No more blind slogging

Well a person who had made news for the right as well as the wrong reasons has decided to call it a day when yesterday the Pakistani slogger-Shahid Afridi quits international cricket. This would mean most of the major cricketing websites would focus on his three fastest hundreds that came against three sub-continent nations namely Sri Lanka, India and Bangladesh. But, speaking facts, Shahid Afridi's absence in the Pakistani batting line up should boost up their middle order for, Shahid Afridi is no way better than some Shoaib Akthar or any other tail end batsmen when it comes to batting.

With so many beautiful shots out there like the cover-drive, the on-drive and much more, Shahid Afridi has had only one shot-just blindly whip the bat and in case it makes contact with the ball you have six runs added to your credit. And, in case the ball nicks the edge of the bat, the slip fielder would be having one more catch to his credit and that is all. In that regard, Shahid Afridi is a batsman one of his kind. Even tail end batsmen would think a dozen times before going in for a shot unlike Shahid Afridi from Pakistan.

We can remember the Australian nightwatchman Jason Gillespie who got a double hundred against Bangladesh which is too much for his standard as a batsman. It was just the helplessness of the Pakistan Crickat Board (PCB) which hardly had any option but to crown Afridi as the Pakistani captain for the 2011 world cup. Afridi should consider himself to be lucky for, he was the captain of the Pakistan side which defeated Australia after their unbeaten 36 match streak and made it to the finals after Waqar Younis and Inzamam (who were better captains compared to Shahid Afridi) could not manage.

Irrespective of the situation his team was in, Shahid Afridi took no serious responsibility of his team and used to slog blindly. The three fastest hundreds out of his six centuries should be nothing but fluke. On the other hand, his bowling had a good amount of variation and used to deceive even the most awesome batsmen which saw him bag two five wicket hauls and an equal number of four wicket hauls in the recently concluded world cup. When most of his fans expected him to showcast his power with the bat, he kept them in suspense when his ball listened to him rather then his bat.

Only the amount will tell

Well I just can't figure out why anybody on earth has to justify himself when he has caused no harm to others in anyway and this happened recently when I read the news about New Zealand cricket denying any reports that suspects them to have forced the retired Sri Lankan off spinner Muttiah Muralitharaan to play for his country's domestic season where he would be turning up for Wellington. Once again it has to be stupid when Larsen says "Muralitharan loves touring New Zealand" . Why should that comment come in between his appointment and his love for the country?

When the Sri Lankan off spinner has called it a day from test cricket almost a year ago when he played against India and bid a farewell to the limited overs cricket once again against India in the finals at Mumbai, who has the right to ask the off spinner what he has decided to go about in his life after cricket? What better work does Muralitharan got to do after he has ended his international cricketing career? If at all he can do something now, it is play for some domestic teams and that to as long as his mind and body supports him.

At present, Muralitharan is now spending his time playing for Kochi Tuskers Kerala with his contribution to his team and his fans not so important at the moment. I really do not have the patience to go through any major cricket sites to check out for how much the Sri Lankan off spinner signed. But, I can just guess that the amount that Muralitharan would be receiving from KTK would be fairly large compared to what the authorities of New Zealand cricket would have paid him to play for Wellington. When the Kochi team owners can declare their payment one has to wonder why not the NZC?

It is the matter of the past that Muttiah Muralitharan is the leading wicket taker in the world in both forms of the game. But, Muralitharan was never the match winner that he was in the recently concluded world cup in the sub-continent. Having signed up Muralitharan is as god as signing up someone else and for that one need not hide their anxiety and give lame excuses over his recruitment. How would it matter for how much has Muralitharan been signed for by NZC? By the way, the exact amount that Murali was signed for is not revealed. Has he been paid a bomb that the NZC is fear of drawing in criticism? Well this is just for the sake of curiosity.

