Well the sub-continent teams namely India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan have always been a nightmare for the Western countries namely Australia, New Zealand, West Indies, England and South Africa. The main reason for this is the fact that the spinners from the sub-continent are far more gifted compared to players from the rest mentioned above. This has been the reason for Steve Waugh's dream to be shattered every time he and his team led Australia would tour India to play a test series. The only conquest Steve Waugh wasn't successful in doing was a test series win over India in India.
However, Sri Lanka and Pakistan have not been that troublesome to Australia and Steve Waugh has had wins against them on their home soil. And, this time in the world cup, it was the three sub-continent teams which played havoc in Ponting's third appearance as captain. Ponting managed what no Australian captain had managed to since 1987 when India last won a game against Australia by 56 runs under the captaincy of Azharuddin. Since 1992, Australia have managed 5 wins against India and no losses at all. But now, for the 1st time since the color dress was introduced in world cup, Australia have lost to India.
All knew that Australia was not at their best of cricket but no one would have predicted that they would end their dream of lifting 4th world cup in a row in the quarter-finals itself. At least a semi-final berth for Australia would have stopped all haters' tongues from wagging and the ACB's head to think like never before. The last time Australia ever lost a match was against Pakistan in 1999 when Pakistan were lucky to have survived a 10 run win over Steve Waugh's men. Perhaps! Had this world cup not been held in the sub-continent, may be Australia would not have fared this bad.
But, Australia and Ponting mainly is not the one who decides who hosts the tournament. Just when Australia would have been celebrating the 8th anniversary of their emphatic win over India in 2003 world cup final, Ponting had to think of what would he face the next day with him having to face the same team but with a depleted side. Talking about Australia's relationship with the sub-continent, Sri Lanka was the team to have stopped Australia's winning streak after the match was abandoned. Let me remind you guys the difference between won and unbeaten. Pakistan stopped their unbeaten streak by a 4 wicket win and finally India broke their world cup dreams after their 5 wicket win yesterday.
For all those crazy cricket fans in India who left their business, women, career, jobs, family, travel to watch India battle it out, it was worth the sacrifice.
Showing posts with label Steve Waugh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Steve Waugh. Show all posts
Friday, March 25, 2011
Sunday, March 20, 2011
What is so gr8 in it?
Yesterday, Pakistan beat Australia by 4 wickets to stop their 35 match winning streak that included one tied match against South Africa in the semi finals of the 1999 world cup and one match abandoned with the match against Sri Lanka being called off due to rains. May be this world have come before for Australia, had that game taken off. But, despite all these facts, I personally don't regard this as a major victory for Pakistan or any team to have managed it. Not because that I'm an Indian and turning down Pakistan's achievements is my birth right that I am into such statements.
But, beating a team that was once an unbeatable team is not a major achievement. Only a handful of players from the Australian side are found playing cricket though not at their career best of form and fitness. Only Ricky Ponting, Shane Watson and Brett Lee are found making it to the squad since 2003 when the Aussies were unbeatable. And for the matter, Ponting is at his best only in smashing LCD sets rather than the ball which has was known to be. There is no Gilchrist, Hayden, Martyn, Symonds and Mike Hussey to take the batting charge with McGrath, Nathan Bracken and Brad Hogg to bowl.
Added to that, the current Aussie team lacks a match winner like Michael Beaven who could take his team out from the clutches of defeat despite his team reeling at 135/8 against England in 2003 and Andy Bichael who was a replacement for Jason Gillispie and proved much more than what Gillispie would have been. Australia never finished with a run rate less than 6.0 an over in the 2007 world cup batting 1st and got all its opponents all out with Bangladesh being an exception in the 2007 world cup. Coming close to such a team was also a tough task let alone winning.
It would be no tough task to fight a 90 year old man when thinking about the same when the person at his young age would have made him pay the price. In the current cricketing world, Australia is as good as any other team and winning against them would be just another win against a normal opposition. New Zealand could have done this for, they were the 1st decent team to have faced the Aussies in 2011 WC. Since the 2007 triumph, the Aussies have made news only for bad reasons though they won the ICC champions trophy in 2009 and were the runners-up in world T20 2010.
