WAQAS119
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
- Messages
- 5,426
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Zaki bhai I was expecting the same reaction from Indian media. Yeh chehrai daish kai mujrim hain.
lol, thank GOD they didn't call them 'AATANWADI'.
ICC 2010 Twenty20 World Cup THREAD
- Thread starter EagleEyes
- Start date
lol, thank GOD they didn't call them 'AATANWADI'.
S.U.R.B.
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 2,741
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
Both Asif and sami are out of form,So Afridi will not induct them in the playing eleven.I guess you missed the term "mere spectators".
Best of luck to Afridi ,it's not that easy as it was last year.But i believe we can do it now.
Best of luck to Afridi ,it's not that easy as it was last year.But i believe we can do it now.
Areesh
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2010
- Messages
- 45,157
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
lol, thank GOD they didn't call them 'AATANWADI'.
Yup and thanks God they didn't call them ISI agent. Spying for Pakistan.
bc040400065
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 1,092
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
English Finally Master a Game They Invented
By HUW RICHARDS
Published: May 12, 2010
Coming up with great inventions, then seeing others make better use of them, is a frequent British experience, in business as much as in sports. Rarely, though, has the process been as rapid as in Twenty20 cricket.
English officials devised the games noisy infant form as recently as 2003. Within four years, India had claimed the first-ever world title. A year more and the Indians had launched their Premier League, which proved much more effective than English competitions at doing what the new format was designed to do: finding new fans and making money.
This week, though, the empire has struck back and made a serious bid to reclaim its own game. Englands cricketers dominated their group in the Super Eight stage of the world Twenty20 tournament, being played in the West Indies.
England was the first team to qualify for the final four, where it will play Sri Lanka in St. Lucia on Thursday. Australia meets Pakistan in the other semifinal on Friday. The two winners advance to the final in Barbados on Sunday.
England was unimpressive in the pool stage, progressing only after a rainout against junior nation Ireland. It qualified by virtue of losing to the host, West Indies the other team in the group by a smaller margin than did the Irish.
Its Super Eight opponents South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan might have thought England was simply making up the numbers. Instead, England swept through its three matches, winning them all with something to spare while its opponents were falling over each other. Each of the others won one match and lost two, allowing Pakistan to scrape through because it had a better comparative run rate.
England has had significant help from imported talent. South African-born Kevin Pietersen played decisive innings against his native nation and Pakistan before returning to England for the birth of his first son. He plans to be back for the semifinal.
Michael Lumb and Craig Kieswetter, the two opening batsmen, who were also both born in South Africa, ensured that each innings had a rapid start. Still more important was Eoin Morgan, an Irishman, who has contributed quick runs to almost every innings.
Yet if anyone personifies this unexpected success, it is the English-born Michael Yardy, a surprise choice for the squad. Yardy is more batsman than bowler when he plays for his English county, Sussex, which he captains. Yet in the West Indies, he has been well down the order and has hardly batted. The contribution has come from his well-controlled slow bowling and athletic fielding.
England goes into the next few days with high hopes of winning its first-ever significant international cricket title. There are, though, formidable obstacles in its way.
Sri Lanka, which qualified when Chamara Kapugedara struck the final ball of its match against India for six runs, has not been the force it was when reaching the final of the last World Twenty20 in England last year. Its three Ms battery of unorthodox bowlers has been much less effective. Its main contributor has been the batsman Mahela Jayawardene. In a format that makes it difficult to record large scores, he played consecutive innings of 100, 98 not out and 81. Still more impressive was the manner in which he scored, with stylishly elegant stroke play relying on timing and placement rather than the vicious swings of the bat popular in this format.
Should England get past Sri Lanka on Thursday, it is likely to face something still more formidable in the final Sunday.
Australia has looked terrific from the start, winning all five of its matches comfortably. Its dominance has echoes of the way it won the last two World Cups, played in the 50-over format.
Pakistan has won only two matches out of five. Yet so long as it is still there, opponents will fear Pakistan. It is the current champion and was the runner-up in the first World Twenty20 in 2007. It has an unmatched capacity for raising its game for the big occasion.
Pakistan will feel much happier than South Africa, which again fell short on the big stage, or India which won in 2007 when it knew or cared little about Twenty20, but has failed twice since its Premier League made it the international center for the format.
CRICKET - English Finally Master a Game They Invented - NYTimes.com
By HUW RICHARDS
Published: May 12, 2010
Coming up with great inventions, then seeing others make better use of them, is a frequent British experience, in business as much as in sports. Rarely, though, has the process been as rapid as in Twenty20 cricket.
