Bryan Davis

In the gathering gloom of an early Saturday night in Bridgetown, Barbados, the last ball in the final game of the Cricket World Cup 2007 was bowled. I must admit that it was with a sense of relief I greeted the end.

The final game between Australia and Sri Lanka sputtered out in the darkness amid confusion. That the Aussies won was not a surprise; it was that the umpires allowed an already dead game to re-start after it was halted because of bad light.

For the record, the rain which chose to fall in a relatively dry island like Barbados on such a special day spoiled the contest, for the umpires were forced to reduce the match to a limit of 38 overs per team.

After all, this is a world event with all the attendant hype and, for it to be practically reduced to some forlorn schoolboy match, seemed to be a punishment from above for the over-confidence and sometimes arrogance of the International Cricket Council.

I could not help but feel sorry for all the people who had travelled from distant countries like Australia, Sri Lanka, India and England, to name a few.

But nature had her way and nothing could have been done about it, except I did wonder why, with the sum of money spent on refurbishing Kensington Oval, it was not thought prudent to install lights.

In a modern-day facility which is going to host a spectacular event like a World Cup final, one would have thought that every eventuality would have been foreseen and accommodated.

Then again, who would have thought of rain spoiling the show in a holiday island like Barbados, when past finals were all played out in bright sunshine and on rain-free days in wet countries like England, which staged four successful finals.  Certainly, as far as the ICC were concerned, this could never happen in the Caribbean, especially not in Barbados!

The cricket in the World Cup was a complete disappointment. It never seemed to rise to the occasion. It was lacklustre to the point of boredom, and I’m sure that there are many who are happy to see the back of it.

In reviewing team performances, I can’t help but think that many of the players looked stale and tired, playing their games with a total lack of zest and enthusiasm.

The lesser rated participants like Ireland, Bangladesh, Kenya and Scotland displayed more of the type of fighting spirit associated with a competition of such a high profile.

The fall of India and Pakistan, not surviving the preliminaries, exposed the limits of their preparation both mentally and physically for this important event, held every four years.

The jaded appearance of their cricketers attracted defeat and there’s no excuse for that. As professionals they have to be always ready to play and their motivation must be in the love of the game itself. 

And, although they might be tired and frustrated, the officials in charge of preparing them for the contest failed in knowing when to rest key men and in selecting the right mix of youth and experience to freshen the outlook and to keep older players on their toes.

Australia suffered the humiliation of losing three-nil in a one-day series to their pugnacious cricketing neighbours New Zealand immediately prior to the World Cup. It actually prompted some newspaper headlines like “AUSSIES LIMP INTO WORLD CUP”.

But, in that series, they had played without Ricky Ponting, who had earned a rest and came back with renewed vigour to lead his team. Other key players were given time off and there were also injuries with which the Australians had to contend. 

Being the true professionals that they are, they rampaged through the playing fields of the Caribbean, not giving a thought to losing, not complaining about anything that might be serious enough to put them off their objective of winning. And that is what it was all about!

In observing other teams in the tournament, there appeared to be a general absence of a will to win, a colourless exhibition that seemed to concede the prize to the rampant Aussies.

Only New Zealand and Sri Lanka offered to the viewer the semblance of worthy competitors, well prepared and ready to do battle to capture the elusive prize.

South Africa, top of the world ratings before the start of the contest, were a huge disappointment. They never came to terms with the occasion, lacking the temperament for the big stage.

In the end, no one can deny that the men from Down Under are the best cricketers in the world. Many can learn from them: how to train; how to prepare physically and mentally; their selection policies; their pool of players ready and waiting for the opportunity to represent their country. 

The competitiveness that exists for places in the Australian teams can only produce better players. Those who are short of the character needed to wait patiently for their chance, while performing at a high level regularly, will not make it; while those who do will be mentally strong enough to accomplish great things.

Australia are worthy and undisputed champions and their cricket-playing, which they advertise in matches, sends out a strong message that they will be unbeatable for some time.

Was the 2007 Cricket World Cup a success or flop?  We’ll have to wait on those counting the dollars to see if it was successful financially.

For our islands in the sun, we’ll have to await the reviews of journalists returning to their various countries on the tourism aspect of their tour and judge accordingly, sifting the cynicism from their REPORTS and differentiating between those who had bitter experiences and otherwise honest reviews.

As a cricket spectacle, the 2007 World Cup was a flop!

There were real, oh too real, personal tragedies and there were many moments of cricketing disillusionment. Many positions were made vacant by the retirement of coaches and captains. For the West Indian spectator, the big fall-out will be a West Indies team without Brian Lara.

An era has ended and a hero has picked up his bat and left. Just as there was a surge in cricket popularity when Lara appeared on stage for the first time, so too will there be a drop in viewer ratings as the curtain falls on his career.

But life goes on and so will cricket. Many a time, international cricket stars have had to make an exit even as their fans called for more. Take George Headley and Donald Bradman as examples, they left.

A void is always created when a great player walks away from the game which he played so well and through which he gave so much pleasure to so many.

But as a star cricketer told me once, it is better to retire when the public has to ask “why did you retire”, rather than to continue until the time comes that they ask “why don’t you retire”.

A sad ending to a tiresome World Cup!