IPL 2013: Rajasthan Royals register comprehensive win at home

Rajasthan RoyalsRajasthan Royals. (PTI)

After winning the toss, they were listless with the bat, and the top-order collapsed to reduce the side to 47/3. Mahela Jayawardene did show some resilience, but couldn't carry on, and left his side at 78/4.

What followed next was the biggest positive from this match- Ben Rohrer's roar to form. The left-hander, after a string of poor performances, came to party with a well-struck 64 (not out), and along with Kedar Jadhav (23 not out), propelled the total to a competitive 154/4.

Even the home side didn't get their team changes right as Shun Tait leaked too many runs in the three overs he bowled. The quick was all over the place, and bowled terrible lines. His pace was not much of threat with such lines, and the Delhi batsmen scored 39 from his overs. Pravin Tambe's debut at 41 was not convincing either, and the leg-spinner went wicket-less in the fixture.

The win today takes Rajasthan one step close to the magical number of nine wins, and Delhi continue to occupy the bottom half of the table.


Rajasthan Royals

SR Watson, AM Rahane, R Dravid(c), SV Samson(wk), STR Binny, BJ Hodge, Sachin Baby, JP Faulkner, SK Trivedi, P Tambe, SW Tait

Delhi Daredevils

DPMD Jayawardene(c), V Sehwag, DA Warner, KM Jadhav, BJ Rohrer, CM Gautam(wk), AB Agarkar, M Morkel, UT Yadav, P Negi, S Kaul

Please read our terms of use before posting comments
TERMS OF USE: The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
comments powered by Disqus