Thursday, 19 April 2007

Balls I Say!

What a load of bollocks over Sri Lanka's game plan for the Aussies eh?

Micheal Holding is the latest to add fuel to Ian Chappel's fires, already burning brightly with Arjuna Ranathunga's good ol' firewood. Unfortunately for him, I don't think he paused long enough to think about what he was saying. See, he's said that Sri Lanka's tactical move only allowed for corruption to creep in to the game by making the result predictable. How? Apparently because the odds in favour of Australia increased on the day of the game when it became common knowledge that Vaas and Murali were not going to be playing. So what?

I mean, why does not Micheal Holding say that West Indies should not play at all? After all, the bookies are going to know they are going to lose if they play against any half decent team. Right? So if the bookies are going to have foresight of a one sided match, does that mean corruption could creep in? Does that mean that one sided matches should not be played? Micheal Holding has handled balls (erm cricket ones but of course) for long enough to know that games are played between two teams, who use all the skills and tactics that they have, to end up one over the other. The teams are not expected to try and play the game in such a way that the bookies don't make an extra buck.

So what if Sri Lanka didn't want to play their best bowlers? I fully support the team's thinking. The element of surprise is the oldest trick in the book. Regardless of whether we get into the finals or not, if we do get in we want to be at our most effective. Leaving out key players in a match, the outcome of which has no significance whatsoever, is perfectly justifiable. This is not a "virginal" situation.

When I was young, I was always taught that cricket was a game of the mind. I've also read around that there's no point winning the battle, you need to win the war. If our war comes, i'm confident now that we will put our best foot forward, because our management had the sense of mind to employ, what I would regard as, a brilliant tactic against the Aussies. Now the Ireland match is another story altogether. I believe Marvan Atapattu should have been given a chance, considering our poor show up front in the first few overs in the last few games. Anyway that's another story altogether.

The likes of Ian Chappel, Micheal Holding and Arjuna Ranathunga are not the best ones to talk about bringing the game into disrepute. Australia have consistently applied tactics over sportsmanship in the past (ie the "go slow" incident at the 1999 world cup against West Indies). In 1996 Australia and West Indies both refused to play in Sri Lanka citing security reasons. Apparently there was nothing unsportsmanly in that, even though ample security was ensured. New Zealand refused to play in Kenya, and Australia and England refused to play in Zimbabwe back in 2003. But that's al forgotten I guess. Even Arjuna Ranathunga, who has always stood up against poor sportsmanship, turned a blind eye to the fact that there was no such incident in this whole scenario. If we won or lost we'd still be in the same position on the points table.

Enough on this. But Mr. Chappel, go tell the ICC that Sri Lanka are being unsportsmanly. I hope you went and told your mummy back in 1981 that your beloved brothers, Greg and Trevor, made fools of themselves and the Chappel name and brought the game into disrepute over the under-arm incident.

5 musings:

Anonymous said...

hehe....interstingly enough...its funny you mention it, because Ian Chappell did criticise his brothers at that time in a newspaper article...and funnily enough he did mention his mother was unhappy about it!

To be honest I was like you...not too fond of Ian Chappell. He has the gift of rubbing people up the wrong way, probably because he speaks his mind. Think he has a long standing feud with Botham. This interview with Andrew Denton forced me to see him a new light (mentions that incident you are talking about :-)) though I still find it hard to feel warm and fuzzy about him.
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s1751805.htm

I have also revised my opnion...about Mr. ugly/Aggro/Macho....Dennis Lilee.
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/enoughrope/transcripts/s842705.htm

Isn't the world an amazing place? When you think you have things all figured out about someone...they turn around and do something that makes you think twice about judging them. Damned confusing too!

I have to admit, I like Michael Holding's commentary, he has a way of putting things and speaks his mind! Bit more witty than Ian Chappel. Especially his wry comments about the West Indies' abysmal performance. He makes me laugh. He was a very gifted bowler in his time.

Hiran said...

Totally agreed, I am guessing if the Australians did something similar to this it would have been termed as "brilliant" and "tactical" and that the game of cricket needs such thinking.

Surely Ian forgot about his brothers!

Safraz said...

I think Mahela Did the Exactly right thing Against Australia, He is the best captain in this world cup, She Like Kpildav(1983), Imran (1992) and Arjuna(1996), I think Sri Lanka will win the world cup under Mahela's Great Captaincy,

go Sri Lanka Goooooooooo

diGa said...

I came across this article today...

http://content.msn.co.in/Sports/Columns/CricketColumn_Kumar+Sangakkara.htm#top

"Why – just because we were playing Australia? That’s nonsense. The simple fact was it was the least important game of our World Cup. Even the Bermuda game was more important." Kumar Sangakkara

Very well said Kumar!

confab said...

anon - thanks for the links. will check em out. i'm sure they're not as bad as i portrayed them. lets just put it down to "hatred inspired by patriotism".

hiran & safraz - thanks for the comments. glad u agree..haha..

diga - ado well said kumar. and that is true. i'm glad we lost as well coz that would bring us down to earth and make us work harder. the day of the aussie match my boss asked me what i thought would happen. i said i hope we lose:)