England v India, Champions Trophy, final, Edgbaston June 23, 2013

England architects of own downfall

With 20 to win from 16 balls and six wickets in hand, England choked like a consumptive goat wolfing a bucket of marbles
121

And so the wait goes on. England have now lost in the final of five global ODI tournaments - three World Cups and two Champions Trophies - and remain the only side who were involved in this event not to have won a global ODI competition.

This result will hurt. It will hurt not just because they came so close, but because they will know that they were, to a large extent, the architects of their own downfall.

With 16 balls remaining, England required only 20 more runs with six wickets in hand. They will never have a better opportunity. But then they choked like a consumptive goat wolfing a bucket of marbles to lose four wickets for three runs in 14 balls. England are in no position to chuckle at South Africa's reputation as "chokers".

There will be a temptation to blame umpiring decisions, the shortened nature of the game and the absence of a couple of key players for this defeat. It is true that some of those factors might have been relevant - Kevin Pietersen making a century for Surrey even as England were collapsing provided a reminder, should any be required, of his value - but none of them inflicted the fatal blow.

The truth of the matter is that when the pressure was at its greatest, England crumbled. An old failing against the spinning ball was exposed once more as England looked, for a time, as if they were back in Colombo last October or in the UAE groping in the dark against the turning ball.

The batsmen will, as ever, bear the brunt of the criticism. Probably rightly so, too. The bowlers had performed admirably to keep India to an under-par total with Ravi Bopara sustaining his fine form in his latest incarnation as an international player. James Anderson, whose figures suffered for mis-fields and edges, was also excellent.

Yet it was telling that the eventual margin of defeat - five runs - was exactly the same number of runs that England gave away in overthrows. Twice a failure to back-up adequately was punished, with Eoin Morgan failing to back-up an errant throw from Tim Bresnan that cost England four and then Morgan throwing wide when the batsman was comfortably home and conceding another single. England also conceded four wides. You do not have to be a mathematical genius to work out the avoidable damage that caused.

There were other factors. Jonathan Trott's failure to cling on to a catch offered by Virat Kohli, Trott's stumping off a leg side wide and an Asian-style pitch that offered so much turn that India could hardly believe their fortune. The British really are a hospitable bunch.

But perhaps the incident that will provoke most debate was the stumping of Ian Bell. Replays suggested Bell, dragging his back foot, was unfortunate to be given out. Certainly Alastair Cook was unimpressed with the verdict of TV umpire, Bruce Oxenford, stating: "I felt it was a poor decision. Maybe the umpire saw it differently. It looked pretty clear that it was in."

But on reflection, England may recall that a close no-ball call went their way in the crucial match against New Zealand. Besides, Bell had never settled and was far from certain to lead England to victory had he survived. It did not look a good decision, but to pinpoint it as a turning point may be wishful thinking. It was the fifth-wicket partnership that should have led England to victory and the Bell incident is, largely, a red-herring. The best sides tend to encourage a "no excuses" culture.

It is no coincidence that India were the only unbeaten side in the tournament. They were not at their best for much of this game but, at key moments, they held their nerve better than England. It is often such factors that define these games.

They could hardly have asked for more familiar conditions, either. Cheered on by a full house crowd overwhelmingly dominated by their supporters - "we didn't have much support out there," Cook said afterwards - their spinners gained sharp turn from the dry surface and exploited it very effectively.

Still, it will frustrate England that they had earned themselves a position from which they should have won. India may have proved themselves the best team in this competition, but England will know that they squandered a wonderful chance to take this competition.

Afterwards Cook admitted that the defeat represented his "lowest moment" in his career as England captain so far.

"We were almost there," Cook said. "It was in our hands. From the position we were in, you back yourself to win more times than you do to lose. We had high hopes of achieving something really special. We had the opportunity. It's a tough pill to swallow. Clearly, us as a batting unit, we'll be looking at ourselves going, what could we have done better?"

But Cook also expressed his faith in his side and his pride in their achievement in reaching the final. Most of this squad, he said, will be involved when the next global ODI event comes around, in Australia and New Zealand in 2015.

"The majority of the squad will be pretty similar in 2015," Cook said. "There were six other teams involved in this competition that would have liked to be in the situation we were in at the start of the day.

"I'm proud of the way the lads have fought. We've been under a fair bit of pressure in this tournament. A lot of criticism and flak have flown our way, yet we got to the final. We played some good cricket; we just couldn't quite get over the line."

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • GeorgeWBush on June 23, 2013, 22:38 GMT

    England bowled beautifully. As usual the batsmen let the bowlers down. However, a huge amount of credit has to be given to India. Dhoni played his hand superbly, setting very attacking fields when other captains might have been more defensive. He knew only wickets would get India across the line and so he got men around the bat. It was a great final that I thoroughly enjoyed. As an England fan I was disappointed by the result but want to congratulate India. They held their nerve at the critical time and did their nation proud.

  • sgd120 on June 23, 2013, 22:15 GMT

    Make no mistake - this was an extra ordinary game, these kind of games only come once in a few years, but boy, do they leave an after taste? To win after losing the toss which Ian Botham and David Gower were saying is a huge advantage for England, and then to come back and defend 129 was magnificient cricket. It was a victory for the game, but one that is likely to leave some scars for England in cricketers who have not had previous scars of Shane Warne or Richards' generation. How a very good England team regroups will be very interesting to see.

  • Naresh28 on June 26, 2013, 14:32 GMT

    I believe England lost because they (1) Had a team which was not T20 prepared although it was an ODI (2) Eng coach/captain took the view that lower half of the team was good enough to knock the winning runs (3) instead the lower half panicked (4) Dhoni was great and his team fought till the end, they certainly wanted to win. (5) they began their batting innings with a view that the target was not that great. (6) The IPL had already played its part in that Indian players were ready. Next time dont underestimate the opposition.

  • MasterClass on June 25, 2013, 9:50 GMT

    The presumption that England gave away the match with 16 balls remaining and 20 runs to get is a fallacy to begin with. Not on this pitch, with this Indian spin attack. Providing India with THIS pitch was gifting the match on a platter. From that point forward, the only way England stood a chance was if the game was shortened to a T20. It was, and they still managed to loose. Bottom line: the best team won. Best by a country mile. Plain and simple.

  • harshthakor on June 25, 2013, 6:39 GMT

    England simply batted in the end as they knew how to lose a game.From the clutches of a famous win they snatched defeat.It was ironic that the pitch turned like a 5th day crumbling test wicket.Without the spinners like Jadeja and Ashwin at the end England may well have romped home.

    Ian Bell's decision of being given out stumped was most erroneous and changed the complexion of the game.Overall an enthralling contest with the ebb and flow changing till the end.More than anything it proved that cricket is ultimately played in the mind.

  • harshthakor on June 25, 2013, 6:32 GMT

    India deserved to win the title as they outplayed every team in the tournament.It is ironical that the match was on the verge of being banned and only 5 mins were left before they would have called off the match.No other team played consistently well in the tournament and India were head and shoulders above ever opponent outclassing every one with disdain.

    In this game India pulled of a win from the clutches of defeat and Dhoni's inspirational captaincy played a major role.England were cruising home at one stage and finished as though they knew how to lose a game..This match was a testimony to the role of temperament in cricket and a great contest .Amazingly the pitch played like a 5th day turning test match track with spin playing the trumpcard.

    Overall it is a shame that the final was reduced to a 20 over game and there should have been a reserve day.India could hardly prove it's true merit.

  • on June 25, 2013, 1:29 GMT

    Scorecard says Cook made 2 off 9 balls & Bell made 13 off 16 balls. So they made 15 off 25 balls. They were always going to lose this with that effort. SNAILS as I call them. This is is why England cannot win any ODI tournament because players play test in ODI, today they played test in T20. This is not the way you play in ODIs - while chasing you got to attack & take the game away from opposition in 1st PP itself which England never do. Very few people have noticed this fact, had it been some player like KP or Hales then he would have taken the game away from opposition by attacking fast bowlers which was India`s strong point. There was no way England were going to do it against the spinners in the last few balls. England were outplayed & rightly so because they never deserved to win this trophy. No team has ever won any ODI competition with the defensive approach & no one will. England`s method of playing this defensive & conservative cricket was going to get exposed sooner or later.

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 22:36 GMT

    Loads of the predictable comms here. Started responding to them but the realised there were too many so just responded to a few This thread was supposed to be about England and where they could have improved but instead has predictably become a "You're making excuses/You didn't deserve this..." thread So before I go further India are fully deserved winners and the few points below are just how I think Eng could improve things in shorter fmts 1 - Cook's captaincy in general and the tactics as a whole are way too rigid and IMO overly cautious 2 - Would not have the top 3 as it is and would have KP replacing Bell to IMO improve the team balance 3 - Swann and Tredwell have by and large been the most consistent shorter fmt bowlers for Eng regardless of conditions so why not play both together?