English officials devised the games noisy infant form as recently as 2003. Within four years, India had claimed the first-ever world title. A year more and the Indians had launched their Premier League, which proved much more effective than English competitions at doing what the new format was designed to do: finding new fans and making money.
This week, though, the empire has struck back and made a serious bid to reclaim its own game. Englands cricketers dominated their group in the Super Eight stage of the world Twenty20 tournament, being played in the West Indies.
England was the first team to qualify for the final four, where it will play Sri Lanka in St. Lucia on Thursday. Australia meets Pakistan in the other semifinal on Friday. The two winners advance to the final in Barbados on Sunday.
England was unimpressive in the pool stage, progressing only after a rainout against junior nation Ireland. It qualified by virtue of losing to the host, West Indies the other team in the group by a smaller margin than did the Irish.
Its Super Eight opponents South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan might have thought England was simply making up the numbers. Instead, England swept through its three matches, winning them all with something to spare while its opponents were falling over each other. Each of the others won one match and lost two, allowing Pakistan to scrape through because it had a better comparative run rate.
England has had significant help from imported talent. South African-born Kevin Pietersen played decisive innings against his native nation and Pakistan before returning to England for the birth of his first son. He plans to be back for the semifinal.
Michael Lumb and Craig Kieswetter, the two opening batsmen, who were also both born in South Africa, ensured that each innings had a rapid start. Still more important was Eoin Morgan, an Irishman, who has contributed quick runs to almost every innings.
Yet if anyone personifies this unexpected success, it is the English-born Michael Yardy, a surprise choice for the squad. Yardy is more batsman than bowler when he plays for his English county, Sussex, which he captains. Yet in the West Indies, he has been well down the order and has hardly batted. The contribution has come from his well-controlled slow bowling and athletic fielding.
England goes into the next few days with high hopes of winning its first-ever significant international cricket title. There are, though, formidable obstacles in its way.
Sri Lanka, which qualified when Chamara Kapugedara struck the final ball of its match against India for six runs, has not been the force it was when reaching the final of the last World Twenty20 in England last year. Its three Ms battery of unorthodox bowlers has been much less effective. Its main contributor has been the batsman Mahela Jayawardene. In a format that makes it difficult to record large scores, he played consecutive innings of 100, 98 not out and 81. Still more impressive was the manner in which he scored, with stylishly elegant stroke play relying on timing and placement rather than the vicious swings of the bat popular in this format.
Should England get past Sri Lanka on Thursday, it is likely to face something still more formidable in the final Sunday.
Australia has looked terrific from the start, winning all five of its matches comfortably. Its dominance has echoes of the way it won the last two World Cups, played in the 50-over format.
Pakistan has won only two matches out of five. Yet so long as it is still there, opponents will fear Pakistan. It is the current champion and was the runner-up in the first World Twenty20 in 2007. It has an unmatched capacity for raising its game for the big occasion.
Pakistan will feel much happier than South Africa, which again fell short on the big stage, or India which won in 2007 when it knew or cared little about Twenty20, but has failed twice since its Premier League made it the international center for the format.
CRICKET - English Finally Master a Game They Invented - NYTimes.com
bc040400065
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 1,092
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Who will win the World Twenty20?
So, we're down to England, Sri Lanka, Australia and Pakistan, and each of the four have legitimate claims to be a contender
The last time I asked this question, the answer was as uncertain as the conversation of the seriously stoned taxi driver who took drove me to the Kensington Oval last Friday afternoon. Eight months ago the knock-out rounds were too close to call, each of the four surviving teams having a claim to be favourites for the title. This time around the world cup has one clear contender, Australia.
Using Roger Moore's toupee-era Bond films as a point of reference is a habit I normally try to keep to my inner monologue, so excuse me when I say that Australia remind the Spin of Max Zorin screaming "More! More power! More!" in the closing scenes of a View To A Kill.
More power. The Australians have three 90mph fast bowlers, with the added advantage that two of them are left-armers. Dirk Nannes is the best Twenty20 quick left in the competition. He is complemented by the wayward but dangerous Shaun Tait and, as an absurdly good first change, Mitchell Johnson. The batting is just as muscular. Michael Clarke rightly reckons that in Shane Watson and David Warner he has the best opening pair in the competition. They are swaggering pair of bullies, strutting around the wicket like jocks in a high school locker room, dumping opposition bowlers over the boundary as though they were depositing nerds head-first into the toilet. David Hussey and Cameron White loom over their shoulders as intimidating back-up.
