From nerves to nerve: India women rise under pressure, rediscover blueprint that made them World Cup favourites

India knew what they were walking into on Thursday. It was not quite a knockout game against New Zealand. But a defeat would have left India in the lurch and hoping for England to do them a favour. Which could well have happened, but in a home Women’s World Cup, that was probably the last thing India would have wanted.

They lost the toss too. And were put into bat at a venue where batting, quite often, gets easier under lights. With or without dew. Rain was a possibility as well, meaning that batting first was, of the two, the tougher gig.

No denying the pressure then. And that seemed to show at the very start, with Pratika Rawal and Smriti Mandhana looking a tad nervous. Neither clicked into gear instantly, and neither found rhythm forthcoming. Four overs yielded just six runs and New Zealand, who were in must-win territory themselves, would have felt that they were up against a side truly feeling the pinch.

That, though, is when India showed the sort of conviction that has been lacking for much of this campaign. The start was, of course, not ideal, but India trusted themselves enough and believed in their capabilities enough to suss out the situation and then change tack.

Mandhana-Rawal brings much-needed calm to Indian batting

Rawal got things underway with a nicely-clipped four through square leg, and followed it up by crashing a square drive over the off-side ring. Mandhana, who has been in a rich vein of form throughout the year, then came to the party, bringing out a sweep to welcome Eden Carson into the attack, and lashing a fierce square cut off Sophie Devine soon after.

And while two boundaries apiece, especially in an ODI, are not massive indicators of what may be in store, those hits to the fence just infused a sense of calm. To those watching. To those in the dressing room. And most importantly, to the two Indian batters out in the middle.

Mandhana and Rawal thereafter batted like two people who knew what they were doing. Rawal may have been more sluggish off the blocks, but always seemed in control, even if there would have been nagging questions over her strike rate and strike rotation.

Mandhana, meanwhile, was ticking along like usual. There were some deft touches behind point. A few classical lofted shots over mid-off, and then the more powerful variants over the leg side. The impressive aspect, though, was how she kept batting at almost a run-a-ball without really giving off the vibe that she was shifting into overdrive.

That is the sort of controlled aggression India missed against Australia, and they were made to pay. Most notably by Alyssa Healy. But that game also saw India fall well short of what they should have gotten, which was down to losing a cluster of wickets and withering the advantage they had fashioned for themselves.

Against New Zealand, that did not happen. Because India kept putting together partnerships, and they had, for almost all of the innings, one set batter at the crease. Once Mandhana was dismissed, the mantle was taken up by Jemimah Rodrigues, back in the mix and promoted to number three, and her partnership with Rawal took the game further away from the White Ferns.

Rodrigues, like Mandhana, was not devoid of tempo in her innings. When the boundaries were a little tougher to find, she ran hard between the wickets. She found an able ally in Rawal, who despite spending so long at the crease, was still willing to do whatever it took to ensure India never lost momentum.

Rodrigues finished unbeaten on 76 off just 55 balls, and perhaps showed the team management what they had missed against England, especially as they let a position of comfort morph into a collapse. But that debate, that repenting is for another day. Thursday was all about what India did right, and what they did right when the pressure was amped up. And in an ideal world, this is exactly what India’s batting display looks like.

The reason they have persisted with Rawal (apart from the truckload of runs she has been scoring) is the way she complements Mandhana. That may have required Mandhana to take up a more aggressive role, but Rawal hanging around to build partnerships gives Mandhana the extra and requisite freedom.

There are, of course, drawbacks. Like when Mandhana gets out early and when Harleen Deol partners with Rawal, which leaves India with two very like-minded batters, who bat at, more or less, the same tempo. But on days when it comes off, like it did against New Zealand, India look every bit the powerful batting side they were touted to be before a ball was bowled at this World Cup.

India benefit from sticking to original blueprint

Mostly because it then gives their more belligerent but perhaps lesser consistent stroke-makers just enough time to leave an imprint, while also not burdening them with batting so many balls that they have to recalibrate their natural game and try to be someone different.

A solid and functioning top order also gives India the luxury to play seven batters and five front-line bowlers. That does leave Amanjot Kaur, an excellent all-rounder in her own right, out in the cold, but it probably bolsters India’s batting and bowling due to more specialists being in the side.

Some, of course, will argue that India, with their batting riches, can be a bit more like Australia or that they can be a little more ambitious from the outset to try and transform these 330-340 scores into, let’s say, 370-380 scores. But it must also be noted that there is a difference in pedigree between the two batting units, and possibly a difference in how much sustained power-hitting both of these sides can indulge in.

And that means India’s top order and specifically their openers, have a responsibility to bat deeper into the innings, and give the rest the chance to impact the game to their best of their respective abilities. Prior to the Women’s World Cup, that had happened very often and that explains why India have seven 300-plus scores this year – way more than any team has ever managed in a calendar year in women’s ODIs.

That all of this materialised when India were up against the ropes, and when they needed a win more than ever, also bodes well. If they can repeat it in the semi-final against a team of Australia, England or South Africa’s ilk, remains to be seen, and is a different conversation altogether.

But reverting to the template that cast them as pre-tournament favourites, and sticking to the blueprint that has served them so well already, is not a bad start. Not bad at all. More so because of everything that had been said in the build-up.

India knew what they were walking into ahead of Thursday. Now, other teams might also be a little circumspect about what they are walking into against India. And that, after the uncertainty that has shrouded their campaign over the past fortnight, is exactly what India would have wanted.

And that is exactly what might take them to where they want to be.