The CSK vs MI IPL result of yesterday’s IPL match witnessed a 103-run victory for CSK against MI. The Samson’s century was the prelude. In the meantime, MI had been defeated by Hosein and his acute attack.
The Chepauk surface remained sluggish. Thus, there was a requirement to control stroke play. CSK rapidly adapted, and MI faced difficulties.
CSK vs MI Key Match Numbers
- CSK: 212/4 (20 overs)
- MI: 109 all out (16.3 overs)
- Outcome: CSK wins by 103 runs
- Player of the Match: Sanju Samson
Controlled Samson Century
Samson called the first ball of every innings. He walked his knock wittily. First, he striked a shot. Next, he quickened following the powerplay.
Sanju Samson Century
- Runs: 102 (58)
- Strike Rate: 175.86
- Boundaries: 9 fours, 5 sixes
Furthermore, Samson also attacked spinners of MI. He played with the sweep and inside-out shots. This caused MI to lose control during middle overs.
But the actual change was between overs 10-15. CSK had an overall phase score of above 70 runs. That outburst knocked MI out of the race.
Powerplay Control Sets the Base
CSK did not play fast and loose. They put their emphasis on wickets in hand instead. As such, they scored 52/1 in half a dozen overs.
In the meantime, MI bowlers failed to hit lengths. They bowled too heavy. Samson and Gaikwad thus came across convenient limits.
CSK Powerplay
- Score: 52/1
- Run Rate: 8.66
This gradual beginning enabled CSK to start later. Contrarily, MI never regained that base.
Hosein’s 4/17: Spin Masterclass
Akeal Hosein transformed the game in four overs. He assailed the stumps. And he waltzed along too.
Akeal Hosein Figures
- Overs: 4
- Runs: 17
- Wickets: 4
- Economy: 4.25
Notably, Hosein rejected the top order of MI fast. He cleared Rohit and SKY in two overs. Hence, MI failed prematurely.
Moreover, he threw into the pitch. The ball caught stingingly. MI batters were unable to adapt.
The Collapse of MI: What Went Wrong
MI required a powerful powerplay response. They however lost early wickets. That pressure never eased.
MI Batting Issues
- Powerplay: 28/3
- Dot Ball %: 48%
No partnerships more than 25 runs.
Moreover, MI struck prematurely. They did not respect conditions. Consequently, wickets continued to fall. The field placements were also a highlight of CSK. They cut singles effectively. Hence, MI batters engaged in risky decisions.
Tactical Turning Points
Middle Overs Domination
- CSK scored 92 runs (7-15 overs)
- MI had lost 5 wickets (7-15 overs)
It is obvious that CSK was the owner of this phase. Samson speeded up, and Hosein led the pursuit.
Death Overs Execution
CSK ended well with 48 runs in last 5 overs. In the meantime, MI collapsed before it reached such a point.
Match Comparison Table
| Match | Top Scorer | Best Figures | Margin |
| CSK vs MI | Sanju Samson 102 (58) | Akeal Hosein 4/17 | CSK by 103 runs |
Points Table: What This Means
CSK receives valuable points. Their net run rate increases drastically. They hence increase the chances of playoffs. In the meantime, MI is under pressure. The weakness of their batting is an issue. They have to reassemble in a hurry.
MI vs CSK Scorecard Wrap Up
CSK showed clarity and control. Samson led the match with purpose. Hosein kept on doubling strategies. In the meantime, MI was hardly adaptable. This finding is indeed subject to debate. Will MI reconsider their batting order? Is CSK capable of continuing with this spin-heavy strategy? Keep up with Cricmatch to get more insightful and acute daily match dissection!
Pitch Side FAQs
Who scored a century in the CSK vs MI match?
Samson made 102 out of 58 balls. He dominated the innings and hastened late.
How many wickets was it taken by Akeal Hosein?
Hosein took 4 wickets at a cost of 17 runs. His magic shattered the MI batting order.
What was the biggest turning point in CSK vs MI match?
The turning point of the match was the middle overs. CSK collected a lot of points as MI lost important wickets.
Why did MI struggle in the chase vs CSK?
MI did not succeed in the powerplay, and it lost initial wickets. They also read pitch conditions wrongly.
What were the pitch conditions?
The surface stayed slow and grippy. Spinners prevailed, particularly in middle overs.
