India win World Cup deservedly and comfortably

India 4/277 (48.2 ov, G Gambhir 97, M S Dhoni 91*) beat Sri Lanka 6/274 (50ov, M Jayawardene 103*, K Sangakkara 48) by six wickets: CWC 201 final at Mumbai ( aka Bombay). India win tournament.

Well done, India. Your victory confirms you as the top world team in the two major forms of the game: Tests and ODIs. T20 has taken a back seat for the moment and the future of the 50 overs (or thereabouts) a side game looks assured for the next few years, not only because India are both world champs and the financial powerhouse of world cricket but also because, despite the protracted length of the tornament, there were many good matches played.

The final was one of these. Sri Lanka, who for some odd reasons made four, not all forced, changes to their semifinal eleven were competitive thanks initially to Mahela Jaywardene's elegantly aggressive 103*/88b (13x4). Lasith Malinga's dismissals of Virender Sehwag 0 and Sachin Tendulkar 18 made India's road look rocky but then Gautam Gambhir 97/122b (9x4) and Virat Kohli 35/49b (4x4) steadied the ship before MS Dhoni took advantage of the second string bowlers to power his side home.

Dhoni's 91*/79b (2x6, 8x4) was the quintessential captain's knock. He hadn't had the best of tournaments with the bat but on this really big occasion backed himself to win, and did so imperiously. I'd sometimes thought he was an overrated cricketer, but no more.

Scorecard

Butterfingered Pakistan let India into final

India 9/260 (50 ov, Tendulkar 85, Wahab Riaz 5/46) beat Pakistan 231 (49.5 ov, Misbah-ul- Haq 56) by 29 runs: CWC 2011 semifinal #2 at Mohali. India will play Sri Lanka in final.

Sachin Tendulkar has played many better innings than his 85/115b (11x4) but few of such value to his team and country. Without it Pakistan would probably have won.

It was also a very lucky innings: dropped four times and reprieved by the Umpire Decision Review Scheme when he looked to many people, though not Hawkeye, to be lbw.

Scorecard

Sri Lanka see off tenacious NZ to move to final

Sri Lanka 220 for 5 (47.5 ov,T Dilshan 73,K Sangakkara 54, T Southee 3/57) beat New Zealand 217 (48.5 ov, S Styris 57, A Mendis 3-35, S Malinga 3/55) by five wickets: CWC2011 Semifinal #1 at Colombo. Sri Lanka progress to final; New Zealand eliminated from tournament.

Sri Lanka deservedly won the match when their bowlers took the last 6 NZ wickets for 25 and their batters chased down, with some anxious moments but no major collapse, what looked like a below par 217. The Black Caps fought hard - better than I'd expected (I stayed up watching later than I'd intended to) - and were worthy semifinalists, but Sri Lanka's temperament carried them through.

Scorecard

Fox Sports video highlights: there was some cloud cover so don't expect to see one of the spectacular sunsets which have been a feature of many of the matches played in Sri Lanka.

Sri Lankan openers crush England bowling

Sri Lanka 0/231 (39,3 ov, T Dilshan 108*,U Tharanga 102*) beat England 6/229 (50 ov, J Trott 86, E Morgan 50) by 10 wickets: CWC 2011 quarter final#4 at Colombo. Sri Lanka qualify for semi finals, England eliminated from tournament.

After some ragged fielding and steady bowling by Sri Lanka had allowed England to post what several TV and radio commentators thought was a competitive score, Tillakaratne Dilshan 108*/115b (2x6, 10x4) and Upul Tharanga 102*/122b (1x6, 12x4) chased it down with panache and considerable disdain for the bowling.

Here is the Scorecard

And here (at least for the immediate future) the video highlights:

Another South Africa CWC choke, this time against tenacious NZ

New Zealand 8/ 221 ( 50 ov, J Ryder 83, R Taylor 43, M Morkel 3/46) beat South Africa 172 (43.2 ov, J Kallis 43, J Oram 4/39, N McCullum 3/24) by 49 runs: CWC quarter final #3 at Mirpur. NZ go through to semifinals, South Africa eliminated from tournament.

What a result! A modestly credentialled New Zealand team, albeit one which was correctly selected for the conditions, ie included three spinners, posted what looked to be a modest - not bad, not good - score and then chipped away at the South African batting to run out easy winners.

The NZ heroes were Jesse Ryder and Ross Taylor with the bat, Jacob Oram in the field and, with Nathan McCullum, the ball. The South African bowling looked good, though the batting crumbled in the face of better than modest bowling, an unusual dismissal (Hashim Amla caught at slip via the keeper's boot) a fine outfield catch (Oram taking Jacques Kallis) and a brain snap (by Francois dePlessis) induced run out of AB deVilliers, at which point the Proteas were 5/121.