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 22:35 GMT

    @Shan156 on (June 24, 2013, 17:04 GMT) You could have just left it at the 1st sentence and then used that sentence for future responses

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 22:35 GMT

    @brusselslion on (June 24, 2013, 13:58 GMT) Absolutely spot on re your last comment - it's sad that fans can't just enjoy their success without any other agenda.

  • GeorgeWBush on June 23, 2013, 22:38 GMT

    England bowled beautifully. As usual the batsmen let the bowlers down. However, a huge amount of credit has to be given to India. Dhoni played his hand superbly, setting very attacking fields when other captains might have been more defensive. He knew only wickets would get India across the line and so he got men around the bat. It was a great final that I thoroughly enjoyed. As an England fan I was disappointed by the result but want to congratulate India. They held their nerve at the critical time and did their nation proud.

  • sgd120 on June 23, 2013, 22:15 GMT

    Make no mistake - this was an extra ordinary game, these kind of games only come once in a few years, but boy, do they leave an after taste? To win after losing the toss which Ian Botham and David Gower were saying is a huge advantage for England, and then to come back and defend 129 was magnificient cricket. It was a victory for the game, but one that is likely to leave some scars for England in cricketers who have not had previous scars of Shane Warne or Richards' generation. How a very good England team regroups will be very interesting to see.

  • Naresh28 on June 26, 2013, 14:32 GMT

    I believe England lost because they (1) Had a team which was not T20 prepared although it was an ODI (2) Eng coach/captain took the view that lower half of the team was good enough to knock the winning runs (3) instead the lower half panicked (4) Dhoni was great and his team fought till the end, they certainly wanted to win. (5) they began their batting innings with a view that the target was not that great. (6) The IPL had already played its part in that Indian players were ready. Next time dont underestimate the opposition.

  • MasterClass on June 25, 2013, 9:50 GMT

    The presumption that England gave away the match with 16 balls remaining and 20 runs to get is a fallacy to begin with. Not on this pitch, with this Indian spin attack. Providing India with THIS pitch was gifting the match on a platter. From that point forward, the only way England stood a chance was if the game was shortened to a T20. It was, and they still managed to loose. Bottom line: the best team won. Best by a country mile. Plain and simple.

  • harshthakor on June 25, 2013, 6:39 GMT

    England simply batted in the end as they knew how to lose a game.From the clutches of a famous win they snatched defeat.It was ironic that the pitch turned like a 5th day crumbling test wicket.Without the spinners like Jadeja and Ashwin at the end England may well have romped home.

    Ian Bell's decision of being given out stumped was most erroneous and changed the complexion of the game.Overall an enthralling contest with the ebb and flow changing till the end.More than anything it proved that cricket is ultimately played in the mind.

  • harshthakor on June 25, 2013, 6:32 GMT

    India deserved to win the title as they outplayed every team in the tournament.It is ironical that the match was on the verge of being banned and only 5 mins were left before they would have called off the match.No other team played consistently well in the tournament and India were head and shoulders above ever opponent outclassing every one with disdain.

    In this game India pulled of a win from the clutches of defeat and Dhoni's inspirational captaincy played a major role.England were cruising home at one stage and finished as though they knew how to lose a game..This match was a testimony to the role of temperament in cricket and a great contest .Amazingly the pitch played like a 5th day turning test match track with spin playing the trumpcard.

    Overall it is a shame that the final was reduced to a 20 over game and there should have been a reserve day.India could hardly prove it's true merit.

  • on June 25, 2013, 1:29 GMT

    Scorecard says Cook made 2 off 9 balls & Bell made 13 off 16 balls. So they made 15 off 25 balls. They were always going to lose this with that effort. SNAILS as I call them. This is is why England cannot win any ODI tournament because players play test in ODI, today they played test in T20. This is not the way you play in ODIs - while chasing you got to attack & take the game away from opposition in 1st PP itself which England never do. Very few people have noticed this fact, had it been some player like KP or Hales then he would have taken the game away from opposition by attacking fast bowlers which was India`s strong point. There was no way England were going to do it against the spinners in the last few balls. England were outplayed & rightly so because they never deserved to win this trophy. No team has ever won any ODI competition with the defensive approach & no one will. England`s method of playing this defensive & conservative cricket was going to get exposed sooner or later.

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 22:36 GMT

    Loads of the predictable comms here. Started responding to them but the realised there were too many so just responded to a few This thread was supposed to be about England and where they could have improved but instead has predictably become a "You're making excuses/You didn't deserve this..." thread So before I go further India are fully deserved winners and the few points below are just how I think Eng could improve things in shorter fmts 1 - Cook's captaincy in general and the tactics as a whole are way too rigid and IMO overly cautious 2 - Would not have the top 3 as it is and would have KP replacing Bell to IMO improve the team balance 3 - Swann and Tredwell have by and large been the most consistent shorter fmt bowlers for Eng regardless of conditions so why not play both together?

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 22:35 GMT

    @Shan156 on (June 24, 2013, 17:04 GMT) You could have just left it at the 1st sentence and then used that sentence for future responses

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 22:35 GMT

    @brusselslion on (June 24, 2013, 13:58 GMT) Absolutely spot on re your last comment - it's sad that fans can't just enjoy their success without any other agenda.

  • samincolumbia on June 24, 2013, 20:58 GMT

    @Shan156 - I was just responding to one of the english poster's comment that IF this were a 50 over game and IF Anderson had gotten 10 overs, it would have been carnage. I was merely pointing out that IF Anderson was so good, how come he got only 1 wicket in 4 overs (Indian batsment being watchful or not, that's a different matter) and how Jadeja had more wickets than him in the tournament. He conveniently forgets England's weakness against spin which was brutally exposed by Jadeja and Ashwin. We all have fantasies, but would help not mixing them with facts.

  • ThyrSaadam on June 24, 2013, 18:08 GMT

    @YorkshirePudding "I know some cannot comprehend this attitude but the Ashes and beating Aus is more important to English fans than an ODI troph" -- so why care about having to wait at all for winning an ODI trophy?

  • sensible-indian-fan on June 24, 2013, 17:56 GMT

    @Shan156 - Loved your comments about Anderson.

    When will people start realizing that the more champion a bowler is, the more cautiously the batsmen will play them.

    Therein lies the challenge for the bowlers to get the wickets which Anderson has done admirably till now.

    3 overs is NO sample size. Just because Indians survived Anderson doesn't make him any less bowler.

    Every country has a few posters who just embarrass their countrymen. Guys don't take them seriously.

    Anderson is a truly scary monster even in flat pitches of India (bcos of his reverse swing).

  • Shan156 on June 24, 2013, 17:04 GMT

    @samincolumbia, rubbish comment. Anderson is an excellent bowler whether or not you accept the fact. The Indian batsmen knew this and played him cautiously. What makes you think a champion bowler would always get wickets in his first three overs? There have been times when bowlers far better than Anderson, like Holding, Wasim, McGrath, et al, have gone wicketless in an entire spell or even game. So, going by your silly logic, they should be ordinary bowlers too? Jadeja got the most # of wickets, yes, but how does that make him a better bowler than Anderson? How could you compare a spinner with a paceman? In the 1983 WC final, Amarnath got more wkts than Marshall. Does it mean Amarnath > Marshall? In your opinion, Eng. batsmen cannot play spin and Indian batsmen are adept at playing pace/spin. So, Anderson was bowling to better batsmen than Jadeja? So, it should be fairly reasonable to assume that Anderson was excellent considering he was bowling to superior batsmen? What is your point?

  • samincolumbia on June 24, 2013, 16:30 GMT

    England Champion pace bowler took all of ONE wicket and that too when Kohli/Jadeja were throwing the kitchen sink and 9 balls were remaining. You would think that a champion pace bowler would take wickets in the first, second or third over when he could exploit the overcast conditions. Indian batsmen played him comfortably. Jadeja got the most number of wickets and so he is a better bowler than Anderson and England batsmen cannot play spin.

  • sensible-indian-fan on June 24, 2013, 15:28 GMT

    Someone commented that Ashwin's leg side balls are causing many wides. I had to laugh.

    1. The wides were caused not by erring line but the spin.

    2. And its for the EXACT same reason why those wides are actually valuable. Batsmen are confused whether to play at it or let it go. Sometimes they overbalance and get out.

    3. Remember Misbah's wicket by Ashwin (through leg slip catch) during the 3rd ODI where Ind defended 160 odd in 50 overs.

