Left field
The Reuters global sports blog
England v Australia, Twenty20 final — live
We’re blogging from the final of the World Twenty-20 cricket in the West Indies, with the clash between England and Australia building towards a climax.
England are doing surprisingly well, but who would write off Australia after their semi-final comeback against Pakistan? Stay tuned … and remember, comments are extremely welcome…
Don’t blame the maths for T20 farces
Paul Collingwood’s call for change to the Duckworth-Lewis system used to determine a target in rain-hit games was understandable, coming as it did after his England team lost a match despite scoring three times as many runs as their opponent.
It is not the calculation system that needs revisiting, however, but the broader set-up of Twenty20 tournaments.
Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis have publicly defended the calculation system that bears their names and while there is something grating about seeing West Indies win after scoring just 60 in six overs in response to England’s impressive 191 for five in the regulation 20 overs, it is not the maths that is to blame.
Over two hours of sunlight remained at a stadium that in any case has floodlights when the officials began reducing the overs for West Indies’ innings. A capacity crowd waited patiently for the chance to see a result and in the end saw just a further 3.3 overs of cricket – enough to deliver a formal result but a farcical end to a game when there was all evening left to play the full 20 overs.
Why is the Twenty20 World Cup set up in such a manner, allowing rain to reduce games to nominal results when they could be full-length battles? The simple answer is television. The three overs of excitement are better than a two-hour wait for resumption of play. Twenty20 cricket is perfect for broadcasters who like to have manageable slots for programming.
The demands of television, particularly Indian television, also explain why games are starting at 9.30 am in the Caribbean – on workdays. Twenty20 was designed in England to allow people leaving their workplaces to grab a chunk of exciting cricket action before heading home. With party stands set-up and floodlights in place, there is no shortage of people in Barbados wondering who exactly is supposed to be partying at breakfast time?
But just as the West Indies Cricket Board have reluctantly agreed to schedule games to suit TV, so the players have done a deal, figuratively at least, to perform in a format of the game that is made for television.
Yes agree it’s not too much to ask that despite rain interruptions most parts of the world do not have persistent monsoons such that a mere 2x 20 overs cannot be completed in one day. And yes let the TV producers re-schedule programmes. But please don’t let Duckworth Lewis off scot free. How on earth can they claim that their model for 50 overs holds true for 20 overs? West Indies won the game the other night for two reasons. First they had a powerplay which Duckworth Lewis does not calculate for – so come on DL factor in the powerplay and we’d have more respect for the mathematical model. Second – and here’s the tricky bit, the model does not factor in the artificial situation of a team having to go out after rain and have a good slog over a small number of overs to win an artificially reduced total. Well DL there’s only one way to make your model more credible in such a situation – as well as reducing the target number of runs for the team batting second, reduce the number of wickets that the team has in hand to complete the run chase. It’s not rocket science guys, but yes we need your big academic brains to work out for us just how many wickets in hand should be reduced. But here’s my prediction DL – your mathematical model can enjoy in T20 the same amount of credibility it does in the 50 over game. but until you reduce the wickets in hand for the team chasing a reduced total after rain, your model will never be credible for T20.
Will India as No.1 team prove the tonic for test cricket?
India’s crushing 2-0 series win over Sri Lanka to become the number one ranked test team for the first time has triggered huge celebrations across the cricket-crazy nation.
The hosts, ranked number three, leapfrogged leaders South Africa and the second-ranked Sri Lanka to become the first team other than Australia or the Proteas to head the list.
In an ideal world, the development in the game’s global commercial hub should work wonders for the classical format, overshadowed by both the limited-over formats, especially after the rise of Twenty20. India owes its current commercial clout to the shock World Cup win in 1983 which particularly turned the 50-over game into a cash cow.
The influential Indian board also successfully launched the franchise Indian Premier League Twenty20 tournament in 2008.
Leading players worldwide are clear about their priority, vociferously backing tests as the ultimate challenge.
India’s consistency is reflected in the captaincy record of Mahendra Singh Dhoni, seven wins in his unbeaten 10-game tenure. The impressive win over Sri Lanka showed millions of fans still emotionally follow the fortunes of the test team.
Firstly, this almost hysterical reaction to the rankings, which we are witnessing, is beyond my understanding. As to test cricket, I think it was never in the grave danger which the media makes it out to be. All the players and organisers have said it is the only true form of cricket, the lack of crowds is not any indication. It has been like this for over a decade. The reason is that the advent of TV rights and live coverage of a good quality, unlike what we were being served up by DD, has ensured adequate revenues to the boards to continue with test cricket.
My thinking is that if test cricket dies, the rest of the formats will also gradually decline. Test cricket is actually the breeding ground for younger players to take to the game gradually at the international level. It gives more opportunities than the slam bang versions. Otherwise we will see more and more one night stands, here today gone, tomorrow and no solid performances.
In fact if anything brings about a fatigue factor and sounds the death knell of the game, it will be the shorter versions. They serve a purpose definitely, but too much of it is already dwindling interest and killing the golden goose.