How does it matter who leads England

Well the breaking news is that England have named two different captains for two limited overs format of the game with Stuart Broad having to lead the side for T20 games while Alistair Cook will henceforth take care of England's one day games. Though this news hardly sparks of any sort of debate, people keeping their fingers crossed are just countable. At least as a cricket blogger, I have no other option but to shed some words regarding the selection or appointment. The tag "No Police State Girls blog" just doesn't seem to go too well with me whatsoever at this moment.

The result of the latest development in England cricket was due to the fact that their then captain Andrew Strauss wants to focus completely on his test career while Paul Collingwood has nothing to say about his T20 career. And, Paul Collingwood has every reason to justify himself when he bought home the country's first glory since decades of cricket that included failures, just misses and chokes. Collingwood's feat was achieved after England had three workld cup finals without a win along with an ICC champion's trophy that too ending up as runners-up. If South Africans would be reading this, they'd just breathe free.

The chokers tag is not totally restricted to South Africa alone and England also have an equal share in it. Coming to the point, one has to rather concentrate on the entire team of England which are in doldrums at present with their latest such thing evident in the world cup. England failed to win matches against Bangladesh and Ireland despite posting a stiff target of 327 on the board against the latter and having the opposition reeling at 111/5 at one stage. Of course, England were able to rarely regain and defend the Ashes on the previous two occasions but that is regarding their test cricket.

Right now, it has to be the entire England team and not just the captain alone whom the ECB needs to focus on. If not for their T20 win last year, England have gone back to their old ways of leaving things half way when they had just one T20 tournament against Pakistan and test series' against the same though which England won convincingly, their body language didn't speak for them. They beat both Pakistan and Australia with destiny favoring them by not having matches against other teams like Sri Lanka and India against whom their real myth is evaluated.

West Indies get what they've begged for

Well it might have just come in as a surprise for all those curious fans of West Indies cricket out there when their favorite team inflicted a 10 wicket defeat on Pakistan yesterday at Guyana. But, to me who has been following the West Indies cricket from the past decade, this should come in as no surprise with the series already decided two one dayers back with Pakistan leaving absolutely no stone unturned in their approach against the West Indies. Of course, the West Indies earlier in the tournament beaten Pakistan in a game that was cut short at Bridgetown.

That was in the 4^th one day international by which time West Indies had already meekly surrendered to the Pakistan team no matter where they were playing them. West Indies had lost the series 3-0 to Pakistan after the touring country had taken an unassailable lead in the five match one day series. Added to that would be the fact that the game was truncated to 30 overs after Pakistan had scored 248 runs on the board. Though not enough in today's limited overs cricket, the total was far from enough when the opposition they were facing came into consideration.

One can see the West Indian cricketers rejoicing their thumping 10 wicket win over the sub-continent nation unaware of their losses in the previous three encounters prior to that and the one off game that proved to be lucky for the hosts. I can remember the West Indies beating Australia on three successive occasions in a 7 match series after losing to the Aussies 4-0 in the first four one dayers that preceded this. Then, the West Indians were responsible in stopping the 21 match winning streak of Australia that started from the VB series involving England and Sri Lanka and went on through the world cup 2003.

The very same thing happened in the test series when the West Indies miserably lost the first three tests and won the 4^th test which made news for the highest ever run chase in a test match that stands even today. All credit to Brian Lara who bought out the best from the worst from his team. If West Indies were even a little bit serious about their cricket, they should have had at least one win before handing out a series to the touring country. A consolation win is the last thing that any team ever dreams about. However, this was far better than a 5-0 whitewash.

Lack of desire from the WICB evident

It is still alive in cricket fans' minds the way the West Indies team surrendered to Bangladesh on their home soil some two years ago, when West Indies made headlines despite the Ashes going on in full bloom on the other side of the cricketing world. West Indies lost three one dayers and two tests to get into the record books for the wrong reasons. If anyone of you would cite the absence of key players to be the reason for their debacle, then I think they have to go through the recently concluded world cup where West Indies had wins only against Bangladesh, Ireland and Holland.

