It seems that for MS Dhoni, the answer was to cut his hair. Here's a photo of him just after the final. And here's a photo of Dhoni the next day holding his man-of-the-match award and the World Cup.
Clearly he's not a drinker (and he's said as much). But his countrymen are as alcohol sales have jumped with India's success....
Tears of joy for Indians it seems, and sadly a terminal heart attack for one Sri Lanka supporter.
There's some tough selections when trying to work out the team of the tournament, but I've ended up going for a team with 9 of the 11 coming from the semi-finalists.
Honourable mentions for those that got edged out go to Murali, Ajantha Mendis, Ray Price, Lee, Malinga and Kemar Roach in the bowling department, ten Doeschate in the batting all-rounder department, and Tharanga, Trott, Jayawardene, Dhoni and Clarke as batsmen. In fact, how about this for a World Cup 2nd XI: Tharanga, Trott, Jayawardene, Clarke, Dhoni (c), ten Doeschate, Lee, Roach, Mendis, Price, Murali? Perhaps a bit of a long tail so you could potentially drop Lee and play Watson to open with Tharanga and drop the other batsmen down a slot, while still keeping a (lesser) bowling option.
1st XI:
Dilshan (SL)
Tendulkar (India)
Sangakkara (SL (c) - edges out Dhoni with an average of nearly double Dhoni's 48)
de Villiers (SA)
Yuvraj Singh (India)
Taylor (NZ)
Oram (NZ)
Afridi (Pakistan)
Khan (India)
Southee (NZ)
Tahir (SA)
3 from winners India, (surprisingly?) 3 from New Zealand, 2 from Sri Lanka, 2 from South Africa and 1 from Pakistan.
Any glaring omissions? Looking at it again I wonder if ten Doeschate should play ahead of Oram to lengthen the batting even more, given that the top 6 already includes two all-rounders who'll bowl plenty of overs in Yuvraj and Dilshan....
World Cup batting total runs list.
World Cup bowling total wickets list.
Congratulations to India who managed to take all that pressure on them and still put in a good performance in the final. And particularly to Dhoni who captained well throughout the tournament and stepped up with his batting when required. His decision to move to 5 above Yuvraj in the final - apparently made on the basis that Sri Lanka picked two (or three if you include Dilshan) off-spinners who would be more dangerous to left-handers, was inspired as it turned out.
However, there is no-one else as far as I know, who would have considered it as an option, with Dhoni's top score in the tournament being 34 and Yuvraj averaging in the 80s for the tournament coming into the final. He took a big risk and it came off, and he would have known the pressure he was under so you have to give him huge credit for that. He also took a risk playing Sreesanth (who bowled 8 overs at 6.5 without taking a wicket) - I and many others would have expected them to play Ashwin.
But it was Sri Lanka who unexpectedly weakened their team through strange selections. As an impartial observer, I'm gutted that Mathews got injured because I think the match would have been even closer, and Sri Lanka probably wouldn't have been tempted to change their team. I feel desperately sorry for Ajantha Mendis who bowled fantastically in the tournament to go at the least runs of any bowler - 3.14 - and then got left out of the final. Herath had a relatively poor tournament and you can see why the Sri Lankan's were tempted to bring in Randiv for him, putting right what many saw as a wrong in the original selection.
My man Kulasekara - who I would have brought in for Mathews - batted well, but bowled with too much width, demonstrating how hard it is to come into a match cold and play well. I also felt that he could have made a better attempt at catching Gambhir at long-off during the bowling powerplay and that could have been crucial. Perera did what we know he can do - hit the ball a long way and bowl relatively expensive medium pace. If they wanted to drop Silva and/or play Perera I think they needed to take the chance to bat Perera at 6 rather than play Kapugadera who hadn't played all tournament and has never been successful at international level.
How would a team of Tharanga, Dilshan, Sangakkara, Jayawardene, Samaraweera, Perera, Kulasekara, Randiv, Malinga, Mendis, Murali have gone in the final? We'll never know. Personally, I'd have liked them to make just one change to replace Mathews - a side builds up morale and winning momentum through a tournament and then it's partially taken away for the final - it's surely poor selection? Given what they know now, I bet Sri Lanka would have picked Randiv instead of Fernando in their squad, given the pre-eminence of spinners in the tournament.
Overall, I think both sides over-thought things. India played Sreesanth ahead of Ashwin and changed their batting order on the basis of the team Sri Lanka picked. Sri Lanka changed 4 players for the final, only one of them enforced through injury, including dropping the tournament's most economical bowler. Just play your best side irrespective of the opposition!
