World Cup Glory Denied

Here is PART THREE of my World Cup review

Now that the subcontinent has restored a level of success and dignity to the World Cup one can't help but ask what the future holds for the premier cricket fixture. The next installment is scheduled to be held in Australia and New Zealand (although don't put it passed the BCCI to scam another one for them) which may produce different kinds of games - hopefully with a bit more for the fast bowlers (although given the wickets of late, don't hold your breath). These elements can be dealt with later though, for now there is one and only one debate

A left-arm fast-medium bowler and friend of mine alerted me to the growing tension over the place of minnow nations in the cricket world cup recently. His words included the following quote:

...because a good way to encourage development and provide exposure to players in nations such as Ireland and the Netherlands is to exclude them from top-level competition. Apparently Zimbabwe deserves a spot in the world cup despite being an embarrassment to test playing nations, but the team that made the group stages interesting is going to be left in the wilderness. The arrogance and plain stupidity of the ICC is baffling at times. I guess calling it the world cup is now more of an ironic statement than what it really is. It's OK to have minnows in the world cup as long as they don't provide any scares to member nations that have clout with the ICC.

...so infuriating (extract from an email sent to me by D. N.)

I wish to discuss the points raised in this quote; I don't agree with every word but the tone is exactly the same as my own when reading about this debate. Just to lay some facts out so we know what is being talked about: The ICC is planning to exclude all but the ten test playing nations for 2015 World Cup in Australasia and from then on each nation must qualify for a spot at future tournaments (minnows and test playing nations alike)

The beginning of this quote features a sarcastic statement about the consequences of this course of action that is both accurate and telling in it's cynical undertone. This feeling will no doubt replicate if the ICC continues this tragic line of self-preservation but I will get to this later. The obvious problem with the freeze-out of the non-test playing nations is that for the next 8 years they will have little opportunity to advance themselves against quality opposition; their development is stalled by this move in more ways than you might think. First their players' skills cannot improve without exposure to the top sides, then without the promise of playing better sides all funding and interest in these teams will wane if not disappear entirely and then the player exodus begins. Thus when it comes time to qualify for the 2019 Cup the damage will be done and there is no way any of them will get into the tournament.

My friend then rightly identifies the ridiculous premise that this plan is based on - that the ten test playing nations are somehow divided from the minnows not just by a line but by daylight as well. No clear thinking individual can believe this. The West Indies are that much better than Ireland? Bangladesh would perform better than the Netherlands in any conditions? England don't even seem to care about ODI cricket, certainly not to the extent that some of the minnows do. Finally, to use the example provided in the quote, Zimbabwe deserve to be playing cricket at all? This is a nation that was kicked out of international cricket because of the tyrannical rule established there that makes it unsafe for players to travel within its borders (an excuse that should rank behind several others that should have come first but I have little room for that argument here). For now I would direct readers to an article by the great Christopher Hitchens (http://www.slate.com/id/2290945/) for those of you who think that Zimbabwe has been moderated by a power sharing agreement. The idea that this nation is able to participate in the World Cup is disgusting

The quote includes accusations towards the ICC of arrogance and stupidity; surely they don't believe that people and cricket boards won't notice this damaging move that is based on a premise which is shaky at best or are they really that foolish? Don't they realise the damage this move will do to developing cricket nations? Well I would answer that the they know perfectly well and that the true callous nature of the ICC has finally become visible, the facade of spreading the game around the world has been shattered to reveal the cartel of self-serving, self-preserving scoundrels that truly hold the reins of power in world cricket. It would appear that the progress of some teams has shaken them to their core and the threat must be negated now.

My friend muses that the term 'world cup' will become an ironic one. Well I would go further - I like to think that irony usually has a ring of humour (at least perhaps dark humour) to it but there is nothing funny here. The ICC is simply guarding the interests of its major power players. The BCCI has for some time blocked development of cricket in any area but their own domestic teams - heaven forbid England, Ireland and the Netherlands form a 2020 league to threaten their own - and the equally as obvious and nefarious attempt to centre all cricket power and growth IN India (which I will go into more as the year unfolds). Australian Cricket has no real idea what it is doing at the moment and surely just went along with this to try and ensure access to quality cricket opposition itself (the only way to maintain revenue with a viewing public in Australia that is cynical at best and racist at worst). England would rather continue to siphon off talent from its neighbours than have competition in that part of the world (not to mention revenge for a certain upset or two inflicted by Ireland over the last few years)

Here is the irony. The ICC seems determined to protect the status quo of power within it's structure, predictable I would have thought, but in doing so it dooms itself in the long run. I mentioned before that this self-preservation is of a tragic nature (in the Greek sense). This refers to the kind of character whose flaw proves his/her undoing. In shutting out the development of other cricket nations the sport will become stale, cold, quite likely-profitable but a shadow of what it was and occasionally still is, to the point where the public will simply stop caring. In attempting to retain a fixed equation of power within world cricket, the ICC will destroy the sport. Until recently this was but a fear of mine however, after witnessing how readily the ICC pushed this plan to shut out the non-test playing nations and how easily a cricket player and enthusiast, like the friend of mine who provided the quote in this post, could see through it with such sad synicism, I am almost certain that this prediction of doom is what awaits the sport that I love.