In a way, those wins for the West Indies proved to be of much joy for, despite not deserving to be there, they made it to the quarter-finals of the world cup and they missed losing out to Ireland and Bangladesh to be fortunate unlike England. The immediate decision from the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) was to drop players like Chris Gayle, Shivnarine Chanderapaul and Ramnaresh Sarwan. I doubt whether the West Indies cricket board was inspired by the BCCI whop dropped senior players like Dravid, Ganguly and Anil Kumble from the squad citing reasons that youngsters be given a chance.

This happened to work well for the BCCI for, the Indian team since their drop happened to win two major titles namely the ICC world T20 2007 and the recently concluded ICC world cup. But, if the WICB also follows suit and does what the BCCI did, one can expect the West Indies to be lined along with class 2 teams like Ireland, Kenya, Canada and co. It would be hard to make anyone believe that the highest individual score in test cricket is a West Indian cricketer. It would be hard to convince anyone that West Indies have won two world cups and were the strongest team in those days.

What has happened for Gayle is something that he might have thought to be and liked as well at the same time when he can enjoy the shortest version of the game and earn ten times the amount what he'd earn had he been the part of the squad that would be hosting Pakistan. If Gayle's words are to be believed, he seems not to have got a call from the WICB among the group of players selected for the training camp in Barbados. I wonder what made the WICB give a NOC to Gayle only to condemn him for not preferring his nation above self.

Was it because Gayle was injury hit and his chances of performing against Pakistan was freak that the WICB gave him a NoC? Now that Gayle has received a call from RCB, the WICB have got more furious and come out to condemn Gayle? Stop this nonsense and look out for some No Police State Girls blog.

New Zealand still in WC trauma

Well regular visits to a cricket website reveals the depth to which the Kiwi players have had to undergo for ending their world cup dreams in the semi finals itself for the 5^th time. Four of their defeats have been to sub-continent nations, two each to Pakistan and Sri Lanka. One can take a wild guess that even the Aussies might have forgot what would have happened a week ago before Shane Watson blasted the Bangladeshi bowlers out of Bangladesh (if given a chance). This was the first time the Aussies have lost the world cup since the new shape of the world cup was introduced in 1999.

I wish it is high time for the Kiwis to realize that only one team can win the world cup and should be contended with not only being one of the 4 teams that made it to the semi-finals but also to be the only nation from the sub-continent to have done so this time. Of course, there was no 4th team from the sub-continent which could make it to the semi-finals of a world cup and there had to ne a non sub-continent nation to fill that vacancy. Still, that could have been some Australia, South Africa or England who could have made it there.

But, the Kiwis should be fortunate to have been there. Once again, New Zealand were the only nation who never faced a sub-continent nation in the quarter-finals of the world cup. And, had they played either of the three teams from the sub-continent, New Zealand's fate would have been decided then itself, thus paving way for any of the teams mentioned above. However, even after two weeks if this is found to worry the Kiwi coach-John Wright more than anybody else, it has to be justified because John Wright had coached India in the 2003 world cup which India lost surrendered.

I don't know whether any coach has been able to do it earlier but, if that is false, then John Wright will be the only coach to have seen two of the teams that he has coached to have made it to the finals of a world cup. However, if John Wright's statement needs a reconsideration, then it is worth mentioning that if New Zealand lost only against Sri Lanka (twice) and Australia then their wins have been only against Pakistan and South Africa. That balances the equation 3-2 favoring the Kiwis. This deleted show desktop icon is my site of the day for you guys.

Pakistan's dream bigger than the world cup

Well it was just 6 days after the 10^th edition of the ICC world cup got over that the multi million dollar IPL kicked in and no doubt, this time as well the excitement happens to be the same despite the likes of Sanath Jayasuriya and Anil Kumble missing out. Likewise, such a grand event can happen only in a cricket crazy land like India and may be a little bit in Pakistan that too if it is equivalent to an Indo-Pak match. Or else, the flavor seems to be missing in most part of the globe with people hardly finding any time outside their busy schedule to watch a game that lasts for 6 hours.

