South Africa choke, Australia to meet Sri Lanka in final
The World Cup final will be between Australia and Sri Lanka as Australia gave South Africa a hiding, winning by 7 wickets. Graeme Smith won the toss and batted - things went steadily downhill from there in a classic demonstration of World Cup choking.
In the opening overs, Smith and Kallis were both clean bowled, advancing down the pitch. They seemed to have devised a strategy of aggressively walking at the bowler, hoping to unsettle the Australian bowling attack. Instead, the early wickets unsettled the middle-order who found themselves anchored to the crease. AB de Villiers nicked to Gilchrist then Ashwell Prince limply wafted at a wide McGrath delivery a la Flintoff 2006. Mark Boucher fell first ball, edging to first slip leaving McGrath on a hattrick (he missed out with the hattrick ball passing perilously close to Justin Kemp's off stump). South Africa collapsed to 5 for 27.
At this point, Ponting made the curiously defensive decision to delay the second power play. He took out second slip (after which several edges flew through that area). Considering Herschelle Gibbs was erroneously given not out early, South Africa's innings could've gone a lot worse. Kemp and Gibbs built a face saving partnership although Hogg had the wood on Kemp, beating the bat regularly with his googly. It was like watching Warne toying with Daryll Cullinan. Any hopes of a South African comeback were dashed when Gibbs edged Tait to Gilchrist.
At 9 for 145, Tait dropped Kemp at deep mid-on. However, I don't think Herschelle Gibbs will be sledging him about dropping the World Cup with Watson bowling Kemp 5 runs later. South Africa were all out for 149, their lowest ever World Cup total. It's hard to believe only 7 weeks ago, South Africa were ranked #1 in the world. But then, they didn't achieve that ranking in big tournament matches like the World Cup.
The Australian bowlers all contributed around with their 5 bowlers taking wickets. Shaun Tait bowled his career best of 4 for 39, McGrath took 3 for 18. I've been singing Sri Lankan bowlers' praises all tournament but its interesting to note the World Cup wicket tallies: McGrath on top, Tait equal 2nd with Murali and Hogg 4th. McGrath has retired from Test cricket and will retire from ODI cricket after the final on Saturday night. Considering his form at the moment, I wonder if his retirement will apply to Twenty20. The World Championship is only 5 months away!
Australia's run chase began with a hiccup - Gilly bowled for a duck. I'm not sure I can take credit for this one as I was away from the TV at the time (just walking into the room as it happened). Does the JC jinx apply when I'm on the verge of watching Gilly bat? On an aside, Chaminda Vaas must be licking his lips at the prospect of exploiting Gilchrist's vulnerability to the swinging new ball.
There was a few more hiccups along the way. Nel bowled Ponting and nearly burst a vein as he celebrated. Hayden skied Pollock to Smith at long-on. Then Michael Clarke (60 not out) and Andrew Symonds (18 not out) cantered the rest of the way home to notch a 7 wicket victory with 18 overs to spare.
There's only one downside to such a one sided match. Australia have progressed through the entire World Cup without experiencing any real pressure (you can tell I'm a glass-half-empty kind of guy to see that as a negative). Part of that was a deliberate ploy by Sri Lanka, resting their key bowlers (a ploy which could turn out to be a masterstroke). So how will Australia handle a tight contest and more challenging bowling in the most important game of the tournament? Bring on the final!
| Posted by JC on Thu 26 Apr |  27 comments |
After the match Smith said:
"I wouldn't say we choked."
I wonder what he would call it?
Posted by Timbo on 2007-04-26 10:45:57
"I wouldn't say we choked."
I wonder what he would call it?
Posted by Timbo on 2007-04-26 10:45:57
It wasn't a choking moment like Herschelle Gibbs dropping Steve Waugh or Allan Donald running himself out in the 1999 semi-final. This was a prolonged innings long choke - or specifically the first 10 overs where SA lost 5 for 27.
Posted by JC on 2007-04-26 10:57:04
Posted by JC on 2007-04-26 10:57:04
I reckon some of the credit to the first two wickets is due to some pre-match comments from the Aussies.
The chokers comment put pressure on Smith so he had a brain explosion and walked down the pitch, and Kallis I think fell to the "we want slow Kallis in" remark.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-04-26 11:28:15
The chokers comment put pressure on Smith so he had a brain explosion and walked down the pitch, and Kallis I think fell to the "we want slow Kallis in" remark.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-04-26 11:28:15
Maybe a slow, gasping..self-strangulation then? :)
Posted by Timbo on 2007-04-26 14:42:29
Posted by Timbo on 2007-04-26 14:42:29
Hey Guys, more World Cup upsets on
http://wc2007upset.blogspot.com/
Be connect and Njoy....
Posted by Chintan on 2007-04-26 14:45:53
http://wc2007upset.blogspot.com/
Be connect and Njoy....
