Where are India’s wicket takers?
Losing the toss should have given India a clue that nothing was going to go right for them. The best way for India to react to this game is first give Pakistan a lot of credit for what can only be described as a real thrashing at their hands.
Shaheen Afridi got three wickets, two in the first six overs. These three wickets were the wickets of Rohit Sharma, KL Rahul and Virat Kohli. That’s basically taking the wind out of India’s sails after which India could just not come back in the game.
Afridi’s spell of bowling gave us a little reminder of how Pakistan have produced these fantastic fast bowlers over the years. No other country can boast of such a long line of 90 mph bowlers who swing the ball big. Afridi is the latest on this list.
Despite the heavy defeat, let me focus on India’s positives first. Losing Rohit and Rahul so early in a batting line-up that had a few batters down the line who are off the boil was the worst nightmare coming true for India.
Yet, India got to 151, which is a very good long-term sign, because Rohit and Rahul failing together at such low scores won’t happen again for a while. The face of the new generation of Indian batters, Surya Kumar Yadav, got out early too. So, one way to look at this is that even when key Indian batsmen fail, they still get to 151. Factor in the lost toss, which meant India faced the more difficult batting conditions. Batting second is and will always be, easier in these conditions.
The big concern for me is India’s bowling. I know there is merit in the thought that you must back your players after their failures, especially in T20s, but this is easier to do when you are playing a long season of the IPL and not when a couple of defeats mean all chances of winning the World Cup are down the drain. What was glaring about India’s defeat was how none of the bowlers looked like they would take wickets. The only way India had a chance of winning the game was by taking wickets regularly.
That defeat to England in the 2019 World Cup in England is a significant moment in the recent history of India’s white ball cricket. It’s the last match India played, with two spinners in the squad looking for wickets. But Virat abandoned that potent winning formula of having spinners who were wicket taking and more importantly bowling only to get wickets. That’s what Kuldeep Yadav and Yuzvendra Chahal would do. Amit Mishra too when he played the odd game. After dumping R Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja, interestingly after a defeat to Pakistan, this time in the Champions Trophy final in England in 2017, India have gone back to them again.
Ashwin, like Jadeja, is not a wicket-taker. Both are more focused on economy than wickets. I believe in T20s, the spinners’ job is to get wickets and be the game changer in the middle.
Jadeja can be your third spinner who will bowl a few overs and not someone you depend on to bowl his full quota of four overs. He has done that only a little more than 50% of the times in T20Is and he certainly can’t be one of your five bowling options. But for that India MUST feel that Jadeja can replace a batter in the playing XI and then be your 6th bowling option. The team will have a better balance then. If Hardik is not going to bowl he must be given the status of a pure batter and your expectation from him must be like you have from a pure batter.
India made a mistake by not sending Hardik ahead of both Jadeja and Pant. I know India wanted to keep the left-hand/ right-hand combination going, one important reason why Imad Wasim, the left arm spinner, bowled just two overs. But elevating Hardik would have served two purposes. You would have given Hardik, the pure batter, the platform any out-of-form batter wants--a bit of time to settle. Also, you would have then had a better understanding of Hardik’s current state of mind and batting ability to decide his immediate future in this tournament.
I had Shardul in my playing XI v Pakistan, not Bhuvneswar Kumar for the reason we saw on Sunday. Bhuvi seems to have just lost all his “strength” as a bowler and this has been on display for a while now. By “strength” I mean speed and nip in his deliveries, whether he is bowling seam up or slower balls. Bhuvi is a wonderful trier but India need to take a hard call on him. Is he going through a bad patch or this is the best we are going to get from him now?
I wonder if Dhoni was involved in the decision of either playing Shardul or Bhuvi. I know who Dhoni would have wanted. Shardul, by the way, though comparatively expensive, is that wicket taker we were talking about.