see see see...

and so it was. Pakistan lost out on an almost decided match only because their batsmen didnt take the chances that twenty20 cricket demands from them. 140 isn't a big score for twenty20s. The Pakistani batsmen particularly Shoaib malik and Misbah-ul Haq were mistaken that they were playing the conventional one-dayer where a run a ball is good enough, where if you keep nudging the ball to the four corners of the ground for singles, u get a pretty good score. Twenty20 os about taking those chances, making room on the crease, swinging the bat either way and going for the boundaries. Shaun Pollock said that a dot ball is like a chunk of gold; from what we witnessed yesterday, giving 6 runs off an over is equally good. Someone may argue that the Indians bowled well but regardless of that, did we see salman butt or shoaib malik making room for themselves,swinging the odd ball for a reverse sweep or a gentle edge through the gaps. They just didnt take the chances and when shoaib malik went for it, he got out. There were some good quality strokes from salman butt but then you can't rely on those in a twenty20 match. It's brains that count in such a game.

About the bowl out, what was that??? Cricket, for crying out loud is not football or hockey where a tied match is decided with penalty strokes or penalties for football. In those games, getting the ball in the goal is the ultimate aim; in cricket hitting the wickets is not. Line and length both count in bowling. You dont just have to be accurate, you gotta be tidy too. Also, accuracy itself is not always the aim. It depends on your field placing. You may very well want the ball to swing away or into the batsman and you may be looking for height to surprise the batsman into playing a hook shot which may provide an easy catch somewhere near the boundary. And then is it really fair to include just one department of the game in the final decider? Aren't batting and fielding as important in the gme of cricket as is bowling. Deciders should reflect the essence of the game and here it doesn't. If the outcome of a match, if tied is dependant only on bowling when the actual match is as much about batting and fielding then it isn't a fair decider.