Cricket Archives - The Common Man Speaks

Inside Edge was once Harsha Bhogle’s territory which very few remember

March 22, 2020 by Keyur Seta Leave a Comment

Over the last few years, Amazon Prime Video’s original show Inside Edge has been a topic of discussion every time its new season comes up with some liking it while some having an opposite opinion.

Starring the likes of Vivek Anand Oberoi, Richa Chadha, Angad Bedi, Siddhant Chaturvedi, Sanjay Suri and a host of others, Inside Edge is based around a cricket league tournament that focuses on what all happens behind the scenes of such glamorous matches.

But for those who started watching cricket in the mid-1990s, like me, the title ‘Inside Edge’ makes us recall something else.

In that era Star Sports and ESPN were the only major television channels showing world cricket. Harsha Bhogle had entered the cricket scenario in that decade. After he slowly started impressing the audience with his commentating skills, ESPN started a sports show called Inside Edge where Bhogle was the host.

Inside Edge was a weekly cricket bulletin show where Bhogle looked back at the significant events that took place in the cricketing world in the week before. Along with international stuff, the show also gave a good footage to India’s domestic cricket. Bhogle also used to interview important cricket personalities from India and abroad.

As I became a huge cricket fan following the 1996 World Cup, I used to follow the game everywhere – newspapers, magazines like Sportstar and, of course, Bhogle’s Inside Edge show. Despite being aware of the cricket happenings of the past week, I still used to make it a point to tune in each week and would watch intently.

Needless to say, I became a great admirer of Bhogle, his commentary and, most importantly, his passion for this game. I remember being taken aback after knowing that the man hasn’t even played domestic cricket.

Mind you, I am not saying this to demean him. In fact, this increased my admiration for him. To see someone who hasn’t played beyond the university level become an international commentator is an incredible achievement.

Also read: Who are Duckworth and Lewis and why ICC adopted their method?

For those not in the know, Bhogle started his career as commentator at the ripe age of just 19 with All India Radio in his hometown, Hyderabad. One of his biggest achievements, which I came to know just now while Googling, is that he became the first Indian commentator to be invited by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation during India’s tour to Australia before the 1992 World Cup.

Coming back to Inside Edge, it is highly surprising that there isn’t a single video footage of the show anywhere on the internet, leave alone an entire episode. In fact, I am also unable to find even a written mention about it after searching on Google.

Maybe Mr Bhogle can help us with that…

England’s Mark Waugh also batted well & bowled off-spin. Here’s more…

March 7, 2020 by Keyur Seta Leave a Comment

Mark Waugh, as we all know, is one of the greatest Australian cricketers ever. He remains one of their highest run-scorers who was also useful with the ball as an off spinner. Those who followed cricket in the 1990s would have fond memories of him, especially his stint in the 1996 World Cup.

But there is another Mark Waugh who belongs to Australia’s arch-rivals England. He too was a top order batsman. Read on to know more.

Long, long ago a Maharashtrian family from Mumbai, India relocated to England. They embraced their new country after becoming permanent citizens over there. They had a son who showed great interest in the game of cricket.

The lad pursued his dreams and enrolled for cricket coaching. He started mastering the game with the passing years and ultimately got into the Warwickshire main eleven. He became a regular player for his county following his impressive performances with the bat.

This cricketer is named Mark and his family’s surname is Wagh. Hence, his full name was Mark Wagh.

Co-incidentally, I happen to know someone who is related to the Wagh family. I got to know his story from them. Interestingly, he was called ‘Mark Waugh’ because the people of England found it almost impossible to pronounce ‘Wagh.’ And Wagh apparently didn’t mind that.

Hence, he was England’s Mark Waugh.

Mark Wagh and Mark Waugh — Photo credits: TheGuardian.com and YouTube screenshot

Funnily, there are also people who address Mark Waugh as Mark Wagh. See below: [Article continued after image]

I have vivid memories of early or mid-2000s of I seeing him play 1 or 2 times for Warwickshire on TV. From what all I remember, he was a stylish batsman with impressive technique. Those were the days when county matches were regularly telecast in India.

