X

Post Your Comments

  • POSTED BY on | May 27, 2014, 21:32 GMT

    I think rehane was good stop blaming him its the bowlers in particular James

  • POSTED BY Nampally on | May 27, 2014, 15:28 GMT

    RR were just one win away from qualification with 3 matches to go. They dropped Samson, Rahane, Faulkner & smith from the line up & lost. Even after this loss they kept on experimenting with the line up until the whole batting order changed in the Match against MI. Why on earth any body thinks that Nair should not open the innings after his success & being in form for the previous 5 matches defies logic. Watson lost the game for RR with 8 runs in 18 balls. It was Nair again who came after Watson & raised RR to the final total with a brilliant 50 at S/R of 185 followed by Hodge & Faulkner who got 20 odd runs at around S/R of 185. Having reached 189, RR should have focussed on the 4 Foreign players - all medium pacers- to defend the score by bowling 16 economical overs (<13 runs/over) between them. But they failed. Only Cooper was below 10 runs/over. This is where they lost the match- very poor bowling with Watson giving 33 runs in 2 overs. Watson lost the match single handedly!

  • POSTED BY ModernUmpiresPlz on | May 27, 2014, 9:10 GMT

    @Jose Puliampatta Do you even watch cricket? What on Earth are you talking about. Since when has a team chasing a target in limited overs cricket ever had to continue batting after reaching the target they have been set and winning the game?

    Not to mention that what you're mistakenly talking about also works the other way around. MI only needed 2 runs off the 14.4 ball to have a higher NRR than RR. The problem is it was impossible for MI to score 2 runs. Once they run the first run the game is over, even if they completed a second run it doesn't count. Even if they run 1 and then the RR fielders give away 4 overthrows the game still ends with the 1 and the overthrows don't count. Hence why they needed a boundary.

  • POSTED BY A.Ak on | May 27, 2014, 8:56 GMT

    If it was other way around (RR batting and MI bowling), MI would have bowled a wide and qualify for the playoffs.

  • POSTED BY android_user on | May 27, 2014, 3:37 GMT

    Mumbai have achieved the target of 190 in 14.4 overs itself. They were chasing and not setting the target. By successfully scoring 190 runs in 14.4 overs they increased their team's N.R.R significantly in comparison to R.R. Then y should they play for another 5.2 overs unnecessarily. Anyway my humble suggestion to you Mr.Jose is u pay a visit to your Maths teacher and get his opinion on this matter. I think u missed the class when he was teaching about Average calculations. Yusuff Pervaze.

  • POSTED BY on | May 27, 2014, 3:16 GMT

    @ Facebook user....The game was played in its entirety. I guess you need a lesson on basic cricket rules. For the chasing team, they don't need to bat 20 overs, but instead achieve the target -which is precisely what happened to end the game. And btw, the batsman's name is Anderson not Richardson.

  • POSTED BY on | May 27, 2014, 2:23 GMT

    I have not been a big fan of Dravid, but I am surprised with the critics here including the GREAT Ajit Agarker, about his change in batting order etc. That was only reason he they scored 189 runs. Now in the fiels you bowlers are letting them to score 189 in 13-14 overs, where is his fault? Even in last over Faulkner gifted two full tosses. Where is the wrong in team strategy and change in players?

  • POSTED BY on | May 27, 2014, 0:22 GMT

    An innings is COMPLETED only after 20 overs are fully played or all the batsmen had been bowled out, before that.

    Run-rate is the result of a game played fully. It can NOT be and should NOT be stopped mid way, when it favours one team or the other. The innings in this case should have gone on till it is complete.

    Looking at the way Richardson was playing and the batting prowess of Tare, MI might have ended up even at a higher NRR. But that is not the point. Arbitrary stoppage of the game, using NRR as the central focus is the issue.

    Theoretically, at least, RR could have taken out the remaining wickets cheaply with overs to spare (then for RR, 20 overs would have been taken into account). AND, the NRR AFTER the game was completed in such a manner, might have favoured RR. The arbitrary stoppage of the innings, before it was complete was illogical and wrong. Games are played for winning. Run rate is the RESULT. The authorities put cart before the horse. -Jose Puliampatta

  • POSTED BY Crazy4cricket40 on | May 26, 2014, 16:02 GMT

    Still can't digest that when opposition needs 14 of 3 balls and an interantional bowler would bowl 2 low full tosses on pads (LEG SIDE). batsmen just need to help himself and guide it where it was perfectly guided even by someone like Tare.... to me tells a lot.... Also, seems like in last 3-4 games RR were testing thier bench strength for playoffs.....

