Gambit Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/WORLD_CUPS/WC83/IND_WI_WC83_ODI-FINAL_25JUN1983.html Amarnath made 26 and took 3 for 12. 2 of them were tailenders(Marshall and Holding). Lal made 17 and took 3 for 31 in a 12 over spell. All wickets were top order bats(Haynes,Richards and Gomes) Wasn't Lal more deserving of an MOM? Link to comment
fineleg Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Whatchammacallit? :D This question hit out of the blue. Perhaps because Dujon and Marshall were building together a partnership (no, i did not watch this - some recordings i have seen later, so just going by scorecard, there will be others who watched and can comment) The partnership was broken by Amarnath and it was crucial given that low score. But, point taken, maybe it should have been shared by Madan Lal. Link to comment
Bumper Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/WORLD_CUPS/WC83/IND_WI_WC83_ODI-FINAL_25JUN1983.html Amarnath made 26 and took 3 for 12. 2 of them were tailenders(Marshall and Holding). Lal made 17 and took 3 for 31 in a 12 over spell. All wickets were top order bats(Haynes,Richards and Gomes) Wasn't Lal more deserving of an MOM? One could argue that in the context of the game, runs were at a premium. 9 more runs with the bat & 19 less runs, makes the diff in their contributions huge. Link to comment
The Outsider Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Don't think the Indian team gave two hoots about who got the award, but in close scenarios like this one has to win and one not. fineleg is right though. Dujon and Marshall were causing major flutters. Link to comment
Yuvraj4Captaincy Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 lal ho ya naath..same thing..India won now we care too much abt individuals and not team..... Link to comment
Gambit Posted October 17, 2007 Author Share Posted October 17, 2007 lal ho ya naath..same thing..India won now we care too much abt individuals and not team..... This coming from a guy who's username is Yuvraj4Captaincy :cantstop: It's just something I thought about after watching the '83 final recently. Link to comment
yoda Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 It is a good question. When two players have close numbers I guess the bigger name wins it. Link to comment
Lurker Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 The reason why Madan Lal was not awarded MOM is to look beyond stats :D Madan Lal was getting hammered in the 1983 semis. Viv Richards had bludgeoned 4 fours in one over. Then Viv got greedy, tried to hit a delivery over cow corner and Kapil running in from mid on towards the boundary, eyes on the ball, took the catch after running about 25-30 yards backwards. That catch remains the best in a World Cup final. And even though Madan Lal got the wicket it was actually Kapil's. Now compare that with Amarnath who gave away 12 runs in 7 overs, completely skittled West Indies with his wibbly wobblies and took three wickets. Also held the innings together with his 80 ball 26. Yes it would seem slow but noone played as many deliveries in a game where 20 wickets fell in total. Amarnath was the rightful MOM.(he won in semis too). Now if you have argued Kapil Dev well.... xxx Link to comment
Gambit Posted October 17, 2007 Author Share Posted October 17, 2007 The reason why Madan Lal was not awarded MOM is to look beyond stats :D Madan Lal was getting hammered in the 1983 semis. Viv Richards had bludgeoned 4 fours in one over. Then Viv got greedy, tried to hit a delivery over cow corner and Kapil running in from mid on towards the boundary, eyes on the ball, took the catch after running about 25-30 yards backwards. That catch remains the best in a World Cup final. And even though Madan Lal got the wicket it was actually Kapil's. Now compare that with Amarnath who gave away 12 runs in 7 overs, completely skittled West Indies with his wibbly wobblies and took three wickets. Also held the innings together with his 80 ball 26. Yes it would seem slow but noone played as many deliveries in a game where 20 wickets fell in total. Amarnath was the rightful MOM.(he won in semis too). Now if you have argued Kapil Dev well.... xxx So Madan Lal's wickets were off innocuous deliveries? BTW is it really true that while Kapil was in the process of taking that catch, DD lost it's feed? Link to comment
The Outsider Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 So Madan Lal's wickets were off innocuous deliveries? BTW is it really true that while Kapil was in the process of taking that catch, DD lost it's feed? Don't know about that but there was a bloody powercut in my Lucknow locality and had to follow the match on radio from WI score of 40 odd to 80 odd when the entire game turned on it's head. Link to comment
