Arguably the best one day batting line-up in the world makes 338 and yet it's not enough. While many will look at the English batting that rose to the occasion, the sad truth is that Indian bowling...well, for the sake of simplicity, sucked!
Perspective is a strange thing and especially in cricket it dons an almost unrecognizable color. While the glass looks half-full on some occasions, on most the same tends to look half-empty and the Indian team is the best example of this. There is no doubt in anyone's mind that logically this Indian side is the most formidable on paper and if MS Dhoni and his men were to lift the 2011 edition of the World Cup no one will be shocked.
But after Sunday's match, one wonders is a good batting line-up that accounts for over 33,000 one day runs just between Sachin Tendulkar, Virender Sehwag and Yuvraj Singh enough to win the world cup?
What about the other department known as bowling?
One would argue that the English bowling wasn't as good for how else would Tendulkar and Yuvraj blaze through in the manner that they did. But look closely and you would see that more than the Indian duo, Andrew Strauss and Ian Bell exposed the toothless opposition bowling attack.
Even after 600 plus runs the pitch didn't give in and the Indian attack just didn't have it in them to stop England. Agreed that umpire Bowden's decision to give Bell not out played some role but it seems like luck was the 12th Indian on the field! Had it not been for the sweet one from Zaheer Khan that trapped Strauss immediately after he got Bell the result would have been something else.
It's funny that everyone's saying England needed 13 of the last over and just 'managed' 12 and hence they didn't 'win'? Managed? Had it not been for the single off the last ball the word managed wouldn't be used so liberally!
In spite of being hit all over the ground the Indian bowlers did give some opportunities to the fielders which were not taken seriously. Kohli might be a livewire in the field but his reaction time isn't a patch on Rahul Dravid's while guarding the slips. There was a time in the match when Indians gave up in the field which isn't the thing to do when you have a score like 338 to defend!
This, like a lot of early matches in major tournaments, is a wake-up call for India. But how can we act shocked and surprised at the same thing over and over? If the top 6 in the batting order can't get enough runs for the bowlers to play to then how can 8 batsmen make the difference? Barring Zaheer Khan who comes up with a stroke of brilliance every now and then, there isn't any consistent bowler in this Indian side. Of course, we missed the regular fifth bowler but you see we miss him more while picking up the team!
Everybody's talking about the nerve wrecking match that this tie (no pun intended) turned out to be. People will talk about the sheer tenacity of this young Indian side while discussing the turning points of the match but let's not make too much of Munaf Patel failing to ground his bat and losing the second run on the final ball that might have cost India a potentially match-winning single for many fielders just didn't chase hard enough when Strauss was on a roll; or Zaheer's beauty of a delivery that got Strauss for it 43rd over and England was almost home.
I could be wrong. Maybe this is what makes a good game great or a great one greater still. Irrespective of how you paint it, honestly while England might not have won the match India lost it. Well, okay India 'almost' lost it. Happy?
Perspective is a strange thing and especially in cricket it dons an almost unrecognizable color. While the glass looks half-full on some occasions, on most the same tends to look half-empty and the Indian team is the best example of this. There is no doubt in anyone's mind that logically this Indian side is the most formidable on paper and if MS Dhoni and his men were to lift the 2011 edition of the World Cup no one will be shocked.
But after Sunday's match, one wonders is a good batting line-up that accounts for over 33,000 one day runs just between Sachin Tendulkar, Virender Sehwag and Yuvraj Singh enough to win the world cup?
What about the other department known as bowling?
One would argue that the English bowling wasn't as good for how else would Tendulkar and Yuvraj blaze through in the manner that they did. But look closely and you would see that more than the Indian duo, Andrew Strauss and Ian Bell exposed the toothless opposition bowling attack.
Even after 600 plus runs the pitch didn't give in and the Indian attack just didn't have it in them to stop England. Agreed that umpire Bowden's decision to give Bell not out played some role but it seems like luck was the 12th Indian on the field! Had it not been for the sweet one from Zaheer Khan that trapped Strauss immediately after he got Bell the result would have been something else.
It's funny that everyone's saying England needed 13 of the last over and just 'managed' 12 and hence they didn't 'win'? Managed? Had it not been for the single off the last ball the word managed wouldn't be used so liberally!
In spite of being hit all over the ground the Indian bowlers did give some opportunities to the fielders which were not taken seriously. Kohli might be a livewire in the field but his reaction time isn't a patch on Rahul Dravid's while guarding the slips. There was a time in the match when Indians gave up in the field which isn't the thing to do when you have a score like 338 to defend!
This, like a lot of early matches in major tournaments, is a wake-up call for India. But how can we act shocked and surprised at the same thing over and over? If the top 6 in the batting order can't get enough runs for the bowlers to play to then how can 8 batsmen make the difference? Barring Zaheer Khan who comes up with a stroke of brilliance every now and then, there isn't any consistent bowler in this Indian side. Of course, we missed the regular fifth bowler but you see we miss him more while picking up the team!
Everybody's talking about the nerve wrecking match that this tie (no pun intended) turned out to be. People will talk about the sheer tenacity of this young Indian side while discussing the turning points of the match but let's not make too much of Munaf Patel failing to ground his bat and losing the second run on the final ball that might have cost India a potentially match-winning single for many fielders just didn't chase hard enough when Strauss was on a roll; or Zaheer's beauty of a delivery that got Strauss for it 43rd over and England was almost home.
I could be wrong. Maybe this is what makes a good game great or a great one greater still. Irrespective of how you paint it, honestly while England might not have won the match India lost it. Well, okay India 'almost' lost it. Happy?
