Gavaskar questions decision to hold back Mayank at crucial juncture

Cricket legend Sunil Gavaskar reckons India missed a trick by handing Kuldeep Yadav the crucial 17th over instead of turning to tearaway pacer Mayank Yadav or left-arm quick Arshdeep Singh in the high-scoring second T20I against the West Indies in Ranchi, which the hosts lost by six wickets as the visitors levelled the five-match series 1-1. Kuldeep was taken for 24 runs in a game-changing over, conceding three sixes, a boundary and a wide as the West Indies gained the upper hand in their daunting chase of 250. The onslaught left India under pressure as the visitors closed in on the target on Friday.

Arshdeep, who bowled the 18th over, could not stem the flow of runs either, conceding 17 to West Indies skipper Shai Hope and Romario Shepherd. The visitors then completed the chase in the 19th over, taking Axar Patel for two sixes to seal a comprehensive victory.

“Definitely! I would have gone with either Arshdeep or Mayank (in the 17th over). Yes, Arshdeep went for plenty in his final over (18th over), but Mayank had struck the early blows. Of the wickets that had fallen, he had taken three,” Gavaskar told JioStar. “His (Mayank) economy rate was about 12 an over, and at that stage, the West Indies needed more than that. So, if he had taken a wicket, and sometimes when the game is going in your favour, who knows, you would have got a wicket even if it had not been off a great delivery,” said Gavaskar.

Mayank still had an over left when the ball was handed to Kuldeep. The tearaway pacer had already dismantled the West Indies top order, dismissing Kamil Pooran (0), Shimron Hetmyer (4) and Rovman Powell (24) to leave the visitors reeling at 58 for three by the sixth over.

Gavaskar felt that another strike from Mayank at that crucial juncture could have put the West Indies under immense pressure and made their daunting chase significantly tougher.

“And once you get a wicket, suddenly, the opposition is on the back foot. A new batter has to come in. So, maybe that (bringing in Mayank) could have been tried. For me, I think giving Shivam Dube the ball in that ninth over was not exactly what was required at that stage. When the batters were still trying to get their eye in, maybe Kuldeep coming in would have been a better idea,” Gavaskar said, pointing out another possible bowling change for criticism.

India spinner Yuzvendra Chahal also raised concerns over the lack of assistance for bowlers on flat pitches, expressing sympathy for the Indian attack. “On such wickets, there’s nothing for the bowlers. When the ball gets old, there’s dew, the ball comes nicely onto the bat, and the grounds are getting smaller. We’ve seen this in the IPL as well, with 260 being chased in 19 overs. In this game too, 250 got chased down easily in 18.3 overs,” said Chahal.

“So, what should bowlers do? What is the use of their skill? I feel for them, because I am a bowler too and when I bowl in the IPL, on small grounds with flat wickets, you have an Impact Player as well. Earlier, when the Impact Player rule was not there, you used to see 50 runs in six overs, and 170-180 was a fighting total,” he said. 

“But these days, 70-80 runs are scored in the first six overs, and the game is done there itself. So, either you have to have something for the bowlers in the wicket, or else just install a bowling machine,” he added.