The frequency of national holidays back in India was a source of much comfort and mirth. It afforded some balance to our crazily structured way of life as students and junior employees. There are few sights as understated yet pleasing to the senses as looking through a calendar or diary, and seeing more red dates than there should be. For me, it's a moot point that the last five years seem like one long vacation in hindsight. The lack of national/public holidays here is palpable, so it's no wonder that the Thanksgiving break is probably the high point of this Semester. Plans are chalked up well in advance, with friends and family as the case may be.
The picture of thanksgiving in my head has been built from scenes in the movies with families getting together at a dinner table and carving out a turkey. Sitting at my Aunt's place in Dallas, I finally remember thay I have no idea what the concept of Thanksgiving is all about and decide to look up wikipedia. Not that I was overly bothered about the significance of major festivals in India, but I tried to make it a point to be aware, somewhat. Wikipedia has become a sort of convenience store where you window shop for any odd details which prick your curiosity for no apparent reason. It says, "Thanksgiving, or Thanksgiving Day, is an annual one-day holiday to give thanks, for the things one has at the close of the harvest season. In the United States, Thanksgiving is celebrated on the fourth Thursday of November". It's essentially the story of how White settlers were able to survive in the new world, helped by native Indians in Virginia in the early 17th century. The encounters between the two groups were apparently comemmorated through Feast Days.
This holiday break means more wasting around for me although I will be seeing family. Best of all, I get to pig out a bit since Kalu mami is actually preparing some turkey. One of the rare family members who cooks meat at home, she explains that cooking turkey is an art - it must be marinated overnight, injected with cajun sauce (yes, a syringe is actually used!) and roasted for three hours the next day. At around 175 degrees, it's done. I take a look Not only is this a novelty, but the timing couldn't have been better as I was eating sporadically over the last week in Austin, largely subsisting on junk food and starchy rice dinners. I take a look at the oven and and the sight of the turkey immediately stirs up juices inside - hence the title of this post. The turkey, as Jim Carrey would have it, seems to say "I'll juice you up!" (My lifelong diet of stupid Jim Carrey movies has led me to believe he has a line for every occasion). In the meantime, the Thanksgiving football game, which is an annual tradition, is on TV. My uncle and aunt, who have turned ardent Dallas Cowboys fans in the last 20 years, urge me to grab a beer and learn a bit about the finer points of the game. I successfully grab a beer. The NFL and all 'football' seems another typically American concept, with a lots of action, lots of cheerleading, media involement and elaborate strategy over seemingly nothing. It'll take more than a while to get used to this, although I've comfortably got used to the taste of Heineken which I tried for the first time in Austin. You have to admire the way they keep up tradition though. Maybe it's time the BCCI went back to staging the Chennai test match during Pongal or the Eden Garden's test on New Year's day, as was the norm apparently during the 60s. But sentiment appears to have no place in the overly commercial and money driven world of Indian cricket. But that'll have to be the subject of another post.
Not much else to say, except the greyhound ride from Austin to Dallas was a bit more eventful than usual. With about half an hour to go, there was some confusion over the line I was standing in and I moved over to the correct one. Now, there are different lines for different buses and they seemed to be intersecting in a crazy way, so I had to ask around a bit before I could feel satisfied I was in the right one. With two minutes to go, a man standing a couple of feet behind me was ranting away to a couple of guys behind him and he suddenly went "...waiting here for too damn long. And who's this guy in front of me? Where did he come from? Came outta nowhere.." He then addressed me in a distinctive local drawl, "Hey you..where did you come from? Looks like you've taken my place...you better get your ass right to the end of the line there." I explained, quite clearly I thought, that there was some confusion as to which line was for which bus, I was directed to where I was, and if he had a problem he should have told me at that moment, not half an hour later when we were all ready to board the bus. He replied, in a smug voice, "Don't gimme your Arabic or whatever it is, you better get right back there. I know a Muslim when I see 'em" I was determined not to move, considering it was boarding time and doubly so because this guy was clearly not worth replying to. There was no way I was giving up my place in the line. As he continued making abrasive remarks, I said something to the effect of "That was English, not Arabic..too bad if you couldn't understand, and I'm not a Muslim so you obviously have no idea what you're talking about". Desparate to win this encounter, he retorted "I hope you get to sit next to me. A good three hours, I'll terrorize your Muslim ass so bad...give you a proper Christian terrorizing you'll never forget." "Whatever" I looked him int he eye and said, which caused a few laughs in the line. On he went, saying something about getting a seat next to me. We didn't end up sitting next to each other, which left me wondering whether I had escaped being subjected to the torturing rants of a fanatic, or had actually missed a chance to put this guy in his place since he had no apparent grounds for complaining, and thus asserting myself for once. The nonchalant reaction of the crowd was enough to convince me that I handled things well enough though. And he didn't say a word on the bus.
