Why didnt Pandya tried to hit Rashid in that 1 over?

[Austin 3:!6]

With 35 runs needed and 1 wicket in hand, one would expect Pandya to go for everything against the leg spinner. That was the best and only bet available for India. But he blocked the whole over and got out to Stokes next over. Imagine 4 sixes off Rashid and only 11 needed for victory would have made entire Eng camp nervous and its anybody's game from there.

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

 

[sensible-indian]

Wasnt in the slot. 

 

One was where he went for it. 

 

Pandya was gauging the bowler. 

[kira]

The game was lost the moment kohli got out, nothing pandya could have done from that situation, kohli alone added 200 runs in this match while the rest of the sorry lot could only muster 236 runs in 2 tries

Edited August 4, 2018 by kira

[Austin 3:!6]

The game was lost the moment kohli got out, nothing pandya could have done from that situation, kohli alone added 200 runs in this match while the rest of the sorry lot could only must 236 runs in 2 tries

I know the game was anything but gone, but hitting Rashid was the only option left that time.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[rkt.india]

too much a risk when all fielders are out on the boundary and these were not small boundaries.

[chewy]

Not easy, 9 down, he went for it but got lucky and edged the googly, it was his 1 over vs Rashid

but he was probably going to go all out next over but alas couldn’t see through Stokes over

[Turning_track]

Field was spread out. No partners at the other end. Had it been 15-20 runs, the chance could be taken. 35 runs is a lot more.

[sandeep]

21 minutes ago, Austin 3:!6 said:

 

With 35 runs needed and 1 wicket in hand, one would expect Pandya to go for everything against the leg spinner. That was the best and only bet available for India. But he blocked the whole over and got out to Stokes next over. Imagine 4 sixes off Rashid and only 11 needed for victory would have made entire Eng camp nervous and its anybody's game from there.

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

This is desperation talking.  It was the FIRST over he faced from Rashid.  And he did go for a big shot.  

[zen]

Pandya was Ind’s 2nd best batsman. He should have batted higher than Karthik and Ashwin, or may be even at 5

Edited August 4, 2018 by zen

[raki05]

Few subtle mistake like sending again before ishu and Pandya taking single and giving strike to ishu early in the over otherwise game could have gone much dipper. However nothing can beat dhwan dropping of Curran that is where we lost the match.

[Moochad]

Can't slog with field spread out, need proper ground shots for boundaries otherwise will get caught easily 

 

he should've started farming the strike even when Ishant was there

[Clarke]

Because this isn't IPL being played on patta with white kookaburra with 50m boundaries. God, the cricketing acumen these days has gone for a toss.

 

 

 

[shortbread]

31 minutes ago, kira said:

The game was lost the moment kohli got out, nothing pandya could have done from that situation, kohli alone added 200 runs in this match while the rest of the sorry lot could only muster 236 runs in 2 tries

Amen! Pandya is not a specialist batsman, he's capable of supporting Kohli, thats it.

 

England won the moment Kohli got out, no point blaming Pandya.

[Switchblade]

1 minute ago, Clarke said:

Because this isn't IPL being played on patta with white kookaburra with 50m boundaries. God, the cricketing acumen these days has gone for a toss.

 

 

 

It has gone for DLF Maximum 

[asterix]

Why wasn’t Pandya sent up the order over KLR, Rahane etc?

 

He could’ve easily won the match... if not that super batsmen KLR, KKD or Rahane could’ve played better with the tailenders and won the match...

 

[Switchblade]

5 minutes ago, asterix said:

Why wasn’t Pandya sent up the order over KLR, Rahane etc?

 

He could’ve easily won the match... if not that super batsmen KLR, KKD or Rahane could’ve played better with the tailenders and won the match...

 

Pandya would have been owned by Broad if he came at 3,he isn’t a top order batsman.

[CG]

too much a risk when all fielders are out on the boundary and these were not small boundaries.

You have to take a gamble.No way Yadav would have lasted long.

[S_pace]

1 hour ago, Austin 3:!6 said:

 

With 35 runs needed and 1 wicket in hand, one would expect Pandya to go for everything against the leg spinner. That was the best and only bet available for India. But he blocked the whole over and got out to Stokes next over. Imagine 4 sixes off Rashid and only 11 needed for victory would have made entire Eng camp nervous and its anybody's game from there.

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

I knew when Kohli got out we lost 95% chance from there to win but when Pandya allowed Ishant to take 2 of Rashid and be on the non striker end I was disgusted at the game awareness of Pandya . If he had took the strike himself the story would have been different.

[Lala]

Keep dreaming to hit 4 sixes for per over by a team only hit one six for the match. 

[Lala]

1 hour ago, Austin 3:!6 said:

 

With 35 runs needed and 1 wicket in hand, one would expect Pandya to go for everything against the leg spinner. That was the best and only bet available for India. But he blocked the whole over and got out to Stokes next over. Imagine 4 sixes off Rashid and only 11 needed for victory would have made entire Eng camp nervous and its anybody's game from there.

 

If Pandya did not bowl in 1st inninings India still could have saved 46 runs.