Chelsea v Arsenal: VAR was "blind" as goal incorrectly given under IFAB Law

Chelsea’s opening goal in the 1-1 draw against Arsenal on Sunday should have been disallowed under IFAB Law 11.

Arsenal unable to take all three points against ten-man Chelsea

With Moises Caicedo being shown a straight red card after fouling Mikel Merino in the first half, the Gunners would’ve been expecting to pick up what could be a crucial three points at Stamford Bridge, but the hosts refused to lie down.

In fact, Trevoh Chalobah opened the scoring for Enzo Maresca’s side just after half-time, although the north Londoners were ultimately able to come away with a point, as Mikel Merino was able to level things up just over ten minutes later.

Speaking after the game, Maresca made it clear he had no problem with Caicedo being given his marching orders, although he did question why Tottenham Hotspur’s Rodrigo Bentancur was not sent off for a similar challenge last month.

However, Mikel Arteta may have complaints of his own, with VAR being accused of going “completely blind” and missing Enzo Fernandez in an offside position during Chalobah’s opening goal.

IFAB’s Law 11 describes offside offences, and Fernandez’s position battling against Cristhian Mosquera certainly meets the criteria for ‘interfering with an opponent’.

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or interfering with an opponent by: preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball or clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

However, the goal stood and Maresca’s side managed to hold out for a draw, despite having ten men for most of the game, so Arteta arguably has a right to feel aggrieved the Gunners were unable to extend their lead at the top.

Arsenal should have taken three points regardless

Although there is a case to be made that Chalobah’s goal should’ve been ruled out, Arsenal will be kicking themselves, given that Caicedo’s early red card presented them with a golden opportunity to pick up a victory.

Arteta concurs that it was two points dropped, saying after the game: “I think overall it’s been a really positive week because the difficulty was immense.

“But I have this flavour that today we should have and we could have won the game and we haven’t. That’s a learning point from it.”

Arteta must drop 4/10 Arsenal star who lost every single duel vs Chelsea

Arsenal were not at their free-flowing best as they drew with Chelsea.

ByMatt Dawson Dec 1, 2025

That said, the north Londoners shouldn’t be too disheartened, as getting a point at Stamford Bridge is still a good result, and they have a healthy lead at the top of the Premier League table, currently sitting five points clear of Man City.

How the Juggernaut Dodgers Lost Their Way

Think back to the morning of the Fourth of July. Our nation’s birthday. Quintessential America. Barbecues. Burgers. Fireworks. Everything as you expect, including the Dodgers with the best record in baseball.

Now seems like a long time ago. Since then, the Dodgers have been as sorry as a sack of soggy charcoal briquettes: 12–21. Only the Nationals and the Rays have been worse.

Wait, the Dodgers? The $391 million payroll Dodgers? The same Dodgers who gobbled up so many high-profile free agents last winter we started asking, “Are the Dodgers good for baseball?”

Eight months later, now we’re asking, “Will the Dodgers ever play good baseball?”

They better figure it out quickly. Starting tonight, the Dodgers play six of their next 10 games against the smoking hot, deadline-fortified, first-place San Diego Padres.

What is wrong with the Dodgers? It’s time to dig in.

1. Maybe the Dodgers are just in a slump

All teams go through valleys. At some point in June, the Dodgers, Cubs, Mets, Astros and Yankees all had leads as big as 5 1/2 games. All gone.

But slumps this deep are rare for the Dodgers. In the past 30 years, here are the only seasons in which the Dodgers hit .236 and lost at least 21 games in a 33-game span:

Dodgers Seasons with 33-Game Span With 21+ Losses and Hitting .236 or Worse (Wild Card Era)

Year

Final Record

Postseason Result

2003

85–77

None

2010

80–82

None

2012

82–76

None

2017

104–58

Lost World Series

2025

?

?

I know you optimistic Dodger fans are thinking:

But the problems this year go deeper than 33 games. Let’s continue.

2. Dodgers don’t measure well against good teams

Los Angeles is 28–32 against teams that are .500 or better. Among the 12 teams in playoff position today, only the Tigers are worse against good competition.

To find the last Dodgers team that had a losing record against teams .500 and above, you must go back a decade, to 2015, when Don Mattingly was the manager, Andrew Friedman had just arrived as president of baseball operations—and the Dodgers were booted in the NLDS by the Mets.

That best record on the Fourth of July? Fool’s gold. The Dodgers were 14–1 against the Rockies, Marlins and White Sox. They proceeded to get swept by the Astros and then twice by the Brewers.

3. Dodgers are a poor team in defensive efficiency

This is shocking news.

What is defensive efficiency? It’s the measurement of how often a team turns batted balls into outs. I like this measurement because it does not isolate defense but reflects the unbreakable marriage between pitching and defense. A pitching staff that gets weak contact, for instance, makes the job easier for the defense.

This has been Andrew Friedman’s secret sauce. You can talk all you want about the Dodgers’ money, technology, scouting, international footprint, annoying speaker system at Dodger Stadium, whatever … turning batted balls into outs is what they do best under Friedman.

No more. Their amazing six-year year run of elite pitching combined with elite defense is over.

Dodgers MLB Rank in Defensive Efficiency

Year

Defensive Efficiency MLB Rank

2019

2

2020

2

2021

1

2022

1

2023

2

2024

2

2025

18

The Dodgers have posted their worst defensive efficiency rating in the past seven seasons in 2025. / Kirby Lee-Imagn Images

4. Dodgers pitchers and fielders share the blame

Dodgers pitchers allow the same average exit velocity this year as Rockies pitchers.

It continues an erosion of generating soft contact. Check out this decline.

Dodgers Exit Velocity Allowed

Year

Average MPH

MLB Rank

2022

87.4

1

2023

88.7

8

2024

88.9

17

2025

89.8

24 (tied with Rockies)

And of the Dodgers’ seven positions behind the pitcher, five of them rate average or worse, according to Outs Above Average (OAA).

Dodgers Weakest Defensive Positions by Outs Above Average (OAA)

Position

OAA

MLB Rank

Third Base

-7

24

Left Field

-6

22

Right Field

-5

21

First Base

-4

19

Shortstop

0

18

5. Dodgers don’t get enough starting pitching length

The Dodgers in recent years have redefined starter workloads. They pitch their starters with more rest and get them out quicker than any other team. They have taken this philosophy to a new extreme.

Dodgers Starters

Amount

MLB Rank

Starts on Four Days Rest

7

Fewest

Batters Faced Third Time Per Start

3.5

Fewest

Pitches Per Start

76

Fewest

Innings Per Start

4.6

Fewest

The result is that because of injuries and workload management none of their starters are in top form. Maybe they will be, come October.

6. Dodgers don’t have enough shutdown relievers

Manager Dave Roberts does not have a clear path to lock down games. This ranking is damning: the Dodgers and Yankees rank among non-contenders as allowing the highest OPS in high leverage spots.

