Poor Batting leads Africa to a loss !

This was the game this World Cup needed. This is the team this World Cup needed. It was getting pretty bland out here without the Pakistan bowlers. Defending only 231 in 47 overs at the small Eden Park, their left-arm quicks turned it on like only the ones from that part of the world can. Under pressure of the chase South Africa crumbled yet again, except for one man, captain AB de Villiers, who scored 77 off 58 and threatened to singlehandedly steal the game, but once he became the ninth man to get out with 32 to get, Pakistan were assured of a win. 

Pakistan 222 (Misbah 56, Steyn 3-30) beat South Africa 202 (de Villiers 77, Rahat 3-40, Wahab 3-45, Irfan 3-52) by 29 runs (D/L method)

Read More

12:52 AM

Wickets down make trouble for Pakistan

 With JP Duminy fit again and Kyle Abbott bowling well, South Africa finally fielded their best XI and chose to bowl against Pakistan in Auckland. "It feels like the kind of ground where you feel you can get on top of the batting side early," AB de Villiers said at the toss. Duminy replaced Farhaan Behardien, strengthening the batting and also providing offspin to the part-time bowling department.

Pakistan made two changes to their side, one of them forced. Haris Sohail was not fit for the game, and Younis Khan came back. Finally the out-of-form Nasir Jamshed was dropped, and in came the enterprising and busy wicketkeeper-batsman Sarfraz Ahmed. It is a wonder it took Pakistan so long to make that change: Jamshed has hardly scored a run, and there has hardly been a match in which part-time wicketkeeper Umar Akmal did not drop a catch off the spinners.

Pakistan 1 Sarfraz Ahmed (wk), 2 Ahmed Shehzad, 3 Younis Khan, 4 Sohaib Maqsood, 5 Misbah-ul-Haq (capt), 6 Umar Akmal, 7 Shahid Afridi, 8 Wahab Riaz, 9 Sohail Khan, 10 Rahat Ali, 11 Mohammad Irfan

South Africa 1 Hashim Amla, 2 Quinton de Kock (wk), 3 Faf du Plessis, 4 AB de Villiers (capt), 5 David Miller, 6 JP Duminy, 7 Rilee Rossouw, 8 Kyle Abbott, 9 Dale Steyn, 10 Morne Morkel, 11 Imran Tahir

Read More

9:37 PM

India makes 4 straight win, destroys West Indies by 4 wickets

 India were given their first scare of the World Cup when West Indies reduced them to 78 for 4 and 134 for 6 in a chase of 183, but MS Dhoni shepherded them through to an eventually comfortable win with four wickets in hand and 10.5 overs to spare. West Indies finally displayed some grit and fight with late-order runs and some penetrating quick bowling, but the damage done by Chris Gayle at the start of the match was too much to undo.

Sunil Gavaskar's 36 off 174 in the first World Cup match of them all. Geoffrey Boycott's 57 off 105, which might or might not have featured a deliberate dropped catch by Clive Lloyd, in the 1979 final. Two of the worst innings played in the tournament's history, in terms of the detrimental impact they had on the team. Gayle put them to shade with his refusal to run singles, accounting for at least one-and-a-half wickets, before trying to make up for those by going on a blind hitting spree, which accounted for him too. By the time Gayle was done, West Indies were 35 for 3 in nine overs. Denesh Ramdin played one on next ball, and there was too much time left to bat for the usual rescuers, Lendl Simmons, Darren Sammy and Andre Russell.

In Gavaskar's defence, India were chasing 335 in the 19th ODI of all time, which is a bit like chasing 334 in the 19th Twenty20 international of all time. Gayle's only defence can be his fitness. He is an extremely skilled batsman and can be great fun to watch when in full flow. But it is clear he is not fit and is not looking to run runs. That Gayle still plays every match no questions asked underlines a serious lack of players who are available and those whom the selectors are willing to pick. Purely on fitness grounds, it is hard to imagine any other team in this World Cup selecting a self-acknowledged injured cricketer.

When you are such a player's opening partner, you'd better not be in poor form. The two gentlemen mentioned before Gayle - great Test batsmen both of them - will tell you that when batting is tough, the best place to be is at the non-striker's end. Poor Dwayne Smith, struggling with his pull shot, looked to get just there with nudges and dabs, but Gayle kept sending him back. Immediately after Gayle had turned down a third easy single in the first five overs, Smith edged a ball he should have been watching from the other end.

