ICC Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka

[Anoop]

ok.. this contract thing is getting irritating.. :rolleyes:

so who will clash in the finals?

Australia is a surety..
If India gets past England, then they have a good chance, if not then it will be South Africa vs Australia.

 

[marc71178]

ICC acted wrong in publicizing it.They can do their own investigation and its good that they are acting pro-actively, but what was the purpose of giving it media exposure ?

They didn't publicise it - Tony Greig did.

Once it came out they could hardly deny it - would have made them look even more stupid than they do already!

 

[marc71178]

Ofcourse that was stupid BUT u can't just start investigation coz of some soft dismisals?

But they're not investigating anything. How many times do we have to say that?

 

[marc71178]

Read This!


Omar Kureishi

Even, as we slam our cricket team, spare a thought for the brilliant cricket that Sri Lanka played, this was a team that seemed down and out on its tour of England, almost entirely because Muttiah Muralitharan was unfit. It re-grouped and with the wizard off-spinner available, it re-discovered its self-belief. It won the tournament in Morocco in style, disposing of both Pakistan and South Africa.

Before its home crowd, Sri Lanka started as favourites to beat Pakistan. Why then are we so surprised that Pakistan lost? But more than surprised, we are angry.

We have got quite used to believing that the Pakistan team can only lose if there is internal bickering or that the bookies have got to it. We rarely give any credit to our opponents. Sanath Jayasuriya is one of the best batsmen in the world and when he fires, Sri Lanka usually wins. Muralitharan is the best spinner in the world, in both versions of the game. If there is such a person as a match-winner in this team game, it is he. It was our bad luck that both were at the top of their game and throw in Aravinda de Silva and our cup of grief was full.

But when a team is down on its luck, the rub of the green is not with it. I thought that Jayasuriya was caught behind off Wasim Akram early in his innings and Aravinda was plumb out, leg-before. The umpire who had not hesitated to go to the third umpire in the case of Shoaib Malik, chose not to use technology in this case. But one has to accept this in cricket as the Sri Lankans had to accept that Saeed Anwar got two lives before he was finally out.

But having said all this, there seems to be little doubt that something is not right with the team. From its body-language, it gives the impression that the players are not enjoying their cricket.


I really can't see what the grievances can be. It is too simplistic to say that there is feuding in the team. There has to be some reason for in-fighting. The team started to unravel in Morocco and that is when the team management should have stepped in and sorted things out.

I don't think it is fair to pin-point or target individuals for what, prima facie, is a collective failure. In management, areas of responsibility and authority should be clearly spelt out.

The captain should be in charge of them on the field, the coach should run the nets and even the captain should be subservient to him in this area. If, so instance, Yusuf Youhana had refused to appear at the nets, it should have been the coach who should have been the disciplining authority. And the manager should be above all this. Somewhere, I feel there has been either an overlapping or a dereliction. It is not just the team that should get its act together but the management as well.

There are 'weak' areas in the team. The batting has not clicked but the main reason is that Inzamam has not been available. This is why the batting order has not been stable. Pakistan is not like Australia. There are no alternatives available. Then there was the wholly avoidable row with Yousuf Youhana. The younger players seem to have got caught in the cross-fire and I can't help feeling that Shahid Afridi is getting too much advice and Imran Nazir not enough or else he wouldn't be making the same mistake over and over again.

It didn't seem right that Saeed Anwar having batted should have been allowed to skip fielding and Imran Nazir brought in to field for him. Jayasuriya did appear to bring this to the notice of the umpires who too no notice. Saeed Anwar is not among the fleetest of fielders and he was replaced by the best fielder in the team.

Judging by media reports, the ICC's Anti-Corruption Unit seems to be very busy making sure that the players do not make any contact of any sort with what are deemed to be unauthorised persons. There are shades of Peter Sellers as Inspector Closseau in the Pink Panther films. Even girl cricket fans, the groupies who attach themselves to cricket teams are being watched and questioned. Big Brother seems to be watching closely over the players and keeping the bookies at bay.

This is supposed to be a rehearsal for the World Cup. This must be tough on the players. Did they bring this sort of vigilance on themselves? It seems to be a validation of the saying that when two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.

Does the ICC Anti-Corruption Unit have the legal right to carry out vigilance in the hotels of the teams? Is this not an invasion of privacy of the hotel guests? The ICC Anti-Corruption Unit should be going after the bookies and by now, it should have got a good idea of who they are. Unless, it is trying to justify its existence.

One wishes the ICC would have shown the same vigilance in drawing up the contracts with the players instead of climbing down when challenged by the Indian players.

Where does this come from out of interest?