But Dhoni deserves to bask in glory for now. The pressure on him was immense already before he promoted himself to 5, and even greater then. And he came through, showing immense guts to do so. Congratulations to Dhoni and India, worthy World Cup winners, even if - for the moment - they're still ranked only number 2 in the world in ODIs.
Amazing team selections from both teams, but particularly Sri Lanka. Sreesanth playing ahead of Ashwin is a surprise but far less than Sri Lanka leaving out both Herath and Mendis. I know there is a school of thought that India read Mendis easily but Mendis has been in great form and I can't believe they didn't back him to get the better of the Indian batsmen.
How Kapugedera got picked is beyond me. Perhaps he'll score a hundred and win Sri Lanka the game now. What will be interesting to see is how Kulasekera and Perera bowl as they haven't bowled competitively for a while, not to mention Randiv as this will be his first World Cup match. I feel very sorry for Herath and Mendis...but if Sri Lanka can win the match that will make up for it for them.
As well as team selections I also said that the toss would be vital so typical that there should be confusion! But there's more being made of it than necessary - Sangakkara won the original toss as well so nothing has changed apart from Martin Crowe being embarrassed for the second World Cup final in a row!
No, not to make it a fairy tale with Tendular scoring his hundredth hundred and winning the World Cup on home soil. In case you've missed it, 20 year-old Indian model Poonam Pandey has been making headlines in India after promising to go nude if India win the World Cup. All publicity is good publicity perhaps, but there are areas of India that are chronically conservative, so I'm not sure it was that sensible in career terms.
Interesting also to note at the end of the article that cricket is under fire for using leather in cricket balls rather than synthetic substances....
With Angelo Mathews out it tips the World Cup final slightly in India's favour so I'd love to see Sri Lanka win the toss and bat first. The toss could be a vital contributor to the final result and if India win it and score 300+, life could get tough for Sri Lanka. It remains to be seen who will replace Mathews and whoever they pick their batting is much weakened....I think I'd go for Kulasekara who has a good recent record against India's much vaunted batted line up.
With Nehra out India will surely play Ashwin, which means they'll play what most see as they're strongest XI and both sides will go in with 3 spinners and some part-time spinners. There's still the chance that Sri Lanka will play 4 spinners plus part-timers, if they choose to play Randiv in place of Mathews of course.
India and Sri Lanka have made it through their semis, both relatively easily in the end despite some worries in their matches. So as predicted and as many people wanted, the two home nations in the knock out stages have made it through. Sri Lanka's middle order had to bat under pressure which has been rare in the World Cup, and India had to work hard for their 260 and bowl tightly to take their place in the final.
A lot has been made of Younis Khan and Misbah Ul-Haq's slow batting during Pakistan's chase. It certainly cost Pakistan dear because by the time Razzaq and Afridi came in the run rate was climbing, which meant they had to get going quickly. Having said that Razzaq, strangely promoted above Afridi for the first time in the tournament, was out playing defensively. It almost felt like Pakistan hadn't agreed amongst themselves how they wanted to go about the chase - was it a case of keeping wickets in hand and then looking at 100 off the last 10, as Younis and Misbah seemed to think, or did they want to stay with the rate or even ahead of it throughout, as Umar Akmal seemed to think? Only they can say, such were their confusing tactics but what we can say is that going from 3 an over to 9 is always going to be tricky, where as 5 an over to 7 might be more achievable.
In defence of Misbah, Younis and MS Dhoni in India's innings, batting in the middle order seems like a struggle in the sub-continent, a point made by Mickey Arthur when looking at South Africa's demise. That's why I think the fitness of Angelo Mathews is critical if Sri Lanka are to win the World Cup as I predicted. With Mathews at 7, Sri Lanka's batting looks very strong up to that point, allbeit with the tail starting at 8 with Malinga who averages only 8 in ODIs. Without Mathews the alternatives look worring with Perera the most likely to come in - he's got some quality and can hit the ball miles but an average of less than 15 tells you all you need to know about his batting, and he doesn't have a history of handling pressure at the top-level - he'll be 22 the day after the final.
The other option Sri Lanka have is to play Kulasekera, who can count himself as extremely unlucky not to make it into Sri Lanka's first choice XI. He would be in the side every time outside the sub-continent where it seems a minimum of 3 spinners are needed. With an average of 17 with the bat he doubles that of Malinga but he hardly strikes fear into the opposition, were he to come in at 7.
