refusal to respond to the call may have been more expensive. It may seem churlish to point it out, but sterner challenges lie ahead of India if they are to become the first team to lift the trophy on home soil and they need to get all aspects of their game spot on.
That aside, though, it was a pretty satisfactory opening for the Indians. Bangladesh showed character and scrapped hard but were never really in the game once Sehwag and the underrated Virat Kohli had done their stuff. It wasn’t the most exciting opening imaginable to a World Cup but neither was it a stereotypically dull fifty over match and it bodes well for the rest of the tournament.
The games on Sunday were less of an advertisement for the World Cup in its current format. Kenya were shock semi-finalists in 2003 but those days seem long past now. Steve Tikolo, once widely acknowledged as the best non-test batsman in the world, looks a shadow of his former self and others such as Collins Obuya seem also to have declined. It’s a shame, but New Zealand made short work of them with a comprehensive ten wicket win. It is difficult to gauge where New Zealand stand after this, but it should certainly have done their confidence the world of good.
Later on Sunday, Canada offered a little more resistance to widely fancied Sri Lanka but, after a sluggish start, Sangakkara and Jayawardene showed their class and Canada, who had given England a scare in warm-up game, were never in the game in spite of flamboyant innings from Rizwan Cheema. As with the other major nations so far, Sri Lanka will face much tougher challenges than this but will be grateful for the work out.
Australia haven’t lost a match at the World Cup since 1999, and even then it didn’t stop them from winning the trophy, and it was never really likely that this would come to an end against a decent Zimbabwean side. Other sides may have noted the Australian top order’s reluctance to use their feet to the spinners, which resulted in a decidedly de-powered first powerplay, but Michael Clarke and Shane Watson played nicely (although Watson was noticeably more comfortable against the quicker bowlers) and the pace attack were too much for the Zimbabwean batting line-up. Whether they will be a challenge to the better sides in these conditions remains to be seen.
So it’s been interesting rather than explosive thus far, although England are doing their best to bring the tournament to life against the Netherlands as I write. With only one game a day there is a slight lack of momentum at the moment, but things are starting to build up and Thursday will bring the next clash of test playing sides when South Africa take on the West Indies. Bring it on.
Thursday 17 February 2011
World Cup Preview: Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s travails in test cricket, a series against a weakened West Indies aside, have been obvious for all to see, but in one day cricket, and particularly at home, they have been improving and their status as joint hosts for this tournament should stand them in good stead.
They find themselves in a tough group, but their knowledge of the conditions and their array of spinners should be enough to see them through the group stages. In Tamim Iqbal they have an extremely dangerous opening batsman who is capable of putting any attack on the back foot and others, such as Imrul Kayes, will benefit from not having the ball whizzing around their ears. If the enigma that is Mohammad Ashraful can bat as we all know that he can then they should make decent runs, especially with the all round talent of Shakib al Hasan in the middle order.
If this World Cup were being played in England or Australia then their attack would look weak, but on slow, low pitches the battery of spinners lead by Shakib should come into their own. England were pretty lucky to win the series in Bangladesh 3-0 a year ago and the whitewash of New Zealand will have put them in good heart, making them believe that they can take on anyone and strangle pretty much any batting line-up. They are not serious contenders, yet, for the trophy but the signs are that they are moving in the right direction.
Much depends on: Tamim Iqbal. If he can regularly get the innings off to a flying start then opponents could be in for a long fifty overs.
Verdict: Quarter-finals
They find themselves in a tough group, but their knowledge of the conditions and their array of spinners should be enough to see them through the group stages. In Tamim Iqbal they have an extremely dangerous opening batsman who is capable of putting any attack on the back foot and others, such as Imrul Kayes, will benefit from not having the ball whizzing around their ears. If the enigma that is Mohammad Ashraful can bat as we all know that he can then they should make decent runs, especially with the all round talent of Shakib al Hasan in the middle order.
If this World Cup were being played in England or Australia then their attack would look weak, but on slow, low pitches the battery of spinners lead by Shakib should come into their own. England were pretty lucky to win the series in Bangladesh 3-0 a year ago and the whitewash of New Zealand will have put them in good heart, making them believe that they can take on anyone and strangle pretty much any batting line-up. They are not serious contenders, yet, for the trophy but the signs are that they are moving in the right direction.