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Where have all the hippies gone?
To B or not to B? That’d probably be what your average Grad Student at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at UT Austin would say, if you asked him (or her) what his greatest fear was at the moment. Getting a ‘B’ Grade in a course isn’t merely a bad thing; it’s taboo. The general rule being, if a course offers any potential of landing you up with a B, avoid it at all costs. The B will stick out like a sore thumb on your marksheet. Just to exaggerate the point, I can almost imagine the partly hypothetical situation where I land up with a B (which isn’t the hypothetical part), and the reaction of the general public (the students) would be a curious mix of sympathy and a ‘how the hell did you disgrace yourself?’ sort of thing. If I sit and survey my academic scene right now, I’m well on the way to a couple of Bs. I’m on a Highway to Hell. The whole B phobia is making me sick. Couple this fear with relative grading et al, and you may understand what a bloody battleground this place is.
In my sudden burst of inspiration and wisdom, I’ve decided that what the world needs is more love and less grades. (duh) The army of long haired people armed with guitars and marijuana sure fought for the right cause (and created some great music too), whatever their lifestyle may have been. Ah Woodstock! Where did you go? Where have all the hippies gone? Don’t tell me they confine themselves to full moon raves at Israel or Goa? To those that exist: Bring your message of love, peace and all that happy shit to a seminar in the Department, for God’s sake, and let them know B Grade is an OK concept; or more to the point, there ain’t no Grade. I’m sitting here by the laptop, telling Bulla that this is our Vietnam. We’re soon to be POWs. Just like the 60s veterans of that lost war have been scarred to the point of being able to do nothing but recount their brushes with Viet Cong, I jokingly wonder, in a parody of this situation, whether all we’ll be able to do in the long run is recall our academic struggles through this degree. If Pete Seeger was writing ‘Where have all the flowers gone’ with my rant in mind, he would probably condense the song into one stanza, something like:
Where have all the hippies gone?
Long time passing,
Where have all the hippies gone?
Long time ago.
Where have all the hippies gone?
Anjuna calling them, everyone
When will they ever learn?PS: The penultimate line was simply keyed in. I've no idea whether Anjuna is still a hippie rendezvous.
Friday, November 10, 2006
Back to the Drawing Board?: NZ vs Australia
Another belated post, another belated match review. By this time the Aussies have wrapped things up as far as the Champions Trophy is concerned, reminding everyone that they're streets ahead of the rest of the pack. An amazing bench strength is central to their success, and it was one thing the kiwis simply didn't have at the Champions Trophy. A lot has been read into the collapse of the top order last Wednesday, but again it was a 'performance' rather than 'personnel' issue.
In future clashes, the Aussies will no doubt point to their 16 wins in the last 18 encounters between the two sides, but the fact was the kiwis played with enough intensity to have the Aussies on the hop for most of the game. I'd like to believe the defeat was a case of repeating some stupid mistakes. The bowlers gave the side more than a decent chance by restricting the Aussies to 240, including just 52 of the last 10 overs - something unheard of for NZ in recent years. Kyle Mills turned giant-killer overnight, finally taking some load off Shane Bond's already sore back. However, as in World Cup 2003, the batsmen froze when the had a real opportunity. To their credit, the lower-middle order - Oram and Daniel Luca Vettori (what a legend, mate) refused to die and gave the Aussies a scare. But it muts be a bit embarrasing when your chase has to be led by your allrounder and your primary spin bowler. Fleming fell to a somewhat obvious trap, Astle (who looks out of sorts at number 3) was cleaned up before he could get his feet moving while Marshall, Vincent and Fulton were sitting ducks. The dismissals of the last three (especially Vincent and Marshall) were the culmination of a series of largely brainless cricket on their part. Despite the repeated failures of Marshall and Vincent, I still believe they must be persisted with because they have much to offer to the side if they play their natural game. For the moment, Marshall seems obsessed with horizontal-nothing shots as opposed to proper cricketing ones, and Vincent is paying the price for forcing himself to think like a pinch hitter. Much has been made of Peter Fulton's ability, or lack of it, at the top level. On the evidence of his form early in the year, he is good enough and should receive more chances. I don't buy the fact that Ross Taylor is a permanent solution to the middle order, but in those circumstances with both Marshall and Fulton struggling, it would've made sense to bring him in. Overall, the series was a good one for Fleming, in terms of personal performance and handling the side. But, not for the first time, John Bracwell's line of thinking was exposed. Does anyone remember the name Mark Gillespie? I guess not.