Naturally enough both Sri Lanka and West Indies decided to attack the
leg-spin of Steve Smith. He turns the ball just enough, and has responded by taking five wickets for 32 runs in his last eight overs. With Hussey and Clarke providing slow-left-arm and off-spin variation, spin is hardly a weak link in the chain.
If there is a vulnerability, it is that the top-order have collapsed twice in five matches, to 65 for six against Bangladesh and 67 for five against Sri Lanka, both stumbles coming when batting first trying to attack spinners. So their top-order can fall apart. But Mike Hussey is a sea-wall at six and both times the waves of attack broke on him and foundered.
Their opposition in the semi-final, Pakistan have won only two of their five games and still made it through. At times they have been terrible, especially in the field. Shahid Afridi has been too burdened by the challenges of captaincy to play with his characteristic Dumas Père abandon. Their batting has been propped up by Salman Butt, who has averaged 47 in the tournament while playing with neat orthodoxy. He has had just a little support from the Akmal brothers. In Saeed Ajmal they have one of the finest Twenty20 spin-bowlers going, but otherwise their attack has been cobbled together from part-time contributions. Mohammad Aamer is the only quick to have played all five matches. He has five wickets at 23 runs each, but three of them came in a single over against Australia.
And yet, no one who knows the old clichés will count Pakistan out yet, unpredictable as they are. In 2009 they also scraped through the early stages before coming up against another power-house team in the semis, South Africa, who they choked with spin. So history provides a little hope. Some will also draw heart from the fact they play Australia on the slower wicket at St Lucia rather than the rapid one on Barbados, but the two teams have already played here at the Beasejour, and Pakistan got thumped. No team is quicker to switch on when the mood takes them, but on form they have a slender chance.
England's consistency has surprised everyone except themselves. Critics still have their doubts, bred by years of disappointment, but the team have a hard-edge of genuine self-confidence. The untried combination of Michael Lumb and Craig Kieswetter are just about working at the top of the order, though England are the only team in the semis where neither opener has passed fifty. In fact, in his 16 T20 innings since he joined Rajasthan, Lumb has passed 25 eight times, and 50 only once. Kieswetter has hit more sixes than anyone else in the team, but is still scoring slower than anyone except Paul Colingwood, over-reliant as he is on big shots rather than quick singles. But England are happy to risk both men in return for the reward of a quick kick-start.
The real reason for their success though is the form of Kevin Pietersen and Eoin Morgan in the middle order. Morgan has failed only once, against Pakistan. He has ice for blood. Pietersen's evisceration of Dale Steyn was one of the moments of the tournament. If he returns to the team in anything like the mood he left, he could bat England to the title single-handed.
They still have a couple of cards up their sleeve when it comes to bowing, though they are jacks rather than aces. Collingwood and Luke Wright have delivered only six balls between them. That is testament to how well the front five men of the attack have performed. The Spin wondered if England's seam bowlers had enough devil about them to survive, and the answer is that they do. Tim Bresnan has been outstanding, his stock ball attacking the ribs and robbing the batsmen of width. Ryan Sidebottom's line has been as tight as his taste in T-shirts. Between the spinners, Graeme Swann takes wickets and Mike Yardy chokes off runs. England, then, have clear limitations. The question is whether or not they can keep winning regardless.
More than any of the others Sri Lanka made it through off the back of one man's outstanding individual form. But after a run of 81, 100 and 98 not out the imperious Mahela Jaywardene has, understandably, started to flag. His batting has been the string holding the team's trousers up: the collapse against Australia on Sunday was an ugly example of just how embarrassed they could have been without his contribution. Against India the others picked up some of the slack. Kumar Sangakkara is starting to tick and the way in which Angelo Mathews clicked into form is ominous for England, as he can beat them with both bat and ball. Still, with Ajantha Mendis dropped and Muttiah Muralitharan out injured, the Lankan's potent spin-combination has been sent to the wreckers. In their absence the team have used 11 different bowlers, more than anyone else in the tournament. Only Lasith Malinga has reached five wickets, and that has taken him five matches.
All of which would seem to suggest that, unless Pakistan catch alight or Jayawardene scores big, the likeliest final is England v Australia. There is surely no need to explain to you which way my heart and head are split over who might win that.
This is an excerpt from the Spin, guardian.co.uk/sport's free cricket email.
The Spin | Who will win the World Twenty20? | Andy Bull | Sport | guardian.co.uk
So, we're down to England, Sri Lanka, Australia and Pakistan, and each of the four have legitimate claims to be a contender
The last time I asked this question, the answer was as uncertain as the conversation of the seriously stoned taxi driver who took drove me to the Kensington Oval last Friday afternoon. Eight months ago the knock-out rounds were too close to call, each of the four surviving teams having a claim to be favourites for the title. This time around the world cup has one clear contender, Australia.
