As a passionate sports enthusiast, it’s truly disheartening to witness our team’s defeat in the ODI Cricket Worldcup Final against Australia. The emotions of despair, dejection, and sadness are palpable and likely to linger for an extended period, despite our best efforts to move on. The prospect of redemption seems distant, a daunting four years away, appearing almost like an eternity in the current moment.
While we, as fans, may believe we comprehend the players’ experience, it’s a misconception. Attempting to understand the depth of their emotions would be an error on our part. Unlike us, some of them may never get the chance at redemption; they will have to live with this profound sense of loss indefinitely!
For both fans and players alike, a persistent “what if” sensation remains. Time cannot be rewound to change outcomes, yet our minds constantly replay scenarios under the relentless loop of ‘what if’ with an irrational hope for eventual peace!
Given the unfortunate loss, we fell short in certain aspects against Australia’s formidable winning machinery. Here, I present a list of 11 ‘what-ifs,’ focusing solely on the controllable factors, as a modest attempt to find the elusive solace.
- What if Sharma had refrained from that ill-fated shot at 9.4? The miscue, culminating in Head’s extraordinary catch, marked a moment where the momentum started to shift irreversibly against India.
- What if Gill exercised more caution, avoiding an early pull shot without fully gauging the pitch’s bounce and pace? At 30/0 after 4.1 overs, was that front foot pull shot truly necessary?
- What if Jadeja wasn’t promoted ahead of Surya at a critical juncture? While Jadeja couldn’t make a significant impact, it felt like Surya stepped onto the field with lingering doubts. Why didn’t the management trust a full-time batsman to navigate the conditions more sensibly than a bowling all-rounder?
- What if Kohli and Rahul exhibited more intent, preventing Australia from dominating with a 100+ ball streak devoid of boundaries? The pressure was evident, but the bowling wasn’t potent enough to justify such a defensive stance. At least one of them could have played more freely.
- What if Siraj had been entrusted with the new ball? Despite his recent form, his designated role was to operate with the new ball. Shami had excelled as the first change, so why disrupt the rhythm? Siraj’s introduction in the 17th over, even after Jadeja and Kuldeep, instilled unwanted doubt even before he bowled his first delivery.
- What if Shami had bowled with more discipline in the initial spell? After 10 overs, Australia was at 60/3, with 15 runs coming from extras. While the bowlers had to strive for wickets, discipline is expected from world-class bowlers.
- What if we had approached this as a 40-over game, adjusting bowling plans accordingly? Kuldeep and Siraj bowled 17 overs without significant impact, whereas we left 1 over of Bumrah and 3 overs of Shami at the game’s conclusion.
- What if we had considered incorporating 2-3 overs from part-timers to disrupt the rhythm? The phase when Siraj, Kuldeep, and Jadeja bowled felt like the team was running through the motion. With Virat, Gill, Surya, and Rohit eager to make an impact, an over or two from them might have turned the tide.
- What if we had adopted a more aggressive field setting? Slips for the spinners were absent, and the defensive spread allowed easy singles, particularly to Marnus when he looked to be under tremendous pressure. Creating pressure through aggressive and creative fielding placements could have made a difference.
- What if players like Surya, Gill, Iyer, and Kohli were more actively engaged in the game? The absence of spirited exchanges, active participation in the huddle, encouragement for the bowlers, sledges, and interaction with the crowd after the 25th over was conspicuous. Bumrah seemed the sole player fully invested, even when not bowling.
- What if our bowlers had displayed more ingenuity in their approach? Variations like slow balls, slow bouncers, cutters, yorkers, and changes in delivery angles were underutilized or entirely absent, contrasting with Australia’s inventive tactics. Sometimes it is better to operate ugly and be effective.
In contemplating these ‘what-ifs’ my intention is not to assign blame but rather to find a semblance of peace amidst the disappointment. My love for the game and team supersedes everything else and will remain undeterred by the outcomes of the game on any given Sunday.
Discover more from On The Run with Aashu
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
On The Run with Aashu 
Leave a comment