One can imagine if all people in the world go jobless and cricket crazy at the same time, what would happen to these cricketers. It was evident in the recently concluded ICC cricket world cup the way teams like Australia, South Africa and New Zealand lost their way inbetween. There was Shane Watson, Ricky Ponting etc from Australia with the South African squad involving Jacques Kallis, A B deVilliars to name a few. But their world cup dreams never lasted more than the quarter finals. The aforementioned teams were better ones compared to New Zealand, who went a step ahead to make it to the semi-finals.

The sole reason for such a debacle can be nothing but the lack of motivation that the teams from the sub-continent were found to be enjoying. Sri Lanka didn't rely on Muttiah Muralitharan and they dropped Chaminda Vass and Jayasuriya from the world cup squad despite their statistics speaking strongly for them. But, the main news other than these is that Pakistan wants to launch a cricket league of its own may be naming it as the PPL. The name itself rivals the IPL with India being replaced by Pakistan. Is this in return for what the team franchisee have done regarding Pakistani players?

Is this owing to the reason that India are the arch rivals of Pakistan and don't want to be anyway behind them at least in cricket? As said earlier, Pakistan is also a strong cricket crazy nation like India and hosting a similar league there would not be a bad idea. Will the current players from the Sri Lankan team feature themselves in the tournament who have experienced the worst on their last tour to the country? Will players from Australia, New Zealand, England, West Indies and South Africa undo the precaution what they did when they were to tour Pakistan earlier? But, one thing can be a good idea- hold the tournament somewhere else outside Pakistan.

Btw shall we move on with farmers' markets?

Kapil's achievement unparalleled

Well it is all cheers for the Indian captain M S Dhoni who once again bought back the world cup which kept on changing hands with Australia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka before India could have its turn. Now, India, along with Australia is the only team to have won world cups with both black & white as well as color dress. That should not make news for, a black and white dress will never be reintroduced in international one day cricket, let alone in world cups. Winning a world cup is no doubt a dream for a life of a cricketer and Dhoni has done just that.

But, this should not overshadow the achievement of Kapil Dev's men in white some 28 years down the lane. In fact, that was an achievement that is even more prominent but hardly spoken about compared to Dhoni's. The Indian team came out victorious in the 1983 world cup with all odds not only favoring West Indies but at the same time closing all hopes for team India. That was the West Indian side with the likes of Vivian Richards, a match for whom is not even found in Sachin Tendulkar. Beating that team is worth more compared to what Dhoni's team have done now.

Back then, India were not even favorites to make it to the semi finals of the 1983 world cup, let alone winning a major title. India, in that world cup beat teams like England and Australia in addition to West Indies which were also competitive opponents. On the other hand, the West Indies were not only fresh from their previous two world cup victories but were undefeated like the Aussies in the last two editions of the same. Sangakkara's Sri Lanka comes nowhere when compared to Clive Lloyd's West Indies. Though no home team has won a world cup earlier, playing in foreign pitches has to be tough compared to home conditions.

No one world have dropped Sunil Gavaskar or Mohinder Amarnath four time like Sachin Tendulkar was dropped in the semi-finals of this world cup. Had India beaten Australia in the 2003 WC finals, that could have been considered to be in par with Kapil's achievement. Of course, a world cup win is a dream come true for any captain as said earlier.Lot would have predicted India to win the world cup this time unlike in 1983. Finally, cricket then was not a millionaire maker or celeb donor. Only guts and glory counted in those days unlike now. Hope this isn't mistaken with any IT Tech Talk.

If I was SRT, I'd have retired

Well the latest abuzz in the cricket world is that Sachin Tendulkar will continue to play international cricket despite winning the world cup. This would definitely bring cheers on all Tendulkar fans who can still see the master blaster doing what he has been since the past 22 years in international cricket. What is more is that Tendulkar will play in both tests as well as one day internationals and God knows how long. It is an undisputed fact that Tendulkar is not the one who runs behind easy money. Moreover, it is not we who decides when Sachin Tendulkar should retire.