There was no disgrace in defeat for the kiwis, especially considering Australia pretty much rolled over everyone else after a false start. But the lack of grit in the top order remains a worry, especially with the World Cup a few months away. Given that New Zealand are part of the VB series in January, Fleming will have plenty of opportunities to get back at the Aussies, in the knowledge that his side can compete. But unless the squad leaves the injury blues behind, and Bracewell gets some sense knocked into his head, those clashes could well demoralise the side in the lead up to the big tournament.
In future clashes, the Aussies will no doubt point to their 16 wins in the last 18 encounters between the two sides, but the fact was the kiwis played with enough intensity to have the Aussies on the hop for most of the game. I'd like to believe the defeat was a case of repeating some stupid mistakes. The bowlers gave the side more than a decent chance by restricting the Aussies to 240, including just 52 of the last 10 overs - something unheard of for NZ in recent years. Kyle Mills turned giant-killer overnight, finally taking some load off Shane Bond's already sore back. However, as in World Cup 2003, the batsmen froze when the had a real opportunity. To their credit, the lower-middle order - Oram and Daniel Luca Vettori (what a legend, mate) refused to die and gave the Aussies a scare. But it muts be a bit embarrasing when your chase has to be led by your allrounder and your primary spin bowler. Fleming fell to a somewhat obvious trap, Astle (who looks out of sorts at number 3) was cleaned up before he could get his feet moving while Marshall, Vincent and Fulton were sitting ducks. The dismissals of the last three (especially Vincent and Marshall) were the culmination of a series of largely brainless cricket on their part. Despite the repeated failures of Marshall and Vincent, I still believe they must be persisted with because they have much to offer to the side if they play their natural game. For the moment, Marshall seems obsessed with horizontal-nothing shots as opposed to proper cricketing ones, and Vincent is paying the price for forcing himself to think like a pinch hitter. Much has been made of Peter Fulton's ability, or lack of it, at the top level. On the evidence of his form early in the year, he is good enough and should receive more chances. I don't buy the fact that Ross Taylor is a permanent solution to the middle order, but in those circumstances with both Marshall and Fulton struggling, it would've made sense to bring him in. Overall, the series was a good one for Fleming, in terms of personal performance and handling the side. But, not for the first time, John Bracwell's line of thinking was exposed. Does anyone remember the name Mark Gillespie? I guess not.
There was no disgrace in defeat for the kiwis, especially considering Australia pretty much rolled over everyone else after a false start. But the lack of grit in the top order remains a worry, especially with the World Cup a few months away. Given that New Zealand are part of the VB series in January, Fleming will have plenty of opportunities to get back at the Aussies, in the knowledge that his side can compete. But unless the squad leaves the injury blues behind, and Bracewell gets some sense knocked into his head, those clashes could well demoralise the side in the lead up to the big tournament.
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Aussies, here we come: NZ vs Pakistan
A belated post, this should have been written a week back when the kiwis hearteningly came good in the crunch game and beat Pakistan by 51 runs. The semi final game against the Aussies is close on the heels of this entry, and I'm strapped for time and energy at the moment, so this'll be a short post.
