Warning: The World Cupdates that follow from today may contain trace elements of dour analysis, sportsmanship, charitable internationalism and The Spirit of Cricket. For this I apologise. On the upside, they will also contain lashings of rampant barracking, shocking bias and one-sided invective.
Thank you.
Well then, the dross rehearsals are done with and World Cup 2007 is finally underway. One thing is certain: if I'm going to watch any of this Calypso Cavalcade, I'll have to get up well before I go to bed. What a perfectly uncivilized time to schedule a cricket tournament. If someone had thought to install modern electric candles at the Windian grounds us antipodeans could have watched most of most of the games. An oversight that may have been avoided had my suggestion to the ICC to have all international cricket outside Australia played in Sri Lanka - home just in time for dinner and cricket - not fallen on deaf ears.
The upshot is, there's not much to report about this morning's match this afternoon against Scotland in St Kitts because I only saw about 20 minutes of action.
We won.
Extras: The Dick was low-key in his beige open-necked ensemble; some bowlers were "tonked", others were mysteriously "tanked"; Flemmo was all over the "good areas"; a Scottish bowler "leaked", which is probably better than bled, but unsavoury nevertheless; Bunny Cullinan is not completely irritating; JIM MAXWELL! is; and various Windian commentators made various sensible and various not-so-sensible comments, some of which I did and/or didn't understand.
CHUCKY
How did I miss this? Well spotted, Rod.
The ABC is not providing ANY coverage of the Netherlands game. For shame!
I get to work at 5am and have Fox on a TV on my desk so I was happy but this morning they only had Kenya v Canada, engrossing as it was. The Aussie matches must be on a super secret channel I don't get. ;-(
Posted by: Amanda | 15 March 2007 at 10:40
Wonder why they would broadcast the Scootland game, and not the Dutch one.
The Aussie match was on Fox Sports ... umm ... I'll just look in the guide ... BUGGER! ... it only works with Flash and my computer here can't run that.
It was on Fox Sports 1, 2 or 3. Trust that helps.
Posted by: Tony.T | 15 March 2007 at 10:45
Gilchrist and Hayden batted adequately against a limited attack. Good fielding by the Scots would have had the top three bats in the shed for a combined 100 or so. Clarke didn't really trouble the scorers, and Hodge missed out on ANOTHER chance to get a 100. SuperHusseys poor run continued - and his average might drop below 50 in this tournament. Tait aprayed it, McGrath took advantage of the minnows, Hodge's bowling will be dangerous later in the tournament (to sightscreens, advertising hoardings, people in the crowd...), and Bracken didn't do much. I was disappointed that Tait didn't break a few jaws. The real assessment of this performance will be after the Yarpies play them. They may make 500 and bowl them out for 50. March 24th (mostly the 25th in the civilised world) will be a game to watch.
ps: Sunny, please come to the pub for some education.
Posted by: nick | 15 March 2007 at 11:01
Because both the Scots and the Windians say "mon" punmanship ends up confused. Disappointing, that. I mean, how many of you would have got it if I'd headed the post OCH, MON!? Hmmm.
Posted by: Tony.T | 15 March 2007 at 11:04
pps:
FoxSports 1 - Kenya vs Canada
FoxSports 2 - World Championship of...darts, then the LPGA (quite attractive young ladies)
FoxSports 3 - Australia vs Scotland
Puts everything into perspective.
Posted by: nick | 15 March 2007 at 11:04
Nick, who's the they and them of "They may make 500 and bowl them out for 50."? Not that it strictly matters, it could well work both ways, but I'm a stickler.
I'd like to say playing the minnows is a waste of time, but this time around it's giving us a chance to get our shit together. Well, a little bit more together than it's been, given I've still got massive doubts about our ability to restrict a reasonable batting line-up.
Posted by: Tony.T | 15 March 2007 at 11:15
What the hell's going on with the comment counter? 10? There's only 6.
Posted by: Tony.T | 15 March 2007 at 11:16
and what's this on the previous post?
Posted by Nabakov on Wednesday, March 14, 2007 at 13:25 | Comments (6)
Category: Film Reviews (12)
Have you had a ghost writer all this time tone?
Posted by: girtbysea | 15 March 2007 at 12:53
i feel deceived, and kind of dirty, but I'm liking it.
Posted by: girtbysea | 15 March 2007 at 12:55
Sadly there's no sleaze or surrepticiousness. Nabakov's been doing fillum reviews here now since 2005.
Posted by: Tony.T | 15 March 2007 at 13:02
maybe i've lost the plot
Posted by: girtbysea | 15 March 2007 at 14:24
I meant the Yarpies but if poor grammar and outrageous fortune coincide in Scotland's favour, I'll be very happy!
Posted by: nick | 15 March 2007 at 15:06
Is little Steve's last name Randell?
Posted by: nick | 15 March 2007 at 15:07
Nasty, but nice.
Posted by: Tony.T | 15 March 2007 at 15:14
Play the games in Japan. No interest but a cracker of a timezone.