It would be nice to think about ways to make money online, online business guide than cheering a pseudo-record by Pakistan I'd suggest.
But, beating a team that was once an unbeatable team is not a major achievement. Only a handful of players from the Australian side are found playing cricket though not at their career best of form and fitness. Only Ricky Ponting, Shane Watson and Brett Lee are found making it to the squad since 2003 when the Aussies were unbeatable. And for the matter, Ponting is at his best only in smashing LCD sets rather than the ball which has was known to be. There is no Gilchrist, Hayden, Martyn, Symonds and Mike Hussey to take the batting charge with McGrath, Nathan Bracken and Brad Hogg to bowl.
Added to that, the current Aussie team lacks a match winner like Michael Beaven who could take his team out from the clutches of defeat despite his team reeling at 135/8 against England in 2003 and Andy Bichael who was a replacement for Jason Gillispie and proved much more than what Gillispie would have been. Australia never finished with a run rate less than 6.0 an over in the 2007 world cup batting 1st and got all its opponents all out with Bangladesh being an exception in the 2007 world cup. Coming close to such a team was also a tough task let alone winning.
It would be no tough task to fight a 90 year old man when thinking about the same when the person at his young age would have made him pay the price. In the current cricketing world, Australia is as good as any other team and winning against them would be just another win against a normal opposition. New Zealand could have done this for, they were the 1st decent team to have faced the Aussies in 2011 WC. Since the 2007 triumph, the Aussies have made news only for bad reasons though they won the ICC champions trophy in 2009 and were the runners-up in world T20 2010.
It would be nice to think about ways to make money online, online business guide than cheering a pseudo-record by Pakistan I'd suggest.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Border's slicing through the cake in 1987
Well if Sri Lanka in 1999 was something special for all the wrong reasons, you can think how Australia was a different team when they were led by Allan Border who bought his team the first world cup in 1987. If anyone can go through the entire world cup consisting 9 major countries, not only was the finals against England a close encounter but the entire tournament for Australia was a close call if the matches against major teams were considered. Australia eventually won the world cup beating England in the finals by 7 runs. Border might just have said Just listen, 'coz I'm being me....
That was the maiden appearance of Steve Waugh who 12 years later adapted another fair but unfair means in the 1999 world cup to end up victorious. Coming back to the 1987 world cup, the major teams participating were India, West Indies, Australia, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, England and New Zealand. Zimbabwe can be considered to be on par with today's Netherlands or Canada. SriLanka on the other hand can partially be kept out of discussion. This brings down the number of teams to 6 with South Africa yet to make an appearance in international cricket especially the world cup.
All teams played every other team twice before the semifinals and in one of the games against India, Australia won the match by 1 run and lost the other by 56 runs with century in the former game by Geoff Marsh. Then was the match against Zimbabwe, which was taken for granted and Australia won a by a decent margin of 96 runs as expected. Their next major encounter was against New Zealand who at that time just a growing kid. Australia managed a 3 run victory against the Kiwis in the truncated match which lasted for 30 overs. However, the game was a high scoring one with Aussies piling up 199 runs at over 6.0 an over.
In another game against the Kiwis, the Aussies managed a 17 run victory which was once again by a small margin. This was followed by a 70 run win against Zimbabwe at Cuttack. Then came the semifinals against Pakistan which the Aussies won by another small margin of 18 runs to meet England in the finals. And what happened in the finals is a known secret with Australia sealing a 7 run win. Thanks to a valiant reverse sweep by Mike Gating which turned the table towards Australia similar to Gibbs' dropping the catch of Steve Waugh in the super six game of the 1999 edition.
