The recently concluded Champions Trophy has certainly cleared quite a few doubts whether the ODI 50-over cricket format is here to stay or not and whether a tournament like the Champions Trophy should hold any future in cricket, considering the amount of cricket that is being played nowadays
The recently concluded Champions Trophy has certainly cleared quite a few doubts whether the ODI 50-over cricket format is here to stay or not and whether a tournament like the Champions Trophy should hold any future in cricket, considering the amount of cricket that is being played nowadays. In my honest opinion this was surely of the tournaments that I really enjoyed watching and the intensity level seemed much better than the one and a half month’s World Cup which was held in Caribbean two years ago. It could be argued that 'even the last Champions Trophy had the same format but yet this one is being differentiated from that?' Well, the answer to that is the poor quality of the pitches that were provided in India which made life really tough for the viewers to be able to watch batsmen labour around to get totals like 200. This time around the wickets were a lot better and supportive to all departments and that’s exactly why we saw some well balanced cricket. It reminded me of the matches of till early 2000 where 300 run mark was very much gettable, yet teams struggled to get there despite maintaining the scoring-rates. The qualification round between Sri Lanka, West Indies, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe a week before the beginning of the tournament itself didn´t help the cause either back in 2006. Less number of matches, particularly in bilateral ODI series´, will definitely increase the hunger of people and it will make such competitions even more interesting in future. There were lots of positives to come from this tournament and cricket was played well within the spirit of the game - which was epitomized by Andrew Strauss´ and Daniel Vettori´s sporting decision to let the batsman continue playing which were the most romantic moments of the entire tournament.
Having shared my overall views briefly on the format and the arrangement of the tournament, I would now like to shed some light on performances of all the eight participating teams one by one and see where it went all right and wrong for them.
Australia
It just amazes as how they keep winning tournaments so consistently despite the fact that quite a few of their great players have retired and they now have a fairly inexperienced side. Ricky Ponting really led from the front and other seniors such as Brett Lee and Michael Hussey, who was struggling of late, came to the party at the nick of time. Apart from them Shane Watson and Nathan Hauritz were revolution this time around. The former in the sense that he went through the matches without any injury scares and showed tremendous application and maturity in the semi-final and final, and the latter for coming on top despite being absolutely written off well before the Ashes itself. He surprised a few in the U.K and really delivered with the ball, not to mention his valuable runs while batting at number 10 against Pakistan when it all seemed down and out for his team. People are talking about New Zealand’s struggle against fitness but one does get a little surprised by reflecting on the fact that even the Australians were without the likes of Bradd Haddin, Michael Clarke and Nathan Bracken. They received a little scare in the group matches against West Indies and Pakistan, but once they got passed that stage they were back to their business best in big matches. I truly enjoyed their performance and I will rate this as the most memorable and enjoyable of all their triumphs in my lifetime, probably because then it was certain that they will win it (making it all a little boring) and that "favourite" tag followed up with other teams this time around. They had to work harder with this newly built up squad. The skipper was as graceful and elegant as always with the bat, only difference was the added responsibility of being the 'daddy' in the team and he delivered astonishingly.
England
"If you live by the sword, you die by it" were the words uttered by Andrew Strauss in the post match press conference having lost to Australia in the semi-final, and that was the first ever positive signs to come from England concerning the ODI format of the game. I was very delighted by their showing in this tournament where they well exceeded the expectations. Change of plan and tactics was there to be noticed once Paul Collingwood came out to bat against Sri Lanka. That guy was awesome to watch and he was in a very good six-hitting mood throughout the tournament. Bowling short to him proved very dangerous as well. Eoin Morgan rang the bell in the ears with his fearless hitting against the Proteas and also composed innings against Sri Lanka. He does not look too bothered about the opposition’s bowling attack either. James Anderson seems to be enjoying the role of a spearhead and bowled wonderfully. I really enjoyed his efforts in bit of helpful conditions. The reason behind my delight for their performance is their refreshing approach which changed drastically in this particular tournament. In the past, barring the days of Andrew Flintoff or Kevin Pietersen, we always saw them to be playing with extra caution and in wait for something to happen. Andrew Strauss´ example of sword was thus right in a sense since the game is all about being positive, brave and taking risks with heart. Test cricket can be deemed to be otherwise. I hope they will continue playing in the same fashion, because their cautious approach of past few years will get them nowhere.
