Toss has often played an important role in the Outcome of the Final of Cricket World Cup tournaments as the performance of the team itself. Sometimes, the decision rather than the toss itself decided the fate of the game. In the entire history of World Cup tournaments, the team that has won the toss has won the Final four times and lost five times.
In the first World Cup in 1975 the most capable team to beat the mighty West Indian team was Australia. Accordingly, the two teams met in the final. Australia won the toss and chose to field. Riding on a brilliant 102 from Clive LIoyed's blade, West Indies scored 291. Chasing 291, a monumental task in that time, Australia fell short by just 17 runs despite three run outs. If there was to be any reversal of the result in favor of Australia it might have been possible by batting first after winning the toss. Who knows if they had batted first after winning the toss they could have defended the total. Remember an even stronger West Indian team in 1983 faltered chasing a mediocre total against a relatively weaker Indian team.
History repeated itself in 1979. The beneficiary again was the might West Indies team. England did not learn anything from the first World Cup final between West Indies and Australia. England won the toss and decided to field as if they were capable of chasing the target rather than setting it or for that matter as if they were capable to skittle the West Indian team for a manageable target. West Indies scored 286 with Vivian and King being the major contributors with 138 not out and 86 respectively. All England could manage is 194 losing all the wickets despite 129 opening stand between Brearly and Boycott.
The history did not change in 1983 either, but the beneficiary did. The beneficiary this time was India, and the beneficiary from the first two occasions the West Indies was the loser. If England has not learned anything from the first instance, West Indies did not learn anything from the first two instances when they themselves were the beneficiaries. But they cannot be blamed as they were much stronger team than India and would have fancied chasing down any target.
Border and Imran chose to bat on winning the toss in 1987 and 1992 respectively and won the Final. Sri Lanka defied the history by winning the final chasing the target after their captain refused to bogged down by history and chose to field after winning the toss. That is the only occasion in the history of the World Cups that a team won chasing a target. In 1999, Pakistan became the first team who opted to bat first after winning the toss and lost the match. In the league stage, Pakistan had defeated Australia batting first.
I fail to understand as to what Sourav had in his mind when he chose to field after winning the toss in 2003 World Cup final against Australia. Whether Sourav was optimistic or pessimistic about the batting ability of his team or rather his own batting ability that he did not opt to bat first. Anyways the moment Sourav invited Australia to bat first, he gifted The World Cup to his rival captain Ricky Ponting. Ricky Ponting did learn from the history and chose to bat in 2007 and won the World Cup for Australia.
In the first World Cup in 1975 the most capable team to beat the mighty West Indian team was Australia. Accordingly, the two teams met in the final. Australia won the toss and chose to field. Riding on a brilliant 102 from Clive LIoyed's blade, West Indies scored 291. Chasing 291, a monumental task in that time, Australia fell short by just 17 runs despite three run outs. If there was to be any reversal of the result in favor of Australia it might have been possible by batting first after winning the toss. Who knows if they had batted first after winning the toss they could have defended the total. Remember an even stronger West Indian team in 1983 faltered chasing a mediocre total against a relatively weaker Indian team.
History repeated itself in 1979. The beneficiary again was the might West Indies team. England did not learn anything from the first World Cup final between West Indies and Australia. England won the toss and decided to field as if they were capable of chasing the target rather than setting it or for that matter as if they were capable to skittle the West Indian team for a manageable target. West Indies scored 286 with Vivian and King being the major contributors with 138 not out and 86 respectively. All England could manage is 194 losing all the wickets despite 129 opening stand between Brearly and Boycott.
The history did not change in 1983 either, but the beneficiary did. The beneficiary this time was India, and the beneficiary from the first two occasions the West Indies was the loser. If England has not learned anything from the first instance, West Indies did not learn anything from the first two instances when they themselves were the beneficiaries. But they cannot be blamed as they were much stronger team than India and would have fancied chasing down any target.
Border and Imran chose to bat on winning the toss in 1987 and 1992 respectively and won the Final. Sri Lanka defied the history by winning the final chasing the target after their captain refused to bogged down by history and chose to field after winning the toss. That is the only occasion in the history of the World Cups that a team won chasing a target. In 1999, Pakistan became the first team who opted to bat first after winning the toss and lost the match. In the league stage, Pakistan had defeated Australia batting first.
I fail to understand as to what Sourav had in his mind when he chose to field after winning the toss in 2003 World Cup final against Australia. Whether Sourav was optimistic or pessimistic about the batting ability of his team or rather his own batting ability that he did not opt to bat first. Anyways the moment Sourav invited Australia to bat first, he gifted The World Cup to his rival captain Ricky Ponting. Ricky Ponting did learn from the history and chose to bat in 2007 and won the World Cup for Australia.
No comments:
Post a Comment