2015 World Cup – Game 28 – India v West Indies

It starts at 6 am our time, and yet I won’t see much as I am off to work. I value my sleep and I need to have my wits about me tomorrow.

India seek to continue their dominant ways, while Virat Kohli may try to find someone else to scream at. The West Indies, meanwhile, better not win given the poverty they inflicted on the BCCI after the aborted tour at the end of 2014.

Comment away.

Ambivalent

Rather than jot down some thoughts this lunchtime, I thought I’d rather take a seat in a quiet place and have a relaxation of the eyes. After all, you lot are doing all the talking for me.

Let me say a few things on the issues that seem to be exercising the minds of those on here, and those on Twitter. The thing is, I don’t care enough to get angry about them. In fact, I’m to be persuaded on many of them. The fact is, you don’t need to be stridently in favour of something to write about it. I think, sometimes, I make that mistake.

Take the associates. The attitude to them has been that they’ve been a blast of fresh air, and indeed, the games between them have been quite exciting, been well played and enjoyable. For that reason, they should remain. The reason they shouldn’t isn’t because of 2007 and the elimination of India and Pakistan after three games each. But let’s face it, all sport is about money. I’m never one for the person who believes fervently in something to say “it just is” as I tend to see when it comes to keeping the World Cup with a full quota of associates. Indeed I’ve seen sports writers who moan like billy-o when our precious England footballers have to play San Marino, who then go on about how wonderful the associate play is. I hate seeded draws, I hate anything that isn’t totally even playing field about sport. It drives me mad.

The key issue is that the game needs to spread worldwide, and yet there is a vested interest in keeping the status quo. If I were the West Indies I wouldn’t go near any of the teams below me in the World rankings with a barge pole. If I were England, I wouldn’t give a shit as we are one of the Big Three. I have no idea what the right answer is. What I know it isn’t is the status quo, and it’s not the line-up in 2019 either. But sorry, and leave the WIndies out of this for a minute, but I hate seeing teams have 400 piled upon them in World Cup cricket. I’m a batsman, I love great batting, but this is now so loaded in the batsman’s favour that when bowling is sub-par, it’s play-time for good players.

I don’t have the answers, but I’m not comfortable with seeing Australia wallop 417 against a clearly over-matched associate team. Start your engines, as I feel a tidal wave of dissent coming my way. I’m also not comfortable with the 2019 set-up as it is too long, and believe me, there will be dead games. I’m inclined to say there should be eight teams playing, but there should be a pre-qualifying tournament involving all nations. So Asia has a tournament with 10 teams, and three qualify for the finals – this gives a meritocracy, and also means the associate nations like Hong Kong, UAE, Afghanistan, Nepal, et al will get regular cricket against the big boys and have a chance to improve. It’s pie in the sky because no World Cup can conceivably go ahead without India, but let me dream.

I’ve not thought it through because others are doing all that. Maybe I’ll think some more. There’s just not a way through with the system as it is, and the lack of opportunity for associates to make that quantum leap across to get through.

As for bats, well it now makes the game similar to golf. With the development in golf club technology, classic old courses were becoming a joke to pros. Something needed to be done when the US Open, which was won with a score very close to Par over four rounds, saw Tiger Woods annihilate Pebble Beach and win with something like -18. St Andrews became a pitch and putt, Royal Liverpool didn’t require a driver. Old courses like Augusta were lengthened, and now the top championship courses are miles over 7000 yards as technology expanded the horizons. You can’t “un-know” these things.

