India’s defeat against Pakistan and New Zealand has set the storm among people. Whether we talk about New Zealand’s match where Indian cricketers were pummelled and induced towards the exit door with a clear eight-wicket victory or India-Pakistan match where the team lost by 10 wickets.
So where did we actually lack?
Now, if we talk about our bilateral countries like England or New Zealand where we won in New Zealand by defeating New Zealand, won the series in India by defeating England, and also defeated Australia in the Australian series. The one thing that was common in these matches was India’s Playing 11.
When we see the warm-up matches where we saw India playing against England, Rohit Sharma was not playing rather there was a combination of left and right openers who were Ishan Kishan, KL Rahul, and Virat Kohli on Number 3 followed by others but when the same squad plays in Australia, Virat Kohli doesn’t play on Number 3 and openers being KL Rahul and Rohit Sharma, which is not a winning combination either Virat Kohli or Rohit Sharma should have played.
Players that could have been an asset to the team
In England, Australia, and New Zealand series the main role was played by Shreyas Iyer who is known for his outstanding batsmanship, scored more than 4500 runs and over 50 in first-class cricket, Yuzvendra Chahal who takes a wicket in the power play, and Deepak Chahar who clinched a heroic hat-trick in T-20, are no more in our best 15 squads. And not having such players who have always proved to be an asset to our team is proving out to be a big drawback for us. This experimental approach is paying us a hard time, like the approach that they took in the India-Srilanka match, India lost by 2-1 and after that, not a single series came.
Experimenting can cost us a complete match
It is not a one-day match, it is a 20 overs match, and playing with the combination of the players and experimenting on it is getting hard on us and most importantly if Hardik Pandya was unfit for the gamer then Deepak Chahar should be taken into consideration he was also good option he has also thrown some good hits in the past, the focus should have been on those 5 batsmen and 6 frontline bowlers. Maybe then the scenario could have been different of the two matches that we lost.
In the Srilanka v/s England match which was on the 1st of November, England was in the same spot as India was and wickets were worse in Sharjah than in Dubai, to make a hundred in such a pitch is equal to making 150 on a good pitch. In 12 overs 60 runs were made then in 8 overs 100 runs were made and two were scored by only 2 batsmen. This approach seems to be of not getting defensive, which means, your bowling should be such that the opposite team plays in a defensive way and not by you getting defensive. In the same way, Srilanka also played well by making 90 runs in 12 overs for 3 but England’s bowling was outstanding, bringing the best bowling lineup.
England is a strong contender for this world cup, people will have an eye on their approach because earlier also England has played well but had to make an exit in the ICC Champions Trophy,2017.
Now the remaining matches of India are with Namibia, Scotland, and Afghanistan.
After all this scenario, the nation has their eyes on them, India needs to rebuckle and frame a new team like they had in 2007, T20 World Cup which was made for CB Series Australia, 2008.