The World T20 Final

As I start this sentence, its been about 30 seconds since Sreesanth picked up that catch to dismiss the man who ensured hope for Pakistan all the way through – Misbah-ul-Haq. The finish bared a little resemblance to the ODI World Cup Final 2007. It was a bit of a farce. There was absolutely no necessity whatsoever for that very dim-witted shot. I write this as the other members of the Indian team form a heap over Virender Sehwag.

Coming back to the dim-witted shot, I cannot understand why he did that. Misbah had shown great calmness thought the innings. But that last reckless shot was inexplicable. He needed six of four balls, which meant that even a four of that ball would have done. Furthermore, Joginder Sharma was nowhere near his delivery stride when Misbah was in position to play the shot. But, Joginder did not capitalise and was lucky enough to get the wicket.

The man who took the catch at short fine leg was Sreesanth. He was absolutely disappointing today – with the bowling at least. Initially, he gave far too much width to the batsmen and enabled the in-form Imran Nazir to capitalise by playing some powerful cut shots through the off side.

One thing good Sreesanth did today was for the marketing of the T20 tournament. He came back in the 18^th over to give 15 runs after Harbhajan Singh had made his contribution by giving 19 runs in his over. What’s more, it was three sixes and a wide.

This bowling is what resulted in Pakistan coming so close to the trophy. Already, before the Pakistani onslaught in overs 16 and 17, the match had swung to what we thought was every possible direction. But, Pakistan ensured that the Pakistanis watched till the last ball of the match. Pakistan played very well, that’s why they came as close as they did. Unfortunately for them India played just that little bit better.

As Irfan Pathan collects his man of the match award, it has to be mentioned that his performance was commendable. He bowled very efficiently, mixing up the variations beautifully and bowling slower ones very competently. R.P.Singh also has had a good tournament.

Pakistan have played well right through the tournament. They lost just two matches in the whole tournament, both very close ones; the first as close as can be. Man of the series Shahid Afridi played well, bowling competently.

On the other hand, India lost just one, but still were not as impressive as Pakistan. Ultimately, fortunately for India and unfortunately for Pakistan, India played better in the final. The man for India was Yuvraj Singh. It was nice to see that all the youngsters, Uthappa, Joginder Sharma, Yusuf Pathan and many more.

The point is, India are the first Twenty20 world champions. This was after they performed very badly in the ODI World Cup 2007.

The Twenty20 championship was also in sharp contrast to the ODI World Cup as it was a great success as a tournament with a house full final and probably a house full semi final as well.

Too many things to think about, too many things to say.-BS

Cricket Opinions congratulates India on its victory. Due to technical difficulties, this article written immediately after the finals could not be published on time.

Australia Are Knocked out

Yuvraj continued his six-hitting with some huge shots. Robin Uthappa supported him with great efficiency and Dhoni went slam-bang-wallop. That was India against Australia.

Yesterday’s result in the second semi final of the T20 World Championship 2007 at Kingsmead in Durban was one which was good for the tournament. Australia were nowhere near their best in this tournament and seem to finding the new format of cricket a little too hot to handle. The result was good for the tournament and the game in general as Australia were knocked out.

This is good for the game as it proved that cricket is not a as one sided an affair as previously perceived. It was good for the marketing of the tournament as well. It resulted in an India Pakistan final. Not only is it the final of the world T20, but the two teams battling it out are India and Pakistan!

Over the period of the tournament, whenever India batted first, the match has gone on well from India’s point of view. It did so yesterday as well. It was nice to see Gambhir and Sehwag ensure that there was no loss of wickets early in the innings.

This provided the ideal foundation for guys like Yuvraj and Uthappa to go out and execute some ‘hell for leather batting.’

Everything went right for India yesterday, and a lot many things went right for Australia as well. It was just unfortunate for Australia that more things went right for India than for them. Australia did concede about 10-15 runs more than they should have and the result shows that that would have counted. Australia batted very well and constructed their innings well, but Symonds’ dismissal proved to be the turning point in the game.

After Symonds’ departure, India had control over the game to a large extent and just had to ensure that they did not lose it.