Much depends on: Tamim Iqbal. If he can regularly get the innings off to a flying start then opponents could be in for a long fifty overs.
Verdict: Quarter-finals
World Cup Preview: West Indies
For cricket supporters of a certain age it is hard not to come over all misty eyed when considering the West Indies. The first World Cup that I followed was in 1979 when they carried all before them, their batting epitomised by the partnership between Viv Richards and Collis King in the final and their bowling by Joel Garner’s devastating spell that clinched their second successive World Cup. If anyone had told me then that they wouldn’t win the trophy again for at least thirty-two years then I wouldn’t have believed them, but since their scarcely credible defeat in the 1983 final they have rarely challenged, the 1996 semi-final, which they should have won, being the exception to the rule.
The green shoots of recovery have been more apparent of late, but they are unfortunate to find themselves in a tough group. They are not short of talent but they, like so many other sides in the tournament, lack consistency. Chris Gayle can be a force of nature at the top of the innings, but he is just as capable of getting out to an indifferent shot. The conditions, however, should suit him. Shiv Chanderpaul has had an extraordinary career and can be devastating in limited overs cricket, but it is hard to escape the conclusion that his best days are behind him. Ramnaresh Sarwan has undoubted skill, and is another who may enjoy the conditions, but he, too, struggles for consistency. Adrian Barath and Darren Bravo are both highly promising but, at the moment, no more than that. This could be their chance to shine. Kieron Pollard can hit the ball freakish distances and can be devastating if he comes in with an established platform, but he isn’t well suited to coming in at 100-5 and manages to find some unusual ways of getting out.
It is, however, difficult to see where the wickets are going to come from. Kemar Roach is exciting, but the pace attack otherwise looks rather pedestrian, especially with the recent decline in Dwayne Bravo’s form. As for the spinners, Sulieman Benn and Nikita Miller present different challenges and can both be very handy, while Chris Gayle’s languid off spin could also play an important role. They will, however, mostly be looking to contain rather than attack.
Much will depend on the mindset, but they could be the big name casualties of the first round. I hope that I’m wrong, but this could yet be a low point in the chequered recent history of West Indian cricket.
Much depends on: Dwayne Bravo. He hasn’t been setting the world alight of late but there’s no doubting his talent.
Verdict: First round
The green shoots of recovery have been more apparent of late, but they are unfortunate to find themselves in a tough group. They are not short of talent but they, like so many other sides in the tournament, lack consistency. Chris Gayle can be a force of nature at the top of the innings, but he is just as capable of getting out to an indifferent shot. The conditions, however, should suit him. Shiv Chanderpaul has had an extraordinary career and can be devastating in limited overs cricket, but it is hard to escape the conclusion that his best days are behind him. Ramnaresh Sarwan has undoubted skill, and is another who may enjoy the conditions, but he, too, struggles for consistency. Adrian Barath and Darren Bravo are both highly promising but, at the moment, no more than that. This could be their chance to shine. Kieron Pollard can hit the ball freakish distances and can be devastating if he comes in with an established platform, but he isn’t well suited to coming in at 100-5 and manages to find some unusual ways of getting out.
It is, however, difficult to see where the wickets are going to come from. Kemar Roach is exciting, but the pace attack otherwise looks rather pedestrian, especially with the recent decline in Dwayne Bravo’s form. As for the spinners, Sulieman Benn and Nikita Miller present different challenges and can both be very handy, while Chris Gayle’s languid off spin could also play an important role. They will, however, mostly be looking to contain rather than attack.
Much will depend on the mindset, but they could be the big name casualties of the first round. I hope that I’m wrong, but this could yet be a low point in the chequered recent history of West Indian cricket.
Much depends on: Dwayne Bravo. He hasn’t been setting the world alight of late but there’s no doubting his talent.
