Rohit Sharma's Role in MI's Victory-Should the Credit Have Been Directed Elsewhere?

Rohit Sharma is usually credited with his strategic thinking and role in Mumbai Indians' wins. His recent proposal to introduce Karn Sharma into the attack at a crucial stage of the IPL 2025 match against Delhi Capitals was in the limelight. Karn Sharma's three vital wickets and his role in disrupting DC's pursuit were pivotal in the result of the game. But some ex-cricketers feel that although Rohit's strategic thinking was beneficial, the actual credit for the victory should go to others, most notably Hardik Pandya, the captain.

The game was exciting and narrowed to a close call, with Mumbai Indians clinching by 12 runs. Although Karn Sharma's bowling was the game-changer, the call to include him in the attack was what garnered much interest. Rohit Sharma, though sitting on the bench, made the recommendation to coach Mahela Jayawardene through the bowling coach Paras Mhambrey. This was what saw the captain Hardik Pandya carry out the plan. Though this might appear to be a minor shift in strategy, it was sufficient to alter the momentum in favor of Mumbai.

After the game, Rohit was widely hailed as having made the tactical decision that resulted in the team's victory. Fans and the media on social media complimented him on the idea, calling it a masterstroke, particularly given that he did not play in the game. Even the broadcaster Star Sports made his contribution one of the major reasons for the win. There were some experts, however, who did not agree with this assessment.

Former Indian cricketer Sanjay Bangar also expressed his view that the credit for the victory should not solely go to Rohit. He said that although Rohit may have proposed the inclusion of Karn Sharma in the attack, it was the performance of Karn and the leadership of Hardik that were instrumental. Bangar emphasized that Hardik provided the directions and made the final decision to execute the plan. Without Hardik's leadership on the field, the plan would not have been as successful.

Another former cricketer, Sanjay Manjrekar, echoed similar thoughts. He highlighted that while it is easy to make suggestions from outside, the captain deserves all the credit for actually doing the plan. He noted that Hardik had taken Rohit's advice into consideration, which was a key element in the strategy's success. But if the plan had gone wrong, Hardik would have been the one to blame, and that is why the credit should go to him. Manjrekar pointed out that the credit for the win cannot be given only to Rohit's inputs, but to Hardik's leadership and the effort of the team as a whole.

Rohit, despite not being able to give much with the bat, played a significant part in the background. At strategic timeouts, he could usually be seen sitting and consulting the coaching staff on what to do about the game's situation. This indicated that he was quite a part of the team's strategy, although he was not out there on the field. Nevertheless, there are those who feel that it is unjust to sideline the captain's role to bring out Rohit's strategic advice.

Rohit's extensive experience and input are definitely valued by Mumbai Indians, but in no way is credit being denied to Hardik Pandya. Hardik's personal connection and experience as a captain add weight to this victory for him, and his past performances put constant pressure on him. This triumph was much required for him and was a welcomed relief. Manjrekar was correct in saying that the captain is the person who has to decide on the field irrespective of the place the idea originates from.

Ultimately, while Rohit Sharma's brain may be a very useful thing to have in the Mumbai Indians, the win really needs to be attributed mostly to Hardik Pandya's leadership and carrying out of the plan on the pitch. Remember that cricket is a team sport and that there is a place for every player. The team effort as a whole, driven by Hardik, was what eventually won the match.