In came one of the laziest runners between the wickets, Marlon Samuels. Cue more cricket lacking urgency. Pressure kept building. Gayle offered a half chance to third man, which Umesh Yadav couldn't hold on to. Now with Yadav bowling, Gayle provided another chance. The top edge went high in the air, but fell short of mid-on. West Indies could have strolled an easy single, but Gayle was oblivious to the world around him.

Samuels jogged through for one, saw Gayle was not moving, touched the bat down in the crease at the striker's end and began to jog back. He had jogged one-and-a-half runs by the time the ball reached the stumps at the non-striker's end. Gayle had taken one-and-a-half steps by then.

Those who know Samuels' history with poor running and his role in a fair few run-outs in his time didn't miss the irony. The lackadaisical manner in which it happened galled. There was no frantic calling, no flailing arms, no what-the-hell-are-you-doing-Chris reaction from Samuels. Only Gayle could have been lazier than Samuels. Even though he took only one step out of the crease, Gayle reached his ground after Samuels had strolled in. It is possible Samuels, who left the field justifiably angry, sacrificed his wicket even without realising it.

Gayle was angrier and began hitting everything he saw. Only on extremely rare occasions do you succeed with such low-percentage cricket. Friday in Perth wasn't one of those occasions. It has been a while since Gayle has done well against good, short fast bowling, and he eventually top-edged Mohammed Shami to deep forward square leg.

In the first over of the match, India hardly went up when Gayle had faintly edged one through to the keeper. A cheeky storyteller might even put it in the same bracket as Lloyd dropping Boycott.

Teamwork, cricketing nous, and the skill to take singles were all missing. What makes such six-or-nothing batting even more ridiculous is that West Indies are highly likely to enter a three-way tie for the last two qualifying spots from their group. There was no attempt to bat sensibly to minimise the run-rate damage.

West Indies have stayed alive in the tournament thanks to Simmons, Ramdin, Sammy and Russell, but previously their repairs began around the middle of the innings. Here they were asked to do the job from the 10th over onwards. The Indian bowlers and fielders have been the heroes of their campaign so far. The fielders slipped a little, dropping two half chances and two regulation ones, but the bowlers were not going to let West Indies back into the contest.

Jason Holder, the 23-year-old captain of the sinking ship, resisted with his second consecutive fifty, but West Indies faced only 44.2 overs. How they would have wished they had batted the whole quota once the bowlers began to drag India back. Jerome Taylor was exceptional mixing outswingers and short balls, Holder was steady at the other end, and Kemar Roach quick at first change. Russell, too, made good use of the bouncer. Taylor got rid of Shikhar Dhawan through a wide in-between length, and Rohit Sharma through a perfect outswinger. Virat Kohli not only steadied the chase, he threatened to run away it until Russell got him on the hook.

Ajinkya Rahane fell to a controversial catch behind the wicket, Suresh Raina hopped around before edging one that was short and wide, and Ravindra Jadeja fell to the hook again. India were in a spot given Dhoni's recent form, but with a comfortable asking rate he got time to play himself in. Coolly, he absorbed pressure, saw off the threatening bowling, and the runs began to flow by themselves.

It was India's eighth consecutive win in World Cups, equalling their longest streak. More importantly one of the best finishers in the game rediscovered his touch, sealing off a difficult chase for the first time since July 2013. Fittingly this made Dhoni India's most successful captain away from home.

Read More

9:24 PM

Pakistan tons toa huge win !

 Pakistan primed their fans for either startling exhilaration or further frustration by first clobbering 339 in mostly efficient style, before damning the UAE chase by the end of their mandatory Powerplay. Hopes that this Pakistan team is capable of as dramatic and irrepressible a surge as that which won the 1992 World Cup will be momentarily boosted by the 129-run victory, but a truer test awaits them at Eden Park on Saturday.

Another single-figure failure from Nasir Jamshed suggested more batting woe, before Pakistan adopted the blueprint that has seen other teams surpass 300 at the tournament. They survived at the start, sailed through the middle overs, then savaged the death bowling, reaping 143 from the final 12 to heap punishment on a wasteful UAE fielding effort, and an attack that was toothless after their own mandatory Powerplay.

Pakistan will be pleased that their total was not wrapped around a talismanic innings, but forged with wit and purpose by a top order pulling together for the first time in the tournament. Ahmed Shehzad's 93 from 105 led the way and Haris Sohail also hit a fifty as the pair's 160-run stand became the substance upon which more flamboyant innings would be built. Coming in with a mandate to attack, for the first time in the World Cup, Misbah-ul-Haq hit a 49-ball 65, and Sohaib Maqsood and Shahid Afridi launched salvos at either end of the death overs.

