Mumbai Indians v Perth Scorchers, CLT20, Delhi

Explosive Mumbai thrash Perth, knock out Otago

The Report by Kanishkaa Balachandran

October 2, 2013

Comments: 121 | Text size: A | A

Mumbai Indians 152 for 4 (Rohit 51*, Smith 48) beat Perth Scorchers 149 for 6 (Whiteman 51*, Coulter-Nile 3-19) by six wickets
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details


Dwayne Smith smashed five fours and three sixes, Mumbai Indians v Perth Scorchers, Champions League 2013,  Group A, Delhi, October 2, 2013
Dwayne Smith powered the chase with 48 off 25 balls © BCCI
Enlarge

Mumbai Indians boast of some of the biggest hitters in T20 cricket in their line-up and they fired in unison to storm into the semi-final of the Champions League, achieving their target in just 13.2 overs. The target was 150, but in order to topple Otago on net run rate, they needed to achieve it within 14.2 overs. The strategy was clear and Dwayne Smith and Rohit Sharma made it look ridiculously simple against a Perth Scorchers attack that failed to contain a determined top order. It meant that the semi-final line-up had three IPL teams in it.

The scenarios were clearly spelt out for Mumbai ahead of the game as to what they required to keep Otago out of the semi-final race. It's common for captains to prefer to chase in such situations and Rohit decided to do just that. The required rate for qualification was over ten an over and Mumbai approached it as a 14-over game.

Sachin Tendulkar wasn't in the best of form but he was sent to open anyway. There was the possibility that this would be his last T20 match in the event of them failing to qualify. He fell for a second-ball duck, flicking to deep square leg and there was a hush around the Kotla as he walked back. Smith provided the big hits starting from the second ball of the innings, which he slogged over mid-on before dispatching another over the rope at long-on.

Scorchers had three left-arm spinners in their line-up, including the experienced Brad Hogg, but their one-dimensional spin attack was demolished by a rampaging Smith. Flighted deliveries were slogged and smashed over the covers and anything dropped short was pulled over the leg side at breakneck speed. The flatter and quicker deliveries kept him quiet on occasion but Scorchers were guilty of bowling the wrong lengths.

The left-arm seamers, Joel Paris and Jason Behrendorff, came in for similar punishment. Paris' first over leaked 19, with an effortless six by Rohit over fine leg followed by an outside edge past the wicketkeeper. Hogg bowled two long hops, the first of which was smashed by Smith over deep midwicket. The second was pulled flatter, but Behrendorff timed his jump to perfection at deep square leg to pull off a sharp catch to send back Smith for 48.

Another hush enveloped the ground as Smith walked back but Rohit was in sublime form at the other end. He ensured the run rate stayed around ten an over, slogging the spinners and launching Paris several rows over long-off to speed towards his fifty. At the end of ten overs, Mumbai raced to 117 for 3 and held the edge. Kieron Pollard had moved to a relatively pedestrian 12 off 12 balls but two solid blows in an over off Behrendorff eased any pressure that may have crept up. Tension started to build in the dugout when Pollard was bowled in the 13th over with Mumbai still needing 13 off 11. Ambati Rayudu sealed the win with consecutive sixes and Mumbai qualified with an over to spare.

Scorchers were already knocked out of the competition but their batsmen did their bit to make it difficult for Mumbai. Two half-century stands pushed Scorchers to what looked like a competitive 149 on a typically slow Kotla track. The openers Ashton Agar and Simon Katich added 55, helped by some ordinary fielding and catching by Mumbai. Sam Whiteman, making his T20 debut, and Hilton Cartwright added a half-century stand in just 30 balls after Mumbai pulled things back with quick wickets. Given the slowness of the pitch, 149 looked respectable but Scorchers didn't have the bowling to keep Mumbai down.

Kanishkaa Balachandran is a senior sub-editor at ESPNcricinfo

RSS Feeds: Kanishkaa Balachandran

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by   on (October 4, 2013, 8:59 GMT)

If only The Scorchers could have had Mitchell Johnson (rested by MI !!) and Nathan Coulter-Nile in their team

Posted by shane-oh on (October 3, 2013, 14:27 GMT)

@ Shashank Pandey - could be sour grapes, although there aren't any teams in the competition that I support, so it seems somewhere between extremely unlikely and impossible. Of course nobody 'owns' the word 'Champion' - but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have a meaning. We can change a meaning of a word if we want and see if it catches on; more likely people will look at you and wonder what is wrong with you. The comparison to somebody's name is so demonstrably absurd that it doesn't warrant any real response. I find it interesting to watch these debates wander wildly off topic and and up at a slanging match whereby anybody who dares to question the management of the game in certain nations becomes a target for rampant abuse. As I have said earlier, when you resort to this, you confirm to people such as myself that we are hitting a sore spot.

