This week saw quite a bit of cricket... some rather one-sided, others extremely closely fought... some with exceptionally low scores, others with huge batting performances... Here's a quick round-up.
The 1st international of 2009
kicked off in Sydney with the hosts Australia looking for a consolation win and keep some of their pride. The visiting South African team had already won the series and were looking for a 3-0 whitewash to take the #1 position in the ICC test rankings. What a match this one turned out to be - Australia scored a mammoth 445 batting almost till tea on Day 2. South Africa suffered a major blow early in their innings as Smith was forced to retire hurt with a
broken hand.
Perhaps the effects of Melbourne lingered as the South Africans didn't look the same dominating team that had been on display a week prior, and they ended the 1st innings conceding a lead of 118 after Siddle took 5. The OZs (except Matty Hayden) had a gr8 2nd innings and Ponting once again showed signs of why the OZs have been so feared over the last few years. Leaving aside the pressure on himself & his team, Ponting
declared extremely sportingly, risking it all for a chance to get on the board in this series. Set with a target of 376 in 116 overs, South Africa didn't start well with make-shift opener Morkel falling for a duck. The 1st 8 wickets fell at relatively regular intervals save for a 56 run 5th wicket partnership between SA find of the series Dumminy and deVilliers. But from 202/8 began the fight back. No one in their wildest dreams would have expected Steyn & Ntini to bat out the 25.5 overs required for the draw.... but bat they did, frustrating the OZs no end. Unfortunately, Steyn fell with 8.2 overs yet to play. Just when everyone thought it was all over, out walked the captain - injured elbow, broken finger and all. Odds were still pretty high on an OZ victory at that point, but Smith & Ntini managed to keep the OZs at bay for a further 7 overs, providing a nail-biting finish that saw the OZs win with just 10 balls to spare. Never mind the winners or the losers in this match... the real winner was Test match cricket.
Borrowing a
from a Cricinfo
article (and thanks to my friend Nichoo for sharing this with me), this line pretty much summed up the atmosphere when Smith walked out to bat against all odds:
They thought it was all over when Steyn was finally adjudged leg-before-wicket to Andrew McDonald following a 50 partnership. But then Smith crumpled his sick note, and the Members Pavilion roared - yes, roared rather than gasped, despite all Australians' desperation for a victory - as his unmistakably fulsome frame came into view, descending the stairs to the compelling conflict zone.
Pretty impressive that he came out to bat with a hurt elbow (albeit a carried injury) and a broken finger. The only more dominant image I have of resilience on the cricket ground is of one Mr. Anil Kumble a.k.a Jumbo walking out to bowl to against West Indies at Antigua with a broken jaw, bandaged face and all.
To be honest, with this game in the week, all other matches pretty much just make up the footer of the post. Normal service resumed in Bangaldesh as the hosts were
trounced by Sri Lanka by a whopping margin of 465 runs with one full day to spare. If not for the
1st Test, this match would most definitely have reignited yet another round of "should Bangladesh be playing test cricket" debate, and in my opinion, they really shouldn't be. The competitive Bangladesh tests have been far too rare and far between in the last 9 years and 59 test matches. But, thats an argument for another day.
Over in New Zealand, West Indies beat the hosts in rain-affected
ODI #2 taking a 1-0 lead in the series (
1st ODI was washed out). WI would take gr8 pleasure from Sarwan's unbeaten 67 and know that their best chance of doing well in the rest of the series depends a lot on Sarwan & his form.
NZ bounced back in the
3rd ODI beating WI so comprehensively that the match was a complete bore to follow. Losing a match with 30 overs to spare must be a terrible disappointment for a young team like WI. NZ once again depended on captain & lead-bowler Vettori to pick 4 quick wickets and restrict the WI from getting any more than 128.
