What Made West Indies Beat Sri Lanka in ICC World Twenty20 Final?

By Adrian Meredith

VICTORIA, Australia (TheSportsNEXT) October 9, 2012: As at the end of the Super Eight stage of the ICC World Twenty20 2012, we all thought that it was close to inevitable that the final would be Sri Lanka vs Australia.

 

They were the two in-form teams, the two most consistent teams, the two teams that had beaten all before them. But while Sri Lanka made it to the final, Australia didn't, and indeed Australia didn't even get close.

While India were busy complaining about how unfair it was that they could miss the semi finals in spite of winning four of their five games, implying that it should have been them, not West Indies, who only won two and had a no result, there West Indies were, showing that a team that had got to the semi final in the weakest position of the four, could really decimate the strongest looking team in Australia.

It wasn't that Australia played particularly badly - West Indies just had perfect tactics and perfect execution. That 205 would have beaten any team in the world! The only question was whether they could repeat it and if they did, would Sri Lanka be able to combat it, or was it, like Brendon McCullum's mercurial 123 against Bangladesh, a one off.

Sri Lanka had chosen to go with mystery ahead of well known by going with Dananjala ahead of Rangana Herath but were otherwise unchanged, while West Indies had no changes of all.

Scarily, West Indies batted first. The wicket of Johnson Charles in the first over should have made Sri Lanka happy; but they were still nervous about the Gayle factor. Even though the first over was a maiden, and it took them until the third over to get the first runs off the bat, still they knew that West Indies could launch. While Gayle is usually good against spinners, the mystery of Ajantha Mendis undid him and when he was out West Indies should have fallen apart. Except that they didn't.

Sri Lanka should have been happy at their containing effort. West Indies were going at all of 4 runs per over for half of the innings - thoroughly inadequate when in most matches the par score is about 160 - at 8 runs per over. But the problem is that with eight wickets in hand and some huge big hitters to come, they knew that West Indies were capable.

Lasith Malinga, the highest wicket taker in domestic T20 history, was belted all around. But they persisted with him. Perhaps Kulasekera, whose three overs went for 21 overs, should have got a fourth. Perhaps Dananjala, whose three overs went for just 16, including a wicket, should have had another one. Perhaps Dilshan or Perera should have bowled. But you can hardly blame Jayawardene for persisting with Malinga. Sure he went for 54 off his four overs and was easily the most expensive bowler; but how can you take him off? He is their trump card.

When West Indies decided to launch, it almost seemed pre-planned. Marlon Samuels and Dwayne Bravo were the first to do it, and it had that same feeling to the game against Australia - like they could do anything - like any ball, even the best ball by the best bowler - could be smashed away for the maximum. Mis-hits went for six, good balls went for six. It didn't seem to matter what Sri Lanka did, they just smacked 6s galore.

Luckily for Sri Lanka they only had 10 overs of mayhem to contend with, instead of the full 20. Luckily they took a few wickets in the process too. Unfortunately, even number seven Darren Sammy smacked it to all parts. Unfortunately, even number eight Denesh Ramdin can bat.

137 seemed like a competitive total. West Indies would have to bowl very well to win it but they had all of the momentum. Marlon Samuels had finished with 78 off 56 balls, with six 6s and three 4s, an innings that some compared with VVS Laxman's 281 in that test match against Australia in 2001, the unwinnable one that they won, rated as the best test innings of all time. This was perhaps the best T20 innings! In a final, in a situation where West Indies were being decimated, from an impossible position!

When Sri Lanka came out to bat they still knew that 150 was a par score on this group and 137 was inadequate. West Indies, in effect, only has two good bowlers in Narine and Badree. Beyond that, they have a fast bowler who isn't all that good in Ravi Rampaul and then a whole bunch of all rounders, like Sammy, Powell, Gayle, Samuels and Russell. All that they had to do was to see off the 8 overs from Narine and Badree and punish the others for 12 overs.

But Sri Lanka lost Dilshan early and then let the runs dry up too much while Jayawardene and Sangakkara were batting. They were in a winning position while they were there, right up until the 10th over when Sangakkara was out; but as soon as he was gone, the match went from Sri Lanka winning to West Indies winning.