Pakistan beat Sri Lanka to win World Twenty20 — your views
Pakistan bowled aggressively and batted with supreme calm to seal a convincing eight-wicket win over Sri Lanka in the final of the World Twenty20 on Sunday.
Shahid Afridi’s finely judged 54 saw them home with eight balls to spare after three wickets from Abdul Razzaq had limited Sri Lanka to 138 from their 20 overs.
Pakistan’s superb start with the ball almost decided things by itself, with Tillakaratne Dilshan’s duck setting the tone, but captain Kumar Sangakkara played beautifully to rescue the innings, scoring 64 to see his side to a total that was at least competitive.
Pakistan batted sensibly during the power play to put themselves in a winning position at 63-1 at the start of the 10th over and they made it home quite comfortably.
What did you think of the final? Let us know in the comments.
PHOTO: Shahid Afridi plays a shot during Pakistan’s World Twenty20 final win over Sri Lanka at Lord’s, June 21, 2009. REUTERS/Kieran Doherty .
I was sad to see my country lose, but Congratulations Pakistan!! Job well done!! .. Congratulations to Sri Lanka too for making it to the finals.
Sri Lanka to face Pakistan in Twenty20 final
Chris Gayle’s magnificent best was not enough to prevent Sri Lanka beating West Indies on Friday night and making it through to the World Twenty20 final, where they will face Pakistan.
Tillakartne Dilshan gave Sri Lanka a total and West Indies were undone by an astonishing first over that saw them lose three wickets…. There’s no coming back from that against a team that bowls as well as Sri Lanka. What an extraordinary tournament this has been, to provide something unexpected almost every game…
So what do you think? Pakistan or Sri Lanka? If Pakistan play like they can I think they’ll win, but if this tournament has taught us anything it is to expect the unexpected…
Let us know what you think…
PHOTO: Spectators try to catch a Chris Gayle six during the ICC World Twenty20 cricket semi-final match between the West Indies and Sri Lanka in London June 19, 2009. REUTERS/Philip Brown
You know what ever happend with srilanka coming to Pakistan or what not. But the main reason i fink Pakistan should win is that their always put down they get the blame for everything. By winning this it b dream come true. But you know what end of the day i am pakistani fan i truelly hope inshallah pakistan does win. But if they dont then what can you do becoz srilanka is a really good team nd i like malinga soo much. So lets jus see. U have 2 admit ppl pakistan was critized so much about how they going to loose to south africa but mashallah pakistan played good and for me and i fink for many pakistani fans the match with south africa had 2 b the best match every 1 was shocked. I dono if any 1 finks dis but england cricket team get payed sooo much for playin cricket dey get excellent training pakistan and sri lanka nd other teams prb dont gt half the pay but they better team. No matta what both teams r winners. but i jus hope inshallah pakistan wins tommrow. But if srilanka !
does den well done 2 dem 
x x
Feeble England still can’t get to grips with Twenty20
England may argue that they were unlucky to exit the World Twenty20 following a five-wicket defeat by West Indies but the simple truth is that they batted poorly throughout the tournament.
With the honourable exceptions of Ravi Bopara and Kevin Pietersen, the batsmen completely failed to get to grips with the art of scoring runs in this form of the game.
Call it lack of urgency, lack of innovation or lack of skill but the main problems were a shortage of power and the confidence to take calculated risks.
Dmitri Mascarenhas’s bizarre innings against India summed up England’s problem. The burly all-rounder has proved that he is capable of hitting sixes at international level. After a steady start to the innings against India he was promoted up the order to number four, specifically to take on the Indian slow bowlers and boost the run rate with a few lusty blows. Or so we thought.
Instead, Mascarenhas paddled the ball aimlessly around for ones and twos, facing 27 balls for his 25 runs. Far from actually clearing the ropes, he did not even once attempt a big hit. Momentum lost, Owais Shah, Paul Collingwood and James Foster, all far more suited to the type of supporting innings Mascarenhas was playing, perished trying to find the boundaries England so desperately needed.
Against India, England’s bowlers performed heroically to pull off an unlikely victory but 24 hours later the tournament hosts found themselves in a similar position against West Indies. A solid platform laid by Bopara and Pietersen simply cried out for sensible attacking batting to lift England to a formidable total. But England went some 50 balls without hitting a single boundary until Stuart Broad hit the last two deliveries of the innings for six and four. Again, England finished at least 20 runs short of a challenging total and West Indies took full advantage.
i thin it’s a question of technique. english players just don’t seem to be able to generate the required power to get the ball away. they need better coaching from a real expert.
England humiliated in Twenty20 opener
Extraordinary scenes in the first match of the World Twenty20, where England have lost the opening match by four wickets against the Dutch.
England went out of their last home one-day World Cup in the group phase … could the same thing happen here?