Using Roger Moore's toupee-era Bond films as a point of reference is a habit I normally try to keep to my inner monologue, so excuse me when I say that Australia remind the Spin of Max Zorin screaming "More! More power! More!" in the closing scenes of a View To A Kill.
More power. The Australians have three 90mph fast bowlers, with the added advantage that two of them are left-armers. Dirk Nannes is the best Twenty20 quick left in the competition. He is complemented by the wayward but dangerous Shaun Tait and, as an absurdly good first change, Mitchell Johnson. The batting is just as muscular. Michael Clarke rightly reckons that in Shane Watson and David Warner he has the best opening pair in the competition. They are swaggering pair of bullies, strutting around the wicket like jocks in a high school locker room, dumping opposition bowlers over the boundary as though they were depositing nerds head-first into the toilet. David Hussey and Cameron White loom over their shoulders as intimidating back-up.
Naturally enough both Sri Lanka and West Indies decided to attack the
leg-spin of Steve Smith. He turns the ball just enough, and has responded by taking five wickets for 32 runs in his last eight overs. With Hussey and Clarke providing slow-left-arm and off-spin variation, spin is hardly a weak link in the chain.
If there is a vulnerability, it is that the top-order have collapsed twice in five matches, to 65 for six against Bangladesh and 67 for five against Sri Lanka, both stumbles coming when batting first trying to attack spinners. So their top-order can fall apart. But Mike Hussey is a sea-wall at six and both times the waves of attack broke on him and foundered.
Their opposition in the semi-final, Pakistan have won only two of their five games and still made it through. At times they have been terrible, especially in the field. Shahid Afridi has been too burdened by the challenges of captaincy to play with his characteristic Dumas Père abandon. Their batting has been propped up by Salman Butt, who has averaged 47 in the tournament while playing with neat orthodoxy. He has had just a little support from the Akmal brothers. In Saeed Ajmal they have one of the finest Twenty20 spin-bowlers going, but otherwise their attack has been cobbled together from part-time contributions. Mohammad Aamer is the only quick to have played all five matches. He has five wickets at 23 runs each, but three of them came in a single over against Australia.
And yet, no one who knows the old clichés will count Pakistan out yet, unpredictable as they are. In 2009 they also scraped through the early stages before coming up against another power-house team in the semis, South Africa, who they choked with spin. So history provides a little hope. Some will also draw heart from the fact they play Australia on the slower wicket at St Lucia rather than the rapid one on Barbados, but the two teams have already played here at the Beasejour, and Pakistan got thumped. No team is quicker to switch on when the mood takes them, but on form they have a slender chance.
England's consistency has surprised everyone except themselves. Critics still have their doubts, bred by years of disappointment, but the team have a hard-edge of genuine self-confidence. The untried combination of Michael Lumb and Craig Kieswetter are just about working at the top of the order, though England are the only team in the semis where neither opener has passed fifty. In fact, in his 16 T20 innings since he joined Rajasthan, Lumb has passed 25 eight times, and 50 only once. Kieswetter has hit more sixes than anyone else in the team, but is still scoring slower than anyone except Paul Colingwood, over-reliant as he is on big shots rather than quick singles. But England are happy to risk both men in return for the reward of a quick kick-start.
The real reason for their success though is the form of Kevin Pietersen and Eoin Morgan in the middle order. Morgan has failed only once, against Pakistan. He has ice for blood. Pietersen's evisceration of Dale Steyn was one of the moments of the tournament. If he returns to the team in anything like the mood he left, he could bat England to the title single-handed.
They still have a couple of cards up their sleeve when it comes to bowing, though they are jacks rather than aces. Collingwood and Luke Wright have delivered only six balls between them. That is testament to how well the front five men of the attack have performed. The Spin wondered if England's seam bowlers had enough devil about them to survive, and the answer is that they do. Tim Bresnan has been outstanding, his stock ball attacking the ribs and robbing the batsmen of width. Ryan Sidebottom's line has been as tight as his taste in T-shirts. Between the spinners, Graeme Swann takes wickets and Mike Yardy chokes off runs. England, then, have clear limitations. The question is whether or not they can keep winning regardless.