Sangakkara fell, then Mathews, then Jayawardene, then Jeevan Mendis, Perera and Thiraminne, as they went from 1/48 off 9.2 overs to 7/69 off 14.3 overs. The run rate required went from 90 off 10.4 overs (a bit over 8 per over) to 69 off 5.3 (over 13 per over). Shamefully, 2 of the wickets were run outs, while the others were to every bowler that West Indies used. No bowler was bowling up a storm - it was just bad batting. Just pressure. Just the fear, that in their heads they were thinking - how the hell did they get 137 when they were going at barely 2 runs per over early, and only 4 runs per over for the first 10?

But then, in an Umar Gul-like effort, Kulasekera suddenly smashed the ball to all places as he scored 24 off a single over. But then, just as there looked to be some hope, as they required just 44 off the last 4, straight after scoring that huge over, he was out. And then the others fell in a heap after him. Sri Lanka didn't even last their full 20 overs and were all out with almost 2 overs to spare, losing by 36 runs.

For West Indian fans, or anyone supporting them, this was the most miraculous comeback. It brings comparisons to India's amazing comeback in that test in 2001 against Australia. In that match, Australia had enforced the follow on but then in the 2nd innings VVS Laxman scored 281 as they not only passed the follow on target but set an almost impossible target, and then Australia went for the total, going for what would have been a world record 17th win in a row, and in going for the win they lost the match.

Was this the T20 equivalent of that match? And was Marlon Samuels's innings the equivalent of VVS Laxman's 281 in that match?

It was certainly a thrilling final though. And I think it is fair to say that in their last 2 matches West Indies looked like the best team in the world by an absolute mile. If they can keep that up, or even reference that in other matches that they play, then they could well be a force to reckon with in the years to come.

But to do that they will need to have a more complete test team. Why not try out their T20 stars in the longer format? See if they can handle the big time. And they definitely need to bring Ramnaresh Sarwan back.

Read More

WT20: ICC official admits to poor pitch for Pakistan-Sri Lanka Semi-Final

By Fathima Zanaida

COLOMBO, Sri Lanka (TheSportsNEXT) October 6, 2012: Amid growing criticism on quality of the pitch used for the all-important Semi-Final match of the ICC World Twenty20 2012 between Pakistan and Sri Lanka, an official of the International Cricket Council has admitted to the poor quality of the pitch.

 

Sri Lanka struggled hard to score 139 runs on a pitch which had uneven bounce, double paced nature, which made shot-making the hardest job in the world. Pakistan were reduced to 123 runs thus falling 16 runs short of the target, thereafter a huge uproar has been started in the Pakistani media questioning the basic purpose of that pitch especially in a Twenty20 match.

The Twenty20 cricket came into being with a purpose to serve the audience with a huge dose of boundaries and sixes and the last night’s match between Australia and West Indies was a prime example of Twenty20 brand that we all are used to.

However, there is something fishy as far as pitch-selection for Pakistan cricket team’s matches in the ICC World Cup matches. Right from the ICC World Cup 2003 played in West Indies, Pakistan were made to play Ireland on a pitch that helped seam-bowlers more than any other pitch in the competition. During the 2007 ICC Champions Trophy, Pakistan had to play their matches against South Africa and New Zealand on seamers-friendly tracks. During the ICC World Cup 2011, Pakistan-India match was played on a pitch which lacked quality of an international match. And now the semi-final match had the worst pitch of the tournament to decide one of the top three important matches.

ICC Chief Executive Officer, Dave Richardson, came on the scene on Saturday admitting the pitch used for Pakistan-Sri Lanka semi-final match was below standard and wasn’t “Ideal” for Twenty20 cricket.

Although he mentioned all the pros and cons in preparation of the pitches, but failed to answer why it’s Pakistani matches which find such pitches.

Dave Richardson, while talking to reporters in Colombo on the eve of ICC World Twenty20 final, said, "Ideally, we need to ensure that a pitch doesn't change its condition from one innings to next one. Yes, the pitch used in the first semifinal wasn't an ideal wicket for T20 format, as there was too much assistance to spinners”.

