And so we are, finally, into the Super Six -- a stage of the competition that, consensus prior to May 14 went, India didn't have much of a chance of reaching. But then, we fans are a volatile bunch -- perhaps as volatile as the players we support. What amazes -- make that amuses -- me is the bookmaker. While the fan can afford to wear his heart on his sleeve, your average bookie is supposed to be a hard-headed pragmatist. He has to be -- after all, he is the guy who has to pay out big time if he gets his calculations wrong. Which is why some of the notions they have gone with, while making out the odds, has had me -- and in fact, quite a few people I know -- in splits. For starters, why would the likes of William Hill and Ladbrookes install England as fourth favourite to take the trophy? "Patriotic money," Michael Holding wryly described it as, with a private chuckle that bookmakers could in this day and age actually put patriotism above profit. But what is more amusing is the way they have rated South Africa, well ahead of the competition, as the overwhelming favourites to take the trophy. Lookit that team, the bookmaker effectively said, they have a 75 pc win record; they have a batting lineup that goes down to number nine; they have the best bowling lineup in the world; they have the best captain going, in Hansie Cronje... and so on and so forth. Let's, just for fun, flip things on its head. Why -- when -- do you strengthen your batting? When you are not confident your main batsmen can deliver, right? When do you need to bat down to number 9? When your top five aren't giving you enough runs for your bowlers to attack behind. So what does that tell you about South Africa's real strength? Look at it another way. From way before the start of this tournament, pundits of every persuasion have been arguing that this is a bowler's tournament. Now, when you have, for an LOI, conditions that suit bowlers, and when in that game a bowler takes five-for and a batsman gets 50, who gets the man of the match? Nine times out of ten, you'll find that it is the batsman -- simply because batting was by definition the harder thing to do in those conditions, and therefore the player who performed with the bat deserves the accolade. Now then, if we say that World Cup 99 is a bowler's tournament, then when assessing probabilities, shouldn't it be the batting strengths of the various teams that we should be looking at? We keep going wow, look at the Proteas, they get into trouble, and time and again Lance Klusener, wielding the heaviest bat in Christendom, comes to the rescue. For my part, it is in that very factor that I see South Africa's biggest flaw -- that they do manage to get into trouble, they have in fact consistently found themselves in batting hot water through the duration of this tournament. And that is why I think this side will not win the World Cup. Another factor that is going against the Proteas is 'professionalism' -- which supposedly is their biggest strength. What strikes you, when you watch the side in the field, is that the bowlers are not going flat out, they are not attacking with all they have, but rather have taken to bowling well within themselves. This explains why the likes of Pollock, Kallis and Donald haven't been as successful as was expected. It also explains why Klusener -- the one guy in the lineup who, when he is out there, tends to go flat out, playing with the heart rather than with the head -- has been firing with the ball. From what I see, I suspect that the professional Proteas have worked out that wides and no balls are a huge minus. That given the abnormal movement on offer in England, if they pitch even six inches outside off, the ball will swing far enough to be declared wide. So they have in the main taken to bowling wicket to wicket, concentrating on not giving away wides. And in the process, they have lost some of that attacking edge -- unlike the Pakistan quicks, who have focused on flat out attack and shrugged off the wides and no balls, and as a result are looking the far more formidable bowling side. I'd have thought the bookies would have figured that angle out -- this is precisely what they are supposed to be good for. But surprise, surprise, South Africa was -- till just the other day -- the universal favourites. The funny bit is, that mindset seems to be changing suddenly, and pretty rapidly. A friend called me at home the other day, and was like, hey, thought I would bet a bit on SA, what do you think? I suggested that if he was going to bet anyway, it might pay to bet against, rather than for, the Proteas. So he apparently called up his friendly neighbourhood bookie, and put a little something against South Africa. Then came the South Africa-Zimbabwe game, and we all know what happened there. Next morning, my friend calls the bookie again, saying hey, I want to increase the size of my bet against the South Africans. Guess what? Bombay bookmakers have apparently stopped taking bets against the Proteas! While everyone and his uncle has been focusing on the cricket, a very interesting development went largely unnoticed. And that was the first ever World Cricket Coaches' Conference and Exhibition, a two day affair that deserved much wider coverage than it ended up getting. There were 2,000 delegates, from all the Test-playing nations and most of the associates. And by all accounts, a most profitable time was had by all. The festivities began with Shane Warne's Svengali, Terry Jenner, talking about the art of leg spin. Rodney Marsh on the workings of the Australian cricket academy, Bob Woolmer on the secrets of his success with the South African side, Desmond Haynes on batting, Sir Richard Hadlee on fast bowling, Bob Taylor on wicket-keeping, John Emburey on a contraption he has patented which helps bowlers develop the right muscles in the right places -- it all sounds incredibly useful. The talks were, I hear from someone who attended, outstanding. Equally useful, apparently, was the exhibition, which featured all kinds of state of the art coaching gadgetry. The only downside, apparently, was that Jonty Rhodes wasn't able to attend and deliver his speech on the art of fielding. I wonder if the BCCI was keeping an eye on this one? Such an event, organised in India, would be of immense help to those who coach the various school, varsity and states sides; it would help them get au courant with the latest techniques and that, in turn, will help raise the standards of our domestic cricketers. Does Prem Panicker really need an introduction?
HOME | NEWS | BUSINESS | SPORTS | MOVIES | CHAT | INFOTECH | TRAVEL | SINGLES BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | GIFT SHOP | HOTEL RESERVATIONS | WORLD CUP 99 EDUCATION | PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL | FEEDBACK