South Africa v West Indies, Champions Trophy, Group B, Cardiff

Pollard wicket hands South Africa semi-final place

Firdose Moonda in Cardiff

June 14, 2013

Comments: 169 | Text size: A | A

South Africa 230 for 6 in 31 overs (Ingram 73, Dwayne Bravo 2-43) tied with West Indies 190 for 6 in 26.1 overs (D/L method)
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details


Kieron Pollard top-edges a Ryan McLaren delivery, South Africa v West Indies, Champions Trophy, Group B, Cardiff, June 14, 2013
Kieron Pollard's wicket, to the last ball before the rain, changed the outcome of the match © International Cricket Council
Enlarge

It has been a decade since South Africa's miscalculation of Duckworth-Lewis saw them exit the World Cup in the first round. Finally, they will consider themselves redeemed.

In a twist of fate as perfectly formed as the ringlet on a young girl's crop of hair, West Indies were pushed out of the Champions Trophy after a rain-affected tied match. After 26.1 overs, with six wickets down, they needed 191 runs to win the match. They left the field on 190 for 6 as the drizzle drifted down. The result awarded a point to each side and South Africa progressed to the semi-finals by virtue of a greater net run rate.

If ever one ball was wholly decisive on the outcome of a match, the first ball of the 27th over was it. Kieron Pollard was dismissed when he threw his bat at a Ryan McLaren short ball and was caught at third man.

Had Pollard not been out, West Indies would have won the match because they were ahead of the Duckworth-Lewis par for five wickets down. Then it would have been them, not South Africa, who advanced to the semi-finals.

As the second innings developed, it seemed more likely West Indies side would pull off a heist. Despite losing Chris Gayle early and seeing their required run-rate soar to 9.5 per over, Marlon Samuels and Pollard plundered 58 runs off 33 balls to resurrect ghosts of tournaments past for South Africa.

When the requisite 20 overs had been reach to make sure the match would count West Indies were 14 runs behind the Duckworth-Lewis total they would have needed to win. At 130 for 4, Samuels decided it was time to tuck in and he took 15 runs off Robin Peterson's next over to close the gap.

West Indies fined for slow over-rate

  • West Indies have been fined for maintaining a slow over-rate during their rain-affected match against South Africa in Cardiff. Match referee Andy Pycroft found West Indies one over short of their target at the end of the match, taking time allowances into consideration. The captain Dwayne Bravo, who accepted the penalty without contest, was fined 20% of his match fee and his team-mates were fined 10%.

But the fit-again Dale Steyn swung the pendulum back South Africa's way. He sent down four dot balls, including a superb bouncer, before conceding just two singles and the onus was on the batsmen again. Lonwabo Tsotsobe entered the ring next and Pollard took him on. Two blistering boundaries, one mistimed over third man, the other a pull to midwicket, clawed West Indies in again.

The protagonists would not have been misplaced at a Wimbledon doubles match as Samuels set on Steyn again. A pull for four off the first ball of his next over put pressure back on Steyn but he delivered the ace. Full, straight and on-target, he uprooted Samuels' middle-stump.

Enter Dwayne Bravo, whose clip for four kept West Indies exactly on par at the end of the 24th over. Pollard played the shot of the match with a straight drive for four off Tsotsobe in the next over and West Indies inched ahead. They stayed ahead after 26 overs and then Pollard made the mistake he will rue on the flight back home.

West Indies had taken 72 runs off the seven overs before Pollard was dismissed and seemed capable to continuing in that vein. The way West Indies batted will not answer questions of whether South Africa - propped up by Colin Ingram's 73 at the top of the order and the 68-run fifth-wicket stand between Faf du Plessis and David Miller - had managed enough runs in a rain-affected affair.

The performance will, however, put to rest some of their other concerns. Ingram notched up his highest score since taking over the opening role and acquitted himself particularly well against the spin of Sunil Narine. He and Hashim Amla put on the highest first-wicket stand of South Africa's campaign so far.

Their finishers had the opportunity to get into the game and did. Du Plessis and Miller took an average total and turned it into something South Africa would feel comfortable with. Most importantly for them, Steyn made a successful return from his side-strain. He bowled at good pace and found swing to restore confidence in their pace attack they can present later in the competition.

West Indies showed glimpses of the same. Tino Best bowled quickly - his fastest ball was 151.3kph - Ravi Rampaul had a menacing slower ball and Gayle, Samuels and Pollard cleared the boundary at will. They got the most crucial thing wrong.

So often, South Africa have been on that side of the equation. In 1992, they were eliminated from the World Cup because of rain. In 1996, the lost to West Indies. In 1999, they tied a semi-final against Australia and had to leave the World Cup because they had lost to them in the group stage. In 2003, they fell foul of Duckworth-Lewis. And at the 2004 and 2006 Champions Trophies defeats to West Indies put them out.

They may well see this result as a cathartic way to move past all of those and an omen that their major tournament fortunes are changing. But the real knockouts are still to come.

Firdose Moonda is ESPNcricinfo's South Africa correspondent

RSS Feeds: Firdose Moonda

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by   on (June 21, 2013, 5:12 GMT)

i agree with silva, lack of communication n shrewdness from the west indies management costed them maybe the trophy.....messages shud have been sent to pollard before that over, he cud have slowed down the procedure....whats the use calling yself a proffessional.....i m sure dhoni wud nt have allowed this........ lots to learn bravo.

Posted by   on (June 18, 2013, 3:06 GMT)

Final : India VS SA I hope it will be fill 50 over match

Posted by yoadie on (June 18, 2013, 0:05 GMT)

On the West Indies bowing out of the Champions Trophy, I have yet to see the pertinent question asked: Of the overloaded West Indies backroom staff, who was in charge of keeping track of this complicated Duckworth-Lewis business? As part of his campaign for president of the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB), Mr. Dave Cameron pledged transparency and accountability. On a tour, the tour manager is in charge. He is not on tour just to wear dark glasses and looking imperious, while looking at rain drops. In my opinion, after the loss, Mr. Cameron should have fired tour manager Mr. Richie Richardson on the spot. Furthermore, the gentleman should have been made to pay his way back to Antigua.

Posted by Harmony111 on (June 17, 2013, 21:37 GMT)

@JG2704: I did say GRVJPR's 3rd sentence was not appropriate so why are you harping about it? WI lost a wicket off the final ball else they were winning the match and the SF slot. WI may have lost a wicket but I don't think anyone would call Sammy as a lesser batsman, he is quite good. 40 runs wouldn't have been too tough for him alone & there was Bravo too. Moreover, Steyn had just one more over left for the remaining 29 balls. SA's bowling did look very ordinary vs India. Good bowling vs Pak with what they've got for batting isn't exactly a good proof & WI did quite well vs them in that chase.

At least GRVJPR made some sense in his comment. He was no where as bad as some of the comments made by some nice blokes here. Hope you remember.

Btw, I have no problems with SA's progression. For me it makes the SF more interesting. I'd ideally want India to face Eng in SF & if they win then SA in Finals so that no one can say that India were lucky to beat weak teams.

Posted by JG2704 on (June 17, 2013, 15:18 GMT)

@Harmony111 -

We'll have to agree to disagree re GRVJPR in general. Obviously have to be careful what I say so can't say all I want to.

But re "Very lucky south Africa" - To me that point can be argued about. WI still had 40 to get and with only one set batsman and an unset all rounder in and a long tail. Also SA did better vs India and Pak Re "SA behaving like the best team in the world" - What is meant by that? And I don't think they are miles behind either. They gave India a good game without Steyn, Kallis and Smith. And re doctored pitches - Isn't that something any fan can say about an opponent's conditions?

Posted by Harmony111 on (June 17, 2013, 1:24 GMT)

@JG2704: Whether India are or aren't the best side is not the point. I don't care about it (nor believe that way). The point is not to make a counterpoint by twisting other's point.

Reg GRVJPR's point, except his 3rd sentence everything else he says is either correct or can be argued for. It is indeed true that in Steyn's absence, SA's bowling does look a lot weaker and at times toothless. Morkel, for all his pace and bounce isn't exactly that effective in ODIs (not sure about stats though).

The day comments that talked about us behind our backs stop coming in and those posters ameliorate I am sure GRVJPR would be happy to go mild too. You know about whom I am talking about. Somehow taking their names is not allowed. At least GRVJPR does not make any ghastly comments.

Cricinfo, pls publish this time.

Posted by Bill1949 on (June 16, 2013, 18:38 GMT)

They should of played the Champions Trophy here in Gauteng SA, at least at this time of the year we do not get any rain. Then they would not have to worry about D/L. Surely in this day and age they should have a good idea what the weather is going to be like. I'm from SA but the D/L method is a lottery. I'm also curious how they work out the net run rate as a mathematical person. In my mind if one team scores 300 in 50 overs and the other team scores 250 in 50 overs the net run rate should be +1.00 in favour of the winning team

Posted by JG2704 on (June 16, 2013, 9:35 GMT)

Another point to those who say that WI were nailed on to win/unlucky/DL biased against - none of who'm have answered my points about SA being just a wicket away from the WI tail and the WI having one (all rounder) batsmen fresh at the crease - Is that no one seems to have noticed that SA had to bowl with a wet ball during the middle/latter overs when WI coincidentally upped the tempo

Posted by Silva-Surfa on (June 16, 2013, 9:04 GMT)

What baffles me is the general approach by the Windies. It was a rain-effected match from the start in which they batted second, knowing that whatever target they were chasing could change, depending on the weather. Samuels showed his good and bad side by batting beautifully, then needlessly throwing his wicket away by hacking a straight length-ball from Steyn. Then Pollard doing what he did, when it wasn't necessary. I appreciate that scoreboard-pressure comes into it, but surely the Captain, Coach and Manager have to be made accountable for keeping on top of all the possible scenarios regarding the Duckworth/Lewis system, but the bottom line is the complete failure of communication cost them a place in the Semi-Final.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 23:04 GMT)

D/L method completely favors one team in a match which is not fair. West Indies were cruising to get the target but English boring weather cost them.