I'm sorry to end on such a lugubrious note but I cannot ignore what is happening any longer and neither should you. To repeat the sentiment of the quote at the beginning, infuriating

Well that is it for my World Cup Review I hope it has proven interesting for you and I hope to see you again after I take a two week break from blogging. Look here again from the beginning of May

World Cup Glory Missed

Hello, here is PART TWO of my World Cup review

While India went about staging their world cup victory on home soil, other teams scrambled to find a means to their own success in the subcontinent. South Africa tried yet again to not suddenly suffer a fatal heart attack and collapse at the finish line, but failed miserably in the quarter-final against New Zealand (the former's worst effort to date and the latter's best as I mentioned a number of posts ago) - possibly my favourite moment of the entire tournament on more than one level; nothing like seeing an entity you despise, fall at the expense of the weakness of one you support. But enough of the quarter-finals for now! Somewhere between the hangover of joy from that match and the strange banality of the final and its somehow manufactured and sickening resemblance to a Disney movie, I forgot to spare a moment for the matches that forced the two finalists (the hosts in fact) together to battle for the trophy.

First came New Zealand's second try at beating Sri Lanka in the tournament and although they failed on the second attempt (the lucky third will no doubt take place in 2015 when the Black Caps will have home advantage) they did not die lamely as they did in 2007 and fought to the end, out gunned, on the empty side of a very imbalanced talent ledger and in foreign conditions. Styris proved his class with a very nice half-century but it wasn't nearly enough - a lack of runs failing to provide the pressure required to really make the opposition sweat. Yet again the effort from the bowlers was impressive and encouraging for the fan looking four years ahead, Southee and Vettori combined to bowl 20-2-93-4 but a third strike bowler was missing (or wickets to McCullum, Styris and Ryder).

There we come to the centre of the problem though don't we? In this match we see the downside of the 'bits & pieces' players - as handy as they can be in odd matches they rarely count in the key matches where the onus is on the top men to perform. This was apparent in both innings as the often quoted line about NZ batting to number ten proved as stupid as it was wishful thinking to begin with; against the triple threat of Malinga, Murali and Mendis there is no tail that bats, only wickets to collect (8 in this case). Next time around it will be up to Taylor, Ryder and McCullum to get the runs (maybe even Guptill and Williamson - we could be so hopeful to have so much batting talent...) and Southee to lead a fierce attack (in accuracy and intelligence if not in pace)

Pakistan can only blame themselves for not being in the final after a disappointing loss to India in the second semifinal. They should have had Tendulkar out for each member of the team by the end of his 85 run innings which proved the difference. They are the most naturally talented team in the world and they always feel the need to play with the handicap of needing to get 22 wickets per game (up to 44 in test matches); they are not quite that good, clearly. Their atrocious feilding (that, I'm afraid to say, forces the eyebrows up the face of even the most naive of viewer) was always going to be a threat to their success in this tournament and sadly, despite an Imran Khan-like effort from Afridi (21 wickets), the old demon could not be overcome - welcome to South Africa's nightmare because that is what this is becoming.

India on the other hand, impressed with another flexible performance. Without their giant first innings lead to smother the opposition, Dhoni had to get the best out of several of his bowlers and in the end all five took two wickets each - a chilling statistic that should have suggested the outcome of the final right then and there

Overall the World Cup was a success for ODI cricket as much as for the BCCI and provided some genuine thrills with the one-sided contests. Ireland's victory over England will long be remembered (not entirely in a happy light as I will get into in the third and final post of this review) and the end of Australia's grip on this tournament can only be seen as a good thing for this form of the game. Unlike in test cricket, this end of an era was brought about by the improvement of several teams as opposed to the decline of the Australian one. If there was one disappointment I would note personally, it would be the weakness of England and the West Indies who left before the semi-finals again. These two teams were the main contenders in the early days of the tournament (1970s) and ODI cricket but in the last 20 years they have been poor, they don't appear to be getting better and worse, they don't appear to want to. England have retained the position of a quality test side that Vaughan built in 2004/2005 but one of these two really needs to step up in ODI cricket to avoid a purely subcontinent dominance - they will get their chance in 2015 in more suitable conditions and I hope they take it

Well that's it from here and I hope you join me again for PART THREE which will look forward to 2015 and beyond in more detail

It's good bye for now

World Cup Glory Achieved

Hello and welcome back to my blog

This is part 1 of my World Cup Review to be posted over the next 3 days. First I will deal with the final followed by the semi-finals/world cup as a whole and end with a look toward the future of this tournament and ODI cricket

