For the first time..

History has been made in the ready-to-end 10^th edition of the ICC cricket world cup held in the sub-continent with one last game between India and Sri Lanka to go before the world would see a winner or the world champions to be more precise. This world cup should have many reasons to cheer not only for the Indian fans who would still be celebrating their team's win over Pakistan a couple of days back but also for the entire cricket followers who can see the first final held between two sub-continent teams. Sri Lanka on the other hand will be rejoicing being the only sub-continent to have made three consecutive world cup semi-finals.

Sri Lanka made it to the semi-finals of a world cup on four times with three being in the last three editions since 2003 when they lost to Australia. This has happened for the 1st time that semi-final match between the same two teams have been held successively. Sri Lanka faced New Zealand in the semi-finals of the 2007 world cup as well and won at the same time. Previously, Pakistan and New Zealand have played each other in two semi-finals in 1992 and 1999 but the successive factor goes missing here. So is the case with Australia playing South Africa in the semi-finals of 1999 and 2007 world cups.

For the 1^st time in history of a world cup, there are two consecutive knock out games between two sub-continent nations when India played Pakistan a couple of days back and are scheduled to play Sri Lanka tomorrow. By tomorrow, there will be a first team from the sub-continent to have lifted the world cup twice with both India and Sri Lanka having their share in 1983 and 1996 respectively.Sri Lanka previously have faced England in two world cup quarter-finals and Australia in two world cup finals. For the 1st time, all three teams from the sub-continent have made it to the semi-finals of a world cup.

For the first time two hosts of a world cup are found playing in the finals of the tournament. Had Pakistan been one of the hosts, the number would have become three hosts to have made it to the semi-finals of a world cup. If India wins tomorrow, they will be the 1^st hosts to have won the world cup which would not be the case if Sri Lanka wins. Likewise, India are the second team after England to have made it to the finals of a world cup with England having their share in 1979 where they lost to West Indies. bullet proof is not what I need at the moment.

Did India win or Pakistan lose?

This was one threat that Pakistan would have been facing with the semi-finals being held at an Indian venue. Pakistan, though would have been physically fit to face their arch-rivals, are not so mentally. The Pakistan players might have well prepared themselves for their assault of Indian players on the field but not with the crowd off the same. Afridi and co can only send the ball rolling across the ropes or above the heads but not bottles and paper rockets. Stopping the Indian batsmen consisting of Sachin and co would be much easier than to stop water bottles from striking the deep fielders.

Verbal abuses from say Sreesanth can be stopped by the match officials but not from spectators who'd be waiting for a Pakistani batsman to step out of the dressing room. I wish Andrew Symonds would be the right person to tell you what happened in the finals ODI against India in the seven match one day series in 2007 when viewers got him out for a duck. Sri Lankan team led by Arjuna Ranatunga in 1996 semi-finals would be the right person to convince Afridi as to what to do in India and what not to do. All these if Pakistan is on the verge of victory.

This was the 2^nd time a world cup semi-final was held in Mohali after Australia played West Indies in 1996. With that being a secondary issue, coming to the point, though India won their 5^th world cup match against Pakistan, explanation regarding dropping of 6 catches is still not satisfactory. No foolish fielder on earth would ever drop Sachin Tendulkar four times and that too in a world cup semi-final match. Pakistani players did everything to see their team lose without giving anybody a chance to point their fingers towards their performance on the field. Afridi's cleverness deserves a lot of applause.

Big partnerships between Hafeez & Shafiq, and Misbah & Umar Akmal stay live and get broken when the situation demanded. A total of 261 can be chased down by India against Australia in quarter-finals but not by Pakistan in semi-finals. There would be a 5 wicket-taker from Pakistan and all Indian bowlers end up with no more than two wickets. That was a rare match where spinner stuns a sub-continent nation with 4 wickets and 1 over maiden. But at the end, the situation is better than what would have happened had India toured Pakistan for any match let alone the semi-finals of a world tournament.

The match might have bought both health and wealth for Afridi with them traveling back safely to Pakistan.