Posted by: Adam 1.0 | 15 March 2007 at 21:25
Play the games in Australia, where they belong. of COURSE the cricket world revolves around us.
Posted by: Scott Wickstein | 15 March 2007 at 22:08
One tartan swallow does not a summer make...
Posted by: nick | 15 March 2007 at 23:30
Well Ireland v Zimbots is going DOWN. TO. THE. WIRE.
Posted by: Amanda | 16 March 2007 at 09:22
I saw a good chunk of the Ireland v Zimbabwe game this morning. Ireland have chucked it, they should have won this in a center. Actually, they are an alright side except for their fielding, which is atrocious. It took 4 genuine nicks before they picked up Duffin - that he only made 12 doesn't say much for his batting. Matsikenyeri should have been runout for nought, and a half dozen other times. Oh well, makes things more interesting.
Posted by: Russ | 16 March 2007 at 09:31
Heh. A bunch of clowns, but entertaining.
Interviewer Ian Bishop to Ireland's Andre Botha: Wow, your first World Cup. You couldn't have hoped for a better start!
Um, they could have actually won?
Posted by: Amanda | 16 March 2007 at 09:42
I'm putting $10 on Ireland to beat The Netherlands in the final.
Easiest million I ever made.
Posted by: Russell Allen | 16 March 2007 at 10:39
Oddly enough, a tie probably suits both sides as well as a win. They are both still a chance to beat Pakistan to progress to the over-long over-kill of the Super-8s. It is the nice thing about having a football style group stage. The games aren't near as meaningless as fools like Lawrence Booth think - still trying to pretend that Kenya's progression to the semis last time round was the result of poor English management, and not their victories over Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe.
Anyone interested in betting might look at the 16/1 bookies are offering on most major teams being knocked out in the elimination stage. Kenya and Bangladesh are better than that.
Posted by: Russ | 16 March 2007 at 10:52
Pity I didn't see the match. Ties in the World Cup warm the cockles. Were there any Daffy Donald Duck style shenanigans?
Posted by: Tony.T | 16 March 2007 at 10:59
Oh my, the dolly feels just like a real baby.
Who wants a real baby (especially one in cricket colours)?
Posted by: Darlene | 16 March 2007 at 11:41
Yes Tony, the final two runouts were evocative of the spirit of 99
Posted by: Scott Wickstein | 16 March 2007 at 12:49
Have the 2003 Semi Finalists, Kenya played yet? Looking to go one better.
Posted by: RT | 16 March 2007 at 14:31
With any luck they would beat Sorth Efrica in the semi because Smuth ballsed up the DuckyLoo calculations.
Posted by: Tony.T | 16 March 2007 at 14:39
It would be only fair that the next world cup be in Zimbabwe.
Posted by: RT | 16 March 2007 at 14:53
Looks just like BindiIrwin, fields like a real baby - so whose progeny is the repulsive tyke ?
Posted by: GoAwayPlease | 17 March 2007 at 18:38
Go the oirish!! Looks like a few pints of guinness have done em a world of good - I imagine there will be much more consumed if they manage to pick up 133 to win.
This little gem from Cricinfo:
Pakistan have been dismissed for 132. Extras top scored with 29, Akmal the 'real' highest scorer with just 27.
Posted by: Vindicate | 18 March 2007 at 05:19
Pakistan going home, India flogged by Bangladesh - Sunny, Shoaib - well done.
Posted by: nick | 18 March 2007 at 08:32
Dang, if only I could have been bothered actually laying those bets... had to happen though, and it's great it did. Now if only Kenya could beat England.
Posted by: Russ | 18 March 2007 at 10:33
Oops, Apologies for my stray tag.
Posted by: Russ | 18 March 2007 at 10:34
Sigh. Tony, why does your site keep deleting italic close tags?
Posted by: Russ | 18 March 2007 at 10:36
I'm all for the qualifiers in the World Cup but I think this proves that only the cream of the 2nd tier nations should be in the tournament. The top three at best.
Maybe Pakistan should be forced to qualify next time?
Posted by: Adam 1.0 | 18 March 2007 at 10:44
I don't agree Adam. If you look at the history of associate teams at the World Cup - Kenya is a good example - they are a mismatch of absolute thrashings, followed by good performances (and the odd win).
The important factor is whether a game has any meaning. The problem in the past (and in the Super-8s to come) is that a loss to a minnow hasn't ever hurt a team much. Pakistan in '99 and England in '92 both made the final. The Super-8 will only be super in it's tediousness with Ireland and Bangladesh there. They won't have the consistency to go on. Four team groups and knockouts are the way to go. Football - Champions League experiments aside - has known this for years.
Posted by: Russ | 18 March 2007 at 11:27
Been having a Bad HTML Day, Russ?
Posted by: Tony.T | 18 March 2007 at 17:26
Awful. But on the plus side today, I found this site of cricket videos. The saddest thing about Pakistan is they were probably lucky that it was so close. Awful cricket.
Posted by: Russ | 18 March 2007 at 18:02