Vintage Rashid Khan is back: How the Afghan star shaped GT’s one-run escape vs DC

0
3
Vintage Rashid Khan is back: How the Afghan star shaped GT’s one-run escape vs DC


For the last two IPL seasons, Rashid Khan had stopped looking like the bowler who could tilt an innings almost by force. The decline was visible in the numbers before it became a talking point around him. In IPL 2024, he managed 10 wickets in 12 matches and, for the first time in an IPL season, did not take even one three-wicket haul. In IPL 2025, the drop was sharper: 9 wickets in 15 matches, an average of 57.11 and an economy of 9.34. For a bowler who built his reputation on collapsing middle overs and shrinking chases, those are not just lean returns. They are a sign that the match was no longer bending to his will.

Rashid Khan and teammates celebrate the wicket of Sameer Rizvi. (Rahul Singh)
Rashid Khan and teammates celebrate the wicket of Sameer Rizvi. (Rahul Singh)

That is why Gujarat Titans’ one-run win over Delhi Capitals felt bigger than a routine early-season result. GT were defending 210, Delhi were unbeaten coming into the game, and the chase had enough moments where it threatened to become straightforward. Instead, Rashid produced the kind of spell that used to define him: 4 overs, 17 runs, 3 wickets, only one boundary conceded. This was not vintage solely because of the figures. It was vintage because of where the wickets came, and what they did to the chase.

Why this match mattered before Rashid even bowled

Delhi’s batting narrative this season had already taken a clear shape. The top order had not always made smooth starts, but Sameer Rizvi had become their crisis man. Against Lucknow Super Giants, Delhi were 26 for 4 before Rizvi’s unbeaten 70 carried them through. Against the Mumbai Indians, he struck 90 off 51 and turned the chase decisively in Delhi’s favour.

That context matters because Rashid was not merely bowling to a random middle-order batter when he removed Rizvi. He was bowling to the one Delhi batter who had already shown, twice, that he could repair an innings and then finish it with authority. In a chase of 211, that is a serious threat profile.

The spell was not just economical. It was strategically perfect

Rashid Khan’s spell reads: 4-0-17-3. On its own, that is excellent. But it becomes extraordinary when set against the rest of Gujarat’s bowling. The other GT bowlers combined to give away 192 runs in 16 overs, which is exactly 12 runs per over. Rashid went at 4.25. In a one-run game, that is not a statistical side note. That is the match’s central bowling fact.

He also bowled 10 dot balls in 24 deliveries and conceded just one boundary. On a night where Gujarat’s seamers repeatedly let Delhi break free, Rashid was the only bowler who kept making the chase feel like work.

His first over came with Delhi already moving. They were 36/0 after four when he entered, and he gave away only 4 runs. That may sound modest, but it mattered because Gujarat had already leaked heavily in the powerplay and were in danger of letting the chase settle into rhythm too early.

His second over cost 5. Again, no wicket, but again he interrupted momentum. In T20 chases, especially big ones, not every decisive over needs a wicket. Sometimes the key act is making the batting side recalculate.

The 10th over was the real turning point

The decisive moment of Rashid’s night came in his third over, the 10th of the innings. Delhi were 97/1 after 9 overs, needing 114 off 66 balls. That is a healthy position in a chase of 211, particularly with KL Rahul set and enough batting left. Then Rashid bowled an over that changed the shape of the innings: dot, dot, dot, four, wicket, wicket. Nitish Rana fell first. Sameer Rizvi followed immediately, bowled for a golden duck. Delhi moved from 97/1 to 101/3 in the space of six balls.

This was the old Rashid trick. He did not wait for desperation. He attacked the chase at a point where it still felt comfortable, suddenly making it unstable.

Rana’s wicket mattered because he was the batter meant to keep the middle overs moving. Rizvi’s wicket mattered more because he had already become Delhi’s designated repairman this season. If KL Rahul was batting the innings’ spine, Rizvi was the side’s accelerant under pressure. Removing him first ball meant Gujarat did not have to deal with Delhi’s best recent problem-solver in the most delicate phase of the chase.

That is what made the dismissal so important. It was not just another wicket on the scorecard. It was the removal of Delhi’s most trusted recovery batter in a season where recovery batting had already defined two wins.

Also Read: KL Rahul’s 92 goes in vain as Delhi Capitals choke; David Miller fails to score 2 off 2 against Gujarat Titans

Rashid’s final over made the finish harder than it should have been

His fourth and final over was almost as important. Delhi were 130/3 after 13, needing 81 off 42. Still difficult, but still very live. Rashid gave away only 4 and dismissed Axar Patel, leaving Delhi at 134/4 after 14.

That over did two things. First, it kept the asking rate elevated. Second, it made Delhi more dependent on KL Rahul carrying the chase deep. That pressure transfer matters. The farther a chase moves toward one batter having to do everything, the more one mistimed shot or one under-hit boundary option changes the finish.

Delhi still got close because Rahul played a superb hand, and Gujarat’s death overs were messy. But that does not reduce Rashid’s value. It actually magnifies it. He was not bowling within a tidy collective defence. He was bowling almost alone in terms of control.

What this means for the Gujarat Titans

The biggest takeaway is not just that Rashid took three wickets. It is that he once again changed the geometry of a chase. He slowed the start, broke the middle, and removed the one middle-order batter who had repeatedly rescued Delhi this season.

GT have enough batting to stay dangerous. What they have lacked recently is the Rashid version that makes 200-plus defences feel possible even when the rest of the attack is inconsistent. Against Delhi, that version returned. And in a one-run win, that was the difference.


LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here