Hitting v Batting: the choice that dictates the shape of a T20 contest

81 All Out  > Conversation, Conversation, Listen >  Hitting v Batting: the choice that dictates the shape of a T20 contest
Hitting v Batting: the choice that dictates the shape of a T20 contest
2 Comments

In the latest episode of the podcast we discuss a fundamental question that underpins a T20 contest: does batting have a place in T20? Are elite batters like Virat Kohli, Babar Azam and Steve Smith good fits in the T20 format – and what metrics tell us how good a batter or hitter is.

Buy Cricket Beyond the Bazaar (recently republished by 81allout)

India (hardback) | India (paperback, e-copy)

Australia (hardback, paperback, e-copy)

USA (hardback, paperback, e-copy)

UK (hardback, paperback, e-copy)

Canada (hardback, paperback, e-copy)

For the rest – please check your country-specific Amazon pages.

Talking Points:

  • The intrinsic logic of T20 – a resource-heavy format with limited time
  • Who is better? A batter who averages 50 and scores at a strike rate of 150 or one who averages 35 and also scores at a strike rate of 150?
  • The evolution of T20 – from a game that resembled cricket to a different sport
  • The problem with picking hitters from an ecosystem that encourages batting
  • Ways to measure the excellence of a T20 batter/hitter
  • Why a single in a T20 is vastly different from a single in an ODI
  • Is there any value in picking an anchor in the top order?
  • Can a team full of hitters find a way in bowler-friendly conditions?
  • Chris Gayle v ABdV v Kohli v Babar v Buttler: who is the better T20 pick?
  • The great T20 hitters – and a formula to rank them

Participants:

Siddhartha Vaidyanathan (@sidvee)

Kartikeya Date (@cricketingview)

Mahesh Sethuraman (@cornerd)

Ashoka (@ABVan)

*

Related:

*

Lead image from here.

 


2 thoughts on “Hitting v Batting: the choice that dictates the shape of a T20 contest”

  1. Great discussion as usual. Like the idea of boundary attempts/ball or dismissal as metrics. For batters the first 10 ball strike rate would be a good measure to see how players approach their start of the innings. Basically the strike rate has to be more dynamic. I think KD’s article also measured the delta of the batters strike rate with that of the team. These are great as well.

    What bothers me greatly is how teams are dealing with the first 6 overs of power play (30% of the innings). With field restrictions – ALL 10 wickets in hand, new ball, fresh pitch it feels criminal to not attempt more boundaries to get to at least 10 an over. It is infuriating to see even chasing teams concede the first 6 overs in the name of taking-it-deep. I’d like to understand if this taking-it-deep strategy really works or not in the long term.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.