Missed opportunities
Risque as it may sound, the one lesson that each and every team which played against Australia in the ICC Champions Trophy needs to learn is
When you've got Australia by the b@lls, you hold on!England were 83/0 in 18 overs and I'm fairly sure Ponting was thinking about where a breakthrough was going to pop up from. Then Bell charged Watson and was caught at cover. India, after losing Tendulkar cheaply, were 120/2 in 27-odd overs. They should have got 275 at least. New Zealand had Australia at 4/2 in the 3rd over, and couldn't finish the job.
Yesterday, Ponting was probably on the verge of throwing in the towel when Gayle and Chanderpaul put on nearly 50 in 5 overs. Then, Chanderpaul got out. Sarwan then followed as did Gayle and finally Lara. In a matter of 7-8 overs, the game turned.
Does anyone have a clue about why Shane Watson (2/11 - Samuels & Baugh and 57 chasing 116) got the 'Player of the Match' award and not Nathan Bracken (3/22 - Chanderpaul, Gayle and Sarwan)? I realize Gayle was one of the stars of the tournament, but I think Damien Martyn, much as I dislike him [while Ganesh is an admirer], should have been the 'Player of the Series'. He played a significant, if understated, part in Australia's wins.
Labels: 2006 champions trophy, australia by the balls cliche, champions trophy, prediction
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed -
|
even i thought it should have been bracken (mom) and my man martyn (mos/mot).
everyone keeps talking about 3 100s by gayle when they shud be talking of only 2, as the first one was *NOT* part of iccct and it belonged to qualifying for iccct.
By 
Ganesh (6 Nov 2006, 11:45:00 am)
What's even more farcical is that Upul Tharanga was #2 in the Player of the Series rankings. He makes 100s against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, and 94 in 3 knocks against Pakistan, New Zealand and South Africa ... and he's higher ranked than Marto!
By Jagadish (7 Nov 2006, 12:58:00 am)
gayle was in good form. his 3 centuries definitely put him above the rest.
why martyn?
Omar: Marto for 73 v Ind, 78 v Eng, and 47 in the final. He didn't exactly flop in the other games too. He certainly had a higher impact on the tournament than Tharanga, you'll agree. As for a toss up between Marto and Gayle, tough on Gayle, especially considering he contributed with his bowling too. But really man of the match/series awards should be on the basis of who won, unless there was no single effort from the winning side or a heroic effort from the losing side. Which is why Tendulkar being named man of the series in Australia (1999/2000) is baffling. People would query him being named player of the series in the 2003 WC too, but that was decided _before_ the final, and he was a couple of notches above everyone, including other competitors like Ponting, Lee, McGrath, etc.
By Jagadish (7 Nov 2006, 7:27:00 pm)
We'd prefer if you posted comments with your real name to add more credibility to your opinions. However, the moderators reserve the right to delete comments, especially those containing offensive or unsuitable language. The opinions in the comments are your own views. You are welcome to provide a URL to your own cricket blog, but the moderators reserve the right to delete comments which only reference sites for viewing live streams.
Links within entries open in a new window. Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original content providers may have archived/removed the contents. Some of the sites linked may require registration/subscription.
All opinions expressed are those of the authors alone. The authors' respective employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. We do not intend to infringe on any copyright. Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to our readers.
|
|
|
|
Post a Comment