Posted by Chintan on 2007-04-26 14:45:53
Sri Lankas 'master-stroke' was cowardice, whether it works or not.
Posted by Stu on 2007-04-26 18:06:27
Posted by Stu on 2007-04-26 18:06:27
Guys, hello... did I not say SA would try and make a few bucks at the bookies by posting their lowest ever score in WC cricket...
Posted by virtualgaz on 2007-04-26 18:36:57
Posted by virtualgaz on 2007-04-26 18:36:57
Did you Gaz? When was that?
Stu, I wouldn't call it cowardice. I'd call it unfair on the fans (and Australians sacrificing a night's sleep to watch the game). But strategically, I admire the decision - it makes me anticipate the final all the more.
Posted by JC on 2007-04-26 18:39:42
Stu, I wouldn't call it cowardice. I'd call it unfair on the fans (and Australians sacrificing a night's sleep to watch the game). But strategically, I admire the decision - it makes me anticipate the final all the more.
Posted by JC on 2007-04-26 18:39:42
Strategic it may have been, and a masterstroke it may prove to be, yet it flies in the face of all that the World Cup should represent ie the best team of one nation up against the best team of another, playing to win.
Regardless of the result of the final, Australia has proved it is the best team in the world. It has also played each and every game with the utmost integrity.
Here endeth the lesson...
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-26 20:42:48
Regardless of the result of the final, Australia has proved it is the best team in the world. It has also played each and every game with the utmost integrity.
Here endeth the lesson...
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-26 20:42:48
Australia definately have been impressive. Last night really proved just how good they are. I was going to say something about how good Clarke has been, but they have all been great... the batsmen (who have actually had innings) as well as the bowlers. If Australia beat Sri Lanka, it will be a very well deserved World Cup.
Posted by Chris on 2007-04-26 21:51:08
Posted by Chris on 2007-04-26 21:51:08
Out of interest, was there any way that South African could have lost this match and not "choked"?
Posted by Jonny on 2007-04-26 22:34:08
Posted by Jonny on 2007-04-26 22:34:08
//Regardless of the result of the final, Australia has proved it is the best team in the world\\
Here.. Here../ I can see some people trying to make "excuses" in advance. If you can't win a final of an important tournament, how could you be the "best team in the world". Nonsense!
Aussies will have to prove themselves by beating Sri Lanka in the final. If Sri Lanka win, they are going to be the "Best team in the World" without a doubt.
//If Australia beat Sri Lanka, it will be a very well deserved World Cup. \\
Why you guys say the other side of the same thing? If Sri Lanka beat Australia, it will be a very well deserved World Cup for Sri Lanka too. They've played much professional cricket than many teams in this World Cup, and they deserve the cup as much as the Aussies. The better team on that day will win, and the world should respect that team as the World Champions, without giving excuses like this.
Read this too.
http://landlikenoother.blogspot.com/2007/04/sri-lanka-last-hope-of-anti-aussies.html
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-26 22:42:33
Here.. Here../ I can see some people trying to make "excuses" in advance. If you can't win a final of an important tournament, how could you be the "best team in the world". Nonsense!
Aussies will have to prove themselves by beating Sri Lanka in the final. If Sri Lanka win, they are going to be the "Best team in the World" without a doubt.
//If Australia beat Sri Lanka, it will be a very well deserved World Cup. \\
Why you guys say the other side of the same thing? If Sri Lanka beat Australia, it will be a very well deserved World Cup for Sri Lanka too. They've played much professional cricket than many teams in this World Cup, and they deserve the cup as much as the Aussies. The better team on that day will win, and the world should respect that team as the World Champions, without giving excuses like this.
Read this too.
http://landlikenoother.blogspot.com/2007/04/sri-lanka-last-hope-of-anti-aussies.html
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-26 22:42:33
Correction
Why you guys DON'T say the other side of the same thing?
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-26 22:47:03
Why you guys DON'T say the other side of the same thing?
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-26 22:47:03
Australia played each and every game with its best available side. In each and every match it gave one hundred percent in effort. In each and every match it was victorious. No other side matched that.
Sri Lanka deserve to be in the final. But they should stand condemned for treating the previous game against Australia as a joke. Leaving your top players out of a match brings the whole concept of a World Cup into disrepute.
If I was a Sri Lankan supporter I would consider a win in the final a very hollow one.
May the best team win.
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-26 23:54:06
Sri Lanka deserve to be in the final. But they should stand condemned for treating the previous game against Australia as a joke. Leaving your top players out of a match brings the whole concept of a World Cup into disrepute.
If I was a Sri Lankan supporter I would consider a win in the final a very hollow one.
May the best team win.
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-26 23:54:06
I was actually trying to be fair by saying 'IF Australia beat Sri Lanka' - I was actually giving Sri Lanka credit! If I wasn't giving them credit I would have said 'Either way Australia deserve the world cup'.
