December 6, 2023
India lost the World Cup Final in 2003, and we all thought that it was our time to take revenge on the Kangaroos. However, Australia have once again shown the Cricket World why they can be called the Real Madrid of Cricket (almost impossible to beat them in knockout games).
Australia’s journey in the World Cup was nothing short of a cinematic drama. They started off on a shaky note, losing to India and South Africa in their initial games. However, in a twist befitting a blockbuster, they bounced back, knocking out the very teams that had defeated them earlier. This resilience and ability to rise to the occasion is reminiscent of Real Madrid’s dominance in football. In cricket, Australia is like the John Wick of the sports world – relentless, formidable, and almost invincible in knockouts.
The final against India was a testament to their indomitable spirit. A moment that encapsulated their determination was when Travis Head made a spectacular save, turning a near-certain four into a display of sheer willpower. It was in these moments that Australia’s intent was clear – they were switched on and ready to dominate. Let’s discuss 5 reasons why India lost the World Cup final.
— simon hughes (@theanalyst) November 19, 2023
In the World Cup final, Australia’s fielding was a game-changer. Their fielders, donned in canary yellow, transformed the field into a maze of hostility with their energetic and aggressive fielding. Travis Head’s remarkable catch of Rohit Sharma served as an illustration of this. Head, though not known as a fielding maestro like Ricky Ponting, displayed extraordinary commitment and athleticism to grab a crucial catch. His effort was not just a display of skill but also a psychological boost for the Australian team.
Australia’s fielding was a blend of agility and smart strategy. They were not just stopping runs but also creating a sense of pressure and intimidation. Their fielders, positioned strategically, were quick to pounce on the ball, often turning potential singles into dot balls. This level of fielding intensity saved Australia an estimated 20-30 runs, a significant margin in a high-pressure final.
In contrast, India’s fielding and wicket-keeping were lackluster. They were not as sharp or proactive as their Australian counterparts. This difference in fielding standards was stark and played a crucial role in the outcome of the match. India’s fielding lapses, including giving away 18 extra runs, were critical in a match where every run counted. The Australian fielders, on the other hand, were a cohesive unit, supporting their bowlers and adding an extra layer of challenge for the Indian batsmen.
The captaincy decisions of Rohit Sharma in the World Cup final raised several questions. One of the key moments was the decision to send Suryakumar Yadav to bat after Ravindra Jadeja. Jadeja, who came in at the 36th over, consumed too many deliveries for a meager score, which hampered India’s momentum. This decision was puzzling, especially considering the need for quick runs at that stage of the game.
Another questionable move was opting for Mohammed Shami with the new ball. Shami, not typically accustomed to this role, struggled with ball control, leading to erratic deliveries and missed opportunities. In contrast, Mohammed Siraj, who is more adept at handling the new ball, needed to be more utilized. This mismanagement of bowlers was a critical factor in failing to apply early pressure on the Australian batsmen.
The slower ball bouncer is so difficult to properly score off.
As soon as it’s released, instinct takes over and self preservation kicks in, then you realise it’s a slower ball, but more often than not, that’s too late to whack.
— Kevin Pietersen🦏 (@KP24) November 19, 2023
Rohit’s defensive approach, especially when spinners were bowling, was also a point of contention. By not maintaining an attacking field and allowing easy singles, the Indian team missed opportunities to take more wickets. A more aggressive approach could have put the Australian batsmen under pressure and potentially changed the course of the game. The lack of strategic field placements and the failure to capitalize on key moments reflected poorly on Rohit’s captaincy in this crucial match.
The captaincy & personal performance of @patcummins30 today has been as good as it gets .. Brave decision at the toss .. tactically he has never let #India settle & has bowled beautifully .. #CWC23Final
— Michael Vaughan (@MichaelVaughan) November 19, 2023
India’s middle order in the 2023 World Cup final was a stark contrast to the explosive line-ups of the past, which boasted dynamic players like Yuvraj Singh, MS Dhoni, and Suresh Raina. In this crucial match, the middle order’s performance was underwhelming. The lack of significant partnerships and the inability to accelerate the scoring rate were glaring issues.
KL Rahul’s innings is a prime example. Scoring only one boundary in his 66 runs speaks volumes about the effectiveness of Australia’s bowling and fielding. The Australians managed to create a ‘boundary drought’ for the Indian batsmen, a critical factor in a low-scoring final. This lack of boundaries not only slowed down the run rate but also increased pressure on the Indian batsmen.
