Sanju Samson played the innings of his fledgling international career, yet he drew flak from a few experts, but largely from so-called critics in the social media for not planning the chase well in the final three overs. “A couple of big hits and I could have delivered India a win,” a disappointed Samson said after India lost the first ODI against South Africa on Thursday night by a mere nine runs.
Samson drew flak for allowing Avesh Khan to face as many as five deliveries in the penultimate over from Kagiso Rabada in which the tailender could collect just two runs before losing his wicket on the fifth ball. On the third ball, he even allowed Avesh to take a couple of runs when he could have restricted it to just a single and got on strike. In the three delivers he could have attacked Rabada and collected at least a couple of boundaries to bring down the runs required in the final over to around 24. But that did not happen and in the end, getting 30 from the final over proved beyond him, despite Tabraiz Shamsi floundering in line and length in a tense situation.
Also Read: Soul-searched Prithvi-II all set to launch
‘Wanted to target Shamsi’
“Shamsi was a little expensive today, so we felt we could target him. We knew he would bowl the last over, and I knew if I had to get 24 runs in the final over, I could hit four sixes. That was the reason for taking the game deep. Unluckily, I missed connecting two shots [in the final over] and fell just short of the winning target. But next time I will work even harder. I am satisfied with my contribution, but disappointed that I could not take the team across [the finishing line],” Samson said in his defence during the post-match media interaction.
A brain fade moment?
So, did Samson have a brain fade or was just stumped by the new rule that came into effect only on October 1? Probably, it was a mixture of both. Samson did not show the presence of mind to regain the strike by refusing a second run. But that was just one instance.
He was more flummoxed by the updated Law 18.11 which now states that after a batsman is caught out, it is mandatory for the incoming batsman to face the next ball. Earlier, if the non-striker had crossed the batsman before catch was taken, then he was allowed to take strike.
Samson faced this situation thrice in quick succession. First, when Shardul Thakur was caught off the third delivery of the 38th over by Lungi Ngadi, and even though Samson had crossed over, it was the new-man Kuldeep Yadav who had to face the next delivery. And as luck would have it, Kuldeep too was caught off the first ball and again Samson had to remain at the non-striker’s end, and Avesh faced the next delivery.
Then, in the 39th over, Avesh was out on the fifth ball, and again it was new man Ravi Bishnoi who faced the next ball, despite Samson crossing over. Thus, due to a mixture of brain fade and the new rule, Samson could not face a single ball in the penultimate over by Rabada and was left to get a daunting 30 to win off the final over by Shamsi.
Law change cost the match?
In the previous Law 18.11, the well-set Samson would have been on strike thrice when a batsman was caught out. Still, there is no doubt that Samson should have been more alert and aware to retain maximum strike, a la MS Dhoni. But that’s where he fell short, as he faced just two of the 12 balls bowled in the crucial 38th and 39th overs. That, in the end, cost the hosts the match.
Also Read: India’s bowling exposed again as SA win first ODI in Lucknow