Verdict: First round
World Cup Preview: New Zealand
If New Zealand were in Group B then they would be at serious risk of being eliminated in the first round, for their form has been dismal of late. There were glimmers of a revival in the 3-2 defeat by Pakistan, but the humiliating whitewash in Bangladesh was indicative of a side at odds both with itself and the conditions. Daniel Vettori’s decision to give up the captaincy after the tournament is not as sinister as it may appear, for he claims that he reached the decision some time ago, but it remains to be seen what impact it will have on the team.
The main problem is one of inconsistency. On his day Brendon McCullum can be as destructive an opener as anyone is world cricket, but his day doesn’t come around as often as his team and its supporters would like. The same is true of the highly talented Ross Taylor and Jesse Ryder, both of whom are capable of winning games more or less off their own bats but who don’t deliver often enough for New Zealand to string together runs of victories. There is some cause for optimism in the steady improvement of Martin Guptill and the exciting talent of Kane Williamson, and there is scope for big hitting down the order from Jacob Oram and Tim Southee, but the batting is a worry, especially if Scott Styris fails.
The bowling lacks stars, Vettori aside, but there are plenty of options. Tim Southee is improving but the retirement of Shane Bond has left the pace attack short of a spearhead. Nathan McCullum is a handy one day off spinner and Woodcock, Styris, Oram and Ryder will all provide useful alternatives for Vettori, but it is hard to see where many wickets will come from. As has often been the case over the years they look a couple of players short of making any sort of serious challenge.
Much depends on: It seems rather obvious, but much will hinge on Daniel Vettori as a bowler, batsman and all round inspiration.
Verdict: Quarter-finals
The main problem is one of inconsistency. On his day Brendon McCullum can be as destructive an opener as anyone is world cricket, but his day doesn’t come around as often as his team and its supporters would like. The same is true of the highly talented Ross Taylor and Jesse Ryder, both of whom are capable of winning games more or less off their own bats but who don’t deliver often enough for New Zealand to string together runs of victories. There is some cause for optimism in the steady improvement of Martin Guptill and the exciting talent of Kane Williamson, and there is scope for big hitting down the order from Jacob Oram and Tim Southee, but the batting is a worry, especially if Scott Styris fails.
The bowling lacks stars, Vettori aside, but there are plenty of options. Tim Southee is improving but the retirement of Shane Bond has left the pace attack short of a spearhead. Nathan McCullum is a handy one day off spinner and Woodcock, Styris, Oram and Ryder will all provide useful alternatives for Vettori, but it is hard to see where many wickets will come from. As has often been the case over the years they look a couple of players short of making any sort of serious challenge.
Much depends on: It seems rather obvious, but much will hinge on Daniel Vettori as a bowler, batsman and all round inspiration.
Verdict: Quarter-finals
Wednesday 16 February 2011
World Cup Preview: Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka have not been on the radar a great deal of late, but they won a one day series in Australia earlier in the winter and unquestionably have the players to make a serious impact in the tournament.
Their bowling could be a problem. Murali will be desperate for a spectacular last hurrah but players on the point of retirement are seldom at the peak of the game and be is no longer the destroyer of the past. The much-hyped Ajantha Mendis is also not as bamboozling as he was, having been video-analysed to within an inch of his life, although he remains a very handy performer. Lasith Malinga is, of course, a freakish talent but there is a touch of the Mitchell Johnson’s in his accuracy. Their advantage, however, is that they have a wide variety of options. Sanath Jayasuriya has finally been pensioned off (having exceeded his sell-by date some time ago) which is a loss to the bowling, but Dilshan is an effective off spinner and Angelo Mathews a genuine all rounder.
The batting, however, has considerable potential. Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakkara, both of whom will relish the conditions, will provide the class, Tillakaratne Dilshan can get them off to a flying start, especially if he re-captures the form of the 2009 World Twenty20, and there is plenty of power down the order, not least from that man Mathews. If they get some momentum then they will take some stopping.
Much will depend upon: Angelo Mathews. His tidy seam bowling will have an important role and they will be looking to him to score quick runs in the latter stages of the innings. If he has a good tournament then that will be a massive boost to Sri Lanka’s cause.
