CricInfo Home
News Home

NEWS FOCUS
Rsa in Pak
NZ in India
Zim in Aus

Domestic
Other Series

When they stage the 20th World Cup final under the roof of Disneyland's Cricketdome in 2056, the last tournament of the previous century will get no more than a passing mention in the historical reviews.

Any world championship is remembered principally for its final and Sunday's was eminently forgettable. Pakistan's limp capitulation in 10.1 overs longer than is allocated for a single innings was a tribute to Australia's strength but it devalued the showpiece of the ``carnival of cricket''.

The two classic matches between Australia and South Africa that immediately preceded it, and the certainty that Pakistan were capable of far, far better, accentuated the sense of anti-climax.

Happily, the semi-final at Edgbaston, with its frenetic finish, is assured a place in the records as the first tie in the World Cup and Steve Waugh's masterful, unbeaten 120 in the Super Sixes round at Headingley will not be quickly overlooked, not least by the unlucky South Africans.

But they were not the keenly anticipated, massively hyped climax of the tournament.

Few semi-finals are recalled much after the event, whether it is the 100 metres at the Olympics, the football World Cup or the NBA playoffs.

It is the final that matters and the most vividly recalled feats of past World Cups have been in the last match – the hundreds by Clive Lloyd and Viv Richards in 1975 and 1979, the Kapil Dev catch that inspired India in 1983, the ill-fated Mike Gatting sweep in 1987, the fight of Imran Khan's ``cornered tigers'' in 1992 and the uninhibited brilliance of the lightly regarded Sri Lankans in 1996.

For West Indians, interest in proceedings diminished as early as the first round.

Inaugural champions in 1975, again in 1979 and beaten finalists in 1983, the West Indies have now been among the also-rans in three of the last four tournaments.

Only last time did they advance past the first round, losing to Australia in that depressing semi-final in Chandigarh.

Not since 1992 in the three-way World Series in Australia have the West Indies won a multi-team one-day tournament.

It is cause for self-examination entering the new millennium in which the shorter game will become increasingly more prevalent and important.

The situation is even more desperate since the 2007 tournament has been assigned to the West Indies. There is a lot of preparation to be done in the interim but nothing is more important than developing a team that won't be knocked out at the first hurdle and can genuinely compete for the Cup.

What the successful teams this time have shown is that you don't get very far without proper preparation, dedication, determination and discipline.

Australia and South Africa adhered to the basics, such as running between the wickets, fielding and catching, and built on them with their individual talent and all-round depth.

Pakistan, as always, were the exceptions to the rule. If their running was less erratic, their fielding more reliable and their approach more disciplined, they would have won every match by the same distance they lost on Sunday since they possessed the most gifted and exciting players.

But then they would not be Pakistan.

Australia, Pakistan and South Africa were the three leading favourites and the fact that they duly arrived in the semi-finals was, on the face of it, justification of the new format.

In fact, there were obvious flaws as exemplified by the fact that Australia were two balls away from elimination from the last four by Zimbabwe who did not win a match in the second stage, the Super Sixes.

Such a scenario is certain to be eliminated in South Africa in 2003 but with a mooted increase to 16 teams in the Caribbean in 2007, it is difficult to imagine a schedule that is fair to everyone.

There were the upsets that add the necessary spice to any World Cup. The two most satisfying, and significant, were Zimbabwe's very first over their intimidating neighbours, South Africa and Bangladesh's over the western ``brothers'', Pakistan.

Along with their win over India, it carried the plucky, but still moderate, Zimbabweans further than they had ever been before and to where the West Indies and the embarrassed hosts, England, couldn't reach.

It was Bangladesh's first appearance in the World Cup and their lone victory was celebrated by their large expatriate supporters in England and by the 120 million back home as if they had won the championship itself.

It would be a bargaining chip for their administrators pressing at the ICC for full Test status.

If no more than half dozen matches were close enough to sustain interest into the last five overs, not one was lost to rain and not one had to go to the complicated Duckworth/Lewis method that decides the result in rain-interrupted matches.

In an itinerary between May 16 to June 20, that was among the most remarkable statistics of the tournament.

The weather did have an indirect effect in that it was mostly cold and grey through to early June, influencing conditions that favoured seam and swing bowlers using the Dukes white ball with its prominent seam.

It was hardly the climate to encourage the ``carnival of cricket'' that was the tournament's slogan. As it is, England, particularly cricketing England, is not renowned for its bacchanalian exuberance and it was far-fetched to expect the MCC members at Lord's and the usually somnolent spectators at other grounds to suddenly get in the marketed spirit of the Cup.

It took immigrant West Indians to spark the Notting Hill Carnival, the most celebrated in this country, and it took fans from less inhibited parts of the world to make this the ``carnival of cricket''.

Wherever they went, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh brought with them hundreds upon hundreds of their joyous countrymen, waving their flags, beating their drums, blowing their whistles and, occasionally, setting off their fireworks. England had never seen anything like it.

If the other teams had fewer fans following them, Australians, South Africans, New Zealanders and Zimbabweans added to the revelry with their costumes, their banners and their sense of fun.

It was not entirely new. Television replays of the 1975 and 1979 finals show Lord's packed with West Indians cavorting all over the hallowed turf at every Lloyd four, Roberts' wickets, Richards' six and Garner victim.

Now such West Indian support is virtually non-existent. Whatever West Indian flags to be seen were waved mainly by those who had travelled from the Caribbean for the occasion, not by those who were there 20 years ago or their children.

Exorbitant prices (£60 a match) and sub-standard West Indian performances were some of the causes. But the modern generation of Englishmen with West Indian roots care little for cricket. Football and athletics hold their sporting attention.

So it was a carnival without West Indians, either on the field or beyond, but that didn't seriously spoil the party.

What did was the flat finale.