You would have correctly understood what I was saying if your mind wasn't clouded by tall poppy syndrome.
Sri Lanka is a worthy oponent and I think a lot of Australians are looking forward to a competitive final.. but we'll be equally as happy to see Sri Lanka get thrashed ;-)
Posted by Chris on 2007-04-27 03:36:44
You would have correctly understood what I was saying if your mind wasn't clouded by tall poppy syndrome.
Sri Lanka is a worthy oponent and I think a lot of Australians are looking forward to a competitive final.. but we'll be equally as happy to see Sri Lanka get thrashed ;-)
Posted by Chris on 2007-04-27 03:36:44
Dan Tas, well, technically, Australia did rest Bracken for one match (forget against who, presumably a minnow side) but that was their own lapse.
Posted by JC on 2007-04-27 08:53:54
Posted by JC on 2007-04-27 08:53:54
//Sri Lanka deserve to be in the final. But they should stand condemned for treating the previous game against Australia as a joke\\
Well it was a joke!
I think Kumar Sangakkara gave a good answer to this argument (of Ian Chappel) in Sanga’s column to Cricinfo.com
This is what he said, as I can recall.
“Australian commentators think, every time when another team play Australia, that’s an important match for that team. This is nonsense. Actually that super 8 match against Australia was the least important match in the tournament for us. So what’s wrong in resting few key players in an un important match? Even the match against Bermuda was more important than this one. It was never a crunch game. The semi final against New Zealand will be a Crunch game. We don’t believe in moral boosting wins. All we focus as at now is winning this world cup. Not just winning an unimportant super 8 match against Australia, just to please few pundits.
Australia had been a great cricket team. But remember the fact that they’ve been beaten in 2 ODI series during this year. So, they are far away being “unbeatable”.
(End quote)
Be ready to face the truth. Sri Lankans are confident. Actually none of the other teams faced Australia in this world cup was not that confident as much as Sri Lankans.
Don’t take things for granted. Australia will have to prove them selves by winning the all important final. Until then, they are not the World Champions.
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-27 13:28:33
Well it was a joke!
I think Kumar Sangakkara gave a good answer to this argument (of Ian Chappel) in Sanga’s column to Cricinfo.com
This is what he said, as I can recall.
“Australian commentators think, every time when another team play Australia, that’s an important match for that team. This is nonsense. Actually that super 8 match against Australia was the least important match in the tournament for us. So what’s wrong in resting few key players in an un important match? Even the match against Bermuda was more important than this one. It was never a crunch game. The semi final against New Zealand will be a Crunch game. We don’t believe in moral boosting wins. All we focus as at now is winning this world cup. Not just winning an unimportant super 8 match against Australia, just to please few pundits.
Australia had been a great cricket team. But remember the fact that they’ve been beaten in 2 ODI series during this year. So, they are far away being “unbeatable”.
(End quote)
Be ready to face the truth. Sri Lankans are confident. Actually none of the other teams faced Australia in this world cup was not that confident as much as Sri Lankans.
Don’t take things for granted. Australia will have to prove them selves by winning the all important final. Until then, they are not the World Champions.
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-27 13:28:33
Moody tells Australia to mind their own business
http://content-sl.cricinfo.com/wc2007/content/current/story/292514.html
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-27 13:35:43
http://content-sl.cricinfo.com/wc2007/content/current/story/292514.html
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-27 13:35:43
Moody's Comments:
"The return shot is why does Sri Lanka have to be told who to play against Australia?" Moody, who won two World Cups with Australia, said in the Courier-Mail. "What is it to do with Australia who we play in a game which is essentially a dead rubber?
"The cricket world did not stick their nose into the fact that half the Australian team didn't tour New Zealand for the Chappell-Hadlee Series. That was Australia's choice. It is the way you prepare your players for a long World Cup." Glenn McGrath and Ricky Ponting had games off during the CB Series while Ponting and Adam Gilchrist did not tour New Zealand for the Chappell-Hadlee Series.
Moody was confident Sri Lanka could spring an upset in the final, despite predictions the pacy and bouncy pitch would suit the Australians. "I think we can win," he said. "What Australia has done has no relevance to Saturday. If Sri Lanka bring their A game it is good enough to beat Australia.
"The Sri Lankans have a huge amount of respect for Australia but are not in awe of the contest. They actually welcome that. During my time with the team it has never seemed they were in fear or starstruck about Australia."
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-27 13:39:04
"The return shot is why does Sri Lanka have to be told who to play against Australia?" Moody, who won two World Cups with Australia, said in the Courier-Mail. "What is it to do with Australia who we play in a game which is essentially a dead rubber?