Perhaps this thinking is why Sri Lanka have called up Chaminda Vaas and Suraj Randiv in case Mathews and/or Murali don't recover from injury. Randiv is a given as he was incredibly unlucky not to be in the squad to start with and Sri Lanka will benefit from a little extra batting if he replaces Murali. But Vaas, despite his poor ODI average of 14, has been batting higher recently, notably opening for Northants in the T20 last season and averaging in the late 20s. Hardly setting the world alight but perhaps they are considering him at number 7 if Mathews isn't fit - it would be an amazing story if they did go back to him. Personally I'd have been going for Maharoof rather than Vaas.
It may seem strange that players might come in from outside the squad and play their only match in the final, but that's how I think it should be - I still have the same objection to limited squad numbers as I had at the start of the tournament.
Much as I want Murali to play, Randiv on the face of it is a quality replacement, where as Mathews would be a big loss with no obvious replacement. The destiny of the World Cup could rest on the fitness of someone who's not yet 24, rather than the man soon to turn 39 and the most successful wicket-taker the game has ever seen.
Taufel just gave Sehwag out LBW to a short left-arm over ball from Riaz. Quality decision - as Mike Atherton said on commentary the instinct is to assume that from left-arm over, short balls must pitch outside leg. This time Taufel knew different. It would be interesting to know if the umpires review the bowling actions of the two teams coming into the match to check how they tend to shape the ball and how wide of the crease they tend to go. Riaz on this occassion was very tight to the wicket.
On another note, there's been some criticism of Dhoni for batting first but whatever the result I think he's done the right thing. It's by all accounts a good batting track that will get slower as the match goes on which suggests batting first is a good idea, but equally it takes the pressure of the Indian batsmen. As it is the pressure will be on India's bowlers, but most importantly, Dhoni himself as captain of the side bowling second, and I think he's happy to take that role on.
As you know I think the best two teams who should contest the final are India and Sri Lanka and Sri Lanka are no doubt favourites tomorrow. But I can't agree with the headline "Mismatch unless NZ can raise game"! New Zealand just beat South Africa pretty easily so I don't think they need to raise their game that much....they just need a bit of luck to go their way, as any short format game can go either way.
Sri Lanka may be worrying about Murali's fitness, but equally if he isn't fit they're likely to being in Kulasekera who is the 5th rated ODI bowler in the world - not a bad replacement.
But whatever team Sri Lanka pick, if New Zealand play as they did against South Africa it certainly won't be a mismatch - it'll make interesting viewing. I'm sure that given the media assertions of their superiority, including here at Cricket Burble, Sri Lanka will be sleeping a little uneasily tonight....
...India v Sri Lanka. You heard it here first.
The shorter the format, the more likely the upset, but even so I find it hard to see either side losing in the semis. My hopes for the semis are that the India/Pakistan game concludes without crowd violence, and that Murali is rested if necessary so that he can get one last hurrah in the final.
Fingers crossed.
A few observations now England have gone out.
Strauss needs to continue as captain, despite speculation about his position. It would be different if he played Twenty20 but as he doesn't, hopefully he can use any Twenty20 time, miss County games and use the international rest periods to make sure he's physically and mentally fit to play and lead. His conservatism frustrates me, but he's still the best man for the job.
The administrator who was responsible for England's pre-World Cup schedule needs shooting. A long drawn out ODI series in alien conditions compared to what they faced in the sub-continent.
Prior isn't an England opener in any format.
Bell still flatters to deceive. If Bopara gets the same chances I'm sure he'll make more of them.
Trott is class, long may it continue.
KP has a low pain threshold.
England need Samit Patel to get fit. If Yuvraj can do it for India, so can Patel for England.
Anderson imploded - let's hope it was only temporary and time away from cricket and with his family sees him fresh and performing well at the start of the Test summer.
Swann can't win games by himself. And he should never ever bat above 8 in any circumstances.
Flower is Strauss' coaching double - fantastic work ethic and attitude, but a conservative thinker who struggles to adapt. England never went with more than two spinners despite the evidence of the success of spinners all around them. Dernbach instead of Rashid when it had become clear all countries needed to play at least 3 spinners?
Luke Wright isn't an England player outside of Twenty20, great attitude though he may have.
Paul Collingwood isn't an England player at all it seems, in any format, given recent selection. But his bowling - while hardly of the strike bowling variety - would have been superior to most that played the quarter-final, even if you ignore his batting and fielding. A bowling line up of Bresnan, Swann, Tremlett, Bopara, Tredwell, Wright wouldn't strike too much fear into a County batting line up, let alone one of the favourites for the World Cup, Sri Lanka.