Unlike so many other occasions when they've been surprised to find themselves in a strong position, the Kiwis didn't ease off. Oram took a couple more quick wickets, then a few overs later returned to dismiss de Plessis who'd briefly threatened to atone for his sin. The 49 run margin was impressively conclusive.

Can NZ go beyond the semi final? Great effort as it was at Mirpur it's hard to see them repeating it against Sri Lanka (if they beat England) in Colombo, but if England win today...

Scorecard

Fox Sports highlights

India knock Australia out of CWC despite Ponting century

India 5/261 (47.4 ov, Yuvraj Singh 57*, S Tendulkar 53, G Gambhir 50) beat Australia 6/260 (50ov, R Ponting 104, B Haddin 53) by 5 wickets: CWC2011 quarterfinal #2 at Ahmedabad. India qualify for semi-finals, Australia eliminated from tournament.

A good match which had moments of greatness.

It fluctuated intriguingly until India's maligned middle order batting regrouped to see off the increasingly ragged and defanged Australian attack and win deservedly (and, by ODI standards, quite comfortably).

Ricky Ponting won the toss and predictably chose in to bat in 40deg C+ heat. Brad Haddin and Shane Watson added 40 for the first wicket before Ponting came to the crease. He was watchful, more so than usual, early on and, it wouldn't have surprised me, on the evidence of his last six months' form, if he'd offered a chance.

But he didn't. Haddin went, well caught by Suresh Raina, who with Virat Kohli, lifted India's fielding performance, for 53/62b (1x6, 6x4). But none of the next three stayed long enough with Ponting, who became more assertive as the brittleness of his team's middle order was once again exposed: 3/140 , 4/150, 5/190. The seven Indian bowlers used trundled away with occasional effective bursts (or balls) and the fielding continued keen, despite the heat, and deprived the Australians, whose running between wickets wasn't always as fleetfooted as I've known, of several extra runs.

Fortunately David Hussey with a breezy 38/26b (1x6, 3x4) supported Ponting who went to a century before being caught off a reverse pull (has anyone ever see him play this shot before?) for a pugnacious 104/118b (1x6, 7x4), his first century for 13 months. Apart from the value to the team it reminded people of what a great player he is (some, but not me, would say, was).

The Australian defence of 260 required, among other things, the pace attack to both take wickets and to rein in their prodigal tendencies. But this didn't happen in the required proportions.

After Shane Watson removed Virender Sehwag for 15, Shaun Tait did get Sachin Tendulkar caught behind for an assured 53/68b (7x4) but leaked too many runs, both off the bat and via wides and noballs. Jason Krejza induced a false stroke or two, but the fielders weren't where the ball landed, and he bowled too many poor balls to keep the pressure on.

Yet David Hussey had Virat Kohli caught off a full toss, as India wobbled. Gautam Gambhir was foolishly run out for 50/64b (2x4) while Brett Lee had M S Dhoni well caught by Michael Clarke for 7 (another batting failure for India's captain).

At 5/187 the match was either side's to win. Unlike other occasions in the tournament, this time India regrouped. Yuvraj Singh and Suresh Raina pulled themselves together after some poor running between the wickets, Australia, with Lee bowling an expensive over, couldn't peg them back and they steered, and then biffed their team to victory without further loss: Yuvraj 57*/65b (8x4), Raina 34/28b (1x6, 2x4). Despite Ponting's century, Yuvraj who'd also taken 2/44 (Haddin and Clarke) from 10 overs, was named, not undeservedly, Player of the Match.

Where to for Australia, and Ricky Ponting, and a few others? Perhaps the selectors should let the dust of defeat in this tournament settle before they decide what steps to take next.

Scorecard

Fox Sports video

CWC 2011

Well, the CWC aka Cricket World Cup 2011 has at last, after a measured progression through the preliminary round, reached the quarter final stage.

As expected, the minnows, aka the non-Test playing nations, were eliminated though some, notably Ireland , had a few overs of fame. Enough of the contests, particularly the India- England tie were close enough to refresh interest in the 50 overs a side ODI format.
As usual Cricinfo has very detailed coverage.

Last night Pakistan, for whom Shahid Afridi has bowled very well, trounced the West Indies by 10 wickets.

Tonight India will start favourites against Australia in the second quarter final, which has been billed in parts of the media as a Sachin Tendulkar v Ricky Ponting or, according to The Australian's South Asia correspondent an "angel of light v prince of darkness" contest. It will almost certainly be more than this and should be much less onesided than last night's encounter, though both sides have shown weaknesses: both middle orders have underperformed, India's fielding and Australia's spin bowling have not always delivered.

