Kridaya Cricket Blog

The outcome of today’s match between South Africa and New Zealand mattered as much to the tournament as who the winner of the French Open was. Both teams had already qualified for the second round and, because of the crazy ICC seeding system, it didn’t matter who topped the group because South Africa was going into Group E, no matter what, and New Zealand into Group F. Perhaps that was why we got a low-scoring game today. If you don’t have the motivation, you don’t hit hard enough.

The difficulty with evaluating a match like this is understanding how true every person’s performance is. There would be at least a few players who would want to make a 20+ score so that they can get to play in the Super Eights instead of throwing their bat around for the team and getting out for a low score. Most of the wickets in the South African innings were soft, careless dismissals rather than the usual slog and get out method. South Africa did not even accelerate much in the final overs.

Brendon McCullum got a stint out in the middle, though this was one of his slower efforts. Like his reign at Kolkata Knight Riders, his captaincy curse seems to be rubbing off on the Kiwis. The one-run loss reminds us of the matches that the Kolkata team failed to close, including that atrocious Mortaza over against Deccan Chargers. McCullum should have stayed till the end to see the game through.

The 1-run margin could technically classify the match as a thriller, but it was a manufactured thriller produced by a mismanaged chase in an inconsequential match. New Zealand shouldn’t worry too much about it and South Africa mustn’t celebrate too much either. We have two more of them coming up tomorrow – India v Ireland and West Indies v Sri Lanka. Of these, perhaps Ireland would be the only one taking it a bit seriously.

The mirror image of the series results between Australia and South Africa is now officially put to rest. If you remember, back in Australia, South Africa won the Test Series 2-1, lost the Twenty20 series 0-2 and grabbed the one-day series 4-1. But suddenly for some weird reason, back home, their form did a 180-degree turn and they lost the Test series 1-2 and won the T20 series 2-0. Cricket fans thought that this was a sure sign that they would lose the one-day series too.

Fortunately for South Africa, their one-day players retained their form to win the series with one match to go. Even if they lose the last match, they have retained their No.1 ranking in the one-day rankings. This is the third time in a row that the South Africans have won a 1-day series against the Australians. Even when they were bloodied 0-2 and 0-3 in their previous Test series matchup against the Aussies, they managed to win the one-day series thanks to that amazing 400+ chase at Johannesburg. This goes to one of our ongoing themes: it is much easier to beat a tougher team in the shorter versions of the game because there is less time to recover.

Despite the Twenty20 and one-day victories, I believe that the South Africans missed a trick here. Their terrible performances in the first two Tests have allowed Australia to retain the Test crown, which the South Africans had won for an ever-so brief reign at the top. One of my friends said that when you win, you must keep on winning lest your opponents gain confidence and beat you back. That is what South Africa did by letting Australia win the 3rd Test in the previous series. They showed an open door to the Kangaroos who came hopping back in full force.

It will be a few more years before the South Africans can take on the Australians again in a Test series. By then, both teams will have evolved quite a bit. India will be sniping at both their heels. So this was a tremendous lost opportunity for this talented South African team. They were not as much beaten as they capitulated through cowardly batting and indisciplined bowling. They let the Aussies escape after they had them in their necks. They let an aspiring allrounder and a couple of debutants run them ragged.

This series will not be forgotten by this South African team. The one-day victory is not enough balm for their spirits.

[Photo licensed from Marc Forrest]

South Africa beat Australia once again to claim the T20 series against the Australians at home. Cricinfo reporter Alex Brown exhibits a profound short memory by proclaiming, “The South Africans continue to dominate the limited-overs formats.” Apparently, he forgot that the Aussies had routed the South Africans by the same margin back in Australia.

Even accounting for that, this was by no means a comprehensive victory for South Africa. In the first match, chasing 167, they were 83/5 needing 84 runs off 47 balls before Morkel and Boucher took them to victory with just 4 balls to spare. If it weren’t for a 21-run over conceded by Hopes, Australia may have won that match.

As for today, the South Africans posted an average score of 156 courtesy some wild hits by van der Merwe which somehow landed over the boundary. Roelof van der Merwe made his debut in the match, but still found the audacity to say, “It’s how you drive, but how you arrive.”