W Indies were one of the most entertaining team with having some great hitters like Gayle, Samuels, Pollard and Sami. it would be good if they stayed.

Posted by jackthelad on (June 15, 2013, 21:23 GMT)

I'm a great believer in the Duckworth/Lewis calculations, but I can see how they could be regarded as being biased against the batting side.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 20:51 GMT)

We lost because of the rash short of Pollard when we desperately did not have to lose a wicket. His captain and fellow country man was with him and did not have the presence of mind to tell him that he only needed to get a single. Sammy came in eager to go but then the rains came. I feel so good he had nothing to do with it because everyone would be calling for his head had it been Sammy that did that idiotic and senseless short just before the rains. Poor captaincy on Bravo's part.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 17:27 GMT)

@Pelham_Barton Just re-think and compare with the current system. I am just proposing to fix the number of overs required to complete the match once maybe before the match starts and re-adjust before the start of the second innings. The number of overs fixed should account for estimated stoppages. Now the match may stop before the pre-determined number of overs are reached even though one team is in strong position. But a washout is a better outcome than current way of producing a result via a complicated dynamic calculation that the current system uses. I think the current system tries to extend the match time to as much as possible maybe due to commercial reasons. But it produces unfair and non-deterministic results.

Posted by clearhead on (June 15, 2013, 17:18 GMT)

I have seen no comment on Darren Bravo's run-out. Had he not given up without trying to reach his end there's a good chance that the run-out would not have been completed.....since the stumps were broken by McKay's foot, which he was not alert to and only completed when DeVilliers pointed that out. This may have given Bravo a chance. Isn't there a moral to this story?

Posted by Pelham_Barton on (June 15, 2013, 16:02 GMT)

@Craig Chan on (June 15, 2013, 12:41 GMT) : The first type of example I quoted could indeed happen under the present system, as you have indicated. My contention is that they would happen far more often under your proposed system. My second kind of example, where the target overs are set too low, and there would have been time to play more overs within the advertised maximum playing time, could not happen at all under the current system. However, even in the first case, I would point out that the minimum 20 overs is written into the competition rules in advance, and applied to every match, whereas under your proposed system, the fixed number of overs would be set by someone (who?) on the match day and only for that match, and that person or group of people could be held to blame if they make a wrong guess - in either direction - as to when the rain will arrive.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 15:48 GMT)

letting a team win or lose without finishing the match is stupid.D/L is a worthless law.I remember seeing a match being called of(SA vs ENG I think.Been years,so I don't remember.)SA needed 22 from 13 when the game ended,but the rain made them lose the match by a low margin.No one could say what could've happened if it continued.

Posted by mar2000 on (June 15, 2013, 14:16 GMT)

Do the people in the WI camp understand the D/L system ? . Did info got passed to Pollard and Samuels ? . Such "bad" cricket make a mockery out of the WI community . The powers that be should have been on top of things and made sure we won that game . Many persons (including the Coach) did not give WI a chance pass the first round . WI were in a great position to prove them wrong , and blew it . The BRAVO experimentation did not work , so lets go back to the SAMMY run things .

Posted by mar2000 on (June 15, 2013, 14:08 GMT)

For years many people would love to meet D/L in a dark alley . That is all I would say for this system.

Posted by dabomb_758 on (June 15, 2013, 13:53 GMT)

The most striking thing for me was the sight of WI coach only standing on the balcony and 'surveying' the proceedings in the middle throughout the match; not one message came from the dressing room to the batsmen at the most crucial moments.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 13:27 GMT)

Points for future to be considered by WI from CT. 1. WI cannot play with 3 bowlers & 3 Batsman. 2. Dwayne Bravo, Pollard & Sammy cannot be the past of same playing eleven. None of them can bowl their quota of 10 overs nor can stick to the wicket for 100 balls. 3. Too much of T20 has ability to play long innings for WI batsmen. They become restless after 20-25 balls. In ODI occupying wicket is still important 4. Need to bring in a left handed seamer for variety.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 12:47 GMT)

@Abhrajit_Roy If 20 overs are complete (i.e. the milestone is achieved), the match is considered over even if more overs can be bowled. The whole idea is to remove the uncertainty of moving target. It will be fair as the target is set before the innings start and it does not move. Of course, the target should take into account that team 2 is playing less number of overs.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 12:41 GMT)

@Pelham_Barton The examples you are giving can still happen with the current system. Let's say the target at the end of 20 overs is 100 runs. Now the team chasing is at 98 runs at the end of 10th over and the rain arrives. It will be considered a washout. Same example the other way around. A washout because target number of overs could not be bowled is already part of the current system. It is still better than the uncertain rain deciding the outcome.

Posted by delboy on (June 15, 2013, 11:44 GMT)

Having paid for and ordered my tickets since April, they arrived two days before we were due to leave London for Wales. We set off at 06:00 in our minibus with coolbags, jerk, spirits, umbrellas , extra layers of clothing and a representation from each Caribbean island except St Lucia, Dominica and Cuba. On arriving at the Swalec, we began to wonder why did be park and ride at the Cardiff soccer stadium. It would make a better stadium for the spectators as most seats are in shelter. However; unlike the Oval where straying into a room we were given strange looks as if we were aliens from another planet, we found ourselves amongst a rent-a-crowd group of EXTREMELY polite school children who donned the scarves and sponsors goodies and sang and danced to the chants of WEST INDIES. Our hopes were quite high when Jnr. Bravo created the schoolboy error of ball watching allowing the momentum to pick up after his exit; looked forward to Pollard and Samuels taking us home so you can imagine CONT

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 11:27 GMT)

Duckworth-Lewis is happy with South Africa this time and will help them throughout this tournament till they win it. They deserve to win at least one tournament. The most unlucky team in world of cricket. May the Rain God help them throughout.

Posted by TSJ07 on (June 15, 2013, 11:25 GMT)

WI would have won it with Sammy at the crease but this time Rain God thought of choosing some other team rather than SA to lose the match by D/L method.Both teams played good cricket but result was declared D/L method. I thought SA's score was chaseable and they should have scored more coz of hard hitters WI have.These boys almost pulled it but rain thwarted their attempt.congrates to SA and well played WI,you definitely have won some hearts.

Posted by BILALSHAH80 on (June 15, 2013, 11:23 GMT)

If ever one ball was wholly decisive on the outcome of a match, the first ball of the 27th over was it. Kieron Pollard was dismissed when he threw his bat at a Ryan McLaren short ball and was caught at third man.

Had Pollard not been out, West Indies would have won the match because they were ahead of the Duckworth-Lewis par for five wickets down. Then it would have been them, not South Africa, who advanced to the semi-finals.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 11:14 GMT)

The Proteas are not performing at 100% and missing the old guns at home.Having said that they are mustard keen and are determined to do well They also had the wet ball factor and poor light.WI was too relaxed and did not act like victors.A good match and played in a good spirit.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 10:55 GMT)

Yes the rain played it's part but SA can take a lot of confidence from a measured batting performance. Can't forget in those conditions bowling can be a lottery with a wet greasy ball. Would have preferred a proper finish and serious questions have to be asked as to why the was a 30 min interval or why still the game was not reduced to 20 over per side. I hope the ICC learn from this start remembering people like results nit equations to decide games.

Posted by JG2704 on (June 15, 2013, 10:41 GMT)

Out of interest - there seem to be plenty of comms saying SA were lucky.

If Bravo and Sammy stayed there to the end WI would have been home and hosed , no doubt. But , if either got out in the next over or so with the RR similar - and let's not forget Sammy had only just come in and was not set and there were still 40 runs to get - I'd have made SA favourites with the batsmen to come below Sammy. Would anyone still have made WI favourites had that happened?

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 10:00 GMT)

99 hurt the most Defo! I remember watching the highlights whilst running the sound for a band at a family holiday camp and when Klusener blasted them two fours I was silently oh yeah then they ran themselves out - I blurted out some profanity forgetting about the mike and so got sacked as well Double Whammy!

As a Saffa fan so happy for some luck to finally come our way for all those complaining about the result if you want farcical try being a Saffa fan in 92!

Posted by Harmony111 on (June 15, 2013, 9:35 GMT)

There is a reason why WI & SA are universally liked. There was no chest thumping by WI fans when they won the WT20 and there has been no such noise by SA after they had won in Eng or in Aus or became the Test #1 or now that they have the monkey off their back. When you play the game at the highest level, you know how much hard work it needs in addition of skill & some luck. Therefore, a true champion will never talk down the others even if they were thrashed. Here today I do not see any drivel from the SA fans that how they did it and showed WI the door etc etc. In fact, the more decent ones have actually empathized with WI cos they know exactly how it feels, precisely what I said initially. Culture & Nationality has nothing to do with this as WI aren't even a nation & sorry to say but crime rate is very high in SA.

Therefore, I am thankful to both WI and SA fans for being balanced and fair in their comments. This is something many of us ought to realize & follow. Rivals, not enemies.

Posted by GermanPlayer on (June 15, 2013, 9:24 GMT)

For those saying the better teams lost, please keep in mind that it was exactly the same situation for SA in 2003 and extremely unjust in 1992. These things are a part of the game. SA have lived with these for 20 years. Its time others learn to live with it as well. Don't cry.

