The Shorter Wisden 2013
Page 52
These West Indians were far removed from their illustrious predecessors, for they had none of their fearsome fast bowling. In fact, with the exception of Ravi Rampaul – chugging along skilfully at around 80mph – they had no fast bowler of impact at all. But they did have batsmen who could slug the ball hard and long: Gayle hit 16 sixes, more than anyone, and Samuels 15. And, in Sunil Narine, they possessed a spinner of genuine mystique.
As the excellent early-tournament pitches, at Pallekele in particular, gave way to tired, powdery surfaces, their lack of pace suited West Indies perfectly. They pummelled the ball over the boundary ropes in a manner few could match, and fiddled through their overs as best they could. It was odd to see a West Indian bowling attack succeed that way. But it worked.
Somewhere, looking on in the Caribbean, there must have been young athletes yearning to grab a share of the adulation. Is it too much to hope we have heard the last of the basketball generation; the conclusion that other sports, more favoured in the United States and beamed in on satellite television, have taken hold; and that West Indies’ decline is not cyclical, but an irreversible malaise? The rejection of colonialism which had first identified itself in their determination to dominate the cricketing world had been replaced by a rejection of cricket itself. And the issue was even broader than that: not merely that Caribbean youth was enthralled by American sport, as much as the fact that their interest in all sport was not quite what it was.
Perhaps the impact of the competition went even wider. But as the World Twenty20 gained a hold on the consciousness, international cricket had an instant format with which it could fight back, so much so that even in the States there was ambitious talk of a professional league. Those who claimed there was no place for Twenty20 beyond the lucrative domestic tournaments were left re-examining their conviction.
So appealing was the story of this competition that it was hard for anybody to contend that it did not matter, that it was an inferior game unworthy of attention, that it demanded no intellect, created no tension, bared no souls. Like its three predecessors, it was a rare thing: a well-run, condensed tournament that, once it got over the preliminary stage, maintained interest.
Sri Lanka Cricket, which had blundered into financial trouble by building two new stadiums and upgrading another for the 2011 World Cup, now staged a slick event. The smart new venue at Pallekele was particularly impressive, with a welcoming feel and a beautiful mountain backdrop. Its pitches were true and, initially at least, possessed surprising pace. It promised to enhance Sri Lankan cricket for years to come.
The early overs in the final, as Gayle of all people made just three in 16 balls, possessed Test-match tension, and there can be no finer accolade than that. If it is not a worthy addition to the game, how then to explain the despair felt by Mahela Jayawardene and Kumar Sangakkara, two players who have offered Sri Lanka wise counsel and stirring deeds for the past decade, but who had failed yet again to win a major one-day trophy? Or the hurt of Lasith Malinga, who bowled four overs for 54, then turned off his mobile phone for a couple of days as he faced up to the most painful moment of his career? Sri Lanka had surely never entered a tournament with more vigour since their breakthrough win in the 50-over World Cup 16 years earlier. Yet, for the fourth time in a row, all they had to show was a losing final.
Even those who continued to argue that Twenty20 demanded more luck than skill had to concede that the right four sides contested the semi-finals: West Indies, Sri Lanka and Pakistan had played the best cricket (Pakistan, needless to say, intermittently); and Australia deserved to be there because of a heroic tournament from Shane Watson, an all-rounder who combines dominance and vulnerability in equal measure. At least Achilles only had to worry about his heel. Watson is a collection of opposites: tough yet soft, untouchable yet fragile, egotistical yet rueful. Any moment he might bully a ball out of the ground, demolish the stumps – or crumple into a heap.
As he continually stoked Australia’s challenge – top-scoring with 249 runs, launching 15 sixes, and taking 11 wickets, second only to Ajantha Mendis – Watson revealed a greater truth about Twenty20: that it is not, as many ex-professionals insist, so much influenced by fortune as potentially settled by a single outstanding performance. That was certainly true in the final, when Samuels secured the match virtually by himself. In an age where individual achievement is so often valued above communal good, that is not about to hold the format back.
