The World Cup is the most prestigious one-day tournament on the cricket calendar designed to unearth the side with the greatest skill. I believe the one day cricket not only depends on the talent but also in the strategies and basically it is a mind game. Test cricket is mainly a game of individual skill and talent but one day is more a team effort and needs participation of all players until the last ball is bowled.
This World Cup the teams are riddled with injuries. The idea was to have matches before the World Cup was to get ready for the world cup. All teams have been playing all over the world and the supportive staff also justify that these matches are good for the team and their idea was to give them enough practice to play well in the World Cup. Now the tournament is approaching and many players are injured or rested to recover from various injuries. This should give warning signals to all the cricketing boards so that in the future they know that players need only fine tuning before the World Cup rather than playing them till they are tired. I am not only talking about physical injury I am referring to mental fatigue. In any sport mental fatigue is the worst enemy. By playing so many matches before world cup the players not only get injured but they put in 100% in each match so that when the World Cup comes there are hardly any competitive juices left in them.
In the run up to the World Cup, in last few weeks the teams have been judged and many predictions have been made regarding who will win. The recent matches have also shown how one team can reverse the tide of the recent history to vanquish a super power, as England did it thrice. The last two months have shown how important can be the absence or lack of form of even a single player can influence the end result.
The conclusion I can draw from all the matches played in last three months is that South Africa is the favourite.
Things have changed in the last two months. While Australia got some major cricketing lessons from their favourite whipping boy England .
An eternal favourite, Australia will be the team to watch. For sheer consistency and quality of cricket, there is no team to match Ricky Ponting’s bunch of performers. History confirms that Australia has always been the team that has the character to win from hopeless situations. Winning the World Cup in 1987 was the first step that Australia took towards attaining greatness in one-day cricket. By winning the crown in 1999 and 2003 it not only affirmed its greatness but also invited greater scrutiny. Critics now evaluate Australia with far more intensity as Ponting and his team prepare for the challenge in the Caribbean
As host, the burden of expectations will be on the West Indies. The Brian Lara-led side is not without ability, but has, in the run-up to the World Cup, lacked consistency. Playing in familiar conditions will give the side an edge, particularly in the tight games. The pressures of competing at home, though, can cut both ways. The Caribbean will be seeking lost glory. After the triumphs in 1975 and 1979, and the final appearance four years later, the West Indians have had just one semifinal finish (96) in the subsequent World Cups. The reasons have been many, from the decline of the West Indian pace attack to a lack of discipline in batting.
The side, with the 2004 Champions Trophy triumph in England being an exception, has not delivered collectively. The conflict between the players and the board over payments and endorsements has often made more news than the performance of the team. In the past, West Indian cricket had been associated with the romance of the game. In fact, the greatest challenge before coach Bennett King, when he took over, was to instill a feeling of togetherness among the cricketers drawn from different nations. To a limited extent, he has succeeded. In this context, the appointment of Clive Lloyd as manager has been significant. The Big Cat led the West Indies, with blistering stroke-makers and explosive pace men, to the top in the 1970s and 80s. More importantly, the side was united – Lloyd’s men hummed as one. The West Indian performances were also underlined by a sense of pride. Indeed, the West Indies has been through some very troubled times. The seniors were not delivering, and the youngsters not coming through. World Cup 2007 could change it all.
Lara’s side can pack a punch. The side’s batting is strong, particularly in the pitches of the Caribbean, where there would not be alarming deviation off the seam. The pitches have been re-laid, but as Indian coach Greg Chappell pointed out, the texture of the soil could be the same. Some of the surfaces could play faster, but there is unlikely to be enough grass on the pitch to assist seam movement.
The ageing Sri Lankan batting line-up looked as loose as a bad set of teeth in the series against India; nevertheless for a variety of reasons the islanders will fancy their chances of making the semifinals.
On current form, the relatively sprightly Kumar Sangakkara is arguably their best batsman, and it’s a miracle that he has so far coped with wicket-keeping duties as well as he has. He is the pivot around which the innings is founded, and the Lankan have meandered when Sangakkara isn’t there long enough to dominate, pace and guide the innings. Others have looked less convincing. Upul Tharanga is going through a rough patch. Since knocking up consecutive centuries in the Champions Trophy he has crossed 50 only twice in 11 innings. Meanwhile his opening partner, Sanath Jayasuriya, 37, playing his fifth World Cup, remains as effervescent as ever. The one significant advantage Sri Lanka has, going into the World Cup, is that none of its players are carrying injuries. The roster of casualties is long for other countries, particularly Australia, and for a side ostensibly loaded with geriatric men Sri Lanka isn’t doing too badly.