    4. I felt Ashwin looked 100 times more lethal when bowling around the wicket to right handers. He really has come a long way after the form dip vs Eng in tests.

  • Sultan2007 on June 24, 2013, 15:12 GMT

    I am struggling to understand why it is being said that the conditions favoured India. It was a virign pitch, expected to have life for the first user, there was significant cloud and damp and humid conditions. England were bowling first and you would have expected them to be devastating with the bowlers that they have and with 2 white balls as well. Add to this the rain interruptions that the Indian batsmen had to face in the first 10 overs. I am just shocked that India were in the game at all. This whole thing about the spinning wicket being key is eyewash. Anderson and Bresnan grossly underdelivered with the ball and the English batsmen choked. I would take nothing away from the India win. It was utterly Magnificent!!

  • YorkshirePudding on June 24, 2013, 15:11 GMT

    I dont see why losing a tournament is a big issue, often you have teams that are 'tournament' specialists or get the luck of the draw, personally I thought it should have been NZ in the finals, who but for the wash out against Aus would probably have topped the group stage, with england second.

    It also hasnt helped the way the ECB has messed with the domestic game, with the YB40.

    At the end of the day the main event for the summer is the Ashes, and the return series in the winter, this is where I would rather the team focus themselves.

    I know some cannot comprehend this attitude but the Ashes and beating Aus is more important to English fans than an ODI trophy.

  • Dark.Matter on June 24, 2013, 14:58 GMT

    It is better to accept the facts rather than remaining in the state of denial, because when we accept it, then the progress starts. It's the fact that India was the better team in the CT. So, the better team won. So, as a Pakistani fan, I have accepted that they defeated us in every field of cricket. Even they were matching our bowling which was always the upper hand of Pakistan.

    So, to compare Ind vs Eng, England fans need to realize that they could not handle the pressure and fell short in the end. As soon as they will accept this fact, they will feel better.

  • elgenioroshan on June 24, 2013, 14:57 GMT

    Its so saddening to see that people have forgotten to appreciate teams when they do well. Cricket lovers have become so biased nowadays. Guys India deserved to win more than anyone else. Stop considering this win as fluke or luck. Dhoni has achieved what no other captain has achieved in the history of cricket. Is that luck? Have you guys seen the way he captained? Who would keep a test match field for a couple of balls in T20 like game? Who would keep a leg slip and a leg gully? Only Dhoni can. David Lloyd said that in his 50 years he hasn't seen such captaincy. It was Dhoni's captaincy that won India the game more than batting, fielding or bowling. So give credit where its due. I agree a few umpiring decisions went India's way but that doesn't mean india solely won because of that. England might have choked but it was because of the pressure created by spin and Dhoni's captaincy. Cricinfo plz publish

  • on June 24, 2013, 14:51 GMT

    Guys, please let's be graceful in victory. Engalnd is no Australia; it is easy to like their side. I believe self-doubt doomed the English. They should have confidently embarked upon the chase. They could have, and should have, comfortably won.

  • on June 24, 2013, 14:39 GMT

    1992 World cup final. England are cruising against the modest target set by Pakistan. Two magic deliveries by Wasim Akram to Allan Lamb and Chris Lewis turns the match in favor of Pakistan.

    2013 Champions Trophy final. England are cruising against the modest target set by India. Two pathetic deliveries by Ishant Sharma to Eoin Morgan and Ravi Bopara turns the match in favor of India.

    Point to Note - It is not about the quality of bowlers or the quality of deliveries. Just that England are always England, when it comes to the finals of Global one-day finals.

    Point to Note - It is not about the quality of

  • KrikGuru on June 24, 2013, 14:25 GMT

    England should be very satisfied with a " Runner Up " as they don't even deserve it ! They lost to Sri Lanka and marginally won against Newzealand ! I would be rather happy to see Sri Lanka or NZ as Runner Up .. Endland does not CHOK , it is their best ABILITY rather . On ther hand India beats all the team they played against , .. they are real champion in CT . As an ameture cricket analyst , it is really unfair to see England as Runner up ... they should be no where in this tournament !!!

  • brusselslion on June 24, 2013, 13:58 GMT

    @IndiaNumeroUno on (June 24, 2013, 8:23): "India won on overthrows basically". If that was the case, how then was "England's champion pace attack".. no good against India's much better bowling ...unit.?"

    @IndiaNumeroUno on (June 24, 2013, 10:28): "It's very simple why India are much better than England... words which come to mind about England.. regimented/ boxed/ chokers/ unadapting/ one-dimensional... whilst words which come to mind for Indian team.. original/ flair/ tenacious... CHAMPIONS!!!!"

    Interesting that the 2 teams attributes are so dissimilar when, in your words, overthrows was the difference between the teams.

    Look, India deserved to win as they were the best, and most consistent, team in the competition. It would just make a pleasant change if some posters could rejoice in their success, rather than see it as an opportunity for more anti-English bashing.

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 13:53 GMT

    @sundar411 on (June 24, 2013, 6:12 GMT)

    Don't think it's any more that stating a fact. In fact I seem to remember there were more non Eng fans upset that KP wasn't here than English fans. However of those names you mentioned I'd say only Yuvraj and Harb might have done anywhere near as well as their replacements. Do you think today's version's of Sehwag/Gabmhir would have done as well as the players who opened in this tournament. I think all bar Sachin who retired were left out and the replacements have given the side a new energy in the field without taking away from batting/bowling skills. KP was injured and not omitted by choice. BTW I am not saying this in any way to undermine India's deserved win

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 13:52 GMT

    @A.Sarkar17 on (June 24, 2013, 1:19 GMT) As a generalism I agree with your post re Eng being too rigid but for this game I think they did the right thing. Buttler has had a poor tournament and needs to settle down. Had Eng needed to chase a bigger total I'd have agreed with you I do agree re the Bres boundary but didn't want it to come over as an excuse. Bres def did not touch the rope when in contact with the ball and I'm pretty sure the ball was stopped within where the boundary rope was

    @Chris_P on (June 24, 2013, 1:34 GMT) Agree re the Eng side being nowhere near the T20 side but they didn't need to bat at a T20 pace so even though this was a 20 over game I think our batting line up we had was more suited to the task. Problem was they weren't

  • JG2704 on June 24, 2013, 13:52 GMT

    @jackiethepen on (June 24, 2013, 0:08 GMT) - That boundary was a good shot - but did that ONE shot mean that Bell was settled and going to win the match for England? Obviously he could have but then Ravi and Morgan both got out when even more set at the crease. You win some , you lose some

    @Praveen Chaudharyon (June 24, 2013, 1:10 GMT)/ sarangsrk on (June 24, 2013, 5:37 GMT) No , not everybody thinks that way. Others have said India were worthy winners and personally I don't think anyone can categorically claim that Eng were definitely on route to winning with Bell at the crease. To me he looked as scratchy as any Eng batsman bar Trott

  • Just42day on June 24, 2013, 13:19 GMT

    England Choked. Loosing runs for mis-fields, poor bowling or just bad luck is all part of cricket. India did not win - England gave them the game. Having claimed to have the best bowler in the world (Anderson) is no good when you loose 4 wickets for 3 runs in 14 balls. Perhaps 5 of the best bowlers in the world is not going to help England. Batsmen were not an issue either. Just choking and lack of BMT.

  • volmitius on June 24, 2013, 13:05 GMT

    and yet u call the S.A, the bigggest chokers at global tournaments... here we hav a team that that lost 5 major ODI finals. perhaps u can make out that bell decision was debatable, yet they should hav sealed the game when morgan and bopara were going great guns...

  • Sameer-hbk on June 24, 2013, 12:53 GMT

    What was heartening to see was the attacking fields set by MSD during the England innings. At one stage, there were 4 guys around the batsman with a spinner bowling. While on-air experts call it a 'test match-like' field, some of us have never seen MSD set such attacking fields in a test match itself. More than India wanting to win, it was England's fear of losing that decided the match. If England batted first and scored 129, you could bet India would have come out and batted at rate of knots right from the word go!

  • itsthewayuplay on June 24, 2013, 12:39 GMT

    @Tigg on June 24, 2013, 11:05 GMT A little credit where it's due. Yes Buttler played a shot that he won't to repeat in a hurry but it was a top-class delivery. His eyes lit up when he saw the left armer slow spinner angling the bowl onto legs and and went for a bit hit out the ground. But the big turn away from him meant Buttler ended up looking silly. Jadeja got Bairstow once with a very similar delivery and is a very underrated bowler. And Morgan was out to a slower ball - was it a good comeback from Ishant or luck? Maybe a bit of both but credit for trying something different. It wasn't only the England batsmen who gave their wickets away. How about the 3 Bopara picked up?

