Have Teams cracked the chasing code in LOI ?

[Sunil1z]

Is it no longer about batting first and setting a total ?
Last 4 ODI WC have been won by Team chasing
Last 4 WT20 have been won by Team chasing .
Are Team batting first under 2 much pressure to set a above bar Total ?

 

[Niall]

Is it no longer about batting first and setting a total ?
Last 4 ODI WC have been won by Team chasing
Last 4 WT20 have been won by Team chasing .
Are Team batting first under 2 much pressure to set a above bar Total ?

T20 has always been a chasing type format but looking at the finals last year Pakistan would have defended their total if Afridi had not got injured. West Indies needed an ATG cameo from Braithwaite to win so those games are complicated. IIRC their was an ATG horror innings from Yuvi that ruined India's chance of putting up a defendable score v Sri Lanka.

In the ODI'S ......2011 and 2015 India and Australia were so much better than everyone else they would have won even if they had to defend.

2019 was insanely close tbf!

Basically yeah chasing has got easier especially in this era but the finals do have caveats you should not ignore.

 

[Silver Silva]

Is it no longer about batting first and setting a total ?
Last 4 ODI WC have been won by Team chasing
Last 4 WT20 have been won by Team chasing .
Are Team batting first under 2 much pressure to set a above bar Total ?

Yes because:
1.Pitches have become better for batting,
2.Most of the 50 over players play a lot of T20 cricket , so stuff like required run rate does not faze players , they have the necessary power hitting skills to keep up or catch up with the run rate.

 

[honestbharani]

The fact that most batsmen today think of the target in terms of the number of boundaries they will need means the dot ball pressure is not what it used to be and that, along with longer batting line ups, has meant less fear of failure.

And the bats, before @Spark tells me I forgot the obvious.

 

[Spark]

The fact that most batsmen today think of the target in terms of the number of boundaries they will need means the dot ball pressure is not what it used to be and that, along with longer batting line ups, has meant less fear of failure.

And the bats, before @Spark tells me I forgot the obvious.

Honestly this isn't down to bats or batting-friendliness IMO, because in principle that helps both batting innings equally. What's really helped chasing sides is (1) flatter pitches which don't wear and slow down as much and therefore are still conducive to nice easy hitting through the line even after 80+ overs of cricket and (2) enormous amounts of coaching and rigorous analysis, including modern analytics, which allow a level of pre-planning and "order" to a batting innings that is only exacerbated when you know exactly what you have to achieve. The modern sportsmen loves the sort of binary structure that chases imposes; you have to score X runs in the next Y overs, targeting Z bowler in order to achieve a target, which neutralises a lot of the inherent advantages of scoreboard pressure. Meanwhile the side batting first still has to kind of feel out the tempo of the innings and could easily err on the side of too aggressive (I've already seen people argue that Rohit was guilty of this) or too cautious (Rahul yesterday probably falls into this category)

 

[honestbharani]

Honestly this isn't down to bats or batting-friendliness IMO, because in principle that helps both batting innings equally. What's really helped chasing sides is (1) flatter pitches which don't wear and slow down as much and therefore are still conducive to nice easy hitting through the line even after 80+ overs of cricket and (2) enormous amounts of coaching and rigorous analysis, including modern analytics, which allow a level of pre-planning and "order" to a batting innings that is only exacerbated when you know exactly what you have to achieve. The modern sportsmen loves the sort of binary structure that chases imposes; you have to score X runs in the next Y overs, targeting Z bowler in order to achieve a target, which neutralises a lot of the inherent advantages of scoreboard pressure. Meanwhile the side batting first still has to kind of feel out the tempo of the innings and could easily err on the side of too aggressive (I've already seen people argue that Rohit was guilty of this) or too cautious (Rahul yesterday probably falls into this category)

Nah, I meant chasing sides can bank on boundaries at the back end for a few reasons and one of the important ones is the modern bats. You are right that it is the same for sides batting first but there are other factors also at play there, one being the fear of collapses.

 

[Molehill]

Honestly this isn't down to bats or batting-friendliness IMO, because in principle that helps both batting innings equally. What's really helped chasing sides is (1) flatter pitches which don't wear and slow down as much and therefore are still conducive to nice easy hitting through the line even after 80+ overs of cricket and (2) enormous amounts of coaching and rigorous analysis, including modern analytics, which allow a level of pre-planning and "order" to a batting innings that is only exacerbated when you know exactly what you have to achieve. The modern sportsmen loves the sort of binary structure that chases imposes; you have to score X runs in the next Y overs, targeting Z bowler in order to achieve a target, which neutralises a lot of the inherent advantages of scoreboard pressure. Meanwhile the side batting first still has to kind of feel out the tempo of the innings and could easily err on the side of too aggressive (I've already seen people argue that Rohit was guilty of this) or too cautious (Rahul yesterday probably falls into this category)

I think one other factor is that so many games are played as Day/Night matches now. The 2021 T20 was a farce as to how much easier it was batting 2nd, but often we see the ball coming on better under lights.

The 2019 World Cup actually favoured the teams batting first at the back end of that tournament, largely because the pitches had become tired and there was no Day/Night advantage to batting second.

 

[Redbacks]

It could be that T20 makes scoreboard pressure less of a thing in late overs than it was back in the day. Early 2000's cricket, teams would start to crumble once it got to 6.5 to 7 an over needed. Now I think sides would be happy to keep wickets in hand and chance 8-9 an over at the death.

 

[GIMH]

T20 has always been a chasing type format but looking at the finals last year Pakistan would have defended their total if Afridi had not got injured. West Indies needed an ATG cameo from Braithwaite to win so those games are complicated. IIRC their was an ATG horror innings from Yuvi that ruined India's chance of putting up a defendable score v Sri Lanka.

In the ODI'S ......2011 and 2015 India and Australia were so much better than everyone else they would have won even if they had to defend.

2019 was insanely close tbf!

Basically yeah chasing has got easier especially in this era but the finals do have caveats you should not ignore.

Nah. Stokes would have taken us home anyway. Just might have been a bit nervier.

 

[Isura]

Teams are not aggressive enough batting first. I think most teams play pretty far from optimal strategy. Teams don't target part timers, bat too slowly in the middle overs.

 

[Owzat]

Nah. Stokes would have taken us home anyway. Just might have been a bit nervier.

agreed, the Afridi injury made it a bit easier but odds were England would have won anyway being only ONE bowler

goes to show though, lots bang on about fielding, saving runs blah blah blah and that pretty much sank their chances. I'm not suggesting just watch the ball fly by but sometimes throwing yourself to try and save 1-2 runs is really not worth the risk