yoda Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 I missed the Richards wicket as well. Don't remember if it was power cut or loss of feed. Probably the latter. Link to comment
atul Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 Gambit wrote "BTW is it really true that while Kapil was in the process of taking that catch, DD lost it's feed?" Actually it was News break from 8.30PM , i think Richard was out around 8.45pm . and Lurkar was right about MoM. Link to comment
kabira Posted October 17, 2007 Share Posted October 17, 2007 all you watched that game live...Lucky B@stards.. but you all are seniors and now you all you retire gracefully. Link to comment
chanakya Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 memories of the final by great bong. Always worth a read. http://greatbong.net/2005/06/24/the-day-we-won-the-cup/ Link to comment
Lurker Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 memories of the final by great bong. Always worth a read. http://greatbong.net/2005/06/24/the-day-we-won-the-cup/ Hahaha I always thought I was the only chap who saw Amarnath as the bowler who slowed down as he approached to deliver..guess not. God answers. Mohinder Amarnath is called into bowl. He lopes in, the only bowler in the world who decelerates as he comes to the bowling crease. An interesting memory of the game is that of Krish Srikkanth smashing a four and a six off Andy Roberts. Srikkanth had pulled a delivery over mid-wicket for 4 and every commentator was awash with how Roberts would bowl a faster bouncer now. You see Andy Roberts was famous for bowling two bouncers without any change in action. The first was fast, and the second was superfast. Indeed it had put many players in hospital(including the game in which a young Ian Botham battled Andy..but thats a story for another time). Anyway Roberts gets hit for a 4 and then he approaches Srikkanth menacingly with a faster one. Cheeka waits for it, then pulls away over square leg for a 6. Till date I maintain that no other Indian batsmen have played better innings in successive finals than Srikkanth in 83 WC and 85 WSC. xxx Link to comment
coffee_rules Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Didn't have TV at home then. DIdn't have a TV coverage for the entire city back then. It was a small town in Karnataka, with no TV signal reaching the town. I remember we had once gone about 40 kms to a ISRO remote location and watched Asian Games in '82. A good 100 people watching one small TV screen with the feed from a ISRO satellite. I followed the final game on Radio commentary. My borther woke up in the middle of the night and said that India won the match. I thought it was a dream and later I thought he was kidding. I believed it only after reading the morning newspapers. Was in 8th std back then. Link to comment
Lurker Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Didn't have TV at home then. DIdn't have a TV coverage for the entire city back then. It was a small town in Karnataka, with no TV signal reaching the town. I remember we had once gone about 40 kms to a ISRO remote location and watched Asian Games in '82. A good 100 people watching one small TV screen with the feed from a ISRO satellite. True. I beleive 1982 Asian Games was the first time there was colour telecast. After that price of Black and White TV started to fall and by mid 80s the TV population has increased manifolds. I remember 1984 Olympics much more than the 83 WC or 85 WSC. It is funny if you start thinking about those times really. There was no cable television obviously, TV used to have a big ar$ed external antenna which would be perched atop your house. If you went to terrace you could every house sporting an antenna with birds sitting atop them. And sometimes the birds, or wind, or kites would "move" the antenna's direction and people would be out trying to point it towards the local relay centre. Funny days those..:thumbs_up: Link to comment
fineleg Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 True. . And sometimes the birds, or wind, or kites would "move" the antenna's direction and people would be out trying to point it towards the local relay centre. Funny days those..:thumbs_up: Hahaha...:haha: Even in early 90s, folks go up to the terrace and adjust the antenna if the picture was not clear. Link to comment
fineleg Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 BTW - Jimmy Amarnath decelerating when running up to the crease...Why the heck does he do that - thats so weird!? Link to comment
coffee_rules Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 BTW - Jimmy Amarnath decelerating when running up to the crease...Why the heck does he do that - thats so weird!? I used to do that involuntarily to avoid overstepping. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now