Why choose to chase a total in such an important match?

[gishy]

If you win the toss, you always bat first unless conditions are extremely in favour of bowling.

The pressure is huge when you lose a few wickets.

Batting first always gives you a 'second chance' if you fail.

Why oh why did Sarfraz choose to bowl?

 

[marlonbrowndo]

It was the right call

 

[The_Odd_One]

Had Pakistan batted first, they would have score no more than 250-270 which India would have chased with 7 wickets in hand.

The better team will win regardless of who bowls or bats first.

 

[gishy]

How many of India's wins in ICC tournaments have come from them batting first?

 

[KamranDestiny]

Because the pitch was very flat which means pefect to chase even some very high scores. Which also meant that if you had made India chase on that pitch Kohli and co would have chased even 370+ there.

But do you honestly think deciding to bat first would really have made a difference ? I mean, Pakistan would have struggled their way to set a 260 - 270 like target, and inda would have chased it bating very safely in 43 overs, having lost a couple wickets only (similar to Asia cup 2012).

The point is, bat first or bat second. You can not change the fact India (and other top 5 teams) are simply a league above us. The talent gape is just ridiculously humiliating.

 

[gishy]

People saying bat first or second, it makes no difference. Why bother playing the match at all then? We might aswell concede the points to the opposition and just sit in the hotel.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

People saying bat first or second, it makes no difference. Why bother playing the match at all then? We might aswell concede the points to the opposition and just sit in the hotel.

With azhar ali, shehzad, Hafeez and Wahab, that might not be such a bad idea

 

[Zak_Fan]

India would have murdered any chase once the sun was out.

 

[HinderTheJinder]

Because the pitch was very flat which means pefect to chase even some very high scores. Which also meant that if you had made India chase on that pitch Kohli and co would have chased even 370+ there.

But do you honestly think deciding to bat first would really have made a difference ? I mean, Pakistan would have struggled their way to set a 260 - 270 like target, and inda would have chased it bating very safely in 43 overs, having lost a couple wickets only (similar to Asia cup 2012).

The point is, bat first or bat second. You can not change the fact India (and other top 5 teams) are simply a league above us. The talent gape is just ridiculously humiliating.

Pak might not have lost as badly as they did if they had batted first.Pak are now as good as gone from the tournament

 

[KamranDestiny]

People saying bat first or second, it makes no difference. Why bother playing the match at all then? We might aswell concede the points to the opposition and just sit in the hotel.

Agreed. We will also save ourselves from being humiliated like that.

 

[proud_pakistani]

Batting first or second, playing Junaid ahead of Wahab, playing Fakhar ahead of Shehzad. Let's just leave it. There is a huge gulf in the skill levels of both teams. Pakistan played to their capabilities. This team just does not match the top tier teams in any department, be it skills, fitness levels, desire to win. Nothing.

 

[gishy]

The point is even if Pakistan had been bowled out for 230, the at least a few quick wickets can cause panic.

If you bowl first, the opposition racks up a huge total...the game is virtually over.

Once India scored 300 plus, it was time to switch off the tv.

 

[Madplayer]

It was a 100% correct call.

 

[hisham_ashraf]

How many of India's wins in ICC tournaments have come from them batting first?

India have won only once while chasing and that was in the 2003 World Cup.

 

[Savak]

Regardless of winning or losing the toss, the team should be prepared to deal with any situation.

 

[gishy]

India have won only once while chasing and that was in the 2003 World Cup.

Exactly...

 

[hisham_ashraf]

Exactly...

But don't think that by batting first too we would have won the game,we actually find new ways to lose.

 

[Madplayer]

Exactly...

In t20is they have won chasing too.

 

[KamranDestiny]

Pak might not have lost as badly as they did if they had batted first.Pak are now as good as gone from the tournament

Big margin or not, we are not winning against SA anyways.

Also, if India had batted second they may have taken the D/L into consideration from the very first ball and probably murdered Pak bowlers in the powerplay ending up scoring 150-2 after 25 overs. Which would have meant a heavy loss anyways.

 

[subbu]

India have won only once while chasing and that was in the 2003 World Cup.

2013 champions trophy!.. Pakistan lost batting first bowled out for 165 (40 overs)

 

[ask_analyse_act]

india will bowl first however even if they win the toss... i dont see pak with bottlers like shehzad, hafeez and wahab to make 250+ targets or restrict India below 250...l