The match deserves to be shown here on free to air TV, but apparently (unless I've not read the schedules properly) won't be.

Update/ correction 7.20pm CST

Apparently Channel 9 are showing the match from 11pm.

Rewind to 1992

While rain delayed the start in Barbados Channel Nine treated us to a replay of the the highlights of the 1992 World Cup final in which Pakistan defeated England.

1992 isn't that long ago, and while the format of the games (though not the tournament) has remained much the same, there are some noteworthy differences, eg that not all batters wore helmets (even against quick bowling) and that England And Pakistan contested the final. In one significant respect things have gone backwards since then: the game was played under lights at the MCG. Some artificial illumination would have been most welcome in Barbados today.

A few other observations:

• Pakistan's 249 from 50 overs was a winning score. England came close, but were all out for 227 in 49.2 overs.
  

• The only player in the match who played in the 2007 tournament was Inzamam ul Haq, or "Haq" as the back of his coloured shirt described him (the legspinner Mushtaq Ahmed is still playing English county cricket) . You won't be surprised to hear that the 1992 model Inzamam was appreciably slimmer than the 2007 version. In one respect he was well up to 2007 standards: his 42 in 35b was by far the quickest innings played by anyone in the game.
  

• One of the umpires was Steve Bucknor, who even then took his time responding to appeals. (The other umpire was a New Zealander - not Billy Bowden - whose decision making capabilities were questioned by the commentators). Some things don't change much.
  

• Most of the TV commentary team featured (inc Richie Benaud, Tony Greig, Ian Chappell and Bill Lawry) are still working for Channel Nine. David Gower also gave us the benefit of his wisdom. I'm not sure if, or for whom, he's still commentating.
  

For more about the tournament see Cricinfo's (presumably retrospective) highlights. From this you'll see that Brian Lara also appeared in both the 1992 and 2007 tournaments (opening the batting in some of the 1992 games).

Gilchrist at his best as Australia achieve World Cup hat trick

Australia won its third consecutive World Cup final by defeating Sri Lanka in the rain-affected final at Bridgetown by 53 runs, a margin determined by the Duckworth- Lewis method.

Adam Gilchrist's magnificent 149/104 b was unquestionably the highlight of the game. I was tempted to say that it was vintage Gilchrist, which wouldn't be inaccurate yet wouldn't do justice to the special quality of his innings, which had some interesting parallels with his century in the Third Ashes Test of 2006. Both were quickfire, though today's was scored at the beginning of a game reduced to 38 overs a side and against as good an attack as any contemporary team apart from Australia can field. I was certainly glad that I was sufficiently patient to stay up until the rain stopped and the game got under way.

Once again Cricinfo's S Rajesh and H R Gopalakrishna provide a detailed statistical analysis of the innings, including details of Gilchrist's performance against each Sri Lankan bowler: Muttiah Muralitharan, who conceded 23 runs from his 23 deliveries was the most economical, a term which only makes sense by comparing his return with Sanith Jayasuriya's 9 deliveries which yielded 20 runs.

Once the pattern of play became clear, which didn't take too long, the other Australian batters sensibly played support roles, though in another situation several of their contributions would have been acknowledged more.

I didn't think that Sir Lanka bowled as badly as 4/281 from 38 overs implies, but once Gilchrist got going there were too many balls which didn't do much apart from inviting him to thump them, which he frequently did. The wagon wheel chart shows that 107 (72%) of his runs were scored on the leg side, yet 65 (44%) - including 5 of his 8 sixes and 6 of his 13 fours - were scored in the V in front of the wicket. It's those powerful and productive straight drives which I remember most about his batting, and which I don't recall being such a feature of his previous innings.

Batting second under a lowering sky, Sri Lanka were always going to be hard pressed to make the runs, yet as expected they gave it a good try. Jayasuriya (63/67b) and Kumar Sangakkara (54/52b) were positive but when the latter was second out with the total 123 from 122 balls, the light of hope flickered and soon after dimmed as none of the others were able to stay long enough to sustain the challenge. Rain once again stopped play, then the target was revised to 269 from 36 overs, which was clearly beyond the remaining Sri Lankan batters' capabilities as darkness descended.

At the end, as so often in this World Cup, ineptitude ruled as the umpires stopped play, then interrupted the Australians' victory dances by making them complete the 36 overs in sepulchral gloom. Sri Lanka had effectively conceded the game by then, so what should have been a justified celebration, was delayed by a farcical interlude. No doubt many others will comment on this kerkuffle, but I'll say no more other than to congratulate Australia for a well deserved victory in both the match and the tournament.