For once, they did that and knocked Australia out. It has to be reiterated that throughout the tournament Australia looked in some discomfort owing to the format. That has resulted in their exit. Australia played much below the usual level and still got through to the semi finals. Other teams must appreciate this and look to catch up themselves in the interests of cricket.-BS

On Technology in Cricket

The issue on how much of technology should be used in cricket is one with many viewpoints. On one hand, at the very basic level, technology makes difficult things easier. On the other hand, it is not true that the computer’s eye is never wrong.

The third umpire certainly is a necessity. It has certainly done a world of good for decision making. Not only has the third umpire resulted in a greater number of correct decisions in the context of close calls. But, in the case of line decisions, the field umpire goes up to the third umpire for confirmation even if he is able to arrive at a verdict. This avoids the possible mistake.

But the same point also proves as a negative, probably the only negative aspect of the third umpire is that it reduces the competence of the umpire and to an extent his confidence. The umpires nowadays do not pay as much attention to the run outs as they can with the reassurance of the existence of the third umpire.

Another aspect of technology is the light meter. This is one implement that can be used well and has – from my point of view – no negative point. The use of the light meter should be encouraged at the lower levels as well.

The other aspect now seeing a lot of controversy is the big screen. The Anglo-Indian test series saw a lot of hue and cry regarding the effect of the big screen. I would have to agree with Dickie Bird and some others who are against the big screen. The basic problem with the big screen is that it brings a sense of insecurity amongst the umpires.

No umpire – I say this out of personal experience – likes to look back at his decisions. And to have a crowd of anywhere between forty thousand to a lakh or even more look at the decision right in front of you is hell for if it turns out wrong, it could ruin the umpire’s day and probably result in more wrong decisions during the rest of the day.

The big screen also unnecessarily unsettles the crowds regarding decisions of the umpire. Furthermore, if the umpire notes his mistake in the big screen, there is the lingering chance that he may over-compensate next time around in a similar situation. The big screen causes quite a bit of confusion on the field as well. Paul Collingwood’s dismissal in the India-England ODI series is an example, where a debutant umpire effectively changed his decision by going back to the third umpire after arriving at a wrong verdict himself. It is true that the right decision was arrived at in the end and that the umpire acted completely within the laws of the game. But, it is also true that had the umpire been more cautious in the first place, he should not have had to revise his decision at all, either by going to the third umpire initially or deciding correctly. The big screen puts far too much pressure on umpires.

The crowds expecting to watch replays at the stadia is not reasonable if these are the side-effects. The spectators cannot expect to have the best of both worlds. They should either watch the replays on the TV at home or enjoy the atmosphere of the game in the stadia.

Some decisions have to be taken, changes to be made. Will that happen?-BS

Feedback to:- southpaw.me@gmail.com. owner@cricketopinions.ath.cx ceases to exist.

An Observation - Sehwag

There was a huge roar when the India openers – Veeru and Gambhir came in to bat. After Gambhir going early and India getting into an uncomfortable position, Sehwag thwacked one from Gul into the leg side for four in a manner which only he can execute. He timed the ball beautifully and was very comfortable at the crease – against Gul at least.

At the other end, Asif was bowling beautifully. He took complete advantage of his front-on action. He released the ball smoothly and got sharp movement into the right hander. Furthermore, he kept the ball at that length which made things difficult for the batsmen. The length was such that more often than not the batsman was indecisive as to whether to come on the front foot or go back.

This meant that the Indian batsmen had to be careful to keep the gap between bat and pad very small. Just when all this was being thought of, it was noted that Sehwag was batting. He is lazy at the crease and his feet are rooted to the ground in some situations. Unfortunately that was what was happening to him at that point in time.

The further up Asif pitched the ball, the greater the chance he had of picking up Sehwag’s wicket. Sehwag has the tendency to attempt a cut at any ball even slightly outside the off stump and therefore any ball pitched up, just outside off stump would do the trick. And it did! Sehwag attempted to cut a ball pitched too far up for that shot. It got the under edge and he played onto the stumps.

