UPDATE 1 at the end of the post.
UPDATE 2 with the final outcome at the very end.
I told friends before the tournament started that I thought Sri Lanka had the best (if tiny) chance of upsetting Australia. With the semi-finals about to begin, I’d just like to get it in writing.
The two-month ordeal (and that’s what much of it has been, thanks to ludicrous mismanagement by international and local organizers) now has just four teams left (out of 16): Australia, New Zealand, Sri Lanka, and South Africa. But Australia have already pounded the holy crap out of the other three during the preliminary rounds, including a 348-133 disemboweling of second-place New Zealand last week in Grenada. (You read that right; a 215-run margin against their supposedly closest competition.)
Australia are the Beatles of cricket, and everybody else are the Dave Clark Five.
But if Sri Lanka can get past New Zealand today, they actually have a decent chance. Australia have been so dominant that most of their middle- and lower-order batsmen have barely waved a bat in anger. Granted, when they have, they’ve been pretty damned good. Just saying.
Brad Hodge slams the ball for six runs against Scotland. (Then again, who didn’t?)
So if Sri Lanka win the toss and make Australia bat first, their pace bowlers could conceivably retire the Aussie openers cheaply on the lively Bajan pitch. ("Could." Hayden is in incredible form right now. Not likely. Just saying.) They’d still need a few breaks, but I can imagine Sri Lanka finding themselves with the best spin bowler in the world facing an Australian middle order that hasn’t faced much competition of late. I’d give Sri Lanka even money at that point.
Aussie captain Ricky Ponting shoots this blog a dirty look; they’ll win, of course
(actually, he was looking behind me at some screaming fans after a bazillion-run crushing of somebody or other)
But that’s the only way Australia loses. Fine by me; they’re my favorite team. What probably happens next: Australia pulps their opponents for two more games, so badly that some fans will wonder why they bothered. They haven’t lost a World Cup match since 1999. I doubt they’ll lose another one until 2011. Australia are so dominant that it’s probably bad for the sport long-term.
But if they do lose, that’s how I think it happens.
UPDATE: Both semis have now been played. Sri Lanka beat New Zealand by 81 runs, and Australia squished South Africa like bugs today. In cricket-speak, Oz won by seven wickets in under 32 overs; translated into American English, South Africa couldn’t even manage to bat out their full allotment of 300 balls before making all ten outs (wickets); Australia then bettered South Africa’s total in fewer than 200 balls, losing only three wickets on the way. South Africa were Bambi, and Australia were Godzilla.
So, here comes a final you could see from miles away. Australia probably crushes Sri Lanka on Saturday, and everybody calls it a tournament, which it never was, really. Sigh.
One thing I’ll add, though, in a desperate attempt to stay interested: Adam Gilchrist, one of Australia’s openers, batted poorly today and seems to be struggling lately, which gives slightly more life to the upset scenario drawn above. Any chance of an interesting final will pivot around Matty Hayden, the other Australian opener, who is the tournament’s leading batsman. If Hayden puts up his typical outing against Sri Lanka, game over. If he goes cheaply, with Vaas and Malinga bowling well, the pressure could shift. Hussey is still searching for his form, Watson has been injured, and Symonds can be overaggressive at times. Game on.
Until Ponting and Clarke put up their fifties, anyway.
UPDATE FINAL: Australia won by 53 runs, and it wasn’t nearly that close. (BBC story here. ABC story here.) The final was shortened by rain both before and during play. Australia were given only 38 overs to bat instead of the full 50 and still put up 281 runs; Sri Lanka’s turn was interrupted by another shower, reducing their target from 282 in 38 overs to 269 in 36. (There’s a surprisingly complex formula, the "Duckworth/Lewis method," used in these situations.) The afternoon rain also muddied the ground, creating, yes, a sticky wicket, and the dimming light made batting almost impossible by the end. Still, at no point in Sri Lanka’s chase did they ever look to have the slightest chance, even before Mother Nature intervened.
I was wrong about Hayden being pivotal, incidentally. Adam Gilchrist suddenly turned into Superman (something he does periodically) and took the game over from the jump, scoring 149 runs off of just 104 balls. The outcome seemed clear by about midday, and when Hayden went out for a below-average 38, it was barely a hiccup.
The conclusion was a fiasco, with the game ending, the Australians celebrating, and the victory stand being hauled onto the field. The umpires then decided that the tournament wasn’t quite over yet after all, so the three final overs were bowled in such near-darkness that the TV cameras couldn’t even focus. Australia won, eventually, but nobody could really even see it.
And that sums up the ludicrous mess this entire tournament was.
Australia have now won three world cups in a row, and about half of the side that played today should be back in four years, too. So as the gates finally close, I guess we can hope for a decent tournament sometime around 2015.
[snip]
Authorities responded to reports of approaching rebel planes by switching off the electricity supply to the capital as millions of Sri Lankans watched their side play Australia in the cricket World Cup final.
I guess that puts the hassles in the West Indies in some perspective.