Let us not read too much into these matches. The nature of the Twenty20 game reduces the enormous disparities between the skill level of teams. In 20 overs, a sudden wicket or a big over fundamentally changes the complexion of the game. That is how Zimbabwe beat Australia in Twenty20, something that they cannot even dream of doing in Test matches.

Whatever South Africa or Australia do today, you can bet that it will have nothing to do with their future results, just as how Australia’s previous series victory could not prevent South Africa’s sweep of this matchup. The ODI format is a different issue altogether. If South Africa wins that, they will have a better claim on being the No. 1 team. It remains to be seen if they will squander their Australian victory like they did with the Test series.

What a stunning assault by Mitch Johnson! 123 runs off just 103 balls with 5 sixes and 11 boundaries. Well, that makes up for Gilchrist’s retirement. It proves that Johnson’s earlier 95 not out in the first Test was not an aberration, but a mark of things to come for the future. Luckily for South Africa, the other batsmen after McDonald did not hang around for too long, thus handing them an innings victory which will provide some balm for the last two demoralizing defeats.

The past six Tests between these two teams, the Top Two in my book, has been extremely strange. As Andrew Hughes puts it,

I can’t work out if what we’ve been glued to for the last three months is two ordinary teams taking it in turns to beat one another up, or two fantastic sides engaged in a titanic struggle for world supremacy.

I am not sure earlier, but I think Australia gained more from these past few Tests than South Africa. They have been able to come back from a hiding at home and beat South Africa with a Test to spare. If Australia had lost this series, their aura of invincibility would have been shattered forever and other teams would play more confidently against them. Now, everyone thinks that the South African victory was a fluke and, besides, how many times has Australia ever won in India?

Australia has also unearthed some gems. Johnson, obviously, is the show-off candidate, shining with both bat and ball. As if the dazzling top order was not enough, now teams have to worry about the tail wagging feriously. If Australia can hit almost 200 runs after being 6 down against one of the best attacks around, that is not good news for the middling bowling of other teams.

But Johnson was also devastating with the ball with his partner Peter Siddle. An underbowled Katich also picked up 5 wickets at 11 runs each. For those who suggest Ponting is a brilliant captain based on this series victory, it is strange that he hardly bowled Katich and Clarke even when the South Africans were piling up their huge score in this Test.

The young Phillip Hughes has been a great find. After a quick duck in his first innings, he played three good hands to wreck South Africa’s hopes of winning the series. However, these good words cannot be said for the other new faces in the team, McDonald and Hilfenhaus, whose days in the team may be numbered.

The big shots in the Australian team, Ponting, Hussey and Clarke, did not make a significant mark in this series. If the trend continues, this could be a troubling issue for Australia. I still don’t think that Australia’s problems lie in their batting. Remember that Australia were bowled out for 207 in the 2nd innings of the first Test (compared to 209 this Test) and still won. Australia won when they were able to get South Africa out cheaply.

Australia’s next series, the Ashes in English conditions, will likely be much easier on the bowlers. But there will less room for error since the England bowlers are also likely to perform better. With Lee’s return, the bowling attack will gain some more teeth. However, Australia are still without a good spin option.

Is there any significance to the innings defeat? After all, it is the first time since 1998 (in India!) that Australia have lost by an innings. Considering it was a dead rubber, I don’t think anyone should read too much into it, except for the bowling failure. Everything reeked of lack of motivation and, if Johnson had not swung his bat around, they would have deserved to lose by much more.

[Photo licensed from stibbons]

Well, it didn’t take too long on the fifth day for the South Africans to bundle the No. 1 ranking and give it back to Australia. The defeat was particularly ironic in that South Africa made the largest innings score in the match, ranking among some of the highest 4th innings scores in history. If they had only made a similar score the first time around, maybe they would have had a chance of saving the match.

Kudos to Australia from coming back from demoralizing Test and one-day series losses to SA at home, and then beating them in their own den with a bunch of debutants who performed brilliantly. This puts the previous South African win in a different light now. Maybe they were just lucky in the first two Tests in Australia. But the defeats helped Australia regroup and reclaim what is definitely theirs. They deserve it.

We, on this blog, have been guilty, like many others, of gloating at Australia’s recent troubles. But I would justify it as hoping for a more level playing ground for teams and greater competitiveness on the world stage. Think of how boring the 2003 and 2007 World Cups were. This is not just about Australia. There is nothing more nauseating than watching two mismatched teams play, which pretty much defines any match played by Australia in the last few years. This post by Philip Oliver misses that point.