Highest OPS Allowed in High Leverage, 2025

Team

OPS Allowed in High Leverage Spot

1. Rockies

.848

2. Nationals

.819

3. Angels

.808

4. Diamondbacks

.782

T5. Athletics

.774

T5. Marlins

.774

T7. Dodgers

.764

T7. Yankees

.764

9. White Sox

.754

So, who does Roberts trust? Here are his most used pitchers in high leverage:

Most Batters Faced in High Leverage, Dodgers 2025

Pitcher

Batters Faced

OPS in High Leverage Spot

Notes

1. Tanner Scott

89

.820

Injured List

2. Yoshinobu Yamamoto

78

.695

Starter

3. Alex Vesia

71

.694

.759 OPS by RHB

4. Ben Casparius

65

.784

4.78 ERA

5. Dustin May

59

1.084

Traded

Three years ago, the Dodgers adopted a paradigm shift. That year they went 51–21 in the second half to win 111 games, a franchise record. They were in the business of building superteams and putting the gas pedal to the floor to get the No. 1 seed.

What it got them was a first-round exit. The Padres sent the superteam home quickly. They held them to 12 runs and a .227 batting average in four games.

The Dodgers learned a lesson. No more maxing out. The north star became workload management. Win enough games to get to the postseason but make sure you get there with your pitchers healthy and with gas in the tank.

It worked last year, barely. Gavin Stone, who broke down, led the staff with 140 innings. But when Walker Buehler got the last out of the World Series, Kiké Hernandez, a position player, would have been the next pitcher if the Yankees scored the tying run.

This year feels like even more of a risk of for October, not grinding toward it. The Dodgers are the oldest team in baseball. They don’t turn batted balls into outs like they used to. And they don’t have the bullpen depth to withstand planned, abbreviated starts.

More than any other team, the Dodgers play the long game. It may work again. But two things have changed.

Now the Dodgers are playing from behind.

And the Padres, fortified by the trade deadline, are lighting it up like it’s the Fourth of July.

Blue Jays vs. Mariners Game 7: 5 Players That Will Decide Series Finale

The American League Championship Series comes down to one game to decide who will meet the Los Angeles Dodgers in the 2025 World Series.

What follows is a look at the five players who will decide the outcome of Game 7 on Monday night.

Vladimir Guerrero Jr.

Vladdy Jr. has been on fire in the postseason, hitting .462 with a franchise postseason record six home runs and 12 RBIs. He's posting a ridiculous OPS of 1.532 in October, but has hammered Mariners pitching in this series. In the last four games, he's 9-for-15 with three home runs, three walks and one strikeout. He has also done some crazy things. There isn't a baseball player on the planet hotter than Guerrero right now. He'll have his say on Monday night.

Cal Raleigh

Like Guerrero, Raleigh has been big in the playoffs. He's hitting .302 with four home runs and seven RBIs, and also boasts an OPS of 1.028. Aaron Judge's only challenger for the AL MVP award, Raleigh has been mostly bottled up in this series. The 60-homer man is 5-for-22 with two home runs against the Blue Jays. In his career against Toronto's Game 7 starter Shane Bieber, Raleigh is 2-for-8 with a pair of singles and a strikeout. Seattle needs him to break through against the righty. If he doesn't, Seattle's offense may not have the punch it needs to win.

Shane Bieber

Speaking of Bieber, who would have thought he'd be here? He spent most of the season rehabbing from Tommy John surgery, then the Guardians sent him to Toronto at the trade deadline before he'd pitched a big league game in his return. Now he's starting Game 7 of the ALCS. The former Cy Young winner has made two postseason starts and is 1-0 with a 4.15 ERA, a 1.27 WHIP and 10 striekouts against two walks in 8 2/3 innings. He took the win in Game 3 of the series, as he went six innings and allowed two runs on four hits while striking out eight. Toronto would take that performance again in a heartbeat.

George Kirby

Kirby took the loss in Game 3 and had the opposite performance of Bieber. He surrendered eight runs on eight its in four-plus innings and the Blue Jays hit three home runs on him. Before that, the 27-year-old righty had allowed three runs on nine hits in 10 postseason innings. His lone ALCS start ballooned his playoff ERA to 7.07. The Mariners need him to bounce back and put his Game 3 disaster behind him. If he can't, the season may end Monday night.

Josh Naylor

Naylor has made himself a lot of money in the postseason. The Mariners acquired the impending free agent from the Diamondbacks at the trade deadline and he has been oustanding when it has mattered the post. His has three postseason home runs and is hitting .341 with a .974 OPS in October. He has hammered Toronto's pitching in this series as well. Naylor is 9-for-21 with all three of his postseason homers in the first six games of the series. In the last three games, he's 6-for-10 with two bombs. If Seattle is getting a big hit in Game 7, there's a good bet Naylor will be the one delivering it.

Mariners' Dan Wilson Reveals Message to Team After Heartbreaking Game 7 Loss to Blue Jays

They'll be sleepless in Seattle after this one.

The Mariners were nine outs away from defeating the Blue Jays on Monday. Nine outs away from winning the American League pennant. In their first trip back to the AL championship series since 2001, they were just nine outs away from clinching a berth to the World Series for the first time in the franchise's 49-year history. They were on the precipice of making dreams come true for millions across the Pacific Northwest, but instead, they induced a nightmare.

The Mariners took a 3–1 lead in Game 7 of the ALCS after solo home runs from Julio Rodríguez and Cal Raleigh and holding the Blue Jays to just one run through six innings. To their misfortunes, they weren't able to keep Toronto down any longer.

George Springer hit a three-run home run for the Blue Jays in the seventh inning, giving them a 4–3 lead. They held the Mariners without another run, with reliever Jeff Hoffman striking out all three Mariners' batters in the ninth inning to secure the win. Seattle was left to fly home from Toronto heartbroken, as their franchise remains the only one in MLB that has never made the World Series.

The Mariners had their chances. Outside of Game 7, they took a 2–0 lead over the Blue Jays to start this series, winning the first two games at Rogers Centre, but couldn't hold on. They dropped four of the last five games of the series, allowing Toronto the opportunity to return to the World Series for the first time in over 30 years.

Despite the crushing defeat, Mariners manager Dan Wilson doesn't want this loss to overshadow their storybook season. Wilson said his message to his team after the game was, "Just to hold up their heads. To understand what kind of a season they had. I know this stinks, there's no question this is gonna sting. The kind of season they had, doing things no team in this organization has done, knocking on the door of a World Series, all that, it's due to how hard they've worked, how hard they've played all season long. All the times they've come back, all the times they've bounced back. It's a special team in there, it's a shame we had to come out on the wrong side of this one."

It definitely was a special season for the Mariners, but rather than finally breaking through and making the World Series, it will simply be another that's remembered for falling short.

Are R Ashwin's 362 wickets the most after 70 Tests?