Scorecard

Australia should win....unless

"Almost Over" shouts the headline on the front page of today's Age, reminding those who need reminding (which probably doesn't include any cricket followers) that the end of the 2007 World Cup is nigh.

I'd prefer to say that it's less than 12 hours to the start of the World Cup final at the refurbished Kensington Oval, Barbados .

Australia will start favourites, mainly because of their unbeaten record in the tournament so far, which has included a thumping of a less than full strength Sri Lanka a week ago. All their players have some form under their belts, their attack has sufficient variety to cope with a variety of conditions and they have the confidence that these things inspire. Sri Lanka also can claim to possess these advantages except for the small matter (as they'd probably see it following their strategic team selection then) of the loss to Australia.

Even if Australia don't perform at last week's level they've still a margin of safety. If they are to slip below this what might need to happen? The media consensus is that Muralitharan would have to turn in a ripper of a performance ("The world in his hands" says The Age), and that, to prevent this, Australia will aim to, as The Australian's headline puts it, "Annihilate Murali" . The Advertiser is relatively restrained compared to these assessments: its headline summing up the Australian strategy is " Blunt Lankans' spearheads". IMO this is much sounder, as at least two of the other SL bowlers ( Malinga and Vaas ) offer a combination of speed and guile and at their best could apply, or reapply, pressure on the Australians, either early in their innings, or later if they have to rein things in.

There's also the SL batting, which isn't as star studded as the Australian, but which has performed well, if not consistently well, throughout the tournament. Dilshan and Silva don't look as likely to set the world on fire as Clarke, Symonds and Hussey, but they are more than capable of supporting a Jayasuriya or a Jayawardene in full flight.

There's always the weather to consider, too. The forecast is for scattered showers with a maximum of 30 degrees. If the worst case eventuates and the Duckworth - Lewis method comes into calculations then the element of luck is likely to have more impact on the result. I hope it doesn't, but I also hope that each team plays more or less to its full potential. If that happens, and the rain keeps away, we should be in for a cracker of a game.

May the best team win.

Australia use heavy roller to crush South Africa

The World Cup semi-final at St Lucia was decided in the first few overs.

South Africa, after winning the toss and batting, crumbled to 5/27 in the face of some sharp, varied and hostile quick Australian bowling. The lower order effected a modest revival but never truly got the measure of the Australian attack (except for some Shane Watson overs) and crawled to 149 all out from 43.5 over; far less than everyone (even the Australians) would have expected at the start of the innings, but better than seemed possible from the depths of 5/27.

As usual when there's a collapse the causes were a combination of good bowling and poor batting, though to my eyes the Australian bowling was far too good for the techniques and mental approaches of the South Africans. Nathan Bracken and Glenn McGrath bowled an almost impeccable line and length (an exception was when McGrath strayed outside off stump yet Ashwell Prince was enticed into chasing the ball and edged it to Adam Gilchrist). Shaun Tait bowled a few wide and wild balls but was consistently menacing (at least while bowling: his dropping a simple outfield catch from Justin Kemp was the poorest piece of Australian cricket in the game), while Brad Hogg bewitched, bothered and bewildered everyone he bowled to. He must be candidate for a place in the Test team.

Prince aside, the top order South Africans seemed determined to come out fighting. In fact they, in particular Graham Smith and Jacques Kallis, chose the wrong balls to advance to and were made to look foolish when they were bowled.

Australia lost an early wicket, and Ricky Ponting was bowled, to the surprise of me and the TV commentators for 22, but Matthew Hayden (41/60b) and Michael Clarke (60 no/86b) led their team to a convincing 7 wicket win in the 32nd over.

Scorecard.

As usual , I recommend the Cricinfo stats summary by S Rajesh and H R Gopalakrishna .

The final

Most people would, I think, agree that the two best teams of the tournament will play off in the final. Who will win? At the moment I'd say Australia. Why? I 'll leave that for another time.

Sri Lanka rightly claim place in final

Sri Lanka convincingly defeated New Zealand by 81 runs in the World Cup semi-final at Kingston Jamaica. They will now play the winner of the Australia- South Africa in Saturday's final.

Sri Lanka, who were at full strength, won the toss and chose to bat. James Franklin took the first two wickets but Upal Tharanga kept things moving. When he was third out at 111 in the 26th over for 73/74 he'd provided a good launching pad which captain Mahela Jayawardene and the other batters duly built upon. The New Zealand bowling fell away in the last 10 overs, conceding 100 runs which left them to make 290 to win: a tall order given the calibre of the Sri Lankan attack.

