I had great intentions of writing a follow up to my Champions League post. I originally intended it to be about Chennai Super Kings and how I thought they were shoe-ins to take out this year's tournament. Unfortunately, it doesn't come across as quite such a revelation when that same team has already swept all before them and won the aforementioned tournament. My second idea was to write a piece stating all the reasons why the Super Kings were the deserving victors, however Cricinfo beat me to the punch with their fantastic statistical analysis:
http://www.cricinfo.com/t20champions2010/content/current/story/478867.html
So, I am reduced to my plan C, which is simply to say that despite my earlier observations about luck and Twenty20, Chennai have all the makings of a champion team in this format.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
A champion of sorts.. (part 1)
The Champions League Twenty20 seems a strange tournament to me. Actually, the idea of crowning any one team in the game's shortest format at all seems slightly bizarre. My reason for saying this is that when cricket is boiled down to only twenty overs a side, fortune, as much as skill, plays a big part in deciding the outcome. It is a big assertion, I know, but I get the feeling that on his day, any batsman could score runs in Twenty20. It becomes a Law of Averages situation where even the most modest of cricketers is bound to strike it lucky at some point or other. And, as they say, fortune favours the brave (something T20 batsmen generally have in spades.)
I think this rule applies to teams as well as individuals. Given relatively equal talent on both sides, a T20 match does not necessarily come down to which team is the more skillful, but to which team has the most assistance from Lady Luck. This is why the IPL in its three seasons so far has seen three different names engraved on the trophy. This is also why Deccan Chargers and Royal Challenge Bangalore eventually played out the final in 2009, despite the fact that Chennai Superkings and Delhi Daredevils were the more dominant teams over the course of the tournament. It is also why last years Champions League finalists, New South Wales and Trinidad and Tobago are not back competing in the tournament this year. Both sides, as talented as they are, could not even win their respective domestic competitions this time around. In fact, this year’s edition sees only Bangalore and Sri Lanka’s Wayamba backing up from 2009.
T20, as you can see, is a fickle beast. The same side that scored 200-plus one week can be bowled out for less than a hundred the next. Of course, this can occur in all forms of cricket, but hardly to such an extreme and rarely with such frequency. This is why the Champions League title is slightly ridiculous. Is the title-holder the best domestic side on the planet? No. Is it the luckiest? Quite probably.
(to be continued…)
Monday, September 6, 2010
A dark day..
30.08.10
It is a dark day for cricket.
It is hard for the lover of cricket to avoid feeling uneasy upon hearing of the match-fixing allegations leveled at Pakistani players this past weekend. The saddest thing for me is that one of the players at the centre of this scandal is 18 year old fast-bowler, Mohammad Amir. He is such a talented young cricketer, it would be a huge loss to the cricketing world if he were found guilty – and thus far things do not look good.
Why is it that Pakistan cricket continually stumbles from one controversy to another?
This is tragic from a country that has contributed so many great cricketers and done so much to enrich the sport.
Let’s hope, for the sake of the gentleman’s game, that this all blows over. And if not, let’s hope that the issue is dealt with once and for all.
It is a dark day for cricket.
It is hard for the lover of cricket to avoid feeling uneasy upon hearing of the match-fixing allegations leveled at Pakistani players this past weekend. The saddest thing for me is that one of the players at the centre of this scandal is 18 year old fast-bowler, Mohammad Amir. He is such a talented young cricketer, it would be a huge loss to the cricketing world if he were found guilty – and thus far things do not look good.
Why is it that Pakistan cricket continually stumbles from one controversy to another?
This is tragic from a country that has contributed so many great cricketers and done so much to enrich the sport.
Let’s hope, for the sake of the gentleman’s game, that this all blows over. And if not, let’s hope that the issue is dealt with once and for all.
He's a keeper..
I just thought I’d weigh in on the McCullum keeping debate. Personally, I think it’s the wrong decision. While I find the prospect of Hurricane Brendon opening in Tests incredibly exciting, I think that a promotion to the top of the order will disrupt the overall balance of the team. The problem does not, perhaps, stem from McCullum himself but from the lack of quality wicketkeeper-batsmen in New Zealand domestic cricket. Let us consider the options then if McCullum were to give up the gloves across all formats – or at least the two longer forms.
Gareth Hopkins and Peter McGlashan are the two keepers used by the Black Caps in the recent past as back up to McCullum. Hopkins has had an extended run in ODI’s over the last few months with limited success (a highest score of 45 in nine innings), while McGlashan managed a not out fifty against India in his only series to date. To my mind McGlashan is the better wicketkeeper and is a handy, if unorthodox, batsman. He could perhaps suffice as a stop-gap solution in one-dayers (he is already 31.) My feeling, however, is that this would be short-sighted, especially seeing as – based on their modest domestic records – neither McGlashan, nor Hopkins have the skill or temperament to foot it as test batsmen.
