This World Cup has finally got it. Close games. That too, a couple of games in quick succession. The first half of the World Cup has more or less been one-sided. South Africa and Australia piled on the runs. South Africa even annihilated England to the tune of 399, and Australia was no different. They virtually out-batted their opponents. Hence, the tournament itself was longing for a close game and we got two. South Africa against Pakistan and Australia against New Zealand. Both the games went down right till the end. One in terms of wickets and the other in terms of balls left. Though both of them were close, one made for gripping viewing and the other rather boring viewing. This is the tale of two close games.
Close games are really fun. It keeps everyone on the edge of their seats. More so, if it happens to be one’s own team. As for the neutral, it makes for a good viewing. For the neutral, it does not really matter who wins as long as he or she gets the worth of their money. Whereas some close games are what cricket needs, there are some that the sport can do without.
Survival of ODI cricket
The South African vs Pakistan game had everything in it. It had excellent bowling performances and it also had the thrill and the nail-biting finish at the end. This is exactly what the game, especially, ODI cricket needs. Already, ODIs are in danger of being completely excluded from the cricketing calendar. There are calls for ODIs to be made a World Cup only event with Tests and franchise cricket taking priority. In a way, it makes sense because ODIs have become quite stale. Its very survival is being threatened now and one-sided games do not really promote interest in the format. It is for precisely this reason that the South Africa / Pakistan game was good for the format.
The result was unknown right till the last South African wicket with a handful of balls to be delivered. South Africa at one stage was actually pretty well placed to make this another one-sided event but some determined bowling from Pakistan, circumspect batting by the South Africans and a bit of nerve, combined to make it an enthralling contest.
The beautiful pitch at Chennai
The pitch that was laid out for the game was a real beauty. It has sufficient pace on it that makes the balls reach the bat just in time for the batsmen to play their shots. The pace wasn’t over-friendly towards the bowler nor was the turn completely supportive of the spinners. Hence, the batsmen were unable to plonk their foot down the pitch and hoick the bowlers to all parts of the ground. This is pretty much expected of a sporting pitch. It does not have to support the bowlers overwhelmingly nor does it have to become a flat track for the batsmen the make merry. It had everything on it for a proper cricket game.
The contrasting game at Dharmshala
This was another close game but only on paper. Yes, Australia in the end won by just 5 runs and the game went right till the last over. New Zealand chased brilliantly. They almost crossed the line when Australia were able to scuttle them at the end. 100 overs were played and the result was achieved in the last over.
Was it really a close game? Was it exciting to watch? If you just go by the result, yes, it was exciting but if you had seen the game, it was anything but. Let me look at it. It was a game where 400 chased 400. For a team to score 400, one, the pitch must be extremely flat and two, it must be a small ground. Dharmshala, we all know is a small ground. There is hardly any difference between the 30 yards circle and the boundary line. If you can beat the circle, it is a boundary. Hitting a six is extremely easy on that ground. Such is the state of the ground.
Do we really want to see the bowlers getting hit to the tune of 800 runs? The game had some good bowlers in Starc, Cummins, Hazlewood and Boult. Yet, all of them were powerless to prevent the batsmen from just going on the front foot and hitting through the line. The bowlers were made redundant.
Redundant bowlers
It would have been better if the bowlers were told that on such grounds, the game does not need you. We will play with bowling machines. What is the point in having such grounds and that too in the World Cup? Such grounds must never be allowed to host any game. If they had to, they must be told that the pitch must ensure either bounce or spin. The bowlers must have a say in the outcome of the game. They must be provided an opportunity to restrict and take wickets. What we witnessed on the night at Dharamshala was a farce and nothing else.
Wrapping up the tale of two close games
Of late, ODIs have become a lottery. It is not much different from T20 in terms of helping the batsmen. There were talks of some team breaching the 500-run mark. Inorder to do that, the pitch must be as flat as it is possible which makes the bowlers redundant. The game will become a shootout between the powerful set of batsmen. T20 can survive this because it is more or less accepted that it is a format only for the batsmen but ODI cannot. The sooner pitches all over the world are made to assist the bowlers, the better it is for the sport itself. Otherwise, in the distant future, I can see the game losing its appeal.
The best example is the ground in Pune where the straight boundary is just 58 metres. It effectively means that the full length of the ground is not even twice that of the 30 yard circle.
Other World Cup blogs