But, one thing as fans of the great legend, it would be nice to see Sachin Tendulkar ending his career on a high like Glenn McGrath did so after winning the Ashes 5-0 and the 2007 world cup 11-0. So was the case with Shane Warne when his last 5 test matches saw him become the 1st bowler to grab 700 wickets in test cricket. But, the Indian speedstar-Javagal Srinath didn't have that sort of retirement when his last one day international saw him get belted by Ricky Ponting and Damien Martyn in the finals of the 2003 world cup.

Srinath was belted for 87 runs in that match at Centurion. Javagal Srinath didn't take a wicket in his finals test match against West Indies as well. Similarly, Sachin Tendulkar's West Indian counterpart-Brian Lara had a disappointing end to his international career when his team lost five major games in the super eight stage of the 2007 world cup at home. Lara was a part of the West Indian team that didn't feature in the super sixes of the 1999 and 2003 world cups. I pray God that no legend gets such a bad farewell like Lara which made him hang his boots permanently not even considering the IPL.

Sir Vivian Richards-who was a part of the West Indies team which was a world beating side played his last in 1991 and didn't wait to see his team crash out of the 1992 world cup which didn't even make it to the semi-finals despite the presence of Lara, Ambrose, Walsh, Bishop and Richie Richardson. In case Tendulkar retires after say India lose in the ICC champions trophy, that would be a sad farewell for a deserving cricketer. And in case Tendulkar retires after scoring his 100^th ton, the world will see him only as a person who did everything to get into the record books.

A final worth watching

Well as an Indian, I should be glad to see my team country lift the ICC cricket world cup for the 2^nd time. At last, India have won another world cup and that too after the color dress was introduced in one day cricket. Pakistan and Sri Lanka had previously won their world cups in 1992 and 1996 wearing color dress and India was deprived of such prestige which happened to be true yesterday after their 6 wicket win over Sri Lanka at Mumbai. As a result, India became the 1^st nation to win a world cup on home soil.

But, my post here is regarding the finals of world cups which have been one sided since the past three editions when Aussies were totally unbeatable. The case was partly similar in 1996 as well when the third Sri Lankan wicket of Ashanka Gurusinha fell when they were closing in on the target of 241 set by Australia. Australia was totally outplayed. This time, both the teams should consistency and finally since there can be just one winner, Sri Lanka had to be satisfied with the runners-up tag. A total of 274 was a decent one to both chase or defend unlike in previous 3 WC finals.

I can still recall the way Shane Warne demolished the Pakistani batting line up consisting of Saeed Anwar and co in the finals of the 1999 world cup where Pakistan were dismissed for 132-the lowest total in the finals of a world cup. Even Scotland and Bangladesh were able to score 181 and 178 respectively in their matches against Australia. The entire match lasted for just 59 overs meaning just about half an hour after one innings would have got over. Had this been known before hand, may be the finals might have been held soon after the 2^nd semi-finals would have got over.

Then comes the 2003 finals where after Australia had piled up a mammoth 359 losing just 2 wickets not before inflicting a 100+ run partnership, the only question that was awaited was "by how many runs would Australia win?" and "how long would the Indian innings last?". So was the case in 2007 . Sri Lanka should be lucky that the match didn't last 50 overs which would have otherwise seen a target in excess of 359 that was imposed against India in 2003. Still, the fastest hundred in the world cup final happened to be broken and so was the highest individual score in the world cup final.Don't forget to check out the Army Blog.

India-Sri Lanka in world cups..A review

With India set to play Sri Lanka in the final of the world cup, a look at the history between the two teams especially in world cup tournaments would be worth I suppose. If things are seen in the world cup tournaments that include the ICC champions trophy and the T20 world cups, Sri Lanka have been at the delivering end with India losing the plot on almost all occasions. The latest one being in the world T20 held at West Indies where Sri Lanka beat India to move to the semi-finals in West Indies. Of course, India had lost all games in that tournament.

