The Mumbai Indians-Punjab Kings Qualifier 2 encounter in Ahmedabad had enough plots and subplots. From persistent rain that threatened to play spoilsport, fluffed chances, a crucial overthrow, tactical errors to a clutch performance from Shreyas Iyer, the game had its share of thrills and spills. At RevSportz, we delve deeper to look at where MI slipped up in their pursuit to reach one more IPL final.
Why did Santner bowl just two overs?
Mitchell Santner, the New Zealand skipper, has a knack of taking the prized scalp. He may not exactly pick 2-3 wickets in every T20 game, but with subtle changes of pace, flight and clever use of the crease, he has the required traits to outsmart the best in the business. In one of the previous games of the season versus DC, he had turned the game on its head by dismissing the dangerous Karun Nair. He also proved to be the telling difference when the same two sides locked horns at the Wankhede.
It is true that Iyer is renowned for his pyrotechnics against finger spin. But Hardik Pandya, the skipper, ideally should have backed Santner’s wisdom of experience. In fact, Hardik could have even used Santner from an over-the-wicket angle in the 19th over, instead of the inexperienced Ashwani Kumar.
Were the lengths too full v Iyer?
In the first innings of the game, it seemed as if the track was a tad tacky with all the rain around. No wonder, someone like Kyle Jamieson was intent on employing off-pace, into-the-pitch deliveries. His final figures read: 30 runs from over overs. Even Azmatullah Omarzai mostly stuck to the same plan in the last over and gave away just nine runs.
Granted that the pitch might have got better when PBKS batted, but it was quite evident that MI’s pacemen missed a trick by not pulling the length back. To delve deeper, just zoom in on Iyer’s scoring chart and you will observe that he smashed five sixes via down the ground, long-off and wide of long-on regions while facing full deliveries.
As a subset to the above-mentioned point, MI had three left-arm pacers in their ranks – Reece Topley, Ashwani and Trent Boult. Unfortunately, none of them tried the round-the-wicket angle and into-the-pitch variations from that aforesaid angle. The troika could have at least used that option as a change-up.
The connecting point between Iyer and third man
By now it is a known fact that Iyer is adept at steering a few of the offerings through the third man region. And with MI’s pacers all set to try the yorkers, the think-tank looked to plug the gap via short third. Iyer, however, showcased tremendous skills to play it very fine and collect boundaries. It goes back to the same old point – Why not mix up the lengths by bowling it shorter and pushing the third man back?
Not a good day in the office for Hardik
It is unfair to blame any loss on one player. Having said that, unlike Iyer, Hardik couldn’t inspire his side. To start with, he could only accumulate 15 runs off 13 deliveries. At a crucial phase of the innings, Hardik couldn’t provide the impetus. He then ended up bowling only a couple of overs. Logically, an experienced campaigner like Hardik should have bowled at least one more over. To make matters worse, some of the tactical decisions went awry.
Follow Revsportz for latest sports news
Also read : PBKS vs MI: Splendid Shreyas Iyer sets up final date with RCB