Read More

Pakistani, Indian senior cricketers face quit calls

By Abhishek Manroa

NEW DELHI, India (TheSportsNEXT) October 6, 2012: Pakistani and Indian skippers are under tremendous pressure to step down from their position after their respective team’s exit from the ongoing ICC World Twenty20 2012.

 

Indian cricket team crashed out of the ICC World Twenty20 2012 at Super Eights stage while its arch-rival Pakistan was knocked out by hosts Sri Lanka in the first Semi-Final by 16 runs the other night.

While India’s performance was not up to the expectations of the local fans, Pakistan did manage to finish among the four best Twenty20 teams in world cricket but despite of a great show, former cricketers and local media has really gone after Mohammad Hafeez and his men.

The center of criticism in both Pakistan and India are the senior cricketers where Indian media has lamented Zaheer Khan, Harbhajan Singh, Mahendra Singh Dhoni and Gautam Gambhir. Across the Line-of-Control (LoC), Pakistani media has took apart senior cricketers like Shahid Khan Afridi, Shoaib Malik, Imran Nazir, Kamran Akmal, Sohail Tanvir, and Yasir Arafat.

The main argument behind the stern criticism is the pace of the shortest format of the game which is best-suited for younger cricketers as players like Suresh Raina, Virat Kohli, and Ravichandran Ashwin have impressed the Indian fans while Pakistani fans feel upbeat about Raza Hasan, Asad Shafiq, Nasir Jamshed, and Umar Akmal.

Former Pakistan Test fast bowler, Sikandar Bakht told TheNation on Friday, “There is a lesson in every defeat. For Pakistan, there are genuine concerns about the performance of their five to six senior players. They have remained inconsistent in the mega event”.

Sikandar Bakht showed no hesitation in naming these cricketers as he was of the view that skipper Mohammad Hafeez, Shahid Afridi, Shoaib Malik, Kamran Akmal, Abdul Razzaq and Imran Nazir had failed to impress in the ICC flagship-event therefore Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) should make a decision about future of these players and replace them with new blood.

Aaqib Javed, another former pacer, who now does coaching for United Arab Emirates, had identical thoughts about the senior Pakistani cricketers. He said there were several young players who could take on the baton from the senior generation of cricketers and get going.

Former Test captain Aamir Sohail showed great disliking for opening batsman Imran Nazir and questioned the rationale behind his selection for such a huge event. "His inclusion in the team spoiled the team's composition. He tries to hit every ball and does not know to take singles”.

Basit Ali, the match-fixing whistleblower, was of the belief that it was worrying to watch Pakistan failing to chase an easy target of 140 runs. Demanding the PCB to do away with foreign coach Dav Whatmore, Basit Ali said, "We don't need foreign coaches in the presence of Javed Miandad and other Pakistani cricket legends”.

On the other hand, Indian cricket team is facing even harder response from the former cricketers as well as a hostile media as they have witnessed a visible decline from their last year’s triumph in the ICC World Cup 2011.

After failing to qualify for the semi-finals of the ICC World Twenty20 for the third consecutive time after winning the inaugural event in South Africa, former cricketers are demanding MS Dhoni and his men to decide on their future to leave way for the younger generation who has improved leaps and bounds at the Indian Premier League (IPL).

Former Pakistan cricket captain, Wasim Akram, who is coaching the IPL franchise Kolkata Knight Riders, put the whole blame of defeat on Mahendra Singh Dhoni mentioning his flawed selection policy.

Wasim Akram was quoted as saying for ESPNStar.com. "I am puzzled with the way the Indian team management has picked playing XIs. For example, I feel a wicket-taking bowler like Harbhajan Singh was missed against the ragged South Africans on Tuesday night.

Talking about Zaheer Khan, Wasim Akram stated, "I have said before that Zaheer has to choose the format of cricket he wants to play. I can't see him running in hard every ball and bamboozling batsmen with pace and movement. India must find replacements and very soon at that. India need fresh legs and stronger shoulders because they will be playing a series of matches at home from November”.

