Cricket
‘We wanted Nortje at..’: Rishabh Pant defends ‘death over’ folly that cost them the match

‘We wanted Nortje at..’: Rishabh Pant defends ‘death over’ folly that cost them the match

Rishabh Pant's Delhi Capitals lost their second consecutive IPL 2024 game, this time against the Rajasthan Royals by 12 runs.

In a nail-biting finish, Rajasthan Royals (RR) edged out Delhi Capitals (DC) to hand DC’s second successive loss in IPL 2024. While Riyan Parag’s knock in the first innings was a major talking point, the strategic calls made by the DC skipper Rishabh Pant also came under scrutiny.

One such decision that was been heavily debated was Pant’s call to delay Anrich Nortje’s overs for the death when Parag was going big in the middle overs.

Parag’s fiery 84* off just 45 deliveries put the Royals in a commanding position. However, many pundits felt that the introduction of Nortje could have curbed the flow of runs at a crucial juncture.

Pant, during the post-match interview, reiterated his faith in his strategy, maintaining that he wanted Nortje fresh for the death overs.

During the interview, Pant said, “There are other options, we wanted Nortje to bowl at the death and sometimes you can go for runs, hopefully we can do better in the next match.”

Nortje had a forgettable game on his return to DC

Anrich Nortje made his long awaited return as the star pacer missed out on most of the cricketing action last year due to his back injury.

However, it proved to be a forgetful outing for the South African who leaked 48 runs in his quota of four overs. While he claimed one wicket in the form of Dhruv Jurel, Nortje was smashed for 25 runs in the last over.

Riyan Parag’s incredible hitting off Nortje’s over completely changed the momentum of the match as it soared up Rajasthan’s morale hugely

Follow
Share

Editors pick

Is Virat Kohli 'immune' to strike rate criticism? Should past performances ensure T20 WC selection?
Share article
Follow us on social media
Google News Whatsapp channel
Tell us why didn’t you like our article so that we can improve on?