Posted by sachin_vvsfan on (June 15, 2013, 9:09 GMT)

I like both teams but WI were just unlucky to be in this group. Those who are blaming Pollard what if it had rained earlier? You would have praised him as he kept up the run rate.May be Organizers should have mind the weather forecast before organizing this tournament.

For Once luck favored SA in big tournaments. I already said they are one of the favorites to lift the cup. Its a funny game. They started the tournament badly with warm up and then lost to India if law of averages work don't be surprised if they lift the cup. Now the most likely scenario is Ind VS SA final game @GRVJPR not even sure you are indian fan. but @Jayzuz its the same dull grass pitch when the opposition too played against India. You might want to restrict the discussion to just ODIs.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 8:36 GMT)

Fortune favours the Brave.....feeling so good to see SA in the semis. I would say SA and Windies were playing against the rain. Pollard made the difference. Absolutely awful shot. Every ball they were looking at the huge screen to match their score with DL and there was no need of that shot when already advance. For Proteas they have to work hard in bowling department. Heartbreaking for the windies. They always had a chance. Unlucky you. Huge fan of Chris Morris. 6 feet 4 inches, nice followthrough, swings the ball both ways. Could be a lethal weapon for sure.

Posted by another_crickect_fan on (June 15, 2013, 8:10 GMT)

where is match in tweets for this match which i found very interesting. rain, dl, and the match itself, i would think twitter would have had lots of things to say about it.

Posted by spinkingKK on (June 15, 2013, 8:06 GMT)

The rule needs to be changed. If they are going to use the D/L method, it should only include the completed overs. This means, if a team was ahead at the end of the previous over, but behind on the one or two balls after, the team who was ahead at the end of the completed over should win. Because, otherwise, you are stopping the team from looking for a win. Please don't put them in predicaments like this. Because, even if Pollard knew that if he gets out in that ball they will be behind he still had to go for it. Because, he can't foresee the rain coming after that ball. If he didn't go for it, they risk losing the match outright. So, you really can not have a plan can you? The better team lost this match. This is total injustice. They could have found the winner by draw lot instead! Because, South Africa only won by a windfall.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 7:49 GMT)

all windies players who played awesome in ipl they were not at there best in this tournament other wise they could make in top four but congrates to my team india congrates to new lads like shikhar and umesh and grand come back to dinesh karthik

Posted by JG2704 on (June 15, 2013, 7:47 GMT)

@Harmony111 on (June 15, 2013, 5:58 GMT) To be fair @Jayzuz he didn't say anything in his post saying that India weren't the best side in the tournament even if his comms are a little ungracious towards how well India have played. However GRVJPR's comms are at best ungracious towards SA , already saying it would be a lottery if they won the tournament. If they beat whoever convincingly in the semis and final then surely they deserve to go through? I felt a tie under the circumstances was fair enough and SA had done better in the prev 2 games than WI both vs India and Pak

Posted by JG2704 on (June 15, 2013, 7:46 GMT)

@GRVJPR on (June 15, 2013, 3:08 GMT) SA are not far from being the best ODI side out there and are miles ahead of any other test playing nation but of course. And please explain the "behaving like...."? I genuinely don't understand that. AB was very humble in the post match interview. Yes India have looked head and shoulders above every other team in this tournament but if SA go on to win then fair play to them. SA have been guilty in many tourns of being fast starters and then fading so maybe they can reverse that trend. If your saying that the dominant side in the group stages deserves to win then we'd have to do away with the semis/finals. That would have meant WI would not have won the T20 WC as SL had already beaten them in the group stages. Baffling.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 7:46 GMT)

you do feel bad for WI but in honestly for what has happened to them over these many years ,I would say SA deserve this luck .Lets see can they make the most of it .

Posted by Pelham_Barton on (June 15, 2013, 7:45 GMT)

@Craig Chan on (June 15, 2013, 5:14 GMT): Perhaps I have misunderstood your system, but it seems to me like a recipe for more heartbreak, not less. Suppose that Team 1 scores 243 in their 50 overs and, based on a weather forecast, Team 2 is set 190 to win in 30 overs. Suppose that Team 2 are on 188-2 after 27 overs when the rain comes. If I have understood your system correctly, this would be a washout, and all of Team 2's supporters would feel aggrieved that a wrong number of overs had been selected - rightly so, in my view. Similarly, Team 1's supporters would feel unhappy if Team 2 were in a position with no reasonable chance of winning but the rain came a few overs earlier than forecast. You would also have issues if either team lose narrowly and the rain does not come as early as forecast. Their supporters would claim that they could have won if they had been allowed more overs. If I have misunderstood your system, please respond to explain why.

Posted by JG2704 on (June 15, 2013, 7:45 GMT)

@Cpt.Meanster - They already reduced the game to 31 overs and were not that far away from completing it. As it happened we still had a result albeit a tie on DL and had the rain came down 20 mins later we'd have had a 31 over game. Also there may have been a further hour or so before the rain came down so if they'd played a T20 game the punters might have felt short changed. I think a tie was a fair result with both teams ( SA with just one unset batsmen to knock over and then the tail and WI with just 8rpo off 5 to get) would have felt they would win from there. If rain had been predicted for much earlier and there was not even a DL result then I'd be with you on the T20 format Maybe they were at fault for not consulting you on your expert opinion on when the weather would come down?

Posted by mahjut on (June 15, 2013, 7:12 GMT)

cricketsundar ... India are not missing any of their main players. Great teams are usually built around a core. SAs core is Smith/Kallis/Steyn/Amla/AB/Morkel (against India they played with two of the 4 for most of the match). I would not have bothered bringing it up because i am completely backing this SA team [win or lose] as they have as much chance as any to win it. Ind look good to win this tourney but we'll see!

@Harmony111 - if you rephrased your question to "which WC loss hurt most for SA fans?" for me it was 1999 (which i listened to on radio) because it was clearly a low-scoring pitch and so, although SA'd kept Oz to a low score, it looked completely lost for SA until Lance arrived (he'd had a great tourney and Oz panicked - he was milking the bowling and suddenly it was possible again ... that was the heartbreaker, i'd accepted it before Zulu). But it was hardly a choke, Oz were a GOOD side, it was the last over, take on the fielder for a single?... has been done before!!!

Posted by andrew27994 on (June 15, 2013, 7:11 GMT)

I'm very happy for SA that they finally got themselves off from what looked to be another choking incident. I would've felt sorry for either side if they had lost. I guess SA needed to qualify for the semis more badly than WI.

Nevertheless, I think both teams need to be congratulated for putting up a great show today. WI should'nt feel too disheartened by the loss because they look a much stronger side than most teams from Group A.

Posted by andrew27994 on (June 15, 2013, 7:05 GMT)

To be fair, I think its wrong to blame only Pollard for the team's loss. Throughout WI's innings, there was a display of rash and reckless batting particularly by Samuels. I thought he was very lucky to have survived long enough as he did yesterday. WI never held their nerve in that run chase. The only time they looked like they were in control was when Gayle and Smith were stringing a solid partnership together.

Posted by Abhrajit_Roy on (June 15, 2013, 6:59 GMT)

@Craig Chan : Brilliant advice. no doubt. but certain problem is there. If a certain target has fixed in certain over, a team will try to achieve that target without thinking of wicket fall. Imagine, in a match total target in 50 over is 300. forecast would say may rain would come after 20 overs. imagine 20 overs target would be 130. Now a team lost 8-9 wickets to achieve that target in 20 overs. and rain not started. then ??? They have achieved target 131 in 20 overs, but if they lost 8-9 wickets how they will get the total run if entire match been played?

Posted by JustIPL on (June 15, 2013, 6:48 GMT)

Rain Gods helped the SA and hopefully this luck has given them the momentum to win the concluding version of Champions Trophy. In the absensce of England, Aussies and Pakistan it was of utmost importance to find SA in the Semis and Final. SA are firing are just two wins away from shedding the image of chockers. Best wishes to SA.

Posted by CricketSundar on (June 15, 2013, 5:59 GMT)

@bull01 Absence of Senior players in the team is not an excuse for loosing a match. Great teams find the right composition even in the absence of few individuals. For that matter, India is not having most of their senior players including Tendulkar in the playing eleven. This is a totally new team. Dhavan hardly played any International match,managed couple of back to back centuries.India is playing good cricket at the moment and they need few improvements in their bowling department to reach bigger stages.

Posted by Harmony111 on (June 15, 2013, 5:58 GMT)

@Jayzuz: Pls read GRVJPR's comment again. He did not say India have won CT already, all he said was that India were the best team in the tournament - that may or may not be true but that is definitely not what you thought he meant.

Suppose India and SA had played their match on a green top with thick clouds overhead. Suppose India had lost that match due to Morkel's killer spell of 6 for 9. Would you then have said that ---" SA had been blessed to be presented with this lush green carpet of a wicket"---??? I guess no.

Then pls tell me how is it that India wining in a certain set of conditions is somehow less nice compared to SA's winning in some other set of conditions? To me it only proves that neither team has full mastery.

I want to remind you that the last time we went to SA, in Test 1, we batted FIRST in Centurion & were a.o. for 137. On the other hand, in Test 2, SA batted SECOND in Durban & were a.o. for 131.

Tell me now, is 131 > 137?

(Btw, SA are def > India in Tests.)

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 5:47 GMT)

well done south Africa.The really better team won the contest.wi team tried their best to be in last 4 but could not make it to the 2 in their group.any way south Africa in last 4 will good weighatage to the tournament semi final/finals.the Australia sri lanka match will be quite interesting and deciding.best of luck for both the teams.

Posted by Harmony111 on (June 15, 2013, 5:42 GMT)

It all started in 1992 in the times of De Villiers. - It all might end in 2013 in the times of De Villiers.

