NEWS
MATCH REPORTS
DIARY
OTHER SPORTS
SLIDE SHOW
PEOPLE
ARCHIVES

Knock, knock, who's out?

So here we are, at the threshold of the 'mini' World Cup.

Why 'mini'? The presence of the nine Test-playing nations makes it a full-fledged World Cup -- despite the odd upset by a Kenya, say, the associate nations who join with the nine biggies are there merely to make up the numbers. ICC's token gesture towards the also rans, if you will.

Anyways. By way of the mandatory curtain raising exercise, we attempt here to examine the conditions, and figure out how they could impact on the progress of the tournament. This time, though, we will go one better -- with a preview of each match, sticking our necks out to indicate who, on paper, has the better chance of winning.

Actually, I expect this could be an interesting exercise, at least for me (hopefully, the readers share a measure of that interest). Because, after all, the bedrock of cricket is that over-used cliche about "glorious uncertainities". So, at tournament's end, it might be interesting to see just how much of the game is uncertain, just how different the game, played in theory, can be from that in practise.

With which preamble, on to Dhaka's Bangabandhu National Stadium. From where the news is that seven pitches have been laid, for the eight games of the tournament.

Great. It sure beats a tournament like, say, Toronto where two pitches are prepared for five games, meaning that the final is played on a wicket that has already seen the wear and tear of two previous encounters. But the key here is going to be the quality of pitch preparation.

The question here, though, relates to the quality of the pitches prepared. Philip Edgar Russell, the South Africa-based curator who was brought in to do the needful, is on record as saying a week ago that pitch preparation, thanks to the rain, was a good fortnight behind schedule.

And the rains have continued till then.

What this could mean is underprepared wickets. If this was the Caribbean, chances are that such wickets will turn out fast, with uneven bounce adding to the problems. On the sub-continent, however, underprepared wickets are typically slower, lower, with more scope for turn than pace. The kind on which the ball doesn't really come on to the bat, making run-scoring difficult.

And this could be one of the vital factors affecting the course of the tournament. Unless Russell -- and subsequently, his replacement team from the Eden Gardens -- have been able to work the cricketing equivalent of Jesus walking on water, this could turn out to be a low-scoring tournament. Which in turn means that for the fielding side, the ability of bowlers to keep a tight length and line, backed by run-denying fielding, could be the key while, for the batting side, it won't be the fours and sixes that make the difference, as much as the ability to work the ball around for singles.

One thing is for certain sure -- a captain winning the toss will want to take first strike. At least for the initial games. At least until we have enough evidence, in the form of completed matches, to indicate whether the pitches are going to get slower and lower as the match progresses, making batting in the second innings doubly difficult.

If all this makes planning hard enough, then there are, this time round, two fresh factors that add to the confusion. And the first of them is the knock-out format.

The splitting of a tournament into a preliminary league phase followed by the knockout in the quarter/semifinal stage on allows teams the luxury of experimenting. Of trying out, in the prelim phase, options such as pinch-hitters, an altered batting lineup, different bowling combinations -- all providing valuable input as the tournament moves into the do-or-die stage.

The option, even of being below par in a particular game -- and despite all those hi-falutin blah that international captains give out routinely, about treating each game like a battle unto death, the fact is that teams do tend to coast at times, especially when they have booked a place for the knockout stage. This gives them a little breathing space, a chance to ease frayed nerves, to regroup for the tougher challenge of the final stage.

That luxury is denied to the teams, here -- every match is literally do-or-die. And that means, first up, that there is no scope for experimentation -- the team think-tanks have to get their parameters perfect, first crack out of the box. Does team A go in with the gameplan of blasting out in the first 15 overs, risking rapid fall of wickets, under the assumption that a cracking start will overcome the relative slowness of run-getting in the latter stages of the match? Does team B presume on swing and seam movement, or does it assume slow, low conditions and go in with trundlers who keep it wicket to wicket on a run-denying line and length?

Lots of questions -- and one shot is all you get at finding the right answers: a situation that seems to favour the strategists like Arjuna Ranatunga, or the innovative Brian Lara, or the thoughtful Steve Waugh, or the Hansie Cronje-Bob Woolmer combo.

The other wild card is the 'bowl out' -- an innovation that, frankly, disgusts me. If the result of a cricket match is to be reduced to whether a bowl can, or not, pitch a ball on the stumps, the development of the game would appear to have reached its nadir.

But in any case, that is what we have -- and therein lie more headaches for captains. The guy who wins the toss has another reason for batting first -- but the team batting second will need, going in, to keep in mind more factors than the pilot of a supersonic jet. For starters, you have to know the final target and the required run rate, that is a given. You also have to budget for rain intruding -- which means that you have to know what you should have got at the 25 over mark, and in stages thereafter, to win. And at the back of your mind is the thought that after all that effort, the game could be reduced to a lottery anyway.

All of which is why this tournament, more than any other in recent memory, is going to be as much a test of cricketing intelligence and, more importantly, nerve as of ability and skill.

The above is more or less a broad overview. From here on, a closer look at the tournament, match by match....

• Game 1: New Zealand versus Zimbabwe, October 24, 1998
• Game 2: England versus South Africa, October 25, 1998
• Game 3: Sri Lanka versus winner of New Zealand versus Zimbabwe , October 26, 1998
• Game 4: India versus Australia, October 28, 1998
• Game 5: Pakistan versus West Indies, October 29, 1998

Prem Panicker