  • MunafAhmed811 on June 24, 2013, 12:36 GMT

    Indian major victories history in ICC ODI/T20 tournaments

    1) 1985 B&H World Championship of Cricket (Australia). India defeated Pakistan in final. 2) 1983 World Cup (in England) .India defeated majestic WI in final. 3) 2011 World cup with India defeating SL in final. 4) Champions trophy 2002 and 2013. 5) India also has won Asia cup most number of times ( 5 times). Besides India has won tri-nation tournaments held in sharjah 5 times as well as the CB series in Australia in 2008 along with Natwest Trophy in 2002 in England. Heck forget seniors..even the Ind-U-19 team has won World cup thrice in 2000,2008,2012. And last not the least India was the first country to with the T20 World cup in 2007 when it defeated Pakistan to lift the inaugural cup and this on bouncy S-Africa tracks.

    And then haters say we win only at HOME. ICC global Trophies in Australia , England , South Africa. And still HATERS come up with one reason or other. But as they say MORE haters means more your SUCCESS

  • on June 24, 2013, 12:30 GMT

    England choked, Cook is a poor ODI captain, Bresnan should never play again, Buttler isn't good enough. If we don't demolish Australia, Cook should resign.

  • on June 24, 2013, 11:55 GMT

    England and Cook have no right to complain....they had no business to lose the match with just 20 required in 16 balls with 6 wickets in hand. Any international team would have finished off the match in Ishant Sharma's over itself. That was a total and inexcusable capitulation from a very ordinary ODI team. This batting line-up might be perfect for a test match but Cook, Bell and Trott are hardly going score and 8-10 an over which is the need of the hour today.

  • CSpiers on June 24, 2013, 11:53 GMT

    A choke of South African proportions! Can only hope to see more of it in the Ashes.

  • on June 24, 2013, 11:45 GMT

    Next near miss for England. C ongratulations to INDIA

  • on June 24, 2013, 11:44 GMT

    England can't score quickly against a spinning ball. It really is that simple. They have learned how to score slowly and stay in against even the best spinners, but they have not worked out how to properly and safely attack spin (at least as a unit). So they can draw and win test matches against spin where survival and occupation of the crease is the key. But in limited overs formats, where 6+ an over are required - they come unstuck. I'm amazed that this simple truth is overlooked by so many. They can't score quickly enough against spin without losing wickets - India and a couple of other sides can. India deserved to win. The fact that it came down to the last ball after the shocking umpiring display (Bell was in - simple as that) shows they have at least some fight in them. But india played better throughout the tournament and thoroughly deserved to win. The fact that the final was so close and the crowds so good throughout the fortnight shows how much 50 over cricket is enjoyed.

  • JM_RSA on June 24, 2013, 11:32 GMT

    England choked!!! "With 16 balls remaining, England required only 20 more runs with six wickets in hand" - There is no other way to explain it.

  • JohnnyRook on June 24, 2013, 11:27 GMT

    I agree with the article. India din't win the match, England lost it. However I dont think they should be too sad. It was indeed a very close match which could have gone either ways.

  • nlpdave on June 24, 2013, 11:24 GMT

    India deserved this win probably because they were prepared to risk more and on occasions, with a little help, it pays off. Cook, great test batsman that he is, certainly has some way to go as a one day player and, more importantly Captain. Throughout this series he has looked lost at the crease and in the field, uncertain how to play or what field to set and as a result his contributions have been very moderate But is it as Captain and selector where he falls significantly short. In typically unimaginative form England like to play the 'safe' or defendable path when perhaps some flair and calculated risk taking is called for. It can have been no surprise that Edgbaston would offer turn later in the match though the amount may have surprised, but even then and with such a low total it was England's game to lose. It seems as though the entire management team are happy to remain in the top quartile without the necessary hunger to be the very best. On to the Ashes.

  • Sir.Ivor on June 24, 2013, 11:21 GMT

    contd... finals only because Sri Lanka had the worst of the playing conditions. England is without doubt a very good team in all formats of the game but they have many shortcomings which they would do well to understand before the Ashes. Firstly, though they have a very good bowling attack, they need helpful conditions to ply their trade effectively. And if the conditions are indeed in their favour, the group of Pattinson,Starc,Bird Watson and Harris can be quite destructive. In Cook Bell Pietersen and Trott they also have a strong batting line up. But I am not very sure if they will raise the match winning scores they did in the last Ashes series Down Under. With Lehmann taking over I feel Australia has taken the first steps to redemption. So since England consider the Ashes the only worthy tussle in cricket they should be forewarned that this series is not going to be a cake-walk. An insight of the immediate future was had in the Champion's Cup of 2013.

  • Sir_Ivor on June 24, 2013, 11:21 GMT

    What must not be lost sight of was that Cool won the toss for England. India had been asked to bat first on a green top from all accounts. In fact most people had projected the game at that point as if it was to be decided on the basis of a toss of the coin ! Many pro English comment makers like Front_foot _Lunge had been so chuffed up that they had only waited for Jimmy Anderson to deliver the coup de grace with his potent mix of pace and swing. And if the Indian batting proved tougher that the others then they had Broad, Bresnan and Tredwell to trample all over a team of dreaming upstarts in their own cabbage patch.While it is well to clinically analyse what went wrong, English supporters should not forget that their team had been fortunate to come this far. Their only convincing win wa against Australia who had turned from Champs to whipping boys in this edition. Sri Lanka thrashed England in the league stage and New Zealand lost by just 10 runs.Also that England beat SL in the

  • Tigg on June 24, 2013, 11:05 GMT

    The main difference, for me, was that England had to get the Indians out whereas most fo the English batsmen got themselves out.

    Cook - Poor Shot, Bell - Unlucky after looking decent (that reverse sweep was pure class), Trott - Poor shot, Root - Poor Shot, Morgan - Really poor shot, Ravi - Benefit of the doubt, Ishant hurried him with a decent bouncer, Buttler - Woeful shot, Bresnan - Embarrassing.

    Kohli played a blinder and Jadeja was excellent. Congrats India.

  • venkatesh018 on June 24, 2013, 10:51 GMT

    Congrats India for yet another victory on "HOME GROUND" and "HOME SURFACE".

  • Tribal_Cricket on June 24, 2013, 10:48 GMT

    @True_point Was it England who won the match or India ? after reading your post I am confused now. I didn't find the English attack anything special or 'champion' like atleast in this match. They bowled tight, agreed, but the wickets were picked up by Ravi Bopara, a real bonus for them. So in a nutshell the main England bowlers were not able to pick even when the conditions were more helpful to them.

    Coming to the India bowlers, firstly they didn't get the same help that English bowlers got. Secondly no one claims them to be champion bowlers like the English ones, so a strong performance was not expected from them at all. Still in the tournament they performed to their abilities and bowled well in helpful conditions.

    Had they played a 50 over game India would have trashed England. Imagine 20 overs from Ashwin and Jadeja... England could't handle 8 overs. So England need not be too unhappy with the result after all.

  • TheUltimateTruth on June 24, 2013, 10:37 GMT

    @true_point I agree with many of your points. But, I have to defend your unfair criticism of Ashwin. His leg side wides are part of a strategy, and sometimes they work like on Trott yesterday. It does also cramp the batsman. In shorter versions of the game choking run flow puts pressure, and results in wickets.

  • TheUltimateTruth on June 24, 2013, 10:33 GMT

    @Front-Foot-Lunge, in denial are we? On what basis are England the better 50 over side? And "England achieved more than anyone"?? Not more than India in this tournament. The facts are India did not lose a single game including the warm-up games. They had been dire straits, 60 for 6 (or some such), before in one of the games and yet managed to post 325+ in that game. They clearly deserved to win this tournament, but the T20 lottery and the constant rain interruptions almost gave the game to England -- but justice prevailed. England out did themselves yesterday. Be happy about that.

  • on June 24, 2013, 10:32 GMT

    As dhoni said "we are no. 1 in world & we have to play like champions" that what whole team india did... they played like champions from very 1st day of tournament.

  • Dr.Vindaloo on June 24, 2013, 10:28 GMT

    Agree with ADB1. Eng just lost a T20 game off the last ball. Water under the bridge once the real cricket gets started next month.

  • IndiaNumeroUno on June 24, 2013, 10:28 GMT

    It's very simple why India are much better than England... words which come to mind about England.. regimented/ boxed/ chokers/ unadapting/ one-dimensional... whilst words which come to mind for Indian team.. original/ flair/ tenacious... CHAMPIONS!!!!