England had their own star name – except that Kevin Pietersen, ostracised over the texting saga, was not there (or rather, he was, but as a pundit in a TV studio). Their title defence suffered as a result. Paul Collingwood, who had captained them to a surprise win in the Caribbean in 2010, hailed Stuart Broad’s vintage as a more skilful bunch than his own but, with a 19-run defeat by Sri Lanka, England’s involvement predictably petered out in the Super Eights.
There may have been an England side that could have reached the semi-finals, but it was not the one which lost three matches out of five. Their nadir came against India’s second-string spinners in Colombo, where they careered to 80 all out and a 90-run defeat, and convinced the Indians that slow bowling would be the way to overcome them in the Test series at home that followed soon after (well, it made sense at the time).
Statistical studies informed England’s strategy of preserving top-order wickets when batting, and taking them when bowling. Luke Wright, his standing already bolstered by experience of domestic Twenty20 in five countries, responded gamely to the challenge. He averaged 48, with a strike-rate of 169 – the highest of any of the 24 batsmen who topped 100 runs – and hit 13 sixes. His most bitter-sweet episode came with an unbeaten 99 against a capricious Afghanistan side in Colombo, while his best innings was a 43-ball 76 against New Zealand in Pallekele.
Alex Hales had his moments, but the feeling grew that Craig Kieswetter was unsuited to a top-order role, especially if preserving wickets was the mantra. He attacked, failed, blocked, failed once more – and was finally dropped for the game against Sri Lanka, in which Malinga took three wickets in four balls, as good as ending England’s pursuit of 170 before it had begun.
An alternative team might have included Ian Bell alongside Hales and Wright at the top; married Pietersen and Eoin Morgan in the middle order (allowing Pietersen to make spectators’ hair stand on end, rather than gelling his own to the same effect for the benefit of TV viewers); and recognised Samit Patel’s ability against spin, a skill that was belatedly underlined with a 48-ball 67 against Sri Lanka. Kieswetter and Jonny Bairstow could then have contested the keeping position at No. 7. Jos Buttler, exciting and innovative, but naive and far from battle-hardened, would have been a standby batsman able to observe his trade.
The side England actually selected, young and untutored in Asian conditions, put excessive onus on setting up the game for Morgan. Yet there were weaknesses with the ball, too. Danny Briggs, whose graceful left-arm spin had been a key component in Hampshire’s domestic success, played only one match, opening against New Zealand, and was a less appealing selection under lights, when the ball was more likely to zip around. Steven Finn led the attack with pace and purpose, but Tim Bresnan had a mediocre tournament, and Jade Dernbach’s variations did not prevent him from being England’s most expensive bowler. Any ambitions for Ravi Bopara’s fiddly medium-pace on pitches which grew slower had to be abandoned because his batting was in such parlous shape. His last-gasp inclusion for the Sri Lanka match smacked of desperation; he made one from six balls.
There was criticism of the qualifying stage, which never sparked into life. But it lasted only eight days, and any ennui was as much the fault of the quality of the sides contesting it. Ireland’s long-serving seamer, Trent Johnston, railed against the habitual description of his team as “minnows”, and demanded they be judged by the standards of a Full Member one-day nation – in which case it is fair to observe that they remain light on quality and will struggle as long as England pilfer their best cricketers.
The same message came from Akila Dananjaya, a young off-spinner – with lots of variations – who was fast-tracked into the Sri Lanka side after being spotted in the nets by Jayawardene. He suffered a fractured cheekbone missing a fierce return catch on debut against New Zealand, but performed admirably when he had the chance.
There were grumbles that all four preliminary group winners ended up in the same pool, but an element of pre-seeding had logic on its side. A large number of travelling supporters cannot book accommodation in a couple of days, and it was entirely sensible to plan for a scenario in which, say, as long as Afghanistan were eliminated, England would play in Pallekele and India in Colombo in the next stage, whatever their final group positions. To determine Super Eight venues by group results would have risked reducing the number of overseas supporters.