Posted by sensible-indian-fan on (June 15, 2013, 5:39 GMT)

@Craig Chan - Mindblowing advice. Why didn't anyone think of that before? Guys, chime in with your opinions.

Posted by Jayzuz on (June 15, 2013, 5:30 GMT)

@GRVJPR, India have played two games. Maybe you should wait till the end before declaring them the winner. One thing for sure. India has been blessed to be presented with all these dull grassless wickets. We saw what happened when they had to bat and bowl on normal English and Australian wickets. Can't wait to see them in SA.

Posted by CricketSundar on (June 15, 2013, 5:26 GMT)

Well Played South Africa and equally well played West Indies.Though DL method points one team as a probable winner of the two teams based on some math, the result would have gone either way , had the full quota of overs were bowled. Justice always do not prevail using DL method. ICC and cricketing world should schedule important tournaments like this during rain free seasons. Having known in advance that seasonal rainfall would affect the games,there is no rationale behind ICC scheduling this tournament now.

Posted by Harmony111 on (June 15, 2013, 5:24 GMT)

A question to all Proteas ... of all the so called chokes, which one hurts you the most? I'd say the loss in WC 1992 was not due to SA's fault so its not exactly a choke, the loss in WC 96 was due to Lara and wasn't a choke either. The 2011 loss was sort of seen coming in the loss to Eng and by that time SA would have become used to it. So that leaves us with the WC 99 tie and the 03 WC D/L tie. Which one rankles the most a SA fan? To me the 99 tie ranks the highest cos it prevented SA from reaching the finals. Pollock got a lot of criticism for the miscommunication in 03 WC but frankly, till that point no one knew that the DL table showed par scores. The 99 tie came even though Klusener was still at the wicket and the target was very low. And while it was a tie it was still a knock out.

The only saving thing is that in my mind that match was the greatest match of all times, even higher than that 434 match.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 5:14 GMT)

Imagine managing a tight run chase that can end any time. Add to that the fact that the target changes based on the number of wickets that have fallen. Now matter This is a perfect recipe for heartbreak for one team and their fans as it brings uncertainty in run chase. The D/L does not account for the uncertainty of the match anytime with a moving target. A simple solution is to always have a deterministic number of overs that must be completed for the match to complete. They already start with at least 20 overs. The next milestone can be 25 or 30 overs depending upon forecast. Each milestone will have target runs. If it rains before a milestone, the match should still be considered a washout. The number of wickets to achieve the target runs at a milestone shouldn't matter. This may increase the chance of a washout but it is still better than the heartbreak that happens so often with d/l.

Posted by bull01 on (June 15, 2013, 5:14 GMT)

@GRVJPR - Wy would you say that South Africa should "stop behaving as the best team in world because they are far from it" ... I am sure that in the ODI format they are quite aware of that since they sit at No.4 in the rankings. They are head and shoulders the best Test team around at the moment tho. But consider facing the No.1 team (India) in the opening match without Steyn, Kallis, Smith and then mostly Morkel ... and still get over 300 runs and play smartly to get a positive net run rate result ... then take out Pakistan by 69 runs despite them having 'the best bowling attack in the world"... if you ask me, that is pretty impressive. To have been mature enough to tackle all the adversity and still find a way to scrape into the last four ... is something to be proud of ...

Posted by RoshanF on (June 15, 2013, 5:03 GMT)

Hard luck on the Windies who I thought would go all the way. By the way i have always thought how some people have very short memories whenever they hark back on 2003 and the supposedly bad luck of Shaun Pollocks team in their D/L miscalculation against Sri Lanka. What these people never ever mention is that it was RAIN which brought back South Africa into the game when Murali started spinning it big. The rain negated the spin and helped the Proteas close the gap. Ah yes they miscalculated alright - but nobody can ever say they 'deserved' to win because if not for rain Sri Lanka would have won comfortably.

Posted by SherjilIslam on (June 15, 2013, 4:56 GMT)

I dare say....DeVelliers had finally changed the luck of SA in ICC tournaments.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 4:48 GMT)

I feel sad for the WI. The way the paced their innings and importantly the wicket of Pollard at crunch situation. Bad luck WI.

Posted by missionbegins2011 on (June 15, 2013, 4:43 GMT)

Finally the rain gods showing some mercy on SA rather than the opposing team, which almost had become a norm whenever SA played and rains interrupted. This is cricket and rules are rules, if D/L says that 190 was the par/tie score so be it. Remember its not just WI scoring those runs and still losing, it was SA who scored 230 in 31 overs as well (pretty decent score and credit needs to be given to SA batters). And its not that WI would have definitely won had the rain not be there. They still needed 41 of 29 balls, with only sammy left who is clean hitter and SA had Steyn, Tsotsobe, Morris and Mclaren to ball those 29 deliveries

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 4:35 GMT)

Finally, Proteas Are No More CHOKERS, 1st Time D/L Method Supported Them :)

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 3:56 GMT)

It was nerve wrecking for both SA and WI. More for WI who learnt that staying at the peak is so much more difficult..West Indians gave up the game on more than one occasion.. Lets focus on IND Vs PAK..which is by no means a dead rubber..it will bring scores of fans to the ground.. more than in any game and in any country where the local boys are absent and there are two foreign teams are competing..emotions and the festive fervor..let it flow again.. am all up to watch th egame..

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 3:22 GMT)

Pollard has improved in the last 18 months but his shot cost us the match & I think the cup because had we got through to the semi we would have won the whole thing. A flashback to his less responsible days. Don't blame D/L method players esp Polly in this case must accept responsibility.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 3:16 GMT)

"In a twist of fate as perfectly formed as the ringlet on a young girl's crop of hair" - what the hell does that even mean?

Posted by thisgameislife on (June 15, 2013, 3:16 GMT)

Was watching the match in a pub without audio. I saw the on field scoreboard display 190 as the D/L Target. Isn't that supposed to be the score to win? Does D/L allow for tie? Isn't that the misreading SAF did in 2003?

Posted by GRVJPR on (June 15, 2013, 3:08 GMT)

Very lucky south africa. Haven't look impressive at all. It's high team that south africa stop behaving as the best team in world because they are far from it. There are many chinks in the armor. Too much dependence on steyn and morkel and if one of them is unfit other bowlers look pedestrian out of south african doctored pitches. There is no one in middle overs to pull back the run rate of opposition. This is where the best team in tournament, India, is different from others. They always pull back games despite oppositions getting off to a flyer. It will be a huge lottery if south africa wins this competition.

Posted by maty33 on (June 15, 2013, 2:53 GMT)

Should Pollard have played that shot. Absolutely not. Should Mark Boucher have taken that run back in 2003 in Durban. Sure. Rain is rain is rain. It's unfortunate and my heart goes out to the West Indies for losing in such a fashion. Again, as a saffer, we know that place all too well. It is interesting however that all the talk is about how D/L is a bad method for determining winners. Had this been an SA loss I wonder how quickly the chokers tag would've come out and Mr. Duckworth and Mr. Lewis would've remained blameless.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 2:38 GMT)

Kudos to the WI team. I was not expecting such a fight from them. They had a good score to chase and the conditions were not that good but they made a fist of it and if they had not lost Pollard they would have been the team to progress into the semi-finals. I hope Misbah and his tuk tuk batters see how batting needs to be done and apply themselves against India on Saturday. Fingers crossed!!!!

Posted by Gregg22 on (June 15, 2013, 2:34 GMT)

Firstly congratulations to the wonderful proteas. As for who between Steyn and Gayle had the biggest influence on the match? Definitely Steyn! @Venkat, yes people praise Steyn a lot and not Best, because of the simple fact that he's not just a one trick pony. Mindlessly going outthere just trying to bowl fast. He has learnt with time that pace is simply one weapon in your armoury. But when combined with swing and accuracy, is deadly. Best is very fast. But unfortunately being fast doesn't make you a great bowler. Ask Shaun Tait.

Posted by Un_Citoyen_Indien on (June 15, 2013, 2:28 GMT)

Well played West Indies. You deserved to win in my opinion. May you come back even stronger in your next assignment.

I've become an even bigger fan of your Calypso Cricket :)

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 2:04 GMT)

DL, UDRS, 3rd Umpire Review are all impact of science on a gentlemen's game. The controllers of the game with a view to uphold fair dealing have brought too much of technology and science to a game of art. It is similar to a computer comparing the work done by Mozart and Bach and saying one is better than the other. Ridiculous! We dont need science aided decisioning. We dont need Clarkes tables to tell us who won. The SPIRIT of the game is lost. ICC is slowly taking emotion and human aspect out of the game. If future you will have Batting Machines for bowlers to bowl and bowling Machines for batsment to bat. Winner will be decided on which machine is better. Is that what we are headed? I feel in a situation like this, if the rain washes out the match or there is less than 15 overs that can only be bowled, then the teams should be asked to bowl one over each at 3 stumps. Just like penalty shoot out. THis can be done indoors as well.

Posted by ricky8741 on (June 15, 2013, 2:00 GMT)

feel sorry for west indies . i thought if they had plated full overs they would have won

Posted by BokkeForever on (June 15, 2013, 1:54 GMT)

Boy, as a Saffer I thought I was reliving a horrible nightmare. I've been there before, no, it's not happening again is it? De javu - can lightening really strike four times!

Well the team surely deserved some luck after all the pain they have been through.

Sorry, windies fans, us Saffer fans know exactly how you are feeling now. You have our sympathies, horrible to go out in that way.

I'm just glad it's not us this time.

Posted by raj_24 on (June 15, 2013, 1:46 GMT)

@nampally

If NZ bt Eng then Eng out and Aus only needs a win vs SL !!

