In the T20 World Cup, the Indian Cricket team’s outdated approach was a testament to that adage. India’s dated powerplay batting approach by the biggest stars, their failure to target one of the two wicketkeepers, and their aversion to taking risks led to their failure to win the showpiece.
Thursday’s semi-final match against England ended in a 10-wicket defeat.
In the end, Dravid’s one-year report card does not paint a rosy picture and a meticulous planner like him will ponder his various options before the ODI World Cup a year from now.
The Indian Cricket team, with multiple soft underbellies, also satisfy with reaching the semi-finals. If skipper Rohit Sharma and Dravid put their hands together.
Cricket aficionados and die-hards alike hate the way the Indian cricket team promises so much but deceives on big days. A knockout game of a global competition is a defeat for the sixth time in nine years for a number of reasons.
Absence of Jasprit Bumrah and Ravindra Jadeja
Due to stress fractures in their backs and knees, Jasprit Bumrah and Ravindra Jadeja will be absent.
As long as Bumrah is present, there is always a cushion of two overs at the end.
It is possible to use Jadeja as a left-handed floater in the batting order in order to introduce a left-handed batsman into the equation. But these are uncontrollable for the Indian Cricket team that often harps on “only controlling the controllable.” They couldn’t do that, either.
The disaster was waiting to happen for a number of reasons:
1) The top three’s safety-first powerplay approach
Taking a closer look at the much-debated approach of the top three, maybe Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli and KL Rahul would admit they have failed to constantly change their game.
As Nasser Hussain asked why India played “antiquated powerplay cricket”, Dravid in one of his cooperations had conceded that they without a doubt neglected to show the dauntlessness anticipated in extreme circumstances for batting.
In the main three, just a single hitter can stand to be an anchor, and maybe bat profound while the other two should assault.
However, Rahul (128 runs, 120.75), Rohit (116 runs, strike rate 106.42) and even Kohli (136.40) have been moderate in their methodology in the powerplays. Against South Africa on a pitch that offered pace, they oversaw 33/2 while in a previous game against Pakistan, it was 31/3 at the MCG. Then, at that point, on a serene Adelaide Oval track, 38/1 was reprehensible.
2) Rishabh Pant versus Dinesh Karthik
Regardless of whether one prefers it, Gasp in white-ball cricket is at his best when he is opening the innings cool as a cucumber. He probably won’t have huge runs however showed a goal. The second it turned into a center request space, the semi-resigned Karthik at 37, came into the image.
The job of an assigned finisher, with an objective of 25 to 30 off 10 balls, is a decent test on the sub-mainland surfaces where he plays the IPL. However, the second the ball bobs a piece extra and barb around, he is viewed as caring.
Then out of nowhere, a match before the elimination rounds the “Karthik trial and error” is discarded. And, the Indian Cricket team board looked for the left-given choice in Gasp.
If Karthik was explicitly ready throughout the previous four months for this competition. Why did the Indian Cricket team, referring to strategic change, change to Gasp? His trust in this entire carousel took a serious beating. This is done exclusively to oblige Rahul at the top.
3) Not using Yuzvendra Chahal
Yuzvendra Chahal is India’s top wicket-taker in T20Is. Yet entertainingly enough, hasn’t played a solitary T20 World Cup game. As he is dropped in one release and warms the seat this time.
Somebody who can turn his leg breaks and bowl a decent googly. Chahal wasn’t playing against the English batting line-up. But, against whom he had great matchups.
All things being equal, they favored Axar Patel, who was disheartening. His wicket-to-wicket bowling on obvious surfaces. Even, with even bob was gun grub for players. Whether it was Iftikhar Ahmed or Alex Hales. He was being done an amazing job for the sake of entertainment. He played five games and couldn’t finish his quantity in the majority of them. And, going at an economy of 8.62 runs per over.
The rationale that he is a batting-request floater likewise didn’t fill in as he only sometimes got a nice hit. That brings up the issue of how could Chahal need a pad of a lower player (say Harshal Patel) to safeguard him. And, if the main five expert players can’t pile up the numbers. So, how should a bowler finish that work?
Adil Rashid’s strength was a valid example.
4) Dravid’s decision making
Dravid has immovably dug in himself in the place of the lead trainer over the most recent year. However, the opportunity has arrived for him to destroy the ongoing layout and set up another one.
Hitters, such as Shubman Gill, Prithvi Shaw, Rahul Tripathi. And, Rajat Patidar have demonstrated tremendous commitment. Also, should be prepared for two years close to the following T20 World Cup.
Likewise, unloading Avesh Khan for a couple of terrible end overs in the Asia Cup. This appeared to be a piece disconnected. Rahul got umpteen games to succeed and all it required to dismiss Avesh was two or three awful trips.