A win against Sri Lanka for India would have been just a consolation after their loss to Australia and West Indies. Before that, India failed to get past the round robin stage of the last world cup after they lost to Sri Lanka and of course Bangladesh before that. Prior to the 2007 world cup, India had won a bilateral series against Sri Lanka at home 2-1 but could not repeat the same a month later. India have beaten Sri Lanka in world cups 2003 and 1999. This time it was India's turn to enjoy with them being responsible for Sri Lanka to go without a win against a major opposition in 1999.

In the 2003 world cup, it was after their win against Sri Lanka that India reached the semi-finals. But, India managed to win all three games in the super sixes which would not have made any difference. However, India's win over Sri Lanka in 1999 and 2003 didn't prove anything worth for India and Sri Lanka managed to reach the semis in 2003 despite being thrashed by India as mentioned. But, India's loss to Sri Lanka in 1996 and 2007 kept India totally out of the tournament. India's world cup campaign in 2007 lasted barely 2 weeks after they first lost to Bangladesh before losing to Sri Lanka.

India's win over Sri Lanka have just aided India's advancement to the next round or has been just another win. But, whenever India has lost to Sri Lanka, the match has made headlines. Previously India-Sri Lanka match in 1979 made headlines for India losing to a Sri Lankan team which was until then not been granted test status. India and Sri Lanka were set to play the finals of the ICC champions trophy 2002 which was abandoned with just one innings possible when rain interrupted the game twice. Since then, India has never played Sri Lanka in an ICC champions trophy. But, things need not be the same this time for both teams.

Well its time to check out some forex trading stuff before the finals.

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.

Bankrupt Ponting files insolvency

It was after Australia's whitewash in the 2^nd T20 world cup where Australia failed to go past the 1^st round of the tournament after losses to Sri Lanka and West Indies that the then Aussie captain-Ricky Ponting stepped down from captaincy. Now, the world had to wait for India to tame the Australian team that has been stripped of all its match winners for Ponting to give up his captaincy from all forms of the game. This might not go down well with most of them who are hardcore fans of the Aussie captain for his achievements in international cricket.

Ponting though is the 2^nd captain to have lifted the ICC world cup twice after Clive Lloyd can hardly be considered in par with Steve Waugh who was not as successful as Ponting. It was Steve Waugh who from nowhere bought his team to victory in the finals of the 1999 world cup when odds suggested that Australia wouldn't even make it to the semis with them needing wins against all three teams in the super sixes. Had Ponting been there, that would have never happened. Likewise, even Mark Taylor was a clever captain who saw his team to the finals in the previous edition but convinced himself with the runners-up tag.

Ponting under his captaincy has more than 41 test wins along with two ICC world cups and an equal number of ICC champions trophies. Till date, Australia is the only team to have won two ICC champions trophies and Ponting is lucky to have captained the side then. It would not be a tough task for anyone to lead a side with the strongest bowling line up in the world aided with depth to an equal amount in batting. Hard hitting batsmen like Gilchrist, Hayden, Martyn, Symonds, Hussey as a bunch is still unparalleled. Similarly, a bowler like McGrath can be born once in a lifetime.

Since the bowling duo of McGrath and Warne, Ponting's team has never been able to retain or regain the Ashes. Australia came close to losing a test match against Sri Lanka which was the 2^nd test for Australia after the retirement of McGrath-Warne. But, with likes of Gilchrist and co, their winning streak was extended by three more matches when they finally lost to India in the 3^rd test of the Border-Gavaskar trophy 2007-08 at Perth. Since then Ponting's highlights as captain are: a test series loss to RSA at home which was their 1st such loss in 16 years. Then comes the two Ashes' losses and two loss to India on their tour.

If you are looking for parenting tips, then this is the site.

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.

