U19 quadrangular series in Australia, April 2012

[Crookbond]

It was a semi-final.

India had lost all their three league games but got an even chance for the title with the tournament format featuring semi-finals.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/current/story/561290.html

[Ultimate_Game]

It was a semi-final. http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/current/story/561290.html

Then I fail to see the point of having the league games where all the 4 teams are anyways through to the semis :haha:

[Crookbond]

That was the point of the post earlier! :phehehe:

[Ultimate_Game]

That was the point of the post earlier! :phehehe:

My bad. I see the point now :winky:

[Crookbond]

CT was the one who caught it before everyone though. :teeth_smile:

[jind]

Congrats to the Colts. Unmukt likes to play his shots...good to see him doing well here

[MCcricket]

I Believe There Is More U19 Cricket After This Tour, Any One Has The Schedule.

[Raghav_12]

Congrats to young lads. A win in Australia is something we rarely achieve across formats and across levels. So good to see these results. However, I find format of tournament really funny. There was absolutely no incentive for winning of any league match. What is need of Semi-Finals when anyway you have only four teams participating in tournament?

[Sir john]

india win in ozz :cleveland:

[Old guy]

another promising batsman.. wbu the bowlers? :((

[Manny_Pacquiao]

the best thing was that india's top young batsman (chand) smacked around australia's top young bowler (cummins). he forced him out of the attack at the beginning of his innings and then batted through. i feel sorry for anyone that plays india at the u19 world cup.

[Sachinism]

hahaha and it happened Unmukt Chand is the next big superstar

[rkt.india]

Then I fail to see the point of having the league games where all the 4 teams are anyways through to the semis :haha:

Take those league games as warmups. :giggle:

[Chandan]

http://livescores.cricket.com.au/scoreboard_2693_7.html Moshin Syyed and Sandeep Sharma takes 4 and 3 wickets each. India in the final after just one win. :hysterical:

This is the report of semi-final where Indian colts defeated English counterparts: Final eludes young Lions 13 April 2012 England Under-19s missed out on a place in the Quadrangular Series final after falling to a disappointing 63-run defeat against India at Townsville's Tony Ireland Stadium. The young Lions were confident of emerging victorious in the semi-final, having beaten the same opponents on Monday to maintain their 100% record in the tournament. Yet they were not able to complete a fourth successive triumph and, subsequently, will face New Zealand - who lost to Australia in the other last-four clash - in a third-placed play-off on Sunday at the same venue. Skipper Unmukt Chand's 94 was the decisive contribution as India Under-19s beat England in their Quadrangular Series semi-final Unmukt Chand and Smit Patel struck 94 and 53 respectively in IndiaÃÔ total of 239 all out from 49.1 overs, after which Mohsin Sayyed claimed 4-31 as England were dismissed for 176 in 44.5. Having opted to bowl first, England took wickets at regular intervals, but had little answer to skipper Chand. Brett Hutton and Craig Overton made short work of the openers as the former got rid of Manan Vohra for a breezy 25 before the latter had Akhil Herwadkar caught behind for 12. Vijay Zol was then dismissed by England skipper Adam Ball and, after Akshdeep Nath departed via a run out, Sam Wood had Baba Aparajith caught and bowled. Chand, though, found a willing ally in Patel, who struck three sixes in a 63-ball stay and put on 90 with his skipper. But the former, having hit six fours and four sixes, fell six runs short of a century, as he departed to paceman Aneesh Kapil. England then efficiently ended the innings, taking the final four wickets for 41 runs as Ball finished with impressive figures of 3-39. The reply began disastrously as Sandeep Sharma made three breakthroughs; he removed Ben Foakes for a duck and, having got rid of Shiv Thakor for 14, claimed the prized wicket of Daniel Bell-Drummond by bowling the opener for 25. That was a position from which England never fully recovered as, despite impressive lower-order efforts of 39 and 37 not out respectively from Ball and Jamie Overton, they fell a long way short. ------------------------------ So in both semi and in final captain won the toss and chose to bowl first? Why? Was the pitch assisting seamers? If yes, in which way? And in those circumstances, Chand's inning gets even more importance as it proves that he isn't an FTB. Maybe earlier tracks were not lively and hence our bowlers were failing. Whatever! Due to lack of coverage from Indian media I'm just not able to get the reason of earlier failures and then sudden success in KO round.