More than any of the others Sri Lanka made it through off the back of one man's outstanding individual form. But after a run of 81, 100 and 98 not out the imperious Mahela Jaywardene has, understandably, started to flag. His batting has been the string holding the team's trousers up: the collapse against Australia on Sunday was an ugly example of just how embarrassed they could have been without his contribution. Against India the others picked up some of the slack. Kumar Sangakkara is starting to tick and the way in which Angelo Mathews clicked into form is ominous for England, as he can beat them with both bat and ball. Still, with Ajantha Mendis dropped and Muttiah Muralitharan out injured, the Lankan's potent spin-combination has been sent to the wreckers. In their absence the team have used 11 different bowlers, more than anyone else in the tournament. Only Lasith Malinga has reached five wickets, and that has taken him five matches.
All of which would seem to suggest that, unless Pakistan catch alight or Jayawardene scores big, the likeliest final is England v Australia. There is surely no need to explain to you which way my heart and head are split over who might win that.
This is an excerpt from the Spin, guardian.co.uk/sport's free cricket email.
The Spin | Who will win the World Twenty20? | Andy Bull | Sport | guardian.co.uk
bc040400065
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 1,092
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Pakistan's mid-over run-fest, and England's alarming audacity
Date: 10 May, 2010 (Monday)
Ibrahim Moiz
21st match, Pakistan v South Africa at Gros Islet: Their most convincing performance of the tournament ended Pakistan's three-loss slide, and opened up a highly unlikely road to the semifinals. Most refreshing for Pakistan will be the resilience and efficiency displayed in this victory, a factor missing from their previous matches this year.
The key was a remarkable middle-over surge. When the South African pace attack had restricted the top order to 23 for 3 in seven overs, it seemed a matter of time before Pakistan would take the flight home. But a quite remarkable burst of Akmal hitting, only encouraged by the onset of Roelof van der Merwe, rescued the innings, and captain Shahid Afridi finally came out of his drought to spank 30 in 18 balls. Atypically, both Kamran and Umar were refreshingly positive, accelerating from the innings' slow start as 101 runs were plundered in the next nine overs.
South Africa's innings, apart from AB de Villiers' belated hitting, strangely lacked in energy and was suffocated by an unusually disciplined Pakistan attack. De Villiers couldn't take the chase alone, and a quickfire burst from Johan Botha came all too late for South Africa, who are left to ponder why it is they don't fire in big tournaments.
22nd match, England v New Zealand at Gros Islet: Ask most people, especially British journalists, to describe England's one-day side and the answers would include words like stultifying, indifferent, demoralizing and stodgy. But of late, with Andrew Strauss and Paul Collingwood leading, the side has gained a refreshing--indeed alarming--burst of daring and intensity.
Eoin Morgan, England's Irish import, is a case in point. Today he hit 40 off 34 balls to rescue England's innings from a midlife crisis, adding 52 in six overs with fellow spitfire Luke Wright. Morgan improvises superbly, times and places his shots to a nicety, and isn't shy of the clean hits over the infield either. With South African imports Michael Lumb and Craig Kieswetter flexing menacingly in the upper order, there wasn't any cause for alarm after the departure of their countryman (in more ways than one), Kevin Pietersen, whose son was born today, and who should be back in time for the semifinals.
Tim Bresnan and Graeme Swann made a strong case, and England might just be helped by the fact that they're no longer obsessing over the Ashes. Maybe it was a case of a 20-year-old hangover, but their post-2005 campaigns, in the one-day arena, were depressing and always conducted with a view to a trophy that they seemed to care far too much for. Strauss and Collingwood have led a fresher outlook, and despite the occasional Ashes-nitpicking in the papers England would do well to maintain their focus.
New Zealand weren't helped by a stop-start top order performance, with only Brendan McCullum managing to assert himself before getting out at exactly the wrong time. The Kiwis will rue missing their traditional semifinal spot, and to be honest it was a close run against Pakistan. Two of their middle-order stalwarts, Ross Taylor and Scott Styris, teed off to ensure a competitive score, but England, it would appear, are in the one-day form of their life.
Pakistan's mid-over run-fest, and England's alarming audacity - Cricdb | an eye on cricket
Date: 10 May, 2010 (Monday)
Ibrahim Moiz
21st match, Pakistan v South Africa at Gros Islet: Their most convincing performance of the tournament ended Pakistan's three-loss slide, and opened up a highly unlikely road to the semifinals. Most refreshing for Pakistan will be the resilience and efficiency displayed in this victory, a factor missing from their previous matches this year.
The key was a remarkable middle-over surge. When the South African pace attack had restricted the top order to 23 for 3 in seven overs, it seemed a matter of time before Pakistan would take the flight home. But a quite remarkable burst of Akmal hitting, only encouraged by the onset of Roelof van der Merwe, rescued the innings, and captain Shahid Afridi finally came out of his drought to spank 30 in 18 balls. Atypically, both Kamran and Umar were refreshingly positive, accelerating from the innings' slow start as 101 runs were plundered in the next nine overs.
