Deepak Hooda: India has said at each press conference that they don’t plan to change their starting eleven. Not because they have a superstitious notion of a “winning combination,”. But because the starting XI for the first two games covered all the possible options.
So why did Deepak Hooda take Axar Patel’s spot in the South Africa game? India lost a far better bowler than Hooda and the lone left-handed hitter in the top seven. However, India reasoned that a part-time off-spinner, they needed a sixth bowler, it will be more effective. Against South Africa’s left-handed lineup. Axar only bowled one over against Pakistan at the MCG, a wicket with similarly short boundaries as Perth. India chose the part-time off-spinner, knowing that he would almost definitely bowl four overs in Perth.
The big reason Deepak Hooda
To strengthen the batting in challenging conditions, however, seems to be the more important factor. In retrospect, it may be claimed that Hooda’s batting was ineffective and that Axar should have taken an over from R Ashwin that India didn’t trust Hooda to bowl. On the other hand, India eventually need deeper batting, and Hooda entered the fray as early as the eighth over.
Bangladesh, who has four left-handed hitters in their top six, will be India’s opponent in the following game. The reasons to go with Hooda only needed for one or two overs. And not more, despite the temptation to return to the effective combination and add more bowling depth.
The Bat First scenario at Perth Deepak Hooda
Given how India had timed their pursuit to defeat Pakistan and how South Africa eventually timed their chase against India, it is a reasonable issue. Australian playing surfaces, however, do not favour chasing sides as much as other surfaces. Prior to Sunday at Perth Stadium, the team batting first had won 15 and lost 11 games. Though it did not work out, it is understandable why India elected to bat first.
Playing with the Hooks
The shot selection by India’s top six batsmen against South Africa’s four-pronged pace attack on a highly fast and bouncy ground cannot be criticised, even though four of them were dismissed playing the pull or hook. They wouldn’t have been able to score much at all if they hadn’t taken the short ball on. At the press conference following the game, South African batsman Aiden Markram was even questioned about India’s enthusiastic hookers. He claimed that their batting technique was flawless.
Because of the bounce, Markram observed, “I think on a track like this, you’re going to wind up playing more as a result of bad strokes than on other wickets.” “When there is extra bounce, playing the shot is difficult. But ultimately, as a batsman, you must also make a play if a side keeps hitting that length in T20 cricket. Because of this, both teams took short balls tonight because, regrettably, if you don’t, you won’t be able to score at a pace that is quick enough.”
Could not bowl Yorker
When Netherlands played Pakistan at the same location earlier in the day, Mohammad Wasim bowled outstanding yorkers to complete a hat-trick and dash any dreams of a late comeback. Even though Arshdeep Singh and Mohammed Shami have excellent yorkers, India continued to bowl length or shorter. The margin of error was likely tiny on the yorker due to the short straight boundaries, however if they hit the hard lengths, the bounce became their ally. India wanted wickets, which is what yorkers typically don’t provide. South Africa would have won in the end if David Miller had batted through the entire innings.
Could Not hold Ashwin for the last over
Ashwin’s final over was always going to be the one that South Africa had . It would target once they attacked his third over, the 14th of the chase. Most captains wait till last over to target. The over is to targeted, by bowler proves. Hence expensive, the bowlers are better suited to the death might not even complete their quotas.
It gets nasty when a spinner bowls the final over. According to Rohit Sharma, who explained why he bowled Ashwin in the 18th over. He might have chosen a different path for another reason. For instance, Pakistan bowled the other overs first in the India-Pakistan match. Hence they anticipated India would target left-arm spinner Mohammad Nawaz’s final over. South Africa just only 25 off 18 balls against India, compared to India’s requirement of 48 off the final three overs against Pakistan. South Africa could have played out India’s quick bowlers and chased down 11 or 12 runs in the final over if India had bowled their fast bowlers earlier.