Virat Kohli is a champion of the game and will go down as a legend of Indian cricket – but his indisputably selfish pursuit of personal glory in reaching a century in their World Cup win over Bangladesh might be as low as he has ever stooped.
In case you missed the dying stages of India’s clash with the Tigers in Pune, here’s the backstory: with 11 overs left, the hosts and tournament favourites needed just 19 runs for victory, with Kohli and KL Rahul well set.
The issue for the veteran was that he was on 81, exactly 19 short of his hundred, with Rahul having just belted Shoriful Islam for a six and a four to race to 34 off just 34 balls.
Apparently, to do as Rahul himself had done in a superb innings against Australia in their World Cup opener, in which he never failed to put the team first to the point he stranded himself on 97 not out when an attempted four to tie the scores instead failed for six, just wouldn’t do for a man with 47 ODI centuries to his name already – just two behind leader Sachin Tendulkar from nearly 200 fewer innings.
Kohli’s solution was simple – and disgraceful. After moving to 85 with a slog-swept four on the first ball of Nasun Ahmed’s over, he drove the third ball to the deep cover fielder – and turned down the single.
A six over mid-wicket followed off the next ball, before Kohli only chose to take one off the last ball of the over and take the strike.
In the next over, it happened three times more: Kohli turned down two more easy singles off Hasan Mahmud and another to short fine leg that would have been safe had they showed any interest, before miraculously finding one off the over’s last ball – in between sprinting like the devil himself was chasing him in getting back for a pair of quick twos and nearly running Rahul out in the process.
He’d do it once more in what proved to be the last over of the match, before whacking Nasum Ahmed for another six and soaking in the adulation of a jubilant Pune crowd, raising his hands aloft as if his century wasn’t the most contrived in living memory.
Umpire Richard Kettleborough deserves criticism as well: long regarded as one of the best in world cricket, his decision to not call an obvious wide down the leg side from Nasum – accompanied by a faint smirk – was either a shocking missed call that should at least earn him a stern rebuke from the ICC, or a disgraceful deliberately wrong decision unbecoming of an umpire at any level, never mind the biggest stage of all.
Equally disappointing was the way Indian commentator Sanjay Manjrekar, calling the match on the ICC’s official television coverage, chose to gush over Kohli’s appalling selfishness as shrewd tactics rather calling it out for the farce it was.
“The plan is set in motion – Virat Kohli’s on 85, 15 to get, and KL Rahul knows it,” Manjrekar said after the first denied single.
Even more pathetic was his cry of ‘No!’ when umpire Adrian Holdstock called a wide during Hasan’s over, and then ‘great placement!’ as he found a single off the last ball: forget being partisan, this was just embarrassing from a veteran and widely respected commentator who is better than relentlessly fawning over a great player behaving appallingly.
All up, Kohli faced the last 17 balls of the innings, ensuring he’d either get out or reach the century he so craved.
Virat Kohli celebrates his century against Bangladesh. (Photo by Pankaj Nangia/Getty Images)
Had any Australian attempted something so brazenly selfish, one would hope their non-striker had had the sense and the stones to either force them to take the single or run themselves out; alternatively, they would have been rightly ridiculed both in the press and in a public statement from Cricket Australia. There’s a non-zero chance, if the powers that be felt the team could afford it, that they’d have paid for it by being dropped for a game or two.
Kohli’s was a wonderful knock, there’s no denying it – but it would have been just as meritorious had he not so brazenly pursued the glory of another triple-figure score and instead put the team – and its net run rate – first, and finished unbeaten on 92 or 93.
Most likely this will have no long-term consequences for Kohli or India. He would, in all probability, have surpassed Tendulkar’s ODI century record anyway, and it’s all but inconceivable that the slightest of net run rate reductions from those denied singles will cost India a semi-final berth, with even the rights to a ‘home’ final inconsequential given this is their own tournament.
But that doesn’t make it any more disappointing to have witnessed a man who as captain was relentless in transforming India from a team obsessed beyond all else with personal glory into a ruthless winning machine that succeeded across the globe in all formats while rigidly adhering to a team-first philosophy, to throw everything he apparently stood for out the window with the most selfish century since Geoff Boycott was dropped for his painfully slow 246 in a Test against India in 1967.
On the field, his hot temper has got the better of him on more than one occasion, most famously in his tirade at South African broadcasters during a ball-tracking DRS controversy in early 2022; but never in his long and glittering career has he so obviously and so disgracefully put himself above the team he once led.
A 90 in a World Cup match-winning run chase would have meant as much for Kohli’s legacy as any triple-figure score: but the way in which he achieved said score now makes it mean so, so, so much less.
IDeals22
Roar Rookie
Astoundingly poor take on the innings! With no concept of what Kohli achieved, this article made obvious the reason why Tim "nobody" Miller, is only a wannabe journo. He's out of his depth in puddles.
