Australia

ICC World Cup 2015: Australia are champions of the world

To tell you the truth, I did not really watch much of this World Cup’s final featuring Australia and New Zealand.

Switching on the telly after returning from morning Mass, with Brendon McCullum gone cheaply, it would be an uphill task for the Kiwis to compile a formidable total. Two more quick wickets followed and I switched off the set-top box.

For a partisan Indian supporter like me, the final held no thrills or attraction. Most World Cup finals have been one-sided affairs and there was no reason for me to believe otherwise.

Catching up with the morning news, Michael Clarke’s farewell announcing the final would be his ODI swansong caught my eyes.

“A World Cup victory would be a great way to sign off,” were my immediate thoughts. And I dwelled again on  the emotional eulogy he delivered at Philip Hughes’ funeral. Clarke will always have his share of detractors but that was the day he displayed how far he has travelled from being ‘Pup’ and the ‘Bad Boy’ of Australian cricket.

Noon and the Kiwis had folded up for 183. Despite Sunil Gavaskar’s vain attempts at drawing comparisons between the ’83 final and Sunday’s mismatch to keep viewer interest in the game alive, it was evident that barring a miracle the Australians were well on their way to being crowned five-time champions.

It was so, with Clark crafting a well-made 74.

Australians were world-beaters yet again.

ICC World Cup 2015: India versus Australia, What went wrong?

What went wrong with a team that came into the semi-finals undefeated, winning seven straight games in a row?

What can explain the abject display of this  Indian side once they came up against their bete-noire of the last five months? Was it another case of déjà vu?

First, the Australians scored 30-50 runs more than our batters could easily achieve. A score of around 280 was chaseable against their strong bowling attack. Once the Aussies went past the psychological barrier of 300, it was an uphill struggle. Dhoni missed a trick by not letting Umesh Yadav bowl the last over. He was the only one who looked like getting wickets in his final spell and a couple of wickets more could have restricted the Aussies to a less substantial total.

The loss of Shikhar Dhawan began the slide. The left-handed opener was looking good for yet another ton but threw it away in a moment of casual lassitude. Rohit Sharma has scored runs but all of his big scores have come against the lesser sides. The Mumbaikar once again failed to step up to the plate when it mattered. How different is this Sharma from the one who made his debut in 2007-08? Have the years left their scars?

Virat Kohli disappointed. And much as Dhoni tomtoms Ravindra Jadeja’s abilities with the bat, the ‘all-rounder’ has no business being in the side if he cannot average at least a decent 30—both at home and away. Sure, he has three triple centuries in domestic cricket but if that’s the reason he’s in the side, then he should be batting further up the order, not with the tail.

The Indians were probably looking at chasing 328 in chunks. A score of 100 in 20 overs, 200 in 35 and 260 in 40 (power play) would have left them chasing less than 70 in the final 10 overs. It was not to be.

Dhoni’s unwillingness to experiment against the minnows meant that the Indians went up against the Aussies with a closed mindset. What works all the time will fail some day. What then?

Indian fans have a lot to cheer about. At the outset, no one expected this side to travel this far. Winning the trophy would have had their cup of joy overflowing but it would not be a true reflection of the capabilities and form of this side.

Overall, a fair result.

ICC World Cup 2015: It’s Australia versus New Zealand

Stephen Rodger Waugh, former professional cricketer and captain of the Australian national team, photographed at the Sydney Cricket Ground at the start of the Test match against South Africa in January 2002 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It’s final.

The home sides will face-off in another Transmanic match-up on Sunday the 29th of March 2015 at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG).

The Australians clinically demolished Team India’s cup hopes with an all-round display of aggression and intent with the bat and ball. They backed it up with tight fielding barring a few hiccups,

Who will it be?

New Zealand can take comfort from the fact that this is probably their best side ever and that they have beaten the Aussies in the league phases.

Now the crucial encounter is in their arch-foes’ backyard.

Do they have the gumption to seal off their World Cup campaign with a zealous kiss of victory?

The demeanor of their gum-chewing skipper Brendon Mcullum in the field against South Africa suggests so. He reminded me of tough-as-nails Steve Waugh. Will Australia drop the cup that cheers?

Michael Clark rebuilt the crumbling edifice of Oz following the exit of the best and brightest of their 3-Cup wizards.

Can Clark win his first World Cup as skipper?

Fortune favors the brave and the brave are not easily felled at home.

My pick: Australia. Can McCullum and his chums spell otherwise?

Anil Kumble: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Anil Kumble theorises.

What he said:

“We have gone into this theory of three seamers and one spinner the moment we sit on an aircraft which travels more than seven hours.”

Anil Kumble is convinced that not much thought goes into the selection of the bowlers in overseas Tests outside the subcontinent.

He said:

“We have the quality of bowlers, it’s just trying to see who can adjust to the Test format and then choosing your best four bowlers who you think can pick up 20 wickets, that’s also been an issue.

We have gone into this theory of three seamers and one spinner the moment we sit on an aircraft which travels more than seven hours – that’s the mindset… If your 20 wickets are going to come with two spinners and two fast bowlers, so be it. If it comes with three spinners and one fast bowler so be it.”

The former India skipper believes that  “Horses for courses” is not the right policy when it comes to selecting teams for the longer format.