South Africa's innings, apart from AB de Villiers' belated hitting, strangely lacked in energy and was suffocated by an unusually disciplined Pakistan attack. De Villiers couldn't take the chase alone, and a quickfire burst from Johan Botha came all too late for South Africa, who are left to ponder why it is they don't fire in big tournaments.
22nd match, England v New Zealand at Gros Islet: Ask most people, especially British journalists, to describe England's one-day side and the answers would include words like stultifying, indifferent, demoralizing and stodgy. But of late, with Andrew Strauss and Paul Collingwood leading, the side has gained a refreshing--indeed alarming--burst of daring and intensity.
Eoin Morgan, England's Irish import, is a case in point. Today he hit 40 off 34 balls to rescue England's innings from a midlife crisis, adding 52 in six overs with fellow spitfire Luke Wright. Morgan improvises superbly, times and places his shots to a nicety, and isn't shy of the clean hits over the infield either. With South African imports Michael Lumb and Craig Kieswetter flexing menacingly in the upper order, there wasn't any cause for alarm after the departure of their countryman (in more ways than one), Kevin Pietersen, whose son was born today, and who should be back in time for the semifinals.
Tim Bresnan and Graeme Swann made a strong case, and England might just be helped by the fact that they're no longer obsessing over the Ashes. Maybe it was a case of a 20-year-old hangover, but their post-2005 campaigns, in the one-day arena, were depressing and always conducted with a view to a trophy that they seemed to care far too much for. Strauss and Collingwood have led a fresher outlook, and despite the occasional Ashes-nitpicking in the papers England would do well to maintain their focus.
New Zealand weren't helped by a stop-start top order performance, with only Brendan McCullum managing to assert himself before getting out at exactly the wrong time. The Kiwis will rue missing their traditional semifinal spot, and to be honest it was a close run against Pakistan. Two of their middle-order stalwarts, Ross Taylor and Scott Styris, teed off to ensure a competitive score, but England, it would appear, are in the one-day form of their life.
Pakistan's mid-over run-fest, and England's alarming audacity - Cricdb | an eye on cricket
MZUBAIR
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2009
- Messages
- 3,501
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Indian media shouldnt be so harsh. Its just a game and in a game some one loses and some one wins
---------- Post added at 03:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:28 PM ----------
Last edited by a moderator:
salman nedian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,374
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey guys, leave this pathetic Indian media and concentrate on the strategy against the aussies. Controlled aggression is what is needed and i think Hafeez and Misbah should be replaced by Hammad and Fawad. Afridi and Razzaq should bat up the order to keep Aussies under presure.
Usama86
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2010
- Messages
- 228
- Reaction score
- 0
The Dawn Blog Blog Archive Gatecrashing the party
Gatecrashing the party
BY FAROOQ NOMANI ON 05 12TH, 2010 | COMMENTS (49)
Many critics and fans alike may term Pakistans backdoor route into the semifinals of the Twenty20 World Cup as a travesty of justice, a lucky break, a gross coincidence of errors, maybe even a cardinal sin. I wouldnt begrudge anyone who is of that opinion. In fact, Id nod my head in solemn agreement if an incensed non-Pakistani cricket follower got in my face and spluttered his discontent about how we hadnt even earned our place in the second round, let alone the semis.
Pakistans ascension to the semifinal has been a story of failure, desperation, kismet, and fortuitousness. In getting this far, we have defied the bookmakers odds, as well as our own meagre form, and confounded most analysts. By refusing to go away despite several attempts to slam the door in our faces we have probably irritated and upset a lot of people.
And you know what? I wouldnt have it any other way.
Let me tell you something: merit is way overrated. You get what you deserve, you reap what you sow. Whatever. We won the last Twenty20 World Cup on merit and where did that get us? Ill tell you where.
For one thing, we were publicly humiliated by being excluded from the Indian Premier League. I mean, couldnt the franchises have just told us that we were too much of a security and political risk to invest in? Why make us go through a farcical auction process. They had to embarrass the Twenty20 champs by laughing them out of the auction house and telling them that none of their franchises had a place in their squad for the men who mastered the format.
No Shahid bhai, Rajasthan would rather bank on the explosive talent of Aaron Finch. Sorry Razzaq, Delhi feel that Andrew McDonald is the next Richard Hadlee. Cant help you, Umar Gul. Kolkata would rather spend its vast reserves of cash on keeping the redoubtable talent of Ajit Agarkar in the team. By the way, how did the season turn out for you guys, then?