And so it proved. Stephen Fleming continued his poor form against Sri Lanka, though this time it was Lasith Malinga, not Chaminda Vaas, who dismissed him. Peter Fulton and Scott Styris retrieved an unpromising 2/32, but the spinners , especially (though not unexpectedly) Muttiah Muralithuran, handed the initiative to Sri Lanka by taking 7/44. A last wicket partnership of 59 narrowed the margin but did little to sweeten the bitter pill of defeat and expulsion from the tournament.

Scorecard.

England keep their best until last

England beat West Indies by one wicket from the penultimate ball of the match in one of the closest finishes in the history of the World Cup.

The game in brief: England won the toss and "chose to field first", then watched Chris Gayle (79/58b) and Dwayne Smith (61/106b) put on 131 in 23.5 overs (143b) to set up a platform, upon which the batters who followed, except for Marlon Samuels (51/39b), failed to build as sturdily as they should have. Still 300 all out was, by their previous standards in the tournament, a good, perhaps surprisingly good, score. And probably enough to win.

Until Michael Vaughan ( an overdue 79/58b), Kevin Pietersen (a commanding 100/91b) and Paul Nixon ( a characteristic 38/39b) decided that valour was the better part of discretion. From the second ball of the final over Nixon was ninth out at 298; number 11 Jimmy Anderson with a leg bye and then Stuart Broad with a lofted two took England past the finishing post with a ball to spare.

The pity is not that one team had to lose but that both left it until they'd passed the point of no further progression to draw upon reserves of skill and determination which they may not have realised themselves that they possessed.

Some of the game's many highlights are included on Cricinfo's Plays of the Day feature. One which isn't was Paul Collingwood's catch to dismiss Samuels: this was shown on tonight's ABC-TV News, and described thus by the Cricinfo commentators:

Flintoff to Smith, OUT, what a catch - a remarkable, gravity-defying catch! Smith slashed seemingly over Paul Collingwood at backward point who sprung up, swivelling as he did so, taking the ball high in the air. A quite brilliant example of athleticism and hand-eye co-ordination.

Also on Cricinfo S Rajesh reviews Brian Lara's career and Rajesh and H R Gopalakrishna provide their customary detailed statistical examination of the game.

Scorecard

Other observations

# The Barbados pitch appears to have played very well. This should ensure a good, if high scoring game, in next week's final.

# The West Indies will face yet another bleak period of rebuilding as Fazeer Mohammed argues in a trenchant piece:

...baseless optimism and the absence of real accountability has brought us right where we are: used, abused and humiliated under the whip of the ICC and their minions in the Local Organising Committee's (LOCs), bundled out of what was laughingly described as "our" World Cup even before the last two Super Eights matches, a fractured, underperforming team, a technical staff incapable of insisting on any sort of standard, and an administration preoccupied with all sorts of silver-tongued public relations foolishness in the midst of almost irreversible decay. ..... I had spoken about how change for change's sake since 1995 has made no difference. Now, though, we should consider real change: not replacing one for another of like mind, but installing personnel who will abide by a code of conduct, on the field and off it, that rewards performance, commitment and integrity and is not compromised by expediency and convenience when it comes to dealing with those - in the dressing room or the boardroom - who make a habit of stepping out of line.

# England will also face a lot of scrutiny from their supporters and media. At the moment only Duncan Fletcher and Paul Nixon, the former for perceived incompetence, the latter for being too old (if hardly incompetent), look likely to be discarded from the England camp (Michael Vaughan's 79 may have left the jury deliberating on him). I can't for the life of me see why Matthew Hoggard , who has just made a significant contribution to Yorkshire's defeat of Surrey, isn't considered good enough to play in England's one day side. He was by far their best test bowler here in the Ashes series.

Australian aggression lays ghosts of recent meetings with NZ

Australia produced an awe-inspiring performance to defeat an understrength New Zealand by 215 runs in Grenada.

Yes, with the semi-final order of battle more or less confirmed, in theory there was little hanging on this match, but Australia used the opportunity to send a message to all the remaining teams that they are still the ones to beat. Unlike their last three meetings with Australia, most of the Black Caps threw in the towel when they tried to chase 349. A poor decision against Stephen Fleming didn't get the innings off to an ideal start but, apart from Peter Fulton, last out for 62/72b, and a breezy 27/22b from Scott Styris the others couldn't handle the Aussie attack in which Brad Hogg 4/29, Shaun Tait 3/32 and Glenn McGrath 2/25 were outstanding. Does any other team have an attack to match? Perhaps Sri Lanka; certainly not South Africa.