Verdict: Finalists
Their bowling could be a problem. Murali will be desperate for a spectacular last hurrah but players on the point of retirement are seldom at the peak of the game and be is no longer the destroyer of the past. The much-hyped Ajantha Mendis is also not as bamboozling as he was, having been video-analysed to within an inch of his life, although he remains a very handy performer. Lasith Malinga is, of course, a freakish talent but there is a touch of the Mitchell Johnson’s in his accuracy. Their advantage, however, is that they have a wide variety of options. Sanath Jayasuriya has finally been pensioned off (having exceeded his sell-by date some time ago) which is a loss to the bowling, but Dilshan is an effective off spinner and Angelo Mathews a genuine all rounder.
The batting, however, has considerable potential. Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakkara, both of whom will relish the conditions, will provide the class, Tillakaratne Dilshan can get them off to a flying start, especially if he re-captures the form of the 2009 World Twenty20, and there is plenty of power down the order, not least from that man Mathews. If they get some momentum then they will take some stopping.
Much will depend upon: Angelo Mathews. His tidy seam bowling will have an important role and they will be looking to him to score quick runs in the latter stages of the innings. If he has a good tournament then that will be a massive boost to Sri Lanka’s cause.
Verdict: Finalists
Monday 14 February 2011
World Cup Preview: South Africa
A little like the All Blacks, the South African cricket team have mastered the art of turning up at major tournaments highly fancied and then finding a way of getting knocked out. In 1992 they weren’t helped by the farcical rain rules in their semi-final against England (although at the point that the rain came they needed twenty-two from thirteen balls with Dave Richardson, who wasn’t noted for his ability to hit the ball off the square, at the crease), in 1999 there was the horrible run out of Allan Donald in the semi-final and in 2003 the most ludicrous of all when they mis-read the Duckworth-Lewis scores and were knocked out by Sri Lanka.
They have arrived in India well fancied once more. Their batting looks strong, with Hashim Amla in particular well suited to the pitches that they will encounter, and in Dale Steyn they have the best bowler in the world. Chuck the explosive talents of AB De Villiers and the all-round excellence of Jacques Kallis into the mix and this is a combination to be reckoned with.
Doubts persist, however. Graeme Smith has been in charge for a long time but his captaincy remains worryingly inflexible at times. There are also concerns about the spin bowling – Johan Botha has an average of over forty with the ball in ODIs and Robin Peterson’s average is over fifty and much may depend on the unproven international talents of Imran Tahir. They must also be concerned that the conditions may neutralise Morne Morkel, leaving much resting on the shoulders of Steyn and the impressive Tsotsobe.
The decision to omit Mark Boucher has also raised some eyebrows, and if they decide to use AB De Villers as their keeper South Africa could end up shooting themselves in the foot. It is always harder for part time keepers on slower, lower pitches where they will be expected to stand up and it would also deprive them of their best fielder. If, however, he can continue to impress with the bat and his keeping is up to scratch then it could turn out to be an inspired gamble.
Much will depend upon: The spinners. If Botha and/or Peterson can keep things tight and if Tahir can live up to expectations then they will be serious challengers, but if not then it could be a painful experience.
Verdict: Quarter-finals
They have arrived in India well fancied once more. Their batting looks strong, with Hashim Amla in particular well suited to the pitches that they will encounter, and in Dale Steyn they have the best bowler in the world. Chuck the explosive talents of AB De Villiers and the all-round excellence of Jacques Kallis into the mix and this is a combination to be reckoned with.
Doubts persist, however. Graeme Smith has been in charge for a long time but his captaincy remains worryingly inflexible at times. There are also concerns about the spin bowling – Johan Botha has an average of over forty with the ball in ODIs and Robin Peterson’s average is over fifty and much may depend on the unproven international talents of Imran Tahir. They must also be concerned that the conditions may neutralise Morne Morkel, leaving much resting on the shoulders of Steyn and the impressive Tsotsobe.
The decision to omit Mark Boucher has also raised some eyebrows, and if they decide to use AB De Villers as their keeper South Africa could end up shooting themselves in the foot. It is always harder for part time keepers on slower, lower pitches where they will be expected to stand up and it would also deprive them of their best fielder. If, however, he can continue to impress with the bat and his keeping is up to scratch then it could turn out to be an inspired gamble.
Much will depend upon: The spinners. If Botha and/or Peterson can keep things tight and if Tahir can live up to expectations then they will be serious challengers, but if not then it could be a painful experience.
