2nd ODI: Despite Rohit’s breakneck start, Indian batters fall prey to Lankan spin

What must Rohit Sharma be going through just now? Five weeks after overseeing one of India’s greatest triumphs, at the T20 World Cup, the One-Day International skipper has watched his colleagues squander two positions of great strength he had worked single-handedly to fashion against Sri Lanka. On Friday (August 2), despite their profligacy, India managed to escape with a tie. There was no such luck on Sunday (August 4) with Sri Lanka securing their first ODI win over India in three years to snatch a 1-0 advantage in the three-match series with one to play.

Similar patterns

On Friday, Rohit was the lead partner in an opening salvo of 75 (76 balls) with Shubman Gill with India chasing 231 for victory. After huffing and puffing their way through, India found themselves within one run of victory when they lost two wickets in as many deliveries to be bowled out for 230. It was a tie all right, but it must have felt like a loss.

A loss it was on Sunday, quite emphatically, as the second ODI followed an eerily similar pattern to the first. Once again, Sri Lanka recovered from a precarious position (136 for six) to post a competitive total under the conditions, 240 for nine. Once again, Rohit provided India with a breakneck start; if his half-century had taken 33 deliveries on Friday, it came off just 29 two nights as he and Gill powered away to 97 in just 81 deliveries.

Then began the familiar dance of doom against the turning ball. Rohit had played it smart, aware that the new ball was the best time to play one’s strokes freely. He knew that once the ball got softer, the effect of the roller wore off and the pitch began to play true to character, life wouldn’t be easy for the batters. What he didn’t know, however, was that his batting mates would show no stomach for battle, allowing a largely anonymous leg-spinner to turn in a memorable spell at the R Premadasa Stadium.

Batting challenges

Until Saturday night, Jeffrey Vandersay wasn’t even in Sri Lanka’s larger squad of 15. He was a late addition after senior leg-spinner Wanindu Hasaranga was ruled out with a hamstring injury. It wasn’t until the team reached the ground at 1 pm on Sunday, an hour and a half before the start of the game, that he was informed that he would replace Hasaranga in the XI. Vandersay, at 34 no spring chicken, wasn’t unaware that he had massive shoes to fill, but even he must have been pleasantly surprised at how generous India’s batters were.

Truth to tell, the conditions at the Premadasa are unique to, well, the Premadasa. Nowhere else in the world does batting second become such a demanding, arduous task when there is help for the spinners. The ball comes slowly off the surface, the exaggerated turn makes it impossible to play strokes with assurance. For set batters, it isn’t so tough but for those new to the crease, the challenges are immeasurable. Immeasurable, but not insurmountable. Unless…

India tied up in knots

Sunday was the third time in four matches, spread over 11 months that India had allowed themselves to be tied up in knots by Sri Lankan spin. At the Asia Cup last September, India folded up for 213 despite an 80-run opening stand between Rohit and Gill, the prime destroyers being Dunith Wellalage (5 for 40) and the unassuming Charith Asalanka (4 for 18), a part-time offie if ever there was one. Fortunately for the Indians, their bowling firepower carried the night as they romped home by 41 runs.

This August has been less kind. India are at full batting strength bar none; the middle order is populated by pretty much the same personnel that turned up at the 50-over World Cup last year – Virat Kohli, Shreyas Iyer, and KL Rahul. Neither of them measured up to scratch on Sunday. Kohli was trapped in front by a leggie for the second time on the bounce (it was Hasaranga on Friday), and both Iyer and Rahul became Vandersay’s unsuspecting victims. In seven overs of relentless accuracy and sticking to the basics, Vandersay had extraordinary figures of six for 26. Vandersay? Say who?

India shouldn’t be strangers to the turning ball; they aren’t, even though the quality of spin in domestic cricket isn’t as high as it once used to be, and several of the internationals have found reasons in the past not to represent their respective states (that’s set to change from this season). But watching them at work over the last 60 or so hours, one wondered if it was their maiden trysts with spin. They were crease-tied, preferring the sweep/slog-sweep to coming down the ground, using soft hands, working the ball into the gaps. Perhaps they didn’t trust their footwork and judgement, perhaps they didn’t trust the surface, perhaps the pace at which Sri Lanka’s bowlers didn’t instill in them the confidence that they could advance down the pitch with any authority.

Why India’s batting needs scrutiny

No matter the reason, they stayed in their crease and tried to play from there. When they pushed forward or hung back in defence, it was with tentativeness and hesitancy. Those are the two worst traits to possess under the circumstances. Sri Lanka were accurate, unbelievably so. They didn’t turn the ball a mile to provide optical delight, they did just enough to ping the pads, to win leg before shouts. They looked average and unthreatening when in reality, they were smart and unyielding. Axar Patel showed his more celebrated batting colleagues how to play in these conditions, with a broad bat, a big heart and with complete belief in oneself, but they were all only watching from the changing room after their dismissals, the haunted looks on their faces a giveaway to the turmoil in their minds.

The batting will come under scrutiny, as it should, but India should also wonder how they allowed Sri Lanka to recover 142 for six and 136 for six to 230 for eight and 240 for nine respectively. It’s all fine to give credit to the opposition, as assistant coach Abhishek Nayar did more than once in Sunday’s post-mortem, but how did India allow the lower order off the hook? Wouldn’t 180 have been easier to chase, knowing full well how the pitch would turn out (no pun intended) in the second half? Did it behoove to concede 65 and 79 in the last ten overs, respectively? Questions, frustrating questions, these.