Latest News

Brits ton in vain as Rana five-for scripts India’s thrilling win

Published

10 months ago

2025/04/30

Priyan

Sneh Rana bagged a five-for [SLC]

India defended 276 – their third highest-score against South Africa – in dramatic fashion to record successive wins in the Sri Lanka tri-series. South Africa were fairly comfortable on 170 for 2 after 33 overs chasing 277 and Tazmin Britts had scored her third ODI hundred and was anchoring their effort. With the required run-rate a touch above six an over, Brits retired hurt with cramp and that sent South Africa into freefall. They lost eight wickets for 80 runs, including three in an over to Sneh Rana, who finished with career-best figures of 5 for 43, and fell short by 15 runs.

Brits’ need to leave the field to seek medical assessment was one reason South Africa lost their tri-series opener but there were several others. Pratika Rawal’s 78 – her fifth successive fifty-plus score in the format which also made her the fastest to 500 runs in ODIs – set India up well and twin 41s from Harman preet Kaur and Jemimah Rodrigues and a 14-ball 24 from Richa Ghosh helped India score 82 runs in the last ten overs. Their total was helped to balloon beyond South Africa’s reach thanks to 13 wides they sent down. India, for comparison, only bowled two wides and a no-ball.

Overall, India’s ground fielding was sharper, though they put down three catches which included Brits’ twice, and their spinners controlled the middle period well. Rana and Deepti Sharma conceded 83 runs between them in their 20 overs while Shree Charani bowled ten overs with figures of 1 for 51.

After India cruised past Sri Lanka in the series opener, they were challenged by a South African side who have not played together for more than four months and looked rusty, especially against Smriti Mandhana and Rawal. The pair put on 83 for the opening stand, with Mandhana initially taking most of the strike and playing the aggressor role while Rawal eased herself in. South Africa started to rein them in and gave away no boundaries between the tenth and 18th over – by which point they had used five different bowlers – and then brought Annerie Dercksen on to try and get a breakthrough.

She benefited from the pressure her colleagues had created. After delivering two wides in her first four balls, Dercksen went short, down leg, Mandhana followed and gloved the chance to Karabo Meso, who took her first ODI catch. Dercksen’s over was still poor as she conceded 19 runs, including five wides and the six over deep mid-wicket that got Rawal to fifty.

Rawal was given a life when she was on 71 and flicked Masabata Klaas to deep square leg, where Chloe Tryon ran to her right to get to the ball but could not hold on. South Africa then thought they had run Harleen Deol out off the next ball when Meso flicked the bail off and Deol seemed short of her ground but the third umpire disagreed. Just as South Africa may have wondered where another wicket would come from, Mlaba ended their frustration with a double strike. In the 31st over, she bowled Rawal with a beauty that dipped and turned past the outside edge to hit offstump and in the 33rd, drew Deol forward to bowl her with a full ball.

Harmanpreet, batting for the first time in ODIs this year, should have been caught at deep cover when she sliced Nadine de Klerk to Lara Goodall but was put down on 4. Despite the miss, South Africa squeezed hard and India were unable to find the boundary for ten overs, until Dercksen returned. She continued to struggle with her lengths and conceded 17 off her second over as India entered the final ten on 195 for 3.

Rodrigues and Harmanpreet’s stand grew to fifty and Rodrigues was playing her shots but when she tried to scoop Klaas over fine leg, only managed to find Ayabonga Khaka at 45. Ghosh played an aggressive cameo and scored 24 runs off the 14 balls she faced and India plundered 82 runs in the last ten overs, including nine fours and a six.

By the time South Africa got to the last ten overs of their innings, they needed 81 runs and had seven wickets in hand. Brits had retired by then in what has been called extreme heat even by Colombo standards but would have felt she’d set her team-mates up well. She dominated the 140-run opening stand with Laura Wolvaardt – South Africa’s second highest for the first wicket – and scored 90 runs off 93 balls to Wolvaardt’s 43 off 75. Brits was also put down twice, on 51 by Deepti off her own bowling and 67 by Harmanpreet at mid-off. Deepti was eventually rewarded when Wolvaardt was hit on the pads as she tried to work her into the legside and given out lbw which allowed India to start to claw their way back.

Goodall, playing in place of the injured Anneke Bosch, played all around a Rana arm ball and was bowled but with Brits still there, South Africa seemed in control. She reached her hundred off the 103rd ball she faced and then blasted two fours in the same over but after the second, could not continue. Her partner at the time was 17-year old Meso, who suddenly found herself with a big job.

