And other lessons learned from the quarter-finals, including the fact that the waist is a philosophical concept
Andy Zaltzman24-Mar-2015Things we have learned from each quarter-finalSri Lanka v South Africa
1. Just because you grew up in Asia, does not mean you can play spin.When JP Duminy woke up on the morning of March 18, he was, one assumes, not expecting to end his day having to answer the question, “So, JP, what is it like to take a hat-trick in a World Cup quarter-final?”Sri Lanka made almost every form of individual and collective batting error it is possible to make during their crushingly inept innings at the SCG, and losing three wickets in three balls to Duminy’s competent probers was the biggest of them.The combined figures of Duminy and the excellent Imran Tahir were 7 for 55. These represented:(a) the fourth time South African spinners had taken seven wickets in an ODI;
(b) the second-best innings analysis by a South African spin attack in an ODI, after the 7 for 50 taken by Duminy and Botha against the rather less mighty Kenya in a rather less important ODI in a bilateral series in 2008-09;
(c) the fourth-best figures by a spin attack against Sri Lanka (who have played almost 750 ODIs);
(d) the first time South African tweaksters have taken more than four wickets against Sri Lanka in a one-dayer; and
(e) a ticket to Colombo.2. When you are playing against a team that has been repeatedly accused, with some justification, of choking under pressure, including in almost every interview and press conference leading up to the match, do not lose two early wickets, then throw away any chances of rebuilding with a succession of batting bloopers.South Africa played very well in their 2011 quarter-final defeat against New Zealand. For several hours. They started well, took early wickets, restrained New Zealand’s batsmen throughout, and were in calm control of the game from the start. Until things went terminally wrong in the space of about 15 head-scrambled minutes. Crucially, New Zealand remained competitive, posted a moderate but workable score, and when Jacques Kallis’ dismissal opened up the opportunity for a panic, New Zealand were able to apply the requisite pressure and exacerbate the mayhem.Perhaps this South African team is not susceptible to that kind of meltdown. Perhaps they are, but will prove good enough in these knockout games not to let themselves be dragged into a SPAM (Scenario of Potential Aggravated Meltdown). They may well win the entire tournament despite suffering some form of choke, or lose it without choking at all. Chokes, stumbles, panics, or whatever term you wish to use for big-game fragility, are mostly not as inevitable as they are retrospectively described, and are often reactive to the match situation.Sri Lanka were unable to put the slightest of strain on any potential South African doubts, whilst the South Africans ruthlessly exploited the growing tension of the Sri Lankans during and after their bad start.3. Imran Tahir needs to stop taking wickets.At the end of a long, long, long, long tournament, the teams with most in the tank physically could have a crucial edge. Whilst Tahir’s wickets have been of vast value to South Africa in this (and the last) World Cup, his wicket celebrations – glorious explosions of delight covering between 50 and 300 yards – could result in Steyn and Morkel running out of energy before the final. South Africa need to ban their pacers from attempting to join in Tahir’s moments of triumph, or instruct the legspinner to take a quiet 0-40 and not risk pulling other bowlers’ muscles.”Irfan says hello”•Getty ImagesIndia v Bangladesh
1. The waist is a philosophical concept, not a physically definable body part.2. Bangladesh have been significantly better than they were in the last World Cup. India have also (thus far) been significantly better than they were in the last World Cup.3. Until boundary ropes are replaced with a sheer drop into a crocodile pit, it will be hard to adjudicate definitively on near-rope catches. It would simplify things dramatically. If the player falls into the crocodile pit whilst taking a catch – six. If he stays on the outfield – out. That change should be made. It would ensure fairness and boost TV ratings.4. When India bowl teams out, World Cups generally go well for them.India have bowled at seven teams, and bowled out seven teams. Only one side has bowled out more teams in a World Cup – the 2007 Australians, who took all ten wickets in nine of their 11 games.In the first two World Cups, India managed to take ten wickets only once – against the hapless East Africa in 1975. In 1983, they bowled their opponents out six times in eight matches, and had them nine down in the other two games. They won the tournament. From 1987 to 1999, they took all ten in just nine of 29 games, and failed to reach a final. In 2003, they dismissed the opposition in seven out of ten matches to reach the final (all for under 200), where their bowling failed against the might of Australia. In 2007, they bowled out Bermuda, but neither of their other two opponents, and departed after the initial group stage, some seven or eight months before the final. (It seemed.) In 2011, for only the third time in ten World Cups, they bowled out their adversaries in at least half of the matches – four out of eight – and lifted the trophy again. When India’s bowlers fire, or at least partially fire, India do well in World Cups.In all, India have bowled their opponents out in 35 World Cup matches. They have won 34 of them. Overall, teams who get their opposition all out have won 92% of World Cup matches, and 90% of ODIs. It is obviously possible to win World Cups without taking all ten wickets, but, not unexpectedly, it certainly helps.Australia v Pakistan
1. Fast bowling is awesome.Mitchell Starc’s first 22 balls were all measured by Hawk-Eye at more than 90mph. In his ten overs, he bowled only six balls below 90mph, only two of which were slower than 89mph. He ended with a very unlucky 2 for 40. Mitchell Johnson was not far behind. Wahab Riaz returned the most memorable 2 for 54 in cricket history. This game was royally enlivened by thrilling pacemen whom the ECB must dream of being able to transform into much more reliable 83mph naggers.2. Shane Watson can play the short ball.Wahab’s thunderous spell to Watson almost turned the game towards Pakistan, possibly decisively. The fact that Rahat Ali’s heavily buttered fingers reprieved the Australian meant that instead it turned the game towards Australia irretrievably. Wahab gave the impression that Watson struggled against bouncers. Therefore, in the 22nd over, after Wahab’s onslaught had ended, Sohail Khan tested Watson out with bouncers. Six, in an eight-ball over. Watson spanked two fours and watched two more sail over his head for wides, and kept out the other two comfortably. Watson was not struggling against bouncers. He was struggling against Wahab’s bouncers. He might well also have struggled against Mohammad Irfan’s bouncers, but the big man’s pelvis denied the cricketing world what could have been one of the fiercest trials by pace in ODI history.New Zealand v West Indies
Nothing was learned from this game that was not already known. About either side.