IPL 2011 saved!

Well just imagine what would have happened in case there was an IPL in 2007 just after the world cup where India along with arch-rivals Pakistan gave a grand exit in the first round of the tournament itself after losing to Bangladesh and Sri Lanka? The franchisees would have been cursing themselves for bidding their hard earned and well thought money on such useless claims. Millions of dollars would have gone down the rains with not even a single paisa being able to recovered. With team India being favorites only on ad shows, viewers' ire would have reached its peak.

This time as well, had there been a super six stage, then India were supposed to win all three games against Pakistan, Australia and Sri Lanka in order to reach the semi-finals of the world cup. Coincidentally, India did win against all the three teams mentioned above in the quarter-finals, semi-finals and the finals. Luckily, India were the only team from group B to have crossed the quarter-finals stage beating Australia. This time, had India been exit from the world cup, then one need not cite specially what would have happened. May be the entire idea to have an IPL would have been dropped.

Of course, India did win the 2007 T20 world cup at South Africa. But, that was followed by a series of crashes after India failed twice in 2009 and 2010 to win even a single game in the super eights of the world cups. But, by then, the IPL had already been over. Added to that, the Indian team mates were also found partying late night that time after losing their last and final match against Sri Lanka. This would have added fuel to the fire no doubt. Now that India have won the world cup, things will go on as smooth as ever.

The IPL this time will be another big hit not only for players who would be seen making another debut but also for the fact that the world cup matches will be repeatedly replayed by the Indian cricket fans with an eye on the IPL. This time, there have been two more teams added with Pune Warriors and Kochi Tuskers Kerala making their debut. But, I wish the franchises have taken a risk with the world cup memories still afresh in people's minds. If everything is good then fine. But, things need to be viewed in other angles as well.

Australia to stay back

Well the winners of the world cup-India and the runners-up Sri Lanka left Bangladesh long back but, the loser in the quarter-finals will continue to stay in Bangladesh for their upcoming three match one day series starting this week. Sri Lanka last played in Bangladesh in the quarter-finals against England and India against Bangladesh in the very first encounter of the tournament. It is ironical to see the team that quit last in the tournament to have played in Bangladesh first and the team that quit second quit Bangladesh second. But, the team that lost in the quarter-finals will remain in Bangladesh.

In just a week after the world cup got over, Australia are scheduled to play Bangladesh for a three match one day series. There are no test matches coming up between the teams mentioned and neither a T20 game. One has to think of the reasons for having such a bilateral series so soon and involving Bangladesh and Australia. The reason can well be thought of to be that all (including the ICC) expected Australia to win the world cup this time as well and with Bangladesh hosting the trophy, a small bilateral series can be held mid-way for a week's time.

Australia's bilateral series against Bangladesh will end just a day after the fourth edition of the Indian Premier League would have begun. This means that only the players who have retired from playing international cricket for Australia will be seen making it big (may be) in this year's IPL. The list includes Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne, Shaun Marsh etc to mention a few. With that being a long way to go about, the talks can be restricted to Australia's tour of Bangladesh or Australia's continuance of the world cup. I just can't guess what would be going on in the minds of Aussies.

Aussies unexpectedly lost to India in the quarter-finals of the world cup and their zest for a thrash can well be understood. Though their days of glory have passed away, players like Shane Watson, Brad Haddin, Mike Hussey etc all continue to dominate with the bat with Mitchell Johnson ding it with the ball. And, with all anger against the sub-continent nations put together by the Aussies, one has to nothing but pity the Bangladeshis. Bangladesh are the only nation from the sub-continent not to have faced Australia in the world cup. Australia will definitely avenge their loss to India, Pakistan and Sri lanka against Bangladesh.

A totally flawless final

Well I just cannot recall a finals between two teams captained by played who also keep wickets for their side. This time I saw it when Kumara Sangakkara for Sri Lanka and Mahendra Singh Dhoni did it for India in the finals. On one side, being an Indian I was rejoicing the Indian victory which came home after 28 years surpassing a silver jubilee in between and on the other hand, I had complete pity for Mahela Jayawardane to have ended on the losing side despite scoring a century. No one scored a century for India despite them being victorious.

This was a rare finals not only because it was India who won the trophy but for the fact that both teams fought it out hard to win the trophy which was eventually awarded to one team that played a slight better cricket. Sri Lanka did well to pileup 274 runs on the board which should have been a winning total for sure. But, needless to be said, Dhoni and team had different plans. I just cannot forget the presence of Sachin Tendulkar in the team for the sixth world cup. Someone like Rahul Dravid, Brian Lara, Inzamam Ul Haq never enjoyed this.

