The Ranji Final
The Ranji final of 1984/85 turned out to be one of the finest matches in Indian domestic cricket history. A sleepy Gavaskar won the toss and batted. He could hardly close his eyes before Bombay was 3 down for 42. Batting at No.5, he scored his 20th and last hundred in Ranji trophy and took Bombay to 333. Shastri made 29 before he was bowled attempting to cut an arm–ball. Delhi was in early trouble before they were rescued by Chetan Chauhan, batting with a fractured finger in his last first class match. Ajay Sharma, in his first season, scored a hundred and took Delhi into the lead with nine wickets down.
The rules of the competition specified that in the event of a draw, the team with the first innings lead would be declared the winners. With two days and 100 minutes left, Bombay went for quick runs. A crowd of about 46,000 turned up for match on the fourth day and the organizers ran out of tickets. Shastri top scored with 76 as Bombay set Delhi 300 to win in a day and ninety minutes.
Except for the odd delivery, the ball spun slowly and afforded enough time for the batsmen to play their strokes. Early on the final day, Delhi reached 95 for no loss and then collapsed. His first wicket was Chauhan who was declared out caught behind with the ball having spun across the face of the bat without apparently touching it. The match changed dramatically and the batsmen lost their head. Gursharan Singh was lbw playing no stroke, Kirti Azad played on, Surinder Khanna was stumped after a few slogs. Shastri took 8 for 91; Bombay won by 90 runs. In the 50th year of Ranji trophy, it was their 30th title.
Read more about this topic: Ravi Shastri
Famous quotes containing the word final:
“A poem is like a person. Though it has a family tree, it is important not because of its ancestors but because of its individuality. The poem, like any human being, is something more than its most complete analysis. Like any human being, it gives a sense of unified individuality which no summary of its qualities can reproduce; and at the same time a sense of variety which is beyond satisfactory final analysis.”
—Donald Stauffer (b. 1930)