The win against Pakistan served to illustrate just how reliant New Zealand are on a group of core (and unfortunately, injury-prone) players, namely Bond, Styris, Oram and Vettori. Of course, Stephen Fleming marked his record breaking 194th game as skipper with a vital 80, but the side was totally transformed thanks to the contributions of Styris (86) , the allround efforts of Oram and Shane Bond's comeback spell. Bond was wayward to begin with, but the fact that he returned to snare Yousuf Youhana and Abdul razzaq showed he is indispensible. Genuine pace is a great commodity which is why he'll have to hit his straps against the Aussies once more, for NZ to come through.
Recent history indicates that Australia remain the dominant neighbour in Trans-Tasman clashes. But the main difference between the two sides is the bench strength: while Australia are spoiled for choice going into the game, NZ have to sweat on the fitness of the core group of players I mentioned. Indeed, it looks like Styris isn't going to make the cut after all which leaves the middle order vulnerable. Whether or not Ross Taylor is allowed to play, I doubt he'll be selected, leaving Marshall and Fulton the enviable task of finding form against the Aussies. On a good day, New Zealand's best XI will prove a match for the Aussies so I'll still hold my breath. NZ just don't have the replacements ready once the key players are unfit though, which seems to tilt the balance in favour of Australia.
Fleming & co have seen an awful lot of Australia in recent years, so he might just be able to work on their predictability. As always, the kiwis' best chance lies in attacking from the word go, as they did back in 2002. I'd say their defeats were more a mental thing than anything else. They seem to be playing good cricket at the moment, so it's a case of striking while the iron is hot. Here's hoping the Champions Trophy Aussie Jinx lives on.
The win against Pakistan served to illustrate just how reliant New Zealand are on a group of core (and unfortunately, injury-prone) players, namely Bond, Styris, Oram and Vettori. Of course, Stephen Fleming marked his record breaking 194th game as skipper with a vital 80, but the side was totally transformed thanks to the contributions of Styris (86) , the allround efforts of Oram and Shane Bond's comeback spell. Bond was wayward to begin with, but the fact that he returned to snare Yousuf Youhana and Abdul razzaq showed he is indispensible. Genuine pace is a great commodity which is why he'll have to hit his straps against the Aussies once more, for NZ to come through.
Recent history indicates that Australia remain the dominant neighbour in Trans-Tasman clashes. But the main difference between the two sides is the bench strength: while Australia are spoiled for choice going into the game, NZ have to sweat on the fitness of the core group of players I mentioned. Indeed, it looks like Styris isn't going to make the cut after all which leaves the middle order vulnerable. Whether or not Ross Taylor is allowed to play, I doubt he'll be selected, leaving Marshall and Fulton the enviable task of finding form against the Aussies. On a good day, New Zealand's best XI will prove a match for the Aussies so I'll still hold my breath. NZ just don't have the replacements ready once the key players are unfit though, which seems to tilt the balance in favour of Australia.
Fleming & co have seen an awful lot of Australia in recent years, so he might just be able to work on their predictability. As always, the kiwis' best chance lies in attacking from the word go, as they did back in 2002. I'd say their defeats were more a mental thing than anything else. They seem to be playing good cricket at the moment, so it's a case of striking while the iron is hot. Here's hoping the Champions Trophy Aussie Jinx lives on.
Saturday, October 21, 2006
Batting woes resurface: NZ vs Sri Lanka
The result of the clash may not have been that surprising in itself, given that Sri Lanka are an in form team and New Zealand are returning after a long layoff. But two sub par totals batting first, whatever the pitches may be, will give Fleming and Bracewell plenty to think about before the sink-or-swim game against Pakistan.
By giving more credit than was required to the pitch, and Murali, NZ almost ensured they started on the backfoot before the game began. Fleming's comment that 'occupying the crease and grinding' would be the way to go was certainly a curious one, and not the most positive approach. Murali, we know: he was in his element, but according to reports the batsmen appeared to play him on reputation and thus right into his hands. On reading the scorecard and reports, the NZ innings appeared to be a recurring theme. The top/middle order couldn't hold fort once Fleming was dismissed early, although Astle at least attempted to slug it out, in an effort to emulate Fleming's innings in the South Africa game. His dismissal for 42 probably illustrates why, despite being one of the premier ODI batsmen over the last decade, he will never be mentioned in the same breath as Inzamam or Ponting, let alone Lara and Tendulkar.