Also: who is the oldest umpire to stand a first-class match?

Steven Lynch18-Feb-2020I read that Naseem Shah was described as the youngest bowler to take a Test hat-trick. Whose record did he break? asked Steve Dillon from England
Pakistan’s Naseem Shah, who turned 17 on the weekend, took a hat-trick last week when he was still 16, against Bangladesh in Rawalpindi. He broke the record of legspinner Alok Kapali, who was 19 when he achieved the feat for Bangladesh against Pakistan, in Peshawar in 2003 (Kapali took only three more wickets in 16 other Tests). Abdul Razzaq was 20 when he took a hat-trick for Pakistan against Sri Lanka in Galle in 2000.The oldest man to take a Test hat-trick was 38-year-old Rangana Herath, for Sri Lanka against Australia in Galle in August 2016. He was about three months older than the England offspinner Tom Goddard when he took one against South Africa in Johannesburg in 1938-39. For the full list, click here.Two batsmen scored 200 for Chandigarh the other day – from No. 7 and No. 8. Is this unique? And was Chandigarh’s first-innings lead of 609 a record too? asked Rahul Bhasin from India
The match in question was the Ranji Trophy Plate Group encounter between Chandigarh and Manipur in Kolkata, which had excited number crunchers even before it started, as according to the Association of Cricket Statisticians it was the 60,000th first-class match ever played.Chandigarh were in a spot of bother at 136 for 5, but Uday Kaul made 148, putting on 221 with Bipul Sharma, who then added a further 172 with Gurinder Singh. That ended when Sharma was out for 200, but Chandigarh’s captain, Manan Vohra, didn’t declare until Singh also reached 200. Singh, in his more usual role as a left-arm spinner, then took 5 for 19 as Manipur were skittled for 63.This was the first time in first-class history that Nos. 7 and 8 both scored double-centuries – but there is an instance of Nos. 7 and 9 reaching 200, again in the Ranji Trophy. For Haryana against Karnataka in Hubli in 2012-13, Amit Mishra scored 202 not out and Jayant Yadav 211, most of them during an eighth-wicket partnership of 392.Chandigarh’s first-innings lead of 609 was the fourth highest in India – on top are Holkar (912 for 8), who led Mysore (190) by 722 runs in the Ranji Trophy semi-final in Indore in 1945-46 – but the biggest in all first-class cricket remains 886, by Victoria (1107) over New South Wales (221) in Melbourne in 1926-27. In Pakistan’s Ayub Trophy in Lahore in 1964-65, Pakistan Railways scored 910 for 6 before bowling Dera Ismail Khan out for 32 (they thus conceded a lead of 878) and 27.Umpires Maurice Tate and John Langridge (right) walk out for a game in 1956•Getty ImagesR Ashwin has now taken 362 wickets in 70 Tests. Is that the most after 70? I know he held this record for a while, but does he still? asked Milind Bhaskar from India
You’re right that R Ashwin held this mark for a while. He still has the most wickets after every number of Tests from 39 (when he had 220) to 65 (342). But Muttiah Muralitharan was level with Ashwin after their 66th Tests, with 350 wickets – and 11 more in his next game put Murali in front, where he has remained. He had 382 wickets after 70 Tests, so Ashwin has a fair bit of ground to make up if he is to get back in front.I noticed that Patsy Hendren’s brother Denis umpired a first-class match when he was nearly 75. Was he the oldest umpire in any first-class fixture? asked Lawrence Cartwright from England
Denis Hendren played a few first-class matches for Middlesex between 1905 and 1919. His brother, Patsy Hendren, was much better known, scoring 170 centuries (second only to Jack Hobbs) in a career that stretched to 1937, when he was 48.Denis Hendren took up umpiring, joining the county panel in 1931 and eventually standing in 390 first-class matches. He did not officiate in the County Championship after 1949, but stood in many university games over the next eight seasons, including ten in 1957. His last was Oxford University against Leicestershire in the Parks in June, three months before his 75th birthday. The oldest known umpire in a Championship match was John Langridge, who was 73 when he stood in his 557th and last first-class game, between Leicestershire and Yorkshire at Grace Road in 1983. Before taking up umpiring, Langridge had played 574 first-class matches, all but seven of them for Sussex.Five umpires older than Hendren are known to have officiated in first-class matches. The oldest of all – and the only octogenarian – was William Bock, who was 81 when he stood in Wellington’s game against Otago at the Basin Reserve in January 1928.In a tough quiz the other day we were asked to name the batsmen who made the highest score for and against Middlesex in 50-over cricket – apparently it was the same score, and both in 2019? asked Mike Everett from England
This peculiar double was indeed achieved inside a fortnight in 2019, during the Royal London Cup. First Luke Wright blasted 166 for Sussex at Lord’s, breaking the old record by anyone against Middlesex in a List A match, Chris Adams’ 163, also for Sussex, at Arundel 20 years earlier, in a 45-over game. Then Max Holden hit 166 for Middlesex against Kent in Canterbury, breaking the county’s previous-highest – also 163 – by Andrew Strauss against Surrey at The Oval in 2008.Use our feedback form or the Ask Steven Facebook page to ask your stats and trivia questions

The lost legacy of Krom Hendricks, South Africa's first great black cricketer

More than a hundred years ago, South Africa lost their fastest bowler to the politics of segregation

Firdose Moonda14-Jun-2020If the personal is political then the playing field is even more so, especially in South Africa. This is a country where sport and public policy have always gone in hand in hand, where race and class, rather than access and ability, open the doors to professional teams, and where selection has never been simple or purely about merit.That’s right, never. Not even at the beginning.When South Africa played their first Test, in March 1889, one William Milton was part of the XI. Milton was a former England rugby player and also head of the Western Province Cricket Union. A year later he became head of the Prime Minister’s Department for Cecil Rhodes. From its outset, cricket in the Cape was politicised, with Milton using his influence to organise English tours to South Africa, and to promote the game in the country, according to his standards.When South Africa played their most recent Test, in January 2020, Temba Bavuma was part of the XI. Bavuma is the only black African batsman to have played Test cricket for South Africa, and the only person from the country’s largest demographic who played in that Test. That meant South Africa fell behind on their transformation target – they are required to field, on average over the course of a season, a minimum of six players of colour, of whom two must be black African. This makes selection in some instances a colour-by-numbers game, with questions raised over the integrity of the process. Perhaps those questions should always have been asked.By the time South Africa played their third Test, in 1892, Milton was a political and sporting hotshot. Rhodes’ private secretary at the time, he was also captain of the country’s cricket team. He was responsible for organising England’s 1891-92 tour to South Africa, whose success hinged on ensuring the hosts provided a competitive enough team to take on their visitors, and provided the gamblers with content to hedge their bets on. On that score, he failed. South Africa were defeated by an innings and 189 runs.But the tourists were challenged later in the month. A Malay team, made up of players from the Cape coloured community, played against the English in an additional fixture. Malay slaves, and rebels and outcasts from the region, had been brought to South Africa from South East Asia by the Dutch in the 17th and 18th century. They brought Islam to the country and formed strong ties with other exiles from Madagascar, East Africa and Brazil, who were also dumped in the Cape by the Dutch. Though the Malays lost the match, they put up more of a fight, and one of them made much more of an impression than any of the South African national players.William Henry “Krom” Hendricks, described by George Hearne as the “fastest bowler in South Africa,” kept the Malay team in the game. Hearne captained the English side in the match against the Malays, and his only Test was the one in Cape Town earlier in 1892; his brother Frank played in that match for England, interestingly enough. It did not go unnoticed that the South African national side had lost because they lacked a strike bowler. Hendricks obviously had the potential to fill that gap, but he never played for South Africa.Hendricks was the earliest big casualty of racial segregation in South African cricket•Penguin Random HouseLittle was known about Hendricks until now, with the publication of , written by Jonty Winch and Richard Parry, who have pieced together the social history of cricket in the Cape, mostly through newspaper reports. They found reports of the game among coloured communities from the 1870s, and reference the first Malay inter-town tournament in 1890. The matches took place at Newlands, which at that point was leased to the Western Province Cricket Club, who allowed it to be used by Malays because they brought with them an estimated 5000 spectators and substantial amounts in gate receipts. So much for the later narrative that people of colour are not interested in cricket. Winch and Parry paint a picture of a vibrant and engaged cricket community, of which Hendricks was a part.