I know that in the past it was the norm to pick a specialist wicketkeeper, but the game has moved on and it is no longer practical to carry a ‘spectator’ in your Test batting line up. Especially, given the fragility of the current Black Caps top order. Also, New Zealand is without a genuine all-rounder, which makes batting ability in the lower middle order all the more vital.
For me, the best solution is probably for one of the side’s existing batsmen to step up and take the gloves. The leading candidate to do this is, BJ Watling, who recently made his ODI debut in the Sri Lanka Tri Series. Already a member of the Test team, Watling also happens to be McGlashan’s keeping understudy at Northern Districts. This way the team is equipped with a decent wicketkeeper – I imagine he would learn on the job fairly quickly – without compromising any of the team’s batting strength.
The question is, will the selectors agree with me or stick with the status quo of Hopkins and McGlashan?
Gareth Hopkins and Peter McGlashan are the two keepers used by the Black Caps in the recent past as back up to McCullum. Hopkins has had an extended run in ODI’s over the last few months with limited success (a highest score of 45 in nine innings), while McGlashan managed a not out fifty against India in his only series to date. To my mind McGlashan is the better wicketkeeper and is a handy, if unorthodox, batsman. He could perhaps suffice as a stop-gap solution in one-dayers (he is already 31.) My feeling, however, is that this would be short-sighted, especially seeing as – based on their modest domestic records – neither McGlashan, nor Hopkins have the skill or temperament to foot it as test batsmen.
I know that in the past it was the norm to pick a specialist wicketkeeper, but the game has moved on and it is no longer practical to carry a ‘spectator’ in your Test batting line up. Especially, given the fragility of the current Black Caps top order. Also, New Zealand is without a genuine all-rounder, which makes batting ability in the lower middle order all the more vital.
For me, the best solution is probably for one of the side’s existing batsmen to step up and take the gloves. The leading candidate to do this is, BJ Watling, who recently made his ODI debut in the Sri Lanka Tri Series. Already a member of the Test team, Watling also happens to be McGlashan’s keeping understudy at Northern Districts. This way the team is equipped with a decent wicketkeeper – I imagine he would learn on the job fairly quickly – without compromising any of the team’s batting strength.
The question is, will the selectors agree with me or stick with the status quo of Hopkins and McGlashan?
An inauspicious debut..
11.08.10
So good to see the Black Caps win last night. Full credit to Ross Taylor (who is now two from two as captain) for playing an absolutely pitch perfect ODI innings. He took his time getting set, picked off the ones and twos and never tried too hard to force the pace (no ugly cross-batted hoicks to the onside here.) His record partnership of 190 with Scotty Styris rescued New Zealand from an ominous looking 28 for 3 and took them (us) to an incredibly respectable total of 288 – though it should’ve been a fair bit more, as they lost wickets in quick succession towards the end.
Taylor’s captaincy too seemed on the money. He cleverly chose to take the batting powerplay when both he and Styris were well set after 30 overs and promoted Jacob Oram up the order as a pinch hitter when Styris departed. Taylor’s only blemish was getting out within spitting distance of a well-deserved hundred. One of my main criticisms of the New Zealand team is that they too often fail to convert fifties (Taylor in particular has been guilty of this over the last couple of seasons.)
Now, the inevitable talking point: Kane Williamson. A rather inauspicious debut given the hype (this is a comment leveled at myself more than anything. I’ve been raving about this guy for close to a year.) Picture this: He walks in on debut with the team struggling at two down for not much. He has been touted as New Zealand’s Boy Wonder, the Next Martin Crowe. Anticipation is palpable. He faces eight balls of pretty impressive bowling in useful conditions before receiving the death knell: a full ball on middle which moves wildly through the air before beating him all ends up and careening into his off-stump. In some ways it is the absolute antithesis of Martin Guptill’s international entrance, a year and a half earlier. Guptill was brought into the team to cover an absent Jesse Ryder. No one, barring a handful of die-hard domestic followers, had ever heard of him. He came in as a total unknown and left with the second highest score for an ODI debutant EVER, 122 not out. Back to Williamson though. I don’t think his first international innings is any indication of the sort of player he is likely to be. In fact, I’m still picking him to score big runs at some point in this series.
Two more points before I finish.
I was really impressed with both Guptill and Oram during their brief stays at the crease last night. Guptill batted with more confidence than he has in quite awhile and unfurled a couple of very attractive shots, a sure sign he’s in good form. Runs are not far away. Equally, Oram looked in great touch, timing it well from ball one and using his wrists really well.
My last point is a question: Why is Peter Ingram playing ahead of BJ Watling? Ingram (the concrete-footed one) has done nothing in the lead up and has a technique suited only to french cricket. That he was eventually dismissed caught-behind after playing an awful waft outside off-stump was largely inevitable. It’s a wonder he makes runs even in domestic cricket. Watling, on the other hand, has made three fifties in five innings and looks more than ready to make the step up.