Verdict: Quarter-finals
Thursday 10 February 2011
World Cup Preview: India
India must surely rank among the favourites for the tournament. They are at home, they have a dazzling array of batting and have been in good form of late. The only reservations might be the pace bowling, which looks rather reliant on the excellent Zaheer Khan, the fielding, which can be somewhat erratic and how the side react to the pressure that will be brought to bear by a cricket mad public. That said, they are well lead by the increasingly authoritative MS Dhoni so seem better equipped than many of their predecessors to deal with the burden of expectation.
The batting, on paper, looks stunning. Yuvraj may not be quite the player that he once was, but Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir and, of course, the genius of Sachin Tendulkar should ensure some big totals, backed up by some startling lower order potential. The only risk might be if wickets fall early and expose a middle / lower order that is more suited to the last ten to fifteen overs rather too soon.
The bowling is significantly less strong, and may yet prove to be the Achilles heel. Zaheer is a superb one day bowler, but Sreesanth can be erratic (and bowl no balls) and Munaf Patel and Ashish Nehra shouldn’t cause too many sleepless nights for the batting. Among the spinners, Harnhajan is clearly the main man and remains a high quality operator without being quite the force that he once was. They have a lot of useful spin options, though, and these will be used extensively in helpful conditions. If this World Cup were being held in England then I would have significant reservations about the bowling but in the sub-continent it should hold up.
Much depends on: Sachin Tendulkar. It may seem obvious, but Tendulkar is revered in India (as a quick glance at the cricinfo comments section will reveal). If Tendulkar goes well, as he has been in the last couple of years, then he will not only help India to make match winning scores but will also buoy the nation. If he, and India, start slowly then it could increase the pressure to intolerable levels.
Verdict: Winners
The batting, on paper, looks stunning. Yuvraj may not be quite the player that he once was, but Sehwag, Gautam Gambhir and, of course, the genius of Sachin Tendulkar should ensure some big totals, backed up by some startling lower order potential. The only risk might be if wickets fall early and expose a middle / lower order that is more suited to the last ten to fifteen overs rather too soon.
The bowling is significantly less strong, and may yet prove to be the Achilles heel. Zaheer is a superb one day bowler, but Sreesanth can be erratic (and bowl no balls) and Munaf Patel and Ashish Nehra shouldn’t cause too many sleepless nights for the batting. Among the spinners, Harnhajan is clearly the main man and remains a high quality operator without being quite the force that he once was. They have a lot of useful spin options, though, and these will be used extensively in helpful conditions. If this World Cup were being held in England then I would have significant reservations about the bowling but in the sub-continent it should hold up.
Much depends on: Sachin Tendulkar. It may seem obvious, but Tendulkar is revered in India (as a quick glance at the cricinfo comments section will reveal). If Tendulkar goes well, as he has been in the last couple of years, then he will not only help India to make match winning scores but will also buoy the nation. If he, and India, start slowly then it could increase the pressure to intolerable levels.
Verdict: Winners
World Cup Preview: Pakistan
I hate clichés. A cliché to me is like a red rag to a bull and I avoid them like the plague. The very thought makes me as sick as a parrot. However, there is one cliché relating to this World Cup that fits like a glove: Pakistan are a little unpredictable.
In this they are in the image of their captain, for Shahid Afridi is surely the most bonkers cricketing talent of recent times. When not being banned for deliberately scuffing the pitch or biting the ball he has been the catalyst for some of Pakistan’s more remarkable feats of recent years, most notably the World Twenty20 victory of 2009. As a batsman he can, when the muse is with him, destroy any attack (although he’s just as capable of getting out to a part-timer), as a bowler he can run through sides and bowl 75 mph leg breaks and as a fielder, when he is not in one of his ‘Hello clouds, hello sky’ moments, he is impressive. The question is whether he can take his team with him or if they will disintegrate in a flurry of rash strokes and comical fielding.
Misbah-ul-Haq deserves a lot of credit for the way that he pulled the team together after the spot fixing scandal and they played some decent cricket in New Zealand but concerns must surely remain about the top order batting and the penetration of the bowlers, especially the seamers. There’s a big part of me that would like to see Pakistan have a successful, scandal-free, World Cup, but there are too many flaws in their side to mount a serious challenge.