Other notable political selections/omissions in South African cricket

1968: Basil D’Oliveira
Lack of opportunity at home prompted D’Oliveira, a Cape Coloured, to take a chance elsewhere. In 1966, when he made his debut for England, there was already talk about his inclusion in the proposed 1968 tour of South Africa. Between politicking and a slump in form, D’Oliveira was omitted from the tour, but was added back as an injury replacement later, which South African politicians would not accept. When it became clear that D’Oliveira would not be allowed to face his former countrymen, England cancelled the tour, which proved a major catalyst for South Africa’s 20-year sporting isolation.
2002: Jacques Rudolph/Justin Ontong
Rudolph was set to make his Test debut in the final match of a three-Test series in Australia, before South Africa’s board president, Percy Sonn, intervened, arguing that Justin Ontong should play instead as a like for like middle-order replacement for Lance Klusener, who was ruled out. Sonn also made it known that the pace of transformation had been too slow and said picking Ontong, a coloured player, rather than Rudolph, would help to speed it up.
2015: Kyle Abbott/Vernon Philander
South Africa went into the World Cup semi-final against New Zealand in Auckland without Abbott, who had been their best bowler by average and economy rate and with Philander, who was carrying a hamstring injury. The official comment was that Philander’s ability to move the ball off the seam sealed the decision, but it transpired later that the CSA CEO, Haroon Lorgat, had stressed the need to field a team that was more in line with transformation guidelines.
2019: The Temba Bavuma issue
After a humiliating tour of India, in which South Africa were whitewashed 3-0, changes had to be made in their batting line-up for the home series against England. Bavuma was injured for the opening Test and dropped for the next two. Captain Faf du Plessis explained that Bavuma needed to force his way back in through “weight of runs,” while du Plessis played despite struggling with his own form, and his average of 20.92 in the season drew the ire of Bavuma’s supporters.

The man himself is something of a mystery. Nobody knows why he had the nickname Krom, or exactly where he traces his ancestry to (Hendricks himself claimed that his mother was from the island of St Helena and his father was Dutch and early stories about him confused him for another Hendricks, Armien). There were no photographs of him that could be used in the book; the illustration above was created by an artist, Bella Forsyth, off a tiny picture from the 1930s which showed Hendricks in his early seventies standing next to his grandson.What is clear is that Hendricks was an immensely talented bowler and that he impressed many who came across him. Apart from Hearne, Hendricks also impressed the heads of the Transvaal and Free State cricket unions and the journalist Harry Cadwallader, all of whom advocated for his inclusion in the South African side that was due to tour England in 1894.Cadwallader was also the secretary of the South African Cricket Association, in charge of the 1894 trip. He wanted both Hendrickses (Krom and Armien) and Ebrahim Ariefdien, all bowlers, to be part of the group that travelled to England. He had the support of the diamond tycoon Abe Bailey, who was also a cricketer, and who was more interested in ensuring South Africa were strong on the field than on insisting they were white. Ironically, the same argument is often used today against transformation, and it appears race and performance have always been regarded as mutually exclusive.Cadwallader’s good intentions took on a different light when, in an article publicly supporting Hendricks’ inclusion, he wrote that Hendricks would travel as both a player and a baggage handler. Hendricks objected to that idea in a letter written to the the next day. “I would state that if chosen, I would not think of going in that capacity,” he wrote.Interestingly, Hendricks argued his place in the team on the basis of race. He questioned why he was regarded as being of colour. “I must disclaim any connection with the Malay community,” he wrote. Hendricks referenced his father’s birth to Dutch parents and his mother’s heritage in St Helena (an island in the South Atlantic Ocean best known for being the place of Napoleon’s death, where people are generally dark-skinned) as evidence that he was not Malay, and though he did not ask to be considered white, the implication was clear.Rhodes was aware of the issue, and was against Hendricks touring on racial grounds. He is reported to have said, “They would have expected him to throw boomerangs during the luncheon interval.” Through Milton, Rhodes was able to block Hendricks’ selection, even when Hendricks turned around and sought Cadwallader’s help in being included. Cadwallader wrote a subsequent letter to the claiming Hendricks would be “pleased to go to England if required, on certain low terms for services rendered and would not for a moment expect to be classed with the rest of the team”.So began a long and desperately sad period in Hendricks’ life, in which he grappled with his own identity. He tried several times to petition to play for white clubs and failed. He wrote numerous letters to newspapers to make his case. These were meticulously unearthed by the authors of this book, including one from as late as 1904, when he was 47 years old. Then, he applied to play senior cricket for Milton’s Western Province Cricket Club and argued that he was European, based on his father’s bloodline. His request was denied, on the basis of race. Instead, Hendricks continued to play among the coloured community, had 11 children and 40 grandchildren (one of whom went on to play football for Liverpool) and is barely celebrated among South Africa’s cricket greats.Penguin Random HouseMilton, on the other hand, has a legacy that lives on. The first state high school in Bulawayo is named after him. It has produced 17 first-class cricketers, 14 of whom are non-white, and also Hendrik Verwoerd, who went on to become prime minister of South Africa and is known as the architect of apartheid. Under Verwoerd, South Africa’s racial segregation become entrenched, and sport, like all other areas of life had to fall in line with that.There were no further suggestions of white and black players competing with or against each other at national level. South Africa’s national teams were all-white, and black players formed their own unions and tournaments, initially in separate race groupings and then collectively under the South African Cricket Board of Control. In 1991, the white and black boards were unified and South Africa, pre-democracy, re-entered the international sporting arena. They are a year short of three decades into this new era and selection is still politicised, with a government-imposed target system in place to address the pace of change. Apart from Bavuma, only eight other black Africans have played Test cricket out of a total of 110 post-readmission players. The discussion around transformation is ever present.In women’s cricket worldwide, the last five years have marked a significant change, culminating in February’s record crowd at the T20 World Cup final. In South Africa, women have been professional since 2014. They were the first South African senior team to have a black African head coach, and they are more demographically representative than the men’s team. It’s difficult to pinpoint an exact reason for this other than that, typically, the women’s game is not steeped in the same traditions as the men’s. Players are not produced by a small number of elite schools, which might have allowed the women’s game to diversify. Instead, there are other issues, not least of which is remuneration, as women seek to close the gender pay gap. And so, even as we move through some of the politics on the playing field, others remain deeply personal.Too Black to Wear Whites: The Remarkable Story of Krom Hendricks, a Cricket Hero who was Rejected by Cecil John Rhodes’ Empire
Jonty Winch and Richard Parry
Penguin Random House
255 pages, R260

