The India vs Nepal game at the Asia Cup was done and dusted. India was expected to win which they duly did though the nature of the win wasn’t conclusive enough. Against Pakistan, the same Nepal side was bowled out for just above 100 whereas against India, they were allowed to exceed well past 200. The innumerable number of dropped catches did not help. Overall, the performance of the Indian team in that game was not as that of a top 3 ranked side against a minnow. It was akin to two minnows battling each other. Under such a scenario, I was stunned to read the headline on www.espncricinfo.com which made me question whether the author even realised what he was writing. I was stunned by a cricinfo article.
The title reads “Rohit shows his enterprising, inventive side during ruthless knock”.
It was written by Shashank Kishore. The author acknowledged that Rohit struggled in the initial overs. The pace of Karan troubled him greatly. He also writes about his dismissal against Pakistan when a combination of a good delivery and Rohit’s laziness, brought about his dismissal. However, to term Rohit’s innings as enterprising, inventive, ruthless, adjectives that are usually reserved for an innings against a top bowling attack, is way overboard.
The author’s comments
“He took apart Sandeep Lamichhane, Nepal’s biggest threat, by employing the slog sweep to good effect. He was equally effective playing the pull – his trademark shot – and in between even treaded into the inventive by playing scoops and an unreal flick-scoop that, much to his astonishment, managed to clear the rope at deep square leg with ease.”
“Rohit’s ease of flicking the switch was quite a treat. After the rain break, it didn’t quite seem the Rohit who had been uncertain against the moving ball. He was quickly into savage T20 mode, picking lengths early, lifting good-length balls down the ground, using his fast hands to thread gaps behind point, and dismissing anything in his zone out of the ground.”
The author lavishes praise on Rohit for his supposed brilliance against a mediocre bowling attack. Where was the same Rohit during the WTC finals on two successive editions? Where was Rohit when India lost multiple ICC tournaments? He had a fabulous 2019 ODI World Cup. That is agreed but he did fail in the crucial semi-final against New Zealand. All those hundreds that he scored during the league stage, did not matter because he failed in the second biggest game.
The point here is that it is onething to praise Rohit’s innings but to use adjectives like ruthless is taking it too far. Let him play a similar innings against in the super-4 and then these attributes can be attributed to him.
Another about Gill
“He wasn’t just intent on being a foil to Shubman Gill, who had taken off like a bullet train with a succession of stunning back-foot punches. There was a ruthlessness in wanting to finish a job that hadn’t begun quite well.”
I wonder whether the author even watches the game regularly. Just a game ago, Gill struggled to read the line and length of the Pakistan bowlers. He was all at sea. The scratchy display was so bad that despite his willingness to get out, he still survived because he was that atrocious. Gill averages 60 in ODI but that was after scoring bulk of his runs against some ordinary bowling attacks. Against good attacks and on challenging surfaces, Gill has not really shown that he belongs at this level. Prithvi Shaw was dropped but the same is not happening to Gill. It is really unfortunate that he still finds himself in the World Cup squad. Laxman despite his brilliance never played a single World Cup game whereas Gill gets to play despite questionable returns.
Wrapping up Stunned by a Cricinfo article
Cricinfo must resist itself from praising cricketers against minnows. It is onething to praise a Nepali against India or Australia but vice versa just does not fit. Rohit was expected to score runs which he did. There was nothing more or nothing less to the innings.