Testing cricket at ICC World Cup

Tony Becca, Contributor

Two Saturdays ago, I along with some friends of mine watched the ICC Cricket World Cup match between England and South Africa on television. We stayed up all night, and for me, it was an unforgettable night.

England, after looking all over the losers, particularly after South Africa's first innings and especially after South Africa had stroked their way to 63 without loss, snatched a memorable victory by six runs.

It was not that England won why it was unforgettable, why it was memorable, and why I was happy. It was unforgettable, especially after some of my friends wanted England to lose, not because they did not like England, once the mother country, or because they liked South Africa, once the land of Apartheid, but because of the quality of cricket on show.

My friends, all born and bred West Indians, wanted England to win because, simply put, an England loss would have made it easier for the West Indies to qualify for the next round of the competition.

It was a memorable night for me, not because England's victory made it more difficult for the West Indies to qualify, but because of the pitch in Chennai - the city in which India won the only Test, out of six, during the West Indies tour, minus the Kerry Packer players, in 1978-79.

Slow pitch

The pitch, as it turned out, was slow and with some awkward bounce, England, who won the toss, batted first, and made 171 after their last six wickets fell for 48 runs, and South Africa, after reaching 63 without loss, after reaching 124 for three, after reaching 127 for seven, replied with 165.

Left-arm spinner Robin Peterson finished with three wickets, pacer Dale Steyn one, pacer Morne Morkel two, and right-arm leg-spinner Imran Tahir four for South Africa, and left-arm spinner Michael Yardy ended with one wicket, pacer James Anderson two, pacer Tim Bresnan one, off-spinner Graeme Swann one, and pacer Stuart Broad with four wickets for England.

It was memorable for me because, after England had been dismissed, and while we were having something to eat, one of my friends talked about England's embarrassing performance, about what South Africa's batsmen were going to do, and about when England lost the match.

I turned to him, and I said, "Boy, I did not know that you are a prophet. As far I am concerned, it is the same pitch that England batted on that South Africa will be batting on."

I remembered that someone once wrote that when Sir Neville Cardus, the world-famous cricket writer, was the sports editor of the Manchester Guardian, whenever one of his reporters covered a cricket match and did not mention the quality of the pitch, he would crush the copy and throw it in the waste paper bin.

The pitch, according to Cardus and many cricketers, was the heart of cricket. In other words, when the pitch was nice and hard, most batsmen paraded their skills on it, when it was dusty, bowlers were at their best, and so whenever something unusual happens, like a team dismissing a team of good batsmen cheaply, he wanted the readers, those who were not at the match, to have an idea of what sort of pitch the match was played on.

The pitch in Chennai was slow, and batsmen, modern batsmen, do not like slow pitches because the ball does not come on to the bat.

Slow pitches, however, help all the bowlers, pace and slow, those who can swing the ball and those who can spin it, and good batsmen can bat on them, providing they are patient, providing they use their feet, and providing they wait on the ball.

The batsmen have to time the ball well, they have to push the ball into the spaces, and when the opportunity presents itself and they are offered half-volleys and short deliveries, they have to welcome them with drives and cuts, pulls and hooks.

In other words, the batsmen have to bat on slow pitches. They cannot just sit back and simply play through the line.

England got into early trouble because Andrew Strauss could not wait, and they lost Kevin Pietersen and Ian Bell because they are not good players to spin.

The two batsmen who lifted them from 15 for three to 114 for four were Jonathan Trott and Ravi Bapora, two good players of spin whose dismissal for 52 and 60 signalled the end of England's innings.

Flashing strokes, exciting fielding

When South Africa batted, they got a good start because of Hashim Amla, who plays spin well, and Graeme Smith, who was fortunate enough to survive. After their dismissals, the others followed each other to the pavilion one by one.

The World Cup of one-day cricket, however, is for those who love to see flashing strokes and exciting fielding more than anything, and as far as that is concerned, the New Zealand against Pakistan in Kandy was the match to see.

Pakistan were expected to beat New Zealand, but in a scintillating performance, New Zealand, batting first, blasted 302 for seven with 13 sixes, the last 100 runs coming off five overs, and limited Pakistan to 192 after knocking the stuffing out of them at 23 for four after 7.1 overs and 66 for six after 17.1 overs.

In christening the Pallekele Stadium, Ross Taylor, on his 27th birthday, cracked 131 not out with seven sixes and eight fours off 124 deliveries as fast bowler Shoaib Akhtar, the man who was once clocked at 100 mph, conceded 28 runs with two sixes and three fours plus a few wides and no-balls in one over and seamer Abdul Razzack gave up 30 runs with three sixes and two fours in one over.

Catches win matches, and if that is really so, Seren Waters of Kenya and wicketkeeper Kamal Akmal of Pakistan must be kicking themselves.

In Delhi, Canada were 48 for three replying to Kenya's 198 when Waters dropped a simple catch at mid-on off Jimmy Hansra at zero. Hansra went on to score 70 before he was dismissed at 180 for four as Canada marched to victory at 199 for five.

In the fireworks in Pallekele Stadium, New Zealand were 60-odd for two and Taylor on zero when the ball, from Akhtar, went past Kamran Akmal, and two balls later, on four, when the ball went in and out of Kamran Akmal's gloves, off Akhtar, with Taylor, starting nervously, on four.