Aus spoilers for SL not true in that case ??

give all possiblities when u write

Posted by johnstanley on (June 15, 2013, 1:45 GMT)

I am baffled at one thing and I blame the umpires. Why did they allow South Africa to bowl one ball in the 27th over when it was already raining. Then a wicket falls and they call it a day. It is ridiculously unfair to any team. They should have allowed for the over to finish or at least come out to finish the over, regardless of what was the finish time. If they are unable to do that then the first ball of the 27th over should not have counted. I do not blame either the West Indies or South Africa. I blame the umpires and the system that makes it unfair. I have very little doubt that West Indies would have beaten us (South Africa) had the 31 overs been bowled. This is not the way for any team to get through and I do not believe we will go very far in this tournament. It is sad day for cricket even though my team won.

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 1:26 GMT)

Look at what the umpires did for Australia in the 2007 worldcup, play continued until pass 6:30 in really dark conditions... I think Durkworth lewis should be revised

Posted by dalboy12 on (June 15, 2013, 0:43 GMT)

It's a shame the weather and luck is playing such a big role in this tournament. Who qualifies from each group is going to be largely impacted by weather affected games - which is a shame, but can't be helped. I gather the important game between NZ and England is also due to be rain affected.

Posted by NCassie on (June 15, 2013, 0:42 GMT)

It's difficult being a WI fan at times when disappointment happens but kudos to the boys they put up a good clean fight chasing down 230 in 31 overs. The players have no one to blame but themselves for losing so many wickets against PAK, that game is the one that dent their net run rate. This group of players all deserved to be at this tournament their were some good performances, so much talent in this squad but I still think they lacked the hunger to win big from game 1. So now they learn that when there are easy totals to get go out and get it in the shortest possible time without losing too many wickets. Better luck next time around fellars, rally round the WI!!!

Posted by   on (June 15, 2013, 0:33 GMT)

@knianR7 I agree wholeheartedly....

It's as if to qualify in these games, the teams need to hire mathematicians and statisticians to calculate all possibilities. A ridiculous system which almost no common man understands and which still exists due to the ICC not finding a better way to decide on matches.

Posted by fguy on (June 15, 2013, 0:06 GMT)

poor WI, for sake of 1 ball they lost. whenever i read that a major tournament is going to be held in UK or SL i just sigh. the chances of the games being rain affected are so high that you're lucky if you get a full game that starts & ends on time. if it rains, bad enough that you have to keep checking in to see if/when the match re/starts but you can have whole matches washed out. & in crucial matches like today thats just unfair. plus they end up helping one team over the other (depending on what point of the match it starts pouring). we've already had the 2002 CT trophy having to be shared. imagine if even on the reserve day of the final, team A is in a decent position & it rains & D/L rule says that team B is the winner. is it fair that a team gets to be the winner of a major tournament just coz of pure luck of when the rain came down. plus, there's risk of injury to fielders. either find another window to hold these tournaments or dont hold it at all. or get retractable roofs.

Posted by heathrf1974 on (June 15, 2013, 0:01 GMT)

The Duckworth-Lewis system is fine. It uses historical data and statistical inference to predict outcomes. However, I don't know if it takes into account players' abilities. There would be no other system better. This system can also account for multiple rain interruptions. All rain affected matches are going to have that air of controversy.

Posted by JerryV on (June 14, 2013, 23:54 GMT)

A farce to end a game between deserving contenders.

If Saffers go on to win this thing (I don't mean our team which is full of Saffers), Pollard will have a lot to think about for a long time to come.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 23:42 GMT)

This is a ridiculous result wi would have won . IOC needs to put in place other ways of resolving like playing the remaining overs on the next day , could have played 25 overs instead of 31 . Sad day for the game when results. Go this way

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 23:15 GMT)

Winning teams have good 'team chemistry'. Windies had a good team chemistry going right up until a few weeks before the Champions Trophy tournament started. But then the WICB changed captains, and messed up the team chemistry. So now the Windies are right back to that looser mentality that had plagued the team before Sammy became captain. If Sammy was in charge, they would have won today, because he would have brought in a couple of pinch-hitters early, and not allow the run-rate to get so high. So, it's not Duckworth-Lewis that is to blame; and it's not bad luck either. The captain blew it, plain and simple!

Posted by SNIFFLEATHER on (June 14, 2013, 22:28 GMT)

So, we are out. Ah well, way too much ltd overs stuff anyway nowadays ha ha. Lets get on with the real stuff - can't wait to see the Windies back in whites! Some very promising fast bowlers coming through of late - Delorn Johnson, the tall aggressive left armer will add fire and variety to the attack, and Miguel Cummins is really lighting it up - can't stop taking wkts (and that's on flat tracks!). Roach needs support - perhaps the cavalry is on the way...?

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 22:26 GMT)

It was an exciting game, despite our lovely sunny English/Welsh weather.

SA/WI fans etc, how are enjoying the UK? Having a good time?

Posted by Greatest_Game on (June 14, 2013, 22:23 GMT)

@ Cpt.Meanster is indignant about the result, writing "Absolute FARCE of a game. … They could have played a T20 international and we would have had a completed fixture."

That is ridiculous: BECAUSE IT RAINED THEY SHOULD HAVE CHANGED FORMATS, & PLAYED A DIFFERENT GAME? They could have played football too. Once you change formats , why not change everything?

You wrote "Spare a thought to all the fans and supporters of either teams; to sit out there in cold, rainy conditions ..." That's why they DID play on, beyond the official end time, through the rain. For people who payed to watch an ODI CRICKET MATCH, not T20 or football. For the teams, there to play an ODI, & for the game called cricket. Were you there? Did you ask the fans what they wanted - ODI or T20? No, you did not. You are spouting only your OPINION.

Things happen. That is the way of the world. This was a game, not a war crime! Relax, & spare a thought for others. If this upsets you so, don't follow the game.

Posted by Rohit... on (June 14, 2013, 22:20 GMT)

1992: South Africa lost to rain. 1996: They lost to West Indies. 1999: They lost to a tie. 2003: They lost to a tie on D/L. Today, on June 14, 2013, South Africa have beaten all four of them.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 22:19 GMT)

Seriously West Indies was the better team on the day...And justice was not done

Posted by BRUTALANALYST on (June 14, 2013, 22:14 GMT)

This really is a tragedy the umpires were out of order to go off mid over with score tied after all the fans had been though sitting in the cold rain all day, on off play to then go off mid over without any idea who had won or if it was over ! Horror show ICC need to fix up this has to end. They should of at least played the over out told both sides that would be it not just mid over like that horrendous W.I were cruising.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 22:09 GMT)

match should be of 50 overs for both sides. Any imaginary calculation (no matter how accurate they go ) can beat the real 50 over each side match.....secondly we are living in highly advance world...LET ICC DO SOMETHING SO that game continue even after heavy rain ...and actualy lot can be done with billions flowing into cricket

Posted by Swingit on (June 14, 2013, 21:53 GMT)

Some random observations: 1.When ABD made that run out appeal it was clear in replay, and most definitely to ABD himself that he did not take the bails off yet an appeal is that against the spirit of the game and thus as punishable an offense as Ramdin appealing for a catch the knew he had dropped? Funny how no one mentioned that. 2. I know Steyne is the BEST bowler in the world now bar none but is Tino Best the FASTEST? I mean the guy was bowling at 152 Ks and averaged 148 ks over his spell! I mean when other bowler get to bowl their fastest ball at 145 they are considered seriously quick and that is 2 below his average! Windies can no longer afford to keep Best our of the side.3. In what was almost a T20 game why would DJ Bravo and Pollards not be sent before the "test pace" players DM Bravo and Devon Smith@ 4. Why is no one talking about Gayle's epic failure at this tournament? Samuels is more dangerous Jamaican by far.

Posted by SLSup on (June 14, 2013, 21:53 GMT)

If West Indies went through just because they have lost one less wicket per D/L method it would have been a travesty of justice since the outcome of a game of cricket must not be determined by any other factor other than the runs scored by each team within a given number of overs. The RR is the only factor that should be considered in a game: SA 7.41 per over in the overs they batted and WI 7.26 in the overs they batted. Glad Pollard got out cos justice is done to Cricket. ICC has done a great injustice to cricket by introducing a pointless, meaningless, logic-defying mind-bender called Duckworth & Lewis.

Posted by jhabib on (June 14, 2013, 21:51 GMT)

Well played SA! Today you have shown D/L, Weather and mother nature itself that you can overcome adversity. Odds were stacked against you but you came out on top. You really deserve more accolades than ones lady luck has allowed you in the past. Congratulations! A Pakistan Fan

Posted by Balb on (June 14, 2013, 21:49 GMT)

Enough of the excuses. I agree with Holding. West Indies threw the game away. The bowling was not the best when competing for a semi spot. The use of the bowlers was not the best strategy.

WI allow SA to pile too much runs for a 31 over match.

Not enough team effort to slow down SA scoring. For a new captain, he should have consulted with his team more often

Secondly, West Indies Calypso style of batting cause them to lose the game.

Gayle knew he had to bat cautiously while scoring runs. Dwayne Smith did not watch the ball come on to his bat. Very poor shot selection especially when the Peterson changed which side he is coming around. on. Who should be blamed for DM Bravo run out? Samuels just hit a four and he knew he is facing Steyn. Poor shot. Pollard knew a lot left on his shoulder. Wild shot.

Sorry WI, all of you who out with poor shot selection should review the tape and realize how you let the fans down.

And I wonder what message Sarwan took in to the field?

Posted by 2nd_Slip on (June 14, 2013, 21:48 GMT)

@Cpt.Meanster I think you are the one who needs to have a little bit of common sense mate, this is not a T20 tournament!!!!! What if this game was reduced to a T20 match in order to curtail the effects of unpredictable weather, than gets completed quickly and one team loses. Surely that team would feel hard-done-by if it happened that it didn't rain after the shorted T20. Please people think before you post ridiculous comments bashing the D/L method ,officials ,Pollard or the ICC!!!!!