That was the maiden appearance of Steve Waugh who 12 years later adapted another fair but unfair means in the 1999 world cup to end up victorious. Coming back to the 1987 world cup, the major teams participating were India, West Indies, Australia, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, England and New Zealand. Zimbabwe can be considered to be on par with today's Netherlands or Canada. SriLanka on the other hand can partially be kept out of discussion. This brings down the number of teams to 6 with South Africa yet to make an appearance in international cricket especially the world cup.
All teams played every other team twice before the semifinals and in one of the games against India, Australia won the match by 1 run and lost the other by 56 runs with century in the former game by Geoff Marsh. Then was the match against Zimbabwe, which was taken for granted and Australia won a by a decent margin of 96 runs as expected. Their next major encounter was against New Zealand who at that time just a growing kid. Australia managed a 3 run victory against the Kiwis in the truncated match which lasted for 30 overs. However, the game was a high scoring one with Aussies piling up 199 runs at over 6.0 an over.
In another game against the Kiwis, the Aussies managed a 17 run victory which was once again by a small margin. This was followed by a 70 run win against Zimbabwe at Cuttack. Then came the semifinals against Pakistan which the Aussies won by another small margin of 18 runs to meet England in the finals. And what happened in the finals is a known secret with Australia sealing a 7 run win. Thanks to a valiant reverse sweep by Mike Gating which turned the table towards Australia similar to Gibbs' dropping the catch of Steve Waugh in the super six game of the 1999 edition.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Only NZC can issue awards for its players
Well some fascinating news from New Zealand cricket (NZC) is that Daniel Vettori has been awarded top three of the awards in this year's major awards of the country. To mention the needed, Vettori has been awarded as the player of the year, Winsor cup for 1st class bowling and Walter Hadlee trophy for the best bowler on ODIs. One aspect that is needed to be mentioned here is that, New Zealand players can be awarded only by their cricket association and no one else. That is what New Zealand have been able to achieve in international cricket until now.
My apologies for not taking pains to go all the way to search as to since when have New Zealanders been playing international cricket. However, if their statistics are given a close look at, it would come as no surprise that New Zealand stand far compared to all other teams but for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Of course, South Africa have been able to do exactly what new Zealand could manage which is a totally different issue here. New Zealand are yet to reach the finals of a world cup in its 25 year long history (since 1975 when the 1st world cup was played).
New Zealand players have hardly been able to produce any out standing cricketers be it in any department of the game. The only achievement by New Zealand team is the ICC Champions trophy which they won in 2000 by beating India at Nairobi. They did everything to win the world cup in 1992 only upto the semis where they lost to Pakistan. One has to note down that the maiden win for New Zealand in a tournament containing three or more teams is the ICC champions trophy 2000 as mentioned. They are yet to boast of a batsman who has scored a triple century in tests.
The highest individual score from a batsman from New Zealand is Michael Crowe who got out on a score of 299. Some outstanding names from New Zealand cricket are Sir Richard Hadlee, Martin Crowe, Shane Bond and Daniel Vettori. Of course, players like Brendon McCullum, Chris Cairns and the present bunch are found doing a fab job for New Zealand. But, these players are of no match to say Mark & Steve Waughs, Sachin Tendulkar & Sourav Ganguly, Brian Lara etc from outside New Zealand. Though Shane Bond stands apart from other fast bowlers like Shoaib Akthar and Brett Lee, his career started after them but ended much before them.
So, where else can New Zealand players expect an award if not for their own country? Stop wondering about New Zealand and become a movie fan instead.
My apologies for not taking pains to go all the way to search as to since when have New Zealanders been playing international cricket. However, if their statistics are given a close look at, it would come as no surprise that New Zealand stand far compared to all other teams but for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Of course, South Africa have been able to do exactly what new Zealand could manage which is a totally different issue here. New Zealand are yet to reach the finals of a world cup in its 25 year long history (since 1975 when the 1st world cup was played).