IDeals22
Roar Rookie
If you can't understand that Tim, it explains everything. "just because Kohli whacked a lot of fours and sixes" It's how he carried the team to victory ... but that's over your head too!
sedz
Roar Rookie
No ICC pitch consultant would be responsible for pitch curation. He and his team will deal with the ground curators to make pitches. This is applicable for any any ICC tournament in the last ten years.
Valentino
Roar Rookie
Irrelevant: cheap shot
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
No, the ICC don’t. They’ve asked for wickets to make scoring runs easier but BCCI retains responsibility for preparation.
sedz
Roar Rookie
Pitches are prepared by ICC. Conditions favor India because it is played in India. Pakistanis won’t be given a visa so how are they treated with contempt?
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
First time I've engaged him really. I liked some of his posts. Some others l found a bit narky.
Tim Carter
Roar Pro
Don't know your history with this guy, Rowdy, but I reported him. That was a wildly inappropriate comment.
ColinT
Roar Rookie
Tim, since when has farming the strike been something to deride? The point Vamsi makes is quite valid. NRR is important in this tournament. If a batsman is scoring at a much higher run rate than his team mate, then of course he should try to keep as much of the strike as he can. If we had a batsman scoring at 9 runs per over with a much slower scoring partner at the other end I would hope they would do the same. Well done Kohli I say! Perhaps you could dial the hyperbole down a bit in future articles? It would make more pleasant reading.
Panthers
Roar Rookie
Then if what you saying is correct, I’d just keep bowling blatant wides & ending each over with zero runs off of my overs. If I were the bowlers involved with that innings. If the umpire is not going to call any ball a wide that is. What’s the umpire going to do then ? Tell me to stop bowling apparently fair bowls? :thumbup: :laughing:
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
A kid said l hit him on the head with an iron bar. I did not do it. I might add that l was cleared by the inquiry because of eye witness statements, l was never arrested and l never went to court. Despite the mandatory requirement of the Dept of Ed that l should’ve been arrested. Thanks for asking but l feel your accusation, ofc with no knowledge, is how you operate. Regrettable is you!
Ed Flanders
Roar Rookie
Michael Clarke. His second ODI century. 2005 vs Pakistan at Sydney. Check the ball by ball commentary transcript on Cricinfo. Ricky Ponting also turned down many singles (batted entire maidens several times) to allow Clarke to get every run he needed. He did it as well for his first century against Zimbabwe, but not as explicit. There you go. Criticise him until your heart is content. I've posted this example three times now.
The Knightwatchmen who say Nii
Roar Rookie
Why did you think the ball is dead when a batsman is bowled off a no-ball or free hit?
Jacko
Roar Rookie
Stop the word tricks. Aus players have farned the strike to earn centries just like any other nations players. Dumb if they dont. Cricket is not just a team sport its also about individual performance and 100s count.
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
I think he's aware of that :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Captain is captain. Greg has owned the mistake. Take it up with him.
Grin
Roar Rookie
Mm .. Noone need to go past your first paragraph to see that the article is very biased . You called him " a legend of Indian cricket " really !!! A legend just of Indian cricket !! If you can't call him a legend of world cricket , you can't call noone as a legend of world cricket !! Then your the attitude is more clear when you said that " as low as he has ever stopped " !!! What does that imply !! Such a shame that prejudiced , negative content like this is spewed i!! Actually the article says nothing about Kohli but It's only shedding light on how , for whatever reason, may be some people are waiting for opportunities .. Is his ascend that infuriating !! Chill ..
Ed Flanders
Roar Rookie
Check Michael Clarke's second ODI century. 2005 vs Pakistan. Sydney. Scorecard is on Cricinfo, of course. Player before team. Not one word of criticism. You can have a point, but in future don't get on the nationalistic high horse, for two reasons 1. It leaves you exposed even if only one example can be presented against you 2. It's just so unbecoming and simple. You're a better writer than needing to drift into "my country is better than yours". All the mainstream writers don't do it (such jingoism would make Gideon Haigh, Greg baum, Malcolm Knox and Geoff lemon cringe) and you should of course be aspiring to one day progress to where they are.
Ed Flanders
Roar Rookie
It is actually. An umpire is not obligated to call a wide if it is deliberately unsporting. Just how an umpire is entitled to call a bouncer a no-ball (even if it is legal) if the bowler is engaging in unsporting play. And just how an umpire is allowed to call notionally non-wide leg side deliveries in test cricket wides if they are unsporting. Umpires have always been able to exercise that discretion.
Ed Flanders
Roar Rookie
Actually Tim, Michael Clarke's first two ODI centuries were stone cold Kohli's. And arguably his 4th. 1st century - hit 20 of the last 22 runs to get that first ton against Zimbabwe. Shane Watson blocked and hit singles. He was 16 off 33. 2nd century against Pakistan in Sydney in 2005- chasing just 163, Clarke hit a century where Ponting hit 17 from 51 balls and blocked out maidens to let Clarke get the century. Remember, just 163 runs. Ponting hit just 17 runs in a partnership of 88. It was engineered. That second example is exactly the same as Kohli. So, yeah, Australia does it too. Every one does it. You've called this wrong, this time.