Posted by Karthik78 on (June 14, 2013, 21:45 GMT)

Samuel! what a player he is. But unfortunately he did not get attention like others Pollard, Gayle, etc. He is equally destroy player who can hit any ball at his will. He played exceptionally well in T20 WC, thats why they won World Cup. Also he is a decent spinner.

Posted by Swingit on (June 14, 2013, 21:44 GMT)

First off congrats to SA, despite fans of both side KNOWING this is NOT a satisfactory result. I truly think SA deserves this more than Windies so in the end the more deserving team won (and frankly after the heartbreaks they have suffered they truly needed mother luck to smile on them). With Sammy and Bravo two T20 specialist in and only 41 needed of 29 balls it was definitely in the favour of the Windies but as rightly said we never know what would happen. I cant blame Pollard too much,. He KNEW what the DL par score was as it was up on the scoreboard for ALL to see during the game. What he tried to do was blast the first ball for six so that windies would be at 196 and ahead of the par score even if a wicket fell in that 27 over thus relieving ALL pressure of the Windies . There would be more pressure on the side if they had to try so had to guard their wicket in the 27th over. It did not work so he look like a chump but he was thinking right. Group of death that was 4 sure!

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 21:43 GMT)

I completely disagree with those who are blaming Pollard and Bravo. When SA batted all they had to do was pace their innings and pick the deliveries which to hit. When WI batted, it was everything all at once that had to be considered. Everything was a gamble against the rain, hence the reason they took the Powerplay in the 18th over. When it looked like the rain was holding up and there was really few runs to make in a few balls, how can we blame the guys for trying to shorten the equation? If they were only trying to keep pace with D/L and not take chances over the last 5 overs, then they would have left too much to risk in the final over, had rain allowed play until then. Bad luck to the WI team but i give them full credit for a truly admirable effort in their batting and am really sorry to see them go.

Posted by Reg19999 on (June 14, 2013, 21:38 GMT)

@knianR7 - What exactly are your proposing? Do you want the teams to play cricket on the internet or on their Playststions and call that the Champions Trophy?

Posted by knianR7 on (June 14, 2013, 21:35 GMT)

D/L is obsolete. Need something that is more sensible. And we don't need umpires to stop a game without making any attempt to complete the over.

Posted by Greatest_Game on (June 14, 2013, 21:34 GMT)

@ GrindAR started with the familiar excuses & complaints: "If thi match was completed to full 31 overs, WI would be the winners. They were is better state. They last two wickets on rain…." Yeah yeah - we've heard it all before, a thousand times over. Of course you have no idea what would have happened - no one does - & fail to mention that WI had the advantage of batting second, SA had to bowl with a wet ball….there are hundreds of reasons, excuses, ifs, ands, & buts. The reality is that the result is in. Its over. Get over it, or don't follow cricket, because every game has ups and downs, and not all are going to go your way.

Take this lesson from a pro, a guys who plays the game: "…but congrats South Africa for making it to the playoff. Both teams deserve a pat on the shoulder. We were hoping we could get back to the field. Umpires have a job to do, they did it to the best of their ability." DWAYNE BRAVO at the presentation ceremony.

If he can be dignified and humble, so can you.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 21:34 GMT)

WI still have chance or what?

Posted by Mayan820 on (June 14, 2013, 21:31 GMT)

This surely must be a good omen for South Africa. After all the crazy results that went AGAINST them in the past, we now , at last, have the craziest result of them all going IN THEIR FAVOUR. High time, I say! Somewhere, in a high and lofty place there is a G-d who has a good sense of humour in order to organize such thrillers for us cricket supporters. I just, somehow, believe He also loves the game of cricket. Today was the day that He remembered all the terrible disappointments and tears of South African cricketers and supporters, alike, during the last one and a half decades and ordered His rain to intervene at exactly the right moment to give South Africa the opportunity to advance.

Posted by Navin84 on (June 14, 2013, 21:26 GMT)

Everybody knows rain was forecast for most of the day and still went ahead and play 31 overs per side considering full play time from the time they started. They should have atleast consider the weather and play 25 overs per side and had more chances of getting a complete game! Sorry for WI.

Posted by noplay on (June 14, 2013, 21:19 GMT)

Listen folks, all teams went into this tournament (and tournaments before) accepting D/L. It can't always work in your favour and it will not always work against you, but it uses the same formula for all. D/L is the system that gives you a result and does not divide the points. And for those of you saying that Sammy should have been the captain, yes Sammy was the Captain in the T20 World Cup, but he never had to face India, SA and Pak. This time the WI is drawn in a group with those three teams. Without Sammy as captain WI beat Pakistan, tied with SA and lost to the number one ODI team.

Posted by knianR7 on (June 14, 2013, 21:11 GMT)

It is a terrible feeling in the 'cricket world' when umpires and rain ruin the game.

When would 'worldwide cricket' invest in 'modern technology' to make 'rain ruined' matches a thing of the past?

We, the billions of cricket spectators, worldwide, would like to see an end to 'rain ruined' matches in this new internet era.

Posted by Greatest_Game on (June 14, 2013, 21:08 GMT)

As a Saffer, my heart goes out to the Windies. We know too well the heartache of exiting a tournament because of rain (92) a tie (99) & a Duckworth-Lewis tie (03.) Eliminated by run-rate is the hardest loss of all.

WI played a great game, & are no losers. Darren Bravo's catch to dismiss de Villiers was brilliant, & changed the batting tempo. Marlon Samuels slashed the reqd. run rate to bring WI on par with SA, & looked to be taking the game away before attacking the best bowler around - no easy task!

Duminy dropping Charles, a missed run-out of Gayle, AB giving Peterson a wet ball, on a pitch with no turn, to bowl to the on song Samuels & Pollard ... SA made errors they cannot afford. But, their composed batting (just 1 run-out!!) set a strong target, & with Steyn the attack had some of it's venom back - just enough to finally, after 21 years, triumph over rain, tied games, net run-rates & arcane rules!

And all those who endlessly chant "SA are chokers & losers" - talk nah, trolls!

Posted by Nampally on (June 14, 2013, 21:05 GMT)

Both the teams deserved to make it to the play off. But there was room for just one. Unfortunately, WI made the exit. They had tied on D/L but lost on better run rate by SA in the previous match. So Pakistan & WI are out whilst India & SA advance to the playoff from Group B. The Group A is in a totally unpredictable status. 2 out of 3 teams- England, SL & NZ- are set to advance. Each has a win but NZ has one more point from the drawn match due to rain. Aussies can only be the spoilers for SL. If the Aussies Win & NZ loses to England, then Aussies still have an outside chance of advancing. If NZ-England match is abandoned due to rain, NZ will end up with 4 points & England 3 points. In that case only NZ is sure to advance. But Weather has a say in, deciding which team advances! It is a shame that weather decided the result. Perhaps they should have covered stadiums, as in Baseball games in Canada & America. It will take the weather out of the equation & lets the better side Win.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 21:01 GMT)

How can people blame pollard? C'mon guys, I think all of are experienced enough not to blame pollard here..The condition was kinda tricky today..They needed to score runs to meet the RRR at the same time needed to keep their wicket incase the rain sttarts to pour..Pollard did not know that it was gonna rain after one ball, did he? and I don't understand why people are saying that WI deserved more than RSA. The game was 50-50 till that point..One wicket for RSA and they would won the game for sure..Whereas one big over for WI would have won the game for them for sure..Sad that the game did not finish but this is cricket and it is not for the first time that something like this happened. Until anyone comes up with the better idea than duckworth lewis its better to follow what the rule says and accept it.

Posted by sdpervez on (June 14, 2013, 20:49 GMT)

Well played both teams, I guess the team that paid more attention to the EQUATION won today, But nonetheless goodluck to S/A in the finals...

Posted by Venkat_Gowrishankar on (June 14, 2013, 20:49 GMT)

@Harmony111: It is unbelievable right, I think discipline is the right word and yes as you saiid it has to do more with the thought process. I mean look at Tino Best, people praise Steyn but this guy bowls his heart out at 148 K's ball after ball. There is Sammy, who can turn matches in a few balls, Samuels, Roach, Pollard, Bravo.. Something is wrong with the thought process, the talent is more than sufficient for sure. They really need someone who can guide them in the right direction- I am not sure if Otis is the right person. Maybe, its time they replaced their coach .

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 20:45 GMT)

Despite what anyone thinks or says i think the WI's could have pulled this off if it went through to the final over, anything could have happened really but at the end of the day i blame only the ICC for selecting England as the place to hold a major competition especially at the worst time of there never ending rainy season.

Posted by Massey_T on (June 14, 2013, 20:44 GMT)

This is why I always said Duckworth isnt the best system but considered 'ok' for the game by all the teams. Why? Ill tell you. If you use a system for so long, everyone forgets why it was used and that it isnt correct in the first place. Duckworth had to be opposed from the beginning which teams failed to do. The logic that , 'ok then bring a better system' and until then use this one is wrong! S.A. are not the only team to have been on the wrong side of this system. This time they were lucky but the system is not satisfying to both teams many a time including this one. Pollard should get a good lecture. If it would rain or not is not his concern. He didnt have to blast anything once they are on par.His intelligence leaves a lot to be desired with unnecessary sledging and dancing. Ofcourse that shows a person's maturity and it showed here too.