"The cricket world did not stick their nose into the fact that half the Australian team didn't tour New Zealand for the Chappell-Hadlee Series. That was Australia's choice. It is the way you prepare your players for a long World Cup." Glenn McGrath and Ricky Ponting had games off during the CB Series while Ponting and Adam Gilchrist did not tour New Zealand for the Chappell-Hadlee Series.
Moody was confident Sri Lanka could spring an upset in the final, despite predictions the pacy and bouncy pitch would suit the Australians. "I think we can win," he said. "What Australia has done has no relevance to Saturday. If Sri Lanka bring their A game it is good enough to beat Australia.
"The Sri Lankans have a huge amount of respect for Australia but are not in awe of the contest. They actually welcome that. During my time with the team it has never seemed they were in fear or starstruck about Australia."
Posted by Voice in Colombo on 2007-04-27 13:39:04
Apples and oranges!! Nathan Bracken has never been a laydown mazaire to be part of the Aussie starting XI. Unlike Murali and Vaas for Sri Lanka. Comparing the CB and Chappell-Hadlee series to the World Cup is a nonsense. And the latter were hot on the heels of an arduous Ashes series. Our rested players wanted to be fit for the World Cup!!.
Why not rest Murali and Vaas from the final, allowing them to be fit for average-boosting, titanic struggles with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe (surely there must be more of those due).
If the drivel coming from Moody's mouth is sincere, then aren't we lucky he is not Buchanan's successor.
A seven hour, 100 over game will decide who wins the trophy, not who is world champion. For that refer to the ICC rankings please.
Not to mention an unbeaten run of almost thirty games at World Cup tournaments.
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-27 15:33:05
Why not rest Murali and Vaas from the final, allowing them to be fit for average-boosting, titanic struggles with Bangladesh and Zimbabwe (surely there must be more of those due).
If the drivel coming from Moody's mouth is sincere, then aren't we lucky he is not Buchanan's successor.
A seven hour, 100 over game will decide who wins the trophy, not who is world champion. For that refer to the ICC rankings please.
Not to mention an unbeaten run of almost thirty games at World Cup tournaments.
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-27 15:33:05
So Sri Lanka v Australia was the least important match for SL. Even less than the following match against Ireland in which Murali and Vaas did play? Pull the other one.
Moody's comments just show how sensitive he is to the whole issue - because it's high risk. The verdict will basically be the result of tommorow's match.
Posted by MT on 2007-04-27 15:54:14
Moody's comments just show how sensitive he is to the whole issue - because it's high risk. The verdict will basically be the result of tommorow's match.
Posted by MT on 2007-04-27 15:54:14
//Our rested players wanted to be fit for the World Cup!!.\\
Just as Murali and Vass needed to be rested for the World Cup FINAL.
//So Sri Lanka v Australia was the least important match for SL. Even less than the following match against Ireland in which Murali and Vaas did play?\\
Yes. Match against Ireland was more important, because it was the last match for Key Players to get some match practice.
Posted by VIC on 2007-04-27 18:32:33
Just as Murali and Vass needed to be rested for the World Cup FINAL.
//So Sri Lanka v Australia was the least important match for SL. Even less than the following match against Ireland in which Murali and Vaas did play?\\
Yes. Match against Ireland was more important, because it was the last match for Key Players to get some match practice.
Posted by VIC on 2007-04-27 18:32:33
Voice in Colombo;
May I call you VIC. I admire the way you are standing up for your team. Our players did not rest from a World Cup game, therein lies the difference.
I wish you luck for tomorrow's game, but my opinion won't change, regardless of which side wins. If Sri Lanka wins it will have my congratulations, but not my respect.
Now I know how important the respect of an anonymous blogger in remote Australia is to the country of Sri Lanka!! But there you go.
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-27 18:47:49
May I call you VIC. I admire the way you are standing up for your team. Our players did not rest from a World Cup game, therein lies the difference.
I wish you luck for tomorrow's game, but my opinion won't change, regardless of which side wins. If Sri Lanka wins it will have my congratulations, but not my respect.
Now I know how important the respect of an anonymous blogger in remote Australia is to the country of Sri Lanka!! But there you go.
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-27 18:47:49
VIC
That is cute.. A Tom Moody motivational presentation???
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-27 18:54:55
That is cute.. A Tom Moody motivational presentation???
Posted by Dan Tas on 2007-04-27 18:54:55
Interesting the rather negative approach of that, its not "Sri Lanka will Win", but instead Australia will be defeated. Just goes to show that even in the Sri Lankan fans mind Australia is the best team.
But thanks for that VIC, I always could do with a laugh on a Friday Arvo.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-04-27 19:24:14
But thanks for that VIC, I always could do with a laugh on a Friday Arvo.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-04-27 19:24:14
Post New Comment
You need to be logged in to post a comment. If you're new, register here. Existing users, login via the right margin.