For a lineup with a reputation for resilience, the rest of the batting caved in too easily. Lou Vincent was again predictably dismissed heaving across the line (Mike has a lot to say on the subject), while Brendon McCullum's penchant for innovation seems to be getting the better of him too often as he fell this time to a reverse sweep. Having kept the faith in Hamish Marshall for so long during his run drought, Bracewell will probably give him a final chance to put things right next Wednesday. Marshall, though, continues to walk on thin ice and at the very least should be shunted down to number 6 where he's more likely to make a run at the moment. All things considered, Fleming would do well to drop himself to the middle order to add some stability to it, allowing Astle to return to the opening slot. With practically everyone looking out of sorts, the thought cannot have escaped him.
The batting woes overshadow the bowling worries for the moment, and New Zealand go into the Pakistan clash knowing they have to raise their game tremendously, though they will secretly be relieved at the absence of Shoaib and Asif. Sri lanka meanwhile, also have a do or die clash to look forward to and, on recent form, should start out overwhelming favourites against the South Africans.
By giving more credit than was required to the pitch, and Murali, NZ almost ensured they started on the backfoot before the game began. Fleming's comment that 'occupying the crease and grinding' would be the way to go was certainly a curious one, and not the most positive approach. Murali, we know: he was in his element, but according to reports the batsmen appeared to play him on reputation and thus right into his hands. On reading the scorecard and reports, the NZ innings appeared to be a recurring theme. The top/middle order couldn't hold fort once Fleming was dismissed early, although Astle at least attempted to slug it out, in an effort to emulate Fleming's innings in the South Africa game. His dismissal for 42 probably illustrates why, despite being one of the premier ODI batsmen over the last decade, he will never be mentioned in the same breath as Inzamam or Ponting, let alone Lara and Tendulkar.
For a lineup with a reputation for resilience, the rest of the batting caved in too easily. Lou Vincent was again predictably dismissed heaving across the line (Mike has a lot to say on the subject), while Brendon McCullum's penchant for innovation seems to be getting the better of him too often as he fell this time to a reverse sweep. Having kept the faith in Hamish Marshall for so long during his run drought, Bracewell will probably give him a final chance to put things right next Wednesday. Marshall, though, continues to walk on thin ice and at the very least should be shunted down to number 6 where he's more likely to make a run at the moment. All things considered, Fleming would do well to drop himself to the middle order to add some stability to it, allowing Astle to return to the opening slot. With practically everyone looking out of sorts, the thought cannot have escaped him.
The batting woes overshadow the bowling worries for the moment, and New Zealand go into the Pakistan clash knowing they have to raise their game tremendously, though they will secretly be relieved at the absence of Shoaib and Asif. Sri lanka meanwhile, also have a do or die clash to look forward to and, on recent form, should start out overwhelming favourites against the South Africans.
Monday, October 16, 2006
Round three to Fleming as the Proteas roll over
Mike apparently got it right when he said (in mikeoncricket.blogspot.com) that the toss would be crucial - and the seamers would play a huge role under lights. Graeme Smith would have done well to have read Mike's preview of the game, but keeping in mind his team's run of success chasing totals (as well as the Sri Lanka-West Indies clash), it wasn't a difficult decision for him. Fleming (tounge firmly in cheek, I imagine) said it was a "good toss to lose". The kiwi top order doesn't look really inspiring at the moment, with some familiar dismissals (Vincent trying one shot too many - to Pollock, and Marshall playing on with an angled bat). However, thanks to the bowlers, they live to fight another day.
The Fleming-Smith rivalry seems to overshadow the contests between these sides at the moment, and today's outcome was a reporter's delight, though it was certainly great to see Smith put in his place. I have my own objections with Fleming and Vincent opening, and Astle at three but Bracewell & co are pretty inflexible and this looks to be the kiwis' preferred batting order right through till the World Cup. Kyle Mills for once stepped up to be counted and actually ran through a formidable South African top order. Crossing my fingers the kiwis perform with equal discipline in the field against the Lankans, who can do no wrong at the moment. Wit conditions like these, Friday's clash should see Sri lanka in their element and New Zealand's series win over them earlier in the year won't be of much consequence. Not much New Zealand can do differently against them, I guess, except stick to the basics. And get those feet moving early against Chaminda Vaas.