Despite being extraordinary players of their era, they never got to lift the world cup. One can look into the last three world cup finals which were all won by Australia and were one sided games. It would not have been a prized prediction for anyone who would have bet on Australia after Pakistan were bowled out for 132 in 1999. And then in 2003, a total of 359 would have never be chased even with ten Sachin Tendulkars in the side against a team with McGrath and co bowling. If McGrath stuck to his line and length, Lee did the damage.

Exactly four years later in the Caribbean, India was replaced by Sri Lanka and Ricky Ponting was replaced by Adam Gilchrist. Every world cup final set up a new record for Australia. In 1999, Pakistan were bowled out for the lowest total in a world cup final. Then in 2003, Indian bowlers were belted for the highest total, the largest margin of victory and the fastest hundred in a world cup final. Four years later, Adam Gilchrist blasted the fastest hundred in a world cup finals bettering Ponting's record by 2 balls and the highest individual score in a world cup final.

Top two teams qualify to the finals

Before predicting the winners of the world cup with less than 24 hours to go for the big game to start, one has to decide whether the teams which have qualified to the finals of the mega event are worth their place. I can just tell you the way how Pakistan was eventually declared winners of the tournament in 1992 when they shouldn't have even reached the semi-finals. Pakistan had losses to India, West Indies and South Africa and wins against Sri Lanka, New Zealand and Australia before playing England. The England tie became important for Pakistan and Australia as the winner would make it to the semis.

As a matter of fact, Australia had lost to New Zealand, England ,Pakistan and South Africa with wins against India, West Indies and Sri Lanka. Pakistan's task was just no to lose the match meaning even a tie or an abandonment would see them through to the semis. Pakistan got all out for 74 regarding which nothing needs to be said in particular. Finally, rain interrupted the game forcing the match officials to abandon the game and award equal points to both teams. So, Pakistan at the cost of Australia reaches the semis and also wins the trophy a week later.

One can also go through the 1999 world cup when Steve Waugh just cashed in on the drop catch by Herschelle Gibbs in the super sixes of the tournament and a wrong decision of Hansie Cronje in the semis which ended in a tie seeing Aussies through to the finals. India cashed in on the drop catch if Sachin Tendulkar by Abdul Razzaq and the presence of Kenya in the super sixes and a toss win against England in the day-night encounter. But, India deserved to be there in the finals. Sri Lanka along with Australia deserved to be in the finals of the 2007 world cup.

This time, Sri Lanka if not for their loss against Pakistan and the abandoned game against Australia had no black spots. India on the other hand lost to the Proteas and had a tie against England but that was compromised with a win against Australia and Pakistan. India also cashed in on the 5 drop chances in the semi-finals against Pakistan which would have otherwise been a Pakistan-Sri Lanka finals. But, despite the loss in the league stages, their body language and attitude showed no signs of compromise which justifies their place in the finals. Youvraj Singh, Dhoni, Tendulkar, Harbhajan, Zaheer all have proved their place.

Will India become the first host to win a world cup?

Well if the history of a cricket world cup is given a close look at, one thing that can be observed is that the hosts have hardly shown any sort of toughness if not for England in the Prudential cup 1979 where they made it to the finals of the tournament. And the other hosts to have earned a name in the history books is Sri Lanka when they won the 1996 world cup when they co-hosted the tournament along with Pakistan and India. But, a slight compromise had to be made when they delighted the world at Lahore and not somewhere in Colombo or Galle.

Otherwise, the hosts have always been underdogs if not for a few exceptions. England did well to a little extent in the first three editions of the Prudential cup since 1975 to 1983 when they made it to the finals and the semi-finals. Until then, no other team ever got to host the mega event. Had India retained their luck what they were enjoying in 1983, they would have become the champions in the 1987 when they co-hosted the tournament along with Pakistan. Australia were not the team to beat 5 years later when they hosted the world cup in 1992 along with New Zealand.

Though India and Pakistan had the potential in 1996, they never seemed to cross the barrier of bad luck when a 4 match winning streak was stopped by India in the quarter-finals and India faced the only team which was yet to lose a game in that world cup in the semis. Then comes the 2003 world cup which was co-hosted by three teams mostly South Africa which are champions in their own way. South Africa couldn't even do what Zimbabwe and Kenya could when they got eliminated in the 1^st stage itself. Four years later, it was a mistake to consider West Indies to host the tournament.

West Indies could not even win a notable game in the entire tournament if not for their win against Pakistan. One thing that everybody needs to regret was that West Indies in the 1970s-80s and Australia in the 2000s never got a chance to host the tournament which deceived them from becoming one of the hosts to lift a world cup. Had Pakistan hosted the 1992 world cup or had India hosted the 1983 trophy, nothing in particular could ave been said regarding their performance. But, West Indies and Australia would have done it in their glory days. What do you say?

