Why did the West Indies drop Chanderpaul?

Thursday’s match was close and exciting, but not a very good one skill-wise. There were two mediocre teams playing bad cricket. The West Indies did well to make the match so close, but overall it was a sloppy game of cricket.

Both teams were very average and guilty of making the same mistakes they’ve made throughout the tournament, and they both have issues to deal with. They should both qualify for the quarterfinals but have a lot of work to do.

Nevertheless, there were positives for both teams and it came in the form of fresh faces. For the West Indies, Devendra Bishoo and Andre Russell put in good performances.

I thought debutant Bishoo bowled very well to pick up three wickets and he showed impressive control. Russell bowled very well and scored good runs down the order.

I don’t think anyone expected him to come out and bat so well. The West Indians had no business to lose from that position. As a bowler, he did his job.

He was successful because he bowled fast and straight, two key assets any fast bowler must have to do well, and all the more so in the subcontinent.

For England, James Tredwell was very good and when you consider he had been just an observer all this while, his achievement really stands out. Luke Wright also came into the team and did reasonably well, bowling and batting pretty decently.

But these were just a few positives in what was otherwise a poor game of cricket.

I cannot understand why Darren Sammy batted at No 3. It may have been a tactic of taking advantage of powerplay overs, but the way Sammy batted, there was no needforhim to play in that fashion. The required run-rate did not warrant that approach.

If England had posted a score of over 300 runs, again maybe, that could theoretically be thought of as a legitimate tactic. Such tactics smack of instability in the side and highlight the management’s uncertain thinking.

And why did the West Indies drop Shivnarine Chanderpaul? You cannot bench your most experienced player. He is a crucial performer in the middle-order and someone who can absorb pressure and bat a lot of overs.

West Indies missed Chanderpaul on Thursday. Who then should have sat out? The answer is simple. Devon Smith might have made a century against Ireland but that doesn’t make him a better batsman than someone who has been doing that on a regular basis against better teams.

Similarly, batting Ramnaresh Sarwan so far down the order made no sense. After the match, Sammy gave the explanation that Sarwan had been indisposed, apparently in the washroom when the wicket fell, ok but why send Devon Thomas?

Is he the next best batsman in the dressing room? If Kieron Pollard is supposed to be a great ODI batsman, why didn’t he go? What has Thomas done so far to indicate he’s capable of batting so high in the order?

All this gives the signal that the West Indies aren’t sure of their thinking. They lack frontline batsmen and then opt to drop Chanderpaul and send Sarwan in late.

It was ridiculous and their tactics dumbfound me. In the end, we saw Sarwan run out of partners and if Russell hadn’t surprised us with his batting, the game would have been over a lot earlier.

I’m not sure what the West Indies were thinking sending Sammy and Thomas up the order. Proper batsman help you win matches, not pinch-hitters unless, as I said before, you require higher-than-normal-run-rates in a chase.

Group B has been very tight, and now the West Indies and England will look at the Bangladesh-South Africa game very closely. Bangladesh did well to beat England, and as we all know, anything is possible in one-day cricket.

A Bangladesh win will really change how Group B looks; that will leave the West Indies needing to beat India.

If Bangladesh lose, England and the West Indies will progress. Bangladesh have played some spirited cricket, but South Africa are a far superior team.

They do need to get a lot more out of Jacques Kallis, who has been ordinary in this tournament so far. However, he’s the world’s best all-rounder, so watch out. Kallis’s average run and the poor form of Graeme Smith have been smoothed over by the likes of AB de Villiers and JP Duminy.

The Australia-Pakistan encounter is of purely academic interest. However, the winner will top the group. There are some issues Australia need to sort out, such as the form of Ricky Ponting andthe striking ability of their spinners and they have not been as dynamic as in previous tournaments.

But this match will tell us a lot about how where they stand going forward.