For SA, maybe they can try to regain some pride by winning the last match. They still have a lot of work to do in the coming years to prepare for the next encounter with the Aussies. I would say that this series defeat would rankle more than the previous 3-0 whitewashes. Rarely have we seen the crown snatched so cruelly and so quickly from a new monarch.

Very unlikely, but if it happens, this is how it would happen.

England have a lead of 82 runs scored over 15 overs. There are 90 overs on the final day. If they bat only 30 overs, then they leave the West Indians 60 overs to get what they hit in 45 overs. Enough time for bowling them out, but enough time to allow them to win too. More likely, they will have to bat 43 overs with a 2-over break, thus challenging WI to make a 58-over target in 45 overs.

That is almost a 1-day scenario. Enough temptation. Will the West Indians go for it? And if they do, will the English bowlers have the guile to take them out? So far, they have not demonstrated anything of the sort. Of course, if someone can do a Taylor once again.

On a different continent, the South Africans need 302 runs with effectively only 7 wickets in hand. The only remaining batsmen who have made a mark in recent times are Duminy, Boucher and Steyn. Not very inspiring. Scoring 300 on the last day is never an easy task in any situation. Only saving grace is that the most threatening Australian bowlers seem to be injured. But then you know what happens: On comes Michael Clarke to make a mockery of the match situation.

Seriously, South Africa have to score at least 100 without losing a wicket and 200 without losing more than two. That makes it 100-odd to get with 25-30 overs and 5 wickets in hand. Then it is game on. If Boucher or Morkel can blast some boundaries at that point, then it will be pretty close. Of course, Australia have more options in a Test match to play negatively and avoid losing the match unlike a one-dayer.

All bets are off if South Africa lose early wickets tomorrow. It would be a much more interesting situation if it was only 200 to get today. South Africa could keep trying. But in this case, if they lose early wickets, Ponting can attack more without worrying about the odd boundary and put greater pressure and start toppling wickets.

As much as I would like the two matches to bring some surprises, I think we are in for boring foregone conclusions: Australia win and West Indies draw, sealing their respective series.

Australia have batted South Africa out of the match and series after the 3rd day and it would take an innings of Hanif Mohammed proportions from a South African batsman to save the day. Not only does the current form of the Australian bowlers rule that out, the South Africans have to do it with their captain out of the running and their foremost batsman probably still under the mental strain of being hit on the jaw.

What a damb squib this series has turned out to be. I am reminded of the Ashes 5-0 whitewash that followed the 1995 classic series in England. Or how the Australians steamrolled past every team in the last World Cup after losing to England in the tri-series and drubbed 3-0 by New Zealand. When you mess with the Australians, heaven help you. They come back and they come back strong.

The story behind this series has been the injuries that has made the Australian comeback possible, though not in ways that they anticipated. Brett Lee and Stuart Clark, both fearsome bowlers, were out of the running for this series. But their replacements have been more than competent, punishing the SA team. It is embarrassing how deep the Australian talent pool is, and how ashamed the Australian Cricket Board should be to have thrown away the last series by keeping non-performers like Hayden around, when they could have had Hughes. 

For the SA team, injuries have been disasters. Smith’s injuries prevent him from leading the effort against pumped up Australian debutants out to prove themselves. Without Smith’s leadership (and undoubtedly, he has more of that than Ricky Ponting), the South Africans seem lost. Kallis has not been great against Australia, but something is always better than nothing, and although he came back from retired hurt, he didn’t last too long.

The West Indies almost had a disaster today losing Gayle to an injury, but the new-look West Indian team is intense and knows how to last out there. Once again, they crossed 100 overs and look good for another century of overs. If and when they overhaul the England score, they will have completed the biggest upset in recent times, and set up England to look forward to another miserable Ashes against a rejuvenated Australia.

Finally, we cannot ignore Sachin’s injury when he was very close to making the first double-century in ODIs. Given how 300 is an average score nowadays and how regularly teams cross 350, the day is not far away for someone. It would have been sweet justice to have Sachin Tendulkar cross that magic figure, just as he should get his first triple century before he retires. Maybe some other day.