Drop catches and the tournament will drop your team

Well one can imagine the drop catch of the Kiwi big-hitting batsman Ross Taylor in the league stages of the tournament in the match between Pakistan and New Zealand at an unimportant venue. Ross Taylor was solely responsible in bringing up a total in excess of 300 when he blasted 92 runs of the last 4 overs at a rate of over 20 runs an over. That was the first defeat that Pakistan had in this tournament but was hard to come to terms with whatsoever. That was Pakistan's first defeat to New Zealand since 1979 world cup in world cups.

And then I can cite the match between Pakistan and Sri Lanka where top batsmen were repeatedly dropped by poor Pakistani fielders which though didn't stop Pakistan from emerging victorious but reduced the margin to victory restricting the same to just ten runs. Many claim that to be a close encounter for Sri Lanka that could have gone anybody's way. But, anybody who would have watched the match ball-by-ball would conclude that it was Pakistan's drop chances that reduced the margin of victory to ten instead of 50. Thse two games never bothered Pakistan for those were league stage games.

There was always a chance for Pakistan to come back into the tournament when all was not lost. They had won the match against Sri Lanka and later on in the world cup tournament beat Australia which saw them top the charts in group A ahead of Sri Lanka, New Zealand and Australia. Then in the quarter-finals, beating West Indies was not a tough task for anyone. But, the real test for Pakistan would be in the match against India where they have been ousted for the third time by their arch-rivals India. I'm not citing their 5-0 loss to India in world cups.

India knocked out Pakistan in the 1996 world cup when they registered a 39 run win despite a 113 run 1^st wicket partnership between Aamir Sohail and Saeed Anwar in 13 overs. Then came the match in 2003 which was famous for a drop catch of Sachin Tendulkar off a Wasim Akram delivery by Abdul Razzaq which spoiled their hopes of entering the super-sixes. Yesterday, another series of drop catches was observed when Sachin Tendulkar himself was dropped four times with Sehwag being given a chance. With all these, chasing 261 should not have been difficult for Pakistan. May be Pakistan wanted to go home early.

Result comes as expected

Well as all of us had predicted a couple of days back regarding the finalists of the world cup, the result is right in front of us with Sri Lanka making their third world cup final and their second in a row. There was no room for New Zealand to sneak into victory not only for all odds being against them but also with them not being the right team to beat the sub-continent nation especially on their home turf. This is the fourth fifth time in a row that Sri Lanka have beaten New Zealand in world cups since 2003.

New Zealand should consider themselves lucky to be in the semi-finals of the tournament beating South Africa in the quarter-finals. Had New Zealand encountered any of the other teams namely India or Sri Lanka, may be they would have given a grand exit there itself. Of course, the story would have been different had they met West Indies. At any cost, new Zealand would have not made it to the finals of this world cup for, India and Pakistan would also have given them the same treatment like Sri Lanka. May be there would have been a worse result for the Kiwis had they faced India.

However, looking at the scorecard, one can guess the panic that the Sri Lankan batsmen had towards the end of the chase suggesting that had the Kiwi total been somewhere close to 250, may be Sri Lankans would have been seen cursing themselves at the end of the day for coming so near and losing the plot mid-way. At one stage the scorecard read 161/3 requiring 58 runs from 102 balls at a rate of over 3 runs an over. But, the Sri Lankan batsmen took 47 overs to get into that magical score. Though they didn't lose wickets at regular intervals, some panic was evident.

The Sri Lankan batsmen had to concentrate more and one has to no doubt give full marks to the New Zealand bowlers for coming back to the game and showing the world that they deserved to be there. Towards the end of the game, one thing that makes me wonder and tough to come to terms with is the fact that Kumara Sangakkara was awarded the man of the match when it was Tilekaratne Dilshan who did the good work in the beginning of the Sri Lankan successful run chase. I just had to convince myself saying the person who captains and keeps wickets gets the precedence.

Predicting the finalists has become easy

Well ask anybody out there regarding who would make it to the finals of the world cup and you would get obvious answers that India from the first semi-finals against Pakistan and Sri Lanka from the second will be the ones who would make it to Mumbai. The game between India and Pakistan can be considered to be in a toss if one side of the coin is given a close look at while the other side of the coin suggests a different story. This is the second time India is playing Pakistan at home when they first did it in 1996.

If history has to repeat itself then, in world cups, India has been beating Pakistan ever since the arch-rivals first met in 1992 which was Sachin Tendulkar's debut world cup and luckily was adjudged the man of the match for his 54. That was the last time greats like Kapil Dev, Ravi Shastri, Dilip Vengsarkar and krishnamachari Shrikanth made their appearance on the international scene with just one Indo-Pak encounter in a world cup paving way for Mohammed Azharuddin, Sachin Tendulkar, Javagal Srinath and Anil Kumble to lead the team. From then onwards it was the Indians who dictated the Pakistanis.

