India lost to South Africa by 76 runs in Ahmedabad on Sunday in the T20 World Cup, but the margin of defeat could have been lower if for situationally-aware batting, writes Sarah Waris.
To gauge how bad a day India had at the Narendra Modi Stadium in Ahmedabad against South Africa, take a look at the last column of the points table, where the net run rate of –3.800 stands out immediately. A 76-run defeat, their second-largest in the format, has left them in a precarious position in the Super Eights, where even victories in the remaining two fixtures may not be enough to guarantee qualification for the semi-finals.
The chase of 188 began on unstable footing for the hosts. Yet another opener fell for a duck in the first over, while Abhishek Sharma and Tilak Varma’s poor run continued, leaving India 31 for 3 inside the powerplay. When Washington Sundar, promoted to No.5, joined captain Suryakumar Yadav, the immediate task was to steady the innings rather than accelerate. By then, however, the required rate had already climbed beyond 11 per over, meaning any rebuilding phase had to be efficient and wicket-free to have value.
India's Ahmedabad chase was never on stable ground
That stabilisation never really arrived. Sundar fell in the eighth over with the score 43 for 4, edging Corbin Bosch’s short-of-length delivery that angled across as he tried to force a boundary. When Suryakumar was dismissed at 51 for 5 in the tenth over, India had added only eight runs in almost two overs while losing another wicket. At that point, the equation stood at 137 needed from 65 balls, roughly 12.6 runs per over. In modern T20 cricket, that is demanding but not impossible. But India neither had the cushion of having enough wickets in hand, nor did they have a set batter in the middle.
The partnership between Hardik Pandya and Shivam Dube gave India hope. From 51 for 5, they took India to 86 by the end of the 14th over, with the five overs producing 35 runs. However, the required rate kept climbing, and had reached 17 with six overs remaining. The phase also fetched just two boundaries - a four and a six, as South Africa’s bowlers consistently used pace and length variations, bowling cutters, yorkers and hard lengths into the surface.
Once Hardik fell in the 15th over, followed by Rinku Singh two balls later, the game shifted decisively. The requirement jumped to 102 from 33 balls, just over 17 per over, effectively pushing the chase into the improbable.
Rinku swung hard at a shorter ball from Keshav Maharaj, but miscued it to long-on. Arshdeep Singh followed with another attacking stroke two balls later, as three wickets fell in the 15th. At this point, with neither wickets in hand nor the margin of defeat getting any smaller, Dube had no option but to go for his shots, hitting three sixes, including two in a row off Kagiso Rabada.
India’s batting coach Sitanshu Kotak acknowledged that the message to Dube was to reduce the margin of defeat at this point. "We spoke about the margin of defeat when Hardik and Rinku were dismissed quickly. The net run rate matters, and that is when the team told Dube to try to take the game deep. However, Lungi bowled the deceptive cutters, and Bosch was also good with his lengths, so it did not pay off for India."
But the calibration should have occurred earlier.
How India mismanaged the net run rate
After the powerplay, with Sundar and Suryakumar together, the required rate was still just under 12 per over. That is a phase where three or four overs of controlled batting, combining low-risk singles with the occasional boundary, could have stabilised the chase and prevented the equation from spiralling. Instead, the partnership never lasted long enough to make a difference.
Super 8 - Match 3, India vs South Africa
vs
- Ball by ball Over
A contrasting situation emerged during the stand between Hardik and Dube. By then, defeat was beginning to look likely, and the priority could have shifted towards reducing the margin rather than going for the unlikely win. While their approach did briefly suggest an attempt to play for the net run rate - as indicated by the minimal risk and the 35 runs that the five overs after Suryakumar's wicket fetched - the batting coach later indicated that the instruction had rather been to remain alive in the chase.
That clarification only puts into question the tempo of the innings further, because regardless of whether the objective was victory or damage control, a measured increase in risk-taking was necessary. With two power-hitters at the crease and overs remaining, this was arguably the phase where big hits, even at the cost of a wicket, could have offered greater value. Instead, that partnership was spent trying to 'safely' rebuild the innings, which allowed the required rate to continue rising.
Once Hardik and then Rinku fell, India were left without either momentum or resources, which is when they admittedly conceded defeat. Dube had to battle it out on his own, denying singles to Varun Chakravarthy in the end, which further impacted the margin of defeat. However, his hands were tied at that point - taking the singles could have risked quicker wickets, leaving India with a bigger deficit.
South Africa’s bowling also deserves praise. Lungi Ngidi’s four overs for just 15 runs without conceding a boundary highlighted how effectively the surface was used, with a deceptive use of slower balls, off-cutters and the newest trick in his arsenal, leg-cutters. Bosch and Marco Jansen complemented that with disciplined lengths and variations.
At the end of the day, India’s confused approach left a lingering impact on their campaign. They kept taking the chase deep at a time when greater risk-taking was required, but still planning to go for the win till it became infeasible. While it is natural for elite teams to not concede defeat in a game as long as possible, tournament cricket brings a second layer of calculation into play. Once the chase began slipping away, perhaps India's plans should have changed and adjusting the approach to reduce the defeat margin would have helped the bigger picture.
The –3.800 beside their name is therefore not just about one bad evening. It means that from here, both the remaining matches have to result in convincing wins, and every over could influence semi-final qualification. In a short stage like the Super Eights, that is a difficult position to be in, and it is one India will now have to work hard to recover from.
Follow Wisden for all cricket updates, including live scores, match stats, quizzes and more. Stay up to date with the latest cricket news, player updates, team standings, match highlights, video analysis and live match odds.