What he really meant:

“It’s a long flight and snooze mode is what the Indian think-tank hits on its ‘Think-Pad’.” 

What he definitely didn’t:

 “The Indian team especially it’s bowlers should just ‘wing it’.”

Tony Abbott: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Tony Abbott says cricket is about ‘drinks’.
Embed from Getty Images

What he said:

“The safest place to put your beer when I was playing was behind the stumps, particularly when I was bowling.”

Australian premier Tony Abbott confesses that the only reason he took up cricket at Oxford was for the availability of drinks at odd times.

He said:

“The only way to get a drink in England in those days during the middle of the day was to be playing sport because the pavilion bars could be open when the pubs had to shut. So the truth, Jim, is I was probably a drinker first and a cricketer second. The safest place to put your beer when I was playing was behind the stumps, particularly when I was bowling.”

Referring to former Prime Minister John Howard’s disastrous bowling sting during an official visit to Pakistan in 2005, Abbot said:

“It wasn’t the most elegant delivery, but nevertheless it was poetry in motion compared to my bowling.”

What he really meant:

“John Howard, you are in good company—beer company.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“I’m Australian and I’m for beer.”

Tony Abbott: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Tony Abbott is not a member of the anti-sledging camp.

English: Tony Abbott in 2010. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

What he said:

“I couldn’t bat, I couldn’t bowl, I couldn’t field, but I could sledge, and I think I held my place in the team on this basis, and I promise there’ll be none of that today.”

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott jests that he was a sledger-par-excellence during his Oxford University days.

The premier was addressing the Indian cricket team at tea hosted at at Kirribilli House in Sydney on Thursday.

Abbott is a former captain of Oxford’s Middle Common Room team of the Queen’s College at Oxford.

Revealing his thoughts on Steve Smith’s delayed declaration during the Melbourne Test, the university cricketer said:

“When I told people last night that I was lucky enough to be hosting the Australian and the Indian cricket teams here today, the only question that they assailed me with was `What did you think of the declaration?’.

My initial thought was it was none of my business. My further thought was that Steven Smith did absolutely his duty, because it is his duty to put Australia in the strongest possible position because, as India’s batsmen have repeatedly demonstrated this summer, you can never take India for granted.”

What he really meant:

 “The English are not the only traditionalists. Australians too have one—sledging—and I carried it all the way to Oxford.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“Unparliamentary language, chaps, unparliamentary language. Just not done, Steve and company.”

Chris Rogers: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Chris Rogers unwraps a ‘Boxing Day’ quote.

English: Chris Rogers playing for Northamptonshire against Cambridge UCCE at Fenner’s on 15 April 2007. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

What he said:

“I’d like to say it’s hard to miss, but I won’t.”

Chris Rogers quips away on being hit in the  box by Ishant Sharma in the first over of the Melbourne Test on the 26th.

What he really meant:

“Balls! Ouch!”

What he definitely didn’t:

“What an apt beginning to the Boxing Day test.”

VVS Laxman: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

VVS Laxman springs to a quick defence.

What he said:

When an Aussie sledges it's aggression but if an Indian sledges its unnecessary &foolish. Bottom line-ind didn't bowl well 2 Mitch. #AUSvIND

— VVS Laxman (@VVSLaxman281) December 20, 2014

What he really meant:

“One team’s aggro is another team’s folly, is it?”

What he definitely didn’t:

“I agree. The Indian side should go gently into the night.”

Virat Kohli: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Virat Kohli is a pacific leader.

What he said:

“If I’m playing the peacemaker, you can imagine what was going on out there.”

Virat Kohli believes that he has discovered new-found maturity as the skipper of the Indian cricket squad. He was describing his reaction to frayed tempers on the fourth day of the first Test match at Adelaide.

India lost to Australia but not before taking the fight to their opponents.

Kohli scored the most runs by a player in his first match as skipper.

Kohli added:

“But I knew I was the captain and had to step in, otherwise things would have turned ugly. I think I am getting smarter and more mature with age… And with a little bit of captaincy, some grey hair as well. I realised I had to step in and calm things down.”

On his stint as skipper:

“I haven’t slept on all the five days. Honestly, I’ll have 12 more grey hairs in my beard now. But I enjoyed captaincy despite the result… We were going for the win, it didn’t happen. We had the right approach and we are not far away.”

What he really meant:

“I guess it’s a little like Donald Duck conducting Anger Management sessions.”

What he definitely didn’t:

“Set a hot-head to cool another.”

Narendra Modi: What he said, really meant and definitely didn’t

Narendra Modi is not averse to ‘Cricket Diplomacy’.Embed from Getty ImagesWhat he said:

“We celebrate the legend of Bradman and the class of Tendulkar together.

We are impressed by Australian speed as you are charmed by the Indian spin Until of course Shane Warne came along!”

The Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was all charm and humour in his address to the Australian parliament injecting references to three great cricketers, two Aussies and one Indian. He is the first Indian premier to visit the continent in 28 years.

What he really meant:

“Yeah, that’s what India-Australia relations have been all about for so many years. Cricket, cricket and more cricket. “

What he definitely didn’t:

“I’m sorry I left out all the Indian students Down Under. Some other time, perhaps. Can’t I label them ‘Made in India’ too?”