The Black Caps' batting surrender followed Australia's pummelling of an attack weakened by Shane Bond's late withdrawal (and Jacob Oram's earlier one, though his absence from the bowling crease should have been easier to cover). The openers, Michael Mason and James Franklin, were, despite the latter's 3 wickets, out of their depth and, while some of the others bowled the occasional good ball (Jeetan Patel looked better than Daniel Vettori), the Australians treated them with disdain. Matthew Hayden (103/100b), Ricky Ponting (66/70b), Michaels Clarke (49/46b) and Hussey (37/44b) and, at the end, Shane Watson with a devastating 65no/32b swept all aside to post 6/348 from the 50 overs.

Note, for future reference, that Adam Gilchrist and Andrew Symonds contributed 12 between them. What might this presage for the finals?

To my bleary eyes the 48th over encapsulated the difference between the teams. With his first delivery Gillespie (never the most penetrating of bowlers) bowled Hussey with a no ball. A leg bye came off the next, and first legitimate, ball. The rest of the over, with Watson on strike, yielded 62446. Enough said?

For the statistically inclined, or merely curious, S Rajesh and H R Gopalakrishna's Cricinfo stats summary is, as usual, worth perusing. Their analysis of Hayden's innings and how the NZ bowlers approached (attacked is the wrong word) him is very instructive. They also provide more evidence to support the claim that Jeehan Patel was by far the best Kiwi bowler.

Scorecard

West Indies win a Super Eights game

West Indies at last broke their Super Eights duck and defeated Bangladesh by 99 runs in Barbados. This shouldn't surprise us, given that the West Indies have been one of the stalwarts of world cricket for many years (though some of the lustre has gone from their reputation and performances in the last decade).

The facts of this match, which had no bearing whatsoever on the semi-finals, may be ascertained from the scorecard and the Cricinfo coverage. I'll just draw your attention to the performance of the West Indies number 6: B C Lara 33/ 27b (1x4, 2x6). After the game he announced his retirement, which deserves, no requires, a separate post.

Sri Lanka bat for 10 overs to defeat Ireland

12 wickets fell for 158 runs in 38.4 overs as Sri Lanka crushed Ireland by 8 wickets at Grenada.

Sent in by Sri Lanka, Ireland's openers briefly flickered before they and the rest of the team were snuffed out by Farveez Maharoof (10-3-25-4) and Muttiah Muralitharan (5-0-19-4).
Sri Lanka wanted an early lunch and , while Upal Tharanga didn't trouble the scorers, the three others who batted did. Captain Jayawardene (39 no/27b) led his team home at a Ten/10 pace (is the the next form of the game?) as they passed the target with the last ball of the 10th over.

As we've come to expect from them, S Rajesh and H R Gopalakrishna 's Cricinfo stats report mines the orebody of material which is there for the quarrying in matches as one sided as this one.

Scorecard

South Africa peak to defeat feeble England

South Africa crushed England by 9 wicketsat Barbados with 30.2 overs to spare and thereby secured themselves a place in the semi-finals. Both the manner and the margin of victory were significant and will boost South Africa's confidence. The England team will soon be going home with their tails between their legs, which they didn't have to do after their last gasp CB series victory in Australia.

The England batting was characteristically deficient: early wickets, a modest and staid revival to 4/111 (but in the 33rd over) by Andrew Strauss (46) and Paul Collingwood (30). The rest, except for Ravi Bopara (27 no), buckled under the pressure applied by Andrew Hall (10-2-18-5) and Andre Nel (10-3-35-3).

154 was not a tough target, and the South Africans sensed it. They turned the chase into a Twenty/20 match. Graham Smith's bat was much much productive than his mouth has been at times during the tournament as he charged to 89 no/58b, and led his team to a 9 wicket win in 19.2 overs. The England bowling? Choose your adjectives: appalling, weak, pathetic, third rate...

If you want to read more see Cricinfo's match coverage (follow link above), which includes another good statistical analysis by S Rajesh and H R Gopalkrishna. The Scorecard is here.

Looking forward

With only four more Super eight games to be played it looks as if the semi-finals will be played between Australia and South Africa, and New Zealand and Sri Lanka. These are unquestionably the most deserving teams in the tournament, even though each of them except Australia has temporarily fallen from grace.

One big question is whether South Africa can maintain their momentum. I'd be surprised if Hall and Nel could reproduce anything like their form in this game against Australia, but...even something less might be sufficient to grab some early wickets and expose the middle order who haven't had much time at the wicket. Smith and some of his aggressive teammates might be able to take a lot of runs off the fifth Australian bowler (whether Clarke/Symonds or Watson). Enough speculation for now.

Australia thrash Sri Lanka A attack

What many people, including me, thought might be a first draft of the World Cup final , turned out to be something considerably less than that as Australia easily defeated an understrength Sri Lanka by 7 wickets in Grenada.

