Latest News

Shafali’s T20I best blasts India into the semi-final

Published

2 years ago

2024/07/24

Priyan

Shafali Verma blitzed her way to a 26-ball fifty [Cricinfo]

Shafali Verma’s career-best 81 and a disciplined bowling effort propelled India into the semi-finals of the Womens Asia Cup 2024 with an 82-run win over Nepal. With three wins from three games, India topped Group A. Pakistan, who defeated UAE earlier in the afternoon, were the second team to advance to the knockouts, with two wins out of three.

Opting to bat first, the Smriti Mandhana-led India posted 178 for 3 thanks to Shafali’s breezy knock and a solid opening stand with Dayalan Hemalatha. It was an uphill task for Nepal, who don’t play under lights and, against an in-form bowling attack, they could only manage 96 for 9 in 20 overs.

With the semi-final spot almost in the bag, India rested their regular captain Harmanpreet Kaur and allrounder Pooja Vastrakar and gave some game time to S Sajana and Arundhati Reddy. There was also a change at the top of the order, with India promoting Hemalatha to open with Shafali. The openers took their time to assess the conditions and several loose deliveries went unpunished early on. But soon enough Shafali found her feet and accelerated. The same cannot be said of her opening partner on the day.

After an unbeaten 41 against Bangladesh in April in her comeback game, Hemalatha had crossed 30 only once in the next eight innings across ODIs and T20Is before Tuesday. This however was a golden opportunity for Hemalatha to cement her spot in the XI, batting against an Associate team on a slow surface. She did get a few good shots away thanks to a strong bottom hand, but in general struggled to find her timing in a 42-ball 47.

Shafali, on the other hand, capitalised on the Nepal bowlers’ struggle to find the right line and length. She used her feet and wrist well to flick, hit straight drives down the ground, slog sweep to deep midwicket and, overall, played with good intent. India finished the powerplay on 50 for 0 and Shafali brought up her tenth T20I fifty in the eighth over, off just 26 balls. At the halfway stage, India were 91 for 0 and looked set to breach the 200-run mark again.

However, Nepal’s experienced left-arm spinner Sita Rana Magar pulled things back and removed Hemalatha and Shafali in the 14th and 16th over respectively. Shafali ended her knock with 12 fours and a six, and the duo’s 122-run partnership was the highest opening stand across editions of the Women’s T20 Asia Cup and the second-highest for any wicket.

India’s scoring rate slowed down when the new batters came in but Jemimah Rodrigues’ clever batting, which fetched her five fours in her 15-ball 28 not out, helped India get close to 180. Sajana, like Hemalatha, also struggled in her 12-ball stay. Whether India persist with Hemalatha or give more opportunities to Sajana at No. 3 is something to keep an eye on, leading up to the T20 World Cup in October.

An injury to Titas Sadhu opened the door for Reddy to get back with the Indian squad, following impressive performances in domestic cricket and the WPL. In the limited opportunities she has got since her comeback against South Africa last month, Reddy has stepped up to the challenge. Against Nepal, she delivered again, picking up 2 for 28 in her four overs. Having worked on her variations and the ability to swing the ball both ways in the last 12 to 15 months, Reddy struck off her fourth delivery, bowling opener Samjhana Khadka. She went for 11 runs in her second over, but fought back to dismiss Magar for a 22-ball 18 with a delivery that seamed back in to hit the middle stump.

Nepal were rocked early in the chase, and never really recovered.

Brief scores:
India Women 178 for 3 in 20 overs (Shafali Verma 81, Dayalan Hemalatha 47, Jemimah Rodrigues 28; Kabita Joshi 1-36, Sita Rana Magar 2-25) beat Nepal Women 96 for 9 in 20 overs (Sita Rana Magar 18; Renuka Singh 1-15, Deepti Sharma 3-13, Radha Yadav 2-12, Arundhati Reddy 2-28) by 82 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

11 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

14 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

19 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.”