In the 90s? Quite the oppositeHe would've cost them more runs getting out prematurely.
It’s the last 6 overs. He should have accelerated a bit earlier. Iyer is doing a good job though, so probably won’t matter much in the end.Guy who’s role is to bring the team through the middle overs unscathed does just that and tons up
CW: wahhhh so selfish
Was a lot chancierIyer deserves century and his century will be much much much better than Kohli... He battered in the middle overs too and look at his strike rate...
I'm pretty sure if Lockie had bowled to him instead of Santner he'd have gotten there much quicker. Santner is the only bowler who hasn't been crap and he happened to bowl at Kohli when he was cramping up.In the 90s? Quite the opposite
Natural tbh given their strike rates.Was a lot chancier
Haha yeah he would've because Lockie is bowling filth. But Kohli milked Ravindra for singlesI'm pretty sure if Lockie had bowled to him instead of Santner he'd have gotten there much quicker. Santner is the only bowler who hasn't been crap and he happened to bowl at Kohli when he was cramping up.
Not his job to hold the innings together, there's a reason Kohli has 700 runs in this cup.Iyer deserves century and his century will be much much much better than Kohli... He battered in the middle overs too and look at his strike rate...
And look at what he's supposed to do in the side. He can't do what he does without Kohli.Iyer deserves century and his century will be much much much better than Kohli... He battered in the middle overs too and look at his strike rate...
Still better bowling the front line bowlers at the death than the part timers.Alternative was Ferg