Posted by   on (October 3, 2013, 14:10 GMT)

@Anand Jakhotia By "Chamions League" sic, I presume you mean UEFA Champion's League. Excluding possibly Faroe Is., etc... all European nations are represented. Also, no club can use another club's player and country's seeding are determined by past performances. The tournament is also held home and away or, at a neutral venue for the final

Posted by   on (October 3, 2013, 10:19 GMT)

dear alexander rehmanov, this is club cricket, not world cricket. by ur comments even chamions league football should'nt be called so bcos there's no brazil, argentina, co. grow up man !think before u ink something.

Posted by   on (October 3, 2013, 10:10 GMT)

Great win for MI but their fielding was litle off-color which allowed perth to put 149 on board despite a sedate start. All in all 2 ipl teams in knock-outs sounds good for an indian fan but nothing much should be read into it. Remember none of the ipl teams qualified in inaugural champions league played in india pretty much around same time. So comments irt imbalance between teams regarding star power is pretty absurd. Players r at liberty to play for whichever club team they wish, so nothing sinister. IF Real madrid & most of the EPL teams have star players u cant say champions league football is rubbish. So enjoy the slam bang cricket rather cribbling abt teams which have been knocked out.

Posted by   on (October 3, 2013, 10:01 GMT)

@shane-oh...Sour grapes? lol. Anyway. For people who question "champions" in the league's name, there is no copyright on it by anyone as far as I know. Neither does it mean including the whole cricketing fraternity. If someone's name is victor, doesn't mean that person never lost. Even in world cup tournament, there are only a few qualified teams which participate. I've never seen people complaining on the fact that full members don't have to play qualifiers like associates. Then why complaining here?! That is absurd ain't it?

Posted by   on (October 3, 2013, 9:50 GMT)

All those who are against the notion of something like a CLT20 tournament, what is the pain u have if all top t20 teams of the top cricket playing nations come together to one forum? What makes you feel amazed and sad? just because County cricket news doesn't attract the newspapers in India anymore?? -are you sad because of that? Or, is it that no longer WORLD 11 comes to play agains AUS 11? Does that hurt you? - Have been following cricket since decades now. Loved the AUS versus WORLD battles, still follow county and love CLT20 too. Guys, stop mourning if India has attracted the world cricket players to itself. You had your days, we are having ours. Enjoy the game :)

Posted by shane-oh on (October 3, 2013, 9:27 GMT)

Seems to be some confusion about the stake that each of the 3 boards have...I've read at least 4 different configurations on here. Anyway, personally, all this argument about who controls the tournament and who gets x number of teams misses the real point. Clearly it's a private competition and clearly India, Australia, South Africa and India (again) can allow who they want to participate. No argument there. The point is, as a Champion's League, it's a joke and an embarrassment. As a side issue, while the exposure for young players for teams like Perth or Otago is a positive, this is possibly out-weighed by the potentially exposure to the murky dark side of cricket, which we know is common is these types of tournament in this part of the world. Perhaps it's worth thinking about not taking the risk until the tournament is run properly.

Posted by KnightTemplar on (October 3, 2013, 8:52 GMT)

Guys please understand that this is club level tournament and not a country level, so players have there choice to select the club. please understand this fact and do comment....

Posted by   on (October 3, 2013, 8:28 GMT)

for me rr vs mi in final.hope mi win for their their fans not sachin

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
Kanishkaa BalachandranClose
Tournament Results
Mum Indians v Royals at Delhi - Oct 6, 2013
Mum Indians won by 33 runs
Trinidad & T v Mum Indians at Delhi - Oct 5, 2013
Mum Indians won by 6 wickets (with 5 balls remaining)
Royals v Super Kings at Jaipur - Oct 4, 2013
Royals won by 14 runs
Super Kings v Trinidad & T at Delhi - Oct 2, 2013
Trinidad & T won by 8 wickets (with 29 balls remaining)
Mum Indians v Scorchers at Delhi - Oct 2, 2013
Mum Indians won by 6 wickets (with 40 balls remaining)
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!