Meso was on 7 off 17 balls when she tried to hit Arundhati Reddy through the off-side but played on which brought the experienced pair of Sune Luus and Tryon together. The required run-rate had climbed over seven. Luus was dropped in the 41st over when she gave Reddy a knee-height chance in her follow through but then holed out to deep mid-wicket in the next over. South Africa needed 70 off 50 balls. Tryon and Dercksen got that down to 41 off 30 before Tryon chipped Rana to midwicket in her penultimate over. Rana’s last over was the one South Africa had to survive.

Instead, de Klerk was bowled trying to sweep off the second ball, Dercksen mistimed a slog sweep to deep square leg and Brits came out again only to hand Rana a return catch and end South Africa’s hopes. They went from 249 for 5 to 252 for 8 and had no recognised batters left. Their last two batters were run-out as India sealed the win with four balls to spare and cemented themselves at the top of the points table.

Brief scores:
India Women 276 for 6 in 50 overs (Pratika Rawal 78, Smriti Mandhana 36, Harleen Deol 29, Jemimah Rodrigues 41, Harmanpreet Kaur 41*, Richa Ghosh 24; Nomkululeko Mlaba 2-55) beat South Africa Women 261 in 49.2 overs (Laura Wolvaardt 43, Tazmin Brits 109, Sunee Luus28, Aneerie Dercksen 30; Sneh Rana 5-43) by 15 runs

[Cricinfo]

All News Advertisement

Latest News

Advisory for Heavy Rain issued for the Central, Uva and Sabaragamuwa provinces and in the Ampara, Batticaloa and Polonnaruwa districts

Published

9 hours ago

2026/02/21

Priyan

Advisory for Heavy Rain Issued by the Natural Hazards Early Warning Centre at 12.00 noon on 21 February 2026 valid for the period until 08.30 a.m. 22 February 2026

Due to the low level atmospheric disturbance in the vicinity of Sri Lanka, Heavy showers above 100 mm are likely at some places in the Central, Uva and Sabaragamuwa provinces and in the Ampara, Batticaloa and Polonnaruwa districts and fairly heavy showers above 75 mm are likely at some places elsewhere.

Therefore, the general public is advised to take adequate precautions to minimize damages caused by heavy rain, strong winds and lightning during thundershowers.

Latest News

Ranaweera’s four-for leads Sri Lanka to tense win over West Indies

Published

12 hours ago

2026/02/21

Priyan

Inoka Ranaweera returned figures of 4 for 44 [Cricinfo]

Sri Lanka took a 1-0 lead in the ODI series with a tense ten-run win over West Indies, thanks largely to a match-defining performance from Inoka Ranaweera.

After being asked to bat, Sri Lanka posted 240 for 6, built on half-centuries from Hasini Perera (61 off 86) and Harshitha Samarawickrema (66 off 105). Captain Chamari Athapaththu made 27, while useful middle-order contributions from Nilakshika Silva and Kavisha Dilhari kept the innings moving at a controlled rate. A late cameo from Dewmi Vihanga, who struck 14 off six balls, ensured Sri Lanka pushed towards a competitive total in St George’s in Grenada.

But it was Ranaweera who tilted the contest. The experienced left-arm spinner returned figures of 4 for 44 from her ten overs. She removed the No. 3 Shemaine Campbelle cheaply, dismissed Chinelle Henry soon after, and then returned to break the dangerous stand of 89 between Stefanie Taylor and Jannillea Glasgow in the 40th over, just as West Indies were threatening to surge ahead. Ranaweera also accounted for Shawnisha Hector at the death.

Taylor’s 66 off 83 balls and Glasgow’s 50 off 67 had revived West Indies from early setbacks, and with Aaliyah Alleyne in the middle, the chase remained alive deep into the game. West Indies needed 18 from the last two overs, and 12 from the last six balls. However, Sri Lanka’s spinners held firm, with Dilhari finishing with three wickets, including two in the final over, to complement Ranaweera’s starring role.

West Indies were eventually bowled out for 230 in 49.4 overs. Sri Lanka have now won four of their last five ODIs against West Indies since 2017.

Brief scores:
Sri Lanka Women 240 for 6 in 50 overs (Harshitha Samarawickrama 66, Hasini Perera 61; Hayley Matthews 2-46, Karishma Ramharak 2-57) beat West Indies Women 230 in 49.4 overs (Stefanie Taylor 66, Jannillea Glasgow 50; Inoka Ranaweera 4-44, Kavish Dilhari 3-49) by ten runs

[Cricinfo]

Latest News

Trump brings in new 10% tariff as Supreme Court rejects his global import taxes

Published

17 hours ago

2026/02/21

Priyan

US President Donald Trump has imposed a new 10% global tariff to replace ones struck down by the Supreme Court, calling the ruling “terrible” and lambasting the justices who rejected his trade policy as “fools”.