  • nlight on June 24, 2013, 10:27 GMT

    Forget the umpiring lapse of judgement, the overthrows and other minor factors. India won because their team was more suited to a T20 contest. We can only speculate on what might have transpired had a full game been possible. In the event, we got a very exciting match in which the outcome was in doubt most of the time.

  • true_point on June 24, 2013, 10:10 GMT

    Indian fast bowlers can learn a few things from the English bowlers. The English bowlers bowled according to a plan for every batsman and the field placements were precise. So they have done their home work about every Indian batsman and set the field as per their strengths and bowled according to a well laid out plan. They never gave even an iota of leeway for any batsman and choked the flow of runs. In contrast Indian fast bowlers were like the geysers which released the pressure created by the spinners. None of Indian quickies had consistent control. Luck played a great part in Sharma getting those 2 wickets. Morgan played a horrible shot and Ashwin held a good catch to dismiss Bopara. The balls that dismissed both were quite ordinary. Ashwin bowls on the leg most of the times and gives too many wides. So Indian bowling has miles to go and start doing soul searching after the euphoria dies.

  • SamRoy on June 24, 2013, 10:09 GMT

    The major reason why England lost is not mentioned by anybody on this forum. The pitch was turning square and the England Middle Order and Lower Middle Order in this match (except Bopara) are not good players of spin.

  • itsthewayuplay on June 24, 2013, 10:06 GMT

    As an India supporter, because of the truly pathetic last 2 -3 years mainly in tests, the performances and attitude throughout this tournament up to the final were the things that have impressed most and not the results. Yesterday howver, was India's weakest performance of the tournament but the attitude was right, fighting to the end. During England's innings, the result swung like a pendulum but ultimately the game was England's to lose. India certainly got the rub of the green with a few umpiring decisions and I have to disagree with George Dobell, in that it was one of the major factors in the final result. Overall an exciting finish to the match in which probably the better team on the day lost but a T20 game to end a 50 over competition was ultimately unsatisfying.

  • on June 24, 2013, 9:22 GMT

    however close this match was, I think it also exposes a glaring gulf between the confidence of the current English and Aussie team....I don't see any other way this year's Ashes are headed. With Finn back into the fold and Swann and Pietersen always dangerous, I cannot imagine the Aussies barring Clarkeand Pattinson making a fist this season....

  • on June 24, 2013, 9:20 GMT

    generally in sports we are not supposed to use the terms " if,but,else,would have been,could have been...bcoz that terms will suit both teams...both team fans can use those terms ..at the end of day..who wins that matters..in odi ind eng head to head 87,,india won 47,eng won 35..

  • on June 24, 2013, 9:19 GMT

    English team has this habit of sulking and finding excuse for their defeats. Still remember Gooch side citing calcutta pollution for their defeat in 1993. This Indian team played like champions. England choked and India rocked!!

  • Teachers on June 24, 2013, 9:04 GMT

    Boof the new coach, Clarke no longer a selector (which means that he is not viewed by the team as an outsider) and now England are seriously demoralized by the loss of the Champions final.....looks like the scales are looking more balanced again. All we need is for Australia to fire again as a team and the Ashes may no longer be a foregone conclusion.

  • on June 24, 2013, 8:55 GMT

    Luck favours the BRAVO. For me Luck is nothing but getting well prepared to meet & accept any challenge that comes in the way. Ashwin was never considered to be an extraordinary fielder, like Raina, Jadeja or Kohli. But he held those important catches that turned the game in India's favour. Dhoni, however people classify him as lucky, his fearless approach, has to be appreciated. He never gives up until the last ball is bowled or run scored. I remember, whenever a wicket fell people used to admire and speak about astounding captaincy of Mike Brearly. Yes, it was very apparent in his captaincy. Perhaps it is not visible in Dhoni's style. Remember when his deputy Kohli wanted a change in the fielding arrangement, Dhoni continued to retain the field to get Morgan's wicket. That is it. Some times many people , although they notice and accept, would not like to recognise the act, if not performed by English men or Australians.

  • on June 24, 2013, 8:52 GMT

    so muhammad farhan ,

    As an Indian fan i still always love Pakistan Team and Support them full hearterdly... it is really unfortnate for a knowledgable Person like you talk like this .. first dont say india is overrated Team , what u say to that Team which won 7 games in a row in this champ trophy. 5 games in the main and 2 games in warmup... so winning 7 games vs top 7 top Teams is overrated for u , isnt it.. and look at the oneday stats , this so called over rated Team has won every Championship in the cricket possible.... at know the stats before you talk... i am very sad to see Pakistan Team strugglin , i want them to be the best .. cos i love Team...

  • muzika_tchaikovskogo on June 24, 2013, 8:35 GMT

    I can only imagine England's heart break. To fall short after coming within a single blow of victory is perhaps far worse than losing by a huge margin. Truth be told, they choked. Nonetheless, the English team and its fans should be proud of their performance.

  • ADB1 on June 24, 2013, 8:26 GMT

    What's with the big post-mortems? Good God Almighty, it was a T20 raffle. Anything can happen in these games.

  • IndiaNumeroUno on June 24, 2013, 8:23 GMT

    "England's champion pace attack".. was no good against India's much better bowling and fielding unit. India won on overthrows basically :)

  • ReverseSweepIndia on June 24, 2013, 8:23 GMT

    What a match it turned out to be. I don't think Eng need to look down with the performance they put. They had been pretty poor side not long back. But with their ascent in Test cricket, they have make pretty good stride in limited over cricket too. And I believe if we have to play a 5 match 50 overs series with Eng right now score will be something like 3-2 save rains. We are better but not by miles and we at the moment I believe are best side (even so called weak bowling right now above average, though not excellent) Eng are not too far behind. Now its out turn to do the same with our test side and match End strength. Well played to both teams.

  • on June 24, 2013, 8:19 GMT

    I think most of the imponderables were in England"s favour. First they won the toss in a rain reduced game. Conditions were a lot more difficult for the Indian batsmen. India made only 129 which most experts felt were twenty below par . when Morgan and Bopara were batting, it seemed like a breeze. Of course it was the same pitch for both the teams and they had Tredwell who bowled intellligently . As someone said England is the bigger choker though they have been quick to brand south africa. But dont take away from Dhoni and his team which won all five games in a row. Well done India and I am sure England is going to wait for some time before it actually wins a biggie. Maybe it wont happen in my life time Ramanujam Sridhar

  • Venkat_Super_11 on June 24, 2013, 8:08 GMT

    @Front-foot-lounge, you said " England were the better 50 over side in this series, they can take heart from that. Reducing the match to 20 overs was no way to decide a 50 over contest but who cares: England achieved more than anyone this CT, what amazing momentum this is going into the Ashes"-------sour grapes, eh? Either you are one of those Brits that never accepts his fault. England were the better 50 over side???? Hilarious dude, wake up. They beat NZ with a turned down no-ball luck. Otherwise, it would have been NZ-Ind in finals. It's not SA who are chokers but clearly, the big mouth England. Better open your eyes and watch the replay. You must feel lucky that England managed to enter Finals. Worst of all teams in the tournament.

  • anshu.s on June 24, 2013, 8:07 GMT

    Well it is quite clear that only two out of Cook,Bell and Trott should play because they are too similar and on current form Bell misses out, either KP opens with or any of the T-20 lads like Hales/Lumb/Luke Wright but KP has to be there in the team , Buttler you better shape up or you will go the Kieswetter way...

    I have seen whenever England play India or Pakistan in UK,there supporters are massively outnumbered by that of those two,now imagine a game of Football involving England and India in England, there one will notice English supporters outnumbering that of India, this just puts in context massive popularity of football among masses in England !!!

  • arun02k81a0205 on June 24, 2013, 7:45 GMT

    Magnificent work by India!! Congratulations to team India and especially MS who haven't put a foot wrong in captaincy riding on luck. Who thought that the 2nd introduction of Ishant might win the game for India. But that spell changed the game entirely on its head. Well played by England. But pretty happy in the end by fair result as India are the deserved winners of this trophy. Can say it's a sweet revenge for 0-4 loss here and 1-2 loss of test series at home. Clearly India can proudly say that they are the world champs as they have beat 5 best teams in this tournament.

  • on June 24, 2013, 7:45 GMT

    @muhammed irfan mate you must be typing with your eyes closed, if u say england is better limited over side than India that must be the joke of the century, and about KP then we dont have proven match winners like Yuvi and Shewag who has more limited over results to show than kphave achieved so grow up but you gave me a good laugh thank you so much....