Broad, Anderson set tone for England's fearsome foursome – but for how much longer?

In English conditions, the combination of Stuart Broad, James Anderson, Chris Woakes and Jofra Archer has all bases covered

George Dobell at Old Trafford25-Jul-2020There’s a famous photo of an iconic West Indies attack. Lined up in height order, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Colin Croft and Joel Garner stare back at the camera. There’s not a smile in sight.The picture was taken in Trinidad in 1981. West Indies were involved in a Test against England at the time; a Test they won by an innings and 79 runs.The quartet only played together in 11 Tests. But it’s an enduring image that represents the West Indies teams of the era pretty well. Each one of those bowlers had legitimate claim to be qualified as a great of the game; each one of them offered skill, pace, hostility and control. It was an awesome attack. It was an awesome team.The England quartet of seamers in this Test doesn’t quite have the same height or pace or hostility. They might not, in Perth or Johannesburg, offer the same threat at this stage of their careers. Batsmen don’t, on the whole, fear for their physical safety when they go out to face them.ALSO READ: Tentative West Indies walk into seam-and-swing trapBut they might well wonder where their next run is going to come from. For in these conditions, under overcast skies and armed with a Dukes ball, this England quartet presents a formidable challenge.The statistics alone are overwhelming. Reunited once more, James Anderson and Stuart Broad have nearly 1100 Test wickets between them and will be remembered as greats of English cricket. Chris Woakes takes his wickets, at home at least, at a lower cost than either of them, while in his first five Tests in England, Jofra Archer claimed two five wicket hauls and took his wickets at 22.08. There’s no respite. Not in these conditions.The key, according to Broad, is the quartet’s control. And it’s true that on these surfaces, offering assistance off the seam, that bowling a tight line and length is often enough to create both pressure and chances.Stuart Broad and James Anderson discuss bowling plans•Getty ImagesBut they have more to offer than control. They also have the ability to swing the ball, utilise the wobble seam – an increasingly common part of England’s game over the last couple of years – and work out any technical flaws they may see. They can go short against those, such as Shane Dowrich, who struggle against the rising delivery. They can nip the ball back against those, such as Roston Chase, who walk across their stumps, and they can move the ball away from those, such as Shai Hope, who tend to push at it.”I can’t think of a better attack in these conditions,” Nasser Hussain said on Sky. It was hard to disagree.And while there may be moments, as the ball softens and the shine wears, when batting becomes more straightforward, Archer’s ability to generate lift from even slow surfaces offers an extra edge. John Campbell was caught off the splice by a brute of a delivery that punished his prevalence to prop forward.Any absence of pace or weakness of spin is negated in such conditions. It was a reminder why England have not lost at home to anyone since 2014 and to West Indies since 1988.”For this pitch, it’s a very, very strong attack,” Broad said. “What you want to try and avoid is four seamers that all do exactly the same thing because if you don’t get a pitch that suits you, you could be in trouble.

When one of us goes, the other will be one of the first to know. There’s certainly been no talk of that. Jimmy’s record is arguably getting better and better, as is mineStuart Broad on his partnership with James Anderson

“We all are slightly different bowlers. We all release from slightly different places on the crease which means that every time a different bowler comes on, a batsman has to make little adjustments”We have a saying in this bowling unit. Control the run rate; control the game. Every bowler on that pitch has got the ability to control the run rate and is a natural wicket-taker.”England have had other decent attacks in recent times, of course. They went to No. 1 in the Test rankings in 2011 with a three-man seam attack, which saw Broad and Anderson supported by, at various times, the likes of Tim Bresnan, Steven Finn and Chris Tremlett.But it was a policy that demanded an awful lot of those bowlers and was held together by the skill of the spinner, Graeme Swann. Eventually, Swann and Bresnan suffered elbow injuries and England had to find another way. The presence of four seamers here – plus Dom Bess’ spin and the possibility of a contribution from Ben Stokes later in the game – means the bowlers have been able to operate in shorter spells and allows for the possibility of enforcing the follow-on should the opportunity present itself.The best comparison for the current unit might, in England terms, be the 2005 Ashes line-up. At their best, the quartet of Steve Harmison, Matthew Hoggard, Simon Jones and Andrew Flintoff had just as much pace, hostility, control and skill. They had a better spin option, too. They played together 16 times, won 10 and lost only twice.How many more times will Anderson and Broad operate together? Not too many, probably. Broad has responded to his omission from the team which played in the first Test of this series wonderfully eloquently. As he asked after play here: “Do you think we’re both in England’s best bowling attack?”Jofra Archer celebrates a wicket•Getty ImagesThe answer, in these conditions, is almost certainly yes. But it remains the case that, in India or Australia, or South Africa or the Caribbean, it could be hard to accommodate them. The extra pace of Mark Wood or Olly Stone may well, in some conditions, prove more effective.We’re probably in that transition phase between eras now. This was, after all, just the fourth time the pair had played together in England’s most recent 14 Tests. The mantle is passing to Archer, in particular, with Woakes, who Broad believes is bowling better than ever, helping bridge the gap. Given the need for rest and rotation in this summer’s packed schedule, it probably wouldn’t be reasonable to expect Anderson and Broad to feature in more than two of the three Tests against Pakistan. And then? Who knows. They’ve proved it unwise to write them off, but time is an unrelenting opponent. It tends to win in the end.”I don’t ever walk on the field and think ‘Is this is the last time we’ll play together?'” Broad said. “Both of us have a burning desire to keep going and keep trying to win Tests for England”When one of us goes, the other will be one of the first to know. There’s certainly been no talk of that. Jimmy’s record is arguably getting better and better. As is mine.”Maybe, in time, pictures of Anderson and Broad together will resonate for England supporters in a similar way to that magnificent Caribbean quartet. They are a formidable pairing. This is a formidable quartet. Enjoy them while you can.