But, history may not repeat itself like New Zealand beat Pakistan this time which was their win over Pakistan in a world cup since 1979. This time, if the league stage performance of both the teams are considered, India doesn't have a notable win and Pakistan can boast of beating Sri Lanka and Australia keeping their hopes high. By the way, it is India who'd be hosting the tie which means that, in case Pakistan tries to show off too much, then they might be greeted with water bottles and paper rockets. Though this can hardly happen, the fear will always be alive in the Pakistanis.

But, with someone like Sachin Tendulkar, Yuvraj Singh and Dhoni in full bloom along with part time scorers like Virat Kohli and Sehwag, heat will definitely be on Pakistan who is led by an uninspiring Shahid Afridi. The next match between New Zealand and Sri Lanka need not be discussed at all with Sri Lanka having already dreamed of a final berth. They have beaten New Zealand earlier in the tournament and this time unfortunately, New Zealand has to face Muralitharan and co on their home ground in Colombo. Whatever, there will be a sub-continent team this time as well in the final.

Best of the quarter-finals

Well with all the four quarter-finals of the world cup being over, I guess it is time to bid the best of the quarter-finals which included 8 teams playing four games (obviously). The first of the quarter-finals between West Indies and Pakistan was just a walk over game for Pakistan who thrashed the West Indies like never before. First by bowling out them for just above 100 and then chasing the same with close to 30 overs left. But, that feat can be enjoyed by no one other than the Pakistanis. So, that match stands canceled in picking the best.

Next on the list comes the match involving India and Australia which India unexpectedly won with 5 wickets still in hand. This goes down as the best of all knock-out games in this tournament so far with hardly anyone having their bet on the co-hosts though they are the favorites to win the crown this time. Though Australia have lost the services of Adam Gilchrist, Mathew Hayden, Damien Martyn, Andrew Symonds, Glenn McGrath and others, there are some like Shane Watson, Mitchell Johnson, Brad Haddin, Brett Lee etc who are still fresh from their days of glory since the last decade.

Australia might have lost to Pakistan in their league stage encounter with the sub-continent nation but the quarter-finals of the world cup is totally a different game whatsoever. Coming to the next game between New Zealand and South Africa, that was just an elimination match where both teams don't deserve to be in the semi-finals and one of them has to make it there irrespective of whether anyone likes it or not. Both South Africa and New Zealand had just one win in their league stage and that too by a one man show and a crash by the opposition.

It was India who lost their equations against South Africa and if not for Ross Taylor, no other batsman from the Kiwi side put Pakistanis under pressure. Last but not the least we have the game between England and Sri Lanka which was (we guess) anticipated by England to be their last show in this world cup. Gone were the good work when they had a tie against India chasing 339 before losing to Bangladesh and Ireland. They were just a step better than the West Indies and nothing else. Teams gotto be lucky to have faced West Indies and England and likewise they did it in style when they didn't lose a wicket en-route to their successful chase.

All three hosts for the semis

Well this can happen only if the world cup is being hosted by the sub-continent teams namely India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. For the first time in the history of a world cup or any other tournament, all the hosts have been into the semi-finals for the world cup. Of course, Pakistan is not a host but still a little bit of consideration can be given for it was once upon a time scheduled to host a few important games in this world cup before all teams starting from India started boycotting their tour to the trouble-torn nation since 2008.

Of course, Bangladesh have not been able to make it to the semi-finals (or even the quarter-finals) of the tournament. A little bit of hard work from them could have seen them scroll over against West Indies. West Indies are as good as Ireland or Bangladesh in this tournament needless to say. Both West Indies and Bangladesh had equal number of wins in the league stages of the tournament. One can consider Pakistan to be a replacement for Bangladesh for, long back Bangladesh was considered as East Pakistan and now, we can adjust those words calling Pakistan some West Pakistan.

Coming to the fourth and the final quarter-final between Sri Lanka and England, England were crushed by the Sri Lankans the way West Indies were done so by Pakistan. Then, West Indies were no match for Pakistan which was not the case yesterday at Colombo. And, just imagine what a lucky thing that the Sri Lankans were facing the Englishmen in their own land when they could have been either at Dhaka or Ahmadabad. More luckily, the Sri Lankans will be facing the Kiwis once again in their home land with the first semi- finals scheduled at Colombo a couple of days later.

I just cannot imagine why teams from only one group have been able to hold the upper-hand with Sri Lanka, Pakistan and New Zealand qualifying from group A with only India getting to the rank from group B. However, things were better this time compared to the 1996 edition where all four teams from group A qualified to the semis with Pakistan, England, New Zealand and South Africa losing out to India, Sri Lanka, Australia and West Indies respectively. Coming to the match, losing just four wickets, how could England end up with just 229 on board? Are England that bad bowlers that they couldn't scalp even a single Sri Lankan wicket?