Much depends on: Umar Gul. Any side in the world would miss Mohammed Amir and Mohammed Asif and Pakistan’s seamers will have their work cut out to make inroads with the new ball, especially with the withdrawal of Sohail Tanvir as well. Umar Gul, though, is a handy performer and if he has a good tournament then it will dramatically improve Pakistan’s chances.
Verdict: Quarter-finals
In this they are in the image of their captain, for Shahid Afridi is surely the most bonkers cricketing talent of recent times. When not being banned for deliberately scuffing the pitch or biting the ball he has been the catalyst for some of Pakistan’s more remarkable feats of recent years, most notably the World Twenty20 victory of 2009. As a batsman he can, when the muse is with him, destroy any attack (although he’s just as capable of getting out to a part-timer), as a bowler he can run through sides and bowl 75 mph leg breaks and as a fielder, when he is not in one of his ‘Hello clouds, hello sky’ moments, he is impressive. The question is whether he can take his team with him or if they will disintegrate in a flurry of rash strokes and comical fielding.
Misbah-ul-Haq deserves a lot of credit for the way that he pulled the team together after the spot fixing scandal and they played some decent cricket in New Zealand but concerns must surely remain about the top order batting and the penetration of the bowlers, especially the seamers. There’s a big part of me that would like to see Pakistan have a successful, scandal-free, World Cup, but there are too many flaws in their side to mount a serious challenge.
Much depends on: Umar Gul. Any side in the world would miss Mohammed Amir and Mohammed Asif and Pakistan’s seamers will have their work cut out to make inroads with the new ball, especially with the withdrawal of Sohail Tanvir as well. Umar Gul, though, is a handy performer and if he has a good tournament then it will dramatically improve Pakistan’s chances.
Verdict: Quarter-finals
Wednesday 9 February 2011
World Cup Preview: Australia
Australia are in a better place than they were a month ago: the series with England will have restored some much needed confidence and they look a good deal happier than the ragged, baggy green clad band that finished the final test at Sydney. The worry for them is that the series against England represents a false dawn, for all in the Australian set-up is not rosy.
Their first problem is the bowling. To go into a World Cup in the sub-continent with only one specialist spinner in the squad, who has only played one previous one day international and was too profligate for the test side suggests a triumph of hope over experience. The reliance on wild and wooly pacemen also looks naïve – any one of Brett Lee, Shaun Tait and Mitchell Johnson is capable of bowling a match winning spell, but they are each also prone to spraying the ball around and on slower, lower pitches could be a liability. They lack a bowler who will be able to bring them control, a man to whom Ricky Ponting can throw the ball in the confidence that he might be able to restore order when all is falling to pieces. This was particularly highlighted in the series against Sri Lanka a few months ago and there is no sign of it having been addressed.
The batting, also, is not the juggernaut that it once was. There were some good batting displays against England, but at least two games were rescued by innings from players who aren’t in the squad (and the selection of Ferguson over Marsh looks a little odd) and they also have the question of what to do with Ricky Ponting. It is a given that he will return to the side, almost certainly at number three, but his form has not been good, he hasn’t played any limited overs cricket for months and there is also the risk, regardless of the rhetoric coming out of the camp, that the happy side that Michael Clarke has been leading successfully for the last few weeks may be undermined by his return. With out Mike Hussey to stabilize the middle order it is almost impossible to see them winning their fourth World Cup in a row.
Much depends on: Shane Watson is incredibly important to this side, as his second successive Allan Border Medal shows. At his best he is devastating at the top of the order and his bowling can be very effective. The conditions should suit him and he may well represent Australia’s best chance of glory.
Verdict: Semi-finals at best.
Their first problem is the bowling. To go into a World Cup in the sub-continent with only one specialist spinner in the squad, who has only played one previous one day international and was too profligate for the test side suggests a triumph of hope over experience. The reliance on wild and wooly pacemen also looks naïve – any one of Brett Lee, Shaun Tait and Mitchell Johnson is capable of bowling a match winning spell, but they are each also prone to spraying the ball around and on slower, lower pitches could be a liability. They lack a bowler who will be able to bring them control, a man to whom Ricky Ponting can throw the ball in the confidence that he might be able to restore order when all is falling to pieces. This was particularly highlighted in the series against Sri Lanka a few months ago and there is no sign of it having been addressed.