Why Dhoni and Jadeja got stuck against Royals

Also, what is up with Royals’ powerplay struggles?

Saurabh Somani19-Oct-2020Why were MS Dhoni and Ravindra Jadeja slow during the middle overs?
The Super Kings weren’t going too well when Jadeja joined Dhoni in the middle, having slid to 56 for 4 in ten overs. The pitch was slow, and offering some grip. The Royals then got both parts of a two-pronged strategy right: tactics and execution. As soon as the powerplay was done, they had brought on legspin from both ends in Shreyas Gopal and Rahul Tewatia, and both men had already got a wicket when Jadeja joined Dhoni in the middle.The tactics involved continuing with legspin from both ends, even though Steven Smith had overs from Kartik Tyagi, Ankit Rajpoot (who ended up bowling just one over) and Ben Stokes to call on – that is without counting Jofra Archer, whom he must have wanted to save for the death overs anyway. But both Dhoni and Jadeja haven’t been at their best against legspin this IPL, particularly googlies. Dhoni’s strike rate against the legbreaks has been a reasonable 129.16, but against googlies, it’s just 86.36. Jadeja’s numbers are even worse – 63.15 against googlies and 110.00 against leg-breaks. So while it may have seemed counter-intuitive to continue with legspin from both ends when a left-hander was at the crease – one who has been in otherwise good striking form in Jadeja – the match-up was valid.The execution involved slowing it up from the bowlers. With no pace to work with off the surface, bowling it slower would mean that much more effort on the part of the batsmen to manufacture pace. When you have to do that, there is always the chance that timing goes awry, which is what happened. Both Gopal and Tewatia rarely rose above the mid-80s kph, and there was only one genuinely quicker ball bowled in their combined eight overs, when Tewatia fizzed one through at 111.7 kph. Lack of pace and accuracy, coupled with their own struggles against the type of bowling combined to keep Dhoni and Jadeja quiet. They did add 51 runs, but took up 46 balls to do so.How did Dhoni get run out?
This was only the ninth run out of Dhoni’s IPL career, having batted 179 times. He’s normally amongst the quickest between the wickets, which is why he isn’t run out very often. In the 18th over, Dhoni had just hit his second boundary, getting it only because Archer at long-off let the ball slip through his fingers. The next ball was driven firmly to Archer again, but Dhoni seemed to think there was only a single in it and wasn’t running hard for the first one. Archer mis-fielded again, and Jadeja, who was alive to the possibility of a second, urged Dhoni on, who then began sprinting back. But the delay from the first run being run meant Dhoni was an inch short when Archer recovered from the fumble and fired in a sharp throw to the keeper. Dhoni, normally a master at converting ones into twos, failed to do so this time. He was run out at 17.4 overs, and the Super Kings could get only 18 runs in the remaining 14 balls.Is the Sam Curran experiment working out for the Super Kings?
The Super Kings took the decision to promote Curran up the order because he had been striking the ball well in the middle overs, and they needed impetus at the top. However, in three games so far, Curran hasn’t managed to replicate his middle-order fireworks. What has worked against him is high pace with a new ball. He was out for 0 off 3 against Delhi Capitals, and made only 22 off 25 against the Royals, having faced eight of Archer’s first 12 balls and scored only two off them, while also getting into all kinds of tangles. Not a single ball from Archer to Curran was pitched up. Curran had relative success as an opener against Sunrisers Hyderabad, but though he ended up with 31 off 21, his start there too was slow, being 10 off 15 at one point.ESPNcricinfo LtdNot having Curran in the middle order has also contributed to the Super Kings being slow through that phase. Against the Royals, they couldn’t hit a single boundary off either Tewatia or Gopal, who combined to bowl eight overs for 32 runs, also picking a wicket each.Why did Dhoni bowl out Deepak Chahar and Josh Hazlewood at the start of the chase?
Despite having seen the Royals legspinners do well, Dhoni opted to go with his faster men at the top of the Royals’ chase. Chahar and Hazlewood bowled their full quota inside nine overs, only broken up by one over from Jadeja. The reasons were two-fold.As Dhoni explained after the game, the reason he brought Jadeja on in the seventh over was to see if the pitch was holding up, and he found that it wasn’t. The grip that the Royals slow bowlers had got, was noticeably less on offer in the second innings, with dew playing a part. That meant Dhoni’s spinners wouldn’t have the advantages that the first innings offered. Secondly, given that the Super Kings had put up only 125 for 5, the only way to win the match was to bowl the Royals out. Dhoni decided to go with his best wicket-taking options while the game was still alive. Both Chahar and Hazlewood did a good job, picking up three wickets inside the powerplay, but in the end, there wasn’t enough to defend.What is up with the Royals’ powerplay troubles?Speaking of wickets, the Royals have been losing more than any other team in the powerplay this IPL. They have now lost 20 wickets in the powerplay in the ten games they have played. The lack of a good start has contributed to their troubles with the batting. On Monday, their powerplay score was 31 for 3, but they could weather that because the target being chased was such a small one.ESPNcricinfo LtdThe trouble at the top has perhaps contributed to the Royals keeping Jos Buttler at No.5. When they lost three quick wickets, they still had the experienced pair of Buttler and Smith in the middle, who eventually put on a match-winning 98-run partnership, with Buttler hitting 70* off 48.Why did Kedar Jadhav bat so lowA couple of weeks ago, Super Kings coach Stephen Fleming reacted angrily when he was asked why Jadhav had batted above Dhoni, coming in at No.4. Fleming said then that Jadhav was the Super Kings’ designated No.4 and was merely batting in position.On Monday, Jadhav came out at No. 7 in the 18th over. His own poor form has probably contributed to the changing position, having even sat out of the XI a couple of times. Perhaps the Super Kings wanted to send a left-hander in at the fall of the fourth wicket since two legspinners were bowling, so Jadeja went in ahead of Jadhav. Then too, overall Jadeja has had a much better tournament with the bat than Jadhav, so recent form could have played a part.

