The 2021 T20 World Cup was very nerve tingling for two reasons. One, the matches were played on neutral venues in the Arabian deserts. There was also a debate at these venues. How was it that the team that batted second was more successful? Dew could have been the main reason as to why some teams that won the toss decided to bat first. The second factor was, what are the teams that will be very disappointed with this tournament. You start off with India who were favourites, but unfortunately, they couldn't even qualify for the semifinals. Some perceived that England were also hot favourites. Unfortunately, they lost to South Africa. They almost lost to Sri Lanka as well. And of course they ultimately gave into Pakistan. So a very enthralling tournament overall.
Michael Holding said, “I do not give commentaries for the Indian Premier League because I only give commentaries for cricket.” Spot on. Take, for example, Arjuna Ranatunga the Sri Lankan Captain who won the World Cup at Lahore on March 17, 1996. Back in 1996, he also condemned T 20 cricket because he said, it's not good for youngsters. Just to mildly digress for the benefit of the curious, there was a Sri Lanka Cricket tour of England and Ranatunga as Chairman of Sri Lanka Cricket, stopped the selected Lankans from playing in the IPL.
However, the world has changed now. Everyone wants instant results. Cricket at T 20 level is entertainment, lasting only approximately three and a half hours.
The stroke play you will see in T20 Cricket is not what you will see in the 50 over format or for that matter, Test cricket. Most of the time you watch the ball being slapped across, not driven across. I think the only batsman that I have seen during the World Cup, who had some sense of technicality was Kane Williamson of New Zealand. He executed a wonderful 85 in the finals.
One of the teams I was disappointed with is India. India was rated too highly. One of the reasons as to why India got into so much of pressure was the media hype. Every time you switch on your television they are only talking about India. They spoke about Jasprit Bumrah. They spoke about a load of Indian players, like for example, Rohit Sharma and KL Rahul. So, the hype was too much of pressure for the Indians. Also factor in the spectator value and the money involved in Indian cricket. So that caused a lot of problems for India, psychologically.
Remember India undermined Pakistan. They did not know what their arch rivals were capable of. They left out Pakistan in the Indian Premier League, for reasons best known to them.
They realized that when they came to play against Pakistan, that they looked a mediocre side, mainly because of Pakistan's natural talent. This columnist talked to Rameez Raja, some years back. He said the Pakistanis do have natural talent. And he also said Sri Lankans also do have natural talent - inborn talent. They might not have the facilities. But the hidden talent in Pakistan and in Sri Lanka is of great value. India played in a lesser group, a group that only had, including them three test playing nations, namely New Zealand, Pakistan, and India. It also included Afghanistan.
But playing against an established team, Afghanistan will suffer. There were Namibia and Scotland, but then you take group A, which involved five test playing nations. So that is where Australia had the advantage as they advanced to the semifinals. And it is a team that peaked at the right time. And that is where they showed their mighty Aussie grit to win the tournament. India made a few mistakes. In example, in their power play approach according to legend Sunil Gavaskar, which is hundred percent true. They did not capitalize on the power play. There are two theories to it. Some experts say, right, power play should go, bang, bang, try and get many runs as possible. But New Zealand found the correct way - they protected their wickets during the power play. They of course, put away the bad deliveries.
Having said that, Pakistan kept their wickets intact. Then after the tenth over, over with many wickets intact they were able to advance and score a lot of runs. And that was evident also with the Australians. Take Sri Lanka vs England. At the end of 10 overs, they were 48 runs for four wickets. However, what did Jos Butler do? He stayed there for those 10 overs on a difficult pitch where the ball was actually skidding straight through and you are expected to hit through the line without playing across the line.
PAKISTAN, AN ASCENDING SIDE
Pakistan has so many talented cricketers, in both batting and bowling arenas. Their batting was very strong. Under Barbar Azam it was a new era in Pakistan Cricket. Their fielding has been fantastic. They don’t talk much on the field. They just get about their business. They don't have big flashy names like skipper Virat Kohli or opening batsman KL Rahul and bowler Jasprit Bumrah to name a few, but they have cricketers, whom we tag as utility cricketers right now. They come with two more overs to go and turn around the entire game. They have got such big hitters at the bottom.