The batting, also, is not the juggernaut that it once was. There were some good batting displays against England, but at least two games were rescued by innings from players who aren’t in the squad (and the selection of Ferguson over Marsh looks a little odd) and they also have the question of what to do with Ricky Ponting. It is a given that he will return to the side, almost certainly at number three, but his form has not been good, he hasn’t played any limited overs cricket for months and there is also the risk, regardless of the rhetoric coming out of the camp, that the happy side that Michael Clarke has been leading successfully for the last few weeks may be undermined by his return. With out Mike Hussey to stabilize the middle order it is almost impossible to see them winning their fourth World Cup in a row.
Much depends on: Shane Watson is incredibly important to this side, as his second successive Allan Border Medal shows. At his best he is devastating at the top of the order and his bowling can be very effective. The conditions should suit him and he may well represent Australia’s best chance of glory.
Verdict: Semi-finals at best.
World Cup Preview: England
England have certainly had a one day series to forget, although the 6-1 margin was probably a little harsh. Beset by injuries and clearly desperate to get home at the end of a long tour they had the look of a side that was pretty much at the end of their tether by the time of the last game.
The question is how successfully they can re-group in the short time that is available to them. A brief stop at home should help to re-charge the batteries (although, surely, any sane scheduler would have allowed more time between the end of the Australian tour and the start of the World Cup) and the injuries to Swann and Broad may have been a blessing in disguise, since they are both key players and should both return refreshed. However, the injury to Eoin Morgan is a considerable blow. Ravi Bopara’s selection at least gives Andrew Strauss another bowling option, but the finishing skills and dazzling fielding of the Irishman will be sorely missed.
They also have headaches with regard to the batting order. Matt Prior has looked a fish out of water at the top of the order, a victim of the modern obsession with opening the batting with a keeper, and would be more effective lower down, but this leaves the question of who might open in his stead. The conditions may suit Ian Bell, but don’t be surprised to see the tactic of opening with Prior continued. The plus point with the batting, however, is the remarkable form of Jonathan Trott. He is currently on course to overhaul Viv Richards' record for reaching one thousand ODI runs in the fewest innings and has scored three hundreds in his first eighteen innings. To put that into some sort of context, Mike Gatting, Nasser Hussain, Graham Thorpe and Ian Bell have three ODI hundreds between them in 338 innings. If Trott can continue to average in the fifties then he could be the catalyst for a successful tournament for England.
To continue with the positive side, England have a good, balanced and penetrative bowling attack with a high quality spinner and, with Broad restored to the side, good batting depth. They are also a terrific fielding side, thanks mostly to Richard Halsall, who will put pressure on their opponents. It is difficult to see them winning the tournament but they are the best English one day side for a generation and if they can get some momentum and the batting can fire then they will be contenders.
Much depends on: Paul Collingwood. England most capped one day player is almost at the end of his career and has been in horrible form with the bat, but if he can rise to the occasion then his runs could compensate for the loss of Morgan, his cutters could be very valuable in the conditions and his fielding remains dazzling. If he has a good tournament then all in the England garden should be rosy, but if he fails then we could all be watching through our fingers (again).
The verdict: Semi-finals
The question is how successfully they can re-group in the short time that is available to them. A brief stop at home should help to re-charge the batteries (although, surely, any sane scheduler would have allowed more time between the end of the Australian tour and the start of the World Cup) and the injuries to Swann and Broad may have been a blessing in disguise, since they are both key players and should both return refreshed. However, the injury to Eoin Morgan is a considerable blow. Ravi Bopara’s selection at least gives Andrew Strauss another bowling option, but the finishing skills and dazzling fielding of the Irishman will be sorely missed.