  • Amar255 on June 24, 2013, 7:45 GMT

    MS best captain ever. Holds all ICC majors in his bucket. We ar proud of U. Just one more trophy to eaqual most no of Icc trophies (4 - by ponting 2 WC's, 2- CT's)

  • warneneverchuck on June 24, 2013, 7:34 GMT

    How can u win an icc trophy if whole team is scared of playing spin. Ckassic examples for eng are champ trophy and uae series against pak. I think they cant beat BD also in Bd

  • on June 24, 2013, 7:23 GMT

    it was a GREAT game.India superbly led by Dhooni.England cannot complain of poor umpiring decision of Bell , for they reached semifinal with the same poor decision of Broad's very clear no ball.

  • Nutcutlet on June 24, 2013, 7:22 GMT

    As a capt, MS has his tired days (almost always in Tests when the game is slipping away from India), but he also has his inspired ones when he's far more hands-on, far more focussed & inventive. On a rainy day in Birmingham, with a major trophy to win, he took on the aura of an Indian equivalent of a cricketing Nelson (the watery connection isn't entirely inapporopriate). First, he did it his way, bowling Ishant in that fateful 17th over. High risk. Inspired. He knew where Morgan would swipe it, with long off back, no matter where the ball could have gone. That fetch from way outside off was signalled by the wide Ishant had just bowled. Everyone put it down to Ishant's loss of line; actually, it was just a sighter for what followed. MS tore up the book & it paid off. Second, his team believes in him as a father-figure & their benevolent dictator. Cook, in contrast, seems to consult the book; works to a formula & reaches many decisons by committee. He is years behind MS as a capt.

  • Front-Foot-Lunge on June 24, 2013, 7:13 GMT

    Firstly, beautiful bowling by England. The Indian batsman have grown used to being spun in a web by England's champion pace attack, from the test whitewash up to the thrashing they gave them at home this year, and today was no different. Secondly, with Sharma bowling worse than a Sunday league 3rd XI, it was right to go after him, especially what he was bowling. But the architects of their own downfall they were indeed. England were the better 50 over side in this series, they can take heart from that. Reducing the match to 20 overs was no way to decide a 50 over contest but who cares: England achieved more than anyone this CT, what amazing momentum this is going into the Ashes!

  • mrgupta on June 24, 2013, 7:11 GMT

    I think a line by Harsha Bhogle immediately after Morgan's wicket sums it up, "All English fans but be asking right now, Eoin Morgan, what have you done?". It was unbelievable that they lost the match from a position of 20 needed from 16 with 6 wickets remaining!!

  • Rahul_78 on June 24, 2013, 6:56 GMT

    Cook should know that he WON THE TOSS. It was his decision to bat first. All of pundits from England were saying that it was a no brainer to win the toss and bowl first and win the match. They failed to read their own pitch. Bottom line is English guys just messed it up big time. You can go into ifs and buts of close decisions and over throws. But that is all part of glorious uncertainties of the game. When it mattered Indias bowlers came to the party and their fielders and captain backed them up superbly. On the other hand England failed to score 20 runs from 16 balls.

  • kabe_ag7 on June 24, 2013, 6:55 GMT

    Lots of excuses and straw clutching here. What would have happened if there were no overthrows? Well what would have happened if India didn't misfield when they did? And how did the shortened format benefit India here? Given how the English batsmen played Indian spinners, a full match wasn't likely to be this close. And if excuses were to be given, why not be comprehensive and fair to the other team? Didn't Eng win the toss and didn't the Indian batsmen alone get affected by the rain interruptions? Also - "to blame umpiring decisions" - what's with the plural 'decisions'?

  • on June 24, 2013, 6:43 GMT

    England were lucky to be in the Semis in the first place. A very median..average team made out to be World class by their own media.. of course the same media belonging to the land of David Beckham.... Crykey! (Whatever!) what a paper tiger media creation he was! England some how won the toss against SA which needs to be probed regarding tosses. The best team in the world by far.. the Champions India won it of course but the nest best teams were SA and Srilanka (quite some way down from India).... it should have been either of these teams in the Final. Had it not been the Indian Origin player Ravi Bopara for England.. England would have been walloped and 'Cook'ed even in this low scoring match, where England had the Advantage of toss and conditions.

  • on June 24, 2013, 6:32 GMT

    The Legendary Sir. R A Jadeja the architect of Indians ICC Championship final victory & lets also title S Dhawan Sir as well after MOS performance in this champions trophy. The two MUSTACHE men did it for INDIA.....

  • Natius on June 24, 2013, 6:31 GMT

    Classic example of a choke. Doubt South Africa could have done it better. Well done to India though! You were the best team throughout the tournament and you fully deserved this victory. You are a great example to other young teams. It's also clear what a difference an experienced and confident captain makes to a team.

  • Captain_Tuk_Tuk on June 24, 2013, 6:28 GMT

    Well if you ask me England almost had it when score was 20 needed from 16 that was almost run a ball than Morgan and Bhopara threw there wickets and when they were well set they didn't took the batting power play. These two things cost England a huge match for you.

  • sundar411 on June 24, 2013, 6:12 GMT

    Dobell should not whine that Pieterson wasn't part of their team. India had just come out of the likes of Tendulkar, Sehwag, Gambhir, Yuvraj, Zaheer and Harbhajan. It is the playing eleven that matters and among the teams that played, India played like true champions throughout the tournament. Hence they deserved to lift the Champions Trophy. England were, at best, the 'next-best' team.

  • on June 24, 2013, 6:07 GMT

    @Chris_P Thats what the difference in the india team,they can switch easily to the match conditions irrespective of match format.

  • sarangsrk on June 24, 2013, 5:37 GMT

    Eng when blaming 3rd umpire for Bell's decision should not forget that they might have never been in final if 3rd umpire had given that no-ball against kiwis. There are no ifs and buts and even as an Indian fan, I would say that Dhoni was just lucky to get this over the line. Still not sure why he had asked Ishant to bowl that over and that was not even a gamble, just mistake which turned in India's favour. That said, You should applaud him for attacking and keeping the pressure on, utilising Ashwin n Jadeja'ss overs so judiciously. Its only fair at the end of the tournament that India won even if Eng were better yesterday.

  • on June 24, 2013, 5:24 GMT

    both team deserved to win...Congratulations to India...Commiserations to England..Please do not analyze the game now...

  • on June 24, 2013, 5:22 GMT

    I really feel sorry for England as their 5th loss in ICC ODI tournament sure will hurt them. England miscalculated the Indian bowling and took field first and they failed to keep the wicket as they thrown away like carpage!!! It's good performance by both the team in the field but at last best team have won!! Hope the bad cloud roaming on SA cricket in knockouts and the same bad cloud roaming on Eng cricket in ICC ODI finals will soon go away and gives competitive cricket.

  • kumarcoolbuddy on June 24, 2013, 5:19 GMT

    @Chris_P, neither ENG nor India knew about 20 over inning. So please don't say that if ENG had chose its typical T20 team then they would have won the match. What if India had lost this match?

  • on June 24, 2013, 4:56 GMT

    It would have been a travesty of justice had England won this shortened 'shootout'. Clearly India have been the standout team throughout the tournament. The fact that England managed to grab defeat from the jaws of victory by - freezing in the headlights or choking - call it what you will because it certainly looked like they did not believe they deserved to win. India appear to have the makings of a real class team in all formats of the game, however only time will tell whether they will live up to the promise that they show or whether the politics in India's cricket will again mess it up.

  • Baseball--Sucks on June 24, 2013, 4:56 GMT

    Even our Lions Sri Lankan team hav tasted many finals. Participation is more important than like winning team India who takes the sport very seriously . Chill guys !

  • viveklogin on June 24, 2013, 4:31 GMT

    I want to ask one single question to Mr George Dobell and all others that what could be the position if the England had to bat first in the rain- stop play? Surely India deserve to win and they were far better than English team in all the three departments.

  • pprasadd on June 24, 2013, 4:15 GMT

    @Muhammad Farhan . The grapes are sour indeed! The miles better England, after having won the most crucial toss (as agreed by Ian Bothom and Gower), bowling in swinging conditions on a bouncy pitch with Jimmy and Broad, Indian batting frequently interrupted by rain and chasing a sub par total, still lost. Agree that India were better on the day. And dont talk of KP. Ifs and buts dont matter. If only Ishant was a bit better bowler... it will go on always

  • cric_roch on June 24, 2013, 3:56 GMT

    @ Muhammad Farhan, Either you haven't seen the match or you dont know cricket. England had all the edges in the form of TOSS , familiar home conditions etc.. How many times a team batting first has won in this tournament ? India still did it. You have to accept that and enjoy cricket.