By fielding a team which lacked its spearheads Muralithuran, Vaas and Malinga, only the last of whom was injured, Sri Lanka debased the coinage of the match, turning it an A team (ie B team) or warm up game where one side fields its strongest batting and second string bowling lineups.
This is not to say that Australia would have lost had SL been at full strength, merely that the result is an imperfect guide to the form of the respective teams.

What it does tell us is

1. That the Australian attack is very strong. Nathan Bracken's 9.4 - 19 - 3 -4 was outstanding, while Glenn McGrath 9-1-48- 2 and, once again, Brad Hogg 10 -0-35-2 ( the two top scorers) probed the opposition weaknesses. Even Shaun Tait, who had an off day by his recent standards, still took two middle order wickets while conceding 68 from his 10 overs.

2. The Australian top order batting is ditto. Everyone who batted got a start. Ricky Ponting 66 no/ 80b and Andrew Symonds 63 no/72b were especially effective as they led their team home with 44 balls remaining. ponting's straight drive for 6 to win the game was worth staying awake to see.

3. The Sri Lankan batting, when faced with a top class attack, is brittle. Take away Mahela Jayawardene (62/88b) and Chamara Silva(64/107b)'s 140 partnership for the fourth wicket and the rest contributed 9/86 to the total of 226 in 49.4 overs.

For some light relief see Cricinfo's Andrew Miller's "Irrelevant statistical spot of the day":

Until the start of this match, Tait's career record for ODI batting and fielding was a binary geek's delight. Matches played 11, Innings 1, Not Out 0, Runs 11, Highest Score 11, Average 11.00, Balls faced 10, Strike Rate 110.00, Hundreds 0, Fifties 0, Fours 1, Sixes 1, Catches 1, Stumpings 0. Of course, he's gone and spoiled that for ever by taking part in his 12th match, although for the record, the binary number 1110111111001011000001110 equals 31430158 in standard decimal. Oh dear. For God's sake, bring back Murali and Malinga. We have far too much time on our hands when matches are foregone conclusions ...


Scorecard

New Zealand lift game to defeat butterfingered South Africa in low scoring contest

New Zealand defeated South Africa in their low and slow-scoring Super Eights match at Grenada. They are now assured of a place in the semi-finals, whereas South Africa will play England on Tuesday for (probably - see Postcript) the fourth place.

After the Black Caps' form reversal I may have to eat my words about the wisdom of batting first. The toss was crucial, but it's nonsense, as I've heard some commentators suggest, to claim that this, coupled with Stephen Fleming's decision to field first was the principal cause of the result. It subsequently emerged that Graham Smith was contemplating batting had he won the toss: the team selection, with swing specialist Charl Langeveldt omitted in preference to left arm spinner Robin Peterson, supported this opinion.

The plain fact is that New Zealand were the better side, especially in bowling and fielding. There was rain about and the pitch was slow, which meant that NZ, with a more varied bowling attack, was able to keep the pressure on the Protea batters. Two early wickets, one to the quick Shane Bond, the other to the contrasting left-armer James Franklin, left South Africa 2/3, the first time as S Rajesh and H R Gopalkrishna's admirable Cricinfo Stats report states, in the team's 38 World Cup appearances that they'd lost two wickets before reaching double figures. Raj & Gop (if I may call them this) argue that the first 20 overs, in which the Proteas reached 3/52, were crucial:

Just how difficult the conditions were for batting can be gauged from the fact that the not-in-control factor - the number of times the batsmen were beaten, rapped on the pads, or edged it - was 23% during those opening 20 overs. Even Kallis struggled, despite his watertight technique - his not-in-control factor was 24%, and he played-and-missed, or edged the ball 13 times out of the 41 deliveries he faced during this period. Among the New Zealand bowlers, Bond was again the most threatening - the in-control factor against him was only 68%. With survival itself being such a difficult proposition, it's hardly surprising that South Africa played out 92 dot balls out of 121 - effectively more than 15 maiden overs out of the first 20. South Africa's strongest statements of intent were the two sixes that Kallis and Gibbs struck off Jacob Oram - apart from that they managed only two fours in the entire Powerplay period.

This wasn't obvious to me, watching the game on TV, as I was expecting a revival of some sorts from the notionally strong South African batting, but it never came. Jacques Kallis was out from the penultimate ball of the 20th over, well caught by Bond in the deep off Daniel Vettori for 22/54b. A standoff ensued in which Herschelle Gibbs (60/100b) and Ashwell Prince (37/57b) added 76 in 95b against steady but nonthreatening bowling. Then, seemingly as an afterthought as the number 7 bowler, came Craig McMillan who, in Gavin Larsen/ Chris Harris / dibbly-dobbler vein, took 3/23 (and three good ones - Gibbs, Prince and Boucher) to leave South Africa 6/149 in the 43rd over. Bond had several overs left, and kept the lower order in check as well as taking another wicket: he finished with 10-1-26-2 and South Africa a below par (whatever people say about the wicket) 7/193.

