***Official*** Pakistan in New Zealand - T20/ODI series - Jan 2016

[NZTailender]

That was some of the finest T20 batting that I have seen.

We should've won it with 30 balls to spare, which we could've if we played all sloggers.

 

[NZTailender]

That probably does it for Todd Astle's selection chances, though it might not be a bad thing if he comes into focus for the longer formats. Would have Sodhi back and leave the T20 quick bowling duties to Mitch/Milne/Henry alone.

If anything, this will probably diminish his chances for selection in the longer format. At least it will with the average punter who can't tell the difference between formats.

 

[Dan]

Well he did fall in a hole in Adelaide, first non "flat" track in Australia.

So did, uhh, literally everyone else though.

If my completely unscientific skim of the scorecard is correct, the only top seven bats who performed above their career average, on either side, were Nevill and Santner (with Rodent on debut so doing so by default).

 

[Dan]

aka stupid bit of trolling is stupid

 

[Hurricane]

We should've won it with 30 balls to spare, which we could've if we played all sloggers.

Haha

My definition of a slogger for the purposes of the debate the other night was someone who can bat with a high sr. Both guptil and Kane accomplished a high sr so justified, Kane in particular, a place in a team that I would select.
My point was that anchor men who open the batting and score 24(24) hurt the team's chances of winning. This isn't a new thought. I first came up with this when different Ipl teams tried to accomodate kallis into their line ups.
Anyway Kane would agree with my position if we were to ask him as he clearly evaluated his performance in the first t20 and decided to bat faster in this match.
Finally not that a conversation with pews proves anything but 3 years ago when Kane was quite young I said he wasn't ready at all for t20z . Pews countered that by saying in his last 4 matches ( at the time ) he had lifted his sr to 130.
Sr is critical in t20 and in some tv broadcasts around the world they display it instead of the batting average.
Fun fact to quote blocky. If I heard correctly last night Kane Williamson has a higher career t20 sr than guptil. So my targeting of him based on one game was a bit knee jerk I will come out and say. In my defence though I built my argument around anchormen in general vs sloggers rather than talking about Kane too much.

 

[Hurricane]

Going to the game on Friday.

 

[Athlai]

Haha

My definition of a slogger for the purposes of the debate the other night was someone who can bat with a high sr. Both guptil and Kane accomplished a high sr so justified, Kane in particular, a place in a team that I would select.
My point was that anchor men who open the batting and score 24(24) hurt the team's chances of winning. This isn't a new thought. I first came up with this when different Ipl teams tried to accomodate kallis into their line ups.
Anyway Kane would agree with my position if we were to ask him as he clearly evaluated his performance in the first t20 and decided to bat faster in this match.
Finally not that a conversation with pews proves anything but 3 years ago when Kane was quite young I said he wasn't ready at all for t20z . Pews countered that by saying in his last 4 matches ( at the time ) he had lifted his sr to 130.
Sr is critical in t20 and in some tv broadcasts around the world they display it instead of the batting average.
Fun fact to quote blocky. If I heard correctly last night Kane Williamson has a higher career t20 sr than guptil. So my targeting of him based on one game was a bit knee jerk I will come out and say. In my defence though I built my argument around anchormen in general vs sloggers rather than talking about Kane too much.

Uh. Guptill had a SR of 100 throughout a good portion of that innings.

 

[Hurricane]

Uh. Guptill had a SR of 100 throughout a good portion of that innings.

If you are 24(24) but accelarate to 60(30) then all is forgiven.

It is when you do what Michael Clarke did in that World T20 final I posted did - get out for some score like 27(27) that you have screwed your team over.

Singles don't really hurt the other team when you are batting. It is when you score a 2 or more off a ball that you have won that particular encounter in the game.
If you walked up to Pakistan and said would you take Kane scoring 35(35) they would take it every time. They would be more likely to take 40(40) and laugh gleefully if you offered them the opportunity to have him make 60(60). The more balls you face while scoring a SR of 100 the more you play into the oppositions hands.

 

[Athlai]

I don't subscribe to this at all. Structuring the team innings and setting team goals is fair enough in any form of the game.

 

[Hurricane]

I don't subscribe to this at all. Structuring the team innings and setting team goals is fair enough in any form of the game.

Provide a reason your disagreement. Not a high level theorem that can't be criticised because it is too high level and generalised for me to sink my teeth into.

 

[Howe_zat]

If you are 24(24) but accelarate to 60(30) then all is forgiven.

It is when you do what Michael Clarke did in that World T20 final I posted did - get out for some score like 27(27) that you have screwed your team over.

Singles don't really hurt the other team when you are batting. It is when you score a 2 or more off a ball that you have won that particular encounter in the game.
If you walked up to Pakistan and said would you take Kane scoring 35(35) they would take it every time. They would be more likely to take 40(40) and laugh gleefully if you offered them the opportunity to have him make 60(60). The more balls you face while scoring a SR of 100 the more you play into the oppositions hands.

No one will disagree with you here, it's the suggestion that there are players for whom 35(35) is intentional that's off.

