There is something vaguely disturbing about a batter scoring a century in 31 balls in international cricket. A.B. de Villiers finished with 149 off 44 deliveries for South Africa against the West Indies. A couple of months earlier, India’s Rohit Sharma had shown what was possible while making a world record 264 off 173 deliveries against Sri Lanka. It was only ten fewer than the Sri Lankan team made in the final of the 2011 World Cup.
The T20-fication of the 50-over game is nearly complete. Once teams begin to score 400-plus consistently, it might even signal the end of the 50-over game. The Guardian’s Mike Selvey expects a score of 500 to be reached when India play Zimbabwe in Auckland.
On a recent visit there, I saw why. The straight boundaries in this essentially rugby ground are depressingly short. Would a score of 500-plus be seen as a triumph, or will it cause the lawmakers to make changes in favour of the bowlers? The two most recent changes—rules under which the World Cup will be played—have merely added to the batsman’s advantages. These include the number of fielders outside the ring, four, and the use of two balls, one from each end, per innings.
The World Cup begins on different dates for different people. For the hosts Australia and New Zealand, it begins on Valentine’s Day; for India and Pakistan a day later. For fans of the non-Test teams, it begins when their outfits first play. But in a real sense, it begins on March 18, when the quarterfinals get under way.
With two pools, each comprising four leading teams and three lesser ones, it will be difficult for the eight top Test teams not to qualify. This is where the essential disconnect between sport and television comes in. Sport thrives on upsets; television puts its money on these not occurring in the early rounds. In 2007, both India and Pakistan failed to qualify for the business end of the World Cup, and television ratings took a hit. That is the only time these countries haven’t met in a World Cup since 1992, the first post-modern version of the tournament with coloured clothes, white balls and night matches.
The focus on Sunday’s match for once goes beyond the usual rhetoric of an India-Pakistan encounter, loaded as it is with the baggage of history. India have beaten Pakistan every time in a World Cup—and for some that has been consolation enough for poor overall performances in at least two of them. This time, however, India’s performances in the lead-up to the tournament has been so pathetic that their supporters hope a tough game against Pakistan might just be the tonic needed to stiffen up the sinews and summon up the blood. India’s possible quarterfinal opponents are either Australia or England, two teams they have lost consistently to on their tour of Australia. There is the usual optimism, of course, as articulated by skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni. Two victories, he has said, and India will be in the final. True enough. But it applies equally to all eight teams in the quarterfinals.
The real story of the World Cup is already here—the elevation of Afghanistan into the Club of 14. Fairy tales are the lifeblood of sport. Yet even in a society that casually accepts talking animals and flying superheroes with magical powers, Afghanistan’s progress has a touch of Bollywood. Skipper Mohammad Nabi’s father was kidnapped, and a player, Rahmat Wali, was shot dead by American forces. A decade ago, there were no grounds, no training centres, no organised cricket, no cricket board. Now here they are, a fine example of what happens when passion meets persistence.
At least one ‘expert’, the University of Canterbury’s robot Ikram (named after the philosopher Ikram Antaki), has picked Afghanistan as the winners. That is unlikely to give Australia or South Africa or New Zealand sleepless nights.
The first two are favourites. But the time has come for New Zealand, one of the most consistent performers. They have the all-round team, the home advantage and have been in six semi-finals. In any case, the World Cup seems bound for the southern hemisphere.
(Suresh Menon is editor, Wisden India Almanack)