Posted by Massey_T on (June 14, 2013, 20:43 GMT)

This is why I always said Duckworth isnt the best system but considered 'ok' for the game by all the teams. Why? Ill tell you. If you use a system for so long, everyone forgets why it was used and that it isnt correct in the first place. Duckworth had to be opposed from the beginning which teams failed to do. The logic that , 'ok then bring a better system' and until then use this one is wrong! S.A. are not the only team to have been on the wrong side of this system. This time they were lucky but the system is not satisfying to both teams many a time including this one. Pollard should get a good lecture. If it would rain or not is not his concern. He didnt have to blast anything once they are on par.His intelligence leaves a lot to be desired with unnecessary sledging and dancing. Ofcourse that shows a person's maturity and it showed here too.

Posted by kc69 on (June 14, 2013, 20:38 GMT)

Disappointed for Windies they way it ended. I think they deserved a fair chance to qualify moreover the fault was on the part of Kieron Pollard and Dwayne bravo's captaincy who needed to know the Duckworth Lewis chart while chasing(per over par score is available with captains). Atleast if bravo doesn't understand the numbers in chart all it states is that things get more and more difficult when you lose wickets or keeping wickets in hand brings down the par score. In this tournament I believe Bravo as a captain has failed and it would be lot better to see Sammy back as captain. Bravo still has a long way for captaincy.

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (June 14, 2013, 20:35 GMT)

Absolute FARCE of a game. SA don't deserve to go to the semi finals as much as WI didn't deserve to get knocked out. When will the ICC ever learn ? MY GOD ! This only happens in cricket. No other sport would have allowed for such a nonsense to take place. Spare a thought to all the fans and supporters of either teams; to sit out there in cold, rainy conditions only to walk away bewildered and without a clue as to who won. The authorities had every chance to avoid this disaster of a game. They could have played a T20 international and we would have had a completed fixture. In this time of the year, especially in the UK, the rain is bound to come. This is where the ICC need to earn their bucks. Retractable roofs in stadiums may not be the way forward but certainly we can have reserve days to provide for some common sense. Even if that's not possible due to logistics, it would make sense to play a T20 match and have a result when you know the rain could come any time. So sad for WI.

Posted by Harmony111 on (June 14, 2013, 20:31 GMT)

@Venkat: Thanks. I think it is a corollary that an Indian supporter will be a West Indian supporter. After many many years of free fall, WI are finally beginning to rise again. They now have some awesome players who can win matches on their own. As always, discipline is vital. Discipline not in terms of demeanor but in terms of thought process. Just a bit more of it today & WI would have won. That said, SA have also failed in the past due to clumsy thought processes so one should feel good for SA too.

@THE_MIZ: My dear, everything you said I already took care of in my original comment here. Neither did I say anything that you should take as me grudging SA's win. Actually I was supporting both teams today, WI a bit more than SA though. SA were ahead but when Steyn bowled that bouncer that went for 4, I thought here they choke again. Had Pollard stayed we'd have blamed Steyn for that bouncer. I am happy for SA too. They got a monkey off their back today though Gorilla remains yet. Phew.

Posted by 2.14istherunrate on (June 14, 2013, 20:30 GMT)

No doubt like many others I find this business of progressing to the semis on the basis of runrate ghastly. No one really wins,though I would say here that SA are a stronger side. Tough on Windies though!

Posted by A-Gunnie on (June 14, 2013, 20:28 GMT)

This is cricket, can't really blame anyone as mother nature played her part in the end result.I must say however Pollard needed to know at that stage that W.I was ahead at the start of the over and where we need to be at the end of the over without losing a wicket.SA played a good game and if not for Samuel it would have seem as close as it did.

PS. I am a WI fan for life.

Posted by kentjones on (June 14, 2013, 20:28 GMT)

One can easily say that mother nature decided the outcome of this match and thus WI were unfortunate. BUT I would beg to differ. There should have been continuous communication between dressing room and players especially when it was quite obvious that rain would would start at some time. The D/L System requires continuous interpretation as the game went along. Someone should have been on top of the game and ensured that the players knew exactly what was happening. This will be a cruel lesson for WI and a harsh reminder that WI needs to take these competitions much more seriously. SA will always remember their experience with the D/L when they painfully exited the World Cup. This time it is the turn of WI. It is hoped that it would pave the way for the Wi officials ensuring such a debacle never re-occurs.

Posted by JG2704 on (June 14, 2013, 20:21 GMT)

A shame for the neutral that the match didn't reach it's natural conclusion.

However (despite some comms saying SA were lucky or WI would have won) I don't see it that way. Sure , just over 8 rpo off 5 overs sounds easy and if Sammy and Bravo remain not out WI win. But if either got out , how much batting is there below those 2? I feel SA have been the better side in the tournament and has already been pointed out , they're probably owed a break on rain affected games.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 20:16 GMT)

I don't like the results when they are math driven.

Posted by BRUTALANALYST on (June 14, 2013, 20:15 GMT)

How can you call game off in the middle of an over after all that and not even bowl the over out ? That was absolutely appalling especially after all that had gone on previous on and offs during the day, to just call it off right there then was horrendous call.

Posted by Khaedu on (June 14, 2013, 20:08 GMT)

But he didn't know it was gonna rain. I am for SA but blaming Pollard is just not on, blame rain and this Duck Lewis thingy method

Posted by mngc on (June 14, 2013, 20:01 GMT)

The forecast was for rain, clear weather and more rain again. Sending SA in to bat was good. When WI went in to bat the strategy should have been to be ahead after 20 overs and then hold the lead. That would have catered for the late rain. I blame the management strategy for the loss.

Posted by Venkat_Gowrishankar on (June 14, 2013, 19:58 GMT)

@Harmony111 Good analysis. I really feel bad that Windies have lost.

I am an India supporter, but I am also a big WI supporter like a lot of Indian fans . The West Indies team has an amazing attitude , an infectious smile and they always play cricket as a 'Game", keeping things simple. For sure, the carribean flair in the tournament would be missed.

I feel very bad right now that they are out of the tournament and that too after making a strong comeback midway in the match. You may say that SA hav been unlucky before, but WI today were in a position to Win with wickets in hand ( Batsmen to follow ) and a gettable run rate.

Posted by THE_MIZ on (June 14, 2013, 19:53 GMT)

Oh come on now, @Harmony111. Really? Ifs and buts...What if Sammy got out in that one ball? We would never know. Also I don't even recall AB appealing. Even so, regardless of context have you never seen keepers do that almost ALL THE TIME! I'm a fan of Pollard, but how can anyone begrudge SA, out of all teams, a win in a rain-affected match. How many times have we been knocked out in similar circumstances??? What about the Windies over-rate? Surely that was a factor as well. Great effort by McClaren (proving his worth in every game), Ingram (who I called to be dropped, admittedly)...WELL DONE BOYS!! Finally, a win in a 'knockout game'!

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 19:52 GMT)

West Indies have only themselves to be blamed for allowing the rain to determine the outcome.... Samuels played a cracker but he should shoulder some o the blame for his slow exit from the field when he was dismissed, he knew the situation with the weather, yet took his time to get off and for the new batsman to make his way to the crease, valuable time lost that proved the decider in the end.... one more delivery could've been enough

Posted by GogaryGogary on (June 14, 2013, 19:50 GMT)

Honestly I am sad for WI. But it is SA's time for some luck! My only thoughts on this is that DL calculation cant be right. WI need 41 off 28 balls with 6 wickets down and a wicket just fallen. For me SA would have won if the game went to 31 overs. DL cant take in to account he number of runs and wickets but simply cannot account for the quality of the batsmen remaining and the fact that of those the best bowler in the world has 6 balls left. For me WI would never have made it.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 19:47 GMT)

Finally we end up on the right side of rain / Duckworthless. I know its not the best way and sincere commiserations to the Windies fans - I think your team rock. Just relieved after so many times of being heartbroken by the weather / formula.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 19:45 GMT)

Now this sucks for Windies cricket totally, at the time when there is a rise in their cricket. Tough luck though and congrats to South Africa from a windies fan. Will be backing on India for the rest of the tournament as windies was bumped out unfortunately though.

Posted by Perera32 on (June 14, 2013, 19:44 GMT)

@2nd_Slip: No, this really was not the most gripping and tense finish this tournament. The most thrilling and tense finish was the SL vs NZ game earlier this week, I doubt any match will get that close in the rest of the tournament. Im sorry but this match was by far one of the most annoying and frustrating matches I've seen this year. No one knew what was going on, I felt sorry for the people who turned up at Cardiff.

Posted by mahjut on (June 14, 2013, 19:39 GMT)

I think SA did extremely well in this game... they set a tough target but in a shortened game WI (very strong at the very short forms) were still in a very good decent position and SA held their nerve .... had it gone to 31 overs i think they'd've still won it with WI 6 down. Not sure they will progress beyond the semis but they've won two tough games in a row against possible favourites...not too badQ

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 19:35 GMT)

Lets face it~ when it comes to the crunch in any limited over format it's how much you have on the scorecard matched with the net run rate that matters and how well you bowl to protect it.The WI bowlers could not contain the sustained run rate of the Proteas as they posted a handy score in a reduced overs game and Steyn asserted his reputation but despite this the Windies squandered a victory that might have been theirs courtesy of D/L through a single rash shot by Pollard as they shot themselves in the foot.They must surely feel robbed where the thieves were Messers Duckworth and Lewis who probably need to be retired in the best interests of the game.

Posted by SurlyCynic on (June 14, 2013, 19:32 GMT)

Unlucky WI, we know how you feel! Can't believe SA finally have a bit of luck with D/L and rain. But if the match had been rained-off entirely then SA would have gone through as they did better against the other teams in the group.

Also, if you bat second in a rain affected match you have a huge advantage as you always know what you have to do. WI should have been safely ahead of D/L.

