Three reasons why Virat Kohli and Co could not win their 10th consecutive ODI

And so it finally happened. After nine matches without tasting defeat, India lost an ODI. After 11 matches without a win away from Down Under, Australia won an ODI. After three matches where Australia threatened to play good cricket only to wilt under pressure, they showed up in Bengaluru.

Virat Kohli was honest in his post-match assessment that, on the day, Australia were just the better team and his team got outplayed. That is mostly true. But, with the series already wrapped up, there were a few instances on Thursday when India were responsible for their own defeat.

Here are three reasons for India not breaking their all-time consecutive ODI win record in Bengaluru.

Overs 49 and 50

Steve Smith, almost uncharacteristically for an Aussie captain, was gushing about Jasprit Bumrah and Bhuvneshwar Kumar after losing the series 3-0 in Indore. He said they are perhaps the best bowlers around when it comes to delivering in the death overs. And few can argue with that. So, it came as bit of a surprise that Kohli would decide to rest both of them together for this match. In came Umesh Yadav and Mohammed Shami – two bowlers who have been great for India in the past year, but mostly in the whites. The duo are not the same when it comes to white-ball cricket, mostly because, on flat batting wickets, they do not have the same weapons/variations in the armoury as Bhuvi or Bumrah.

While they did mostly alright, coming back after more than a month away from action, their lack of discernible variations was apparent in Bengaluru. Yadav ended up with four wickets, yes, but was plagued by the familiar troubles of bowling one bad ball every over, conceding 71 runs in his 10 overs. Shami, for his part, could not find the yorkers towards the end that made him an ODI force to reckon with before a long injury layoff.

Together, the two of them conceded 28 runs in the last two overs. And the margin of defeat? 21 runs.

The Rohit-Virat partnership

Oh dear, it happened again. For the sixth time in ODIs, a partnership between Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli ended in a needless run-out. The old fable that a batsman is so good that he can only dismiss himself is becoming increasingly true when these two are batting together. For two remarkably fit athletes, for two cricketers who have played so much cricket together, it’s quite amazing how often the two of them ended up causing havoc while running between the wickets.

The six dismissals by itself is a significant number, but regular watchers of the Indian team will know that that is not even a clear reflection of their misunderstandings when it comes to completing a run. Whether it’s their habit of instinctively starting to run after every time they hit the ball, or whether it’s a deeper malaise of not communicating who takes the call – this is a problem that will cost India more matches, if not fixed. After all, not every time one of the two can go on to score a double century after getting the other run out. (Yes, both of Rohit’s double hundreds saw Kohli getting run out)

The Pandya Experiment

Kohli said after the win in Indore that Hardik Pandya was promoted to No. 4 to hit the spinner (Ashton Agar in that match) out of the attack. It worked. His 78 took India home, chasing a not-so-steep target. When he came out to bat at the same position again in Bengaluru, though, it felt like a miscalculation. Sure, he did start with a massive six off Travis Head and targeted Adam Zampa with two sixes in one over early on his innings. But chasing a big score, India were sacrificing the wicket of the only guy in this lineup who can start hitting from the word go.

That’s a trait that would have come in handy when the required rate went over 12 runs per over towards the end. His 41 off 40 balls was a solid innings, no doubt. But by promoting Pandya, MS Dhoni was pushed to No. 7, coming in to bat when the situation demanded aggression from the first ball – as fit and crucial as Dhoni is to this Indian side, he’s simply not that batsman anymore.