So if youre looking for a travesty of justice, look no further than our snubbing at the hands of Lalit Modis circus. Which is why Im quite pleased at the manner weve stumbled into the semi-finals. Its like our team collectively slapped the rest of the cricketing world in their faces. Earn ICC silverware? Not on your life. Well play club cricket and still manage to outlast the better teams.
Secondly, you know another problem with success based on merit? Once you achieve it, you start to expect more of it. You begin to think that the momentum earned through hard work is going to pay off in this future. Youre on cloud nine and brimming with confidence. And then Australia happens and you get smacked back down to the bowels of the earth. It still hurts to reflect on what the country expected from the team in that series in Australia and what we ended up getting. Our massacre down under will leave a scar on the national psyche so deep it will take years to erase.
Or perhaps just a potential final or semi-final victory.
Does anyone still believe that to be unlikely? Unlikely is our middle name, apparently. And now that fate has conspired to put us in a position we dont deserve to be in, it is only fair that we return the favour by eliminating a team that is rightfully entitled to be in a similar position. Its not like we havent done it before.
Youll hear a lot of 1992 World Cup references over the next few days, a tournament in which we werent the masters of our own destiny and were counting on various permutations to progress to the semi-finals. We also werent a good team by any stretch of the imagination over the first three quarters of that tournament, but managed to pull it all together when it really mattered.
Things have come full circle since then. Now, were coming off a string of three successive losses and our most recent victory was against a puzzlingly uninspired South African side. Umar Akmal and Afridi may have impressed with the bat, but 140 odd wasnt a competitive total by any means. Yet, against all reason, it proved adequate. There was a point when AB DeVilliers threatened to make a game out of it in the space of one over and the Pakistan teams hearts were in their mouths. However, AB played a needlessly cute ramp shot into Kamrans flimsy hands and suddenly we had toppled a giant.
Then came the waiting and praying game. The freedom fighters who gave their lives for liberation from British imperialist hegemony in 1947 must have turned over in their graves upon feeling the aura of pro-English sentiment emanating from Pakistan. Luckily for us, our prayers were answered and we managed to sneak into the semi-finals like a bunch of thieves.
So I say merit, justice, and logic can go to hell. Been there, done that, dont want to go through the repercussions again. Its time we turned back the clocks and attempted to win a tournament like the good old days of 1992. Back in those days, no one had high expectations and yet we ended up winning the whole tournament. Face it, unpredictability is in our blood. We have madness down to a science. If our players are going to be accused of being retards, might as well win the trophy in as retarded a fashion as possible. Heres to a Duckworth-Lewis technicality taking us to the final.
Gatecrashing the party
BY FAROOQ NOMANI ON 05 12TH, 2010 | COMMENTS (49)
Many critics and fans alike may term Pakistans backdoor route into the semifinals of the Twenty20 World Cup as a travesty of justice, a lucky break, a gross coincidence of errors, maybe even a cardinal sin. I wouldnt begrudge anyone who is of that opinion. In fact, Id nod my head in solemn agreement if an incensed non-Pakistani cricket follower got in my face and spluttered his discontent about how we hadnt even earned our place in the second round, let alone the semis.
Pakistans ascension to the semifinal has been a story of failure, desperation, kismet, and fortuitousness. In getting this far, we have defied the bookmakers odds, as well as our own meagre form, and confounded most analysts. By refusing to go away despite several attempts to slam the door in our faces we have probably irritated and upset a lot of people.
And you know what? I wouldnt have it any other way.
Let me tell you something: merit is way overrated. You get what you deserve, you reap what you sow. Whatever. We won the last Twenty20 World Cup on merit and where did that get us? Ill tell you where.
For one thing, we were publicly humiliated by being excluded from the Indian Premier League. I mean, couldnt the franchises have just told us that we were too much of a security and political risk to invest in? Why make us go through a farcical auction process. They had to embarrass the Twenty20 champs by laughing them out of the auction house and telling them that none of their franchises had a place in their squad for the men who mastered the format.
No Shahid bhai, Rajasthan would rather bank on the explosive talent of Aaron Finch. Sorry Razzaq, Delhi feel that Andrew McDonald is the next Richard Hadlee. Cant help you, Umar Gul. Kolkata would rather spend its vast reserves of cash on keeping the redoubtable talent of Ajit Agarkar in the team. By the way, how did the season turn out for you guys, then?
