Of course, the glass half-emptyers shall moan and groan about lacking the killer punch to take the last wicket. And that Rahul Dravid did not give himself enough time to bowl the Windies out. I wanted to write about that aspect until I read Prem Panicker's match report. He said it best at the very end. I quote:
An interesting point that has cropped up repeatedly in email exchanges with friends is the possibility that India could have looked to have pushed on a bit quicker, and gotten a few more overs at the West Indies batsmen. 450 runs ahead in 20 overs less was more or less the consensus suggestion - that is to say, India should have been around 580 runs in around 130 overs.
The good bit about hindsight is it is always 20/20. But then what? A target for the West Indies of 4 an over, with 110 overs to get there? On the ground where, in May 2003, the West Indies successfully got 418 for seven in 128.5 overs to win a Test - against the world champion side boasting an attack that read Glenn McGrath, Jason Gillespie, Brett Lee, Stuart McGill and Andy Bichel?
To set that target, India would have had to make 580 runs in 130 overs, India would have had - coming into the second innings 130 runs behind, with the consequent risk that losing wickets in the push for quick runs would toss the game, gift-wrapped, into the opposition's lap - to have scored at 4.46 per over throughout its innings. Assume that was possible for the Indians, then by what logic is a run rate of 4 not possible, on the same pitch, for the opposition?
A team that after being 130 behind in the first innings lost the game setting that sort of gettable target on a pitch that has played placid throughout would have been incarcerated in an asylum for the criminally insane - and quite rightly too.
No comments:
Post a Comment