Final.

[JASON]

Toss will be crucial , IMO.

The Aussies having already played at Bridgetown have an advantage in knowing how it plays.

But I am hoping on lady luck to see SL through along with the number of match winners in the Team all playing their part.

Umpiring will also be a crucial factor . I hope that doesn't spoil what could be an entertaining final and possibly the most entertaining match of this World Cup.
Aussies will have the Massive Fan advantage as well. I suspect they will outnumber SriLankans 10 to 1 at least at the ground.

It will be tough....and McGrath's last game and all that .....

 

[Turbinator]

Don't worry my Lankan brothers, I have some tissue papers left over from 2003 .

 

[Richard]

Homework going well As?

 

[bugssy]

will be a good tough game. sl hopes lay in murrali and there top 3 batsmen..... if they all fire australia will have a battle, but if australia dominate early like they have and get into a rythem then i think it will 3 for the aussies.

 

[shehanwije]

Yet in spite of that, he'll end his career with a fairly mediocre average in the grand scheme of things...

A point thats hardly known is that Sanath spent the first 5 years of his ODI caeer batting at 6 or 7 down...its only during the 95/96 B&H series that he was moved to the top of the order with more opps. to build an innings with more balls to face.

 

[shehanwije]

Will Aussies choke?

SL generally have had the better of head to head contests in ODI finals against Aus - despite being the clear under dog on each of the 5 occasions that they have played.

SL lead 3-2 in wins in finals played between the two countries:
B&H World Series 1995/96 - Australia won best of 3 finals 2-0
World Cup 1996 - Sri lanka won by 7 wkts
Singer Cup Final 1996 - Sri Lanka won by 50 runs
Aiwa Cup Final 1999 - Sri Lanka won by 8 wkts
VB series 2006 - Australia won best of 3 finals 2-1

So like the '96 Cup Finals, will Aussies choke again?

 

[Turbinator]

Homework going well As?

Haha yup, decided to take a break after a little while...

I am human you know .

 

[Prince EWS]

So like the '96 Cup Finals, will Aussies choke again?

That was nearly ten years ago. Any relevance it ever had has long evaporated.

 

[shehanwije]

That was nearly ten years ago. Any relevance it ever had has long evaporated.

Yes, it was ten years ago, it does not change the fact though - Aus lost an "already won" match after its heroics against WI in the semi...its still as relevant as RSA choking against Aus 8 years ago getting discussed over and over again....this low point from '96 in Aus cricket will be played out in the media and may also get into the Aus minds....this was the last time that Aus lost a "must win" game in the World Cup (choke?)

Aus are playing great cricket right now, but have not been tested in this cup (obviously not their fault). SL, whilst no longer the minnow it was in '96, will still be able to take in the surprise weapons in its bowling line-up after its tactics in the S8 round.

Aus are clear favourites to win the finals again, but like '96, the pressure may get to them...particularly if the Lankan bowling apply the blow torch early in the game.

 

[Prince EWS]

its still as relevant as RSA choking against Aus 8 years ago getting discussed over and over again

First, that in itself is completely irrelevant and I've said so elsewhere.
Secondly, they've continued to do the same since so there's a pattern to follow. Australia, on the other hand, have two consecutive world cups since.

this low point from '96 in Aus cricket will be played out in the media

I doubt it, because it's a silly point.

this was the last time that Aus lost a "must win" game in the World Cup (choke?)

Losing a must-win game isn''t necessarily a choke - in fact it rarely is. A choke involves throwing away a winning position. Also, the fact that it was nearly 10 years ago really says something!

Aus are clear favourites to win the finals again, but like '96, the pressure may get to them...particularly if the Lankan bowling apply the blow torch early in the game.

Again, I don't see why what happened in 1996 is at all relevant to now. Clutching at straws really. I'm not saying Australia will definitely will, but if they do happen to lose, it'll have nothing to do with the fact that they lost a game to Sri Lanka in 1996, nor the fact that the pressure has got to them. Gilchrist, Hayden, Ponting, Symonds, Hogg and McGrath have all been there before and didn't let "the pressure" get to them then - I don't see why it would be a problem now just because a completely different team that just-so-happened to be representing the same country supposedly had debatable issues with it 10 years ago.

 

[Burgey]

Yes, it was ten years ago, it does not change the fact though - Aus lost an "already won" match after its heroics against WI in the semi...its still as relevant as RSA choking against Aus 8 years ago getting discussed over and over again....this low point from '96 in Aus cricket will be played out in the media and may also get into the Aus minds....this was the last time that Aus lost a "must win" game in the World Cup (choke?)

Aus are playing great cricket right now, but have not been tested in this cup (obviously not their fault). SL, whilst no longer the minnow it was in '96, will still be able to take in the surprise weapons in its bowling line-up after its tactics in the S8 round.

Aus are clear favourites to win the finals again, but like '96, the pressure may get to them...particularly if the Lankan bowling apply the blow torch early in the game.

Malinga, who Australia have seen to some extent anyway, is the only surprise to the Aussies though.