THE FINALS
Ian Chappell made a very strong point in this T - 20 World Cup. The side that wins the toss just has an advantage because they tend to chase. And more often than not, most of the teams that won the toss did chase and they were successful. Now let's come to the finals - New Zealand vs Australia. Frankly, before the finals, everyone was of the view that New Zealand has a much better team because they had been faring very much better than Australia during the preliminary rounds. They have got a fantastic opening batsman in Martin Guptill ably supported by Daryl Mitchell.
And we all know what Kane Williamson is capable of. He is a typical Mahela Jayawardene type who plays technically correct cricket. He does not slap the ball. He drives through the line, flips it off the back foot. He is typical player who executes cricketing strokes. Let’s not forget that the New Zealanders had an excellent bowling attack, especially in Trent Boult and Tim Southee together with their spinner Sodhii, who has been very impressive right throughout this particular tournament.
Australia wins the toss and put the Kiwis into bat. They got to a very decent total of 172 runs for the loss of four wickets. But the criticism over there was for their lower order. For example, Glenn Phillip should have fired. Jimmy Neesham, went to bat a little bit earlier because he is a man who can turn the heat on. What was very disappointing was the way that Martin Guptill and Daryl Mitchel got out. I mean, they got the Kiwis to a decent start because the first wicket fell when the score was 28. Between the sixth and the 10th overs, the Kiwis mustered only 32 runs for the loss of one wicket. And all credit must go to Hazelwood. Josh Hazelewood bowled such a tidy line and length, which was absolutely fascinating to watch. He was great. An example of how to bowl in the power play overs was exhibited by this wonderful right-arm seamer and then, of course, by Adam Zampa. If he does not come into the equation as a leg spinner, that is not a game of cricket as far as Australia is concerned, because he is the main cause for all these to succeed in the shorter version of the game because he has such a variety. He bought the wrong ‘un and he has a slider which is very, very effective.
Just take a look at the New Zealand scorecard - 172 runs for the loss of four wickets. Kane Williamson’s was one of the finest innings I have seen in one day international or in the T 20 format, a masterly 85. Martin Guptill will be disappointed with his 28 and of course, the rest. As for Glenn Phillip, I wish he got bat to ball because he was disappointing. He made only 18 and Jimmy Neesham, well, had to bat at the end and only made 13 runs.
So 172 for four on this particular track in Dubai was quite a decent score. But that is where my mind goes back to what Ian Chapell very clearly said. Chasing in this particular part of the world has been the norm. So is there an imbalance? As far as the topic is concerned, it is a big question. That has to be answered because it has happened more often than not. Teams winning the toss win the match. I mean, that's not good for cricket is it? Chasing was something that the Australians had no problem with. They needed 173 runs to win this game and they got to 173 for two wickets and they won the game very easily. The game, the finals and the T20 World Cup. All cheers to David Warner, who made 53 runs, though he was ultimately was completely bamboozled by a Trent Boult delivery. David Warner, in the IPL, was tagged as a spent force, but he came back and taught the cricketing world what a great player was. In fact, he felt very comfortable in his own dressing room. He was playing with his actual mates in life, so he got to 53 and ultimately also won the Most Valuable Player of the Tournament Award. But the feature in this particular innings was Mitch Marsh, who made that wonderful unbeaten 77 with Glenn Maxwell getting among the runs at last. So as far as Australia was concerned, let's not forget that they peaked at the right time. That is very important in this type of cricket, especially when you are playing a World Cup Tournament. You need to peak at the right time. You will have struggles right up, no doubt about it because you are new to the country (UAE) and you are playing on a wicket that you are not used to. But where a team shows that they are good is getting used to the atmosphere. This is exactly what Australia did. So they were very, very used to what the Dubai wicket had to offer and they knew there was extra bounce you can drive through the line and of course, the ground is quite big in Dubai, but they knew exactly what the bounce was, so that's where Mitch Marsh should be given so much credit. He made that superb 77. Let's not forget the contribution of David Warner and Glenn Maxwell.
All in all, New Zealand will be very disappointed because they were very competitive. But they lost the finals. Only one bowler did cause some sort of problem to the Aussies. And that was, of course, Trent Boult who took two wickets for 18 runs. He was absolutely fantastic. He gets the in-swinger. That did seem very, very late. He also has a deadly out-swinger which he moves away from the right hander. It is very decisive. And let's not forget that his deliveries are extremely effective on any given surface. Whatever the critics may say, Australia turned out to be the better side on that day.
0 comments:
Post a Comment