The most unpredictable team in world cricket. And the most under-performing bunch. Pakistan cricket has perennially suffered from problems and there is reason for skipper Inzamam-ul-Haq to feel concerned on one important aspect – how to get the best out of his players.
Though Imran Khan taught it to win, Pakistan has been most vulnerable to pressure. Pakistan’s problems have more been self-made than caused by opponents. Even Imran has conceded that this trait would be difficult to overcome Pakistan has a line-up that can create self-doubts even in a team like Australia, but the players have repeatedly lost contests from winning positions. The best of cricketing brains in Pakistan have failed to spot the reasons for the team’s inconsistency. Under the guidance of Coach Bob Woolmer the team has come to understand its potential, but success has not matched the awesome talent at Pakistan’s disposal the team can draw motivation from the success in 1992 when it rose from the brink to make a strong statement. There is reason to believe that Pakistan has a realistic chance of winning the Cup.
Thanks to the recent reverses suffered by Australia in the Commonwealth Bank Series finals and the Chappell-Hadlee Series, the World Cup seems so open that some players are on a desperate scramble for fixing broken bones. One of them even talks of amputating his troublesome finger, and this is no loose-tongued, inebriated statement considering that all the teams seriously believe they can win the Cup and realize that this is the best chance they will ever get. The Kiwis are quite confident. After two historic run-chases and the sweep of the Chappell-Hadlee Series against Australia, the same New Zealand team that failed to qualify for the tri-series final in Australia is now dreaming of winning the World Cup. The team that was heavily criticized by its media for the batting lapses in Australia is now riding on its two path-breaking batting performances. The New Zealand teams of the past seemed to have everything, but lacked that extra something needed to win the World Cup. Slotting the current team in the same category would not be fair to its members for the squad now has the variety and the depth to regard itself as a serious contender for a place in the semifinals.
England for the World Cup, after three visits to the final without a single success, with an attitude problem towards one-day internationals, with injury doubts and only a brief flurry of triumph at the end of their recent tour of Australia on the plus side of this winter’s equation Under Fletcher’s guidance England can win the World Cup 2007.The first World Cup final victory can be a turning point in the English game’s history. But there is always one team ready to spring a surprise and, provided Vaughan stays fit, South Africa’s previous World Cup attempts have been flawed. When it mattered the most, the side floundered. It can be argued that the side was unlucky. But then, winning teams make their own luck.
South Africans have been a strong favourite in the four previous editions before the brilliance of the likes of Lara and Waugh, and not to count the bad weather in Australia (1992) and South Africa in 2003.put armature stop to their progress The foremost challenge before Graeme Smith and his men would be to retain their intensity throughout the competition in the Caribbean. The side has to exude the confidence of a World No. 1 there is a view that South Africa, otherwise a well-oiled unit of multi-dimensional cricketers, lacks the aggression of a champion. You can expect South Africa to bat and field well. Smith, maturing as captain, led the side to back-to-back victories over India and Pakistan at home. But history does not favour the side; it has never progressed beyond the World Cup semi-finals. Four years ago, the South Africans got the Duckworth and Lewis arithmetic wrong on a rainy night in Durban; the team-management had blundered. The Caribbean sun could shine on them. . South Africans have been a strong favourite in the four previous editions before the brilliance of the likes of Lara and Waugh, and not to count the bad weather in Australia (1992) and South Africa in 2003.put armature stop to their progress
Fortunately, for India, Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell are keeping their heads even if no one else is. They look at the World Cup as a tournament of two parts: the first consisting of the group stage and the Super 8, and the second comprising the knockout stage. The key is to do well in the first stage, where India often struggles to maintain form, so as to enter the second, better suited to India’s traditionally spasmodic style of play. About this time last year, one thought that India had shrugged off that particular tradition, that under Dravid and Chappell, the team had emerged as a combination of near interchangeable parts that wasn’t dependent unhealthily on specific match winners. Make no mistake, one-day cricket matches are often won on the back of two or three performances: encouragingly for India, these two or three weren’t the same every time. There were recurring suspects – Yuvraj, Dhoni, Pathan, Dravid – but others were chipping in. Kaif and Raina, R. P. Singh and Sreesanth, Uthappa and Harbhajan Singh all caught the eye during this phase. Whether the side can consistently maintain respectable fielding standards is another issue. At least in Yuvraj, India has a fielder that can turn a match. Dravid has spoken of the necessity of being smart with field placements – he will be helped by the fact that the Caribbean is the one place in the world a team can fudge on its fielding. The small outfields privilege the captain who knows his angles; throwing arms have it easier as well.
In the end I predict that South Africa, India, Australia and West Indies will reach the semifinals. Sri Lanka and Pakistan are also equally strong to reach the semi finals.
I pick South Africa to win the 2007 World Cup.
Related Videos
