- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
It’s about time the results of my cricket gambling started to match up to the ‘informed’ reasoning behind them.
I’m still to forgive Steve Waugh and co. for their inability to get the better of West Indies in the Caribbean at the end of the last century.
A banged-on bet if ever there was one. A crushing victory in the first Test and then collapse.
Okay, Brian Lara was operating on another planet for that particular series but come on: Warne, McGrath, Gillespie – what were you playing at?
And despite studying the form in detail for every World Cup since I was legally allowed to set foot in a bookmaker’s shop, my record stands at five bets, no winners.
Australia to win in 1996. Wrong.
South Africa in 1999. Klusener/Donald. Cock-up.
The Proteas again in 2003. Duckworth/Lewis.
India in 2007. Ponting.
Sri Lanka in 2011. Almost.
The only cricketing wager I can recall actually paying out was when I backed the England side my brother was part of to lose a series in Sri Lanka. Don’t worry, my conscience is clear – he didn’t play.
So if it’s sound betting advice you’re looking for I should probably recommend that you search elsewhere or, in what is likely to be a more foolproof method, pick a couple of teams and then flip a coin.
But you can’t win the raffle if you don’t buy a ticket, so how about this for a prediction. Come March 29 at the MCG it will be South Africa getting prepared for a humdinger of a celebration.
The Aussies are too obvious a pick, New Zealand are worthy outsiders but will come up short, India can’t bowl, Pakistan are too loose, England never win consistently, Sri Lanka aren’t at home and the rest just aren’t up to it.
That leaves the Proteas who, surely, have to put their baffling ability to find defeat in the gaping jaws of victory behind them at some stage and this tournament will be as good a time as any.
You may call my logic flimsy, and there certainly is a strong element of hit and hope about it, but it’s not all random nonsense.
Why I think they will triumph can be encapsulated into three factors.
Firstly, their batting. In AB de Villiers they have the world’s best practitioner of limited overs batsmanship with his accomplice, Hashim Amla, less flamboyant but none the worse for it.
The supporting cast – Quniton de Kock, JP Duminy, David Miller – are no mugs either and it all adds up to an order capable of doing real damage.
Secondly, the seam bowling. The modern-day 50-over regulations of two new balls and four outside the fielding circle, have made the bowlers’ lot an even worse one than before – so early wickets will play a crucial part.
The Australians may disagree but Dale Steyn, Vernon Philander and Morne Morkel are the best attack in the game. If they step up to the mark, their side will gain an added edge.
Thirdly, the conditions. They are playing away but Australia and New Zealand are the nearest thing to their home turf. On the other hand, these conditions will be the Achilles heel of the sub-continental outfits.
The conditions will count for more than any of the participants will let on.
Far from infallible, they do have obvious weaknesses. They have an erratic spinner in Imran Tahir and a less than obvious fifth bowling option – but these can be masked to a significant degree by the strengths.
I realise that all of the above could be describing the Australians who bat aggressively and effectively, can boast a strong fast bowling attack and know the pitches like the back of their hands.
But – and I’m preparing to put my tin hat on – I just don’t want them, for reasons both easily identifiable and unfathomable, to win.
So it was with supreme confidence that I logged into my betting account the other day to put a tenner of my hard earned on de Villiers, Amla, Tahir and co.
Easy money.