The Black Caps' reply, despite the modest target, was very cautious. Once again the lack of variety in the attack (accentuated by keeping Peterson away from the crease until the game was all but decided) told against the Proteas, but it was their fielding which, as Andrew Miller's Cricinfo "Plays of the Day" describes, fell apart:

Drop of the Day Mk 1

Ashwell Prince's parry at square-leg had all the makings of a match-sealing moment. When you're defending 193 and the batsman of the tournament, Scott Styris, gives a chance while still in single figures, there's really no forgiving the culpable fielder. In mitigation, the ball was whipped through square leg with such power that it pulled up just yards inside the rope, but on the other hand, South Africa's reputation in one-day cricket has long been based upon their superlative fielding. At 54 for 2 it was a vital opportunity squandered.

Drop of the Day Mk 2

Ditto, with knobs on. Mark Boucher will need little reminding of the last time New Zealand and South Africa met in the World Cup. At Centurion in 2002-03, he dropped Stephen Fleming on 52 - a sitter of a chance off Jacques Kallis - and Fleming went on to make a fantastic match-winning 134 not out. Two weeks later, the hosts had been ejected from their own party. Today's chance was tougher - a thin top-edge that a leaping Boucher could only parry onto his nose - but the impact on his team-mates was very much the same.

Drop of the Day Mk 3

Ok, so it's cruel to labour the point, but déjà vu is a powerful thing, especially when poor old Herschelle is involved. For eight painful years, he's had to live with the memory of thataberration at Headingley in the 1999 World Cup, and like a particularly rubbish punchline, the joke gets wearier every time it is repeated. So, all together now, for (surely?) one last time: "You just dropped the World Cup, Hersch!" Of course, he could well cling onto a blinder to seal victory over England next week, and all will be forgiven. (At least, until the fourth-placed South Africans take on Australia in the St Lucia semi-final...)

I struggled to stay awake as the Black Caps plodded towards victory. Fleming 50/84b, Scott Styris 56/84b and Craig McMillan, adding 38 no/ 55b to his bowling, took their side across the winning line with 5 wickets and 10 balls to spare as the sun sank in Grenada and rose here.

Scorecard


Postcript: Where to from here?

Much depends on the England - South Africa game on Tuesday. "Expect a cracker" writes the prolific S Rajesh on Cricinfo, who explores the consequences of a win to each side. In short, England must win, but all is not necessarily over for South Africa if they lose, and, according to Rajesh, there even be a scintilla of hope for Bangladesh and West Indies.

All will be clearer by Wednesday.

Another game, another win for Australia...

Yes, as expected Australia did defeat Ireland , and by 9 wickets, a margin which was not surprising given that Australia won the toss and, as Worldcupspeak now puts it, "chose to field".

The match was all over before the lunch (or between innings) break, and I've heard some comments to the effect that Australia, who won the toss, should have batted. As if it was an exhibition match...

No Irish batter looked like staying long enough to compile a half decent score, even though some of the Australian bowling was a tad ragged. Tait, the main offender, compensated for a reversion to his pre-tournament waywardness with some very quick deliveries which clearly distressed the Irish by taking two wickets in successive balls at the start of his second over and a third later. Glenn McGrath (7-1-17-3) was, well, Glenn McGrath 2001 vintage. There was no recovery from 3/2, 4/12, 5/32 and so on, despite some resolute defence and a few bold strokes from the lower order as the total crawled to 91 all out from 30 overs.

Australia promoted Michael Hussey to open with Adam Gilchrist. While the latter was his characteristic self (34/25b), Hussey (30 no/45b) didn't always look comfortable early on, but eventually came good, bringing the game to an early finish with a pulled 6 over midwicket.

Australia are now confirmed semi-finalists. Who will join them in the top four remains to be determined. Sri Lanka have an easier run home, while England, New Zealand and South Africa will most probably contest the last two places.

Scorecard

TV commentary

Mark Taylor and Ian Healy in the Channel Nine Studio in Australia are collectively much better than the grab bag of commentators who provide most of the (Fox Sports?) TV feed commentary. Tony Cozier, who revealed that his son is working as part of the production team and that the media centre at the ground is named after his late father (and two others), and Mark Nicholas are good but many of the others are conspicuous only by their silence or blandness.