Bangladesh goes missing

With the second round of the 10^th edition of the world cup being over, it is just fascinating to see that all three teams from the sub-continent have qualified to the semi-finals of the tournament. This has happened for the first time and teams had come close to doing so in the 1987 world cup where Pakistan and India had qualified for the semi-finals with Sri Lanka being just as good as today's Bangladesh and Bangladesh being absent from world cups. Perhaps! Had Bangladesh been a little decent, may be New Zealand would have missed out from entering the semi-finals.

If one can take pains to go to the recent past, Bangladesh have beaten whitewashed the Kiwis 4-0 on their recent tour to the sub-continent nation. They managed wins against Ireland and England when all odds were against them all these in addition to a win that was guaranteed against Holland. Bangladesh had equal number of wins as had West Indies with three wins each. It would not have been a mismatch had they won against the Caribbean country, with both teams standing an equal chance to come out victorious. May be that was the reason for the fans' anger which resulted in them pelting stones on the team bus.

With the match against West Indies being played on home soil, Bangladesh should have made that one count but which was however not the case whatsoever. Moreover, Bangladesh rather than winning the contest against the West Indies, made it look half dead with the home team losing all ten wickets for 58 runs on the board. Bangladesh managed to pile up 283 runs in the opening encounter against India when they were chasing 371 to win and didn't end up losing all ten wickets. This proves the Bangladeshis caliber not to panic under pressure. Neither was their performance any bad against the remaining teams barring RSA.

The debacle against South Africa can well be understood but not the one against West Indies. Now, the remaining three teams from the sub-continent qualifying to the quarter-finals, it would have been a delight to see Bangladesh as well in the contest. Of course, Bangladesh would not have made it to the semis with either Pakistan or Bangladesh having to quit after the quarter-finals. Previously, in the 1996 world cup, all three teams from the sub-continent had qualified to the quarter-finals and two among them went to the semi-finals. Bangladesh were yet to make their international appearance and even if they did, their dreams would not have been beyond the league stages.

Should this mean that I should look out for some jophilsuperman stuff? Not at all.

No choker, only inefficient tag

I don't think the chokers tag is well suited for South Africa since the 2003 world cup when they were hardly the team that anybody would have wanted to beat. I can still remember the then South African captain-Shaun Pollock being given an over short in their 1^st game against West Indies which was solely South Africa's fault for maintaining a slow over rate bowling first. And then there was the match against New Zealand where though South Africa managed a satisfactory 307 provided by Herschelle Gibbs, Stephen Fleming's men also had equal zest in them to fight it out on the field.

New Zealand were given a revised target of 229 runs from 39 overs which was still over run a ball. All odds supported New Zealand despite South Africa having scored a 300+ total for, the Kiwis lost just one wicket en route to their successful run chase. The last was the game against Sri Lanka where a wrong signal from the stands ended the match in a draw and with it the South African dream not only in the world cup but also to reach the super sixes. Sri Lanka did their part of the game best by not relying on their wins against West Indies and New Zealand alone.

Atapattu did a fab job scoring 124* from 118 balls showing equal fight rather than just being a team that would cash out from the bad luck that the Proteas are believed to be cursed with. So was the case in 2007 when South Africans were far from being the favorites. With a miserable loss to Australia twice that included a complete surrender to Glenn McGrath in the semi-finals and New Zealand along with a clueless loss to Bangladesh, it was lack of the presence of India and Pakistan that saw South Africa in the semi-finals. I just cannot tell you My view on anything and everything under the sun.

The South Africans were favorites to win the cup only in the 1996 and 1999 editions where they had beaten all opponents in the league stages until they lost the plot in the knock out games against West Indies and Australia. This time, the South Africans have to consider themselves lucky to have ended up as the top team beating India and West Indies. A loss against England chasing 173 cannot be justified and neither can the loss yesterday against the Kiwis with the likes of Smith, deVilliars and Kallis. South Africa are gifted with the most promising squad even better than Sri Lanka and India. But, lack of commitment needs a heavy payment.