What a major difference?

Well if any team cannot even chase down a small total of 221 in the quarter-finals of a world cup, then expecting something special from them would just be as stupid as it can get whatsoever. And that was what the South Africans were found doing yesterday against New Zealand at Dhaka. And, with winning being totally out of question, just look at the margin of victory the Kiwis had against the Proteas and you can realize that the Proteas have just been better than the West Indies. I can no doubt say that Bangladesh and Ireland played better cricket than the South Africans.

One has to just take a look at how many times in world cups the South Africans have been losing to the Kiwis since their entry into world cricket in the 1992 world cup. If not for the 1996 and 1999 world cups, New Zealand have been able to take home twice of what the South Africans have managed. This was the third consecutive time that New Zealand beat South Africa in world cups. I just felt pity to see Shaun Pollock go in first to the presentation area despite scoring 307 runs and Herschelle Gibbs missing out to Stephen Fleming for the MoM award.

You can just go through the scorecard top see that there were no big hitting by the New Zealand batsmen. All the New Zealand batsmen did was to wait for an opportunity and strike at the right time. The entire New Zealand innings consisted of just lone six from the blades of Kane Williamson. There was a 114 run 3^rd wicket partnership between Jesse Ryder and Ross Taylor which was instrumental in the eventual score of 221.The South Africans couldn't even bowl the New Zealand batsmen all-out and allowed them to play all their 50 overs which laid the foundation to their defeat.

The match should not go down as another chucking by the African team for, this was anybody's game unlike in 1992-1999 world cups. The South African scorecard which at one point of time read 121/3 in the 27^th over eventually ended at 172 all out meaning only 51 runs could be scored in 16 odd overs at the rate of just over 3 runs an over losing 7 wickets. This was the second time the South Africans were found doing this. Previously, against England as well, they succumbed chasing 173. This time, had this been the score against England there would have been another tie for England.

Luck strikes India at the right time

Well there have been two games in this tournament where India should have won and eventually lost. Those are the game against England and South Africa where India lost the plot mid-way defending a decent total. Despite those two huge losses, the Indian players in every department were no short of their body language and guts. They did everything well till yesterday's game against the Aussies which was their win against the team after 24 years. Had the even took place a year later, may be India would have celebrated a silver-jubilee of their win over the four-time world champions.

India had last won a game against Australia in world cups in the 1987 edition where the Mahammed Azharuddin-led team India beat the to-be world champions by 59 runs though they lost their other encounter against the Aussies by 1 run in the same tournament. Since then, India has been at the receiving end of the Aussies as many as 5 times. Coming to the tournament, in that match against England, India did very well to get to 338 powered with a hundred by Sachin Tendulkar but eventually not only lost all their ten wickets but an opportunity to win as well.

Though India lost 9 wickets for less than 30 runs and failed to play their complete quota of 50 overs, a score of 297 was not a bad one at all. The score was more than enough for the Proteas to shed their sweat. Had the Proteas been that tough to face, they should not have lost 7 wickets and played until the last over en-route to their successful run chase. That was the second bad luck that struck team India. One need not consider their win against West Indies to be a luck favoring India for West Indies are a team that only Holland can fear.

You can see from the scorecard about the panic that the Aussies had with not even a single bowler happening to bowl his complete quota of ten overs. The Aussies could extract only 1 over maiden when Brett Lee happened to be the lucky guy this time. Likewise, there were four bowlers from India to have completed their full quota of ten overs that included the likes of Yuvraj Singh and Ravichandran Ashwin. There were three bowlers from India to have been better than the four from Australia. Concluding the post, did the Aussies take the Indians for granted or was Dhoni lucky to have this his?

Was this a T20 or an ODI?

Well I just cannot say anything about the first quarter-finals between West Indies and Pakistan. I was totally confused whether the game was a T20 or an ODI. Scorecard suggests that West Indies played a 50 over cricket with Pakistan playing a T20 game if the overs played are considered. To be exact, West Indies played 43.3 overs and Pakistan played 20.5 overs meaning, the West Indies' innings lasted just short of 50 overs while Pakistan's batting innings lasted just above 20 overs. This would no doubt go down as the worst contest of the tournament no matter who says what.

Needless to be said, Pakistan effortlessly surpassed the total with no bowlers able to stop them from winning. The West Indies' bowlers could not even get a single Pakistani batsman out. Had Shahid Afridi been to the crease, the West Indian bowlers might have just walked out with a consolation of having gone with a wicket in hand. One can go and check out the scorecards of all the games played in his tournament so far to see where the West Indies stand after this encounter with Pakistan. As a matter of fact, Canada were able to bowl out the Pakistanis out for 184.