Is Mohali (India) the right venue to host semis?

Well as an Indian and an avid cricket fan, I am also eagerly looking forward to the fifth India-Pakistan match in world cups (barring T20 world cups and ICC champions trophies). This will be the second time Pakistan will have to tour India to play a match against the hosts after the famous 1996 world cup quarter finals played at Bangalore which was Javed Miandad's last show on the international stage. Needless to be said, India won that battle by 39 runs despite a threatening start from the Pakistani openers namely Saeed Anwar and Aamir Sohail who saw Pakistan reach 113/1 after 13 overs.

Anyway, that is history and then things were not that serious as is the case now. Things were not anticipated then in the match at Bangalore, with India winning the match unlike what happened in the semi-finals against Sri Lanka at the Eden Gardens. Now, Pakistan is once again cursed to tour the venue which he last prefers to. So would be the case for India, for whom the ghosts of the 1996 semi-finals might haunt again in case they give a sign a being defeated. This has happened earlier in a tri nation tournament with Pakistan having a high upper hand and people start hurling bottles on Pakistan players.

Luckily for captains of both teams, there was no India-Pakistan match until 1992 which averted something similar in 1987. In 1996, though there was nothing unexpected in the quarter-finals at Bangalore, what happened in the semi-finals was nothing compared to what would have happened had India won that semi-finals against Sri Lanka. The finals of the 1996 world cup was held at Lahore which might have made the then India captain Mohammed Azharuddin think many times before winning the semis. Anything might have happened had India toured Pakistan for the finals in case India managed to do so. Though this was not the reason for the defeat, it cannot be completely ruled out.

Since then, Pakistan has never been a venue for any world cup tournaments be it the world cup, the T20 world cup or the ICC champions trophy. Pakistan has been canceled to host an ICC champions trophy in 2008, which was canceled completely with the ICC not deciding on the venue to host the tournament that year. And then, this time Pakistan was denied to host any matches of the ongoing world cup which would have made Indians smile to a greater extent compared to other countries. Afridi may just think upon going back to Pakistan rather than be the target for bottles and paper rockets gifted by angry fans for having his team trounce India.

One can just see paint colors in Afridi's face with dilemma whether to go in for the kill or save his life from people's anger.

A tough task for India

Well on one hand if as an Indian I rejoice my team's victory over the West Indies, on the other hand, troubles begin or have set to begin for team India for, their victory over the West Indies in yesterday's game means that India finish at number three after South Africa and England, with the West Indies finishing at number four. As a result, India will now have to face Australia who are positioned at number 3 after Sri Lanka and Pakistan in the group A points table. This is a difficult task for India who have thrashed by the Aussies 5 times since 1992 world cup.

Of course, the Aussies were unbeatable in 2003 when India lost to them twice. And, as for all bright faces to cheer for, India has been beating Pakistan since 1992 world cup. No matter whether Pakistanis are crowned the world champions (in 1992 world cup) or have been declared the runners-up (in the 1999 world cup), their record against India in world cups is nothing but a zero. Moreover, India can play Pakistan better compared to Australia despite Australia being just another team unlike when they were two world cups earlier. Had India lost yesterday's game they would have been paired with Pakistan.

Pakistan has been placed in the number one position in group A after their wins over Australia and Sri Lanka. If this could be a concern for any team about to face Pakistan, it would be worth mentioning their 11 run win over Sri Lanka that involved an uncountable number of misfield and drop catches. Easy catches have been dropped at crucial stages against Sri Lanka. And coming to the match against Australia, Pakistan lost 6 wickets en route to their successful run chase of 177. There was no need to lose so many wickets in chasing such a small total.

India's chances in the quarter finals would be 50-50 with Australia being a decent squad compared to Pakistan keeping the past results apart. If anyone would cite Australia's lack of match winners like in the past two world cups, one has to keep a check on the Indian batsmen who lost 9 wickets for 29 runs against South Africa and tied with England. Both big games were assisted by Sachin Tendulkar who scored 100s in both the games. A win against West Indies is as good as a win against Bangladesh, Holland and Ireland. Accepting facts, past need not repeat itself in India-Pakistan matches also.