The BCCI endeavored to stage and win a World Cup and they have succeeded. For this title they should probably thank their players. Not the coup of getting another home advantage (3rd time hosting in the last 7 tournaments) or the schedule which tried unapologetically to keep the minnow teams from kicking them out ala 2007. Nor the slow, low wickets to negate the fast bowlers of every other team or the shameless game plan that went with those wickets: bat first, get 300 and role'em with your spinners. No sir, that kind of planning, as open and obvious as it was, for reasons I have already gone into (http://bowlingblind.blogspot.com/2011/03/why-being-beaten-by-australia-can-help.html) could not have taken them to the trophy. An impressive hardening of the team was visible as they were forced to chase during the finals and chased well after their bowlers - targets of many a condescending remark - kept their targets from reaching insurmountable heights. Captain Dhoni has emerged as a big game player to challenge Richards, Khan, Waugh and Ponting by moving himself up the order when it counted and winning the final with a wonderful innings signed off with an appropriate maximum into the stands that erupted with celebration long before the ball touched the ground there.

In the final, Jayawardena played another fantastic innings as he did in the semi-final of 2007 (to knock out NZ on that occasion) and you would have been forgiven if, at the half-way point, you resigned yourself to a Sri Lankan victory; the innings was of high class and felt like the winning move, add to that Malinga, Murali and Mendis to defend 274 and the challenge to India looked immense. The early dismissals of Sehwag and Tendulkar served to strengthen the impression that the dream of a billion people might be over. Ghambir played a crucial role too but the way in which the captain put the match beyond doubt was inspiring.

Now to the small matter of my Fantasy Cricket League.

In terms of my own performance I had two notable triumphs: picking Ross Taylor as captain (take the hint NZC!) in the match during which he made a large century against Pakistan (a model for success throughout if I were to offer advice) and the selecting of Roach (fast bowlers) as captain against minnow nations (Malinga, Tait or Lee would be examples of others). Overall my progression was hindered though, by my refusal to use the following players: Watson, Tait, Johnson, Haddin, Kallis, Broad, Harbhajan Singh, Sehwag and perhaps others. These players are ones I don't think much of as cricketers or sportsmen (look for polemics against many of them in the future).

As for the participant in the league who gained the top spot...

Daniel Parker (14,065 points)

Although I'm not very familiar with this individual, he ended up in the league and cleaned up wonderfully, keeping within the top 5 or 6 positions for most of the group phase before taking the lead right before quarter finals and not surrendering it, to win by an impressive 800+ points. To achieve this he learnt most of the lessons mentioned below very quickly plus benefited from picking players like Watson, Dilshan, Malinga and Sehwag. He showed no player or team bias - to the point where any allegiance to New Zealand was swept to the wayside in the single-minded pursuit of points as soon as they looked certain to exit the finals. OK that sounds a little bitter but it does illustrate a point, namely that you can't win these things by being principled or creative but simply devoting all that you are to gaining points. I can't begrudge Daniel that and I salute him for being able to do what I could not/dared not do. Although only he can say whether the effort destroyed his sole, but perhaps with a team named 'Oedipus XI' there wasn't much to maim to begin with. Take heart sir in the knowledge that you are the first civilian to be named on this blog (not even my true name appears here I think) and that is equal to 'praise from Caesar' if nothing else. If I were to sum up Daniel's effort during the tournament it would be with this example: for the final match he picked up the cheapest player he could for one spot to allow the picking of very expensive players in the other spots. This resulted in the addition of one B A Westdijk for $60,000 to his team; the cleverness to win matched with the maturity of a 10 year old. Although I understand he will soon by hired to host TVNZ's Breakfast show...

A little fun there at Mr Parker's expense perhaps but he did very well. 22 people signed up at the start of the tournament but perhaps only the top 9 at the end tried until the end (the significant gap of 3000 points between 9 and 10 is a bit of a give away). I won't get after the individuals below this line, my polemical tongue is better reserved for Jonathan Millmow of the Dominion Post (and others of that mold) rather than close friends who I know enjoyed the cricket, if not to the fanatical point of some of the top place holders perhaps. Just one footnote on that though, two of the top contenders happen to be Christchurch residents and for their efforts I must reserve some praise; outside events can seem trivial in times of disaster - particularly when they occur half a world away - but for your success you gain my approval and respect. I hope everyone enjoyed the friendly feud of the fantasy league and will be happy to join again for future large events.

There were some lessons learnt I think, here are a few that come to mind:

• Don't believe the match previews in terms of which player is fit and which is not; I for instance picked Malinga for several games on this basis, only to be disappointed and then infuriated when I dropped him right before the first match he actually played in


• Also there were several late injuries that rendered many transfers a waste like Chris Gayle late in the World Cup


• The balance of transfers was also a lesson in forward planning and patience. Many of those that languished in the middle of the table used up their transfers far too early. Although one friend of mine managed to stay near the top while doing this, he was lucky


• Picking opening batsmen early on proved vital, while opening bowlers were more consistent the points system prevented them from providing a significant increase in points

Look out tomorrow for PART TWO