Australia v South Africa, 1999 World Cup video

Terrific video of the 1999 World Cup semi-final between Australia and South Africa. Yep – that one. Seems years ago, now…

Video: West Indies v Australia, Third Test, 1999

I watched this video (14 mins) the other day of the West Indies against Australia, in the third Test at Bridgetown in 1999. For various reasons, that particular year was a total bloody washout for me, and I missed a lot of the cricket that went on. So it’s great to see a video of such a tense Test, and doubly great to see messyrs Ambrose and Walsh. However, what struck me most was…

  • How roly-poly Shane Warne was back then
  • How superb Austalia were under Steve Waugh
  • Jason Gillespie used to bowl quickly
  • Jason Gillespie swung it and moved it off the seam at will
  • Glenn McGrath used to bowl quickly
  • Glenn McGrath swung it and moved it off the seam at will
  • Glenn McGrath was an angry, bitter, and quite remarkably aggressive competitor
  • Australia must miss having Mark Waugh in the slips

Rightly or wrongly, Australia of 2005 are nothing compared to the 1999 model. The old model had bite, power and uncompromising aggression. The new model seems a bit lost; their warhorses and spearheads are, to be blunt, blunter than they once were. Watch the video and see if you’re as surprised as I am at their slick, machine-like qualities.

As a sidenote, what a knock by Lara!

Sixa! (Video of Geraint Jones hitting a six)

Sixa!

Have some of that

Inzamam’s dismissal

The most curious thing about the first ODI between India and Pakistan was Inzamam’s dismissal, given out obstructing the field. It’s a very rare dismissal.

If you didn’t see it, you can watch the video of it thanks to google video. He was given out under Law 37, Obstructing the field, which states:

1. Out Obstructing the field
Either batsman is out Obstructing the field if he wilfully obstructs or distracts the opposing side by word or action. It shall be regarded as obstruction if either batsman wilfully, and without the consent of the fielding side, strikes the ball with his bat or person, other than a hand not holding the bat, after the ball has touched a fielder. See 4 below.

2. Accidental obstruction
It is for either umpire to decide whether any obstruction or distraction is wilful or not. He shall consult the other umpire if he has any doubt.

Now it seems to be a clear cut case to me. Michael Holding questioned the spirit of the appeal, but to my mind, I have no complaints. I think Inzamam was being a bit of a smartarse, and he paid the price.

The other thing worth noting is that as cricket fans, we can now use tools like google video to replay and examine incidents like this. I think the future is bright for humanity in general. For cricket bloggers in particular, things are looking simply marvellous!

Oddities – and “four to zero”

Received an email from “John Smith” (he wishes to remain anonymous!) showing me this link to Google Video, in which someone (I guess from Google News) mentions England’s Ashes victory. It’s right at the end of the clip, to save you listening all the way through it. The only remarkable thing was listening to the American say “Australia, who were four to zero (4-0) at the close”, which raised a smile.

It’s all very odd.