Final.

[Matt79]

Wow - Maharoof, Maharoof, Maharoof is on fire.

 

[Athlai]

Maharoof expected to play final

Bout time.

 

[Perm]

Maharoof expected to play final

Roofers!

 

[social]

Maharoof expected to play final

3rd seamer is a really weak point for SL - Maharoof is a pretty ordinary bowler IMO

 

[Mahindinho]

3rd seamer is a really weak point for SL - Maharoof is a pretty ordinary bowler IMO

Yeah, but did you _see_ what happened to Fernando the other day?!

He absolutely cracked under pressure...although the way Koertzen handled it probably didn't help. If it was a player like Murali or Vaas, no worries -- they'd sort it out next match. But Fernando's got a history of problems with his run-up...and there's absolutely no way that SL would beat the Aussies with a misfiring 3rd seamer.

So, Maharoof's the better bet. I still think we might need his batting, too.

 

[Mahindinho]

No, the truth is, the best 4 teams reached the semis, the best 2 played each other so can't both make the final.

Rankings are all well and good, but I seriously think SA have been over-rated thanks to their recent home series...while SL have been under-rated thanks to their smashing in India last year.

It'd be interesting to see what the ranking points gained in the last 12 months would be like -- SL's tour of England was their turning point, and they've looked a completely different side ever since.

 

[Anil]

Obviously you missed my prior response - repoduced below. We are more in agreement than you think as Aus can only play the situation that is presented to them.

i didn't miss it, i was responding to it, none of those situations were "presented" to them, they forced them with their superior performance, got it?

 

[Langeveldt]

Rankings are all well and good, but I seriously think SA have been over-rated thanks to their recent home series.

Sorry, but are wins against Australia, England, India and Pakistan not worth being ranked above them?

 

[silentstriker]

Does it really matter? Being second best is merely being the first amongst the losers.

 

[Prince EWS]

Does it really matter? Being second best is merely being the first amongst the losers.

Which is better than being the first among the losers to the first among the losers (AKA third).

 

[four_or_six]

Everyone's saying it's about the big player match-ups... McGrath v Jayasuria, Ponting v Murali. But I'm liking this one: Watson v Maharoof.

If either team is going to get a really big score, surely these are the two bowlers that have to travel. And if either team loses a few early wickets these are two talented young batsmen who could conceivably do something special.

What does anyone think? And who would you fancy to come out on top?

 

[Turbinator]

Lol at this thread tbh, didn't know a bunch of well respected members would argue like little girls .

Chill guys .

 

[silentstriker]

Which is better than being the first among the losers to the first among the losers (AKA third).

I stop counting at the first loser tbh.

 

[marc71178]

It'd be interesting to see what the ranking points gained in the last 12 months would be like -- SL's tour of England was their turning point, and they've looked a completely different side ever since.

Not sure if it's possible to get it to that level of detail, but the table at 30 April 2006 was:

1  	Australia  	132
2 	South Africa 	119
3 	India 		116
4 	Pakistan 	114
5 	New Zealand 	113
6 	Sri Lanka 	105
7 	England 	103
8 	West Indies 	 90
9 	Zimbabwe 	 41
10 	Bangladesh 	 23
11 	Kenya 		  7

So SA have gone from 119 to 125 and SL 105 to 112 - similar increases if not the SA being a bigger one because of the starting point...

 

[legglancer12]

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

Well Average alone does not does not tell the whole story. Its not just the runs one makes, but how they are made. Not many players in this world has dominated & Intimidated bowlers like Sanath. So compare the Average with his Strike Rate and you might get an Idea !

 

[shehanwije]

Aus Players from '96 - Mental Scarring?

"Pigeon homes in on Jayasuriya" is the cricket headline in today's Sydney Morning Herald. "Glenn McGrath has declared the setting perfect for a third consecutive World Cup and a final crack at his old rival Sanath Jayasuriya" says Chloe Saltau ( http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/...-final-showdown/2007/04/26/1177459881339.html)

Saltua is Australia's answer to Sri Lanka's Elmo (probably two of the worst cricket journos)...he generally is off the mark and even cant get his facts correct - "his arm was broken by a rising Brett Lee delivery at the 2003 World Cup" When did this happen?

In another article in the same paper, Tim Neilson (Aus coach in waiting) says "I always find it funny when a team feels it has to go out there and defend itself against talk that they are mentally scarred. From my experience, if you don't bring things up, you're probably not worried about them. But if you feel the need to go out there and make all sorts of statements and denials, then you probably are in a bit of trouble." (Full article at: http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/...as-says-nielsen/2007/04/26/1177459881336.html)

With this is mind it interesting to see how much potential mental scarring his players (survivors from the '96) are now going thru.

Ricky Ponting, the other Australian survivor of that game, exuded confidence before the final, and seized another opportunity to question Sri Lanka's decision to rest their best bowlers, Muttiah Muralitharan, Chaminda Vaas and Lasith Malinga, for their recent Super Eights game "It's actually going to be quite interesting now coming up against them after they rested a few players last game. I thought they had a chance to make a bit of a statement against us in that last game and they chose not to," Ponting said.

"The fact I have decided to retire is probably one of the reasons why I'm bowling so well. There's no pressure, no fear, no anything," said McGrath

Some mental scarring perhaps...as described by their own coach?

 

[age_master]

lol 11 years is a long time, Sri Lanka would only have 3 players left from that game too - you would also have to sonsider that Sri Lanka haven't been anywhere near that good since then and Australia has beaten everyone since then.

 

[adharcric]

Pasag and JASON.

 

[legglancer12]

Intelligent argument that one

look who's talking ?

 

[shehanwije]

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?

lol 11 years is a long time, Sri Lanka would only have 3 players left from that game too - you would also have to sonsider that Sri Lanka haven't been anywhere near that good since then and Australia has beaten everyone since then.

Have a look above at one of my prior posts - in finals between Aus-SL, SL lead 3-2....Is it the Aussies turn to choke?