In cricket we have stadia with pretty fixed dimensions so lengthening the boundaries isn’t an option. Nor is making the bat thinner, as the technology will get round that. So we need to think outside the box a little. Evening up pitches to make the contest fair between bat and ball is all well and good, but hardly definable. Loosening fielding restrictions will only increase those dead overs when batsmen milk 1s and 2s. Two new balls seem to mean the ball is harder to fly around the park at the end of the innings. Here’s a really silly suggestion. For ODI cricket, how about shortening the wicket a foot? Put in a fourth stump? Make the stumps a little higher? They are stupid suggestions, I know, but no more stupid than watching mis-hits fly for six, and so on. While I know a lot of you laugh at Scyld’s column, there’s something, sorry, rather dull than seeing some of this stuff. I am a massive baseball fan, but although I’m a batsman in cricket, I love the duel between pitcher and batsman. When the batters were juiced up, looking like weightlifters, the game went home-run mad. It was dull. It’s so much better to watch a 1-0 pitching duel, where scoring runs is hard, than seeing an 11-10 slugfest when it is easy. It’s a matter of taste. And for me, when it comes to evaluating innings like Warner’s 170-odd or Gayle’s 200, I look and think, that’s the equivalent of Sosa and McGwire back in the day.

I don’t expect you lot to agree, and given by your comments, you don’t, but I’m truly vexed on the issues. Maybe it’s because England don’t play that slugging game that I have the hump. Maybe it’s because I don’t like sporting bullying that I don’t know the answer on the associates. I haven’t seen the answers from anyone else.

Feel free to comment. I’m truly open-minded on the associates – and I do agree they need to play proper international cricket against full nations (for example, England, Scotland, Ireland and Netherlands play a European Cup – why not? Imagine the fun when we don’t win it…) – but I don’t think this format is the way, nor do I think the 2019 one is either. As for the bats…..

Oh well. I don’t pretend I’ve thought these through, so off you go….

2015 World Cup – Game 24 – South Africa v Ireland

After the stupidity and rancour of the last 36 hours, let’s get back to cricket. Tonight’s game looks like a walkover, with AB the Unstoppable in prime form, and with Ireland looking a little over-matched. But this Irish bunch is a resilient team I think we all get a lot of fun from watching, and who we want to see a lot more of. Canberra can mean runs……lots of them.

Any comments from those who can should be left here.

If anyone is interested, John has followed up my blog post with a comment. You can read his views. I’m not particularly interested in responding, if truth be told. I made my point. He made his. Would I prefer restraint in the comments? Probably. Do I moderate? As little as possible. I’m not The Guardian BTL, that’s for sure. I would, actually, prefer if you all just left it where it is, and didn’t chip in now. But I won’t stop you. Keep it clean.

Enjoy the game, for those who can get to watch it.

2015 World Cup – Game 22 – England v Sri Lanka

Wellington. Eight days ago. Annihilation.

Welcome back England, for an important game in the qualification process. Win, and we may get South Africa or India, lose and we may get South Africa or India. There’s a lot riding on this one. Actually, that’s being facetious. The big game in this group may not be this one, although winning it would help, but the one against Bangladesh. I’m looking past Afghanistan which may not be wise, but the Sri Lankans have alread buried Bangla and struggled past Afgha, so they have their two wins out of the way.

This thread is for comments as the game goes on. Also, follow my other alter ego, you know what it is, on Twitter for comments through the evening.

The past form guide isn’t good. We lost in 2011, in the quarters, in a stuffing. We lost in 2007, in the Super 8s, when Ravi and Paul Nixon came so close to snatching a win, which I was trying to listen to while at the same time listen to my future wife in the car back from Heathrow Airport, having not seen her for around 2 months! She still doesn’t understand this obsession with cricket. In 2003 we didn’t meet, whereas we did in 1999 when we won a low-key damp opening day game (I had a George Sharp anecdote re no play at The Oval, then found out it was another time – probably 2004… only five years out). Then there was Faisalabad in 1996, memorable for the brainstorm of picking Phil de Freitas and getting him to bowl spin! Brilliant times. Oh those Illingworth years….

