India vs Australia 2018: 3 things India could have done differently in the T20Is

India levelled the T20I series against Australia by winning the 3rd game at Sydney by a margin of 6 wickets. While the first T20I was won by the Aussies by a narrow margin of 4 runs, the second match at Melbourne was abandoned due to rain, right after the first innings.

India were unlucky with the weather at Melbourne, where they seemed to be in a winning position after restricting Australia to 132 for 7 in 19 overs, when the heavens opened up.

However, with the win at Sydney, India managed to extend their unbeaten streak in T20 series to nine.

As far as Team India was concerned in the series, what was new for the team? Apart from the unexpected success of Krunal Pandya, the following routine matters happened in the series for India :

1. The Aussie batsmen failed to pick up Kuldeep.

2. Shikhar Dhawan, as is the case more often than not, clicked in white-ball cricket.

3. K.L. Rahul found himself in the playing XI despite repeated failures while Shreyas Iyer continued to warm the bench.

4. King Kohli anchored a chase in the third T20I which helped India to level the series.

5. Dinesh Karthik proved his value to the team as the new finisher for close to a year now.

Team India played the same XI right through the entire series, which under Kohli, was something distinctive. Turning back, India could have done differently in the T20 series against Australia which could have benefitted the team immensely in the long run.

Here is a list of 3 major areas where India could have done differently in the recently concluded T20 series against Australia.

#1 India could have played only one wicket-keeper in the playing XI

Playing two keepers in the Playing XI shuts down one bowling option

At the start of the series, the Indian team management decided to go in with Rishabh Pant as the specialist wicket-keeper and Dinesh Karthik as the specialist batsman. By adopting this strategy, the team management shut down a sixth bowling option.

Instead, India could have rotated Pant and Karthik for the series by playing only one of them in a match and the resultant vacancy could have been filled up with a bowling all-rounder like a Washington Sundar. That would have given India more options in bowling.

Washington Sundar - A better sixth bowling option and a decent bat

In the first T20 which India lost narrowly, the absence of the sixth bowler was felt so badly. At Brisbane, Krunal and Khaleel combined to bowl 7 overs and gave away an astounding 97 runs at almost 14 runs an over. The other 3 bowlers, Bhuvneshwar, Bumrah and Kuldeep were stingy in their 10 overs conceding just 60 runs at 6 runs per over.

Kohli had to continue with Krunal and Khaleel despite the hiding they got at the hands of Lynn, Maxwell and Stoinis. A sixth bowling option in the form of a Washington Sundar in place of Rishabh Pant or Dinesh Karthik in the first match could have made all the difference for Team India. In the end, India ended up losing the first match by just 4 runs by D/L method.

In the long run, India should choose between Pant and Karthik for the one available spot as otherwise, the player who will be playing as the specialist batsman will be under tremendous pressure to perform in his specialist role. India could have experimented this in this T20 series itself.

#2 Shreyas Iyer or Manish Pandey in place of K.L. Rahul

Manish Pandey or Shreyas Iyer - a better option

K.L. Rahul once again flatters to deceive in the series. At Sydney, Rahul struggled to score 14 off 20 balls. At Brisbane, Rahul came in at No 3 and scored 13 off 12 balls. He failed to deliver on the innumerable opportunities that were presented to him. After his century against England in July’2018, Rahul had scores of 6,19,16,26,17,13 & 14.

On top of it, K.L. Rahul sometimes he struggles to throw the ball overarm from the deep. In fact, in the first T20I, Rahul missed an easy run-out of Maxwell which was the turning point of the match. Besides, Rahul becomes a liability to the team if he is slotted to bat anywhere below No 3.

Compared to K.L.Rahul, Manish Pandey is a better fielder and he can create an impact with his fielding abilities alone. He is India’s most preferred and omnipresent 12th man on the field. Either Shreyas Iyer or Manish Pandey could have been given a chance in the third T20 match in place of the out-of-form K.L. Rahul.

Unlike K.L. Rahul, both Shreyas Iyer and Manish Pandey have the experience of batting down the order in IPL matches and finishing off matches for their respective teams. India could have tried either of them in the Playing XI ahead of Rahul in this series.

#3 Umesh Yadav or Yuzvendra Chahal in place of Khaleel Ahmed

Umesh Yadav could have been tried ahead of the Test series

Khaleel Ahmed had a dream start to his first overseas tour to Australia when he dismissed Short off his very first ball Down Under. Ahmed failed to capitalize on the good start as his next over went for 21 runs with 3 sixes coming off the bat of Chris Lynn. Khaleel finished with figures of 1 for 42 in 3 overs.

At Melbourne, Kohli gave Khaleel the new ball and he got the wickets of Chris Lynn and Short in his first 3 overs. Kohli could have bowled him out at that stage. But for some strange reasons, Kohli held him back and Khaleel’s last over went for 19 runs.

In hindsight, after Khaleel’s poor performance in the first match at Brisbane, Chahal should have taken his place as Krunal Pandya was in the team as an all-rounder. Chahal is a wicket-taking bowler for India in the middle-overs and is also an effective bowler in the powerplay as well as at the death.

However, the overcast conditions at Melbourne warranted the third seamer in the team instead of a third spinner. The only other option left in the squad was Umesh Yadav who could have relished the favourable conditions at Melbourne.

Umesh Yadav is in the Test squad and he should have got a look-in going into the Test matches. But the team management didn’t want to try anything different, that could have resulted in long-term benefits. Team India continued with Khaleel in the entire series despite his inconsistency.

To sum up and to be fair to India, they could have won the T20I series against Australia by a margin of 2-1. More than the victory, India missed an opportunity to experiment something different in alien conditions. The very fact that India played the same playing XI for all the three matches suggested that the team might not have been willing to think out of the box.