So if youre looking for a travesty of justice, look no further than our snubbing at the hands of Lalit Modis circus. Which is why Im quite pleased at the manner weve stumbled into the semi-finals. Its like our team collectively slapped the rest of the cricketing world in their faces. Earn ICC silverware? Not on your life. Well play club cricket and still manage to outlast the better teams.
Secondly, you know another problem with success based on merit? Once you achieve it, you start to expect more of it. You begin to think that the momentum earned through hard work is going to pay off in this future. Youre on cloud nine and brimming with confidence. And then Australia happens and you get smacked back down to the bowels of the earth. It still hurts to reflect on what the country expected from the team in that series in Australia and what we ended up getting. Our massacre down under will leave a scar on the national psyche so deep it will take years to erase.
Or perhaps just a potential final or semi-final victory.
Does anyone still believe that to be unlikely? Unlikely is our middle name, apparently. And now that fate has conspired to put us in a position we dont deserve to be in, it is only fair that we return the favour by eliminating a team that is rightfully entitled to be in a similar position. Its not like we havent done it before.
Youll hear a lot of 1992 World Cup references over the next few days, a tournament in which we werent the masters of our own destiny and were counting on various permutations to progress to the semi-finals. We also werent a good team by any stretch of the imagination over the first three quarters of that tournament, but managed to pull it all together when it really mattered.
Things have come full circle since then. Now, were coming off a string of three successive losses and our most recent victory was against a puzzlingly uninspired South African side. Umar Akmal and Afridi may have impressed with the bat, but 140 odd wasnt a competitive total by any means. Yet, against all reason, it proved adequate. There was a point when AB DeVilliers threatened to make a game out of it in the space of one over and the Pakistan teams hearts were in their mouths. However, AB played a needlessly cute ramp shot into Kamrans flimsy hands and suddenly we had toppled a giant.
Then came the waiting and praying game. The freedom fighters who gave their lives for liberation from British imperialist hegemony in 1947 must have turned over in their graves upon feeling the aura of pro-English sentiment emanating from Pakistan. Luckily for us, our prayers were answered and we managed to sneak into the semi-finals like a bunch of thieves.
So I say merit, justice, and logic can go to hell. Been there, done that, dont want to go through the repercussions again. Its time we turned back the clocks and attempted to win a tournament like the good old days of 1992. Back in those days, no one had high expectations and yet we ended up winning the whole tournament. Face it, unpredictability is in our blood. We have madness down to a science. If our players are going to be accused of being retards, might as well win the trophy in as retarded a fashion as possible. Heres to a Duckworth-Lewis technicality taking us to the final.
salman nedian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,374
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey guys, leave this pathetic Indian media and concentrate on the strategy against the aussies. Controlled aggression is what is needed and i think Hafeez and Misbah should be replaced by Hammad and Fawad. Afridi and Razzaq should bat up the order to keep Aussies under presure.
salman nedian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,374
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey guys, leave this pathetic Indian media and concentrate on the strategy against the aussies. Controlled aggression is what is needed and i think Hafeez and Misbah should be replaced by Hammad and Fawad. Afridi and Razzaq should bat up the order to keep Aussies under presure.
Frankenstein
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2010
- Messages
- 2,985
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
The only problem we have is Fielding, we lost every previous matches jus cuz we dropped so many catches, if are fieldING is even then our team is the best in T20
Frankenstein
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2010
- Messages
- 2,985
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
The only problem we have is Fielding, we lost every previous matches jus cuz we dropped so many catches, if are fieldING is even then our team is the best in T20
DANGER-ZONE
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 3,754
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
ICC T20 WORD CUP 2007
SONG FOR INDIAN TEAM: "chak de, ooo chak de indiaaaa...chak de, ooo chak de indiaaaa"
REACTION: India become word champion.
then
Launch of IPL
and now Indian cricket players started playing for money.
later
ICC T20 WORD CUP 2009-10
ACTION OF INDIAN TEAM: eliminated from super eights without wining single match in both World Cups.
SONG FOR INDIA TEAM IN REACTION,FROM JANATA: "hug de,oo hug de india....hug de indiaaaaa.......hug de, ooo hug de india...!"
SONG FOR INDIAN TEAM: "chak de, ooo chak de indiaaaa...chak de, ooo chak de indiaaaa"
REACTION: India become word champion.
then
Launch of IPL
and now Indian cricket players started playing for money.
later
ICC T20 WORD CUP 2009-10
ACTION OF INDIAN TEAM: eliminated from super eights without wining single match in both World Cups.
SONG FOR INDIA TEAM IN REACTION,FROM JANATA: "hug de,oo hug de india....hug de indiaaaaa.......hug de, ooo hug de india...!"
Similar threads