South Africa aren't out of the picture yet though the playing conditions appear to be distinctly against them. And I guess Herschelle Gibbs could have done without the revisiting the past here - his duck will not have gone unnoticed. Looks like the happenings off the field seem more engaging on it, what with Shoaib and Asif flunking a dope test a while back. Oh well, it's the Pakistanis anyway.
The Fleming-Smith rivalry seems to overshadow the contests between these sides at the moment, and today's outcome was a reporter's delight, though it was certainly great to see Smith put in his place. I have my own objections with Fleming and Vincent opening, and Astle at three but Bracewell & co are pretty inflexible and this looks to be the kiwis' preferred batting order right through till the World Cup. Kyle Mills for once stepped up to be counted and actually ran through a formidable South African top order. Crossing my fingers the kiwis perform with equal discipline in the field against the Lankans, who can do no wrong at the moment. Wit conditions like these, Friday's clash should see Sri lanka in their element and New Zealand's series win over them earlier in the year won't be of much consequence. Not much New Zealand can do differently against them, I guess, except stick to the basics. And get those feet moving early against Chaminda Vaas.
South Africa aren't out of the picture yet though the playing conditions appear to be distinctly against them. And I guess Herschelle Gibbs could have done without the revisiting the past here - his duck will not have gone unnoticed. Looks like the happenings off the field seem more engaging on it, what with Shoaib and Asif flunking a dope test a while back. Oh well, it's the Pakistanis anyway.
Sunday, October 8, 2006
The Black Caps: Champions Trophy Preview
You could consider Shane Bond a good outside bet to be named man of the series in this edition of the Champion's trophy, for when he's on song he's destructive. Of course, two things are likely to stand in the way of that: his recurring fitness and health problems, and the tendency of the ever-reliable New Zealand top order to capitulate and undo any good work on his part. The 2003 World Cup clash with the Aussies, where he took 6-23 but still ended up on the losing side, is the best example.
There's little you can say that's incisive in a preview of the Champion's Trophy, especially for the Kiwis. First of all, thanks to the existence of the longhorn Cricket Club and its screenings, I hope I'll get to watch at least one game (even in the knowledge that it won't involve the kiwis) . The equation laid out for them is simple enough - win at least two of three games against South Africa, Pakistan, and the qualifier from the intitial stages (Sri Lanka or the West Indies, if things go according to script).
Except for Mark Gillespie, of whom i have no idea about, the Kiwi squad is predictable. While it's probably the best pool of players we've got (and I say 'we' as a pseudo-member of the Beige Brigade), I maintain there should have been room for Ross Taylor. He would have brought in the surprise element, but i guess the selectors feel they have all holes covered in the top order which includes an under-pressure Hamish Marshall. There's really only one currency in the subcontinent, and that's quick runs, which is why Taylor should have been there. Opposition bowlers have seen enough of Fleming, Astle, Vincent, Marshall and Styris though if at least two of them strike a sudden rich vein of form it really won't matter. Peter Fulton provides the promise element for the moment, and in an effort to sound optimistic he should be able to replicate his great form earlier in the year once more. The bowling looks less convinving, and needs to stay injury free. Daniel Vettori remains central to Fleming's plans, but I'd like to see Fleming use him differently. Perhaps as first change, and then a spell at the death? Gillespie was supposedly drafted in with a view to solve New Zealand's problems bowling at the death. However, my view on bowling at the death is that if your bowlers are good enough they'll manage. To put it another way, the best 'death' bowlers you have are most often simply your best bowlers - Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne, as used by Mark Taylor for example. I'd say Bond and Vettori are still the best men for the job, even if they've not been particularly good at it. Bringing in a rookie and expecting him to address this task straightaway is a tough ask. The rest of the bowlers have their own (injury) problems, apart from being none too penetrative. Even so, we might be going in with one medium pacer too many. To put my finger on it, the selection of James Franklin, in these conditions at least, is somewhat redundant but I could still be wrong. However, if I was in Fleming's shoes I'd still be tempted to play two spinners (Dan and Jeetan Patel) for all three games.
