India are in the final of the Champions Trophy,
for a third time in succession. Big deal, right? After all, wasn’t the tournament draw laid out in such a way to facilitate their entry into the title round, at the very least?
That’s what several pundits would have us all believe. Not that the Indian team is skilled enough and strong enough and versatile enough and accomplished enough to get to the finals. That there is class in batting and depth in bowling. That while Jasprit Bumrah is irreplaceable, the others have rallied around each other to manfully strive to fill the giant hole triggered by his absence.
Champions Trophy 2025:
News |
Schedule |
Results
The Champions Trophy, revived after eight years, is the property of the International Cricket Council (ICC). Even when the tournament was allocated to the Pakistan Cricket Board in 2021, it was pretty much a given that the Indian team wouldn’t travel across the border, because that has been the consistent stance of the Indian government. Not the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), but the Indian government.
Confirmation that India won’t play in Pakistan came towards the last quarter of last year and in December – a day before Christmas – the ICC announced the schedule of the hybrid model event. India would play all their matches (three definitely, four potentially and a maximum of five in case they reached the final) in Dubai; the other games not involving India would be staged in Rawalpindi, Karachi and Lahore. Not ideal, without question, but a compromise that had to be hammered out for the tournament to go ahead. Any possibility of the event proceeding without India? Well, any chance of a desert running out of sand?
Dubai pitches are no mystery to any cricket team
Hardly anyone harped on the ‘unfair advantage’ that was being bestowed on India in the two months leading up to the event from the time the schedule was made public. On the bonuses of staying put in one city, in one hotel, on becoming accustomed to the conditions, on the comfort level that comes with continuity and stability. Are these genuine, tangible factors? Of course they are. But playing surfaces in Dubai don’t hold any mystery to anyone, not in this day and age when teams use the ICC Academy grounds as a pitstop on their way to Test series in the subcontinent, and when players from around the globe regularly play in the ILT20.
Then, India beat Bangladesh by six wickets. And Pakistan by the same margin. Somewhere between the two wins, the whispers began. Then they grew. The familiar suspects from England –
Nasser Hussain, Mike Atherton, Jonathan Agnew – weighed in. Back in Australia, injured skipper Pat Cummins joined the chorus. As did South African batter Rassie van der Dussen. And, on the eve of the semifinal, stand-in Australian captain Steve Smith sang a similar tune, though without the vehemence of some of the others.
Shreyas Iyer pointed out after India’s defeat of Pakistan that this was a ‘neutral’ venue for both sides. Before the semifinal, Rohit Sharma observed that
his team wasn’t playing ‘at home’. After the three-wicket haul on Tuesday night, Mohammed Shami made no bones about the fact that he had benefitted from playing only at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium, that three preceding games had helped him understand what and how to bowl. Different folks, different strokes.
India aren’t in the final of the Champions Trophy because they have played all their matches in Dubai. So yes, it is a big deal that they have made it to the title round for the third edition on the bounce. They are in the race for top honours because they have played terrific cricket. They have chased down targets, they have set and defended one with class and confidence. They have overcome their knockout bogey against Australia, with conviction and character. They have been fun to watch, without being their natural exuberant, exhilarating, exciting self because the pitches haven’t allowed them to be so.
If India were to be brutally honest, they’d rather have played on the shirtfronts in Pakistan than the ponderous, sluggish decks at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium (DICS), because that’s what best suits their attacking, aggressive style. At home against England last month, they were greeted by grand batting surfaces that allowed them to be themselves; within days of their 3-0 rout of England – the team that can’t seem to buy an ODI win in the subcontinent – they were forced to recalibrate and refocus because if they continued to place all their eggs in the attacking basket in Dubai, those same eggs would be on their faces.
So, India remodelled their approach. They dialled down on aggression, they became more sapient and less gung-ho. They swapped adventurism for commonsense, bluster for brainy. They didn’t sacrifice flair but used it sparingly. They made changes to their gameplans on the go, they read and utilised the conditions perfectly and they didn’t gripe or carp that all four tosses in this tournament – or the last 14 of them in all ODIs – went against them.
Instead, they bedded down like the No. 1 ODI team in the world that they are. They refused to worry about the uncontrollables, they focused on the things they could control. Such as their team selection. Their strategies and tactics. Their conservative but not circumspect faith in the art of making runs. They realised that the sandy outfield at the DICS would not offer value for strokes, so they gave up on glamour and concentrated on the brick-and-mortar. They used spin judiciously, Rohit Sharma moving his pieces with a prescience that might make chess World Champion D Gukesh turn green with envy.
India’s
four wins on the bounce – they are sitting on a seven-match winning streak and have won 18 and tied one of their last 23 ODIs, starting with their World Cup opener against Australia in Chennai on 8 October 2023 – haven’t come about by accident. They have been on point with bat and all but not always in the field – they have dropped a tournament-high seven catches in four matches. Most impressive is the calm, unruffled manner in which they have hunted down totals – 228 by Bangladesh, 241 by Pakistan, 264 by Australia, each succeeding chase magnified by the pressure and the stakes involved.
India’s depth and flexibility is the real advantage
The best of India was on view on Tuesday, in the semifinal. Travis Head threatened to take the game away from them, like he has done so many times in the last 21 months. Rohit brought on Varun Chakravarthy and struck paydirt. Smith was at his innovative best but Rohit matched him in creativity. Australia were handily placed to target 280, maybe even 300, at 198 for four midway through the 37th when India regrouped and rallied, picking up wickets to stymie the rate and the size of scoring. When Hardik Pandya cleaned by Adam Zampa, India had taken all ten opposition wickets for a fourth game on the trot. Hmmm…
The chase was textbook – calm, unhurried, without panic or alarms, a testament to the depth and belief, to the security that comes with having wise heads and great experience. Virat Kohli was the master puppeteer, Shreyas Iyer and Axar Patel were willing allies, after Rohit had done his early running and departed. KL Rahul and Pandya were the enforcers while Ravindra Jadeja had precious little to do after coming in with just four needed for victory. India had successive partnerships of 91, 44, 47 and 34 for wickets third through sixth. How’s that for consistency? For assurance and authority? They seldom batted above third gear – they didn’t need to, so beautifully did they manage the chase – and always seemed to have plenty in reserve against an admittedly depleted Australian attack.
Advantage India in Dubai? Most certainly, yes. That’s what variety in bowling and quality and depth in batting usually bring in their wake. That will loosely translate to advantage everywhere, not just in Dubai. What say?