The most boring ODIs are usually the ones where the team batting first scores over 350. The remaining four hours are usually an utter waste of the spectators’ time, with the chasing side either skittled in quick time, or limping to a total that will minimize damage to their net run-rate, if it’s a multi-nation tournament. Such games almost always lack drama, which is the very essence of sport.
This is not just an opinion either. The match in Dharamsala was the 4,684th ODI. Of those, 141 had been won by teams batting first and making 350 or more. Only ten times had a target of that magnitude been chased down. And only once, at the Wanderers more than 17 years ago, had a team chased more than 372. In a nutshell, that’s what New Zealand were up against when they went out to bat in the afternoon.
We often talk of the ebb and flow of games. This one didn’t have that. Here, the changes in fortune were almost violent in nature. Forget ebb and flow, this was like a boxer getting hit by a vicious hook and replying with an upper-cut of his own. We shouldn’t have been surprised. Forget the Trans-Tasman rivalry. This was, after all, a match pitting the most successful side in World Cup history with the most consistent team of the modern era.
At the 10-over mark, New Zealand were already 45 runs behind in comparison, with Travis Head and David Warner having walloped 118 in the Powerplay. By the end of over 20, the Black Caps were maintaining a run-rate over 7 an over but were still 35 behind. With Rachin Ravindra refusing to take his foot off the accelerator though, the gap to Australia’s total had been narrowed to 22 by the end of 30 overs.
Australia then took the crucial wickets of Tom Latham and Glenn Phillips. You would have expected that to stem the run flow. Not a bit of it. Ravindra kept finding the gaps, and Jimmy Neesham was an able foil. By the 40-over mark, the comparative scores were dead even – 292-5.
After 45 overs, New Zealand were in fact two runs ahead, but that was where they ran out of steam. Or rather, with seven wickets down, it was impossible to match the carnage that Pat Cummins had unleashed in three overs, when Australia rattled off 58 runs. Five sixes, four fours, two dropped catches – those overs from Matt Henry, Trent Boult and Neesham were almost a match in miniature. Ultimately, that was the passage of play that proved the difference between two well-matched teams.
In a close finish, however, Australia seldom lose. If you want to beat them, you usually have to thrash them. In a close contest, if they scent blood, you’re done for. This is especially so in World Cups, where the canary-yellow shirt has such an aura. Only twice in the last quarter-century have Australia lost a nail-biting match on the biggest stage. Wasim Akram, Saqlain Mushtaq and Shoaib Akhtar sent them to a 10-run defeat at Headingley in 1999 after they needed just 38 from the last 32 balls. And at Eden Park in 2015, Kane Williamson’s composure took New Zealand to a one-wicket win after Michael Clarke’s team had defended a paltry total of 151 with tigerish tenacity.
No one needs reminding that on both those occasions, Australia went on to win the tournament.