Shaiman Anwar's 62 from 88 balls was the best of UAE's response - though for much of their innings, they did not even attempt Pakistan's total. With that score, Anwar became the tournament's top run-scorer, two runs clear of Kumar Sangakkara. UAE would reach 210 for 8, thanks in large part to some fun but futile late-order hitting, as Pakistan's attack grew complacent.

Jamshed played his third fatal pull shot in four innings and fell for 4, before Shehzad's innings spluttered to pained life as he miscued, edged and prodded his way through the early overs. Manjula Guruge kept him on a leash with his line and length while Mohammad Naveed delivered a sharp, varied spell that extracted testing bounce and carry from the McLean Park surface. Both bowlers had Shehzad dropped off his bowling, on 8 and 11.

Sohail found a steady tempo early in his innings, and Shehzad was soon batting to his beat. The pair soon set about massaging UAE's friendly change bowlers into the gaps, and completed their maiden World Cup fifties just before the halfway mark of the innings - the sluggishness of the early overs shaken off.

Having reached 148 for 1 at the 30th over, the batsmen called for an early Powerplay, but then fell within it. Sohail sent an attempted slog to the hands of mid-on to sign off for 70 off 83 and Shehzad was beaten by Anwar's throw from fine leg, as he failed to keep his bat grounded during the dive.

Maqsood and Misbah came together on an unprecedented cushion of runs, and they accumulated intelligently for a few overs before warming to some sustained hitting. Amjad Javed was cracked for three boundaries by Maqsood in the 39th over, before both batsmen ganged up on Krishnan Chandran, to reap 17 runs from the 42nd - sixes flying high and long in the arc between long-off and cow corner.

The pair had plundered 75 from 53 balls before they were parted, as Maqsood hit Guruge to point, on 45. But Misbah signed up Umar Akmal for a sidekick until the penultimate over, bludgeoning balls into his hitting zone on the leg side, while the UAE attack crumbled under the onslaught. He and Akmal were gone in successive Guruge deliveries to good catches in the deep, but had propelled Pakistan to 312.

Given less than two overs in which to bat, even Afridi did his job perfectly. His 21 not out off seven featured two sixes and a four in the final over.

Sohail Khan found enough swing in his early spell to muzzle the UAE openers, but Mohammad Irfan's bounce genuinely startled them, as they alternated between hanging their bats out in hope, and flashing ambitiously, all to little avail.

Irfan was forced to leave the field with a niggle after conceding only two from his first three overs, but his absence was soon made irrelevant. Rahat Ali had Amjad Ali chopping on in the seventh over, before Sohail took the edge of Andri Berenger five balls later. Chandran poked and guessed at the bowlers' line for 10 deliveries, then was gone himself on the last ball of the Powerplay, as Umar Akmal collected his second catch. With the score on 25 for 3 and the required rate at 7.87, any chance of a successful chase had effectively been scuttled.

Anwar flashed and missed often when he was new to the crease, but found the middle of his bat with a backfoot punch and a ramp shot off Sohail in the 14th over, and signaled his World Cup form was not about to taper off just yet. For much of his innings, he had Khurram Khan in support, while even Sohail picked up a niggle, and Pakistan eased back a touch.

The batsmen were largely indifferent to the climbing asking rate, striking only the loose balls to the fence, perhaps having recalibrated their ambitions toward an honourable, rather than outrageous, result. They hit 83 runs in each other's company, punctuating the long, steady passages with big heaves. Khurram's was the more impressive: a pick-up off Wahab into the leg-side stand.

Maqsood dismissed Khurram, then Afridi claimed Anwar as the first victim in a double-blow in the 39th over. Nonetheless, Pakistan were guilty of allowing the match to meander, failing to attack UAE's middle order in search of a greater boost to their net run rate. Javed's adventure sparked the Napier crowd to life in the 46th over, when he dispatched some mediocre length bowling from Sohail for two sixes and two fours, but the conclusion was long foregone.

Read More

9:34 PM

10- team World Cup . Does it fits?

 David Richardson's defence of a ten-team World Cup is now largely remembered for his claim that it would be better for having more "competitive" matches. But he also made a defence on business grounds, highlighting the need for the ICC to earn revenue that could be spent on development.