Sub-continent ghosts and not hosts for Australia

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 4^th 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 8^th 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.

Bad grouping of teams evident from the quarter final line up

Well keeping in mind the quarter finals of the world cup, this just seems to be a mismatch with Pakistan not only having an upper hand against the Caribbean but also the West Indies might never ever be able to regroup once the quarter finals against Pakistan be over in the next 8 hours to come. Also the other side would be Sri Lanka who are scheduled to face England on Saturday. No doubt that both these teams would enter with minimum or no effort into the semi-finals of the world cup. But, is this right on the part of the ICC is a million dollar question.

There is no particular team like the Aussies in the past two world cups to have a birthright on the world cup. And neither have Bangladesh and Zimbabwe been underdogs as they have been expected. But, if things are given a close look at, it looks that group A is gifted with weaker teams compared to group B. Group A has two teams from the sub-continent namely Sri Lanka and Pakistan who always have an upper hand being the hosts and enjoying home like conditions. I all blame it on Australia to have deceived the ICC who came out with such grouping of teams.

In group B, only India is a team worth having anyone's bet into. Though South Africa have emerged on the top of the table, it was India who gifted them with a victory by losing 9 wickets for 28 runs with all odds predicting a 350+ total at the end of the Indian innings. Added to that, there were mismatches in England's games against Ireland and Bangladesh which reduced England's chances that in turn favored South Africa to end as the top team. Had England won against Ireland and Bangladesh, they would have been on the top and not the Proteas.

Teams like Zimbabwe, Kenya, Canada and Holland never made their presence felt. However, Ireland and Bangladesh did. Both Ireland and Bangladesh were far superior compared to Kenya, Canada and Zimbabwe in group A. One has to take a deeper look to Explore reality. West Indies on the other hand proved a 2^nd chance for teams like England and India. In group A, All four teams played to their potential with minnows aside. Pakistan beat Australia which in turn beat New Zealand. If I was in place of Lorgat, I'd have put Australia in group B and South Africa in group B and Bangladesh in group A while Zimbabwe would have been in group B.

Time to turn this one down

Well I have highlighted this in the past as well regarding the introduction of the quarter finals into the world cup which brings luck to some teams and an obvious bad luck to others. Earlier world cups since 1999 had something known as the super sixes and super eights which gave every team another chance to set right their earlier mistake while every team played every other team once before entering the knock out stage of the tournament. This time, all eight test playing nations barring Bangladesh have qualified to the quarter finals. But, there will be just 4 games before the semis would start.

taking on England. Prediction would always go in for Pakistan over West Indies and Pakistan will be taking on the West Indies tomorrow at Mirpur with India scheduled to play Australia day after. That would be followed by the Kiwis taking on the Proteas and Sri LankaSri Lanka over England. Anything might happen in the remaining two games. But that is not we are here for now. There should have been a super eight stage instead of a quarter final which would reduce chances of the cup going into the wrong hands. Consequently, the tournament would end up as a failure though one emerges victorious.

Pakistan will not be facing India, South Africa and England and the situation is the same for the remaining 7 teams as well. Despite four teams emerging victorious and moving on to the semi-finals, questions would definitely be raised regarding that particular team's performance against those teams which they have not played. West Indies and England are the least preferred teams and it would be a cakewalk for both Pakistan and Sri Lanka who would be facing them in the quarter finals in the next four days to come. The same Pakistan would have flunk had they faced South Africa-may be.

It would be tough for Sri Lanka to have an upper-hand against India and their chances would be made slim had there been a super eights stage. Had there been a super six stage, both England and West Indies would not have crossed the initial stage of the world cup. Australia's chances might be high against West Indies, South Africa and England. In case they lose to India day after, fingers would definitely point towards the format. Australia have faced a similar fate in the world T20 at England in 2009 when they were teamed up with Sri Lanka and West Indies with the other groups consisting of two strong teams and one weak opposition.

So it is time to save the lost at any cost.