Namibia win by 4 wickets with just 5 balls to spare.
Scotland lost the match at the toss and with their Power Play return of 22-4 and whilst they made a good fist of protecting a low total of 109, the benefit of Namibia knowing what they had to get and the pace they needed to go at was ultimately the difference.
So that's 12/14 of the sides that have won the toss and opted to chase that have won and 7/7 in the main group stage of the competition too.
Most of his recent returns have been against the lesser cricketing nations but, even so, as with all of Mark Watt's efforts, he bowled superbly today especially taking into account Afghanistan's total of 190-4
Police in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh have arrested three Kashmiri students for allegedly celebrating Pakistan's win over India in Sunday's T20 World Cup cricket game.
Police said they shouted "anti-India and pro-Pakistan" slogans during the match and were charged with "promoting enmity and cyber terrorism".
Fair play to him, that's a really good statement. Explains why he did what he did, makes clear that he isn't opposed to anti-racist gestures and accepts he should have considered the effect on his teammates before acting. Seems like he would have made a different choice if CSA had given the players more notice, so they could have discussed it as a team.
Fair play to him, that's a really good statement. Explains why he did what he did, makes clear that he isn't opposed to anti-racist gestures and accepts he should have considered the effect on his teammates before acting. Seems like he would have made a different choice if CSA had given the players more notice, so they could have discussed it as a team.
Very good result, all-round. De Kock will take the knee and support his team-mates and colleagues in an anti-racist stance; the world will get to see one of the best white ball batsman taking part in a major tournament; the player has learned the importance of standing against racism, his responsibility to set an example and that taking a knee helps to educate others, and makes the lives of others better; and Cricket South Africa have been rightly criticised for their abject decisions ahead of a major tournament, yet again.
He's not a racist and no-one suggest he is. But he should help to spread a message of anti-racism and of diversity. Fair play to him.
Variation on a
theme but more of a look at what a potential winning first innings score might
look like, based on all 21 matches to date including the group qualifying games.
I've also indicated in brackets the team bowling first in games that were won
by the side that batted first:
44-10 L
55-10 L
96-10 L
106-10 L
109-8 L
118-9 L
122-10 L
124-9 L
125-8 L
129-9 L
134-7 L 140-9 W (v Bangladesh)
143-8 L
151-7 L 153-10 W (v Oman)
164-4 L 165-9 W (v PNG)
171-4 L 171-7 W (v Ireland) 181-7 W (v PNG) 190-4 W (v Scotland)
So The average first innings score is just 133 but
only one side from 14 who scored less than 152 or less actually won. The other amazing stat is that in 18 of the 21
games, the team batting first lost 7 wickets or more. In 2 of the 3 matches
where the team batting first was only 4 wickets down, they still lost.
With the
possible exception of Bangladesh (and even that its stretching things a bit),
the first innings opposition bowling attacks for those bigger winning scores
can only be described as being at the weakest end of the spectrum.
I've previously suggested that teams batting
second are winning because they can pace themselves in chasing a low total especially
as conditions are more amenable to do so anyway. The issue for those sides
batting first is also, in attempting to achieve that 165 plus score, there is a
need to go hard in the PP. The PP, after all, is the time when the ball is at
its hardest so it is easier to get value for their shots but it is difficult to
do so given the variable nature of the track which has then caused early
wickets to fall. Effectively, the top order of the team batting first is stuck
between a decision as to whether to “stick or twist” -they can’t get a 165 plus
score without having a really good PP because the ball, by the latter stages, is
soft but, in attempting to do so, they are losing 3 early wickets which then means that they have to
have a period of consolidation.
The other thing
to take into consideration is “match ups” which again make it hard for the top
order – look at how effective Moeen Ali has been bowling in the PP against left
handers. Invariably, they want pace on the ball when it is at its hardest and
they also don’t want the ball turning away from them especially on wickets that
not just turn but where the bounce is so variable.
I would say
that T20 in this WC has become like a game of chess. The trouble is that it’s
one where the side that bats first starts the game without a Queen. Any that do
triumph in such circumstances can hold themselves out to be worthy winners.
It really kills you when you spend hours putting together data and an explanation as to what has happened and someone comes along with a totally plausible solution in one sentence! But it is definitely the way to go.
It is that thing about the PP though and getting enough runs on the board without losing wickets. 45-1, for example, would be a good PP in these conditions - the issue is then getting 115 at almost 8 runs an over with 5 players out, some big boundaries and no pace in the wicket to enable them to get enough purchase to clear the ropes. It is in going for a PP of say 60 that too many early wickets are then lost so at then there is that period of consolidation and in the latter stages you end up with numbers 8 to 11 having to finish the job off trying to hit balls that are bowled into the surface and with no width to enable the batsmen to free their arms.