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 15:57 GMT

    wide is a win for MI - and its not sportsmen ship

  • POSTED BY CricketChat on | May 26, 2014, 14:11 GMT

    RR was in a great position to finish in the top3 after first 10 games or so. They goofed up couple of matches they should have won in sleep and their captain's indifferent form didn't help either. They lost all their momentum around the 10'th match mark. The more I watch, the more I am convinced that Rahane doesn't belong in T20s, just like Pujara of Kings XI.

  • POSTED BY niazbhi on | May 26, 2014, 14:04 GMT

    IPL success rules 1] Have your high SR bats early.. specially those who are known for their fireworks in 20Is. ABD, Duminy, Hodge should come early.. not late 2] Use mystery spinners (Narine, Ashwin) with many variations. 3] User left arm spinners. 4] If you are lucky to pick one of them indian seamers who can swing the ball with control (BK, Bumrah, IC, MM) use them early batsmen care about their wickets early. 5] Pick 5 bowlers.. 6] it helps if one of those bowlers are high SR bat (Sakib, Faulkner, AR Patel, KK Cooper). It does not matter if he has a high FC average (Kallis is not helping). 7] Use an indian captain. Peterson, Watson or Baily have to play all the matches if they are captains.. Foreign players are big assets, Baily has to play so Punjab cannot try different combinations of Johnson, Hendricks, Marsh, Maxwell, Miller (three of them walk in almost all other teams). 8] hire strategists..

  • POSTED BY Haleos on | May 26, 2014, 13:38 GMT

    @joice - wide would have meant mumbai won in 14.3 overs which is what they needed. Wide does not add to the number of balls used up. I was surprised when harsha bhogle made the same mistake on air. Best explaination is given.on cricinfo.

  • POSTED BY android_user on | May 26, 2014, 11:39 GMT

    @Joyce.. if they have bowled wide, Mumbai would have been qualified as ball wouldn't count and run added to the total become equation of 14.3 overs 190 rums and that was required..

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 11:15 GMT

    It is still a mystery as to why they didnt bowl a wide.

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 10:42 GMT

    Only we can say Sanju Samson & Karum Nair has played an outstanding innings for RR....nothing else to say.Sanju will be the future wicket keeper for India.

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 9:44 GMT

    Let us not forget that Tare did not even need to swing at that last ball (IMHO he was an accidental hero, but in reality not that smart). Had he left that delivery, it would have a been a wide down the leg side and MI would have won - a higher percentage option that swinging at it. If I were the MI coach I will have a quiet word with him as to how he almost blew the game for MI by his seeming stupidity.

  • POSTED BY Haleos on | May 26, 2014, 9:33 GMT

    @Abhijeth_Manohar - well said. He should be the first person to know what stability is. During his time if Indian selectors had done what he did with RR he would have not played so much cricket. He chopped and changed the batting order. He missed a trick here.

  • POSTED BY Abhijeth_Manohar on | May 26, 2014, 9:19 GMT

    With Dravid at the helm, forget winning IPL. He would be a very good test cricket coach as he over thinks everything

  • POSTED BY muzika_tchaikovskogo on | May 26, 2014, 8:32 GMT

    RR paid heavily for complacency. To understand where the rot started, go back to their game against MI on 19th May: at that stage they had won 7 out of 11 and MI 3 out of 10. Instead of going for the kill, with two difficult away games, RR unnecessarily experimented with three changes to the side. They lost that game and with it, all momentum.