Mark The Week

My blogging world, as you may be able to tell, is in a little bit of turmoil. I am hopeful that I will soon be able to at least reinstate the old blog (on a different URL) for you all to refer to as needs be. I am sure most of you might know that I deleted the original URL, but all posts are backed up. I may have more of an idea on that in the middle of next week. That will also dispel one of the better guesses as to why I deleted it – the ECB suing me for libel – which hasn’t happened, but that would have put a few stripes on my shoulder if they had….. although let’s not go there.

So what’s to talk about? The guys on here are doing the greatest job in disrobing the pretence of equanimity by Dave Richardson. The two games this week between UAE and Ireland and Afghanistan v Scotland were fantastic entertainment. The latter may even be game of the tournament as Afghanistan pulled victory out from nowhere with a joy unconstrained. For that is what sport is about – watching great matches whoever plays them. There’s too much focus on the “big teams” who rarely put on great games it seems. Before we get too far ahead of ourselves, only Scotland have played one of the four best teams so far – New Zealand – and UAE v India tonight will be important, because an associate giving India a run for its money would be incredibly important. Australia v Scotland could also see some rancour from those who just want to see the big boys playing each other.

We can have this debate in full after the World Cup group stages in particular, but it’s pretty clear what side of the debate is in the ascendancy at the moment. Games between the full test nations have been, with one disgraceful exception, a case of bat first, hammer the opposition. So while we’ve watched a double hundred by Chris Gayle, and the second passing of Hurricane ABe, the fact is that chasing any sort of target has been unachievable by a full test team against another one. D’Arthez is all over this on the comments.

Elsewhere we have had the leaked document – how jolly unfortunate that was – from the new bigwigs at the ECB. Clearly thinking the unthinkable, we are presented with the sort of “we’ve got to change things” bollocks that is less about the future of the game and more about some sort of legacy for the marketing geniuses and new head honchos. I’m sick to death of this sort of nonsense. Test cricket should not be touched, and yes, I’ve heard all that death of test cricket twaddle for the best part of 20 years and funnily enough it is still here. 40 over ODIs are a load of bilge. Yes, the 50 over format doesn’t appear to be loved, but that’s because the matches are so frequent that often many players are rested, they are played on roads, especially at some notorious venues for bowlers, and when the main competitions come around, there is some sort of ODI fatigue. Three day county championship cricket is a classic example of if you hang around long enough the old ideas come back around. As for franchising in, you didn’t seriously think this load of brain boxes were going to replace the county stuff, did you? This is pure League Cup to FA Cup jollop.

So Colin Graves, elected of course (hang about, did I miss this election?) to the head position in the ECB was disappointed this was leaked. He’d better get used to that. He then says that he didn’t want to be accused of leaving any ideas out, which is, of course, utter twaddle. The new David Collier is obvious one of those sorts who thinks you think the unthinkable, and I’m just getting the impression based on nothing in particular, that he’s the cricket equivalent of this bloke. (note NSFW – well the very last word is).

There’s so much wrong with the document that I can’t fathom why it was leaked 🙂

Meanwhile on press row, there is a world out there where paul newman gets nominated for cricket reporter of the year (last year of all years!!!!) and George Dobell doesn’t. Yes, that thing you saw flying out of the window was that organisation’s credibility. Of that grouping, if Nick Hoult doesn’t win, then there’s a bit of a stitch up. But at the end of the day, they can do what they please….

I have had just fleeting watches of the Cricket World Cup, but have all the games played so far on highlights. I also ran off a game last night, and just happened to have the whole of AB deVilliers 162 not out live. I think I might be watching that a little.

I’ve also done no analysis on the competition as yet. I think a lot of us had Ireland as the first associate to defeat a test team, and some of us went a bit OTT on the run outs! I’ll look to see what I can do on that this weekend.

But what I’ve seen, and what I’ve read of this World Cup, I’ve enjoyed it.

Looking forward to being able to live blog through tomorrow night’s game. Not sure I’ll be around much for the games tonight and tomorrow morning (sleep and chores).

Thanks, as always, for the comments. I do read them all. Top stuff.