He played 212 first class matches and scored 12445 runs with an average of 38.80. He scored 31 hundreds with a highest score of 315 against Middlesex at Lords, the mecca of cricket, in 2001. At that time it was only the fourth triple century at Lords. Jack Hobbs, Percy Holmes and Graham Gooch were the three batsmen to do that before.

Later Wagh’s Warwickshire teammate Nick Knight became the fifth player to achieve the feat in 2004 when he scored 303 not out against Middlsex.

And guess what? Wagh also bowled off-spin and was a useful bowler, just like Waugh. He took exactly 100 wickets in first class matches. He had two 5-wicket hauls with his best performance being 7 for 222 against Lancashire in 2003.

Despite a good first-class record, Wagh couldn’t play for England’s national side. He was included in the preliminary squad for the 2004 ICC Champions Trophy but couldn’t make it to the final team.

In 2006, Wagh migrated to play for Nottinghamshire. He was awarded Player of the Season by the county in 2007.

Wagh took retirement from first class cricket in 2011. Interestingly, he then pursued a career in law. [Read more about him HERE and HERE]

If you look up on the internet, you won’t find much about his life except an interview he gave to Warwickshire’s official portal in 2016.

A quote from the interview reads, “I look back fondly on my cricket career but it all seems a very long time ago. I did play club cricket briefly but no longer even do that. When you work reasonably long hours during the week, it’s a stretch to then play club cricket which takes up one of your days off, pretty much 9am to 9pm.”

Also read:

Only time Tendulkar was NOT selected in team India, neither injured nor rested

He was selected for 1983 WC, but had to wait till ‘99 to play for India

Yuvraj Singh’s 3 heroic TEST innings that have been forgotten: See videos

When hearing issues stopped India from winning against England

Only time Tendulkar was NOT selected in team India, neither injured nor rested

August 4, 2019 by Keyur Seta 3 Comments

Throughout his career spanning 24 years, Sachin Tendulkar never went out of form. There was a never a time when his spot in the team was in danger due to non-performance. This is one of the major reasons why he is considered a legend.

But there was one occasion when he wasn’t selected in the team for a series against Pakistan. And this wasn’t because of any injury or with the intention of giving him rest.

The month of September in mid and late 1990s brought the excitement of the Sahara Cup, a five match India-Pakistan ODI series in Toronto, Canada. The Toronto Cricket Skating and Curling Club used to be thronged by supporters from both countries that were treated to some quality cricket.

Circa September 1998, the Indian cricket fans were gearing up for another India v/s Pakistan series. But they were in for some disappointment this time around as Tendulkar wasn’t included in the squad for the Sahara Cup.

It so happened that the Commonwealth Games [CWG] clashed that year with the Sahara Cup. Cricket was included in the CWG for the first time during that edition [it hasn’t happened after that] which was played at Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia.

As many as 16 teams participated to achieve cricket glory. The format was very much like the World Cup. There were four groups of four teams with one team from each group going into the semi-finals. Instead of one West Indies team, the series saw Jamaica, Antigua-Barbuda and Barbados play separately.

The Board of Control for Cricket in India [BCCI] were about to send a second string team for the Commonwealth Games, just like how Pakistan did. However, Suresh Kalmadi [guilty of corruption in the infamous 2010 CWG Scam] who was the President of the Indian Olympics Association then, put tremendous pressure on the BCCI to send a strong India team to the CWG.

After a lot of negotiations, it was decided that India’s main squad will be divided into two for Sahara Cup and Commonwealth Games. As it happened, Sachin Tendulkar was selected to play at the CWG along with other big names like Anil Kumble, Ajay Jadeja, Robin Singh and Harbhajan Singh.

Also read: Sachin Tendulkar the bowler: 8 best bowling performances

Unfortunately, India couldn’t reach the semi-final stage as they won only one match out of the three against Canada with their match against Antigua-Barbuda being a no result due to the rains. India lost to Australia by being all out for just 109 while chasing a total of 256. [See all results of that year’s CWG HERE]

Meanwhile, by the time India were out of the CWG, they had lost the Sahara Cup too in the first four ODIs itself [see all results HERE]. But despite that, Tendulkar was sent to Toronto to play the last ODI. He scored an impressive 77 but India lost the match after Pakistan easily chased their total of 256.