  • POSTED BY espncricinfomobile on | May 26, 2014, 7:39 GMT

    A part of true Sachin and MI fan, I am a admirer of Dravid. He has been fantastic with his role in IPL-6 and IPL-7. I feel he is the best mentor and who can turn great coach if he is willing for the job. Supporter of RR and rest of cricket lovers should understand that when it comes to big games you need that big names and X-factor to deliver. RR has history of winning heart utilizing the limited resources. RR can be academy for youngsters but to win big occasion they need heros. That was missing. I still feel RR should have qualified 2 games earlier but eventually they failed. You can't afford to loose momentum at the ending phase of tournament. RR needs to prove hard to lift the cup again. But it is harsh to debate Dravid vs Sachin. Dravid is guru (Teacher) type of figure where as Sachin is inspiration to the world. We should respect Dravid for his contribution to cricket. I would love to see Dravid as coach and Sachin in dough out to inspire world believe I am possible. #DilSeMI

  • POSTED BY Rajeshj on | May 26, 2014, 6:20 GMT

    I think Royals made a blunder like Sunrisers in choosing a better captain.. Sunrisers would have fared better if Sammy was in charge from the start of IPL.. Similarly, Royals should have made Steven Smith the captain instead of Watson... Smith is a far better tactician and shrewd compared to Watson and one should say that Watson's poor form with bat/ball really cost them a chance in playoffs.. With this team and Smith being in charge, I would say Royals would be a force to reckon with in next year's IPL.. Good luck guys..

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 5:28 GMT

    They all looked like Alice in Blunderland....how could anyone lose with 190 on board and an ask over 13 an over. RR made some of the dumbest moves in several games leading to this one. Very disappointing to see them persist with Binny after repeated failures and over experimentation. By far the worst conference from Dravid with his usual platitudes.

  • POSTED BY Marcel_Ci on | May 26, 2014, 5:24 GMT

    Rahul dravid failed to inspire & motivate RR players during critical times in this tournament. Hoping to see another mentor in next season for betterment of RR team.

  • POSTED BY Siva_Bala75 on | May 26, 2014, 5:18 GMT

    @Facebook user. Bowling a wide on 14.3 was not an option and I never said that. However, as some commentators say MI had 2 more balls left i.e., till 15.0 for a 4 and 3 more balls or till 15.1 for a 6 is also not correct. If MI had not taken a run in 14.4, then RR could have bowled a wide (after 14.4) and lose but still qualify. Anyway, it was not normal cricket. You are saying "All Faulkner was to do was bowl a blockhole delivery give away a single" ….what else was Faulkner trying? I am tired of 'experts' saying why not bowl a yorker?!?! .....what a cricketing brain is that? It was throwing and swinging your bats around. To do that you need the 'cushion' of more batsmen. At the end of 10 overs, RR was just 59/1- they did not have the 'cushion' to throw and swing their bats around because they simply played too many bowlers for a 14plus over match!

  • POSTED BY godshand on | May 26, 2014, 4:21 GMT

    No point crying over spilt milk, it's just that day's performance that matters but we shouldn't judge Watto or anyone by 1 or 2 bad games. In the end cricket won and we should be happy about it.

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 4:14 GMT

    In IPL 7 we have had lots of ghosts playing UV Watto Gayle are prime example.Watto opened the innings and scored 1 run in 11 deliveries and took the ball and leaked runs very disappointing performance Steve Smith would have been a better choice but ideally they lacked the xtra bowler Bhatia Dhawal was listless and they kept feeding half volleys and short balls to sit back and hit as Dravid says a few tight overs by the unplayed bowler could have changed the game utlimately their love for Binny and playing Indian players ahead of Hodge Faulkner cost them two games which would have given the play off spots

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 4:07 GMT

    Siva_Bala75 either you saw a different game than what we saw or something like that 189 is a pretty decent score RR lost the game due to listless bowling their batsmen except for watto played really well sanju and karun were going great guns they missed a slow bowler in Bhatia they already packed their side with too many batsmen and were short in bowling and you want them to add more batsmen and who is your choice Binny a 13 game failure wow I admire your cricketing brain ESPNCRICINFOMOBILE if you had watched the last few mins of confusion in the game Harsha clearly said that bowling a wide was not a choice at all as if Faulkner bowled a wide it would be 190 in 14.3 overs that was what was needed no wide was never the option.All Faulkner was to do was bowl a blockhole delivery give away a single he ended up giving six game over

  • POSTED BY android_user on | May 26, 2014, 3:44 GMT

    drop Watson he did not carry his weight. also one of the games they made too many changes instead of trying to qualify

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 3:42 GMT

    Watson is one the worst captains i have seen. He has no command on his team and he looks lost on the field asking others what should i do. He doesn't bowl well, his technique to play spinners is pathetic. Smith needs to be the captain. Sadly but Watson is another Yuvraj Singh in the making. A Liability on the team.