  • pprasadd on June 24, 2013, 3:51 GMT

    Agree with all the points that Dobell has to say. However all the points that the author has stated are not the complete set of points. Like.. England had the best bowling conditions to themselves, helped by pitch doing something for the fast bowlers, good bounce, rain interruptions while India batted and the fact that it was a very important (to put it mildly) toss to win. Also Eng has the best fast ball attack in English conditions with untested Indian middle order. I would put it as an even contest overall. And you cant fault Buttler (someone should have calmed his nerves) and the tail. Morgan and Bopara have to finish matches even more consistently than what they do. This team has the right players. Now its about timing.

  • sweet2hrme on June 24, 2013, 3:36 GMT

    England ! hv to blame themselves Only. How can u loose from that position whn 20 runs required from 16 and having 6 wickets in hand. Any team can win at this position. Why Eng playing is playing old fashion cricket in ODI ??? Bobara is always good find. But he is batting too late. JRoot still need to justified his position. whenever he slog he thorws his wickets. There was no game planning by england specially whn they came to chasing. U know spiners was going to treat than why bulter was not given to chance to open the inning. They hv taken this modest total as granted. Poor thinking from england. why Bresenan is always rated too high over finn ??

  • unbiased_referee on June 24, 2013, 3:23 GMT

    As the match turned out to be a "T20" ENG could and should have been a bit innovative and opened with Morgan & Bopara with Buttler at no. 3. Maybe then asking run rate would have been around run-a-ball at each stage. ENG were never going to be comfortable once Cook/Bell/Trott gave them a perfect test match start yet again! ENG are probably the only side who are perfectly capable of batting collapses in all formats of the game: be it T20; ODI or Test matches[as we saw a couple of years ago in UAE]. Captain Cook hopes to turn things around in 2015 WC in AUS/NZ; but looking at their last ODI performance in AUS where they lost series 6-1 it is guaranteed that WC dream will keep eluding ENG for a long time to come unless they shed their "test + t20" approach of playing ODIs!

  • on June 24, 2013, 2:33 GMT

    For once I salute the analysis of Sanjay Manjeraker whom I heard stating in the beginning that winning the toss would presnt Enlgland with an Hobson's choice vis a vis India who would have bowled had they wn. England had the tough decision of trying to exploit the overcast conditions by inserting India and taking chance in facing their spinners in the second venture when conditions would have been conducive to spin or insert the Indians and wind them up for a modest gettable total. While they chose the former and succeeded to an extent but their vulnarability to quality spin was their nemisis in the end. It was poetic justice for India as it avenged the sereis defeat at home earlier in the year.

  • on June 24, 2013, 2:26 GMT

    A win is a win and no amount of cavailing will make it any different. Let us face it that justice has been done in this tournament when the result went according to form. India dominated this tournament as it had never done in any earlier ones including the world cups and the world T20 wins. The qualitative difference between India and the rest was very evident and any result other than what came about would have been a traversity of justice. It should be borne in mind that even in this truncated match England not India held all the aces. They won an important toss and were lucky that rain intervened to cut short a flowering partnership between Dhawan and Kohli. But for the interruptions early on India may have had a higher total in the end. Thereafter the Englishmen got an uninterrupted and near bright run throughout their innings. Yet at the end they were destined to fall short. Let it be accepted that the best team on view won at the end and let us glory in the win. God Bless u team

  • mikey76 on June 24, 2013, 2:00 GMT

    India deserved the win. They were the better side throughout the tournament and were just better in all aspects on the day. Back to the drawing board for England. Buttler clearly is a work in progress, two spinners should be the norm for England, not the exception while Bresnan doesnt look a class ODI bowler. England need to look at the likes of Stokes and Borthwick as all round options and perhaps move KP back to opening the innings to give us a little more impetus.

  • on June 24, 2013, 1:42 GMT

    England once again finishing "bride's maid!!" Target could have been reached playing sensible cricket. Broad is a capable bat. Dhoni's midas touch worked. Why so much of cry about Bell. When he was out as per law MS recaled him. After lunch interval the crowd booed Indian team entering the field. When they saw Bell coming out booes became standing ovation. Bell you can be lucky once.

  • Chris_P on June 24, 2013, 1:34 GMT

    This English side, to be fair, is not in any way near the same side if they had picked a T20 side. A T20 game to decide a 50 over tournament?

  • A.Sarkar17 on June 24, 2013, 1:27 GMT

    Talking of umpiring decisions, equally baffling was the 3rd umpire's decision to signal four when Bresnan saved one on the boundary as there was no evidence that the ball had crossed the imaginary boundary line though the rope had moved. After the recent fixing controversy 3rd Umpire should be especially careful on marginal decisions as the on field umpire do not have replays but the TV umpires evidence is evaluated by millions, especially knowledgeable commentators who show there surprise and thus further influence the viewers' opinion. If apparent wrong calls are made even after multiple replays unpleasant questions arise especially when one team benefits from them!

  • raiden0411 on June 24, 2013, 1:23 GMT

    I think the England coming close to the total was a bit deceiving. It was just a result of Dhoni holding back the spinners for the final overs. Had he continued with spinners, I don't think England would have even come so close

  • A.Sarkar17 on June 24, 2013, 1:19 GMT

    I believe England also paid for lack of imagination and an inflexible approach that has been criticized time and again. Seeing that this was a 20 over game why couldn't they change the batting order? Butler would have been much more useful as an opener as the pressure would have been less and he could face the seamers in the power play with the license to go hell for leather. That there will be turn was obvious from Treadwell's bowling earlier and Cook with his better technique could have milked the spinners better in the later stages. Also, there was a case for sending Bopara higher up as he has been England's best batsmen on view and should have had larger number of overs to utilize.

  • on June 24, 2013, 1:10 GMT

    Well...everybody mentions about that tricky Ian Bell's decision.BUT nobody wants to talk about the on and off of rain during the early part of Indian innings.Our openers could not get into rhythm due to it.Yet you blame one tricky decision onto your failure.Come on...

    Congratulations to the Indian cricket team.Well deserved.And to Ashwin/Jadeja and more importantly to MS Dhoni - I could never understand what made you call Ishant to bowl.Probably that is why your are the best captain in the world.You definitely know something about International cricket that we don't.We could never have taken that decision.Kudos to you and here is to the best captain holding every single trophy in his cabinet...Cheers

  • thephill on June 24, 2013, 1:03 GMT

    "There were six other teams involved in this competition that would have liked to be in the situation we were in at the start of the day. " And at the end of of the day there were 6 other teams that you were in the same position as. The bottom line is England choked and STILL have not won a meaningful ODI tournament.

  • on June 24, 2013, 0:57 GMT

    India beat England despite the screwed up weather (which definitely affects India more). Had there been a 50 over match instead, I think England would have been thrashed. This Indian side played brilliantly and deserved to win the Champion's Trophy. Too bad, England, you couldn't win on your own grounds.

  • jackiethepen on June 24, 2013, 0:08 GMT

    Bell had never settled? Starved of the strike during Trott's innings he had only faced 15 balls in nearly 9 overs when he was 'stumped'. He had just got a boundary by reverse sweeping so how can you say that Bell would not have affected the game - given England only lost by 5 runs! It's not a question of being a red herring or of finding excuses etc. It is a question of a wrong decision by the third umpire who ignored the evidence of the replays. It isn't acceptable. Standards should be impeccable when replays are available from every angle. It would still matter if England had won. I'm sure India would have complained if they had lost a top batsman in that way. Dhoni is very vocal in such matters. And so he should be.

  • Nampally on June 24, 2013, 0:00 GMT

    Yes,, England blew the game when they were almost there. Dhoni, for the reasons best known to him, brought in Ishant Sharma, the most expensive Indian bowler thru' this Tourney, to bowl the 17th over with match on the line. I think it was like "Red Flag" waved in front of the Raging Bull. Both Motgan & Bopara fell- speared by Ishant- the Matador! It is rather similar to Bopara bowling to the 2 of the best Finishers in ODI- Raina & Dhoni. I think it was very skillful captaincy of Dhoni that won the match. He used his spinners very effectively, knowing that his seamers are expensive. His use of Ishant was a stroke of genius. If Indian innings was not interrupted by rain in first 6 overs- at least twice- Bopara may not have got his 3 wkts. This Indian team is capable of scoring at least 160 against the same England bowling in a continuous 20 over match. With so many concentration breaking factors they lost their way. England blew a golden chance of not taking advantage to win the Trophy.