Cricket will be returning to the next edition of the Commonwealth Games in 2022 in the form of Women’s T20.

By: Keyur Seta

Additional reading:

Who are Duckworth and Lewis and why ICC adopted their method?

WC Final 2019: Cricket won, ICC lost

When Australia played against Australia in this World Series

Who are Duckworth and Lewis and why ICC adopted their method?

July 28, 2019 by Keyur Seta 3 Comments

The Duckworth-Lewis Method instantly comes to our minds whenever a limited overs cricket match gets affected by rains. It’s a formula that decides the fate of a match in such situations. This is all I know about it as I am yet to come across anyone who perfectly understands the calculation. So we will not go into that.

But the bigger question which has been lingering in my mind is, who exactly are Duckworth and Lewis and why their calculation has been adapted by the International Cricket Council [ICC]?

I decided to explore this. Hence, this article is also a personal learning for me as I went searching on the internet about Duckworth and Lewis.

As it turns out the method has been named after Frank Duckworth and Tony Lewis, the duo which brought about the calculation in rain affected matches.

*********************

Frank Duckworth:

Born in 1939, Frank Duckworth is a retired statistician from Lancashire, England. He has a BSc Hons in Physics and PhD in Metallurgy from the University of Liverpool. He has worked as a mathematical scientist for the nuclear power industry in the UK and is the editor of the Royal Statistician Society’s monthly news magazine called RSS News.

Apart from contributing in the Duckworth-Lewis method, he also singlehandedly developed the ‘Duckworth Scale,’ which can be read about HERE.

Tony Lewis:

The life of Tony Lewis has been pretty much the same. Born in 1942, he also hails from Lancashire and holds degrees in statistics and mathematics from Sheffield University in the 1960s. He was a lecturer in Quantitative Research methods at Oxford Brookes University and University of the West of England. Currently, he is the chairman of the Western Operational Research Discussion Society.

*********************

Apart from this, nothing much is known about their personal lives. But recently there was an interesting article published in Dawn.com, which narrates how the two of them formed a duo and developed the Duckworth-Lewis Method.

To understand this, it is important to know the back story of rain affected matches in cricket. When ODI cricket was in its initial stages in the early 1970s, the cricket governing body adopted the rule of taking into consideration the run-rate of the teams.

It was an unfair method because it didn’t consider the number of wickets lost by a team. For example, if a team is chasing a score of 200, it should have at least 100 runs on board by the 25^th over in order to be declared winners. However, the team will qualify to win even if it has lost 9 wickets to reach the score of 100 in 25 overs.

This rule was done away with in the 1990s and ‘Most Productive Overs’ rule was adopted, which turned out to be an embarrassment after the 1992 World Cup Semi-Final between England and South Africa. For the uninitiated, the latter needed 22 runs in 13 balls to win when the rains poured in. After resuming, as per the new method, needed 22 off just 1 ball.

In between in the 1980s, Duckworth had sent his own scoring formula to decide the fate of rain affected matches but it was rejected by the cricket governing body for being ‘too complicated.’

But he saw his chance after the debacle of the 1992 Semi Final. When he was giving a presentation of his method at Royal Statistical Society few months later, Tony Lewis, who was sitting in the audience, got interested in it.

Also read: WC Final 2019 – Cricket won, ICC lost

The two got together, worked out their formula, which came to be known as Duckworth-Lewis Method, and presented it to the cricket governing body which, was then called the ICC. Their formula was accepted since it also took into account the number of wickets lost by teams.

Their method was first implemented on 1 January 1997 in the England v/s Zimbabwe match at Harare. See the scorecard HERE.

Over the years, the method has received numerous criticisms for being unfair. In the same interview with the Dawn, Duckworth also honestly accepts that the method is not foolproof since it doesn’t take into consideration the identity and ability of batsmen who are yet to bat.

Their formula is reviewed and updated every two years. Duckworth and Lewis gave up looking after their formula six years ago as they decided to retire. They handed over its responsibility to Steven Stern, an Australian professor of statistics. Hence, the formula got a new name – DLS method – with the ‘S’ signifying Stern.