The ball had come in off the track as well. This meant that the ball was not wide enough to cut. So Sehwag was effectively cutting at a ball, which was neither short enough nor wide enough to cut. Now that’s when you get out.-BS

Ahh.....Twenty20

The Twenty20 World Championship has begun and what an atmosphere! On day one, at the Wanderers in Johannesburg, it seemed like the whole of the Eden Gardens was there! The noise was deafening, the atmosphere jubilant – with the match yet to begin. It certainly was party time.

We all hoped the cricket would be similar. Around the world, in all the countries that play cricket, one cannot find someone more capable of starting a party than Christopher Henry Gayle. He began the World Championship with a four through backward point – with a slight misfiled though – off Shaun Pollock. That was where undoubtedly the greatest innings in the brief history of the Twenty20 game had begun.

Gayle treated all the bowlers with sheer disdain. Gayle chose to pick on one of the most economical bowlers in the world – Shaun Pollock. We all know how useful Shaun Pollock is to control the runflow. But something tells me Twenty20 is not Shaun’s favourite.

In his first over, Shaun Pollock conceded eight, in his second 14, third 14 as well and in his fourth, 16. He finished off with figures of four overs, no maidens, 52 runs and the wicket of Marlon Samuels. It’s not very often that you see Pollock being dismissed in this manner.

Gayle has always showed us the power he has. But there were some shots which kept us in wonderment. He flicked one of his pads into the air and the ball just hung in the air and seemed to never come back down. He cleared even the stands with so much ease.

There was one stage where we all though he had got off to a good start but had to capitalise. More often than not, when there is such a thought, the batsman throws away his wicket. But Gayle simply went on. He seemed like he didn’t have a worry in the world. Fittingly, Gayle brought up his hundred against Pollock, and off just 50 balls!

Pollock was treated worse than most of the other bowlers because Pollock was probably relying on the ball to swing. The ball did absolutely nothing. This meant he was just feeding Gayle with quicker than military medium length balls. And Gayle took complete advantage to go on and score 117 of 57 balls.

Hopefully we can see more of this from Chris.

Wednesday, September 12, 2007 is a day Zimbabweans are not going to forget very easily. It is a day which prove to be a very significant one and – if looked at without bios – a good one.

This was also a good day for cricket as the result meant the defeat of the world’s strongest team. What cricket did not want is a one sided tournament and a one sided circuit. The defeat of the Australians aided this requirement. The fact that it came in the hands of minnows made it all the more significant.

Zimbabwe’s victory was with a close margin, but it has to be noted that the Africans did not just scamper to victory. The Zimbabweans were always in control of the game. They got a couple of early wickets and went on to take wickets just when they needed them the most. After that, they got the start they needed with Vusimuzi Sibanda playing some extravagant drives through the off side.

They bowled well, restricting the Australians to a not-so-comfortable score. Not just that, they also went on the construct their innings very well. Zimbabwe also fielded extremely tidily.

There was also a sense of maturity in the young side. Every player knew his role and knew what was expected of him and what he should do to satisfy that. Brendan Taylor played a wonderful innings and when the other batsmen recognised Taylor’s form; they just played around him and helped him build his as well as the team’s innings.

Although they won with just a ball to spare, it was an easy victory. As for the Australians, Zimbabwe just played better than Australia……for once.-BS

Editor's Choice

Readers and all those who have helped me - right from my cricket coaches, to my friends (one in particular) who have gone through my articles and aided me with a feedback on writing quality - I would like to thank all of you for your continued support. This, as you should know, is a significant time in the development of Cricket Opinions. We have just published our 50th article. I have chosen what I thought have been my best and here's a look back at our growth from a blog written by a cheesy amateur to a site written by a little more advanced amateur.

1. Thank You Ashley Giles
2. Benefit of doubt - to whom?
3. They've taken the challenge but have to prove themselves
4. Records, Tons and misapprehensions
5. Did you see God bat?

These are some of the good ones (I think), but there's 50 to choose from.
Yours Faithfully,
Your Editor,
Bharadwaj Sheshadri.