Sri Lanka still bugged by batsman error

Dominant position enhanced by desperate decision-making from opponents

Andrew Miller16-Jan-2021Batsman error is a curious concept. It’s what all bowlers are looking to cause when they turn at the top of their mark, by applying sufficient pressure to force the fatal misjudgement, or by setting a crafty trap and springing it on the unwitting. Because, as Jack Leach finally proved with an outstanding delivery late in the day to Kusal Mendis, it’s only a glorious handful of balls that are genuinely unplayable.So what are we to make of the batsman errors in this contest so far? Specifically the Sri Lankan ones, for England, despite an afternoon of rather harder toil than they might have envisaged after the first innings, still have the first Test at their mercy, with a hefty lead in the bank and two more days on a wearing deck to reassert their authority.But even in the midst of an otherwise valiant rearguard, the one wicket to fall in the first 59 overs of Sri Lanka’s second innings was another self-inflicted wound of the type that came in a torrent on day one. With only one man back on the rope at deep backward point, even England’s unofficial Maker of Things to Happen, Sam Curran, struggled to take the credit for a wide outswinging long-hop to a well-set Kusal Perera, and his coy puff of the cheeks as Leach completed the catch rather gave the game away.Related

  • Stuart Broad's subtleties prove the old dog isn't done with learning

  • Sri Lanka batting 'the worst I've seen' – Grant Flower

  • Dom Bess admits 'I didn't feel like I bowled very well' after first-day five-for

  • England 'unconcerned' by hotel staff's positive Covid tests

  • Joe Root posts majestic 228 but Lahiru Thirimanne stands firm to give SL hope of saving Test

“You don’t take Test wickets for granted but, yeah, that wasn’t the way I expected,” Curran said at the close. “The way things happened for us on day one aren’t going to happen very often, but you don’t take those days for granted because when they do come you’ve got to enjoy them. In the second innings, Sri Lanka fought really hard, which we expected, but we stuck in there as a bowling group, keeping the scoring rate as low as possible in really tough conditions.”To be fair to Perera, his second-innings dismissal was not remotely as culpable a dismissal as his first-day aberration – a second-ball reverse sweep to Dom Bess that set in motion one of the most preposterous five-wicket hauls in Test history. However, it was in keeping with a contest in which England have so far claimed just three wickets out of 13 with good deliveries, and the first two of those might well have been resisted by less skittish opponents.There was Stuart Broad’s legcutter to Mendis, an outstanding piece of thinking against an opponent who at that stage had not scored a run in four innings, but it still required a nervy hard-handed thrust to seal the deal. As for Dilruwan Perera, his second-ball inside-out drive against Bess was perhaps not the ideal response to a well-flighted delivery on off stump.In mitigation for England, this match is effectively their warm-up fixture, because a low-key intra-squad warm-up in Hambantota wasn’t nearly enough of a gallop after nearly five months in mothballs for most of the squad. But with five more Tests to come in the next two months, including four against a ferociously drilled India who are currently dredging new reserves of spirit on their tour of Australia, the worry for Joe Root’s men is that they might not find the freebies quite so easy to come by from here on in.”No-one’s really played much cricket so you’d expect a bit of rustiness and a lack of rhythm, but the guys fought hard in humid, sweaty, hot conditions,” Curran said. “The build-up was what it was, we have no complaints. Rooty was very clear that we need to hit the ground running which we luckily did on day one. But day four is going to be a test for us, because we’ve got a lot of overs in our legs now, and we’ve got to come back and keep fighting.”Sam Curran celebrates his breakthrough with Dom Bess•SLCAnd for that reason, it’s hard to pick too many holes in a team who are still favourites to complete an unprecedented fourth consecutive victory in Asia – all of them in Sri Lanka, following their 3-0 clean sweep two winters ago.They’ve got some significant bench-strength to come as well – for the India leg of the winter, if not before – including James Anderson, who seemed the pick of the bowlers in Hambantota, as well as Ben Stokes and Jofra Archer, two men whose methods might prove especially effective in Asia, not to mention Moeen Ali – now finally released from his Covid quarantine.However, the likelihood of Moeen returning for the second Test is slim, given both his own lack of match practice, but also the fact that Leach and Bess are now finally getting enough overs themselves to start feeling a hint of rhythm. Leach in particular – one of the stars of that last Sri Lanka campaign – had bowled a grand total of 52 first-class overs in the 12 months leading up to this Test, through a combination of illness and life in the England bubble. It’s little wonder he has needed a session or two to locate his range.”Line, length, pace … everything really! I probably came up a little short,” Leach told Sky Sports at the close. “I’ve been short of match overs for a little bit of time. You can do as much as you want in the nets but you need that stuff in games. I found I bowled a little bit short when I tried to bowl quicker, that’s something to think about for tomorrow.”The good news for England is that their game plans, though lacking the requisite meat on the bone, do seem to be firmly in place. In particular, the use of Mark Wood in a series of two- and three-over bursts has been encouraging – and the fierce lifter that slammed into Perera’s top hand was an early example of the shock value of a raw quick, even on an unconducive deck.At the other end, Stuart Broad produced another inventive and economical display of out-of-the-box seam bowling – showing echoes of Darren Gough’s methods from his triumphant tour of 2000-01, going through the wall, round the wall, sometimes even under the wall with an attempted slow yorker to Lahiru Thirimanne late in his second spell, in a bid to prise a rare and precious opening.However, Broad was blowing by the end of his eighth over, and sixth maiden – a state of affairs that reiterated the importance of England’s spinners. It’s all very well inverting the pyramid and turning to your seamers to bowl the spinners’ holding overs, which was a secret of England’s success here two years ago, but it does increase the onus on those spinners to attack with the utmost discipline.Instead, Bess in particular found his good fortune from the first innings being rebalanced in a leaky display, while Leach’s own struggles seemed to have been summed up in his 16th over, when Mendis propped forward to a decent biting delivery and lobbed a simple chance to short leg. Sadly for England, however, that fielder only materialised one ball later – Leach’s economy rate of close to four an over had rather negated the option of being attacking.But late in the day, Leach found his fizz at last, and with a nightwatchman at the crease alongside the steadfast Thirimanne, Root remains confident that his side is on course to close out the contest.”When you come and play here, and at this ground in particular, you’ve got to remember how quickly things can change, and how difficult it can be to start your innings,” Root said at close, after establishing England’s dominance with his magnificent 228.”It’s really important as a bowling group that we remember that. You’ve got to make those first 10-15 balls count against a new batter, and remember you’re always in the game throughout, because there’s always that one ball somewhere if you get it in the right spot and fortune’s on your side.”You’ve just got to work hard and try and be as patient as possible, and keep applying as much pressure as you can for long periods.”

RCB's batting hurt them, but where exactly did the batsmen – and tactics – go wrong?