 

[marc71178]

Remember the 99 WC semis, Zulu didn't even moved yet Donald kept running untill he reached the other end, that runout costs SA the final birth, i guess ACU should investigate that runout.

If I remember rightly, Donald said he didn't hear the call until it was too late to turn around.

Actually that moment of bottling it is one of the reason why I don't think SA would have scored the runs in the now infamous (on Cricketweb) 1992 Semi Final

 

[Neil Pickup]

Back to the Trophy...

England were looking like getting 300 up vs Zimbabwe but their middle order has collapsed.

243/5 off 42.5, Shah 9*, Stewart 1*, to bat Cork, Caddick, Snape and Hoggard :rolleyes:

Was looking like 300+ before Nasser and Tresco got out.. now 280 max.

 

[anzac]

ok so my predictions for a 300 score is still on for Aus V Bangladesh...England 8/298 & Corky out first ball was it LE????????

anyone any comment re my early post re the '1 bouncer' rule ??????

:P

 

[Neil Pickup]

Nearly made it :P

However Zimbabwe don't appear to be looking too much in the chase..

12/1 off 6 overs. Hoggard 3-1-5-1

Zimbabwe needing 287 off 42 (2 deducted - run rate ) - that's 6.83 an over.

All down to the big one on the 22nd!

 

[Gotchya]

All down to the big one on the 22nd!

Do i sense a hint of optimism ? :P

[Edited on 9/18/02 by Gotchya]

 

[Neil Pickup]

Hoggard now has 3-18 off 8. Not bad for someone who can't bowl in one-day cricket..

And Zimbabwe need 243 off 31.2 (7.76). Andy Flower's going to have to go some here!

 

[Neil Pickup]

Now 227 off 27.2 (8.30). However...

19.6 Hoggard to A Flower, FOUR, no slip, so the last ball of Matthew Hoggard's 10 overs goes for the first boundary off him, Flower edging to where first slip would have been and running away to third man.

Why not even one slip?! England are/were hugely on top in the RR stakes so surely one attacking fielder wouldn't be a tactical loss?!

 

[Anil]

Zim will probably finish at around 200. When is the India-England match?

 

[Rich2001]

Zim will probably finish at around 200. When is the India-England match?

Not a bad guess mate

England have just wrapped up a 108 run victory against Zimbabwe, but not before H.Streak reached his 50 (58).

Zimbabawe managed just 190/9 in reply to England's massive innsings of 298/8.

All of English bowlers bowled well with Hoggard 10 - 1 - 25 - 3 the star and Irani 10 - 0 - 37 - 4 ripping the middle of the Zimbabwe batting order out, inculding the prize wicket of A.Flower for 44.

And for the other question England vs India is on Sun 22 September 2002 @ Premadasa

 

[Gotchya]

The Decider :

22nd Spetember

Its the big match so far for the tournament others have been pretty predictable and tame lets see what we have in store, Do you think the itenarary was deliberate ? (Ind vs Zimb) -> (Eng Vs Zimb) and then Eng vs India.

 

[marc71178]

And the forum's going to down for the build-up to it!

!

 

[basil]

But they're not investigating anything. How many times do we have to say that?

For ur kind information, the ICC have completed their investigation and came to the conclusion that their wasn't any MF going on.

:rolleyes:

 

[BengalCat]

The match to watch out for will be India vs England, India have a psychological advantage because they defeated England in the last match that was played in Eng.

This match might be a thriller :cheesy:

 

[Neil Pickup]

It could well be one of the best games of the Tournament.

England's big(ish) win over Zimbabwe will give them (especially Hoggard) confidence boosts.

I reckon whoever wins the toss will bat first and stand a very good chance of winning, given how slow the Premadasa is in the first place, and gets slower under lights. I'm surprised Corky didn't make more of an impact (or any..) against Zimbabwe, maybe he's for the chop against India.

 

[aussie_beater]

I reckon whoever wins the toss will bat first and stand a very good chance of winning, given how slow the Premadasa is in the first place, and gets slower under lights. I'm surprised Corky didn't make more of an impact (or any..) against Zimbabwe, maybe he's for the chop against India.

Yes, I agree with that assesment.Premadasa at night can get a little dewy like any other place in the subcontinent in these months and specially if England bowls second, India can get into trouble with England's seamers specially Hoggard who gave a fine performance today.

 

[marc71178]

But they're not investigating anything. How many times do we have to say that?

For ur kind information, the ICC have completed their investigation and came to the conclusion that their wasn't any MF going on.

:rolleyes:

For your kind information, there was never any real investigation going on, so how can it have conluded if it didn't exist? They just wanted EVERY tape from the ICC Tournament.

No-one ever really thought anything dodgy was going on.