da lvbet： There are at least three things that were so very obvious, if onereally looked, after the New Zealanders took a 2-0 lead over the WestIndies in this five match series
da bet7： Colin E. Croft05-Jan-2000There are at least three things that were so very obvious, if onereally looked, after the New Zealanders took a 2-0 lead over the WestIndies in this five match series.Firstly, if you did not believe it, then you should. One day cricketis changed forever. Twenty years ago, Daniel Vettori, as an orthodoxleft arm leg break bowler, would not have been selected for hisbowling, as fast bowlers ruled then. However, he was again thearchitect of the West Indies downfall. He bowled with tremendousguile, as he did in the first game. Here, though, he was that muchbetter, attacking the batsmen by bowling straight at them. He actuallyteased the West Indian batsmen to try to dispatch him. None did.8-1-24-4 were not just flattering figures. These did not come from alate West Indian slog. These figures were well worked out, andachieved, when the West Indies, in the forms of Jimmy Adams andRicardo Powell, were trying to recover from the poor start the teamhad had which saw them to 31-3. By then, Brian Lara and the twoopeners, Sherwin Campbell and Ridley Jacobs had already departed.Vettori’s “Man of the Match” effort was pure magic.Secondly, there was a repeat of the first game in the second for theWest Indies. Considering that “Olde Lang Syne” was sung almost a weekago now, deja vu is still with the West Indies. In the first game,the West Indies deteriorated from 111-1 in the 18th over to onlymanage 268-7 in 50 overs. In this 2nd game, the West Indies againonly managed 42 runs in the last 10 overs, while losing five wickets.They moved from 150-5 in over 32 to the eventual 192 all out in over42. It seems that when the going gets tough, when the pressure shouldbe put mostly on the fielding side in the final 10 or so overs, theWest Indies just cannot, or do not have the lower order battingskills, to implement this pressure. Less than 200 runs in 42 overswas again hopelessly inadequate, especially when that total was easilywithin grasp. One day cricket is a team game. The West Indiescricket team have got to remember this, if nothing else.Finally, although suited more for one day cricket than Test cricket,the West Indies seem even to be having problems concentrating for thetwo and a half hours or so of each innings of a one day game. This isas a direct result of not playing, and thinking, Test cricket well.The quick assimilation of situations in one day cricket is aspertinent as centuries and five wicket hauls.After the initial losses of wickets, the West Indies recovered well.Yet Ricardo Powell lost his head, and wicket, with an unnecessarystroke, given the situation at that time. Both he and Adams werecontrolling things well then.To make things worse for the West Indies, the team strategy then lostits way. Nehemiah Perry should not have been sent in after Powell’sdismissal, since he is, like Adams, more of a deflector than a hitter.A hitter, such as Merv Dillon or Franklyn Rose, should have been sentto help Adams. As it was, both Adams and Perry perished in quickorder because of Perry’s early presence, and non production at thecrease. With both gone, the big hitting tail of Dillon and Roseespecially had no reliable batsman to partner and guide them, andtherefore fell away too.2-0 down in a five game series is not easy to recover from. Havingcovered the tour of South Africa last year, where the West Indies lost5-0 in Tests and 6-1 in One Day Internationals, I see very serious andobvious parallels here in New Zealand. Could it happen again to theWest Indies? For the sake of the players and West Indian cricketoverall, I sincerely hope not. Game 3 of this series will tell, atleast should tell, the final story of effort, heart, determination andeven the future of an important facet of present day West Indiescricket on the field of play!!