In the Super Eights, India (on net run-rate), New Zealand and South Africa – a disappointment once more at a major tournament – succumbed along with England. India had the most romantic story – the return of Yuvraj Singh after treatment in the USA for cancer. Yuvraj had a solid tournament, although there were times when his inclusion appeared to add to the confusion of India’s selections. Only Virat Kohli, looking ever more likely to succeed Sachin Tendulkar as his country’s cricket idol, possessed authority with the bat. With Zaheer Khan on the wane, their pace attack rarely looked competitive.
Quite what it all said about the IPL was hard to judge, for India actually won four games out of five, only to do their run-rate irreparable damage when they were thrashed by Australia in the match that mattered most. It is one thing having the most successful domestic Twenty20 tournament in the world; quite another for that to lead to a successful national side. There was little evidence Indian players were benefiting any more from the IPL than the assortment of international players who descend annually upon their shores. This is no surprise in England, where the glitz and glamour of football’s Premier League, awash with foreign players, has not translated into international glory.
New Zealand had an extraordinary tournament. They were involved in two eliminator-over deciders in the Super Eights, against Sri Lanka and West Indies – and lost both, leaving their captain Ross Taylor struggling for words. Their new coach, Mike Hesson, understandably questioned the rationale of using these one-over tie-breakers in group matches, when it ought to have been perfectly possible for the teams to share the spoils. That would not have saved New Zealand from elimination, but Hesson had a case. An American-style aversion to tied matches seems to have crept into cricket without much debate.
Pakistan’s semi-final qualification ahead of India owed much to a remarkable recovery against South Africa, when Umar Gul and Umar Akmal put on 49 in 27 balls for the eighth wicket to pull off an unexpected win. But Pakistan’s interest ended when, on a crumbling pitch at the Premadasa, Jayawardene produced a delicate gem of an innings to guide Sri Lanka into the final.
West Indies saw off Australia in the other semi as the mighty Watson failed to deliver; Australia were lucky to keep the margin down to 74 runs as their batting line-up, at last exposed, plunged to 43 for six. Nevertheless, a team that had briefly been ranked tenth, just below Ireland, a few weeks before the tournament, had at least silenced the sniggers.
A team of the tournament might have gone something like this: Shane Watson, Chris Gayle, Mahela Jayawardene (captain), Virat Kohli, Marlon Samuels, Eoin Morgan, M. S. Dhoni (wicketkeeper), Mitchell Starc, Sunil Narine, Saeed Ajmal and Dale Steyn. Here were 11 players who had performed excellently in a short, sharp, engrossing tournament. If only the ICC would apply the lesson elsewhere.
FINAL
SRI LANKA v WEST INDIES
VIC MARKS
At Colombo (RPS), October 7, 2012. West Indies won by 36 runs. Toss: West Indies.
West Indies won the World Twenty20 for the first time, sparking more cricketing optimism in the Caribbean than it has known for a decade or more. The margin of victory seemed mammoth for a Twenty20 game, yet there were moments when West Indies seemed doomed to failure – a situation familiar to Darren Sammy’s side on their route to the final.
Earlier in the tournament they had looked destined for an early return home. They managed to qualify for the Super Eights without actually winning either of their group games, like previous champions England in 2010. Then, six days before the final, they looked certain to lose to New Zealand, but fought back to tie, against the odds, before prevailing in the super over by smashing the 18 runs required. These scrapes seemed to forge a wonderful, joyous spirit within the West Indian camp, as well as the belief that this would be their trophy.
Even in the final, a West Indies victory seemed out of the question after the first ten overs, at which point they were an unfathomable 32 for two. Their champion, Gayle, had been dismissed for three, and Jayawardene was controlling affairs like a master puppeteer. But Samuels played an astonishing innings. After a cagey start he cracked 78 from 56 balls, smashing six sixes along the way.