Fair play to him, that's a really good statement. Explains why he did what he did, makes clear that he isn't opposed to anti-racist gestures and accepts he should have considered the effect on his teammates before acting. Seems like he would have made a different choice if CSA had given the players more notice, so they could have discussed it as a team.
Yep. Good statement from De Kock. One thing in that article that slightly grinds my gears though, is that on one side, QDK gives a full and frank apology while explaining his position, while on the other side, CSA says they “regret” the fallout and timing of their directive. ”Regretting” something is not apologising. It’s a politicians ‘apology’ which means nothing. They need to take more responsibility in my opinion.
How good a bowler is Zampa! These SL batsmen, just the one wicket down and brought up on playing spin - he just hasn't allowed them to dominate just when they are looking to kick on.
Comments
22-4 off 6 overs
8 of those runs came from 2 edges that went to the boundary
Scotland lost the match at the toss and with their Power Play return of 22-4 and whilst they made a good fist of protecting a low total of 109, the benefit of Namibia knowing what they had to get and the pace they needed to go at was ultimately the difference.
So that's 12/14 of the sides that have won the toss and opted to chase that have won and 7/7 in the main group stage of the competition too.
4-0-22-1 (Namibia)
Police in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh have arrested three Kashmiri students for allegedly celebrating Pakistan's win over India in Sunday's T20 World Cup cricket game.
Police said they shouted "anti-India and pro-Pakistan" slogans during the match and were charged with "promoting enmity and cyber terrorism".
He's not a racist and no-one suggest he is. But he should help to spread a message of anti-racism and of diversity. Fair play to him.
Variation on a theme but more of a look at what a potential winning first innings score might look like, based on all 21 matches to date including the group qualifying games. I've also indicated in brackets the team bowling first in games that were won by the side that batted first:
44-10 L
55-10 L
96-10 L
106-10 L
109-8 L
118-9 L
122-10 L
124-9 L
125-8 L
129-9 L
134-7 L
140-9 W (v Bangladesh)
143-8 L
151-7 L
153-10 W (v Oman)
164-4 L
165-9 W (v PNG)
171-4 L
171-7 W (v Ireland)
181-7 W (v PNG)
190-4 W (v Scotland)
So The average first innings score is just 133 but only one side from 14 who scored less than 152 or less actually won. The other amazing stat is that in 18 of the 21 games, the team batting first lost 7 wickets or more. In 2 of the 3 matches where the team batting first was only 4 wickets down, they still lost.
With the possible exception of Bangladesh (and even that its stretching things a bit), the first innings opposition bowling attacks for those bigger winning scores can only be described as being at the weakest end of the spectrum.
I've previously suggested that teams batting second are winning because they can pace themselves in chasing a low total especially as conditions are more amenable to do so anyway. The issue for those sides batting first is also, in attempting to achieve that 165 plus score, there is a need to go hard in the PP. The PP, after all, is the time when the ball is at its hardest so it is easier to get value for their shots but it is difficult to do so given the variable nature of the track which has then caused early wickets to fall. Effectively, the top order of the team batting first is stuck between a decision as to whether to “stick or twist” -they can’t get a 165 plus score without having a really good PP because the ball, by the latter stages, is soft but, in attempting to do so, they are losing 3 early wickets which then means that they have to have a period of consolidation.
The other thing to take into consideration is “match ups” which again make it hard for the top order – look at how effective Moeen Ali has been bowling in the PP against left handers. Invariably, they want pace on the ball when it is at its hardest and they also don’t want the ball turning away from them especially on wickets that not just turn but where the bounce is so variable.
I would say that T20 in this WC has become like a game of chess. The trouble is that it’s one where the side that bats first starts the game without a Queen. Any that do triumph in such circumstances can hold themselves out to be worthy winners.
It is that thing about the PP though and getting enough runs on the board without losing wickets. 45-1, for example, would be a good PP in these conditions - the issue is then getting 115 at almost 8 runs an over with 5 players out, some big boundaries and no pace in the wicket to enable them to get enough purchase to clear the ropes. It is in going for a PP of say 60 that too many early wickets are then lost so at then there is that period of consolidation and in the latter stages you end up with numbers 8 to 11 having to finish the job off trying to hit balls that are bowled into the surface and with no width to enable the batsmen to free their arms.
One thing in that article that slightly grinds my gears though, is that on one side, QDK gives a full and frank apology while explaining his position, while on the other side, CSA says they “regret” the fallout and timing of their directive.
”Regretting” something is not apologising. It’s a politicians ‘apology’ which means nothing. They need to take more responsibility in my opinion.
For no other reason than I always want the Aussies to lose.
Another thing that p*sses me off is the huge number of times the cameras alight on nubile, stunning young women in the crowd !