 

[Hurricane]

No one will disagree with you here, it's the suggestion that there are players for whom 35(35) is intentional that's off.

4 out of 5 times it is intentional. Sometimes you will get surprised with a dastardly opposition fielding plan (this is really what made Kane becalmed the other night), sometimes the pitch will be two paced and ****, more often than not the pitches are good, and more often than not the fielding team doesn't have any amazing plan for you, and your scoring rate boils down to your willpower and it is in your control.

 

[indiaholic]

4 out of 5 times it is intentional. Sometimes you will get surprised with a dastardly opposition fielding plan (this is really what made Kane becalmed the other night), sometimes the pitch will be two paced and ****, more often than not the pitches are good, and more often than not the fielding team doesn't have any amazing plan for you, and your scoring rate boils down to your willpower and it is in your control.

Is a question of ability more than will power IMO.

 

[Hurricane]

Is a question of ability more than will power IMO.

If you are a batsman and you lack the ability to strike at 140 plus then I am arguing you shouldn't be selected to begin with. For the rest of them it is matter of will power and timidness standing in their way of striking that quickly.

 

[Athlai]

It's also a question of the risk that players will take throughout the innings. Slogging every ball just doesn't work. Kane and Guptill showed Afridi a lot of respect early on because he was getting some nice drift. Guptill then smashed him towards the end of the game because the platform had been set, the risk was worth it and he was more prepared to take him on. They also looked to target the short boundary and pick off the easier singles on the long.

T20 is a game where you need to play every ball but the Munro headless chicken school of smash everything is not for everyone, and even for Munro it's still super unreliable.

I honestly can't think of any gun t20 bat that smashes at a SR of 150 throughout their innings every innings. Even Gayle will build his innings.

Afridi? Averages 18

 

[Hurricane]

It's also a question of the risk that players will take throughout the innings. Slogging every ball just doesn't work. Kane and Guptill showed Guptill a lot of respect early on because he was getting some nice drift. Guptill then smashed him towards the end of the game because the platform had been set, the risk was worth it and he was more prepared to take him on. They also looked to target the short boundary and pick off the easier singles on the long.

T20 is a game where you need to play every ball but the Munro headless chicken school of smash everything is not for everyone, and even for Munro it's still super unreliable.

I honestly can't think of any gun t20 bat that smashes at a SR of 150 throughout their innings every innings. Even Gayle will build his innings.

Afridi? Averages 18

OK good answer I will come back a bit later.

 

[Hurricane]

It's also a question of the risk that players will take throughout the innings. Slogging every ball just doesn't work. Kane and Guptill showed Afridi a lot of respect early on because he was getting some nice drift. Guptill then smashed him towards the end of the game because the platform had been set, the risk was worth it and he was more prepared to take him on. They also looked to target the short boundary and pick off the easier singles on the long.

T20 is a game where you need to play every ball but the Munro headless chicken school of smash everything is not for everyone, and even for Munro it's still super unreliable.

I honestly can't think of any gun t20 bat that smashes at a SR of 150 throughout their innings every innings. Even Gayle will build his innings.

Afridi? Averages 18

There is a lot of truth to what you say Athlai. Which is why I stopped to do the dishes and have a think about things.

I will grant most of your points and will incorporate your arguments as nuances in my theory. In granting these as nuances I had already been on the same page as you anyway. I had just hadn't made a post to that effect. As long as you finish up with a high SR then it is fine if your inning ebbs and flows along the way. And at one point Guptill noticeably just held up an end for Kane when Kane was barnstorming. And yes Gayle takes some sighters (not 20 mind you).

My revised theory -

1) You need to on most nights have a SR of 140 or you are a liability
2) Each inning can have highs and lows to it as you adjust to the game situation. Ideally these ebbs will last for 6-8 balls and not 20-30.

 

[Athlai]

16 of 132 players who have played 19 or more T20I innings (Sir Colin qualifier) have a SR over 140

Batting records | Twenty20 Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

I mean yes, the higher the better but I'd extend the range to what makes a good t20 bat much, much further out. SR of 115-120 is acceptable.

 

[NZTailender]

16 of 132 players who have played 19 or more T20I innings (Sir Colin qualifier) have a SR over 140

Batting records | Twenty20 Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

I mean yes, the higher the better but I'd extend the range to what makes a good t20 bat much, much further out. SR of 115-120 is acceptable.

Haha I was literally in the middle of looking this up.

 

[Hurricane]

16 of 132 players who have played 19 or more T20I innings (Sir Colin qualifier) have a SR over 140

Batting records | Twenty20 Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

I mean yes, the higher the better but I'd extend the range to what makes a good t20 bat much, much further out. SR of 115-120 is acceptable.

Talking Career Strike Rates then yes sure it would be lower than 140 as you have to allow for the times when the player has an off night, or when the pitch sucked. Or when you blocked the first 3 balls and got out on your 4th. I am even happy with the career range you have picked of 115-120. As I am willing to wager when those players stay in for 20 or more balls that they do strike at 140.