was it a good option to bowl mendis bowl the super over?
By stardustcdsd
@stardustcdsd (1856)
India
April 24, 2009 1:46am CST
i was not surprised when shane went to his young colt to bowl the super over but when the knights went for mendis i was surprised.i think the mind set of the knights was not to save runs but take 2 wickets and it almost got paid if hodge hadnt dropped that catchbut i still think they should have gone with ishant .sure he went for too many runs but the senario is different here.he played over 14 T 20 matches whereas mendis only his second match.ishant could have bowled a bouncer in that over and they may score boundaries but in ressure situations,six of a quick bowler is not easy and recently i havent seen yusuf hitting too many quickies out of the ground.yet mendis is y second choice for bowling super over
1 person likes this
1 response
@innocent_dr (539)
• Pakistan
26 Apr 09
Super over is a gamble which sometimes pay off, sometimes it does not. I personally feel mendis was fine choice. He bowled well in the match and he has got the mystery balls. On some other day, he could have taken two wickets in first two delieveries and match would have been over. In T-20 any bowler can be hit for sixes and any bowler can come up with wickets.
As far as your Yousuf Pathan point coming, I should inform you, first the bowler is picked then the batsman are picked. so it isn't KKR's mistake that they selected Mendis in against Yousuf. Anyways, it was just a bad dat for KKR. hope they will come back strongly