What an extraordinary result in the gloom of London, and here’s how the English newspapers saw things:
The Daily Express said: “England have had some embarrassing moments in World Cup cricket but none as embarrassing as this, coming on their most famous of grounds…”
“Clogs 1 Clots 0″ was the headline in The Sun which said England bowler Stuart Broad, who missed with a throw at the stumps to hand the Dutch victory off the final ball, “was made to look a total lemon by the orange men of Holland…”
The Times added: “Fluffing your lines against the likes of Australia or India is one thing, but England played like headless chickens in the closing two overs…”
Bad for England, good for cricket. Well done the Dutch. Maybe this tournament will be worth watching after all…
Twenty20 – Perfect for the future or a cricket cannibal?
In an ideal world Twenty20, cricket’s newest and shortest format, should be hailed as the perfect way forward for a game still played by barely 10 teams at the highest level.
The World Twenty20 which begins in England on Friday is expected to draw huge crowds and television audiences, pointing to the galloping popularity of the three-hour game, the sporting equivalent of a Hollywood action flick rather than the Bollywood drama of a five-day test.
Twenty20 is drawing new and younger audiences, at stadiums and in living rooms in front of TV sets. Last year, it triggered the Indian Premier League (IPL), the multi-million dollar franchise event with players from many countries which resembles other major professional sports like soccer and NBA.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) says it is pleased to own three versions, the 50-over game being the other, but betrays nervousness that Twenty20 could gobble up the other two in the near future.
The ICC has said it wants Twenty20 to be played more at the domestic level. Its CEO Haroon Lorgat said last week it would keep a tight leash on T20 on the international stage.
Some fret that upcoming players could soon lose the skill and temperament essential to even survive five-day tests.
@Swami – I’m sorry but that’s a terrible idea.
Twenty20 is about entertainment, not the result
If the result of a cricket one-day international is forgotten by most fans within a week the shelf life of Twenty20 memories must be measured in Mayfly proportions.
However, that does not mean that there is no value in the smash and crash of cricket’s newest format. Quite the opposite.
England all-rounder Kevin Pietersen, one of the most explosive and inventive batsmen in the game, greeted the first edition of the world Twenty20 by describing his efforts as “silly shots for a silly game”.
As he prepares for the second, having yet to master a format that would appear tailor-made for him, he says he is taking it very seriously.
A close-up view of the IPL, where he was jointly rated as the most valuable commodity in the game alongside Andrew Flintoff, and the realisation that international trophies are few and far between, have combined to focus Pietersen’s mind.
For most fans, however, one-day cricket and particularly the 20 overs-a-side version, is still more about having a day out and marvelling at the hitting power of the game’s top batsmen.
Will the Mongoose rule at the World Twenty20?
Cricket never had much of a reputation for embracing innovation but now the stately rhythm of the five-day Test is being elbowed out of the way by the hell-for-leather scramble of Twenty20 perhaps it’s no surprise that the Mongoose bat Stuart Law used on Tuesday has generated hardly a whimper of protest.
Midway through his innings for Derbyshire on Tuesday, Law switched to using the new Mongoose T20 bat, which, we are told, has a handle that’s 33 percent longer than the standard bat, but with hardly anything in the way of shoulder.
At first glance it looks a bit odd, something that’d be very useful for killing spiders but a bit awkward for batting. Still, Law sounded cautiously pleased with it after a brief knock that included one huge six. Here’s a Law quote from The Buzz:
“You need to get used to it,” Law said. “The greater bat-speed means you’re more inclined to go through early with the stroke — which is a good thing in a way.”
The question now is whether we’ll see this thing being used at the World Twenty20, which is almost upon us. And if so, is there anything wrong with that? From what I’ve read, it sounds like the lack of shoulder means it might not be appropriate for facing quick bowlers, but seeing as slower bowlers seem to be key to success at the Twenty20 game this thing could have a profound impact.
And never has the phrase “Give it the long handle” been more apposite.
Mongoose photo by Alexandra Beier/Reuters. And you’re right, we didn’t have one of Law batting yesterday.
This is really bad. This is going to make so many kids get off of bowling and just play for batting. I cannot believe that this is legal, the MCC should grow some bollocks and get rid of it
-
Resident Left Field Expert
-
A cricket blog seems out of place amongst all the football blogs . I make this point because a radio programme was talking to a tennis star AND WAS SUDDENLY ASKING THE TENNIS STAR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WORLD CUP FOOTBALL .Possibly i am wrong about that because i was trying to do other jobs and was not listening attentively enough to the radio .Please note that sports stars are often foreign and they may be able to cope with English language using words connected with their own particular sport. Asking the sports star questions about another sport is just “not on ” The star is giving up his or her time and to maintain star standard in journalism as well , i think it far better to stick to questions about that stars particular sport . Mixing a cricket report in with many footabll blogs might lead other interviewers to try “steering off “the main reason why the sports star has been chosen to give up his or her time ie the sports star is most likely expecting to be asked to talk about his/her own sport .Why give the sports star more hastle? Why give me this hastle ? I like headings and think they are important in life/There is no heading really to indicate the posts should be all about football so no mistake has been made but nevertheless it seemed important to make this point here ie a sports person is probably notdesirous of wasting time That sportsperson might consider it a waste of time if he or she is asked a question about another sport perhaps .