So glad Steyn took that catch or he would have been labeled a 'choker' for the rest of his life. Not easy with a wet ball in that light.

Oh well, for once I don't have to curse the rules and can leave that to other supporters!

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 19:32 GMT)

SA should bring Genuine Spinner like Johan Botha,imran tahir.They cnt take the Advantage of dry pitch by spin due to lack if quality spinner

Posted by JustIPL on (June 14, 2013, 19:31 GMT)

Good for Champions trophy that SA are through. Looks like this time they will dump their title of the chokers in the crunch games. This time rain did it for them the opposite and they will meet either NZ or SL which they should be able to get better off. Hoping to see SA in finals.

Posted by Harmony111 on (June 14, 2013, 19:25 GMT)

Pollard would be blamed by many, including myself, for that shot. It really was an ugly shot. However, something that might go unnoticed is that in the prev over Pollard had taken two runs where only one was possible and there was a run out appeal by ABD. It was clear in replay, most definitely to ABD himself that he did not take the bails off properly yet an appeal was made which was dealt with in a longer than usual time. Just imagine, those 50-60 seconds lost might have been enough for 2 balls (& almost certainly for at least one ball). Who knows what might have happened in that one phantom ball? Sammy might have gotten out making SA outright winners, Sammy might have hit it for a 4 or 6 making WI outright winners or it might have been a wide yada yada.

I am not saying ABD did something wrong. May be he did not act deliberately, may be he acted smartly. I am just trying to point out an event that had a profound effect on the result (though KP & Samuels wickets were very imp too.)

Posted by knianR7 on (June 14, 2013, 19:25 GMT)

It is terrible feeling in the 'cricket world' when umpires and rain ruin the game.

When would 'worldwide cricket' invest in 'modern technology' to make 'rain ruined' matches a thing of the past?

We, the billions of cricket spectators, worldwide, would like to see an end to 'rain ruined' matches in this new internet era.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 19:23 GMT)

The only set of outcomes from first five matches in Group B that would have allowed India to qualify as the top team without having to play the final game verses Pakistan has just played out... pretty amazing!

Posted by StevieS on (June 14, 2013, 19:18 GMT)

Don't know why people are being hard on Pollard, thats how he rolls. How did he know it was going to pour down seconds later.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 19:16 GMT)

Game done, have a nice flight West Indies. SA were on the right side of DL for once... and SA are through to Semi's. So that means SA will play Australia in the finals!

Posted by neo-galactico on (June 14, 2013, 19:14 GMT)

Gosh! My heart nearly jumped outta my chest. Happy to be on the good side of D/L for a change, lady luck on our side. I reckon when the match was reduced into 31 overs I felt WI will win this 'cause they can approach the match like a T20 and their lack of rotating of the strike wouldn't hurt them as much. SA were good in patches but once again when they were attacked by the WI batsmen they were found wanting. Furthermore, I think SA were 20 short of the score they should've done. Squeaky but I'll take it but SA have to play better in pressure situations than they did today to stand a chance of reaching the finals.

Posted by GrindAR on (June 14, 2013, 19:13 GMT)

So far, pathetic time and host for the so called last Champions Trophy. If thi match was completed to full 31 overs, WI would be the winners. They were is better state. They last two wickets on rain. Umpires were sleeping on the ground, that allowed bowling balls when it was raining, and obviosly, you have lot better chance of taking wickets. Remember, Smith was given out lbw on review when he had to face the ball in rain. So far, pathetic tournament, and useless organizers, and unacceptable DRS. ( this match has proved it heavy and strong.

Posted by SurlyCynic on (June 14, 2013, 19:12 GMT)

Unbelievable, SA have some luck with D/L and rain after all these years.

But batting second in a rain-reduced match is a huge advantage, you know exactly what you have to do, just keep ahead of D/L every over. WI can only blame themselves for not having a safety margin there.

Who knows what will happen now, but an interesting game nevertheless. Big pressure on Steyn for that catch, if he had dropped it then everyone would have called him a choker for the rest of his life. Pollard? Hmmm.

Posted by aclarity on (June 14, 2013, 19:09 GMT)

Again I repeat, WI selectors should be fired! Sarwan and Holder were the worst two picks and Dwayne Bravo as captain. Why did Charles open the innings after keeping wicket? I can see him opening if WI batted first. We just depend on talent and have no strategy. Pollard obviously did not see the scoreboard or the rain coming. Congrats SA. WI gets its just desserts. Fire the Selectors please!!

Posted by 2nd_Slip on (June 14, 2013, 19:06 GMT)

By far the most gripping, tense and breath taking match thus far. Too bad the weather didn't hold, classic humdinger. Gibbs dropped the world cup and Pollard has just edged the champions trophy!!!These two back to back pressure games have prepared SA well for the next round where nerves of steal are required, thought there was something stuck in my throat there for a while when Samuels was carving them all over the park.

Posted by GrindAR on (June 14, 2013, 19:04 GMT)

Pathetic ICC with their pathetic D/L. Soon D/L is going to kill Cricket for ever... if not all forms, atleast ODIs.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 19:03 GMT)

Finally South Africa got that X factor in major tournament.. The luck..

Posted by maddy20 on (June 14, 2013, 19:03 GMT)

It was WI's turn to choke. What caused Pollard to play that stroke is beyond me. Gotta feel for WI. SA with Steyn huffed and puffed to tie with them, and I don't see them making the finals.

Posted by Patdabac on (June 14, 2013, 19:00 GMT)

Oh dear, Keiron Pollard. He's a hero in IPL and Zero in internationals. Why would someone play that shot, when you're ahead on D/L, now that means WI are out of the tournament.

Posted by Sivaramsu on (June 14, 2013, 18:59 GMT)

Headless cricket from Pollard. Sad to see WI out of the contention. Surprisingly rain god smiles at SA.Law of averages.

Posted by 2nd_Slip on (June 14, 2013, 18:02 GMT)

What a picture that is, poetry in motion, perhaps the only thing better than watching De Villiers playing his wonderful shots in limited overs cricket is watching Amla's wristy drives and flicks in the test arena absolute class act these two lads are. SA are blessed with such talent.

Posted by Greatest_Game on (June 14, 2013, 16:34 GMT)

At the innings break I can't quite decide if SA posted quite enough. If their bowling is tight it will be a challenging target. Tsotsobe can blow hot and cold, & could be expensive. Morris did well in the IPL, but he'll have to bowl longer spells, and the batsmen will have more time to figure him out. Steyn could hold the key, keeping the run rate down and ratcheting up the pressure, but he does take a few games to get to his best. If he gets the ball to swing he'll be tough to target.

For the Windies, Gayle, Pollard & Sammy are big stroke players, and containing them would be key. If they are on song SA may not have enough bowling to contain them. The WI batting order will also be key to the development of their chase.

Should be an exciting 2nd innings for this 31/31.

Posted by mar2000 on (June 14, 2013, 16:26 GMT)

If WI batting click , this will be a 20/20 style innings where the WI will breeze through this 231 breathless.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 16:12 GMT)

Horrible bowling by Rampaul, frankly i dont understand what can be future of the team when part time bowlers like Pollard and Bravo bowl better than Rampaul in the death Also again same problem with Bravo too much predictable short balls,After Sri Lankan bowling this is the worst bowling unit in this CT

Posted by BRUTALANALYST on (June 14, 2013, 14:13 GMT)

I can't believe Tino wasn't selected v India he's visibly rushing and troubling Amla the no1 batsman and also the lefthander who are both brought up V pace unlike the Indians. W.I need to use Narine wisely safe him for end and against ABD who has struggled repeatedly to pick him throughout the IPL.

Posted by realfan on (June 14, 2013, 13:38 GMT)

man... this is really getting exciting for me...... both are my fav teams.......and also india.... tooo unfortunate these 3 teams are in same group......

Posted by PRAMOD_2012 on (June 14, 2013, 13:34 GMT)

Let's see how this chokers perform today. I here that Morris can also hit hard but don't think he can. And that IPL wonder Miller, should be given last chance today.

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 13:25 GMT)

With the rain delaying the match between SA vs WI, the match may be canceled and each team gets a point each. Which makes SA and WI to get 3 points to qualify for the semis. But SA with the better run rate qualifies to the semis than WI. So in group B, India and SA qualifies for the semifinals.

Posted by rockyyy on (June 14, 2013, 13:20 GMT)

IF this Washes out India and SA will go UP to the Semis

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 13:20 GMT)

This going to be a really undersided tourament if this game is wash out and the game on Sunday Eng/NZ. The winner will be the side with the best aqua equipment

Posted by JustIPL on (June 14, 2013, 13:16 GMT)

Windies should have batted first as their batters might misfire chasing. Good sign for SA to take hold of the game with the bat and finish off with the bat and gain momentum towards winning the tournament.

Posted by spot_on on (June 14, 2013, 13:09 GMT)

Rain is getting warmer... Welcome and Enjoy the English Summer... LOL !!!!

Posted by Rally_Windies on (June 14, 2013, 13:01 GMT)

Shortened match ?

WI odds just got better ....

WI cannot bat 50 overs ...

Posted by   on (June 14, 2013, 12:54 GMT)

So what happens if this is a washout. Who advances?

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Firdose MoondaClose
Tournament Results
England v India at Birmingham - Jun 23, 2013
India won by 5 runs
India v Sri Lanka at Cardiff - Jun 20, 2013
India won by 8 wickets (with 90 balls remaining)
England v South Africa at The Oval - Jun 19, 2013
England won by 7 wickets (with 75 balls remaining)
Australia v Sri Lanka at The Oval - Jun 17, 2013
Sri Lanka won by 20 runs
England v New Zealand at Cardiff - Jun 16, 2013
England won by 10 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days