The final most people wanted

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.

The World Cup final will be between...

...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 word or two on Murali

Well he achieved the perfect ending...800 wickets exactly. Whatever you think about his action, you have to admit that considering all the grief he's had, Murali has continued to be a statesman of the game, even retaining humility when submitting to the many ICC tests, and then going for further tests of his own fruition to ensure that he did all he could to convince people his action was legit.

Test cricket will miss him.

Murali to return to Lancashire?

The Mirror is reporting - with a typo in the title of the article - that Murali still wants to play for Lancashire again after he completes his Test career with the current series against India. Would be good for those in the UK to see a legend of the game one last time (whatever your views about his action Mr Davis!!)....

The best bowlers and batsmen in Tests and ODIs

Of course this type of analysis is always open to question, but Cricinfo have had a go at working out who the best batsman and bowler is when you take into account Tests and ODIs.

The best batsman? Sachin Tendulkar.
The best bowler? Muttiah Muralitharan.

International Team of the Decade

It's that time of year again. Here's who I've gone for....controversial no doubt! I'm sure Aussies will be aghast that Sangakkara gets in ahead of Gilchrist, but they've both had very tricky bowlers to keep to, and Sangakkara averages far more than Gilchrist. Waugh only played until 2004 but I needed a captain (Warne was also in the mix) and someone who could offer the 6th bowling option if necessary.

I also had real problems trying to think of a bowler to open with Glenn McGrath - testament to the dearth of quality fast bowling in the "noughties". For a bit more spice, and because he bowled left-arm and could create rough for the spinners, I wanted to pick Wasim Akram, but given that he finished in 2003 and averaged 10 less with the bat than Shaun Pollock, I went for Pollock. Not the fastest, even in his prime, but worthy of a place in the team, at least for me.

Matthew Hayden
Virender Sehwag
Rahul Dravid
Jacques Kallis
Sachin Tendulkar
Steve Waugh (captain)
Kumar Sangakkara
Shaun Pollock
Shane Warne
Glenn McGrath
Mattiah Muralitharan

The unlucky ones? For me the unluckiest are Lara, Jayawardene and Gilchrist. Lara, and Dravid are different types of players but Dravid shaded it on the basis of longevity. And Dravid is a true number 3 which allows Kallis more time to recover from bowling as necessary.

Go on then. Who have I forgotten?

Murali to retire next year

I'm aware that a certain Cricket Burbler is adamant that Muralitharan throws the ball, but I'm happy to go with whatever the scientists that have tested him say and they have cleared him. So for my money, he's a truly great bowler and the time had to come when he'd bow out - having seen the diabolical way that Sri Lanka have handled the tail end of the careers of great players like Jayasuriya and Vaas, Murali has stated his intentions clearly - he wants to retire from Tests in November 2010, play in the 2011 World Cup, and then milk the cash through Twenty20.

Fair play - I wonder if the Sri Lanka board will allow it to be that simple....they seem intent on making player's retirements tricky.

Dale Steyn - a meteoric rise

I knew that Steyn had been taking lots of wickets for South Africa, not least in last week's superb win over India, but I didn't realise just how well he had been playing. Proof of his sustained form has come in the latest ICC rankings, which place him as joint 1st with Muralitharan.

As an England supporter it will be great to see Steyn over here in the summer - traditionally England seem to have played fast bowling relatively well so fingers crossed that continues!

Murali ranks an Englishman as 2nd hardest to bowl to

Interesting to hear Murali's comments on who the hardest batsmen were to bowl against following his record. Brian Lara heads the list, but an Englishman was next on the list along with Andy Flower of Zimbabwe. Who? Graham Thorpe was apparently right up there as the hardest player to bowl at, according to Murali - I've always felt that we didn't quite realise what a great player Thorpe was while he was playing, so it was interesting to hear Murali's thoughts.

Lack of respect for Murali...

It appears that the Cricket Burble readership are clear in their minds - Shane Warne was a better bowler than Muralitharan. Over 63% of you voted Warne, with less than 14% voting for Murali, the rest being undecided.