Duckworth and Lewis were appointed Member of the Order of the British Empire [MBE] by Queen Elizabeth II in 2010.

Additional reading:

When hearing issues stopped India from winning against England

How Pakistan was saved by rains from a difficult situation in 1992 World Cup

WC Final 2019: Cricket won, ICC lost

July 16, 2019 by Keyur Seta Leave a Comment

There is no doubt that we got to see one of the most exciting and tension-filled one day internationals yesterday between England and New Zealand. And this happening in the final of a tournament as huge as the ICC Cricket World Cup [2019] makes it immortal for cricket fans around the world.

The final of the most coveted cricket trophy being a tie and on top of that the Super Over also being a tie was unthinkable. In the end, I felt the luck was on England’s side as they just managed to sneak through as the new World Champions courtesy that infamous overthrow that got them 6 runs.

But the revelation by the former umpire Simon Taufel today that it was an error by the onfield umpires to grant six runs to England has made me feel too bad for New Zealand. As the ball hit Stokes’ bat before he completed the second run, it should have been only five runs.

See the incident again in the video

I don’t need to spell out the importance of that one run. That error was the reason why the men in Blue were holding the World Cup at the iconic Lords balcony yesterday.

It is still understandable for the umpires to make mistakes because they had to pay attention to too many things simultaneously. But why can’t the third umpire intervene in such situations? Or why did the onfield umpires didn’t deduct the one run after watching it on the big screen?

During India’s ODI against Australia in the DLF Cup in Kulala Lumpur in 2006, umpire Mark Benson gave Sachin Tendulkar out caught behind off Glenn McGrath.

However, as soon as he saw on the big screen that the ball had clearly hit Tendulkar’s shoulder, he called him back. Commentator Ian Bishop pointed out that the umpire has the right to change his decision if he does that promptly.

See the Sachin Tendulkar incident here

So, what stopped the onfield umpires and the third umpire from deducting one run? I am sure the third umpire must have seen the numerous replays. Why not use them for minimization of errors? And to think that this one decision stopped New Zealand from lifting the trophy makes me feel bad despite me not being a New Zealander.

The umpiring has been pathetic in this World Cup. On top of that, ICC has done nothing to solve it and is tight-lipped about it. In fact, they also went ahead and appointed Kumara Dharmasena as the umpire in the final despite his dismal run in this world cup.

But this is not the only factor where ICC messed up. Till yesterday I was unaware about this rule of the team with the most numbers of boundaries winning the match if the Super Over is a tie.

How on earth a team hitting more boundaries be declared a winner when it scored exactly the same amount of runs as the other team? Scoring the runs is important. It is irrelevant how they scored it.

A joke that is going around on social media is that England can say the won the World Cup but what if someone asks them by how many runs?

By the way, what would have happened if both teams had hit exactly the same number of boundaries? Make both the team compete in Gili Danda at the iconic Lords?

Also read: World Cup Final: Ben Stokes makes up for major slip up 3 years ago

The old saying ‘Game of cricket is the winner’ suits yesterday’s 2019 World Cup Final. The game indeed won.

But is it the ICC which has lost because of its unforgivable stupidity.

Not to forget, instead of such pressing issues, they were more concerned about the logo on Indian wicket-keeper Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s gloves.

By: Keyur Seta

Additional reading:

Yuvraj Singh’s 3 heroic TEST innings that have been forgotten: See videos

When hearing issues stopped India from winning against England

World Cup Final: Ben Stokes makes up for major slip up 3 years ago

July 15, 2019 by Keyur Seta 1 Comment

The ICC Cricket World Cup 2019 Final, where Ben Stokes emerged a hero, has left us speechless like anything, no matter which corner of the world you live in. England and New Zealand have produced a match which was simply unthinkable!

I won’t believe if anyone claims to have expected the World Cup Final to end in a tie. On top of what, who would have expected the Super Over to end up in a tie as well. If anyone says that the 2019 World Cup Final was fixed, just laugh at him or her. You can’t script or fix such a match ever!

In the end, one does feel bad for New Zealand, more so because of the Super Over rule of team hitting more boundaries wins the match. [See the full scorecard HERE.]