Many people would argue that money should not be the primary consideration, particularly when the largest share of that revenue will be directed towards those members who need it least. But let's set aside sporting ideals for a moment, and judge the ICC against business ideals instead.

The ICC annual reports detail the profits made on various global events. The World T20 was a big unknown when the previous rights were being negotiated, but quickly became a key product, bringing in US$78m in 2009, $105m in 2010, $129m in 2012 and approximately $150m in 2014. Then the ICC decided to have it only every four years. There is no replacement, nor is there any indication that a four-year cycle will increase the rights value. There are (perhaps) a few savings in qualification costs, but the last World T20 qualifiers had a broadcast partner and made a small profit. In short: the ICC decided to forego about $300-400m in revenue over the eight-year cycle to make the World T20 a four-year event, starting in 2016.

The choice of 2016 was in itself interesting. The ICC commissioned a report to examine the costs and benefits of participating in the Olympic games. They measured the costs assiduously, noting both that England would be disadvantaged - though they exaggerated the degree to a ludicrous extent, claiming a potential loss of £160m for what amounts to a two-week gap in their schedule - and that the $85.5m in revenue distribution from the World T20 was not offset by the $14m cricket would receive from the International Olympic Committee. But this was predicated on there being two World T20 tournaments in a four-year cycle and that one would conflict with the Olympic tournament. Otherwise, the ICC was merely giving up the chance to get an IOC distribution. Nevertheless, through a miracle of board incompetence, the ICC achieved both aims: stifling any opportunity to promote cricket through the Olympic movement, and losing out on revenue from the World T20.

The $14m figure was, nevertheless, also a gross under-valuation. National Olympic committees routinely give large funding grants to Olympic sports, in the hope of qualifying, or achieving a medal. And for western nations these are not small amounts. Germany spends approximately $143m a year on Olympic sports. Numbers ten times what the ICC currently gives to Associate nations are routine. In the book Second XI, Sahil Dutta reported the figure as $20m from various bodies in China, even before other benefits from exposure and programmes are included. Even a low-ball figure of $30m in government grants per year, spread across the ICC membership, would earn similar amounts to the World T20 over the revenue cycle, without any of the costs.

On the other hand, the ECB will host India for five Tests, five ODIs and a T20 in 2018, in addition to five ODIs and a T20 with Australia. How fortunate for them that the World T20 is no longer in potential conflict with their most lucrative tour.

© Russell Degnan

The cricket World Cup consists of 49 matches, around 400 hours of programming, and earns somewhat more than USD$500m in television revenue. The graph above shows the ending times (more or less) for each day of the World Cup (Australian Eastern Standard Time). Notice that there are gaps; there are also gaps in the mornings of most days - though mornings have half the viewers of the evening. All told, there are some 50 hours of Australian prime time / Indian afternoon with no cricket being played, and by extension, no revenue being earned.

The consequences of this are two-fold. The first is that it stalls momentum in the tournament. Secondly, while having one game per day ensures matches aren't competing with each other for a TV audience, the cost of putting on a match is a long way below the value of that match to broadcasters, even when played by a pair of Associate teams. The marginal value of extra matches is lower, but unlike a broadcaster, the ICC should not be interested in marginal value but in total revenue. When 70% of that audience is (largely) interested in six specific matches, the others are gravy.

There is ample slack in the scheduling to include more teams and more matches. Having multiple matches ensures that an early finish, or a dud game, allows the viewers other options. In a world of multiple television channels, it would be easy to add an extra $20-30m to the rights value of the World Cup. Instead, we are treated to empty, drawn-out schedules and the sense of a tournament grinding instead of accelerating to a conclusion.

It is taken as an article of faith that because India will play at least nine matches in the next World Cup, the ICC will earn more from the tournament than from a tournament with more knockouts but potentially fewer Indian matches.

It may therefore come as a surprise that Indian fans, loyal as they are, also happen to like matches with meaning and context. The TV ratings for 2007 and 2011 are telling in this respect. The reported TVR figures for previous World Cups are somewhat inconsistent but the following figures seem broadly correct:

Read More

9:30 PM

Tendulkar calls for 25 nation World Cup, says it will be bad for Associates

 Sachin Tendulkar has called the ICC's decision to reduce the number of teams in the 2019 World Cup "a backward step" in the global expansion of cricket and described the lack of consistent matches available to Associate sides as "unfair".

Tendulkar, an ambassador for the World Cup on behalf of the ICC, told an audience at an exclusive dinner in Sydney that the ICC should instead be exploring ways to expand the next World Cup to as many as 25 teams.

