As a former Ranji player, I’ve seen my fair share of tense dressing rooms and collapsing batting orders. But trust me, nothing compares to the adrenaline of an India–Pakistan match. It is not just cricket; it is combat minus the missiles. And on this front too, as on the borders, India has shown that intent beats bluster, provided you don’t slip into the comfort zone of complacency.
When India won the toss and put Pakistan into bat, they looked like they had come armed with more than just bats. For the first 10 overs, they went at nearly nine an over, as if determined to avenge what their army couldn’t in four days of “Operation Sindoor” — India’s precision strikes that decimated terror bases earlier this month. But cricket, like war, rewards patience and strategy. The moment spinners entered, Pakistan’s bravado began to look like hollow gunfire. Wickets fell in intervals tight enough to choke momentum, and from a possible 200-plus, they limped to 171.
Now, you might say 171 is defensible. Perhaps in a club game at the Bahadurpura grounds. Not against this Indian batting unit, though. Abhishek Sharma and Shubman Gill came out with the swagger of soldiers marching into captured territory. In no time — 8.4 overs to be exact — they piled up 100 runs. Abhishek looked like he was playing street cricket in Punjab, slapping sixes at will, reaching a 25-ball fifty with the kind of nonchalance that makes bowlers question their career choices. Gill, elegant as always, stroked his way to 47 before Faheem finally breached his defence.
_vb_77.jpeg)
That breakthrough gave Pakistan something to cheer about — if only briefly. Abhishek soon followed, falling for 74 in the 12th over, and suddenly, there was a whiff of tension. India still needed 49, but Pakistan smelled an opening. They fought back with intent, Haris Rauf producing a fiery spell that sent Sanju Samson and Suryakumar Yadav back cheaply. From 118 for no loss, India slumped to 124 for three. The Pakistan dugout, till then quieter than a Karachi cinema during an Indian war film, erupted in belief.
Here’s the thing, though: Indian teams of the past may have flinched. This one didn’t. Hardik Pandya and Tilak Varma ensured no more hiccups, nudging singles, cracking the odd boundary, and refusing to panic. In the end, India won by six wickets with 7 balls to spare. Not a thrashing, but a lesson: you can push us, but you cannot topple us.
Ironies abound. Jasprit Bumrah, the world’s most feared speedster, went wicketless and leaked runs — proof that even champions have off days. Yet, his teammates picked up the slack. Abhishek, guilty of dropping a sitter earlier, compensated with his bat. Sanju, dismissed cheaply, still looked classy for those few deliveries. Cricket, like war, is about collective grit, not individual heroics alone.
Pakistan’s fightback was spirited, and to be fair, they showed more teeth than their generals across the border. But as has been the case too often in both domains, intent faltered against India’s discipline. Our openers proved again that the real difference lies in seizing the moment and dictating terms.
So, yes, another India–Pakistan clash, another Indian victory. The scorecard will say “India won by six wickets.” But the real story? India’s dominance on the ground, much like on the borders, is decisive, clinical, and most importantly, with intent.
For those doubting Thomases who felt my earlier comparison of our cricketers to our soldiers was “too dramatic,” well, the scoreboard is my reply. In war or in sport, India doesn’t just play to win anymore. We play to dominate. In my personal view, I could find Abhishek Sharma and Tilak Verma as great promises for Indian batting to dominate world cricket in the years to come. Undoubtedly, Sharma impressed me most. Simply because of his glorious 74, which included five sixes and 4 fours and his response, while receiving the Man of the Match as well, he answered like a soldier, saying that they (meaning Pakistanis) were coming on them and the only way to respond to them is with the bat.