The president unveiled the plan shortly after the justices outlawed most of the global tariffs the White House announced last year.

In a 6-3 decision, the court held that the president had overstepped his powers.

The decision was a major victory for businesses and US states that had challenged the duties, opening the door to potentially billions of dollars in tariff refunds, while also injecting new uncertainty into the global trade landscape.

Speaking from the White House on Friday, Trump indicated that refunds would not come without a legal battle, saying he expected the matter to be tied up in court for years.

He also said he would turn to other laws to press ahead with his tariffs, which he has argued encourage investment and manufacturing in the US.

“We have alternatives – great alternatives and we’ll be a lot stronger for it,” he said.

The court battle was focused on import taxes that Trump unveiled last year on goods from nearly every country in the world.

The tariffs initially targeted Mexico, Canada and China, before expanding dramatically to dozens of trade partners on what the president billed as “Liberation Day” last April.

The White House had cited a 1977 law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the president power to “regulate” trade in response to an emergency.

But the measures sparked outcry at home and abroad from firms facing an abrupt rise in taxes on shipments entering the US, and fuelled worries that the levies would lead to higher prices.

Arguing before the court last year, lawyers for the challenging states and small businesses said that the law used by the president to impose the levies made no mention of the word “tariffs”.

They said that Congress did not intend to hand off its power to tax or give the president an “open-ended power to junk” other existing trade deals and tariff rules.

In his opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, sided with that view.

“When Congress has delegated its tariff powers, it has done so in explicit terms and subject to strict limits,” he wrote.

“Had Congress intended to convey the distinct and extraordinary power to impose tariffs, it would have done so expressly, as it consistently has in other tariff statutes.”

The decision to strike down the tariffs was joined by the court’s three liberal justices, as well as two justices nominated by Trump: Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch.

Three conservative justices, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito, dissented.

At the White House, Trump said he was “absolutely ashamed” of the Republican appointees on the court who voted against his trade policy.

He said they were “just being fools and lap dogs” and were “very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution”.

Shares on Wall Street rose after the announcement, with the S&P 500 closing up about 0.7%, as businesses across the US cautiously welcomed the ruling.

“I feel… like a thousand-pound weight has been lifted off my chest,” said Beth Benike, the owner of Busy Baby products in Minnesota, which manufactures products in China.

Nik Holm, chief executive of Terry Precision Cycling, one of the small businesses involved in the case, called the ruling a “relief”.

“Though it will be many months before our supply chain is back up and running as normal, we look forward to the government’s refund of these improperly-collected duties,” he said.

The anticipated refunds and relief from tariff costs may prove elusive, however.

On Friday, Trump imposed the new 10% tariff under a never-used law known as Section 122, which gives the power to put in place tariffs up to 15% for 150 days, at which point Congress must step in.

Analysts expect the White House to consider other tools, such as Section 232 and Section 301, which allow import taxes to address national security risks and unfair trade practices.

Trump has previously used those tools for tariffs, including some announced last year on sectors such as steel, aluminium and cars. Those were untouched by the court ruling.

A White House official said countries that struck trade deals with the US, including the UK, India and the EU, will now face the global 10% tariff under Section 122 rather than the tariff rate they had previously negotiated.

The Trump administration expects those countries to keep abiding by the concessions they had agreed to under the trade deals, the official added.

“Things have only gotten more complicated and more messy today,” said Geoffrey Gertz, senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security in Washington.

Reaction by major trade partners was relatively muted.

“We take note of the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court and are analysing it carefully,” European Commission spokesman Olof Gill wrote on social media.

The US has already collected at least $130bn in tariffs using the IEEPA law, according to the most recent government data.

In recent weeks, hundreds of firms, including retailer Costco, aluminium giant Alcoa and food importers like tuna fish brand Bumble Bee, have filed lawsuits contesting the tariffs, in a bid to get in line for a refund.

But the decision by the majority does not directly mention refunds, likely handing back the question of how that process might work to the Court of International Trade.

In his dissent, Justice Brett Kavanaugh warned the situation would be a “mess”.

Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG US, warned that the cost of litigation could make recouping funds difficult for smaller firms.

“Unfortunately, I’d say curb your enthusiasm, although I understand the desire for relief,” she said.

Steve Becker, head of the law firm Pillsbury, said the “best thing” for businesses would be if the government created a procedure that did not require filing a lawsuit.

[BBC]

“I think companies can be fairly confident that they’ll get their money back eventually,” he added. “How long it will take really is up to the government.”