2015 World Cup Semi-Final – India v Australia

Can’t they both lose?

Comments below. I’ll be awake a bit earlier tomorrow, so I’ll try to watch some of this on the train if I can get my Sky Go up and running.

We are all Black Caps now (presumably if you aren’t Indian or Australian or desperate to win the contest).

Thanks for all the nice words below. It’s always good to know people like the blog.

Advertisements

44 thoughts on “2015 World Cup Semi-Final – India v Australia

  1. Mark Mar 25, 2015 / 11:20 pm

    I am betting on an Australian win. People keep saying India are now showing their true form. I have my doubts. They were no match for the Aussies in the tri nations or the Test series.

    I think the whole game will come down to the Aussie quicks against the India top order batting. If the Indians can get a score they may pull it off. But I think if this match was played 10 times the Aussies would win 8-2.

    Like

  2. Annie Weatherly-Barton Mar 26, 2015 / 12:06 am

    Okay guys. Just had interesting chat with Simon Hughes on Twitter. Quite an eye opener. I tweeted the Collomosso piece. He was not happy about that. Questions from him ensued and I did my best – not like a lot of you guys would of course. I asked him some serious question but he seems to have gone quiet. Still good on him for engaging and not blocking me for disagreeing with him. I’ve put a summary under “furious” piece as it seemed to fit under that title. It is very strange when you see where they are coming from and make their point about KP and his rants etc and then when I say: wasn’t that more or less what Cook did last week and isn’t it what Gatting and Ravi were doing on Cricinfo today? So okay for one but not for everyone it seems. The blind spot is more like a huge big boil in their eyes. Why is that? What is it that we can all see that they cannot see?

    I think Aussies will win but I’m rooting for India.

    Like

    • Benny Mar 26, 2015 / 12:26 am

      I have to chuckle a bit that someone proudly claims the title The Analyst. I want to see him in the ring with The Rock or The Undertaker

      Like

    • Mark Mar 26, 2015 / 9:18 am

      Annie your debate with Hughes is priceless. Hughes starts off by claiming that KP playing second division cricket is not a good preparation for playing for England. You reply, not unreasonably that Cook plays second division cricket too. Hughes then says what’s your point?

      It’s like trying to debate with a petulant 4 year old. He seems to be following his leader in the petulant stakes.

      This bit I find very revealing “He has said Form is not what cricket is about – that’s how it comes across to me ” No surprise here because their illustrious leader has not shown any form for nearly 2 years. So lack of performance is not what cricket is about apparently. Well it is if your name is Cook. But if your name is Compton, or Carberry and many others form is everything cricket is about.

      So what is elite cricket about if it’s not about performance? As I have said before these people see England as a sort of private club. They want to run it as a glorified village team. Players get in because of who they know, not what they know.

      Like

      • Annie Weatherly-Barton Mar 26, 2015 / 10:16 am

        I went to bed without all the questions being answered. However more happened between George Dobell and others with Simon. I think it has petered out now. Some bloke chimed in this morning telling me to basically get over myself as Alistair Cook hasn’t played for Essex for over 10 years. I told him he was wrong as Cook played for Essex last year! Didn’t like that much. So doesn’t make any difference because Cook was on a central contract. Of course I didn’t know that (yawn!) Anyway gone now.

        Wonder why Mr Hughes didn’t answer my questions about Ravi, Gatting piece on Cricinfo? Mention about Cook slagging off his team mate and ECB management but no reply. Someone said: “double standards” but nothing came back to that one. George Dobell weighed in. Well that livened up my morning.

        Like

      • Mark Mar 26, 2015 / 10:30 am

        “Some bloke chimed in this morning telling me to basically get over myself as Alistair Cook hasn’t played for Essex for over 10 years.”

        It’s the cult of Alastair Cook. Reason goes out of the window. Form is irrelevant, results are irrelevent.

        Like

      • BigKev67 Mar 26, 2015 / 12:07 pm

        Not for all of us Mark.
        Believe it or not there are some of us out there who can support KP’s sacking without thinking that Cook has a divine right to captain the England side in perpetuity. Or who think, very strongly, that Flower should have been moved on at the same time as KP. Or who think that Downton has been a disaster regardless of his position on KP.
        Sections of the media and the ECB have propagated this whole “all or nothing” argument – that if you agreed with KP’s sacking, you have to accept the rest of the package. It’s not true. It’s never been true. Downton and Cook don’t get a free pass from me just because I supported one decision they took.