  • POSTED BY espncricinfomobile on | May 26, 2014, 3:38 GMT

    if faulker had bowled a wide ball in that last ball ...easily rr would hav won....this shows the pooe captaincy...

  • POSTED BY Jyoti76 on | May 26, 2014, 3:25 GMT

    next year they will make Smith the captain and come back stronger...

  • POSTED BY android_user on | May 26, 2014, 3:19 GMT

    over confidence Thats why RR loss

  • POSTED BY Siva_Bala75 on | May 26, 2014, 2:59 GMT

    MI showed all their cards up front. They have to- no other choice: a) They will chase b) Pack with big hitters and c) will bat only 14.3 overs. Rajasthan should have played Tim Southie i/o Hodge. This will mean Faulkner, Cooper and Southie will bowl 12 overs upfront. Play these 3 + Watson plus 7 Indian batsmen. No point in playing Ankit Sharma, Thambe and Kulkarni. Instead Unmukt Chand, Binny and Yagnik- all should have played and thrown their bats around. If RR has won the toss, then they should have batted first- as MI can not play beyond 15 overs. MI and RR played two different games. RR tried to play 'normal' cricket! They could have still won but by not being smart, RR never tried to increase the chances that MI can lose

  • POSTED BY Rohit... on | May 26, 2014, 2:37 GMT

    Dravid Himself Declared it to be One of the Best Games of Cricet... Need a Lot of Heart to say so.

  • POSTED BY Cric-Aus-SL on | May 26, 2014, 2:22 GMT

    Brad hodge would have been made as captain for RR,

  • POSTED BY smokem on | May 26, 2014, 1:46 GMT

    Having Watson as captain hurt the Royals bad. He is not captain material and worse still, if he wasn't captain he probably wouldn't have made the side. As it was, Brad Hodge had to step up as de facto captain last night and Watto crumbled under pressure again.

  • POSTED BY Tharunmedini on | May 26, 2014, 1:34 GMT

    Rahul Dravid has become an epitome of simplicity and calmness that even a minor frustration becomes a special special point of discussion on cricinfo.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY on | May 27, 2014, 21:32 GMT

    I think rehane was good stop blaming him its the bowlers in particular James

  • POSTED BY Nampally on | May 27, 2014, 15:28 GMT

    RR were just one win away from qualification with 3 matches to go. They dropped Samson, Rahane, Faulkner & smith from the line up & lost. Even after this loss they kept on experimenting with the line up until the whole batting order changed in the Match against MI. Why on earth any body thinks that Nair should not open the innings after his success & being in form for the previous 5 matches defies logic. Watson lost the game for RR with 8 runs in 18 balls. It was Nair again who came after Watson & raised RR to the final total with a brilliant 50 at S/R of 185 followed by Hodge & Faulkner who got 20 odd runs at around S/R of 185. Having reached 189, RR should have focussed on the 4 Foreign players - all medium pacers- to defend the score by bowling 16 economical overs (<13 runs/over) between them. But they failed. Only Cooper was below 10 runs/over. This is where they lost the match- very poor bowling with Watson giving 33 runs in 2 overs. Watson lost the match single handedly!

  • POSTED BY ModernUmpiresPlz on | May 27, 2014, 9:10 GMT

    @Jose Puliampatta Do you even watch cricket? What on Earth are you talking about. Since when has a team chasing a target in limited overs cricket ever had to continue batting after reaching the target they have been set and winning the game?

    Not to mention that what you're mistakenly talking about also works the other way around. MI only needed 2 runs off the 14.4 ball to have a higher NRR than RR. The problem is it was impossible for MI to score 2 runs. Once they run the first run the game is over, even if they completed a second run it doesn't count. Even if they run 1 and then the RR fielders give away 4 overthrows the game still ends with the 1 and the overthrows don't count. Hence why they needed a boundary.

  • POSTED BY A.Ak on | May 27, 2014, 8:56 GMT

    If it was other way around (RR batting and MI bowling), MI would have bowled a wide and qualify for the playoffs.