I can correlate India's situation to The Simple Life of a Baghag.

Long gaps in world cups

I just happened to come across a JMF Bloogger before I could point out long gaps in cricket world cups wherein a team has not won a single match against a particular opposition or has been a long time since a team has had an upset in a world cup. A couple of Saturdays before, Pakistan beat Sri Lanka by 11 runs, which was Pakistan's 8th victory over the island nation in the history of a world cup keeping the world T20 apart. Sri Lanka was awarded the test status in 1983, partially considering their win over India in a prudential cup.

Matches between Pakistan and Sri Lanka have been played in 1975, 1983, 1987,1992 and 2011 offlate with Pakistan meeting Sri Lanka twice in 1987 and 1983. Viewers had to wait for 5 world cup to see a Pakistan-Sri Lanka match which was last played in 1992. Similar results include India's victory over Pakistan in all four meetings since 1992 till 2003. And then, India's last win over Australia was in 1987 when the Mohammed Azharuddin led team beat Australia by 56 runs at Delhi. Since then, India have lost 5 matches to Australia with two in the 2003 edition and one each in the others.

The best part being that in their 1^st encounter, Australia reduced India to their lowest world cup total of 125 and in the other Australia notched their highest world cup total against India or India conceded the most number of runs in a world cup when Australia ended their innings at 359/2 at Centurion. In 2007, neither did India face Pakistan nor did they play Australia. As mentioned in one of my earlier posts recently, New Zealand needed 28 years to find a win against Pakistan in a world cup match. The Kiwis had last won a match against Pakistan in 1975.

Of course, matches between a test playing nation and a non test playing nation cannot prove any different results unless the strong team underestimates the weaker opposition. New Zealand last won a game against Sri Lanka in 1992 when the Martin Crowe led New Zealand chased down the Sri Lankans' total of 207 with 6 wickets to spare. New Zealand since then have lost to Sri Lanka in 2003 and twice in 2007 with Jayawardane's captain's knock being the famous one in the semi finals of the 2007 world cup. Prior to 1992, Sri Lanka's games are as good as those involving today's Bangladesh or Zimbabwe.

Sehwag has to go

Well if a dashing opener from a team is expected forced to return back from a major tournament, most of the time puts the team in confusion as to whom to go in for in the remaining encounters of the tournament in case the team has to face a tough opponent. However, at times the absence of a similar player becomes a boon for the viewers if not for the team to see a tough fight between the two teams which would otherwise be just another game and just another win for that team. A tough fight can be a treat for the viewers' eyes more than a win or a loss.

Here as well, the situation is almost the same with Virender Sehwag having to opt out of the remaining matches of the Asia cup. There are matches against Bangladesh and Sri Lanka to go for India, before they take on Sri Lanka in the final of the tournament. It was the win against Pakistan that mattered much for India and moreover, a win against Bangladesh is guaranteed if not for some unexpected mishaps like in the world cup 2007. If that would happen, it would be another Extremes case. Anyway that apart, with the presence of Gambhir, Dhoni and Yuvraj Sehwag's absence shouldn't matter much.

All the aforementioned names belong to the list of big hitters provided they are inform on their day. Prior to the ommision of Virender Sehwag, Sachin Tendulkar has been ruled out of the Asia cup for reasons not so important here but which hardly drew a response. Out of the two remaining games, one of them being a cakewalk, the other becomes inconsequential with India already having beaten Pakistan in their opening match and with Pakistan losing both their crucial matches against India and Sri Lanka. Bad luck was that both these matches were close encounters for Pakistan with the margin of defeat being 16 runs and 3 wickets.

The absence of Virender Sehwag though deprives the team of a powerful opener, at the same time provides the platform for another batsman to prove his myth on the big stage. There is Virat Kohli, Rohith Sharma etc, all of whom are waiting for a chance to prove themselves and have even done so in the past. But, with the playing squad restricted to just eleven, the rested players will have to wait for their turn either when a match is being played against a weak team or when the match they are playing is of little consequence. Worst come, one of the regular player gets injured.