He also suggested Full Member nations should regularly play their 'A' sides against Associates and strive to provide a "fair platform" for smaller cricketing countries.

"I found out the next World Cup would only be ten teams," said Tendulkar. "Which is slightly disappointing because as a cricketer I want the game to be globalised as much as possible and, according to me, this is a backwards step.

"We've got to find ways of encouraging the lesser teams."

Tendulkar also contradicted the views of ICC chief executive David Richardson, who defended the planned reduction of teams from 14 to 10, by suggesting, "The World Cup itself, the premium event, without exception should be played between teams that are evenly matched and competitive."

Richardson's statement has been widely challenged, with only one match so far between Full Member nations - New Zealand's one-wicket victory over Australia - considered to be competitive. In stark contrast, some of the matches between Associates have provided the most keenly fought contests, Ireland scored a notable result by defeating West Indies and Afghanistan capped off their remarkable rise in qualifying for the World Cup by overcoming Scotland in a final-over thriller.

"The lesser teams have, in each and every World Cup, they always surprise top teams," Tendulkar said. "And they can do it on a consistent basis only if they're given a fair platform to express their talent.

"Right now, they get up after four years on the cricket world's biggest platform and they're expected to play and compete with the likes of Australia, South Africa, India, New Zealand, West Indies, Sri Lanka, so many top sides. It's unfair to them."

Since the 2011 World Cup, Ireland has played only 11 ODIs against Full Member nations and their captain William Porterfield has been joined by his Scotland counterpart - Preston Mommsen - as well as a host of players and officials from both Associate and Full Member sides, in calling for a "level playing field".

An online petition asking the ICC to reverse the decision to cut the number of World Cup teams has, at the time of writing, gathered more than 15,000 signatures.

Tendulkar said he believes cricket's global fan base will only grow if the Associates improve to the level where they can be consistently competitive and he believes the first step is to schedule regular matches against second-string sides from the Full Members nations.

"Why not get Australia A, England A, New Zealand A, South Africa A, New Zealand A, India A, everyone, to go and visit these countries and play them on a regular basis," Tendulkar said. "And see, not just 14 teams, but how can we get to 25 teams participating in the next World Cup?"

"It is not just about the top six or seven sides. If we are to globalise this game we have to get more and more people excited about cricket and the fan following only follows the result.

"If the results are good then you have more fans, so it's important that they play good cricket consistently for a longer period, not just one good performance and then suddenly they go underground for four years and then turn up if they do well in those qualifying rounds.

"So I would say it's something the ICC needs to look into and I hope they look into it."  While calling for an expansion of the World Cup, Tendulkar also spoke about his concerns for the 50-over format and said he had suggested to the ICC about splitting ODIs into two 25-over innings.

"I think Test cricket definitely will survive and T20 is definitely going to survive," he said. "There is a big question mark over one-day cricket because I think it is getting monotonous. I have sort of casually suggested to the ICC that they need to look at the format. Can we change the format a little bit so that it's not predictable?

"Right now when it comes to batting from the 15th over onwards to the 35th over you know exactly how the batters are going to bat and that is something that is possibly boring the spectators.

"Can we change that? Can we look to introduce something that is not quite as predictable, which is slightly out of the box?"

Tendulkar proposed a split-innings format, which he said could encourage more exciting matches and fairer results when games were interrupted by rain. It is the type of format that was trialled during the 2010-11 Australian domestic season when the 45-over Ryobi Cup was split into two innings although the experiment only lasted one season after it was determined the international game would remain at 50 overs.

"I suggested that it be 25 overs and then the other side comes in and they bat 25 overs and then you go back again and bat 25 overs and then you finish the game with 25 overs but in the entire match you have only ten wickets," he said.

"I felt there was a huge disadvantage in certain venues when the sides had to go in second because there is so much dew. Spinners are virtually out of the game and fast bowlers don't get any movement.

"They're bowling straight and the batters are thinking, well, where am I going to hit the next boundary? The game doesn't go ahead like this. We need to find the right balance."

"It just adds to the excitement, whether you want to lose seven wickets in the first 25 overs and score 270 runs because it's going to rain later, or have wickets in hand because later on there's going to be dew and batting's going to be easy and you can attack the bowlers."

When asked about the reaction of the ICC, Tendulkar replied, "They haven't reacted. I'm still waiting."

Read More

9:25 PM