You're drawing a long bow to say SL have a secret weapon because they rested Murali & Vaas when they played the Aussies in the Super 8s. If they win, it won't be because of any "secret bowling attack". It would be like Australia resting McGrath, who's played against SL for over 10 years in all forms of the game and bowled 100s if not 1000s of deliveries to them, then saying that because he didn't play vs them 2 weeks ago, they haven't seen him and he's a "secret weapon".

If they beat Australia, it will be because they are better on the day. It will hopefully be a good match between two evenly matched sides who are very familiar with the way each other play.

As for Australia having ghosts form previous chokes vs SL, I think the fact that they've won 22 or 23 straight games in WCs, gone undefeated in 27 or 28 matches at the same tournament, and won the last two WCs probably indicates that any scars which they may have are probbly well and truly healed. Oh, and the fact that they beat SL in the WC semi 4 years ago may be fresher in their minds than the 1996 final.

As was noted on the semi-final thread this morning - as soon as teams start talking the psycho-babble stuff you have your proof that their opponents are already inside their heads and messing with them.

Generally, but not always, the best team will win.

 

[Francis]

The two best teams made the final.

What's good about Sri Lanka facing Australia is that they have a nice contingent of match winners. People talk about NZ having more depth etc, but Sri Lanka have match winners. Australia are the safer bet, but a great day from Murali, Vass, Malinga, Jayawardene, Sangakkara or Jayasuria and the game could be theirs. Remember, all it took was a genius named de Silva in 1996 to do the trick and the cup was theirs.

Regardless of how crappy their world cup has been, the two best teams have made the final, and you can't ask for anything more than that!

 

[Lostman]

Australia's thumping win over SA, has meant that SL odds for the final are at 2/1. PERFECT!!!!
Iam going to put all the money I have won during the WC and put it on SL. So best case scenario would be that by Saturday night I would be $500 richer and drunk, and worst case scenario would be that Iam only drunk.

If you think about it, it is really a win win

 

[Prince EWS]

The two best teams made the final.

What's good about Sri Lanka facing Australia is that they have a nice contingent of match winners. People talk about NZ having more depth etc, but Sri Lanka have match winners. Australia are the safer bet, but a great day from Murali, Vass, Malinga, Jayawardene, Sangakkara or Jayasuria and the game could be theirs. Remember, all it took was a genius named de Silva in 1996 to do the trick and the cup was theirs.

Regardless of how crappy their world cup has been, the two best teams have made the final, and you can't ask for anything more than that!

I actually don't think the two best teams made the final, TBH. The two best-performing teams of this World Cup made the final for sure, but I still maintain that South Africa are a better side than Sri Lanka.

And no JASON, that does not mean I'm South African!

 

[Davey]

It all comes down to how Bracken bowls his opening spells, we dont play swing very well so he has the potential to screw us over badly......

 

[Anil]

Aus are playing great cricket right now, but have not been tested in this cup (obviously not their fault). SL, whilst no longer the minnow it was in '96, will still be able to take in the surprise weapons in its bowling line-up after its tactics in the S8 round.

what do you mean, australia have not been tested? it's not as if all their opponents rolled over and played dead, they have been so ruthlessly dominant and that much better than every other team thus far and just have not allowed any team to test them, that's the truth....and one other thing, sri lanka was far from a minnow in '96.....

 

[Evermind]

I always put my money on the team I dislike.

I'm-a put all my money on Australia - that way, if they win, I feel miserable but I win money, so it's not so bad, and if they lose I feel good but lose money so in the end it's WIN-WIN too!

 

[shehanwije]

what do you mean, australia have not been tested? it's not as if all their opponents rolled over and played dead, they have been so ruthlessly dominant and that much better than every other team thus far and just have not allowed any team to test them, that's the truth....and one other thing, sri lanka was far from a minnow in '96.....

what do you mean, australia have not been tested? I just mean just that....The closet this Aus team came to facing some pressure was - RSA 210/1 in 30 overs in R1, and then again SL 167/3 in S8...on both occasions, Aus took quick wickets to regain the dominance and was not really tested.

"sri lanka was far from a minnow in '96"...not what I recollect in the Aus press at that time...particular in the Thurs to Sat period of saturated publicity for the Aus cricket team after the heart stopping semi against the Windies.

Cricket also dissappared so fast from the Aus media after the '96 finals that it was amusing - almost like the cup finals never took place. Fortunately, the footy season got into swing to take the minds off the cricket. Even to this day, almost all the Aus cricketers involved in that '96 final have an unbelievable level of bitterness in this loss to the Lankans as they were def. a minnow at the time (gleaned from the numerous autobiographies of those involved, also both Mcgrath and Warne recently named this loss as one of their worst).

Re live the experience. Refer to the ABC news clip at that time - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LSqE9rr2uY

 

[SJS]

Australia to win in the final and Matty Hayden to walk away with the MOS [Man of the series] award.

Both my labradors also say the same thing

 

[pup11]

As far as Aussies choking in the 96 WC final, i won't say that they choked in that game they were just unlucky, Aussies had a good total of 250 on board but in the 2nd innings there was lot of dew which made the ball wet, which completly killed Aussie chances of winning. Sri lanka cruised through to a victory due to that.



P.S: SJS, it seriously about time that you cut the crap.