Bangladesh, defending 58 runs were able to scalp the wicket of Devon Smith and Holland were bowled out for a score that was 8 runs more than what West Indies could score against Pakistan yesterday. The list goes on and on. The only performances worse than this was Kenya's loss to the Kiwis and Bangladesh losing to South Africa to mention a few. Was this the game that most of the cricket fans over the world were looking forward to? A hint regarding the performance of the West Indies team was observed in the earlier games the West Indies played.

They did well to get both England and India all out but failed miserable in the chase which was not so tough given the likes of Chris Gayle, Devon Smith and Ramnaresh Sarwan. A total of 245 against England and 269 against was not an unachievable one for any decent outfit. Had West Indies beaten India the other day, they would not have been playing Australia today which happens to be a different issue. But, quarter-finals of a world cup should be a different game compared to what happened in the league stages isn't it? One has to just wait and watch what happens after this.

Shall we predict?

Well with less than 24 hours to go for the second round of the 10^th edition of the game's major event to kick start, a close look at the teams would be worth the time spend I suppose. The first game that would happen in 24 hours would be the 1^st quarter-finals between Pakistan and West Indies. As all of you would have by now predicted or had your bet upon, winner is definitely going to be Pakistan though as a rare case, a 2007 sort of thing can be repeated once again. But, there is no Brian Lara to bind the team.

Pakistan are not the team gifted with players having a midas touch. The second quarter-finals that would obviously be happening a day later between India and Australia. This would be a tough call for the betters for both the teams out there are gifted with the most sophisticated players like Sachin Tendulkar & Dhoni for India with Shane Watson and Michael Clarke having done the job for Australia. If anybody speaks for India, one can go through the encounters between India and the Aussies in the 1996 and 1987 editions where Australia had an upper hand. And, all is not lost for both the teams.

I just give this game a pass and moving on to our next game i.e between the Proteas and the Kiwis, I can just say that the Kiwis have an edge with big hitting Ross Taylor and Brendon McCullum compared to the out-of-form Graeme Smith and a slow and not-steady Jacques Kallis from South Africa. Both teams have only one notable wins in their league stage matches with New Zealand winning over Pakistan and South Africa winning over India. South Africa's win over West Indies cannot be taken into consideration for, they are just a team that has been written-off by one and all.

It is to be noted that both South Africa and New Zealand have wins only against arch rivals-India and Pakistan. Coming to the last but not the least quarter-finals between Sri Lanka and England, needless to be said, Sri Lanka have all odds favoring them with their wins against New Zealand and a close encounter against Pakistan and with players of the likes of Mahela Jayawardane, Kumara Sangakkara and Thilan Samaraweera who can do miracles with the bat and though not in his all time form, Muttiah Muralithran can surprise the Englishmen at least with his presence in the playing XI.

Way to go all of you

Well with the first round of the 10^th edition of the ICC cricket world cup coming to an end, there has rarely been any sort of thrill with the initial stages of the tournament filled with matches involving mostly the minnow nations which took over two weeks of time. Excluding that also, the thrill could not get bigger with teams like South Africa and New Zealand giving a merciless thrashing to teams like Bangladesh, Holland, Kenya etc and stand nowhere when it came to stronger teams like England and Sri Lanka. So was the case with England and India.

Some interesting games that took away everyone's breath was the one between England and Ireland and the one involving India and South Africa. Full marks to South Africa and Ireland for coming from nowhere and ending up victorious in the games against England and India respectively. India were at one stage 268/1 from 38 overs indicating a 400+ total against South Africa and on the other hand, Ireland were at one stage 111/5 chasing 326. Putting it simple, England completely messed up their games against the minnows. And then they had a tie against India and a win against the Proteas.

That balances the equation though they lost their must win games against Bangladesh and Ireland and had a tough time against the Netherlands. Another match that needs a consideration is the one between New Zealand and Pakistan where 92 runs were scored off the last 4.2 overs with Ross Taylor doing all the damage. Had it not been for that game, Pakistan would have come out with a 100% success rate. So was the case for Sri Lanka if not for the game against Pakistan which they lost by 10 runs. But, X-factor lies in the abandoned match against Australia.

So, with that there has never been a team with a 100% success rate like it happened in the last two editions with Australia sweeping all the opponents it came across. Australia was unlucky not to have faced the Proteas in the 2003 edition and India & Pakistan in the 2007 edition. But, that is a totally different issue here. Coming to the current edition, sufferers have been India with a loss to South Africa and a tie against England, South Africa with a loss to England and finally New Zealand with a loss to Australia and Sri Lanka. Unofficially, all gates are closed for West Indies.