New Zealand players have hardly been able to produce any out standing cricketers be it in any department of the game. The only achievement by New Zealand team is the ICC Champions trophy which they won in 2000 by beating India at Nairobi. They did everything to win the world cup in 1992 only upto the semis where they lost to Pakistan. One has to note down that the maiden win for New Zealand in a tournament containing three or more teams is the ICC champions trophy 2000 as mentioned. They are yet to boast of a batsman who has scored a triple century in tests.
The highest individual score from a batsman from New Zealand is Michael Crowe who got out on a score of 299. Some outstanding names from New Zealand cricket are Sir Richard Hadlee, Martin Crowe, Shane Bond and Daniel Vettori. Of course, players like Brendon McCullum, Chris Cairns and the present bunch are found doing a fab job for New Zealand. But, these players are of no match to say Mark & Steve Waughs, Sachin Tendulkar & Sourav Ganguly, Brian Lara etc from outside New Zealand. Though Shane Bond stands apart from other fast bowlers like Shoaib Akthar and Brett Lee, his career started after them but ended much before them.
So, where else can New Zealand players expect an award if not for their own country? Stop wondering about New Zealand and become a movie fan instead.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Are Warne's words justified?
Well the latest from the world of cricket is that the Australian retired spin wizard - Shane Warne has not only complimented the England team that a couple of days back lifted their maiden international trophy when they won the third edition of the world T20 in the Caribbean, but in addition also gave them an undeserving applause by saying that England are not scared of playing Australia. The point is, who on earth is scared of playing any team when the least happens is that they may lose the game or the series or whatever but still go back alive saying "better luck next time"?
Anyways with that being a different issue here, the point here is whether Shane Warne's words are completely justified? Shane Warne is believed to have made the statement after England's victory over Australia in the finals of the T20 world cup and also taking into consideration the 2-1 victory over Australia in the Ashes last year. Is that completely enough to justify Shane Warne's words? Likewise, another retired Australian fast bowler Glenn McGrath had predicted a 5-0 whitewash for Australia in the last Ashes played in England. But, forget about whitewashing, Austraia couldn't even win or defend the title they had won two years ago.
Australia generously gifted England the series, first when they drew the first Ashes test which they should have won after having a major lead in the first innings and then by losing two out of the 3 matches that were played after Australia won the second. However, coming back to Shane Warne's words, if England's world cup victory is given a close look at, no doubt, England did deserve to win the title, but winning a test series against Australia and that too on its home ground needs some special consideration. With the shortest format of the game still being a fluke, the results can go either way.
I don't have the patience to go back to cricinfo and search for the last time when England held the Ashes in Australia. I remember a series of 4-1 loss in the Ashes by England when Steve Waugh was the captain, with the latest one being in 2002-03 played in Australia. Australia have always been a predictable team for the right reasons with most of the time being victorious while England on the other hand having a 2005/2009 Ashes sort of thing or a world T20 2010 thing once in a lifetime. The only team that England can beat is the West Indies in today's cricket and they still need not fear Australia or any other team whatsoever.
Anyways with that being a different issue here, the point here is whether Shane Warne's words are completely justified? Shane Warne is believed to have made the statement after England's victory over Australia in the finals of the T20 world cup and also taking into consideration the 2-1 victory over Australia in the Ashes last year. Is that completely enough to justify Shane Warne's words? Likewise, another retired Australian fast bowler Glenn McGrath had predicted a 5-0 whitewash for Australia in the last Ashes played in England. But, forget about whitewashing, Austraia couldn't even win or defend the title they had won two years ago.
Australia generously gifted England the series, first when they drew the first Ashes test which they should have won after having a major lead in the first innings and then by losing two out of the 3 matches that were played after Australia won the second. However, coming back to Shane Warne's words, if England's world cup victory is given a close look at, no doubt, England did deserve to win the title, but winning a test series against Australia and that too on its home ground needs some special consideration. With the shortest format of the game still being a fluke, the results can go either way.