Wasim Akram was quick enough to name replacements for Zaheer Khan. "Where is Umesh Yadav? And Varun Aaron seems to be a forgotten name. With the new selection committee in place, both Umesh and Varun should be groomed to power India's pace battery. I hear Varun is injured. I think the BCCI needs to get after him and pull him out of his problems. At least Umesh should have been in the T20 squad," he added.

Amid all the criticism and calls for captain’s resignation, there were some positives for both Pakistan and India as Virat Kohli once again exhibited his true colors at the biggest stage for India while Pakistan discovered Nasir Jamshed as a proper batsman in their top-order. As far as bowling is concerned, Pakistan were more fortunate as they found Raza Hasan as a true replacement for Abdur Rehman but Indian bowling woes sustain as their skipper feels no confidence in the experienced Harbhajan Singh and he mostly put him on the bench rather than using his skills against the top opposition in the tournament.

Yuvraj Singh, who recently rejoined the Team India after beating cancer, was another factor to relish for the Indian cricket fans as he was among the top wicket takers for the Men in Blue with eight wickets. Yuvi was the second leading wicket taker for India as Lakshmipathy Balaji took nine wickets despite of going for too many runs.

Read More

Watson helps Australia maul India by 9 wickets in ICC WT20

By Fathima Zanaida

COLOMBO, Sri Lanka (TheSportsNEXT) September 29, 2012: Shane Watson came up with another all-round performance as Australia easily defeated India by nine wickets in their first Super Eights Group 2 match of the ICC World Twenty20 2012 at R Premadasa Stadium on Friday.

Shane Watson captured three wickets for 34 runs and then doubled up his performance with an aggressive half century of 72 from 42 balls to help Australia to an astounding victory over India, who resorted to play five bowlers.

Indian skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s decision to play five bowlers hit back after his batsmen failed to put up a good total on the board after he decided to make veteran hard-hitting batsman Virender Sehwag warm benches in the dug-out.

Batting first, India managed to score only 140 for seven from their 20 overs on a pitch which had plenty of more runs on offer as none of the batsmen were able to prolong their stay and prolong it with fluency.

Gautam Gambhir (17 from 12 – 3 fours) and Irfan Pathan (31 from 30 – 2 fours, 1 six) looked struggling as an opening pair yet again and just managed 21 runs for the opening wicket partnership.

The in-form Virat Kohli (15 from 13 – 2 fours) looked good before Pat Cummins got his scalp, but Yuvraj Singh (8 from 10 – 1 four) and Rohit Sharma (1 from 2) were undone by Shane Watson and Mitchell Starc, respectively as Australian skipper George Bailey’s decision to persist with fast bowlers paid huge dividends for his team.

Left-hand middle order batsman Suresh Raina (26 from 19 – 4 fours) and Indian skipper MS Dhoni (15 from 21 – 2 fours) did spend some time in the middle but while Raina looked fluent Indian captain looked completely out of sorts. A late burst by Ravichandran Ashwin (16 not out from 12 – 1 four, 1 six) took India to a moderate total of 140 for seven from their 20 overs.

Shane Watson was Australia’s most successful bowler as he captured three wickets for 34 runs while Pat Cummins also bowled for two wickets for 16 runs.

Indians were hoping their five specialist bowlers to make an impact but Australian openers Shane Watson (72 from 42 – 2 fours, 7 sixes) and David Warner (63 not out from 41 – 7 fours, 3 sixes) showed no mercy and blasted their way on road to victory.

The opening pair almost overhauled the run-chase and scored 133 runs from just 13.3 overs before Glenn Maxwell (4 not out from 6) completed the job with the left-hand opening batsman as Australia achieved the target from 14.5 overs which gave them a huge lift in a possible net run-rate scenario.

MS Dhoni tried eight bowlers out of which five had their economy rates in double figures.

With an incredible all-round performance, Shane Watson fetched him third Man of the Match award of the ICC World Twenty20 2012 and is well and truly on course to steal the Man of the Tournament award.

Read More