        Like

      • Mark Mar 26, 2015 / 12:18 pm

        Kev, there is an honest argument for not having KP in the team. But they have not made it, and instead decided to protect Cook at all costs rather than make a consistent argument for removing KP.

        They can’t do this because if they did, the criteria would have to apply to Cook as well. Ie decline in form, and failure to score big runs. Apparently Cooks form is not an issue. The playing of 2nd division cricket is not an issue for Cook. But it is for KP.

        It is this over protection of Cook that annoys me more than the dropping of KP.

        Like

      • BigKev67 Mar 26, 2015 / 12:52 pm

        I think there’s a section of the KP fan club who will never be reconciled with any argument for his removal, well made or not. But there is also, as you say, a section on the other side who are hell bent on protecting Cook.
        I understand it at least vaguely in the test arena. Averaging 49 in his last series, even without a century, is probably enough to keep his place. I would have taken the captaincy off him after Lords and given it to Broad – but given Broad’s seemingly terminal loss of pace, that may have just created more problems.
        But no doubt some of the media rhetoric around Cook is nauseating. And his comments last week were rather indicative of a spoiled brat who’s lost his marbles. I think with the advent of Graves he knows change is afoot and is trying to position himself. But if that’s an example of how he does it, he should just shut up and concentrate on getting some runs. Like Downton, the more he opens his mouth the worse he sounds.
        I think we’re stuck with him until any Ashes defeat and then the Root accession. I guess the reason I’m more sanguine about Cook than some is because the alternative captaincy options really are so poor. But Graves is itching to shake things up. I can see KP back post-Ashes, and Moores, Cook and Downton all gone. Wonder what the media will make of that?? 🙂

        Like

      • Tuffers86 Mar 26, 2015 / 3:07 pm

        @Mark I don’t think there is an honest argument anymore. Not one that wouldn’t see Cook become collatoral damage, which a week ago, you’d definitely feel sorry for him.

        Cook’s form has hampered any chance they can come out of it clean on the other side. This is why the all-or-nothing card is being played.

        And like all other hands they have dealt, we have the camera view under the perspex table and see it for what it is. All bluff and bluster.

        Liked by 2 people

  3. Benny Mar 26, 2015 / 12:18 am

    I’m not too confident India will cope with the Aussie bowling either but hope they do.

    Tempted to record the match and watch after the family has gone to work

    Like

  4. d'Arthez Mar 26, 2015 / 4:08 am

    Australia won the toss, and elected to bat. They lost Warner quite quickly, in the 4th over. Just 12 of 7 balls.

    34/1 after 7 overs. Shami in particular bowled beautifully, and Yadav was not too shabby either.

    Finch hanging in there, and Smith, well, is Smith.

    Like

  5. @pktroll Mar 26, 2015 / 9:07 am

    With Kohli out I can’t see anything other than an Aussie win now. India needed their top order to get India to a good position come the 40th over where they may have needed 80 or so. After Australia had almost strolled to 200odd for 2 I was thinking a total of 400 was on. India bowled pretty well in the 2nd part of the Aussie innings but let it go in the last 3 overs when Johnson slugged a few quick boundaries. Having got down to him, they will have been disappointed that they didn’t keep their heads a bit.

    Like

  6. d'Arthez Mar 26, 2015 / 10:31 am

    Pretty one-sided now (177/4 after 36). And Rahane gone second ball of the over, after Australia reviewed the faintest nicks.

    Like

  7. SimonH Mar 26, 2015 / 10:33 am

    Richardson speaks and it’s not good:

    “The decision has been made, as we stand it’s a 10-team tournament at the next World Cup, We’ve also got the Cricket World Cup qualifier, which has been upgraded and been granted a higher status. Any decision to change the number of teams that qualify will have a knock-on effect for that qualifying tournament”.

    That qualifier? The one likely to include Bangladesh even though they reached the QFs this time? The one set in Bangladesh which creates a level playing field for, say, Ireland? Above all, the tournament that will not attract the coverage the WC itself will?

    “There are lots of commercial implications to consider. We also need to have a look at the attendances at all the associate games, what were the viewing figures, and see where they really stand.”

    How about looking at performances on the pitch to see “where they really stand”?

    “To me the debate should be more about what are we doing for associate member cricket to enable them to qualify for a World Cup, whether it’s an eight-team, 10-team, 12-team, 14 or 16-team. I think that’s where we’ve made the most progress,”

    Agreed that what happens between WCs is as important and the ICC has done good work here – but since when is it either/or? Then there is the major issue of matches for associates between WCs – is your latest promise ten? Or six? Including matches where associates play each other?