One person who stood in between New Zealand and the World Cup was Ben Stokes with the bat. The all-rounder kept his nerve and played a brave knock of 84 not out to take England so close to the target. Of course, England were lucky to get that overthrow off Stoke’s bat, which was unintentional.

Ben Stokes in World Cup Final — Photo source: Cricinfo.com

It is obvious that stokes would be delighted with the result and why not! This is the first time that England has won the 50 over World Cup. But this final was also a moment of redemption for Stokes.

Let’s go back to 2016 at the Eden Gardens in Kolkata for the 2016 ICC World T20 Final between England and the West Indies. The English men looked good to pull the match off when West Indies needed as many as 19 off the last over with Ben Stokes about to bowl it.

Also Read: When Australia played against Australia in this World Series

The England all-rounder was devastated when Carlos Brathwaite hit him for four 6s in the first four balls of the over to get his side him in the most dramatic fashion.

The visuals of Stokes literally weeping after the last 6 was hit are still fresh in our memories. Although it was T20, it was a world title nevertheless.

But today Stokes made up for it in a tournament much bigger in stature.

By: Keyur Seta

Additional Reading:

When hearing issues stopped India from winning against England

How Pakistan was saved by rains from a difficult situation in 1992 World Cup

World Cup Final 2019 — Photo source: ICC Facebook page

World Cup: Only 2 interesting FINALS in last 6 editions

July 13, 2019 by Keyur Seta Leave a Comment

Australia and India, two of the favourites to win the ongoing 2019 ICC Cricket World Cup aren’t a part of the final tomorrow. Not many would have predicted an England-New Zealand final before the start of the tournament.

But the good thing is that for once we will get a new pair of hands holding the cup as none of the teams has ever won a World Cup before. This is the second final in a row for New Zealand. England, on the other hand, will be playing its fourth after 1975, 1987 and 1992 editions of the tournament.

Having these two teams also gives hope of the final to be interesting. Viewers like me, who roughly started watching cricket from the mid-1990s onwards have rarely got to enjoy an interesting World Cup final. This is largely because whenever Australia has entered the finals after 1996, the match has been boringly one-sided.

Here’s revisiting last 6 World Cup finals:

1996 Final at Lahore
Australia: 241 for 7
Sri Lanka: 245 for 3
Perhaps the only final in last 24 years which was interesting despite Australia participating in it. Aravinda de Silva was the star of the match with one of the best innings in a World Cup final of 107 not out. He also picked up three wickets with the ball.

1999 Final at Lords
Pakistan: 132 all out
Australia: 133 for 2
This was the period from where Australia’s dominance in world tournaments begun. After getting the narrowest escape into the final, thanks to South Africa, the Aussies literally crushed Pakistan which ensured the most boring World Cup Final ever.

2003 Final at Johannesburg
Australia: 359 for 2
India: 234 all out
India had had a positive run in the tournament but it all fizzled out in the final. Australia literally hammered the opposition and cruised to victory. This was the second final in a row where the result was almost decided at half point.

2007 Final at Bridgetown
Australia: 281 for 4 in 38 overs
Sri Lanka: 215 for 8 in 36 overs [Target was 269 through Duckworth-Lewis method]
This wasn’t as one sided as the previous two World Cup Finals but it was boring to see Australia achieving a hat-trick of world glories. The unwanted rain made Sri Lanka’s target even difficult. This is the most unpopular World Cup of all. People hardly seem to discuss this edition.

2011 Final at Mumbai
Sri Lanka: 274 for 6
India: 277 for 4
Now this was the most interesting World Cup Final after 1996. Not just because India won but also speaking from the cricketing point of view. The first team somewhat breaks the morale of the opposition by smashing their bowlers in the end. The other team gets deep into trouble only to recover by a bold move of their captain. Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s 91 is one of the best World Cup innings.

Also read: How Pakistan was saved by rains from a difficult situation in 1992 World Cup

2015 Final at Melbourne
New Zealand: 183 all out
Australia: 186 for 3
We were back to the old story in the last World Cup Final. New Zealand was all out on the same score that India were in the 1983 final but history didn’t repeat. Despite losing Aaron Finch early, it was a cakewalk for Australia towards its fifth World Cup title.

