Inopportune giant-killing

So Pakistan are out of this World Cup. They will have to wait another four years, before they can have the chance of breaking the jinx of losing to India in the premier tournament. Poor me. Poor You. We have been left to watch ridiculous encounters between Ireland and the other teams entering the not so super eight. Do we expect Ireland to win another game in this tournament? That is unlikely, very unlikely, unless Kenya make it through by catching England off-guard. I sincerely hope that doesn’t happen.

I would rather watch Kevin Pietersen bat than Thomas Odoyo. I want to watch and enjoy good cricket. No flash-in-the-pan upsets that push good teams out of the tournament. Let us leave those to tournaments and bilateral series, which are of lesser importance. Not in the World Cups. The stage is too big for the minnows to play spoil sport. You might disagree with me. No, I don’t have anything against upsets. But the losing teams must be given enough opportunity to make amends. Otherwise, we would be left with mediocre games to watch. Honestly, do you expect Ireland to beat Pakistan even once in the next ten matches they play against each other? Assuming, of course, they are not fixed. Does Ireland deserve to figure in the super eight? I don’t think so.

We can, from the comforts of our drawing room couches and office cubicles, ridicule players for not playing well, for misfielding, for missing run outs, for dropping dollies, for playing irresponsible shots at crucial junctures, for making the wrong decisions. But aren’t they humans? Every team has off-days. Days when over-confidence, lethargy or the pressure of the occasion gets the better of the team. Why, even the ever consistent Australia lost to Bangladesh. Yes, that was an inconsequential series. Australians would never have taken the game lightly given the importance of the tournament. Maybe, but, did we really want the Pakistanis and possibly the Indians to be kicked out of this World Cup unceremoniously, based on a day’s performance? I am sure more than half the interest in the event will be lost should India also exit the tournament. That is not what the ICC, or the sponsors of the game want.

Who benefits by these upsets, anyway? Certainly not the ICC. Definitely not cricket. Not even the minnow winning the game. Where is Kenya now as a cricketing nation? Out of the 15 ODIs played by Kenya against the test playing nations in four years after the 2003 World Cup, it has not managed to win even a single game. And it was one of the semi-finalists of that tournament, remember? And why only 15 games in a span of four years? Well, that is an entirely different issue, not relevant to the current argument. The point is, apart from spoiling what could have been an engrossing contest between India and Sri Lanka in the semi-finals, the 2003 World Cup upsets amounted to nothing. So will this Irish win against Pakistan, in all probabilities, be. An inconsequential upset, as far as the future of Irish cricket is concerned.

Bangladesh, I agree, are a much better lot than the ‘minnows’ of the game. Bangladesh have certainly improved as a team over the years. But, I would laugh at you if you said Bangladesh deserved to go into the super eight ahead of India. In my opinion, Bangladesh caught India napping. Why, Mortaza’s bowling notwithstanding, Tamim Iqbal’s flair notwithstanding, Bashar’s impudence not withstanding, India are more likely to be consistent with their performance in the super eight stage than Bangladesh. To be honest, Bangladesh did beat India fair and square, but it is unlikely that they will turn in such a performance in this World Cup again, now that the teams know what they are capable of.

The problem actually lies in the format of the tournament. The format itself makes the tournament susceptible to such upsets. And ICC has to have a league phase before the round-robin phase, just because there are too many teams playing in the tournament. One bad day can virtually relegate a good team out of the tournament in the league phase. We can’t have a round-robin of 16 teams. That would mean 120 matches in the round-robin stage itself. Almost half the year will be lost deciding the champions. Or, we have a format where each team meets the other two times before deciding the top two. That would mean 24 extra matches. The best option, in my view, would be to play lesser number of teams. Nine test playing nations, and the top three ICC Trophy division-1 teams. Twelve teams and 69 matches. Longer tournament, but definitely a fairer one. Where one upset doesn’t push a team out of the tournament. Where, greats like Sachin Tendulkar and Inzamam-ul-Haq are given the opportunity to bow out gracefully, with the satisfaction of having tried their best. The ICC owes them the opportunity. It is time ICC avoids such anti-climaxes in the World Cup for the good of the game.

This week, the cricketing world lost the opportunity to see a soporific Inzamam orchestrating a thrilling run chase with nonchalant ease. By this Saturday, we may have lost the opportunity of watching two veterans, Tendulkar and Mcgrath, battle it out in the middle. As a lover of the game, I hope they do get to go at each other’s jugular, for one last time. The victor does not matter, the battle does.