    “We want the World Cup to not just be window-dressing but a shop window for cricket at the highest level.”

    So the football and rugby WCs are full of mere window dressing?

    “Now we realise, let’s not spread ourselves our too thin, we’ve got full member countries, Zimbabwe being one, West Indies maybe, where we’ve got to be careful that they don’t fall off the ship,”

    Spread ourselves too thin? Is world cricket talent a finite thing? You’re going to carry on pumping eight times the money into Zimbabwe than Ireland? Despite where much of that money goes while Ireland have been praised as a model of good governance?

    “USA, as an example, is a country that has enormous potential. It has more players playing cricket in the USA than Zimbabwe and I think very close to the number playing in New Zealand. If UAE can qualify for the World Cup then there’s no reason why USA shouldn’t. So that’s going to be a focus for us in the next few years.”

    Why are the USA the only associate you ever seem to mention by name Richardson? Despite their abysmal governance and poor recent playing record? It couldn’t be the cash, could it?

    And what happened to your competitiveness argument? It couldn’t be that if the associates destroy one of your garbage arguments you (and your “hell-bent” mate Giles) just move the goalposts?

    Desperate news for world cricket.

    Like

    • d'Arthez Mar 26, 2015 / 11:35 am

      Yeah, and we must not forget that the World Cup qualifier had been penciled in to be hosted in Bangladesh (typical English conditions, presumably), long before this tournament started.

      So the ICC had already made their decision, in the hopes of getting away with it, in a tournament in which all the odds were stacked against the smaller teams. Still did not stop Team ECB, the one that sold this stitch up as MERITOCRATIC, from crashing out in the opening round.

      World cricket is in an absolute mess, and I am not sure if it will survive the current administrators.

      I can see it survive in only 3 countries, and then it becomes the most curious of past-times in England and Australia. Congrats India, for beating a bunch of amateurs in 2063, and winning another World Cup.

      Like

    • Tuffers86 Mar 26, 2015 / 3:12 pm

      OH FFS.

      I have not much else to add, but cricket is eating itself. And its absolutely tragic.

      There’s a bloody good chance WI and Zim are done by 2019. There’s only so much money you can pump into them to hide the mess they are in. What then? More associates?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Annie Weatherly-Barton Mar 27, 2015 / 11:35 pm

        Eating itself? Just about the most brilliant term to call this utterly disgusting stitch up. So many wonderfully exciting teams out there buried by the greedy and selfish and power & money grabbing ICC! Axis of evil I’d call it.

        Like

  8. Mark Mar 26, 2015 / 10:57 am

    It all makes perfect sense if your only objective is money.

    ICC is now following the FIFA model where revenue extraction is the only priority. They are a governing body only in name.

    It was interesting to hear a New Zealand cricketer point out the other day that he is looking forward to playing Ausralia at the MCG because they have not done that since 2009. Think about that. Two top cricket nations have not played ODI cricket at the Aussie major stadium for over 6 years. And they are countries that are geographically neighbours. New Zealand are not seen as one of the big 3, and so can’t sell tickets and fill grounds.

    England Vs Ausralia Vs India for eternity!!

    Like

    • d'Arthez Mar 26, 2015 / 11:42 am

      But you have to admit, even FIFA are not that incompetent.

      The UEFA European Championship will have 24 teams soon. 24! That is about half the countries in Europe. But no matter if you’re Germany, or San Marino, you still have to qualify.

      Why can they expand? Because they play MULTIPLE games on the same day, so the tourneys don’t drag on forever. Because they use a knock-out format with small groups, so that the number of games does not bloat massively. A 24 team tournament will have 6 groups of 4.

      That means: 6 * 6 = 36 group games. 8 games in last 16, 4 QFs, 2 semis, and one final. That is 51 games, and that will take about a month to complete. Which is still 50% quicker than a 10 team WC the ICC is envisioning.

      Last time New Zealand played Australia in a bilateral ODI series was February 2010. They have had two Tests in 2011 (New Zealand drew the series in Australia), and a couple of meets in ICC tourneys.

      Like

      • Mark Mar 26, 2015 / 12:10 pm

        “But you have to admit, even FIFA are not that incompetent”

        If your definition of not incompetent Is just making money then maybe so. But The football World Cup bid to give the World Cup to a country that has temperatures of 45- 50 degrees is incompetent and corrupt. Now they they have moved it to a winter World Cup. Which also shows a false bid, and either corruption or incompetence.