As the history of SA’s World Cup difficulties show, they come ever so near the prize and then self-destruct. After managing to defeat Australia at home, all they had to do was hold their nerve against an inexperienced new Australian team at home and lay claim to the No. 1 title without anybody objecting. At the end of the 2nd day in the second Test against the Australians, they are already looking at a demoralizing defeat (Test and series), their captain out for several weeks and perhaps even a whitewash.

What a change from just a few weeks back when South Africa had beat Australia in the second Test to clinch the away series and then beat them again in the one-day series. Even without their captain, Graeme Smith, they won the ODI series with a match to spare. Australia, on the other hand, seemed beaten down and failed to even beat the New Zealand team in the following one-day series.

The key to Australia’s comeback has been the excellent performance of their debutants and Mitchell Johnson. Even without his bat talking in this match, he has made an impact, striking fear into the hearts of the South African batsman, like we have not seen in some time. Today has been a ferocious advertisement for hostile fast bowling.

South Africa’s hopes lie in some amazing heroics by Jean-Paul Duminy and Dale Steyn. They have done it before, but history rarely repeats itself and not so soon either. With only 10 batsman in the team after Smith’s injury, they would first have to get very close to Australia, then bowl them out for nothing and then not do the same as the Australian batsmen. Tall order. Possible, but improbable. If it happens, that would be one of the greatest comebacks in Test cricket. 

ICL is not the first attempt by cricketers to try to take advantage of their earning potential. One attempt was the World Series Cricket organized by Kerry Packer. Like the ICL, players who participated in the World Series were banned from international cricket. However, after two seasons of various matches (Supertests and one-day matches), there was a rapprochement and former WSC players returned back to their teams. 

WSC popularized one-day cricket to the detriment of Test cricket. It also showed how money can be made from cricket. The day-night matches in the WSC have become quite popular now throughout the cricketing world. Colored clothing was also introduced during this period.

While WSC was simply competitive capitalism in action, the other example of cricketers ignoring their national body’s directives was despicable. These were the rebel tours to South Africa during the 1980s.  There were tours from England, Australia, Sri Lanka and West Indies. The last was the most surprising as South Africa was in throes of apartheid at that time. Most players who went to South Africa were banned for life, and that was the end of many careers. 

The South African tours were bad, but the fact remains that many cricketers who went there were ready to throw away their ambitions for an entire career for a few pieces of silver. If cricket had provided more profitable opportunities for them at both international and national level, these tours would not have attracted the talent that they did.

Australia go 1-0 up in the away series against South Africa, beating them by a comprehensive 162 runs. Except for a brief period during the fourth day, Australia dominated the match, even though they entered the match with one of the least experienced teams in their cricketing history.

This Test has given Australia a lot of positives:

1. The debutants have done well: North with a century, Hughes with a 50+ score to extend the lead and Hilfenhaus with a few critical wickets.
2. Ponting and Clarke continue to be in form.
3. Johnson is turning into a true menace with the ball. And if that is not enough, he is making bucketloads of runs.
4. Bowling was Australia’s weak link and that seems to be less of a concern with the performance in this match.

However, Australia cannot go back to complacency based on this performance against an opponent, which is still among  the most talented outfits in cricket. There remain some concerns and areas of improvement.

1. The debutants did well with an asterisk. North didn’t perform the second time around. Hughes gloved the ball twice in his 2nd innings, but escaped because Smith did not use a referral against him. 3 wickets for Hilfenhaus is not anything spectacular and he could go either way in the next matches. With the pressure of the debut match over, it is anybody’s guess how each person would perform in the next Test.
   
   
2. McDonald was a disappointment with both bat and ball. He may be retained for the next Test, but he is (or should be) under pressure to show some results.
   
   
3. Michael Hussey continues his slump in Test cricket with a painful 4 in the first innings and a golden duck in the second. His ever-decreasing average is down to that of mere mortals, 57.11. This is his fourth duck in the last six Tests. Until this improves, Australia have a gaping hole in one of the most critical batting positions.
   
   
4. Australia’s first innings total was made possible only by some serious rearguard action after they were reduced to 182 for 5. Johnson’s unbeaten 96 with 5 sixes is not something he will repeat every time he bats. In fact, that was his highest first-class score. Next time, the South Africans would be better prepared for an assault by the tailenders.
   
   
5. The top order of the South Africans all made some runs in one of the innings. So that may give them some confidence. Johannesburg has been one of their worst venues. And so it is too early to call this series for the Australians.