“Unbelievable,” said Eoin Morgan and he does not usually do hyperbole. Teams seldom win when the opposition needs 10 runs from 10 balls with five wickets in hand but that is what his England side managed.
“We decided we needed wickets [before the final over from Mark Wood] and to make them hit the ball in the air,” explained Morgan. “But we didn’t take any wickets and still managed to win. Unbelievable. Wood’s yorkers are usually good at the end but we decided to go with his raw pace. We thought a few bouncers was our best chance of taking those wickets. Maybe we bluffed them.” Morgan’s smile suggested he was not so sure about that.
It was the best kind of victory since it was so unlikely with 10 balls to go. Sides cherish those wins the most.
Ben Stokes’s century was obviously significant but there remain concerns for his captain about the fitness of his gun all-rounder. “We are monitoring him,” said Morgan, “and managing him the best we can with the Champions Trophy in mind. He is certainly good to play as a batsman at Lord’s [on Monday]. It depends how he pulls up. But he wants to play. I think that unless he’s injured or a risk he will play.”
If that is the case he will not be bowling his full quota of overs since that is the process which currently gives Stokes pain. At the Ageas Bowl he was restricted to just three overs. “Before the end I’d already decided that was enough,” said Morgan, who also has to keep an eye on Chris Woakes’ fitness as well. “His absence was more precautionary but we don’t want to take any risks with him.”
Morgan’s opposite number, AB de Villiers, did his best to hide his disappointment. “We got a bit excited at the end,” he said before applauding how David Miller and Chris Morris had almost taken his side to victory.
De Villiers was more cheerful about his side’s performance than his conversation with the umpires, Rob Bailey and Chris Gaffaney, midway through England’s innings. De Villiers was candid and serious when explaining how the umpires felt that the condition of one of the balls had changed. “I was upset by that. I had the feeling that they felt we were responsible for that. It felt as if we were being accused of ball‑tampering.”
He then added that no further steps were taken and the ball was not changed. “I think it was just a bad ball. That happens sometimes.”
De Villiers’ sensitivity on this issue can be explained by South Africa’s experiences in the winter when there were accusations of ball‑tampering, most notably against Faf du Plessis after the Hobart Test against in Australia as well as during the one-day series against New Zealand. Du Plessis was heavily fined and extremely grumpy about that.
Moreover the South Africans are not exactly over the moon about losing a match they should have won.