His assault on Malinga was breathtaking. While Mathews and Ajantha Mendis bowled their eight overs for 23 runs and five wickets, Malinga – probably the most experienced, and feared, fast bowler in the world in this format – was carted for 54, including five of those sixes. Somehow Samuels differentiated between the slower and quicker balls before depositing them over the leg-side boundary. This was an enthralling display of brutal, calculated hitting. Bravo and Sammy offered handy assistance, and the total advanced to 137 – far more than expected, and enough to generate hope.
Sri Lanka’s chase was badly hindered when Dilshan was bowled by Rampaul’s first delivery. Then the wise old men, Jayawardene and Sangakkara, set about knocking off the target as sensibly as possible – but they could not score quickly enough on a pitch that offered increasing encouragement to the spinners. Sangakkara was well caught by Pollard at deep midwicket, Jayawardene felt compelled to reverse-sweep and lobbed a catch to point, then panic set in. There were run-outs, as West Indies displayed an athleticism in the outfield that few international sides can match, and the unorthodox spinner Narine, a potential Caribbean star for the next decade, tormented everyone.
There was a little scare when Rampaul conceded 22 in the 16th over, as Kulasekara regularly found the boundary. But soon the game was up, and the cricketers of the Caribbean, as united as they have ever been since the golden days, began to celebrate as only they know how.
It was a proud moment for Sammy. “Today we were down and out, but our never-say-die attitude came out,” he said. No one had a smile broader than Gayle, until recently a so-called mercenary, but now the heartbeat of the side.
Man of the Match: M. N. Samuels. Man of the Tournament: S. R. Watson.
Umpires: Aleem Dar and S. J. A. Taufel. Third umpire: R. J. Tucker.
Referee: J. J. Crowe.
ICC WOMEN’S WORLD TWENTY20, 2012-13
ALISON MITCHELL
1. Australia 2. England 3= New Zealand and West Indies
The third Women’s World Twenty20 ended with the thriller the tournament was crying out for, as Australia beat England by four runs in Colombo to become the first team – male or female – to retain the title.
England were heavily fancied to repeat their triumph of 2009, in the first tournament, having only recently been halted on a run of 19 Twenty20 international victories (excluding abandonments). They picked the same XI throughout the competition, including four spin bowlers – Holly Colvin, Danielle Hazell, Laura Marsh and Danielle Wyatt. Australia’s openers came out firing, however, and they clinched victory off the last ball of a tense final. “I’m disa
ppointed we lost,” said England captain Charlotte Edwards. “But I’d rather play in a final which was a great spectacle for the women’s game. I’m very proud of that.”
For the third time, the women’s event ran parallel to the men’s. The group games were hosted in Galle, where crowds were small, despite the efforts of ICC marketeers to raise enthusiasm by erecting life-size cardboard cut-outs of the leading players next to their male counterparts on roundabouts across the city and in Colombo. The semi-finals and final were staged as double-headers at Colombo’s Premadasa Stadium before the equivalent men’s matches, and broadcast worldwide by ESPN STAR Sports.
The semi-finals were a perfect illustration of why the pace of the pitch is so important to women’s cricket, which is determined more by canny deflections and careful placement than brute force. A painfully slow turner led to a turgid game between England and New Zealand, but a truer surface the next day made for far more engaging cricket, even though Australia’s win over West Indies was similarly one-sided.
England had swept through Group A unbeaten, with their batsmen rarely tested. Against India, Edwards became the first woman to pass 1,500 runs in Twenty20 internationals, and she finished as the tournament’s leading scorer, with 172 at 43.
India, long regarded as one of the big four of the women’s game, lost every group match, prompting concerns that Australia and England were pulling away from the rest of the world – a theory strengthened by the ease of England’s semi-final win over two-time runners-up New Zealand, the other member of the quartet. India’s nadir was confirmed when, in an unattractive, low-scoring game, they were unable to chase down 99 in a dead rubber against Pakistan.