For the 2019 World Cup Final tomorrow, England and New Zealand look almost evenly matched, although the former has a slight upper hand. Fans of both countries would surely want their team to win. But all we are asking for is an interesting final that isn’t one-sided. This is something we haven’t often got to see in our careers as cricket fans.

By: Keyur Seta

Additional reading:

When hearing issues stopped India from winning against England

Yuvraj Singh’s 3 heroic TEST innings that have been forgotten: See videos

When Australia played against Australia in this World Series

July 7, 2019 by Keyur Seta 1 Comment

Australia has been a powerful force in ODIs over the decades, more so in world tournaments. They have won five World Cups so far while no other team has lifted the cup more than twice. Not to forget that they have reached the finals seven times in the 11 World Finals that have taken place till now.

In the mid-1990s the world witnessed Australia’s tour de force in the 1994-1995 World Series in the most unexpected way. Four teams took part in the tournament – Australia, England, Zimbabwe and, guess who, Australia A!

Yes, you read it right. Australia fielded two teams in the series. This is something that took the cricketing world with a jolt. Such a thing had never happened before and has never happen after that till date.

Sending two teams in a series, obviously, spoke volumes about the strength of the team. It meant that the cricket scenario in the country was such that all talented cricketers couldn’t fit in one team.

The series turned out to be very interesting. Zimbabwe was the weakest team of all and was out of the race for the finals. But surprisingly as well as interestingly, England also couldn’t make it to the finals. This meant that the final was between Australia and Australia A. [See results of all matches HERE]

The last match of the league stage was like a semi-final between Australia A and England. The former managed to thump the latter and entered the final to play against their own countrymen.

It was quite amusing to see two teams of the same country battling against each other in the tournament called World Series.

This World Series, like other ODI tournaments in Australia, followed the format of the best of three finals. Australia won the first one easily whereas they had to struggle to win the second since Australia A put on a good fight.

Also read: When hearing issues stopped India from winning against England

Although both teams represented the same country, they played with the same spirit that they would if the opposing team was from another country. This can be seen from the highlights videos carried with the article.

I had seen the highlights of one of the two finals few years later on TV. I have a vague memory of watching a heated exchange of words between the bowler and the batsman, despite both being from the same country.

For this World Series, Australia consisted of players like Mark Taylor, Michael Slater, Mark Wagh, Steve Waugh, David Boon, Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath, Ian Healy, Craig McDermott, etc.

On the other hand, Australia A had the likes of Matthew Hayden, Ricky Ponting, Michael Bevan, Damien Martyn, Justin Langer, Greg Blewett, etc.

Needless to say, these players from Australia A later went onto become heroes for their country in tests and ODIs, including World Cups.

By: Keyur Seta

Additional reading:

He was selected for 1983 WC, but had to wait till ‘99 to play for India

Yuvraj Singh’s 3 heroic TEST innings that have been forgotten: See videos

When hearing issues stopped India from winning against England

June 29, 2019 by Keyur Seta 4 Comments

India is all set to play England in one of its most important matches of the ongoing 2019 cricket World Cup tomorrow. India would be hoping to keep its unbeaten record intact. For England, it’s a must-win match. They are in the fourth position but one winner out of the Pakistan and Afghanistan match today will move ahead of them if they lose today.

The last time India and England clashed in a World Cup match was in the league stage in 2011 at Bangalore. After winning the toss and electing to bat, India scored a big score of 338 all out in their 50 overs. They were largely helped by Sachin Tendulkar who scored 120 off 115 balls, including 5 sixes.

India did look good to reach 350 but they kept on losing wickets in the powerplay and got all out, much against the run of play. Losing wickets in the powerplay was a common norm for a lot of teams in the 2011 World Cup. But 338 was still a very good total.

But the runs didn’t turn out to be enough as the match went onto become a tie. England’s opener Andrew Strauss was adjudged the man of the match for his fighting 158 off 145 balls. At one stage, England was cruising to victory only to encounter an India-like collapse in the end which ensured they didn’t go home with a victory.

However, not taking anything away from England’s response, this is a match that India should have clearly won. I am not saying this by stating if India would have bowled well. The reason for putting it this way is because the Indian players’ hearing issues in the match.