India
A real disappointment they were and it is definitely not nice being knocked out so early in a consecutive ICC tournament after the World Twenty20 2009. Their batting still remains their mainstay despite the emergence of some much rated pace bowlers. Venkatesh Prasad, their bowling coach, looks to have played board games like Ludo or Chess, or perhaps even some card games as the bowlers nowhere gave even an iota reflection of having attended any coaching sessions. Much was expected from Harbhajan Singh on the helpful conditions for the spinners, and particularly after having struck some late form in tri-series in Sri Lanka, but he came to no good for them. Despite all this they came so close to qualifying for the semi-finals. They had done all their homework for the game against West Indies and it all was then dependent on Pakistan’s bowlers against the Australians to get them through. However, it wasn’t to be as a billion hearts were broken by a last-ball thriller which saw the Aussies overcome some brilliant 'late-found' bowling energy by Pakistan. The deserved teams got through but Indians will console their hearts in the thought that one of their games was rained-off. And I think it is fair enough in a sense that their batsmen were not left to give it a shot. Australia were comfortably placed at 234/4 in 42.3 overs by the time rain came down and they were looking good to reach the 'ever-so-challenging' 300 run mark, and thus they looked the favourites to be able to defend. But then it has to be said that they themselves would have lost the match and luck wouldn’t have matter so much. Of course the same could be said for Australia as well. Their chase always looked well on the track against their arch-rival (Pakistan), but they kept losing wickets at regular intervals which derailed them. Thing for them now is to ignore most of the IPL "flash in the pan" performances and look to solve their bowling issues. Bilateral ODI series´ victories can make your team and players to be the top ranked, but they matter a little coming into an ICC tournament. They will have to sort out their problems come the next Twenty20 World Cup in a six months´ time, otherwise the "chokers" tag is well on its way to India. One has to give it to them for they were already without Zaheer Khan (probably their best pace bowler) and Virender Sehwag and the latest injury to Yuvraj Singh did strike their chances a blow. But that cannot be an excuse for such an average showing considering the fact that even other teams had to deal their share of injuries as well.
New Zealand
So close but yet so far. It has to be said that they really fought their own limited abilities to come to the final like the way they did. Their campaign started in a very familiar fashion when they went down against the hosts, but they really lifted themselves to overcome the Sri Lankans. Their players kept doing well and kept getting injured on the other hand. It really is a huge matter of concern the number of injury they have in their bank every time they start playing a tournament. Jesse Ryder kicked off things against Sri Lanka by hitting their bowlers all around the park. Daniel Vettori was instrumental in their success before joining the injured players´ list in the final, which was a huge blow to them. He really led from the front like Ricky Ponting and wasn’t reluctant to bat higher in the order either, not to mention his consistent and accurate bowling. He really showed some guts by coming out to bat ahead of the other recognized batsmen in the semi-final and truly master-minded that chase of theirs. They looked toothless in the final without him and he was missed as a player and as a captain. Brendon McCullum and Shane Bond were the real disappointment for me. The stylish wicket-keeper batsman needs to finally stand up being a senior member and show the responsbility. Batting as an opener is doing him no good at all. He was more suited to come in the last few overs to whack a few to lift the run-rate. A job of a professional early order batsman is too challenging for him. Shane Bond was disappointing always in his last spell. Almost all of his opening spells were digestible but he really struggled with his line and length later on in the innings. I was more in favour of him bowling 10 consecutive overs on the trot. The idea may sound a little off but that’s the only they can use him well right now. Him getting back to international cricket after such a long time was a positive in itself. He will definitely look to get better in future. Kyle Mills deserves a special praise as he was the most impressive of all their pacers. He tried his heart out in the final as well. Grant Elliot came to the party in a couple of games, too. In being able to overcome Sri Lanka and Pakistan - that too in a semi-final - was a huge achievement for them. They were truly the deserved runners-up.