Back home in India, the 2008/09 Ranji Trophy Super League reached the semifinals stage where again there was a massively
one-sided affair between Mumbai and Saurashtra; never mind the
controversial BCCI playing condition that could have seen Mumbai lose the game despite scoring over 600 runs. The
2nd semifinal between Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh was almost as close as the Aus-SA test, with the game being decided only in the last hour of play. Tamil Nadu were just 2 wickets short in the end, and UP were carried home by a unbeaten 150 by Shivakanth Shukla. The finals between Mumbai & UP
will be played in Hyderabad from the 12th.
In other news - Mohammad Asif (remember him?) still
does not know if he can play cricket ever again, SCG
went pink in support of the McGrath Foundation for breast cancer awareness, Sri Lanka are
trying to get India to travel and have even
split their Pakistan tour into 2 to accomodate India, the ECB has
offered English players a clear opportunity to play in IPL, Pakistan for the 1st time in many years have some form of stability with Malik
appointed captain for an 'indefinite period of time', England
dive into instability as captain resigns and coach is sacked, and Hayden is given the
boot from the ODI team.
And finally, the Cricinfo Awards 2008 nominees are
out. Please vote for your favs.
The International Cricket Council has finally decided to move the postponed Champions Trophy out of Pakistan. A tournament that had already been postponed from September 2008 to October this year, was retained by Pakistan purely because of the BCCI backing to PCB. At that time (in Aug 2008), India & Pakistan were pretty close and both countries considered the other to be a stauch ally. Under pressure from BCCI, PCB & the other pro-BCCI boards, the rather powerless ICC merely postponed the Champions Trophy by a year hoping that the situation would change by end-2009. And change they did. The unfortunate terror attacks in Mumbai in Nov 2008 put the 2 countries at loggerheads. Public opinion against Pakistan led to India's tour of Pakistan being called off on the advise of the Indian Government. With the cancellation of that series, with the security situation in Pakistan not improving, with many internation teams still against touring Pakistan, and with the BCCI-PCB bloc breaking up, the ICC took the open option to move the tournament out of Pakistan. Though no alternate location has been announced, based on the alternate venues discussed last year, I would think that Sri Lanka and South Africa would be the likely alternatives. Given their history of raising questions over a visa for Peter Chingoka (Chairman, Zimbabwe Cricket), England & Australia are least likely venues for this tournament.
Pakistan have now lost the Oval 2006 test to England.... again! After having initially lost the match after umpires Darrell Hair & Billy Doctrove awarded the match to England, Pakistan got the result changed to a draw at the July 2008 ICC meeting.However, the custodians of the laws of cricket, the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), refused to acknowledge the change in result on the basis that the ICC did not have the authority (Law 21.10) to overrule the umpires' decision. Keeping in mind the stance of the MCC, the ICC have now decided to re-reverse result of this match to a forfeiture by Pakistan. This ping-pong how weak the ICC is, and how easily it is swayed by its member countries. The main "aim" of the ICC, it appears, is to simply avoid confrontation with anyone, nevermind the rationale of their decisions. In my opinion, the ICC should never have changed the decision of the umpires in the 1st place. Over-ruling the umpires' decision on the very result of the game opens such a pandora box that it is not beyond possibilities that teams could start asking for reversals of dismissals on the basis that the umpires were wrong. Don't get me wrong; I don't for 1 moment think that the umpires were correct in awarding the match to England. In his quest to exert his authority as the umpire, Mr. Hair conveniently forgot that as an umpire, his 1st action should be to ensure an environment where both teams can compete fairly. As the umpire, he was not the main event, merely a conduit to ensure that the main event carried on. So, though I don't agree with the umpires' decision, I firmly believe that the umpires' decision should be final. If batsmen are expected to take wrong decisions by umpires, if bowlers and fielders are expected to recognise that snicks might be missed by umpires, it goes without saying that a result determined by the umpires should be accepted by all and sundry. The initial decision by the ICC to reverse the original result was a political one... and I for one am glad that they have rectified that by now making a cricketing one!