Tough wicket to bat on but surely India would have liked a few more runs on the board. Early wickets will decide India's resurgence in the game. Waiting to see @MdShami11 vs the left handers.#CWC23Final #IndvAusFinal
— Robin Aiyuda Uthappa (@robbieuthappa) November 19, 2023
Suryakumar Yadav’s approach in the final overs was also questionable. His reluctance to take the strike and play aggressively left the lower-order batsmen exposed and under pressure. Instead of taking charge and accelerating the scoring, he played a passive role, which was detrimental to India’s chances of setting a challenging total. The middle order’s inability to forge big partnerships and score quickly was a significant factor in India’s underperformance in the final.
— simon hughes (@theanalyst) November 19, 2023
The pitch at the Narendra Modi Stadium played a crucial role in the World Cup final. Historically, this stadium has seen an equal distribution of wins for teams batting first and second. However, in the final, the pitch conditions were slower and drier than expected, which significantly influenced the game’s outcome.
India’s strategy did not adapt well to the changing conditions of the pitch, especially in the second innings. The slower nature of the pitch, which should have been an advantage for the Indian spinners, turned out to be a disadvantage due to the dew factor. The moisture made it difficult for the spinners to grip the ball, reducing their effectiveness and allowing Australian batsmen to play more comfortably.
Australia’s decision to bowl first was a strategic masterstroke. They capitalized on the pitch’s evolving nature, which became more conducive to batting as the game progressed. This decision was pivotal in their ability to chase down the target.
The final’s pitch drew criticism from experts for not being conducive to a balanced contest between bat and ball. The pitch, which was presumably prepared to exploit Australia’s weakness against spin, backfired. Instead of creating a balanced track that offered a slight advantage to both batting and bowling, the pitch ended up favoring the team batting second. This miscalculation in pitch preparation was a significant factor in India’s defeat, as a more balanced wicket might have allowed them to post a more competitive total.
India has lost the World Cup. If there was anyone who could have stopped them, has stopped them. pic.twitter.com/WMIMbcmEaO
— Shoaib Akhtar (@shoaib100mph) November 19, 2023
The World Cup final of 2023 saw a pivotal moment that significantly impacted the outcome of the game – the shot selection by India’s captain, Rohit Sharma. His approach to batting in this crucial match was more akin to an exhibition game rather than a high-stakes final. Instead of anchoring the innings and building a substantial score, Rohit played a careless shot, leading to his dismissal.
Had Rohit Sharma played with more caution and stayed at the crease for around 20-25 overs, the scenario could have been vastly different. With his ability to score quickly, he could have easily added 30 to 40 more runs to his tally. A score of 75 to 80 by the 20th over from Rohit would have significantly bolstered India’s total, potentially taking it to around 275 to 280 runs. This higher score would have created massive pressure on Australia, especially considering their shaky start of losing 3 wickets for just 45 runs.
Rohit’s premature departure not only cost India valuable runs but also exposed the middle order earlier than necessary. His shot selection, particularly in such a crucial match, was a glaring mistake. It reflected a lack of strategic thinking and an underestimation of the situation’s gravity. As a seasoned player and the team captain, Rohit should have recognized the importance of his wicket and the need to build a solid foundation for the team. His dismissal was not just a personal failure but a strategic blunder that had a ripple effect on the entire team’s performance.
In the World Cup final, Australia outperformed India in every aspect of the game. Their superiority was evident in batting, bowling, fielding, and captaincy. Australia’s fielding was particularly impressive, saving an estimated 20-30 runs, a significant margin in a high-pressure game like a World Cup final. This level of fielding efficiency not only prevented India from scoring more runs but also added psychological pressure on the Indian batsmen.
I'm a big fan of Travis Head as a cricketer, I believe he will be a future star for Australia in all forms of the game @wwos !!
— Shane Warne (@ShaneWarne) December 6, 2016
Captain Pat Cummins displayed astute leadership, especially in his bowling strategy. Recognizing the Indian batsmen’s discomfort with bouncers, Cummins and Josh Hazlewood consistently delivered these challenging deliveries. This tactic rattled the Indian batsmen, contributing to their downfall.
A remarkable century served as the foundation for Australia’s performance in the batting department. The innings of 137 off 120 balls was a masterclass in batting under pressure and will be remembered as one of the finest in World Cup final history. This century, scored during a challenging phase of the match, showcased skill, temperament, and determination. It placed the batsman among the likes of Ricky Ponting and Adam Gilchrist, who have also scored centuries in World Cup finals for Australia.
Overall, Australia’s comprehensive performance in the final highlighted their dominance in cricket, akin to their reputation as a team that rises to the occasion in big matches. Their ability to excel in all departments of the game was the key to their victory, proving once again why they are considered one of the greatest cricket teams in the world.
Also Read: Most Runs in World Cup History