'In 2007 World Cup, Sachin batted at 4 and see what happened': Sehwag's classic example as India demote Rohit to No. 3
- Virender Sehwag has given a classic example from the 2007 50-over World Cup and explained how India possibly committed a similar mistake by making Rohit Sharma bat at No. 3 in the game against New Zealand.
Virender Sehwag has given a classic example from the 2007 50-over World Cup and explained how India possibly committed a similar mistake by making Rohit Sharma bat at No. 3 in the game against New Zealand during their T20 World Cup match in Dubai on Sunday.
As India made Rohit Sharma bat at No. 3 against New Zealand, Sehwag recalled how the decision to make Sachin Tendulkar bat at No. 4 instead of opening the innings, where the batting great had tasted most of his success, played a huge role in India exiting the World Cup.
"In the 2007 World Cup, we had made two mistakes. When we were chasing so well - we won 17 consecutive matches while chasing - but when the World Cup arrived, our coach said 'no, we need batting practice'. I said 'let us win 2 matches first and then we will have 6 matches to improve our batting. But he said 'No'," Sehwag said on Cricbuzz.
With Suryakumar Yadav missing the game due to back spasms, India included Ishan Kishan. But it came as a surprise to many when he came to open the innings with KL Rahul and Rohit batted at No. 3. Sehwag drew parallels between these two decisions, indirectly indicating that when a tried, tested and successfully formula is tempered with, it usually transforms into a recipe of disaster.
"The second mistake was that when the opening pair of Sachin Tendulkar and Sourav Ganguly were performing so well, so why was that broken? Why was it said that if Tendulkar bats in the middle order, you can control it?" Sehwag pointed out.
"We had already had three players to control - Yuvraj Singh, Rahul Dravid and MS Dhoni. Why did you need a fourth one? Sachin batted at No. 4 and see what happened. When teams change strategy, that is when they play badly. When there is a proven formula, there is no need to change it. That is the best example I can give."