I wonder if Murali is looking forward to the tour of Australia - he has several problems in Australia and there is clearly concern for him. Andrew Symonds is calling for the Aussie crowds to show Murali respect, although it seems unthinkable that they wouldn't given that they will be watching the highest test wicket taker of all time by the end of the series....doesn't it?

Warne or Muralitharan?

The Sunday Times suggested that Murali has had a little bit of help in getting to 700 wickets by playing the lesser ranked nations 23 times and taking 163 wickets against them (Bangladesh and Zimbabwe) versus Warne's 17 wickets in 3. The argument seems pretty water tight. But we should remember that Murali hasn't played anywhere near as many games as Warne yet either so he still has plenty of time to take more wickets than Warne in the same number of games, even discounting wickets taken against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

Not wanting to leave any stone unturned Cricket Burble wants to find out what you think, so vote for who is/was the better bowler above.

Murali sets his eyes on 1000

It wouldn't have been right to have ignored Muralitharan's 700th wicket for Sri Lanka which brought up another very easy win against Bangladesh. He's now only 8 behind Warne's record and having played many games less so it's difficult to argue that he's not a true great.

He's now talking about 1,000 test wickets and it would be a brave person to bet against that happening.

Muralitharan

I don't think there's anyone that is unaware of how successful Muttiah Muralitharan has been in international cricket, but I for one was surprised to hear just how successful he's been for Lancashire. He has played for 22 matches for Lancashire and has taken 5 wickets in an innings 19 times. Had he had time he would have made that 20 today too, having taken 4 wickets out of 5 before Sussex's game against Lancashire ended in a draw. Not bad.

Why is Abu Dhabi hosting international cricket?

Ready yourselves for another rant. Why are Sri Lanka and Pakistan playing in Abu Dhabi from 18th - 22nd May? Yet more strange scheduling brought about by money, much like the World Cup schedule - you can view that particular rant here.

After lots of uncertainty, Zakir Khan, PCB’s Director of Cricket Operations, has publicly stated that the Abu Dhabi series will be played from May 18-22 as the hosts have sorted out all the financial concerns. “The Abu Dhabi cricket officials have informed us that there are no financial issues anymore and the series would go ahead as planned."

Originally the organisers in Abu Dhabi wanted a triangular series to go ahead between Pakistan, Sri Lanka and South Africa, but South Africa rightly refused to enter a tournament so shortly after the World Cup. There is something very different about a tournament held in a neutral country between 3 countries, and a series held as part of a tour to another country such as India are going to play in Bangladesh and West Indies are going to play in England. This particular series should never have been scheduled, and it's no wonder that the hosts have had so much trouble getting sponsors and bidders for the TV rights given the proximity of this series to the World Cup.

As always money is at the forefront of the decisions made by the Sri Lankan and Pakistani cricket boards to send their teams to Abu Dhabi - both teams have been reportedly offered $500,000 each, but this hasn't been enough to stop several top players ruling themselves unavailable - Younis Khan and Shoaib Akhtar from Pakistan, and Kumar Sangakkara, Muttiah Muralitharan and Chaminda Vaas from Sri Lanka.

It will be interesting to see if the cricket produces games that create even the slightest interest. Pakistan can't really be taking the series too seriously - they haven't even appointed a coach for the event following Bob Woolmer's death at the World Cup. Another case of turning up to collect the money then - one wonders if there is anyone that this particular series is benefitting?

Sanity prevails...

Fortunately sanity has prevailed when it comes to "Gilchrist-gate". Perhaps some Sri Lankans are a bit embarrassed by what their Secretary has said - it certainly seemed that way when Muttiah Muralitharan was asked what he thought about the Secretary's remarks, “This is his personal opinion, the team doesn’t think that,” Muralitharan said.

Australian officials have rightly joked about the situation. “It’s a storm in a teacup, or a batting glove,” Australian spokesman Peter Young told the Australian Associated Press. “It’s been suggested that if shoving a squash ball into your bottom glove makes you bat like Adam Gilchrist then perhaps the ICC should make it compulsory.”

If you are interested to see the statement from the MCC Laws Sub-Committee, you can view it here.

Sri Lankan secretary Kangadaran Mathivanan questioned if Gilchrist's actions had been within the spirit of cricket, so to read about the spirit of cricket, the text which comes before the laws, you can view it here.