Ian Chappell
Two of cricket’s greatest rivalries, India vs Pakistan and Australia vs England, will take place within a 24-hour period during the 2024 T20 World Cup.
The fierce rivalry still generates a lot of excitement, but the Australia vs England match did not live up to expectations, with Australia winning the T20 match comfortably. India vs Pakistan matches always generate a lot of excitement, and this time it was a big one in New York, as the US has a large expatriate population from both countries.
Going into the heavyweight clash, India have only lost one match in the World Cup to Pakistan and that was in the 2021 T20 format.
This imbalance was partly explained by a prominent Indian cricketer some years ago: “Pakistan is trying to impress India, but we are only interested in influencing the West,” he explained.
Pakistan’s past history of cricket may also help explain why India has struggled in the World Cup. In early 1973, the Pakistan team was dubbed “Panic Stan” after their suicidal 92-run loss to Australia at the MCG. They then confirmed their newly acquired nickname by losing the third Test at the SCG by 52 runs despite only chasing a modest target of 159 runs. For the 2024 World Cup, the “Panic Stan” moniker came to the fore once again as Pakistan lost a crucial match against India in New York. After coming up in a strong position to win, Pakistan succumbed and lost by six runs in a low-scoring match.
It was yet another classic big brother victory over little brother, a syndrome that has weighed heavily on Pakistan in their World Cup matches.
There is still one highly competitive cricket match left in the Super Eights – India vs Australia – which has become a blockbuster in recent years.
But in Toronto in 1996, the two teams met in a friendly series at the aptly named Toronto Cricket, Skating and Curling Club. The five-match series ended in a 2-2 draw, with one of the Indian players amusingly commenting, “The soldiers are lining up at the border with stones but they don’t know which direction to throw them.”
India and Pakistan got along so well that I asked a mixed group of players, “Why do the two countries go to war if the players get along so well?”
The answers were inspiring and worrying at the same time. “We understand each other and eat similar foods,” the Indian athlete said. “People generally get along well, but politicians on both sides want to keep the animosity simmering.”
American ballparks were once again rife with controversy, with New York’s in particular attracting a lot of negative publicity and proving difficult for hitters, with matches often being won or lost with scores just over 100.
The reputation of US pitches being dodgy is not a recent one: in September 1999, I covered a five-match series between India A and Australia A in Los Angeles, captained by VVS Laxman and Adam Gilchrist, respectively, both of whom would go on to have illustrious international careers.
The pitches then could only be described as “shaky”, especially when a genuine paceman like Brett Lee was playing on them. In 1999, shaky pitches were accepted with a shrug, but now that the US team is competing in the Super Eights and being touted as a promising cricketing nation, this is no longer enough. However, US cricket has long been plagued by organizational disarray, and this may be yet another example of the disarray that exists in their administration.
While T20 pitches are never entirely in favour of batsmen, there is no excuse for a surface that is considered dangerous.
There is still one highly competitive cricket match left in the Super Eights – India vs Australia – which has become a blockbuster in recent years.
But even if these two teams put on another exciting match, it should not mask the problems in the U.S. If cricket wants to thrive in the U.S., it needs to significantly improve its operations and pitches, as well as convince home-grown players that cricket is a sport worth playing.
Former Australian captain Ian Chappell is a columnist.