  • POSTED BY android_user on | May 27, 2014, 3:37 GMT

    Mumbai have achieved the target of 190 in 14.4 overs itself. They were chasing and not setting the target. By successfully scoring 190 runs in 14.4 overs they increased their team's N.R.R significantly in comparison to R.R. Then y should they play for another 5.2 overs unnecessarily. Anyway my humble suggestion to you Mr.Jose is u pay a visit to your Maths teacher and get his opinion on this matter. I think u missed the class when he was teaching about Average calculations. Yusuff Pervaze.

  • POSTED BY on | May 27, 2014, 3:16 GMT

    @ Facebook user....The game was played in its entirety. I guess you need a lesson on basic cricket rules. For the chasing team, they don't need to bat 20 overs, but instead achieve the target -which is precisely what happened to end the game. And btw, the batsman's name is Anderson not Richardson.

  • POSTED BY on | May 27, 2014, 2:23 GMT

    I have not been a big fan of Dravid, but I am surprised with the critics here including the GREAT Ajit Agarker, about his change in batting order etc. That was only reason he they scored 189 runs. Now in the fiels you bowlers are letting them to score 189 in 13-14 overs, where is his fault? Even in last over Faulkner gifted two full tosses. Where is the wrong in team strategy and change in players?

  • POSTED BY on | May 27, 2014, 0:22 GMT

    An innings is COMPLETED only after 20 overs are fully played or all the batsmen had been bowled out, before that.

    Run-rate is the result of a game played fully. It can NOT be and should NOT be stopped mid way, when it favours one team or the other. The innings in this case should have gone on till it is complete.

    Looking at the way Richardson was playing and the batting prowess of Tare, MI might have ended up even at a higher NRR. But that is not the point. Arbitrary stoppage of the game, using NRR as the central focus is the issue.

    Theoretically, at least, RR could have taken out the remaining wickets cheaply with overs to spare (then for RR, 20 overs would have been taken into account). AND, the NRR AFTER the game was completed in such a manner, might have favoured RR. The arbitrary stoppage of the innings, before it was complete was illogical and wrong. Games are played for winning. Run rate is the RESULT. The authorities put cart before the horse. -Jose Puliampatta

  • POSTED BY Crazy4cricket40 on | May 26, 2014, 16:02 GMT

    Still can't digest that when opposition needs 14 of 3 balls and an interantional bowler would bowl 2 low full tosses on pads (LEG SIDE). batsmen just need to help himself and guide it where it was perfectly guided even by someone like Tare.... to me tells a lot.... Also, seems like in last 3-4 games RR were testing thier bench strength for playoffs.....

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 15:57 GMT

    wide is a win for MI - and its not sportsmen ship

  • POSTED BY Tharunmedini on | May 26, 2014, 1:34 GMT

    Rahul Dravid has become an epitome of simplicity and calmness that even a minor frustration becomes a special special point of discussion on cricinfo.

  • POSTED BY smokem on | May 26, 2014, 1:46 GMT

    Having Watson as captain hurt the Royals bad. He is not captain material and worse still, if he wasn't captain he probably wouldn't have made the side. As it was, Brad Hodge had to step up as de facto captain last night and Watto crumbled under pressure again.

  • POSTED BY Cric-Aus-SL on | May 26, 2014, 2:22 GMT

    Brad hodge would have been made as captain for RR,

  • POSTED BY Rohit... on | May 26, 2014, 2:37 GMT

    Dravid Himself Declared it to be One of the Best Games of Cricet... Need a Lot of Heart to say so.

  • POSTED BY Siva_Bala75 on | May 26, 2014, 2:59 GMT

    MI showed all their cards up front. They have to- no other choice: a) They will chase b) Pack with big hitters and c) will bat only 14.3 overs. Rajasthan should have played Tim Southie i/o Hodge. This will mean Faulkner, Cooper and Southie will bowl 12 overs upfront. Play these 3 + Watson plus 7 Indian batsmen. No point in playing Ankit Sharma, Thambe and Kulkarni. Instead Unmukt Chand, Binny and Yagnik- all should have played and thrown their bats around. If RR has won the toss, then they should have batted first- as MI can not play beyond 15 overs. MI and RR played two different games. RR tried to play 'normal' cricket! They could have still won but by not being smart, RR never tried to increase the chances that MI can lose

  • POSTED BY android_user on | May 26, 2014, 3:19 GMT

    over confidence Thats why RR loss

  • POSTED BY Jyoti76 on | May 26, 2014, 3:25 GMT

    next year they will make Smith the captain and come back stronger...