They also have headaches with regard to the batting order. Matt Prior has looked a fish out of water at the top of the order, a victim of the modern obsession with opening the batting with a keeper, and would be more effective lower down, but this leaves the question of who might open in his stead. The conditions may suit Ian Bell, but don’t be surprised to see the tactic of opening with Prior continued. The plus point with the batting, however, is the remarkable form of Jonathan Trott. He is currently on course to overhaul Viv Richards' record for reaching one thousand ODI runs in the fewest innings and has scored three hundreds in his first eighteen innings. To put that into some sort of context, Mike Gatting, Nasser Hussain, Graham Thorpe and Ian Bell have three ODI hundreds between them in 338 innings. If Trott can continue to average in the fifties then he could be the catalyst for a successful tournament for England.
To continue with the positive side, England have a good, balanced and penetrative bowling attack with a high quality spinner and, with Broad restored to the side, good batting depth. They are also a terrific fielding side, thanks mostly to Richard Halsall, who will put pressure on their opponents. It is difficult to see them winning the tournament but they are the best English one day side for a generation and if they can get some momentum and the batting can fire then they will be contenders.
Much depends on: Paul Collingwood. England most capped one day player is almost at the end of his career and has been in horrible form with the bat, but if he can rise to the occasion then his runs could compensate for the loss of Morgan, his cutters could be very valuable in the conditions and his fielding remains dazzling. If he has a good tournament then all in the England garden should be rosy, but if he fails then we could all be watching through our fingers (again).
The verdict: Semi-finals
World Cup Fever?
The Ashes are but a distant (if fabulous) memory and the phoney war of the seemingly unending ODI series is mercifully over, so the World Cup is almost upon us. In spite of the ICC’s relentless drive to suck all of the fun and spontaneity out of the tournament by staging it over an interminable period it is still hard not to be excited at the prospect. The fact that it is to be played in the most cricket mad part of the world adds to the fun, as the atmosphere should be electric at most matches, as does the fact that there is no clear favourite. Any one of a number of sides could end up lifting the trophy with a little bit of luck and momentum.
The introduction of quarter finals at the end of an overlong group phase is to be welcomed, since it spares us the endless, and poorly named, super phases, and should make the closing stages rather more exciting. Tournaments of any type are more exciting once the knock out phases are underway and it is at this point that the competition should come alive.
I shall be previewing the chances of the main players over the coming days. There’s a very real risk that I may be coming down with World Cup fever…
The introduction of quarter finals at the end of an overlong group phase is to be welcomed, since it spares us the endless, and poorly named, super phases, and should make the closing stages rather more exciting. Tournaments of any type are more exciting once the knock out phases are underway and it is at this point that the competition should come alive.
I shall be previewing the chances of the main players over the coming days. There’s a very real risk that I may be coming down with World Cup fever…
After the Lord Mayor's Show
It’s been a while. I originally had grand plans for writing a report on every one day international, but the rigours of a seven match series took its toll not just on the two teams but also on the stamina and enthusiasm of spectators and bloggers. Does anyone outside the marketing men of the various cricket boards seriously think that a seven match one day series is a good idea, especially when it is tacked onto the end of a test series? Long before the series was over it was obvious that England and, to a lesser extent, Australia would rather be doing something else. As Andy Flower has pointed out, coaches should be involved in itineraries and it is difficult to imagine that this series did anybody much good, apart from providing a much needed boost to Australia’s confidence.
It cannot even be said to have been decent preparation for the World Cup, since both sides were hit by injuries and the conditions will be radically different on the sub-continent. Shaun Marsh and Adam Voges, who both played match winning innings at different points in the series, won’t be at the World Cup, while Chris Tremlett, who bowled reasonably well for England, will also be watching it on the telly. All the series has really done is muddy the selectorial waters a little and enable England’s best finisher, Eoin Morgan, to get injured. Bring on the World Cup.
It cannot even be said to have been decent preparation for the World Cup, since both sides were hit by injuries and the conditions will be radically different on the sub-continent. Shaun Marsh and Adam Voges, who both played match winning innings at different points in the series, won’t be at the World Cup, while Chris Tremlett, who bowled reasonably well for England, will also be watching it on the telly. All the series has really done is muddy the selectorial waters a little and enable England’s best finisher, Eoin Morgan, to get injured. Bring on the World Cup.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)