The best Zimbabwe can do

Well yesterday at Kolkata, Zimbabwe did what best they could do-beat the nation which is yet to win a contest in this tournament when they beat Kenya by a huge margin of 161 runs. For the second time in a world cup, the Kenyans have gone without a win when they first did it in the 1999 edition at England when they lost all their games to India, South Africa, England, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe. Luckily they won a match against Canada in the 2007 world cup in the Caribbean. No one expects Kenya to win big games like they did in 2003.

If our memories are fresh enough, Kenya beat Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe in the 2003 world cup to become the first non-test playing nation in history to make it to the semi-finals of a world cup. In the 1996 edition, they surprisingly beat the West Indies when they ere under-estimated by them. With that being history now, this time Kenya could not win games against Canada and Zimbabwe when expectations said otherwise. If winning against Sri Lanka in the 2003 world cup is considered to be a sort of a cheap gimmick, then one has to give hats off for the way they tackled India and Australia in the super eights.

Kenya saw Australia reeling at 117/5 chasing 175 and India at 107/4 chasing 227 under lights. In that particular match against Australia, Aasif Karim was awarded the man of the match for returning with figures of 3/7 from 8.2 overs with 6 overs maiden-can you believe it! However, he was the bowler who gave away the winning runs to Australia with a boundary snatched from his 50^th delivery. If not for that boundary, his bowling figures read 3/3 from 8.1 overs. Even Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne would have been ashamed of such figures. That was Aasif Karim for you.

Now that Kenya have lost all their six games, especially to Canada and Zimbabwe, it looks like they have gone back to the 1996 world cup since when they had started playing decent cricket. This is the fifth time Kenya are playing in world cups. Canada have played four times out of which three are countable. It was not a decent start for Canada in 1979. Likewise, Scotland have had their third appearance and Holland their fourth with them missing out in 1999. With winning a secondary issue, Kenyans didn't even come close to winning or even give a tough fight when they were bowled out for 147 which was 3 runs less than 150-a milestone score.

Great hosts-Bangladesh!

Well I wish like Pakistan, had even Bangladesh been stripped off its hosts' status, that would not have been a bad decision at all by any means. By no means are Bangladesh justifying their being the co-hosts along with India and Sri Lanka. For the second time in the tournament, Bangladesh were bowled out for a score less than 100. The first one was against West Indies when they were bowled out for 58 runs at their home ground. This time, Bangladesh did slightly better to see them end their score by another 20 runs on the board. The only reason for critics to go silent.

Even in that match against the West Indies, Bangladesh had absolutely no reasons to fare so badly taking into account the caliber of the West Indies team who are yet to win against a decent opposition till date with a match against due. On the other hand, Bangladesh did well in the match against England where they beat them by 2 wickets and then in the first encounter against India where though Bangladesh lost, they gave in a tough fight to the co-hosts India where they didn't lose all ten wickets and scored 283 runs on the board losing by 87 runs.

In yesterday's game against South Africa, though hardly anybody would have expected them to win, at least a few of them would have expected Bangladesh to put up a tough fight. Another match that would be worth citing here would be the one against Ireland where both the contestants were equally competitive, with wins against England and Holland. With this loss, Bangladesh end their campaign with three wins, equal to West Indies who have wins against Holland, Ireland and Bangladesh. These were obvious wins for a test playing nation like the West Indies. However, their big game is due against India later this week.

Similarly, India has had wins against Ireland, Bangladesh and Netherlands which is also quite obvious. Both of them have their big game to come. But, the scorecard of yesterday's game might make someone laugh when only one batsman from Bangladesh happened to score more then 10 runs and making it more worse was that even the number of extra deliveries bowled by the South African bowlers ended at 8 which was 2 less than the speculated figure. This was South Africa's second 200+ margin victory after their thrashing of Holland at Mohali. Concluding the post, Bangladesh should be glad that the Proteas didn't cross the 300 run mark like India.

Ireland take home two

What a delight it was to see the Irish players yesterday do what no other team in this world cup could afford to when they not only had their second win yesterday but also did it with style when they recorded their second successful run chase in excess of 300. First it was in the match against England where they chased down 326 and then yesterday against Netherlands when they successfully chased down 307 needless to be said. But, a little bit of thumbs down to the Irish bowlers for allowing Holland to put up 306 when they failed to win a single encounter.

This is the second time that Netherlands failed to grab even a single victory out of the games that they played. Earlier, they had a similar feat in the 1996 world cup when they lost all five games they played when they faced Pakistan, England, New Zealand, South Africa and UAE. A little bit of effort would have seen Holland register their first win in that tournament against UAE. Though no one expects Holland to win against strong teams like South Africa and India, their performance has to be high against teams like Ireland. After all, Holland have been playing in world cups since 1996 as mentioned.