India v/s England during the 2011 World Cup

When Strauss was batting on just 13, he tried square cutting Zaheer Khan, got a nick and was caught by the keeper Mahendra Singh Dhoni. However, nobody appealed! The players couldn’t hear the nick but the commentators and the viewers clearly heard it from the stump microphone. I remember hearing it repeatedly whenever the replay was played.

But that’s not all. The same batsman nicked the same bowler and was again caught by Dhoni when he was on 111. And for some strange reason, none of the Indian players heard the edge and they didn’t appeal!

The commentators were of the view that there was a lot of noise in the Chinnaswamy Stadium and this would have been the reason why the Indian players didn’t hear the edges. They may be right as the noise was high. But it beats me even eight years later because it happened twice and Indians are used to playing amidst noise created by fans.

There is no denying that the Indian players messed up by losing their last seven wickets for just 33 runs and then their bowlers gave away too many bad balls. But if England’s top scorer would have got out so early in a match that was tied, India would have been the clear winners that day.

This would have also impacted the points table after the end of league matches. England had 7 points while West Indies and Bangladesh were tied with 6 points each. WI went to the quarterfinal round because of better net run rate.

Also read: He was selected for 1983 WC, but had to wait till ‘99 to play for India

But if England had lost the match, they would have been tied with West Indies and Bangladesh with 6 points. Obviously, England would have still qualified because of better net run rate but it would have created an interesting situation.

We have seen bad umpiring decisions being remembered and debated for years. But something as unusual as this has hardly been discussed in these years. So much so that there is no video of the aforementioned incidents and just one article on the internet.

By: Keyur Seta

Additional Reading:

Finally, a chance to revisit Kapil Dev’s 175, which hardly anybody has seen

How Pakistan was saved by rains from a difficult situation in 1992 World Cup

How Pakistan was saved by rains from a difficult situation in 1992 World Cup

June 23, 2019 by Keyur Seta 2 Comments

Winning the 1992 World Cup has been the biggest achievement for the Pakistan cricket team till date. The second best might be their triumph in the 2017 ICC Champions Trophy where they defeated India convincingly in the final.

Pakistan sprung a surprise by winning the cup in ’92 as not many would have fancied their chances during the league stage. But their performances in the semi-final against New Zealand [what a chase it was!] and final against England [Wasim Akram’s mystery ball to get Chris Lewis out] showed that they were the deserving winners of the cup.

Interestingly, while going through the points table and the scores of the league matches in the series, something alarming caught my eye. The points table showed Pakistan with 9 points on the fourth position while Australia and West Indies tied on the fifth position with 8 points each.

Now, let us go back to the match between Pakistan and England in the league stage played on March 1 at Adelaide. Pakistan were sent in to bat by England and they were all out for a mere 74 runs! At one stage they were reduced to 47 for 8.

England looked like winning the match as after eight overs there were 24 for 1, needing only 51 more with plenty of overs left. Unfortunately for England, rains started pouring in and as per the weird rain rule in the series, they needed 62 off 10 overs to win the match.

Reacting on this, England’s Gladstone Small, who played that match, told The Guardian, “It was ridiculous. It should have been that we needed to get 14 or something like that.” But the rain kept interrupting and ultimately the match was abandoned. Both the teams got one point each from the match.

Small also admitted that the same rain rule helped them in the infamous semi-final where South Africa were reduced to getting 21 to off just 1 ball.

Going back to the points table of the ’92 WC, if rains wouldn’t have interrupted the match, England was on course to winning this one. If this would have happened, Pakistan, Australia and West Indies would have been tied on the fourth position with 8 points each.

1992 World Cup points table Pakistan — Source: ESPN Cricinfo

As seen in the points table above, the Net Run Rate [NRR] of Pakistan, Australia and West Indies was 0.166, 0.201 and 0.076 respectively. If Pakistan had lost the match, their NRR could have been affected.

Also read: He was selected for 1983 WC, but had to wait till ‘99 to play for India

It would have been interesting to see the extent to which Pakistan’s NRR would have been reduced and whether it would have impacted their chances of qualifying for the semi-finals.

By: Keyur Seta

With valuable inputs from Tamojit Ghosh