In a team sport, the glory or the shame, the joy or the heartbreak, is shared by the collective. But a team is not merely the sum of its individual parts. There is a collective energy that palpably becomes an x-factor, when suddenly everybody becomes the best version of themselves, even for a short while with that energy lifting them to a different level (this was most palpable in Pakistani teams in their pomp when their fire burnt so bright in short bursts that you could almost feel its heat). The reverse is also true, when negative energy spreads and turns out the lights abruptly across players of a team (South Africa had fallen prey to that in several World Cups before).
Both happened simultaneously in the last 5 overs of this T20 World Cup final which had anyway had wonderful ebbs and flows. South Africa needed 30 to win off 30 balls, 6 wickets in hand. Klaasen 49 off 22. Miller 14 off 7. They had just taken 24 off the last over. The match was a slam dunk. Win predictor showing 3.3% chances for India. 95-97% teams would win from here in these conditions. South Africa’s ghosts of 1999 were showing signs of fully fading away.
When South Africa were batting earlier, except for when Bumrah bowled, the South African batsmen never seemed to be in any problem. Two of the four wickets they’d lost were to loose shots given the circumstances (Stubbs and de Kock). But Klaasen, playing to his strengths, and Miller were doing it easy – the pitch was flat, nothing for the spinners. It was clear this was a 190-par pitch, if not 200. And India were at least 15-20 short.
Bumrah came on – the only bowler from both sides all day who looked like he could get a wicket anytime. He didn’t this time, but just four runs were scored, and thrice, he almost got a dismissal. 26 from 24 required now – the needle had moved very slightly for India. And then, after a slight break in play (did it change the momentum?), it moved dramatically, when Klaasen chased a wide ball off Hardik, and got an edge. Miller needed to calm things down now, which happened. Just 4 runs were conceded in that over and 22 off 18 still had South Africa favourites. A single loose ball would turn the momentum, most likely decisively. Bumrah bowled a vicious over, every ball a potential wickettaker, one of which did. Only 2 runs given. 20 off 12 now; suddenly the match had turned full circle. The panic was palpable on the South African faces. Arshdeep bowled a highly underrated over in those circumstances, giving just four runs. 16 off 6 was India’s match to lose now, unless the over began badly, which it almost did, as Hardik bowled the first loose ball in 5 overs. SKY’s breathtaking catch at the boundary for what seemed a certain six represented a collective desperation to win – many others on that ground would have probably taken the same catch.
That combination of Bumrah-Hardik-Arshdeep won the match for India from a lost situation. No loose balls, several lethal ones, and the fielding was as inspired. One of those bowlers was the rightful Man-of-the-Match – most likely Bumrah, since he lit what eventually became the fire.
Now, let’s do a small thought experiment. Let’s go back to 30 off 30 required. Let’s imagine the 96.7% probability playing out on the win predictor, the 95-97% likely side to win actually winning comfortably from there. Let’s imagine Klaasen had not thrown it away, Jansen had not frozen the way he did (he’d bowled very poorly too) and Miller had not got spooked. And South Africa won from there. What would have been India’s biggest reason for losing in those conditions? For not reaching the par score?
The answer is actually very straightforward. The pitch was slower at first, and India hadn’t done well to be at 45 for 3 at the end of the powerplay (the exact powerplay score for India predicted by Boucher just before the match started). It was perfect for Kohli though, who could go back to his natural T20 game, as some consolidation was the order of the moment. Kohli had been 21 off 13 at one point (the beneficiary of three half volleys from Jansen and one half tracker from Maharaj) – trying to play the new role chalked out for him. But after SKY fell, he could rightly revert back to his natural waiting game. Which was fine for a bit, since Axar took all the risks, which began to come off as well. India were 75 for 3 in 10 overs (Kohli 36 off 29). Dube, Pandya and Jadeja to come – all strokeplayers. By the time Axar got run out (after 47 off 31) , Kohli was on 43 off 38. Again, despite being well set, he didn’t speed up, making 7 off the next 10 balls and reaching his 50 off 48 balls (which he was clearly conscious of) – curiously the slowest fifty of his T20I career (that lasted 125 matches in 15 years). Immediately after that, with just 3 overs to go, he cut loose, or rather, joined Dube in scoring quick runs (Dube got 22 off 13, Kohli got 26 off 11) before holing out. Hardik Pandya, India’s most successful hitter in this tournament, came out to bat with just 7 balls to go. And then Jadeja got just 2 balls in the innings.
Kohli’s 76 off 59 may have been the highest score of the innings but his SR of 129 also ensured that India were 15-20 runs short, simply because the biggest hitters in the team did not get enough balls to face. As Nasser Hussain said diplomatically then (and very astutely) that the match result would decide how people view Kohli’s innings. But the fact also is that South Africa lost the match from an overwhelming winning position. So, how is Kohli’s innings to be viewed then?
Just because of an unexpected twist in the match near the end, should that change the evaluation of Kohli’s innings? The manner in which all of this is not just going to be glossed over, but aggressively countered, actually tells you why Kohli led RCB to 8 playoffs in 15 years without winning a single title. Or why India had not won a single T20 world title even after 16 years of the IPL. Or a World Cup in any format for 13 years, a world tournament for 11 years. And only won a T20 World Cup now after 17 years (a period when England and West Indies won two titles, while Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Australia won a title each). All of this, despite having the biggest T20 league in the world and the highest number of world-class players by a mile.
The bowlers won this tournament for India – that is crystal clear, of course. And Rohit’s risk-taking at the top of the order (yet again) filled the team with rightful urgency for this format (the biggest change from the 2022 WC team). One has to feel good for Rohit – he deserved this success for just that selflessness (and for the pettiness he had to endure in the last IPL season). His captaincy was outstanding, for lifting his team after customary post-IPL exhaustion (kudos to the whole support staff for that) and embracing risk-taking with conviction without losing the discipline. And for managing that awe-inspiring bowling, that could carry a handicap top-of-the-order and still win all games. Both Rohit and Kohli were playing their last T20I match – that was fairly clear. But if the Man-of-the-Match award to Kohli was to commemorate that, it just compounds the poorness of the choice.
A classic South African choke saw them lose yet again from a winning position, but they have been vindicated on not mixing world tournaments with transformation targets – hopefully this will now be the norm for them. India, on the other hand, played with a handicap, and found it getting justified in the end, just because the match was won against the odds near the end, that had nothing to do with that player in question.
There is nothing to agree or disagree here – these are just plain facts. This is not a democratic exercise where the majority gets to decide what reality is or what the facts are. It’s one thing that casual fans of the sport won’t get any of this, or care – since they’re looking for a short-term wave to ride on (and celebrityhood makes that even easier). But it’s quite another for those who follow the sport closely, and care about the future of Indian cricket, to gloss over the bullet this team dodged. The sold-out mainstream coverage of the sport that cannot speak the truth (even an international commentator would lose his job if he hinted some of this in India) can happily move on to low hanging fruit celebration.
An era of Indian T20I cricket ends here, as Rohit and Kohli exit, with Dravid. Having seen how Hardik captains, and how the newer generation plays, when the likes of Jaiswal and Rinku have their places secured, with the right kind of coach (hopefully Gambhir) – it’s most likely that merit will once again become the main criteria for selection, without Holy Cows. When the team will play contemporary T20 cricket and the batting line-up will radiate the same kind of fever the bowlers did here (led by Bumrah – the greatest international bowler so far of this century at the very least). And when the team won’t have to depend on perfect conditions for their spinners (the semifinal) or an oppositional brain fade (the final) to win a tournament. And, most significantly, it won’t have to wait 17 years for the next T20 title.