They have wins against Namibia in the 2003 edition and a win against Scotland in the next edition at the Caribbean. With that apart, Ireland might have just managed to reach the quarter-finals of this world cup with just one more victory with teams like Bangladesh and West Indies out there. When Ireland could have chased down a total of 326 successfully against England, it should not have been a tough thing for the Irish to win against at least Bangladesh though West Indies stand an equal chance. Though Bangladesh were the hosts, they have been under-rated needless to be said.

The match between Ireland and Netherlands was much better than the one between Pakistan and Canada where Canada failed to chase down 184 set by Pakistan. May be, had Ireland been there in the place of Canada may be the Pakistani batsmen would have bee bowled out for even lesser total and may be the Irish might have had another upset there. Very rarely can there be two batsmen from a single team to have notched up two fastest hundreds of this world cup when O'Brien scored it in 50 balls against England and yesterday Paul Stirling scored a 72 ball 101 against Holland.

When there exists losers

Well in case a match that can be won happens to be lost, who is to be blamed becomes the toughest question of all. And that was what the West Indies were to face after their close and yet so far from victory against England at Chennai yesterday. A total of 244 on the board put up by the Englishmen should not have been a tough chase for a team that started off well blasting off 58 runs from the first 7 overs at a run-rate of over 8 runs an over. Chris Gayle and Darren Sammy were supposed to make life miserable for the Englishmen which eventually didn't happen.

Chris Gayle blasted 43 runs from just 21 balls scoring over 2 runs every ball he faced while Darren Sammy massacred the English bowling by scoring just less than one and a half runs every ball he faced when he too fell 9 runs short of scoring a well deserved half century. I just couldn't stop cursing the West Indian batsmen who undid the good work which the bowlers did. If one can go through the scorecard, the West Indies team is hardly gifted with decent bowlers though Kemer Roach and Dwayne Smith can boast of some splendid feats occasionally.

At the end, if Chris Gayle and Darren Sammy fell short of a well deserved half century, the West Indies team fell short of a well deserved victory. Compared to the bowlers like Ravi Bopara, Tim Bresnan and Graeme Swann, the West Indies' bowlers fall way short though there is Kemer Roach who has had a hat-trick against Holland earlier in the tournament. Similarly, in the batting department, England fall short of a hard hitting batsman of the caliber of Chris Gayle though the tournament's highest individual run scorer has been Andrew Struass when he blasted the Indian bowlers for a 50X1.5.

But, the scorecard suggests otherwise when bowlers do the job for the West Indies team by restricting the English batsmen for a score less than 250 and at the same time getting the opposition all-out. Getting a team that has so far holds the record for the highest team total batting second should come in for some praise until the unexpected happened. England scored 339 batting second in the game against the co-hosts India at Bangalore. West Indies' unsuccessful run-chase started from 58/1 at 6.5 over to 150/6 at the end of the 27^th over. This brings 92 runs from 21 overs which is just less than 5 an over but still gettable.

Aussies still on top

One has to decide himself whether it is the bad timing of the games or is it the wrong schedule of the tournament or finally is it luck that is seeing Australia victorious throughout even in this world cup despite them not being at their very best. Yesterday, as expected Australia won their pool A match against Canada by 7 wickets. Of course, one might not have been shocked for Australia winning the game but, they are yet to get into games involving decent teams like Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Unfortunately, the game against Sri Lanka got washed out in Colombo.

The three teams that would have given Australia a tough time were Sri Lanka, Pakistan and New Zealand. With New Zealand being a team that Australia would be most fascinated facing, the remaining two teams are indeed a threat to Australia for reasons too many. First, they are the co-hosts of the world cup and second, they have a spin bowling squad facing whom is the last thing the Aussies would ever want. Though Muralitharan is not at his bowling best, Aussies no doubt fear him the most. Muralitharan has made the Aussie batsmen concentrate like never before and never again.

However, a hint of an Aussie collapse is evident from the earlier games they have played in this tournament. They no doubt crashed New Zealand by finishing the game in just 34 overs and thrashing being handed out to Zimbabwe, Kenya and Canada. Against Canada, Aussies take the blame for allowing the minnow nation to cross the 200 run mark and they had to bowl 45 overs. Well, that is not a big issue but, having the same Shane Watson and Brad Haddin do the job for Australia needs a reconsideration. Ricky Ponting like Graeme Smith has been a total failure.

The Canadian batsmen were able to maintain a run-rate of 5.0 an over and end the innings at over 4.62 runs an over. Well, with the wait game seeming to come to an end, Australia will be facing Pakistan in their next encounter scheduled after finishing with all the minnows, New Zealand and escaping partly against Sri Lanka when rain played a spoilsport (though an Aussie victory cannot be ruled out completely). Had the Aussies been teamed in group B, they might have had a tough time with the Proteas and India still with England and the West Indies being an easy prey. But, it is not the time for ifs and buts.