So good to see the Black Caps win last night. Full credit to Ross Taylor (who is now two from two as captain) for playing an absolutely pitch perfect ODI innings. He took his time getting set, picked off the ones and twos and never tried too hard to force the pace (no ugly cross-batted hoicks to the onside here.) His record partnership of 190 with Scotty Styris rescued New Zealand from an ominous looking 28 for 3 and took them (us) to an incredibly respectable total of 288 – though it should’ve been a fair bit more, as they lost wickets in quick succession towards the end.
Taylor’s captaincy too seemed on the money. He cleverly chose to take the batting powerplay when both he and Styris were well set after 30 overs and promoted Jacob Oram up the order as a pinch hitter when Styris departed. Taylor’s only blemish was getting out within spitting distance of a well-deserved hundred. One of my main criticisms of the New Zealand team is that they too often fail to convert fifties (Taylor in particular has been guilty of this over the last couple of seasons.)
Now, the inevitable talking point: Kane Williamson. A rather inauspicious debut given the hype (this is a comment leveled at myself more than anything. I’ve been raving about this guy for close to a year.) Picture this: He walks in on debut with the team struggling at two down for not much. He has been touted as New Zealand’s Boy Wonder, the Next Martin Crowe. Anticipation is palpable. He faces eight balls of pretty impressive bowling in useful conditions before receiving the death knell: a full ball on middle which moves wildly through the air before beating him all ends up and careening into his off-stump. In some ways it is the absolute antithesis of Martin Guptill’s international entrance, a year and a half earlier. Guptill was brought into the team to cover an absent Jesse Ryder. No one, barring a handful of die-hard domestic followers, had ever heard of him. He came in as a total unknown and left with the second highest score for an ODI debutant EVER, 122 not out. Back to Williamson though. I don’t think his first international innings is any indication of the sort of player he is likely to be. In fact, I’m still picking him to score big runs at some point in this series.
Two more points before I finish.
I was really impressed with both Guptill and Oram during their brief stays at the crease last night. Guptill batted with more confidence than he has in quite awhile and unfurled a couple of very attractive shots, a sure sign he’s in good form. Runs are not far away. Equally, Oram looked in great touch, timing it well from ball one and using his wrists really well.
My last point is a question: Why is Peter Ingram playing ahead of BJ Watling? Ingram (the concrete-footed one) has done nothing in the lead up and has a technique suited only to french cricket. That he was eventually dismissed caught-behind after playing an awful waft outside off-stump was largely inevitable. It’s a wonder he makes runs even in domestic cricket. Watling, on the other hand, has made three fifties in five innings and looks more than ready to make the step up.
An introduction..
By way of an introduction; Hello, my name is Daniel and I’m a 23 year old cricket obsessive.
I grew up watching cricket as a youngster, but I think the moment I was bitten by the proverbial bug was during THAT Chappell-Hadlee in 2007 when the Black Caps successfully chased consecutive scores of 300-plus.
My allegiances change like the weather. I support New Zealand due to a convoluted mixture of patriotism and a will to see the underdog triumph. However, the idea of dominance fascinates me as well, and as such, I often find myself cheering on our better, faster, stronger cousins from across the Tasman – especially when it comes to the battle for the blessed urn.
My career as a cricketer lasted all of one season for the under-15 B’s and my greatest cricketing achievements to date include a glorious straight drive over the bowler’s head and onto the roof of the library at school and cleaning out one of the Canterbury Magicians first ball in a casual back yard game. As a spectator, I am however, prolific. I have sacrificed more good nights' sleep than I (and my wife, I’m sure) care to count, all in the name of leather and willow. My playing fortunes are on the up and up though, it must be said. I’ve taken to bowling leg spin in the nets to one of my fellow cricketing devotees, something I seem to have a bit of a knack for.
And thus, my first post comes to an end.
I grew up watching cricket as a youngster, but I think the moment I was bitten by the proverbial bug was during THAT Chappell-Hadlee in 2007 when the Black Caps successfully chased consecutive scores of 300-plus.
My allegiances change like the weather. I support New Zealand due to a convoluted mixture of patriotism and a will to see the underdog triumph. However, the idea of dominance fascinates me as well, and as such, I often find myself cheering on our better, faster, stronger cousins from across the Tasman – especially when it comes to the battle for the blessed urn.
My career as a cricketer lasted all of one season for the under-15 B’s and my greatest cricketing achievements to date include a glorious straight drive over the bowler’s head and onto the roof of the library at school and cleaning out one of the Canterbury Magicians first ball in a casual back yard game. As a spectator, I am however, prolific. I have sacrificed more good nights' sleep than I (and my wife, I’m sure) care to count, all in the name of leather and willow. My playing fortunes are on the up and up though, it must be said. I’ve taken to bowling leg spin in the nets to one of my fellow cricketing devotees, something I seem to have a bit of a knack for.
And thus, my first post comes to an end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)