The fact that it's not a knockout scenario means that the Black Caps will get second chances unlike the previous two editions where they were creamed by the Aussies. I actually feel the South African game will present an easier challenge than the other two. Personally, I think this is the most boring South African side ever assembled since 1992 so it's a little hard to digest that we lost 4-0 to them last year. I suppose Fleming has his plans right this time for Graeme Smith, Justin Kemp & co. though i can safely imagine it won't include verbal barrage. Sri Lanka and West Indies were both overcome easily at home last summer, but this time the conditions are definitely on their side. As for the Pakistanis, they'd like to think playing in the subcontinent would make it that much easier for them in this group and I'd put them as favourites to top the pool, actually. The point of interest for me is whether the kiwis have finally figured out a way to stifle their big hitters, Razzaq in particular. Knowling the extensive use of previous knowledge that goes into kiwi preparations, Fleming will be wary, but he'll also be looking at exploiting their ability to self-destruct.
It's a tough ask on paper but if collective experience has any value New Zealand should progress to the semis at least. From then on anything can happen, but for once the format of the Champios trophy makes it a valuable build off to the World Cup. In the meantime it's quite exasparating not to have live coverage of the Kiwi's Games.
There's little you can say that's incisive in a preview of the Champion's Trophy, especially for the Kiwis. First of all, thanks to the existence of the longhorn Cricket Club and its screenings, I hope I'll get to watch at least one game (even in the knowledge that it won't involve the kiwis) . The equation laid out for them is simple enough - win at least two of three games against South Africa, Pakistan, and the qualifier from the intitial stages (Sri Lanka or the West Indies, if things go according to script).
Except for Mark Gillespie, of whom i have no idea about, the Kiwi squad is predictable. While it's probably the best pool of players we've got (and I say 'we' as a pseudo-member of the Beige Brigade), I maintain there should have been room for Ross Taylor. He would have brought in the surprise element, but i guess the selectors feel they have all holes covered in the top order which includes an under-pressure Hamish Marshall. There's really only one currency in the subcontinent, and that's quick runs, which is why Taylor should have been there. Opposition bowlers have seen enough of Fleming, Astle, Vincent, Marshall and Styris though if at least two of them strike a sudden rich vein of form it really won't matter. Peter Fulton provides the promise element for the moment, and in an effort to sound optimistic he should be able to replicate his great form earlier in the year once more. The bowling looks less convinving, and needs to stay injury free. Daniel Vettori remains central to Fleming's plans, but I'd like to see Fleming use him differently. Perhaps as first change, and then a spell at the death? Gillespie was supposedly drafted in with a view to solve New Zealand's problems bowling at the death. However, my view on bowling at the death is that if your bowlers are good enough they'll manage. To put it another way, the best 'death' bowlers you have are most often simply your best bowlers - Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne, as used by Mark Taylor for example. I'd say Bond and Vettori are still the best men for the job, even if they've not been particularly good at it. Bringing in a rookie and expecting him to address this task straightaway is a tough ask. The rest of the bowlers have their own (injury) problems, apart from being none too penetrative. Even so, we might be going in with one medium pacer too many. To put my finger on it, the selection of James Franklin, in these conditions at least, is somewhat redundant but I could still be wrong. However, if I was in Fleming's shoes I'd still be tempted to play two spinners (Dan and Jeetan Patel) for all three games.
The fact that it's not a knockout scenario means that the Black Caps will get second chances unlike the previous two editions where they were creamed by the Aussies. I actually feel the South African game will present an easier challenge than the other two. Personally, I think this is the most boring South African side ever assembled since 1992 so it's a little hard to digest that we lost 4-0 to them last year. I suppose Fleming has his plans right this time for Graeme Smith, Justin Kemp & co. though i can safely imagine it won't include verbal barrage. Sri Lanka and West Indies were both overcome easily at home last summer, but this time the conditions are definitely on their side. As for the Pakistanis, they'd like to think playing in the subcontinent would make it that much easier for them in this group and I'd put them as favourites to top the pool, actually. The point of interest for me is whether the kiwis have finally figured out a way to stifle their big hitters, Razzaq in particular. Knowling the extensive use of previous knowledge that goes into kiwi preparations, Fleming will be wary, but he'll also be looking at exploiting their ability to self-destruct.
It's a tough ask on paper but if collective experience has any value New Zealand should progress to the semis at least. From then on anything can happen, but for once the format of the Champios trophy makes it a valuable build off to the World Cup. In the meantime it's quite exasparating not to have live coverage of the Kiwi's Games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)