Published: Sep 08, 2014, 07:34 AM (IST)
Edited: Sep 08, 2014, 10:52 AM (IST)
MS Dhoni set the media abuzz following his denial of a single to bring Ambati Rayudu on strike. He took an enormous risk, they said, that did not come off. Abhishek Mukherjee explains why it was the other way round.
Ambati Rayudu took a run off the last ball of the 18th over. India needed 26 from the last two overs. MS Dhoni adjusted his gloves. Rayudu did his bit, taking a two and a leg-bye; the wide sandwiched between the two brought the target down to 22 from ten balls.
It was déjà vu for Dhoni. He had been there, done that before. He merely re-adjusted his gloves, took guard, and slammed Gurney over mid-wicket. It bounced just before reaching the boundary. He took another single. India needed 17 from eight balls. India needed anything, anything from Rayudu: a four, a two maybe.
But Gurney was not willing to give it away easily. Rayudu shuffled and missed it. Indian supporters went up collectively in appeal for a wide, but the umpire was correct. Gurney pitched up the next one, and all Rayudu could do was to play it to point. Two dot balls, one on leg, the other on off, from the unheralded Gurney: probably the two balls that made Dhoni make up his mind twice in the final over of the match.
Chris Woakes ran in. Dhoni, as calm as any man that has ever wielded a cricket bat, thwacked it in the second tier of the stands. The match “tilted in India’s balance”, they said as they had always done: this was going to be one of those Dhoni finishes. But Woakes was not finished: Dhoni played him towards mid-wicket, and Rayudu got away despite some frantic running. They managed a brace. Then came the third ball: Dhoni pulled hard and went for the easy single — but hang on, he never ran! He wanted to keep Rayudu away from strike.
India needed nine from four when Dhoni denied a single. This meant that Dhoni backed himself to score nine off three (three runs a ball) more than he backed Rayudu to score eight of three (2.67 runs per ball). Was this a gamble? Was this a risk? Or was Dhoni actually playing safe? Let us weight the balances: before the ball Dhoni, already set and perhaps the most feared finisher of the sport, was batting on 20 from 14 balls and Rayudu, relatively new to the crease, had managed only three from five — the last two balls he faced being dot balls.
On hindsight, it seems more of a safe decision more than a risk. Given Dhoni’s track record and the six hit earlier that over and the fact that Rayudu had played two dot balls, he went for the safer option. It was true that a dot ball would have been disastrous, but Dhoni was actually faced with two options:
1. Take a single, take it down to eight from three, and give the strike to the man who had just played two dot balls.
2. Play out a dot ball, let it remain on nine from three, and keep the strike.
He knew he was playing it safe. The world knew he was taking a risk. The world swore at him with their jaws dropped in astonishment: if this does not come off he will be ripped apart, they thought. Dhoni went at the next one with a sledgehammer-like blow. The ball was not timed properly, but mid-off was inside the circle; those arms ensured the ball had enough momentum to reach the ropes. They needed five from two balls. Then Woakes bowled the fifth ball.
Dhoni tried to give it the almighty heave, but the ball reached Moeen Ali at square-leg. Rayudu ran up to the other end — surely Dhoni will not decline another single? He almost ran to the other end when he realised Dhoni was not interested, and he ran back.
Let us see Dhoni’s options at this stage:
1. Take a single, take it down to four from one; this would mean that Rayudu had to hit a four to win the match.
2. Play out a dot ball, let it remain on five from the last ball, and keep the strike; this would mean that Dhoni had to hit a four to take it to the super over (or a six to win the match).
What was the safer option? The last six balls Dhoni had faced had resulted in 17 runs (this included a ball where he turned down a single); the last two balls Rayudu had faced had resulted in nought. The man had to clear the boundary. A six would have meant a win for India. A four from Rayudu would have led an Indian win. A two would have resulted in a defeat. A three was almost ruled out (there had been no threes in the match, though there were 17 twos). A four from Dhoni, on the other hand, would have resulted in a super over.
No, Dhoni did not risk taking the single. He needed to maximise the probability of an Indian victory, and he did exactly that, though he knew he would be ripped apart by media and fans alike — which was precisely what happened.
Complete coverage of India’s tour to England here
(Abhishek Mukherjee is the Editorial Head and Cricket Historian at CricketCountry. He blogs here and can be followed on Twitter here.)
