T2K

The 2000th test has just concluded and has it signalled a move in supremacy (at least on the field) from the new world order back to the old world order?  We shall see.  And was it really the 2000th Test or only the 1999th Test and does anybody care about that detail?

Just as there was discussion with Y2K – was it really the first year of the new millennium or in fact, the last year of the incumbent – the festivities went on oblivious of that minor point, the same applies to the 2000th Test match.  But should we pay more attention?  The game of cricket is more obsessed with numbers than most and there is a big difference between, say, a batsman making 99 runs as opposed to 100.  Just one run does not often make a difference to the match but it seems to make a lot of difference in this case.  So why should not the T2K question be important?

Personally, I don’t care and am not going any further into it, except to say, I feel bound to explain that some feel that the ICC World XI “Test” should not count and that is why this really was the 1999th Test.  Whatever the case, 1999 or 2000, that is a lot of days both dreary and exciting, sunny and rainy, good and bad.

And England has bored it up them.  After a good campaign against Sri Lanka, they have carried the good form on to the Indian series.  Even KP managed some runs.  Lots of them.  But my buddy, Jay, got his wish with Dravid deservedly getting his name on the honour board at Lords’.  And Dhoni did something really surprising.  Two things. He didn’t complain about the umpiring and he bowled some interesting overs of in swingers.  I had no idea that he had the ability to do either of those things.  And in fact, if there was any cause for complaint in the umpiring department, it was England who held it.

If England wins this four Test series by a margin of two, believe it or not, in less than one year, they will have risen from 5th to 1st in the Test rankings.  They probably fancy their chances, I should think.