3 costly mistakes New Zealand made in their World Cup 2023 loss to India

Prior to their meeting against India on Sunday, October 22, New Zealand were arguably the standout team in the 2023 World Cup.

The Blackcaps had an unbeaten record heading into the contest, with eight points from four matches despite issues with the availability of Kane Williamson and Tim Southee. More importantly, they recorded a memorable victory over England to their name and had the best net run rate in the competition.

However, things didn't go to plan for New Zealand in Dharamsala as India ran out winners by four wickets to displace them from the top of the World Cup 2023 points table.

Tom Latham and Co. have a tough run of fixtures coming up. They need to be at their best if they are to establish themselves as one of the favorites to clinch a semifinal spot ahead of the business end of the tournament. Reflecting on their first loss of the World Cup is something they are bound to do with keenness.

Here are three costly mistakes New Zealand made in their World Cup 2023 loss to India.

---

#3 Daryl Mitchell slowed down as he approached his century

Daryl Mitchell played a superb knock against India

This is a harsh thing to say since Daryl Mitchell put the New Zealand batting unit on his back following two early wickets and kept one end up for the majority of the innings. However, it must be said that he didn't accelerate sufficiently as his knock progressed.

Whether that was because he was nearing his century is something only Mitchell will know. However, the truth of the matter is that his relative sedateness at the death cost New Zealand a fair few runs.

He went at less than a run a ball as he approached the three-figure mark and couldn't make up for his lack of boundary-hitting intent until the very last over of the Kiwi innings.

The same was called out on air later in the game. Yes, Mitchell's 130 was simply special, but New Zealand can't afford to compromise on the needs of the team in order to facilitate personal milestones.

---

#2 Tom Latham didn't bowl his frontline bowlers at the right times

Tom Latham has led the Kiwis well in Kane Williamson's absence

India got over the line with two overs to spare, with Virat Kohli and Ravindra Jadeja's match-defining partnership clinching the contest for the hosts. But did New Zealand make things tough enough for the duo?

Trent Boult was the only frontline fast bowler to complete his quota of 10 overs by the time India crossed the finish line. Matt Henry had bowled nine, and Lockie Ferguson eight. More importantly, the pacers only came into the picture to bowl that many overs towards the end of the chase.

Tom Latham has been good as New Zealand's stand-in skipper for the most part. However, he arguably should've reverted to his frontline pacers earlier in the piece and put pressure on the likes of KL Rahul. There is also a case to have bowled out Mitchell Santner once Ravindra Jadeja came to the crease. Speaking of which...

---

#1 New Zealand didn't attack Ravindra Jadeja with spin at the start of his innings

Ravindra Jadeja was up and running with a pair of boundaries off Lockie Ferguson

In an extension of the previous point, it was clear that Latham didn't want to bowl out his frontline fast bowlers too early and show all his cards. The Kiwi skipper should've then attacked Ravindra Jadeja with spin at the start of his innings.

India were under serious pressure following Suryakumar Yadav's run-out. The visitors could've made matters worse by forcing Jadeja to start against a style of bowling he has struggled with over the last few years.

Instead, Latham brought on Ferguson one over after Jadeja came to the crease, and the southpaw helped himself to two boundaries.

By the time Glenn Phillips was introduced, Jadeja had already found some momentum in his innings. And by the time Santner was brought on for the last two overs of his spell, the India No. 7 had already faced 24 balls.

The three overs of Ferguson and Matt Henry that New Zealand turned to at the start of the Kohli-Jadeja partnership proved costly in the end.