CricInfo Home
News Home

NEWS FOCUS
Rsa in Pak
NZ in India
Zim in Aus

Domestic
Other Series

LONDON, May 17: Pakistan's victory at Bristol was a tribute to their determination, nerve and skill - but Wasim Akram's side also have to thank the selection naivety of the West Indies management.

The lack of a specialist fourth bowler, let alone a fifth, to back up Ambrose, Walsh and Dillon cost West Indies the chance of a major win of their own because at 42-4, Pakistan were staring down the barrel.

Just when he needed someone to pour into the breach opened up by Walsh and Dillon, what did Brian Lara do? Scared to bowl out his main bowlers too early, he threw the ball to Keith Arthurton and, immediately, 10 runs came off his first over of very ordinary left-arm spin.

India's lack of quality support for Kumble, Prasad and Srinath had been exposed 24 hours earlier at Hove, against South Africa, and now came West Indies' turn.

The white ball, and generally seamer-friendly conditions, mean that early wickets are a likelihood in this World Cup. But the teams that do well are going to be those with the resources to keep up the pressure in the middle overs of an innings.

West Indies, needing to fill 20 overs with Arthurton, Jimmy Adams, Phil Simmons and the debutant Ricardo Powell, let Pakistan off the hook. By contrast, of course, when the West Indies batted themselves, they found no easy runs against a Pakistan side that could even afford to leave Waqar Younis and Mushtaq Ahmed on the sidelines. Abdur Razzak, with his late swing, was a particular revelation.

But more of Pakistan's bowling effort later. First, let us give due praise to Wasim Akram and Azhar Mahmood for their tremendous efforts in hoisting the total to 229 - and to Ijaz Ahmed, whose 36 provided the initial steadying influence.

I thought Ijaz was unlucky to be given out lbw, while Yousuf Youhana spoilt another high-quality performance with an uncontrolled hoick. But Youhana and Ijaz must be applauded for answering the crisis in their fifth wicket partnership.

Wasim acknowledged afterwards that mistakes had been made with the bat, none more so than Inzamam-ul-Haq. Imran Khan had, before the match, called Inzamam ``the best current player of fast bowling in the world''. But, even if he is, Inzamam should not have been attempting to hook his very first ball of the tournament.

It was an irresponsible stroke, but at least Inzamam had woken himself up enough to cling on to two vital slip catches during the West Indian reply.

As captain, Wasim will be pleased with his own contribution with the bat. Again, it must be recorded that he was able to plunder most of his 42 from 28 balls off the lesser bowlers, but it was nevertheless an innings that further strengthens his position as a leader his men unhesitatingly respect.

Wasim's greatest reward, though, was establishing further confidence in the minds of his players that they will be at their best when defending a total and using their formidable bowling attack to pile up the pressure on opponents. His decision to bat first was a calculated gamble, but one which sends out a clear message to other nations. Perhaps Wasim believes that he can wring even more achievement out of the likes of Shoaib and Saqlain if he gives them a target with ball in hand. Knowing exactly what they have to do might concentrate minds that little bit more.

On a slow pitch, and in moderate temperatures, Shoaib's pace was astonishing. His first ball of the World Cup, sliced involuntarily over third man for six by a startled Sherwin Campbell, will live long in the memory. So will the express delivery which castled Campbell several overs later. But, for me, the most remarkable moment came when Ridley Jacobs gloved another steeply-rising delivery - and the ball flew over the slips and landed just inches inside the rope.

This World Cup has begun in an exciting fashion but the organisers have not yet covered themselves in glory.

Allowing no reserve day for the warm-up matches was foolish with teams like Pakistan and Zimbabwe being severely handicapped as a result. Even in victory, a certain amount of rustiness was evident in the Pakistan display.

But the organisers also erred in allotting the India v South Africa and Pakistan v West Indies fixtures to non-Test grounds. Both Hove and Bristol upped their usual capacity with temporary seating, but literally thousands of potential spectators could not get a ticket to see their heroes in the flesh.

And, in matters technological, World Cup '99 officials have also been caught short.

Their refusal to position a speed gun machine at each ground is robbing the tournament of the answer to one of its biggest early questions: Just how fast is Shoaib Akhtar?

And cricket's rulers should not be sitting back and allowing a situation to occur like the one in which Mervyn Dillon was bowled by Saqlain - but allowed to stay at the crease. Umpires Darrell Hair and Dave Orchard were both unsure whether Dillon's leg stump had been disturbed by the ball or by bouncing back off wicket-keeper Moin Khan's pads. But, under current rules, they cannot refer such an incident to the third umpire. Why not? Television replays, in this case, showed clearly that Dillon had been bowled.

Any benefit of the doubt should obviously go to the batsmen, after TV referral, but on Sunday it was a nonsense that Dillon was not given out. Come on ICC, show some flexibility. The next time it happens it might actually affect the outcome of a match ... perhaps even a World Cup final.