Why link this with the past

Well, if the latest article on one of the leading cricket websites are to be believed, the world gossip has now found to have shifted from movies and politics to cricket as well or may be it has happened long back and is seen offlate. Rumors suggest that India's recent win over arch rivals Pakistan was a revenge for the loss they attained in last year's ICC Champions trophy. If in case, that holds true, should that mean that India would have lost that one dayer in the Asia cup, had they won that battle in the champions trophy 2009?

Though georgetownksa has got nothing to do with the current post, I'd like to irritate you guys a bit but not before I get back to my topic which makes news for no reasons, be it good or bad. There is no reason for the win over Pakistan to be linked with India's loss to Pakistan in the champions trophy for, India lost to Australia as well in that same edition and had returned with just a consolation win against the West Indies who were fresh from their 3-0 loss at the hands of Bangladesh which was followed by a 2-0 defeat in the test series.

Pakistan has always been a team to beat for India and so is the case for Pakistan who consider India as the team to beat. This doesn't and shouldn't matter for either teams regardless of whether they had won the last encounter or not. One can take lessons from Australia who thrashed the English team 5-0 in the Ashes 2006 and not yielding to just a 3-0, 3-1 etc like victories. Thanks to the combined efforts of Glenn McGrath and co in the bowling department and Gilchrist and co in the batting department. However, what happened in the later episode is a secondary issue.

India had little reasons to beat Pakistan in the 2003 world cup after India had until then lost to just one opponent (obviously Australia). India had won the matches against England and Zimbabwe before facing Pakistan at Centurion. But, that would have made enter into the super sixes with the need to win all three games in case they needed to make it to the semi finals of the tournament. Coincidentally, India managed to win all three games against Sri Lanka, Kenya and New Zealand in the super sixes of the 2003 world cup. Still, why did India win all three when two wins could have seen them through to the semis? Rubbish isn't it?

A Look At India's Run In ODI

Well a couple of days back, cricket avatar had written about the status of team India in test cricket which shows that India had wins against only two teams namely Sri Lanka and New Zealand in 2009, one of which was at home and the other one owing to the fact that it was the senior pros that won the only game against the Kiwis out of the three that were scheduled. Added to this would be the fact that India gained a lot due to other teams' bad performances. Now, a quick look at team India's run in the one dayers will be of some worth one can suppose.

In the past one year or so, though team India has played enough number of games, the number of teams that India has faced is not justified. Majority of India's wins came against Sri Lanka, against which India won 8 out of the 11 matches that it played with Sri Lanka winning just 2. The other major team that India has faced in 2009 is Australia against which it has played 7 matches out of which India could manage just 2 wins and in the ICC Champions trophy, team India managed to escape from the jaws of defeat after the game was ruled out.

Then, India played a game against Pakistan in the ICC Champions trophy which it lost convincingly. And the other teams that India have played against include New Zealand and West Indies. Though the 3-1 victory against New Zealand can be given a pat on the back, the ones against the West Indies can never be. India managed to win the series against New Zealand in New Zealand which is something good for India. West Indies is not the team that any team would be satisfied beating be it at home or otherwise. In addition, India won the tri series against Sri Lanka that New Zealand was also a part of.

In the ICC Champions trophy, India's lone win came against West Indies that was stripped of the big guns that included Chris Gayle and co. If the 9 test playing teams in the world are given a closer look at, only victories against the teams namely Pakistan, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand (to some extent) can be worth it. A win against even a team like England cannot guarantee a caliber for any team though ICC considers the matches against minnows as valid one day internationals in deciding the rating the team is to be given. India had two close encounters against Australia, where India lost by a small margin, but however, all these were at home.

So, on can conclude that India's wins have either come against weak oppositions or at home or subcontinent conditions that has placed it in the number 2 spot in the latest ICC's one day ratings.