Notes From the World Cup: Rohit Sharma's Day Out in Ahmedabad

On the big day, he turned up in royal colours

By the end, it was a stroll. You could judge by the body language of both teams. As Shreyas Iyer hit Mohammed Nawaz for a six to officially close the game, faces in the Indian dugout broke into broad, relieved smiles. Their opponents had already resigned to fate. Both teams were almost glad this was over.

Whatever the visuals didn’t convey, the scorecard filled in. 191 all out; chased down in 30 overs. There are no caveats to use as a shield. I was watching the game from nearly 1900 kilometres away, but the air felt palpably light, robbed of the tension that a game of this magnitude carries. The cameras panned to the players exchanging handshakes, hugs, and consolatory pats on the shoulders.

These scenes couldn’t have been more different from the last time the two teams met at a World Cup. At the end of that night in Melbourne, almost exactly a year back, Ravichandran Ashwin was running around with arms wide open, Rohit Sharma was lifting Virat Kohli on his shoulders, Hardik Pandya was in tears, and about 90000 people at the Melbourne Cricket Ground were trying to find their voice and jaws. That game was so good ICC made a montage of the final few overs. Commentary packages have been edited into Instagram reels to accompany videos from the match.

But that game was also an aberration. The recent record of India vs Pakistan at World Cups speaks of worrying lopsidedness. Since the 2015 World Cup, most games between these two teams have finished without spectators having to dig into their nails. India have ended up on the right side of the result for all barring one, but even on that ashen night at Dubai, Pakistan bulldozed past India without losing a wicket. Thanks to Shaheen Shah Afridi, that contest was over in roughly 15 minutes. 

This one at least had something brewing for two hours. At that point, with 29 and a bit overs gone, Pakistan stood strong at 155-2. Not quite rapid, but steady, which is often a good tactic for tense World Cup games on slow, low pitches. Babar Azam and Muhammed Rizwan, two exceptional cricketers, were looking ready to feast, with a lineup of heavy hitters waiting to join in.

We know what happened next. If you don’t, let me summarise. Babar got out, and Pakistan then lost the remaining seven wickets for thirty-six runs. A collapse so monumental, it didn’t even register fully with those watching. A friend in Mumbai went for a nap at the 30th over mark, hoping to come back refreshed for the final few overs of the Pakistan innings and India’s chase. By the time he woke up, possibly by the incessant pulse of his phone’s notification bell, the scorecard beggared belief.

Outcome bias is an error made in evaluating the quality of a decision when the result of the decision is already known. Before any such questions arise, I am not evaluating my friend’s choice to get some shuteye. 

There, instead, is something else that warrants evaluation. If you look at the ball-by-ball commentary from the Pakistan innings, you will notice Mohammed Siraj bowling that 30th over. His cross-seam ball to Babar Azam triggered the collapse. Rohit Sharma had brought him back for a spell two overs earlier, replacing Ravindra Jadeja. At that point, Pakistan were 131/2 at 4.85 runs an over. A good time to keep Pakistan’s run rate in check, and who better than Jadeja to execute that? Siraj’s first over back went for 13 runs.

Rohit persisted for another over. From that Siraj spell onwards, every single bowling change brought wickets. Before one could catch their breath, Pakistan were all out for 191. Genius? Lucky? How do we read this?

Reading it through the prism of a closed scorecard will be a repeat of the folly we all commit way too often, so let’s not do that. The alternatives present to Rohit, when he makes certain decisions, start telling a story. At that 30th over, Rohit had three bowlers who had done well: Ravindra Jadeja, Kuldeep Yadav, and Jasprit Bumrah. Siraj, Hardik Pandya, and Shardul Thakur had been expensive. Rohit had to get at least ten overs out of Hardik and Shardul, so squeezing them in when Pakistan were still building a base seemed intuitive and safe. Keep Jadeja, Kuldeep, Siraj, and Bumrah, the main bowlers, for a majority of the final fifteen where they’d be in a place to stifle an assault. Hardik and Shardul may or may not have the same range of tools.

It is one, entirely valid, way of thinking. In big games, top coaches and captains, across sports, often tilt towards risk aversion. Another school of thought, divergent in approach, would point towards wickets and the possibilities of counter-attack.

There is no way Rohit brought back Siraj in the 28th over to stifle the flow of runs. Jadeja and Kuldeep were doing that just fine. Rohit was thinking of wickets at a time when it would’ve been second nature to think about preservation. For that, for persisting with Siraj and Hardik in their opening spells, and for immediately looking towards Bumrah as soon as Kuldeep twinkled out two wickets in the 32nd, Rohit deserves his laurels. 

We often think of Virat Kohli as the last bastion of aggression in captaincy, at least amongst the Indian ranks. While that reputation of ferocity is well-earned, Rohit, a little muted in his body language, is no less ruthless. He is proactive and analytical, often relying on data to inform his decision-making. The aggression wasn’t specially reserved for this big day; it’s natural to him.

By the time India were walking back, smiling in disbelief, after polishing Pakistan off for 191, Rohit Sharma was already having a day to remember for his life. By the time Pakistan were walking off, glum-faced, unable to create a contest in their defence of that total, Rohit Sharma had a day that no one watching will ever forget. His innings of 86 included six fours and six sixes, each sweeter than the previous. To compliment Jasprit Bumrah’s surreal mastery of the cricket ball, Rohit Sharma brought jaw-dropping beauty with the bat.

Easy, pristine, glorious. Photo credits: AFP

After days like this, you begin to wonder if Rohit Sharma, already considered a pearl of Indian cricket, is worth a pedestal even higher, amongst the greats. To be honest, he has a serious case.