Their season disintegrated in the latter stages, with their batsmen not putting up enough runs for their bowlers to work with

Karthik Krishnaswamy07-Nov-2020Five matches, five defeats. That’s how a promising Royal Challengers Bangalore season ultimately came to nothing. In each of those last five games, the Royal Challengers batted first, posting totals of 145, 164, 120, 152 and 131. And as hard as their bowlers tried to keep them in the game, they simply didn’t have enough runs to defend, with only two of these matches going into the final over.Something, clearly, went horribly wrong with the Royal Challengers’ batting. But what, and why? How did a team that won seven of its first ten games disintegrate so spectacularly?According to Mike Hesson, the Royal Challengers’ director of cricket, the downturn was caused by the batsmen’s inability to adapt to the slowing down of the pitches as the tournament progressed.”The reality is that the wickets slowed up and as a batting group we didn’t adapt quickly enough, and when you don’t score enough runs you put an awful lot of pressure on your bowling unit,” Hesson said in a media interaction on Saturday. “Last five games, we batted first, [and] on all of the surfaces we struggled to adapt, we struggled to be able to apply any pressure on our opposition, we kept losing wickets by trying to force our case, therefore you end up basically crawling over the line a little bit from a batting point of view, getting a sub-par score, and then scrapping hard.”And the fact that we’ve had to scrap for every game, the last four or five, it certainly exposed the fact that we struggled on the slower surfaces as the tournament progressed.”The first ten rounds, when there was enough pace in the surfaces, as a batting unit we were very good. In the death we were the second-best team, in the powerplay I think we were second or third, in the middle we were sort of around the middle, and as the tournament progressed we dropped off in those phases, but that in a nutshell was the story of the last five games.”On the surface, Hesson’s reading seems accurate. The Royal Challengers were indeed the second-fastest-scoring team in the death overs until the end of their tenth match of the season, and third-quickest in the powerplay, but second-from-bottom in the middle overs.Then they simply fell off a cliff, particularly in the death overs (their middle-overs scoring rate actually improved marginally in the latter part of the tournament).The Royal Challengers’ death-overs scoring rate nosedived over their last five games•ESPNcricinfo LtdBut did cracks suddenly erupt in the Royal Challengers’ batting unit after game 10, or did they exist right through the tournament, papered over initially by the acts of a genius? Look at the death-overs numbers in the above graphic, and think about this game, this game, this game and this one. Would the Royal Challengers have won any of them without AB de Villiers?Four wins out of seven, owing largely to the efforts of one man. And even de Villiers can’t keep such a run of form going forever. The Royal Challengers’ death-overs decline towards the end of their campaign can be attributed largely to de Villiers reverting to the mean. In their first ten games of the season, he batted six times in the death overs, and was only dismissed twice in 69 balls. In their last five games, he was dismissed three times in 16 balls across three innings.The Royal Challengers were heavily reliant on AB de VIlliers’ death-overs masterclasses•ESPNcricinfo LtdA team can’t be so reliant on one batsman. Or even two. Virat Kohli’s approach in T20s has been widely debated, but when he makes it as far as the death overs he usually makes it count. In the early, happy phase of the Royal Challengers’ season, he made it into the death overs four times in 10 innings, and scored 88 runs off 40 balls (strike rate 220.00) while being dismissed once.In his last five games, Kohli only got into the death overs once, scoring 17 off 11 balls in the phase against the Chennai Super Kings, after having scored 33 off his first 32 balls.That sort of start was typical of Kohli’s season, and the Royal Challengers were prepared to accept it given the death-overs payoff he can deliver. But did they organise the rest of their batting well enough to complement those slow starts?Simon Katich, their head coach, certainly believes so.”One thing that we tried to do with our batting order was structure it so that guys who batted in consistent pairings complemented each other,” Katich said. “You’re having guys who are strong against maybe pace, and other guys who’re strong against spin to complement each other in different phases of the innings, so it makes it harder for opposition captains to really stifle the innings.ALSO READ: Gambhir says RCB need to look beyond Kohli for captaincy”We see that in games where two similar players bat together and an opposition captain can win a three- or four-over spell of the game with a certain type of bowling, so we were really mindful of that, and hence the reason why there were games where we did bring left-handers into the fold to break up our right-handers at the top, which we obviously had, with three of the top four, in [Aaron] Finch, Kohli and de Villiers.”Pretty much in T20, batting has to be adaptable and flexible, because the nature of the game situation dictates how you have to play, whether you’re batting first or you’re chasing and when you enter the fray. So there are no actual set positions in T20 a lot of times, it comes up to how you have to go against a certain match-up and try and make it as hard as possible for the opposition captain.”That flexibility, however, wasn’t always apparent when it came to de Villiers’ batting position. He batted at No. 4 in all but two of his innings, no matter when the second wicket fell. And he ended up with a rigidly fixed position over his last six innings of the season, after the Royal Challengers made the widely debated decision to promote a pair of left-handers, Washington Sundar and Shivam Dube, above him, to match up against the two legspinners in Kings XI Punjab’s attack.”We certainly tried [promoting the left-handers] in Sharjah against Kings XI knowing full well they had their two legspinners bowling in that phase of the game,” Katich said. “Unfortunately, the execution of that plan probably meant that we copped a lot of flak over it, because it left AB de Villiers not batting as much as we would have liked, and also we didn’t get the runs we would have liked in that phase, where we did promote Sundar and Dube. I don’t think there was anything wrong with the actual thought around the plan.”

“The wickets slowed up and as a batting group we didn’t adapt quickly enough, and when you don’t score enough runs you put an awful lot of pressure on your bowling unit”Mike Hesson, RCB’s director of cricket

There wasn’t, but the flak they copped for the move dissuaded the Royal Challengers from trying it again, even in situations that seemed to cry out for it.In the game against the Super Kings in Dubai, Kohli and de Villiers scored a combined 68 off 62 balls against Ravindra Jadeja, Mitchell Santner and Imran Tahir, all of whom turn the ball away from the right-hander. Moeen Ali, a left-hand batsman with a T20 strike rate of 169.36 against legspin and left-arm orthodox before that game, and a far more proven performer than Sundar or Dube, didn’t come out to bat until the 18th over.Moeen didn’t play another game until the Eliminator against Sunrisers Hyderabad, when the Royal Challengers made two major changes to their batting line-up. It felt like a belated recognition of the issues that had plagued the team through the tournament, especially through the middle overs. Kohli, who had struggled to find the boundary through the middle overs all season, opened alongside Devdutt Padikkal to try and make use of the powerplay field restrictions. Moeen – who boasted the best middle-overs strike rate (176.51) of all Royal Challengers batsmen since the 2018 season – came back into the team.According to Katich, Moeen was set to bat at No. 3 to target the legspin/left-arm spin combination of Rashid Khan and Shahbaz Nadeem. But the Royal Challengers lost two wickets within the first four overs, and the plan was put on ice. Moeen eventually arrived in the 11th over and ran himself out, off the first ball he faced – a free-hit.ALSO READ: Kohli’s mentorship and never-say-die attitude vital for RCB, says coach Katich”There was a period, if we hadn’t lost a wicket early [in the Eliminator], Moeen would have probably batted three, if he’d come in at the back end of the powerplay or just after the powerplay, so the timing of the wickets probably changed how our batting line-up looked,” Katich said.”We were taking the aggressive option, really, in moving Virat to the top of the order to try and get him in the game, to influence the game positively. That didn’t happen, I mean, that’s the way it panned out. It’s not often you get someone [Kohli] caught down the leg side and someone else run out off a free-hit no-ball, so that’s the way the game goes sometimes, and it didn’t go our way.”It didn’t go their way, but it might well have done had the Royal Challengers taken those decisions earlier in the tournament, and acted more proactively to address their middle-overs issues.

Game
Register
Service
Bonus