Kevin O’Brien’s blazing century against England on Wednesday night took my mind back almost 28 years to Kapil Dev’s stupendous 175 not out against Zimbabwe at Tunbridge Wells in the 1983 World Cup. Like India’s flamboyant former captain, the burly Irishman showed valour, character, derring-do and strokes of stunning audacity to win the match from a near-hopeless situation.
There are several great centuries witnessed in World Cups. In finals alone, Lloyd (1975), Richards (1979), Ponting (2003) and Gilchrist (2007) come to mind instantly. But I would still rate those by Kapil and O’Brien a notch higher: for the excruciating circumstances they were made in, and for the fact that neither of them is truly a frontline batsman.
O’Brien would be flattered by this comparison but Kapil will not be belittled. The history of World Cup cricket, as I mentioned, is replete with terrific centuries over the past 36 years; in fact so many, given the frequency of one-day games, that it is impossible to remember most.
But there are a few that remain etched in memory forever. Kapil’s 175 is now part of cricket lore; whether O’Brien’s stands the test of time — and not merely in the record books for a while till somebody else betters it — will depend on what he does from here.
Kapil’s innings, for instance, not only won the match, but revised India’s otherwise unhappy history in World Cup tournaments. Till that particular game, India had won only thrice in three.
When the two teams met again, India were on the verge of being ousted, till Kapil took charge and made the highest score and the fastest hundred till then. Neither of those records stands today: O’Brien’s 50-ball century is now the fastest in Cup history and Gary Kirsten’s 188 in 1996. But the impact of Kapil’s innings survives still because of the cathartic effect it had on Indian cricket.
Such is the delight among cricket aficionados at O’Brien’s spectacular batting against England the other night that not only has it sparked off greater interest in the Cup, but also raised huge expectations from the Irish team. But this may not be easy to fulfill based on the evidence of some of the matches played so far in this tournament.
Netherlands, for instance, ran England close in the first match but have since slumped so badly that they are unrecognisable as the same team. Canada, who looked dismal in the earlier matches flattered to deceive against Pakistan.
The problem with so-called minnow teams is in their inconsistency because of paucity of talent and lack of international experience. A great day usually remains just that — a one-off. There is obviously a strong case for giving such teams more exposure, but whether this should be done only in a World Cup is something that is exorcising cricket administrators currently.
Ireland find themselves currently in a sort of in-between stage where they are not a top notch team, nor a rank minnow, as it were. In 2007, they had a splendid victory over Pakistan, and by beating England in that brilliant run chase on Wednesday, they’ve enhanced their credibility manifold. But how much further they can travel in this Cup is the moot question.
Does Team India have an answer?