        FIFA is now run as a private enterprise to enrich a bunch of old men. They are a governing body only in name. No government will stand against them. ICC in a much more minor way are following their model. Money trumps everything.

        Listen to Richardson………. “There are lots of commercial implications to consider. We also need to have a look at the attendances at all the associate games, what were the viewing figures, and see where they really stand.”……… Follow the money. It’s all the ICC cares about now

        Like

      • d'Arthez Mar 26, 2015 / 12:18 pm

        Can’t dispute any of that. Though bear in mind that the ICC is even worse, as it cannot even reasonably maximise the revenue it generates for itself, or its constituent boards. And FIFA is infinitely more meritocratic. At least there was a pretense of people voting for the hosting of the World Cup. The ICC resolved that by executive decree (that might not be the official name of the measure, but it was not voted on independently from the ICC reforms), as part of their reforms.

        Chances are Germany will play San Marino in a World Cup / European Cup qualifier. It just depends on a draw.

        When is the last time, England bothered with say Zimbabwe? Afghanistan? UAE? Namibia? Bangladesh? The same can be said of Australia (BD, New Zealand, all the Associates).
        All of which have teams that are relatively stronger than San Marino are in football.

        Like

    • SteveT Mar 26, 2015 / 2:20 pm

      Still, it’s more often then England have played Ireland at Lord’s!

      Like

    • thebogfather Mar 26, 2015 / 2:34 pm

      Don’t worry.
      Sir Giles is riding his sweat-stained white charger into Paraguay… He’ll find the ECB a team to provide a challenging opponent (one we can beat) whilst spreading the world of cricket to South America and beyond!

      How to become an ICC full member…

      1. Do you have money?
      2. Do you have a big tv audience?
      3. Do you have oil-fields that need professional management?
      4. Is your Champagne chilled and your Port rested appropriately
      5. Oh, just as an aside – have you anybody who plays cricket?

      (Nose in trough)

      Like

      • Tuffers86 Mar 26, 2015 / 3:17 pm

        How to become an ICC full member…

        1. Do you have money?
        2. Do you have a big tv audience?
        3. Do you have oil-fields that need professional management?
        4. Is your Champagne chilled and your Port rested appropriately
        5. Oh, just as an aside – have you anybody who plays cricket?

        Even if that was the criteria, we’d have more full members than what exists now! The situation is beyond brown envelopes it seems.

        Like

      • thebogfather Mar 26, 2015 / 4:20 pm

        @TUFFERS86

        It’s the last point that screws up the ICC global family – there maybe money out there, but the selective inclusiveness will always prevent global spread of the game. Self interest precludes advancement…

        Like

    • Tuffers86 Mar 26, 2015 / 3:15 pm

      “ICC is now following the FIFA model where revenue extraction is the only priority. They are a governing body only in name.”

      Only difference is Fifa’s methods, no matter how disgusting they appear to be, directly broadens the game, while the ICC remains strictly members-only and insular.

      Like

  9. d'Arthez Mar 26, 2015 / 1:27 pm

    We have rape threats to Anushka Sharma (Kohli’s girlfriend), and a whole host of other unsavoury behaviour back in India.

    What the bleep

    Like

    • thebogfather Mar 26, 2015 / 2:36 pm

      So sadly predictable… I don’t know what else to say

      Like

  10. Tuffers86 Mar 26, 2015 / 3:52 pm

    Strauss is the latest poo-poo KP’s chances.

    http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/mar/26/kevin-pietersen-andrew-strauss-england-return-very-unlikely

    The usual suspects appear. Get your bingo cards out.

    “If you just look at everything that has gone on in the past … his book … that’s a significant hurdle he’ll have to get over. Then also, from a cricketing point of view, in one-day cricket we’ve got to build towards the next World Cup.”

    Book. Check. Building for next WC. Check.

    “Kevin Pietersen [will be] 36 years of age, [so] I can’t see how he would necessarily play in that. Also, in the Test match arena, our top five or six have all been in excellent form. So it’s not as if there is an obvious place in the side for him either.”

    Age. Check. This is confusing. 36? The quote is either again slamming his age like its the most damning thing ever. Or Strauss believes he is actually only 32. Has there ever been a personality where people are always so completely wrong on age?

    Anyway…

    Top five or six in excellent form. Subjective.

    “But I have to say I still think it’s very unlikely that he’ll play for England again. It’s going to take something extraordinary, England to lose a lot of games and for Pietersen to score a lot of runs – and probably for a captain or a coach, or both, to lose their jobs in the process.”

    England are not exactly blazing it. Already at a very low ebb, Strauss. Pietersen will score runs. Both plausible.

