How Sunrisers kept Pant quiet
Rishabh Pant, who had a strike rate 180.28 before this match in IPL 2018, managed just 18 off 19 balls against Sunrisers Hyderabad. The Sunrisers fast bowlers repeatedly bowled slower balls at Pant, but they had to do more than that. Before this match, Pant had picked slower balls well and struck at 213.51 against them. Off the 37 slower balls he had faced, he had hit four sixes and eight fours.
The mistake bowlers had been making was bowling slower balls in Pant's swinging arc, either on a length or full, allowing him to hit through the line, which is one of his strengths. The Sunrisers bowlers dragged the length back, so the slower balls died on Pant as he attempted cross-batted shots. They also bowled wide of off stump, making Pant lose his balance while chasing the ball, a habit they may have spotted from his previous innings. Stifling Pant after Daredevils' quick start was the key to Sunrisers keeping their target down to 164.
Why did Avesh Khan keep bowling short?
Thirteen of the 18 balls Avesh bowled to Sunrisers were either short or short of a length, and they went for 37 runs. His second over, the sixth of Daredevils' innings, went for 27 - three short balls were dispatched for six - and turned the game in Sunrisers' favour. But the short length has been Avesh's go-to strategy through the tournament. Even before this match, nearly half the deliveries he bowled had been short. The short balls had cost him less than when he overpitched and had given him three of his four wickets.
Avesh clearly has trouble landing the yorker. He's landed just three all season and has bowled 11 full-tosses. He's been economical when bowling length, but has often overpitched, and when he has done so has gone at 13.33 an over. This is probably what led him to keep trying the short length, and it should be pointed out that before Alex Hales hit him for three sixes in that sixth over, he should have had him out off a short ball, but Glenn Maxwell put down the chance at deep square leg.
Sunrisers wait for the weak link
Not often does a team chase 160-plus when they let four opposition bowlers go at 7.50 an over or less. But from the start of their chase, Sunrisers were patient against Daredevils' best bowlers. They played out Trent Boult's first two and then targetted the young Avesh. When Amit Mishra began to turn the ball and trouble batsmen, they settled for singles against him.
Shreyas Iyer was smart with his bowling changes. Knowing he did not have a huge total to defend, he kept attacking with his best bowlers, hoping to build pressure. Avesh was brought back for his third over only in the 16th, and Sunrisers took him for 10 runs. Then, knowing that eventually Avesh or Daniel Christian would have to bowl one more, they did not panic against Trent Boult and Liam Plunkett. The strategy left them with 14 to win off the last over, but it was Christian who had to bowl it, and they got home with a ball to spare.
Why Sunrisers did not get a leg-bye after a successful review
In the 19th over, Boult struck Yusuf Pathan on the back pad and appealed. Umpire CK Nandan waited a long time before raising his finger, by which time Pathan and Kane Williamson had almost completed a leg-bye. Sunrisers reviewed successfully, but the rules say that the ball is dead the moment the umpire declares a batsman out, and therefore the leg-bye does not stand.
There are some who argue this rule should be tweaked so batsmen are granted a run if they cross before the umpire makes his decision. But this would take us down a rabbit hole. In this instance, the single Sunrisers took was a comfortable one. But consider this scenario: The ball hits Yusuf's pad and trickles to the fielder at short cover; the batsmen set off for a quick single, and the fielder rushes in to effect a run out; he sees the umpire signalling out, and stops; the decision is eventually overturned and Sunrisers are also given a run, but the Daredevils captain is left complaining that his fielder could have effected a run-out had he not stopped.
To avoid this, players would have to be told to keep playing on despite an umpire's signal. Firstly, this would further erode whatever semblance of authority umpires now have on the pitch. And it could also lead to situations like this: The fielder continues rushing in and runs Williamson out, leaving us with a double-play, two batsmen out off the same ball, and we are reviewing to see which one is out. And if you think that would be confusing, think of what would happen if instead of Yusuf and Williamson, the batsman given lbw was Umesh Yadav and the batsman run-out off the same ball was Virat Kohli. Daredevils realise the umpire has actually mistakenly given Umesh out, so can they now, in order to get the fairest result, review their own successful appeal to try to get Kohli out?
The other option would be to tell umpires to give their decision only when all the action is complete. But that might look like this: Yusuf and Williamson attempt a single, the fielder throws at the stumps and misses, it goes for four overthrows, Yusuf and Williamson are high-fiving, but the umpire then says, "Sorry, actually Yusuf is out," and we're all left thinking we may have to get this game down to 100 balls after all.
The bottom line is that without DRS, Sunrisers would not only lose a possible run but also an important wicket. So at least the technology is improving that situation, and we should be grateful that matches are not being ruined by howlers. But then, we invented giant metal contraptions that can fly and now complain we can't use our cellphones on them, so