Women's T20 World Cup semi-final: Mooney, Lanning take Australia to 172/4
Cape Town, Feb 23: India's shoddy fielding allowed Australia to post a challenging 172 for four in the first semi-final of the Women's T20 World Cup here on Thursday.
The bowling effort also left a lot be desired as Beth Mooney extended her envious record against India with a classy 54 off 37 balls.
One of the best power hitters in the game, Ashleigh Gardner, hurt India with 31 off 18 balls while skipper Meg Lanning made 49 not out off 34 balls.
Australia opted to bat at a sunny Newlands and India skipper Harmanpreet Kaur, who chose to play the knock-out game a day after suffering from high fever, did not seem to mind Lanning's call.
There was no swing on offer, making life a lot difficult for star pacer Renuka Thakur, whose first ball of the game was a half volley to Alyssa Healy (25 off 26) and she duly put it away.
Healy is usually the aggressor in her opening partnerships with Mooney but it wasn't the case on this occasion. It was Mooney who got the boundaries more regularly in their 52-run stand as she manoeuvred the field beautifully with her nimble footwork against the spinners. Shafali Verma dropped a regulation catch off Mooney at long on when she was on 32.
Deepti Sharma, India's most consistent spinner in the tournament, bowled too short in her opening spell. Her second over went for 12 runs as Mooney stepped out for a six over wide long off.
Besides the inconsistent line and length, poor fielding and catching cost India a lot of runs.
Lanning, who was dropped early in her innings, made India pay with an unbeaten 49 off 34 balls. She collected two sixes and a four in the 20th over bowled by Renuka, who went wicketless in her four overs and conceded 41 runs.
Sneh Rana, playing in place of Pooja Vastrakar, was unfortunate not pick any wicket as she troubled the batters with her flight. She could have had Lanning caught behind in her first over but wicketkeeper Richa Ghosh dropped the chance. Richa also fluffed a stumping chance of Lanning.
The last five overs yielded 59 runs for Australia.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Bhojshala complex registered as 'mosque' in old revenue records: Muslim side to MP HC
Indore (PTI): The disputed Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque complex has historically been registered as a 'mosque' in revenue records and available sources don't clearly mention any Saraswati temple established by then-king Raja Bhoj, the Muslim side has told the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The Hindu community considers Bhojshala a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side calls the 11th-century monument Kamal Maula Mosque. The disputed complex located in Dhar district is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
During the hearing before the HC's Indore bench of Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi on Wednesday, Qazi Moinuddin questioned two PILs filed as intervenors in the Bhojshala case by an organisation named Hindu Front for Justice, one Kuldeep Tiwari and another individual.
Moinuddin claims to be a descendant of Sufi saint Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti and the 'Sajjadanashin' (spiritual head, guru, or successor of a Sufi shrine, khanqah, or religious site).
The PILs state that Bhojshala is actually a Saraswati temple and only Hindus should be granted the right to worship at the disputed complex.
Moinuddin's lawyer, Noor Ahmed Sheikh, claimed in the court that his client's ancestors, who are descendants of Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti, have historically held titles to the complex, and the site was also recorded as a "mosque" in government revenue records.
He contended that those associated with the management of the Kamal Maula Mosque, located within the complex, have been in "continuous and peaceful occupation" of the site for a long time.
Citing Muslim law, Sheikh argued that in the case of religious property, particularly a mosque or its related properties, officials such as the Sajjadanashin and Mutawalli (person entrusted with management, maintenance, and administration of a Waqf), and their descendants, not only have the right to intervene, but also have the right to manage and use such a structure.
Citing provisions of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904, the Muslim side's lawyer said the term "in-charge of the property" is used in this law, which makes it clear that the person or party who has been in charge of a property for a long time has rights over it.
During the hearing, Touseef Warsi, the lawyer representing the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society of Dhar, claimed that Hindu parties in both PILs had made "misleading representations" regarding historical facts before the high court.
He further claimed that available historical sources do not clearly mention the existence of a Saraswati temple established by Raja Bhoj, the legendary king of the Parmar dynasty who ruled Dhar from 1010 to 1055.
The ASI, a central government agency, has adopted three different positions in the lawsuits filed regarding the Bhojshala dispute, changing its answers from time to time, and this situation raises serious questions about judicial scrutiny of the complex, Warsi submitted.
He raised objections regarding the ASI's process of scientific survey of the Bhojshala complex, carried out on the HC order in 2024, and the method of videography and requested the court to examine these objections.
The hearing in the Bhojshala case will continue on Thursday.
The HC has been regularly hearing four petitions and one writ appeal since April 6, contesting the religious nature of the monument.