I don't have the patience to go back to cricinfo and search for the last time when England held the Ashes in Australia. I remember a series of 4-1 loss in the Ashes by England when Steve Waugh was the captain, with the latest one being in 2002-03 played in Australia. Australia have always been a predictable team for the right reasons with most of the time being victorious while England on the other hand having a 2005/2009 Ashes sort of thing or a world T20 2010 thing once in a lifetime. The only team that England can beat is the West Indies in today's cricket and they still need not fear Australia or any other team whatsoever.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Tendulkar's lone six in the IPL
The fact that Sachin Tendulkar has hit only one six in the IPL is quite hard to believe not only because it is Tendulkar who is under discussion at the moment but also due to the fact that he stands in the second position when it comes to the highest run scorers in this edition of the IPL. Sachin Tendulkar might be kicking himself when he would have learnt that a bowler in Harbhajan Singh has hit more shots out of the boundary than him. However, if the same is seen from the discipline point of view, Sachin has to be heading in the right direction.
As said earlier, Sachin Tendulkar is the second highest run scorer in the IPL second to only Jacques Kallis with 493 runs from 10 games. He has 3 scores above fifty and an equal number of man of the match awards. Sachin Tendulkar has hardly been the man to hit sixes when compared to someone like Sehwag, Gilchrist, Jayasuriya and Afridi to name a few. Big hitters like Gilchrist, Sehwag, Symonds and Jayasuriya have not been doing exactly what is expected from them and Sachin Tendulkar indeed deserves a lot of applauses for what he has been able to do.
It doesn't mind as to how many sixes a batsman has been able to hit when the team for which he plays is found to top the charts after ending in the second position from the last in the 2009 edition. In the 2008 edition, it was Sanath Jayasuriya who hit the maximum number of sixes when he hit 31 of them only to see his team not make it to even the semis of the same. If Sachin Tendulkar was to hit more sixes, he wouldn't have had so much success in the areas mentioned above. It is the job of a tail end batsman like Harbhajan whose sole duty with the bat is to whip it through the air and see the ball fly over the ropes.
Harbhajan is not responsible if he fails with the bat when his duty is to bowl the opposition. But, Sachin Tendulkar is gifted with the responsibility to take the batting further with no other experienced batsmen in his side. One can see signs of the great Australian captain Steve Waugh whose individual records hardly speak for him. Steve Waugh has been able to hit only three hundreds in his entire ODI career lasting 324 matches. But, all those three centuries have been referred to as "captain's knock" with the 120* against South Africa in the super sixes being the highlight of them all.
As said earlier, Sachin Tendulkar is the second highest run scorer in the IPL second to only Jacques Kallis with 493 runs from 10 games. He has 3 scores above fifty and an equal number of man of the match awards. Sachin Tendulkar has hardly been the man to hit sixes when compared to someone like Sehwag, Gilchrist, Jayasuriya and Afridi to name a few. Big hitters like Gilchrist, Sehwag, Symonds and Jayasuriya have not been doing exactly what is expected from them and Sachin Tendulkar indeed deserves a lot of applauses for what he has been able to do.
It doesn't mind as to how many sixes a batsman has been able to hit when the team for which he plays is found to top the charts after ending in the second position from the last in the 2009 edition. In the 2008 edition, it was Sanath Jayasuriya who hit the maximum number of sixes when he hit 31 of them only to see his team not make it to even the semis of the same. If Sachin Tendulkar was to hit more sixes, he wouldn't have had so much success in the areas mentioned above. It is the job of a tail end batsman like Harbhajan whose sole duty with the bat is to whip it through the air and see the ball fly over the ropes.
Harbhajan is not responsible if he fails with the bat when his duty is to bowl the opposition. But, Sachin Tendulkar is gifted with the responsibility to take the batting further with no other experienced batsmen in his side. One can see signs of the great Australian captain Steve Waugh whose individual records hardly speak for him. Steve Waugh has been able to hit only three hundreds in his entire ODI career lasting 324 matches. But, all those three centuries have been referred to as "captain's knock" with the 120* against South Africa in the super sixes being the highlight of them all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)