    “I’d be surprised if he plays in this Ashes series – and if he doesn’t, then it’s counter-intuitive that he would then come back in the side when they’d be building again towards the next Ashes series in two-and-a-half years’ time. There would have to be a lot of things that go wrong with the England cricket team between now and the start of the Ashes for him to come back.”

    Oh building again, are we? Carpe diem.

    Like

    • Silk Mar 26, 2015 / 4:03 pm

      To be fair to Strauss, he also commends KP on what he’s doing.

      Personally I find Strauss to be part deluded, and part unimaginative.

      It’s deluded to that the top 6 are ‘in excellent form’. 2 of them are. Ballance and Root. Bell is in passable form. Cook is in rotten form and Robson has been dropped. Ali is injured.

      The unimaginative part is that the possibility that we might lose 3 or 4 of the next 5 Tests doesn’t appear to have crossed his mind. If that happens Cook and Moores are both gone.

      Like

      • Simon K Mar 26, 2015 / 4:45 pm

        If Clownton goes it will almost certainly because Harrison decides to delete the post, with the agreement of the (post-Clarke) board.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Vian Mar 26, 2015 / 4:47 pm

        They’re more likely to abolish the role if they get rid of Downton.

        Like

      • Vian Mar 26, 2015 / 4:49 pm

        Dammit Simon, you could have waited two minutes! 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

  11. Annie Weatherly-Barton Mar 26, 2015 / 6:56 pm

    The man who can only talk with words of four letters tells us that KP will never play for England again? Too confrontational and Cook & Moores would have to leave? When do these people start to grow up? Pathetic. I used to so like and admire Strauss but not any more. Strauss had plenty to say after the texting stuff but very little to say about the pain he and his team-mates caused by the Twitter Account. That was played down as nothing. These bloody people make me so angry. Hypocrites one and all.

    Like

    • dvyk Mar 26, 2015 / 8:52 pm

      It’s all quite putrid isn’t it. Strauss should realise that what he said disqualifies him from credibility when talking about KP.

      In any case case all these fellows are doing is trying to control the public debate about it. It’s just like Brenkley saying talk of Cook losing the ODI captaincy is mere windbaggery.

      I noticed in KP’s book that he said a change of management and he’d be able to come back. And he said that at a time when all these windbags were saying he’s gone for good. If KP was into cheap point scoring he could already declare great victory, just for being declared selectable again, but it looks like he’s really only interested in playing cricket.

      Like

      • dvyk Mar 26, 2015 / 8:59 pm

        And attempts to hush up public talk of KP haven’t exactly worked in the past….

        And the other thing they don’t realise is that the more they talk down the chances of a comeback, the greater his achievement will appear if he does, and the stupider they’ll look.

        Like

      • Annie Weatherly-Barton Mar 26, 2015 / 11:46 pm

        That’s absolutely right. As a woman the word Strauss used is so offensive, it really is. Now I’ve heard it all in my time but that is really the worst of all. You are absolutely bang on. He has no right. He got caught out and it will haunt him. Many will forget it but I won’t. Really & truly upset me to hear it especially coming out of the mouth of Strauss. I told him so on Twitter!

        They all need to get together and have a bloody great row and clear the air and start acting like grown ups rather than a bunch of school kids. Cook is supposed to be captain and slightest thing and he throws all his toys out of his pram. Take a leaf out of the NZ team. Another management mess up happened with them. They had to have a damn good row about it all and sort themselves and play together. Some of them don’t like each other much but they play together. Aussies didn’t get on. It was known that Ponting and Warne really didn’t hit it off at all, but they played together and were fantastic. When are our players going to stop acting like a bunch of Prima Donnas? Grow up boys. Leave it too long and you will all be past it and only have failure to pin on the wall! Maybe if they do lose to the Windies it will shake them all enough to sort themselves out. Do what Darren Gough did with Swanny “the mouth” – take him round back of bike shed and sort themselves out. Have a real upper and downer and then get on with playing the game.

        Like

    • thebogfather Mar 27, 2015 / 10:05 am

      many thanks to my ‘little (or) fan Annie – it seems I’ve now got my own press officer!

      Like

  12. paulewart Mar 27, 2015 / 8:20 am

    The difference between Australia, New Zealand and England? Australia and NZ made the tough calls, they then got in with it. At no stage did they drop their best player. If Clarke can play with Watto and Ross Taylor (who suffered a far greater humiliation than Cook) can play with BMac, surely Cook can play with KP. If he can’t, drop him.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s