Pakistan
They were the only side that looked to me to be the most balanced one to lift the trophy. The charming factor they bring to world cricket was there to be seen this time around as well. They struggled a little bit to get over the line against the West Indies, but simply outplayed MS Dhoni´s men. They were up for the 26th September´s challenge and no one was more prepared than Shoaib Malik. He alongside Mohammad Yousuf showed application and built a massive partnership after they were put on the back foot by their own top order batsmen. It was boring to watch them in the earlier half of their partnership but they outsmart all of us by really putting the foot on the accelerator later on their innings. It was a wonderfully composed innings by both of them as they made sure Pakistan reached the aimed 300 run target. Their bowlers then made sure that there were no hiccups in defence of that big total. Mohammad Aamer, Saeed Ajmal and Umar Akmal started off from where they left in Sri Lanka. The junior Akmal was particularly impressive in his matured approach in a couple of innings. He will consider himself unlucky at being given LBW by Simon Taufel in the semi-final. Their bowlers fought their heart out against Australia to defend a paltry 204 run target. Rana Naved was very accurate with his yorkers, but the Australian tailenders found a way out to qualify for the semi-final. Mohammad Asif was back in the colours after serving a long ban. He looked good and I think he should have played the semi-final ahead of Umar Gul. The latter was a very disappointing aspect of their campaign. He looked out of sorts. Younis Khan as a batsman is doing no good to the team. He goes out to bat and seems to be blocking almost everything that is bowled at him. If one consumes so many deliveries to get his eye in then he should be able convert it into a big one. In my personal opinion, players who don’t possess any big hitting abilities should never look to consume too many balls. Singles should be the aim at least. Anyway, it all looked in the right direction until the day of semi-final arrived. Pakistan was the clear favourites to win against their good old favourite enemy for a semi-final. It could well be the case of the team or its fan being over-confident. In a way it reminded me of the Champions Trophy 2004 semi-final where it looked that West Indies were only going to fulfil the formality of entering the park as it would be a cakewalk for Pakistan only to be bowled out for around 130. They were still in the game by giving the target of 234 to New Zealand. I thought that was good enough with their bowling line up and the flashy opposition batsmen. I still maintain that had Younis Khan held on to Grant Elliot´s catch when he was on 42, it would been really tough for the rest of their middle order to get over the line. But it was all Daniel Vettori´s brilliance that night. Pakistanis shouldn´t be too disappointed at their team not being able to qualify for the final. The important and valuable thing is that the team is heading into the right direction for the future. All the players are seemingly disappointed with it and the needless match-fixing allegations are doing them no service at all. However, all said and done, it was a good showing by Pakistan.
South Africa
There is not much to write home about their performance really. Ever since the World Cup 2007 South Africa has lost whatsoever confidence left in me that they are at all capable of winning a tournament. They went into the tournament with a lot of expectations to finally clinch one this time around. They need to realize that playing with 11 batsmen and 10 bowlers doesn’t make the composition or balance of the side. What happens with such bits and pieces players is that they all look absolutely empty when the need strikes. It is a scary thought that in their chase against England they were heavily relying on the likes of Albie Morkel and Roelof Van Der Merwe, their number eight and nine batsmen, to take the side home in the last 10 overs or so. That strategy was very successful back in 1999 where Lance Klusener was in the form of his life, but is not too much expected this time around from guys who hardly have an international fifty under their belt? Such of their players did cost them dearly as Albie Morkel went wicketless the entire tournament. Their bowling line up is much overrated as well in my opinion. I mean, you cannot claim to be a world class bowling attack when you end up conceding a 300 plus runs total in two of your three matches. Graeme Smith might have done his bit by scoring a wonderful 141 against England to survive the criticism, but rest of his team mates looked disinterested. I was actually expecting them to shock us all again but not at least by failing to qualify for the semi-finals. Mickey Arthur and Graeme Smith have lots of things to ponder about. Their way of thinking needs a little bit refreshment as well.
Sri Lanka
A lot was expected from them but they really failed to deliver. With those senior players in their side it was a below par performance from them. Thilina Kandamby and Angelo Mathews were only of the few positives they might have got from this tournament. Their bowling line up which looked like the best of them all in the recent past few months now looks very toothless. Ajantha Mendis is a decoded mystery for most of the teams and Muttiah Muralitharan looks to be very selective on which matches to play. It was a shocker for me that he was sitting out against the much favoured New Zealand batting line up and in such a crunch game. I don’t get the Sri Lankan think tanks strange policy. I mean, if you are being selective in matches concerning a certain player then make sure that he at least plays the big matches. He was not played in the tri-series final against India either. Sanath Jayasuriya´s only aim seems to be playing more and more matches irrespective of the fact whether he scores in them or not. Much of the game nowadays depends on Tillakaratne Dilshan who is in form of his life currently. Their campaign started off brilliantly when they thrashed the South African side by a very good margin, but absolutely faded away against teams like England and New Zealand.
West Indies
Their bowling line up still looks competitive but the batting is too inexperienced without the likes of Chris Gayle, Ramnaresh Sarwan or Shivnarine Chanderpaul. They were very much like a minnow this time around, but they did not devalue the tournament at all. They were an exciting bunch of players who looked pretty determine to do well. Their bowlers like Kemar Roach and Gavin Tonge were very good to watch who showed their class against Pakistan and Australia. We hope that the contract issues are solved at the right time before any further multi-nation tournament takes place. Cricket already has very few teams compared to a sport like Soccer and the number needs an increase rather than a decrease.