  • on June 23, 2013, 23:50 GMT

    Truth be told, the game was all stacked up in England's favour. England are traditionally much better than India in the 20 over game. They won an extremwly important toss and were able to curtail India, thanks also to the on off nature of India's innings. On the lighter side, IPL for India and SA presence for England seems to be rubbing off :)

  • cloudmess on June 23, 2013, 23:23 GMT

    As an England supporter, I'm disappointed by the result. England have quite a good record in tight games - except in global ODI finals. In 2004, they had the WI needed 70 with 2 wickets left in damp and murky batting conditions - and somehow lost then too. A spinning pitch and 20-over game handed the IPL hosts an advantage - that said, India still looked the best team in the competition overall and probably deserved to win.

  • on June 23, 2013, 23:14 GMT

    I very much hope this will be the last game for Jos Buttler and Tim Bresnan for a while. The two just aren't good enough at international level.

  • F.Ephraime on June 23, 2013, 22:40 GMT

    Poor series for jos buttler to be honest...why did england choose him over birstow

  • Anubhav-the-Experience on June 23, 2013, 22:37 GMT

    It was a close match....both teams should be proud of that. It was a 50-50 entertainer match. Today was India's day.

  • on June 23, 2013, 22:37 GMT

    Indian team deserved this victory because they were better - please acknowledge this fact FIRST. Indian cricket team brought England's downfall. Some folks are just too gullible. Gullible enough to believe ridiculous media hype surrounding this English team. Look - Indian team had to wait after losing the toss and then after that there were two interruptions during Indian innings AND they were able to defend their modest score with the "weakest bowling attack" of this tournament.

    Articles like this make no logical sense. Please THINK! How were England not able to score 130 - in English conditions - and against the "weakest bowling attack" ? Well - because England were hyped to be of some mythical caliber- and Indian on the other hand were WAY BETTER - that is why!

  • on June 23, 2013, 22:30 GMT

    Very well said. This was England's match to take home but did not. But it would have been travesty of Justice if India lost since they were the best team in the tournament.

    To win 4 in a row and not win the final would have been heartbreaking. And by keeping their nerve, Indians were the deserved winners today!!

    Cheers

  • Cpt.Meanster on June 23, 2013, 22:21 GMT

    I thought England depended a lot on the conditions to begin with. They did win the toss and bowled decently. Some how, given how the strong Indian batting struggled, many people felt it won't be easy for England. However, to lose it from where they were would really make a lot of South Africans happy with regards to the 'C' word. The 2004 finals was down to complacency and this one was down to nerves. Plus, it is always better to win the toss and bat first in finals because you never know. Still, as an Indian fan, it gives me utmost pleasure to see India beating England in challenging conditions. Although I am sure many Indian fans would have been confident at the start of the day irrespective of the result of the toss. India were by far the best team in this tournament and thoroughly deserve their victory. Like Mark Butcher put it, England are still a way better team than the Australians and should romp home in the Ashes.

  • BHARATLIFE on June 23, 2013, 22:17 GMT

    Yes, England did not play too well, but i as an Indian fan could tell , that with spin , India are always going to trouble England. All they needed 8-1-32-2 (2 or maximum 3) from Jadeja and Ashwin . Indians can make a case for that annoying start stop start they had, and giving Bopara 3 wickets, so if India lost, they might have got the flak for giving ( due respect to Bopara ) 3 wickets to bad shots. The only fair result would have been a tie and a super over deciding it...it could have gone either way.

  • ToTellUTheTruth on June 23, 2013, 22:11 GMT

    Cook and Bell opening in a 20 over match has sealed England's fate. Come on...Cook opening in a T-20? A little bit of out-of-the-box thinking, instead of the English selfishness would have won the game for Engloand. I would have opened with Bell/Bopara and Root/Morgan. Come on England, it was only a T20 game!!!! You can't hide your best in this format for later!!!!

  • CurrynOz on June 23, 2013, 22:09 GMT

    Why can't people accept that the other team performed better.. Indians have the problem, Pakistanis even bigger and nohingw POMS have it.. Something we can learn from Aussies and South Afiricans

    Face it India threw a quality spin attack better than the test series in Indian and England flopped big time against spin.. Hope Aussies find Warne.. England down down..Aussies thrash them.. and I am an Indian supporter.. Aussies even when they were champions were not so arrogant as English who are no where close to being champions.. Aussies deserved to be arrogant.What have England achieved..

  • on June 23, 2013, 22:07 GMT

    CONGRATULATIONS TO INDIA.

    Great India made England CHOKE again,.....they just don't give up ....very much like Sir Alex Ferguson & Man,Utd ,this great Indian side keep playing right to the VICTORIOUS END.

  • on June 23, 2013, 22:04 GMT

    Very disappointing to see England lose from such a great position. They dominated the highly over-rated Indians throughout the match, but threw away in the end. What a waste!

    The positive for me, though, is that England still are miles better than India.

    Still, they reached the final without KP and nearly won the CT.

    Well done!

  • on June 23, 2013, 22:04 GMT

    Very disappointing to see England lose from such a great position. They dominated the highly over-rated Indians throughout the match, but threw away in the end. What a waste!

    The positive for me, though, is that England still are miles better than India.

    Still, they reached the final without KP and nearly won the CT.

    Well done!

  • on June 23, 2013, 22:07 GMT

    CONGRATULATIONS TO INDIA.

    Great India made England CHOKE again,.....they just don't give up ....very much like Sir Alex Ferguson & Man,Utd ,this great Indian side keep playing right to the VICTORIOUS END.

  • CurrynOz on June 23, 2013, 22:09 GMT

    Why can't people accept that the other team performed better.. Indians have the problem, Pakistanis even bigger and nohingw POMS have it.. Something we can learn from Aussies and South Afiricans

    Face it India threw a quality spin attack better than the test series in Indian and England flopped big time against spin.. Hope Aussies find Warne.. England down down..Aussies thrash them.. and I am an Indian supporter.. Aussies even when they were champions were not so arrogant as English who are no where close to being champions.. Aussies deserved to be arrogant.What have England achieved..

  • ToTellUTheTruth on June 23, 2013, 22:11 GMT

    Cook and Bell opening in a 20 over match has sealed England's fate. Come on...Cook opening in a T-20? A little bit of out-of-the-box thinking, instead of the English selfishness would have won the game for Engloand. I would have opened with Bell/Bopara and Root/Morgan. Come on England, it was only a T20 game!!!! You can't hide your best in this format for later!!!!

  • BHARATLIFE on June 23, 2013, 22:17 GMT

    Yes, England did not play too well, but i as an Indian fan could tell , that with spin , India are always going to trouble England. All they needed 8-1-32-2 (2 or maximum 3) from Jadeja and Ashwin . Indians can make a case for that annoying start stop start they had, and giving Bopara 3 wickets, so if India lost, they might have got the flak for giving ( due respect to Bopara ) 3 wickets to bad shots. The only fair result would have been a tie and a super over deciding it...it could have gone either way.

  • Cpt.Meanster on June 23, 2013, 22:21 GMT

    I thought England depended a lot on the conditions to begin with. They did win the toss and bowled decently. Some how, given how the strong Indian batting struggled, many people felt it won't be easy for England. However, to lose it from where they were would really make a lot of South Africans happy with regards to the 'C' word. The 2004 finals was down to complacency and this one was down to nerves. Plus, it is always better to win the toss and bat first in finals because you never know. Still, as an Indian fan, it gives me utmost pleasure to see India beating England in challenging conditions. Although I am sure many Indian fans would have been confident at the start of the day irrespective of the result of the toss. India were by far the best team in this tournament and thoroughly deserve their victory. Like Mark Butcher put it, England are still a way better team than the Australians and should romp home in the Ashes.

  • on June 23, 2013, 22:30 GMT

    Very well said. This was England's match to take home but did not. But it would have been travesty of Justice if India lost since they were the best team in the tournament.

    To win 4 in a row and not win the final would have been heartbreaking. And by keeping their nerve, Indians were the deserved winners today!!

    Cheers

  • on June 23, 2013, 22:37 GMT

    Indian team deserved this victory because they were better - please acknowledge this fact FIRST. Indian cricket team brought England's downfall. Some folks are just too gullible. Gullible enough to believe ridiculous media hype surrounding this English team. Look - Indian team had to wait after losing the toss and then after that there were two interruptions during Indian innings AND they were able to defend their modest score with the "weakest bowling attack" of this tournament.

    Articles like this make no logical sense. Please THINK! How were England not able to score 130 - in English conditions - and against the "weakest bowling attack" ? Well - because England were hyped to be of some mythical caliber- and Indian on the other hand were WAY BETTER - that is why!

  • Anubhav-the-Experience on June 23, 2013, 22:37 GMT

    It was a close match....both teams should be proud of that. It was a 50-50 entertainer match. Today was India's day.

  • F.Ephraime on June 23, 2013, 22:40 GMT

    Poor series for jos buttler to be honest...why did england choose him over birstow