  • POSTED BY espncricinfomobile on | May 26, 2014, 3:38 GMT

    if faulker had bowled a wide ball in that last ball ...easily rr would hav won....this shows the pooe captaincy...

  • POSTED BY on | May 26, 2014, 3:42 GMT

    Watson is one the worst captains i have seen. He has no command on his team and he looks lost on the field asking others what should i do. He doesn't bowl well, his technique to play spinners is pathetic. Smith needs to be the captain. Sadly but Watson is another Yuvraj Singh in the making. A Liability on the team.

  • POSTED BY android_user on | May 26, 2014, 3:44 GMT

    drop Watson he did not carry his weight. also one of the games they made too many changes instead of trying to qualify

Mumbai Indians v Royals, IPL 2014, Mumbai May 25, 2014

Very disappointed we didn't qualify - Dravid

ESPNcricinfo staff
  shares 38

In the chaotic denouement of one of the most dramatic IPL matches of the season, Rahul Dravid stood up from his seat in the Rajasthan Royals dugout, pulled off his cap and flicked it into the ground. The emotional display from the Royals mentor, one of cricket's most stoic figures, perfectly encapsulated the frustration of watching his side let a game and a playoff spot slip away in improbable circumstances.

"In terms of emotion, we thought we won the game at one stage," Dravid said after a gut-wrenching five-wicket loss to Mumbai Indians ended Royals' season. "Then we still had to bowl a ball and they hit the boundary so you can just imagine the emotions. There was sheer disappointment in their camp, joy in our camp and suddenly a ball later that's completely reversed. So for sheer emotion and drama, I think this was probably one of the best games of cricket I've been involved in. It's just disappointing that I happened to be on the wrong side of the result."

Mumbai needed to achieve a target of 190 in 14.3 overs to overtake Royals' net run rate and qualify for the playoffs. They had a brisk start but when Mumbai captain Rohit Sharma was dismissed two balls into the 10th over, with the score 108 for 4, it left the side needing 82 off 31 balls. Dravid said that a couple of decent overs would have ensured that Royals secured a playoff berth. Instead, Mumbai scored 49 off the next 2.4 overs and entered the start of the 13th over requiring a slightly less daunting 33 runs off 15 deliveries. Corey Anderson was motoring away on 75 off 33 balls and eventually finished 95 not out.

"At that stage if you bowl a couple of seven, eight-run overs or 10-run overs for that matter, the game quickly goes out of hand," Dravid said. "But they kept getting that 15, 16-run over. They just stayed in the game. It looked at the stage we got Rohit out, I think after that stage when Rayudu and Anderson batted, there was a period of about 12 to 15 balls where we suddenly gave 50 runs. That was the critical phase of the game where we thought we could've maybe bowled a couple of better overs there. The guys have tried their best and it's just not worked out for us in this tournament."

Dravid said Royals' death bowling had cost them in all three losses at the end of the season, including two to Mumbai. He deflected away criticism over team selection during that stretch, when a win in any of the last three games would have clinched a playoff spot. When prompted to elaborate, Dravid said the team was battling its share of injures and rejected any notion that they had rested players to get them refreshed for the playoff stage when a spot seemed practically assured for the Royals.

"We knew we needed about 16 points to qualify. It's not that we were trying to say, 'Oh we've already qualified.' We were not trying to be arrogant at that stage. Even today we made three changes in a must-win game. The last game we made three changes. We tried to play the situation. Ajinkya Rahane was injured in that [first loss to Mumbai]. If you noticed he didn't field in the game before that. He was carrying an injury. We would have loved to have played him but that is the nature of the situation."

Despite the immediate disappointment of failing to qualify for this year's playoffs, Dravid was optimistic for the future, saying the young nucleus of the side would only get better over the next two years.

"I think there's a lot of positives from our season as well. It's the first year and we've always been saying that this is the first year of three," Dravid said. "The performances of people like Sanju [Samson] again, Karun Nair has been exceptional, even people like Ankit Sharma and Rahul Tewatia who played only a couple of games and showed there is a potential for the future. I think Steven Smith playing for us this year showed that he is going to become a force to reckon with in the IPL and in this tournament. So there were a lot of positives from that point of view."