The First Twenty20 World Championship

This article is a significant one in the development of Cricket Opinions. This article is the 50^th in the life of Cricket Opinions – which thanks all its viewers for their continued support. We look forward to bigger, better times. There may be more than 50 posts, but this is the 50th article. Feedbacks can be mailed to: southpaw.me@gmail.com.

As I write, we are 4 days away from the tournament. Twenty20 may not be the most intricate form of what once used to be the gentleman’s game. It may not please the connoisseurs. Some consider the whole thing a farce.

But this is where all these connoisseurs and great cricketing minds forget that cricket is but a sport. They forget that cricket is a sport meant for entertainment. And if Twenty20 cannot offer entertainment, then nothing can. Twenty20 is a very progressive step in the world of cricket.

I myself may not be all in favour of Twenty20 but, this could mean that that generation in India which switched to football may just leave a bit of their time for the game which could go on five days and not produce a conclusive result. It is important that a sport keeps everyone satisfied and Twenty20 does so for the people who are not as interested in the deep charm of cricket but want to see action. To put it simply, it’s like watching a highlights package live.

The World Championships makes it all the more entertaining. It’s a new format of the game. This means that not everyone’s sure who the best players are, which team is capable, the kind of role bowler can play. Of course all that has been debated and talked about so often, but it remains to be seen.

A player of sound technical abilities may turn out to be a gross failure – which at this stage seems likely. The Twenty20 circuit in England has shown that innovative play will pay dividends. The shorter format of the game means each run and each wicket is more valuable than ever before. This implies that every improvisation that does not go off could cause a great amount of harm as well.

The shorter format also needs a different kind of mental preparation. It is not endurance that is required now but an additional amount of that focus which was already there. This is owing to the increased number of pressure situations in the game.

I will not say anything conclusively as that is the way things are now. This is unchartered territory; entertainment guaranteed. The first match between South Africa and the West Indies – a repeat of the first match of World Cup 2003 - will give us a heads up on how different kinds of players will perform in this version of the game. After that, Cricket Opinions will get back to you.-BS

Once again, thank you for your support.

Sachin's Admission

So often we hear his name in so many different contexts. That’s probably because he’s been playing cricket at the top most level for nearly a score years. If he’s been playing that long, he must be good.

Of late people, many significant people as well have been wondering as to how long Tendulkar can stay at the top. He has not been in the best of form in the past 2-3 years owing to injuries and many other problems. Ridiculously, people have actually questioned his place in the team.

Some said, Tendulkar was just playing for the money and no longer cared for the performance of the team. This is trash. Tendulkar is the kind of man who would do (or sometimes not do) as much as he can for the team’s success. Recently, many things he has said and done are just making things a little better.

There was a report on the proceedings of one of the tem meetings after India lost the fourth ODI in a very disappointing manner. Reports said that Tendulkar was very disappointed and believed that some members of the team had not given hundred percent. When Dinesh Kaarthick commended the performance of Broad and Bopara in the crunch situation and said that they had played well, Tendulkar reportedly retorted by asking why that always happened to the Indian team and not Australia.

If all these reports are to be believed then I don’t think there can be any doubt or ambiguity on the issue regarding Tendulkar’s commitment to the game. Also, he said that the one day internationals are getting tougher to play owing to insufficient recovery time between games. He said that a 22 or 23 year old would be able to recover much faster than he would be able to. It was nice to hear this as it gives us the assurance that Tendulkar is completely aware of what he was doing and did not – as some said – believe that he can go on for a long time what with the security of his p[lace in the side. Cricket Opinions had pointed out earlier that Tendulkar had a little kid inside him which gave him the aggression and commitment that he had. Tendulkar confirmed this himself by saying that regardless of his age, he ‘has a little boy inside him’ who kept him going. Millions around the world will pray that that one little boy will not grow old too soon.

He started at 16 and is now 34. The story goes on…..-BS

Once again cricket opinions apologises for the slight delay. We all know why. But, if you don’t, or have any other queries or opinions, mail them to southpaw.me@gmail.com. Note – owner@cricketopinions.ath.cx ceases to exist. You can also always comment on any article.