[deathmonger]

This is the report of semi-final where Indian colts defeated English counterparts: Final eludes young Lions 13 April 2012 England Under-19s missed out on a place in the Quadrangular Series final after falling to a disappointing 63-run defeat against India at Townsville's Tony Ireland Stadium. The young Lions were confident of emerging victorious in the semi-final, having beaten the same opponents on Monday to maintain their 100% record in the tournament. Yet they were not able to complete a fourth successive triumph and, subsequently, will face New Zealand - who lost to Australia in the other last-four clash - in a third-placed play-off on Sunday at the same venue. Skipper Unmukt Chand's 94 was the decisive contribution as India Under-19s beat England in their Quadrangular Series semi-final Unmukt Chand and Smit Patel struck 94 and 53 respectively in IndiaÃÔ total of 239 all out from 49.1 overs, after which Mohsin Sayyed claimed 4-31 as England were dismissed for 176 in 44.5. Having opted to bowl first, England took wickets at regular intervals, but had little answer to skipper Chand. Brett Hutton and Craig Overton made short work of the openers as the former got rid of Manan Vohra for a breezy 25 before the latter had Akhil Herwadkar caught behind for 12. Vijay Zol was then dismissed by England skipper Adam Ball and, after Akshdeep Nath departed via a run out, Sam Wood had Baba Aparajith caught and bowled. Chand, though, found a willing ally in Patel, who struck three sixes in a 63-ball stay and put on 90 with his skipper. But the former, having hit six fours and four sixes, fell six runs short of a century, as he departed to paceman Aneesh Kapil. England then efficiently ended the innings, taking the final four wickets for 41 runs as Ball finished with impressive figures of 3-39. The reply began disastrously as Sandeep Sharma made three breakthroughs; he removed Ben Foakes for a duck and, having got rid of Shiv Thakor for 14, claimed the prized wicket of Daniel Bell-Drummond by bowling the opener for 25. That was a position from which England never fully recovered as, despite impressive lower-order efforts of 39 and 37 not out respectively from Ball and Jamie Overton, they fell a long way short. ------------------------------ So in both semi and in final captain won the toss and chose to bowl first? Why? Was the pitch assisting seamers? If yes, in which way? And in those circumstances, Chand's inning gets even more importance as it proves that he isn't an FTB. Maybe earlier tracks were not lively and hence our bowlers were failing. Whatever! Due to lack of coverage from Indian media I'm just not able to get the reason of earlier failures and then sudden success in KO round.

Chand smoked Cummins so that means he's good against pace.

[speed_demon]

I see so many posts critisizing the format, i think it,s pretty simple, whatever you do in the league, which helped india sort their combination of playing XI, tournament starts from semis, india being last positioned had to topple the best team to be in the finals, if england was really that good wgy wern't they able to chase it? Point to note is that india,s victories were EASY and loses were very close which could have gone either way, except the game against new zealand. I think it was india who played well when it mattered and won the tournament by upping their ANTE.

[Needforspeed]

Congrats to India on winning the title...We won when it mattered. The Semis and the finals

[MCcricket]

Chand playing and hurtin Cummings in the final shows he has class, looks like Indian bowling is not great especially seamers.

[Chandan]

I see so many posts critisizing the format' date=' i think it,s pretty simple, whatever you do in the league, which helped india sort their combination of playing XI, tournament starts from semis, india being last positioned had to topple the best team to be in the finals, if england was really that good wgy wern't they able to chase it? Point to note is that india,s victories were EASY and loses were very close which could have gone either way, except the game against new zealand. I think it was india who played well when it mattered and won the tournament by upping their ANTE.[/quote'] I agree completely with the post. These tournaments are also to get experience and that you can get only if you play more games, the league games. They might be irrelevant from tournaments' point of view but are very important for players' development point of view.

[MCcricket]

I agree completely with the post. These tournaments are also to get experience and that you can get only if you play more games, the league games. They might be irrelevant from tournaments' point of view but are very important for players' development point of view. Oh really? You guessed that without following/watching a single game? Then please explain how Indians got the Aussies out for just 194 in finals and England for just 176 runs in semis?

I am not sure how much u follow or watch the game but three of these pacers have played for the Ranji sides, S Sharma played for Punjab and I have seen him bowl, Kalaria also has played for his state and have seen him too , from what I know Moshin seems to be young and has potential. Umesh, Shukla, VRV, were really good as far as pace and potential at that age comparatively, we surely have better bowlers then most of these pacers who went to OZ.