Amazing (I think) that at this stage of the World Cup, Jonathan Trott is the leading run scorer. He continues to surprise people and there's no doubt he's been England's one success story in this World Cup. His strike rate is 80, but imagine what it could have been with better support from those around him, rather than having to hold most of England's innings together.
This piece by Duncan Fletcher sums things up for me - he compares Trott to Kallis, which in itself is a huge compliment to England's number 3, with Kallis being one of the all-time greats.
Interesting that Smith took Botha off when he was right on top of the batsmen. I definitely would have kept him going against Shakib, and would have had a short-leg, silly point and slip as he had bowled 4 overs, 1 for 11 before that. Even those figures were a little worse than they needed to be as Smith kept a long-off out throughout, allowing the Bangladesh batsman to occasionally nudge the ball down the ground without risk.
Great start for South Africa...England have one foot in the quarters. I don't feel I can relax completely until Shakib is out though....
Not sure about calling up Dernbach (and anyway, England may not get the quarters still). Not the conventional call of Woakes or the unconventional (that I would have gone for) of Adil Rashid.
Spinners, and leg-spinners in particular seem to be doing well, and do England need to open with a spinner and perhaps play three? I'd be tempted. It doesn't seem that Swann is that up for opening and Rashid is used to opening the bowling after his Twenty20 experiences in Australia this winter....
Who would you have gone for?
I presume that the England management have weighed up the potentially galvanizing impact of changing a few players against playing an on-paper weaker team, and have decided the former is most important! Definitely not the team I would have picked, but if they win and go through it won't matter....
Looking at the scorecard from England's match against Bangladesh I assumed that Strauss had done his usual and set defensive fields when England needed to take the final 2 wickets, and made a mistake in not letting Collingwood bowl out. It wasn't quite as bad as I feared, but it would be great if bowlers like Bresnan don't have to plead with their skipper to have a slip, as happened in the 48th over. Although there were no attacking fielders in the closing overs, Strauss was quite attacking by his standards as there was a slip in when Raqibal Hasan was bowled by Shahzad and again when Swann bowled Shakib. And taking Collingwood off, even when he was bowling economically, was the right move too. So still some way to go but a slight improvement I reckon.
But what is the skipper meant to do when players let him down with poor performances? Prior cost England several runs with missed attempts to take the ball behind the stumps and, with Prior's help, the bowlers racked up 23 wides. James Anderson's 7th over was one of the worst of all time, and swung the game in Bangladesh's favour....with Broad out England desperately need Anderson to find his range, but it's not looking hopeful. And to make matters worse, Shahzad dropped his caught and bowled and Trott missed a stop at 3rd man as things got tight....Strauss must have been tearing the hair he has left out.
Elsewhere in England's group Ireland felt the cost of dropping Kieron Pollard in the 20s and Asoka de Silva's inability to remember that the batsman can't be out LBW when they're playing a shot and are hit outside the line. England should still qualify if they beat West Indies, but the way they are playing, and with Pollard in form, I can't say I feel confident!
I'd love to see Bopara opening rather than Prior, and Strauss to attack (much) more but, more than anything, Anderson needs to bowl properly and byes, dropped catches and misfields need to be a thing of the past. Strauss had some good company today in going defensive - Dhoni suddenly lost his bottle at the end of India's game against South Africa and suffered the consequences. Harbajan had to bowl one of the last 2 overs with 17 needed and South Africa having 3 wickets in hand. But instead he turned to the expensive Nehra with 13 needed from the final over, and he went for 4,6,2,4 to allow South Africa to win the game with 2 balls to spare.
Will England make it through?
Pretty explosive stuff....I wonder if the Pakistan innings will follow the same pattern with the likes of Afridi and Razzaq down the order....
I previously questioned why squads had to be limited in number and said it wasn't good for the World Cup that Eoin Morgan and Mike Hussey wouldn't be gracing the latter stages of the tournament. Well, it seems fate has conspired to allow them both their chance and Hussey describes it as "a dream come true".
Morgan is getting his chance following Pietersen's withdrawal due to a hernia. Pietersen isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I think his withdrawal is a huge blow. His batting is good enough that in the latter stages of the tournament he would have had the capability to win the game single-handedly, as Adam Gilchrist did in the 2007 final. But on top of that, his bowling should always have been a key part of England's strategy in this World Cup and he's being replaced by a non-bowler. Pietersen's bowling was quality yesterday and he was extremely unlucky not to have wickets to add to his economy rate of 3.75 in 8 overs, particularly the missed stumping.
England's best team now is: Strauss, Bopara, Trott, Bell, Morgan, Prior, Collingwood, Bresnan, Swann, Broad, Anderson. And Bopara needs to bowl.
