IPL Mailbag

Thanks for all your questions!

Thanks as always for all your questions, we couldn’t get to them all last Wednesday on The Cricket Podcast so I thought I’d do a follow-up here to cover a lot more.

If you want to listen to that podcast you can do so here:-

https://www.youtube.com/live/v0Unp_l4Few?feature=share

Erika: ‘At the midway point of the IPL which:

1. Team has surpassed your expectations so far

2. Team who has not lived up to expectations

3. Player who has surprised you the most

4. Player who has disappointed the most’

1. Gujarat Titans. Last year they had poor net boundary numbers yet won the tournament. My perception was that they were lucky, winning a lot of matches via very fine margins. I still stand by that, but this year, they have impressed me far more although I do think they got lucky with the Williamson injury allowing them to structure up differently with two overseas pacers.

2. Sunrisers Hyderabad. I thought they did some good recruitment at the auction but as I discussed on The Cricket Podcast prior to the tournament, my reservations focused on them having a brand new coach who has never been a professional franchise head coach before, and a pretty inexperienced captain. In my view they’ve been tactically lacking this year, and instead of challenging for the top four, are struggling near the bottom.

3. A few have. Rahul Tewatia for his ice cold finishing, Piyush Chawla because it’s a wonderful comeback to IPL cricket, Kyle Mayers because I think he’s improved more than basically any player in T20 cricket, but I’m going to go for Ruturaj Gaikwad. Previous to this season he obviously had talent but was a bit too one-dimensional for my liking, without a high SR gear mostly. However this year he has shown that upside and if that continues, will make him an international regular for many years to come.

4. I had pretty low expectations from a strike rate/hitting perspective for David Warner and he hasn’t changed my opinion. KL Rahul is always going to be in this conversation until he ups his boundary hitting/strike rate, but again, it was fairly predictable that he’d take his continued approach. Andre Russell looks to be a distance away from his peak now, and Umran Malik has struggled for SRH. A few will consider Prithvi Shaw also, but I think he’s been questionably managed. Some names there, but I’m going to go for Ishan Kishan. 26/129 at the time of writing isn’t good enough for a player of 1) his talent and 2) his cost, both in terms of Crore spent but also the implications that Mumbai spending so much on him at mega auction last year had on their bowling ‘attack’.

Nick: ‘Is the standard of the IPL now a lower standard than the PSL?’

It’s a good question but difficult to compare the two leagues. PSL has an obligatory emerging player rule which reduces the quality of the league (but often produces eventual stars) but with six teams only, you’re requiring only 42 (6 x 7) domestic players.

The current IPL squads need 70 (10 x 7) domestic players so they are using the 28 next best domestic players, which as I predicted before the expansion, would create struggles for teams in terms of quality balance. Much better in my view would be to use 5 overseas per team = 60 (10 x 6) domestic players which is similar to before the expansion with 8 teams playing 7 domestic players (56). On the flip side, IPL has slightly higher overseas quality and also pretty much full availability for them as well which is not something many leagues benefit from.

Both leagues need to consider the effects of expansion. IPL, as I say, should go 5 overseas or allow the impact player to be overseas, while PSL if as is mooted go from 6 to 8 teams, will need to understand that they will need to find minimum 14 extra domestic players and that isn’t an easy process if you want to maintain the standard of the league.

Raazi: ‘How much having high pace helps in T20, or is it just an exaggeration?’

I think it’s not quite a clear-cut argument. With an express pacer such as Ihsanullah it seems to benefit him because when he’s missed his length, he’s not been punished as much as the average bowler. Where he’s struggled more is line control.

I like him as a prospect more than another high pace bowler, Umran Malik, because Umran tends to bowl middle overs more and that’s not really of great use when constructing a roster.

You get quite a few fairly high pace bowlers who are quite one dimensional though. They often just bowl 85+ from a decent height and just bowl length or back of a length without having other weapons such as a brutal short ball, or more importantly, a Yorker. These are the ones who I think struggle to hit a high ceiling and eventually get worked out.

Bowlers who lack high pace tend to have a bit more nous, because it’s the only way to succeed. There have been plenty of slower ball merchants who have been successful at the death. Again, some get worked out - there’s always a bit of an in-nod with analysts about Tom Curran but some such as Naveen-ul-Haq continue to evolve and he’s improving continually.

Also some batters much prefer pace-on, others pace-off. I know some who literally hate facing high pace. Others will want to face it as much as possible.

So, to conclude, it’s pretty complicated! But there’s little doubt that a high pace bowler with good control, a potent Yorker and a decent slower ball will always be in the upper echelons of T20 bowlers.

Ayet: ‘Are Indian fast bowlers becoming a scarce resource - not many young quality bowlers around compared to the obvious experienced bowlers?’

It seems to be the case. It’s certainly a market dynamic I noticed when planning for the mega auction last year. However, I’d say that it’s not a rare dynamic either - certainly something that I feel is the case in the English domestic player pool as well.

Random Cricket Stats: ‘What’s gone wrong with Brook so far?’

I’m not sure really that anything has. Yes, he’s had a good few low scores but also a ton, and he’s playing for a struggling team. I think that he will really benefit from the experience (as he appeared to when he struggled in the Big Bash in his first season in that league) and he will emerge a better player in the future.

What I think has also happened is that expectations of him were too high because of his price tag at auction. The price he reached was utterly absurd (and I’m on record for saying it at the time) as a single-skilled batter who had some seeming vulnerability against high quality spin and not a huge body of evidence that he’s done well in other T20 overseas leagues.

The irony is that unless he produces a fair few runs in the remainder of this season, he’ll probably get released and be able to be bought back cheaper as a ‘distressed asset’ when he should actually be a better player for the experience.

Silva: ‘How many [wins] do you think a team will need to qualify for the play-offs?’

Minimum 8 wins with a positive net run rate. The table is pretty congested so I don’t think 9 wins will be needed unless a team has a poor NRR (such as Mumbai, who may need to go 5-1 in their last six matches to qualify).

Virinder: ‘How would you rate the performance for the first half of the IPL as the teams that are defending are winning and teams should know that wickets should start to get two-paced. Shouldn’t they start to bat first and set the tone of the match?’

Definitely numbers this season suggest that teams batting first have had far more success than in recent years. However, I think a lot has to do with the impact sub rule, allowing teams to structure up with an extra batter when batting first and then subbing on a bowler.

This means that the top order batters can go stronger earlier in their innings knowing that they have a safety net in case they lose a few early wickets, and I think the impact sub rule has been a good leveller, somewhat negating the traditional chasing bias.

Not the zen guy: ‘Are SRH the perfect team for King Legend?’

For those who are unaware, the question focuses on KL Rahul. It looks like KL is unwilling to change his batting style to be higher intent, so for him to be an asset to teams, he needs to be incorporated in a team with an extremely strong bowling attack - that way he doesn’t have to hit at a high strike rate batting first because lower scores can be defended, and he’s unlikely to have to chase big targets when batting second.

Gurjot: ‘How to convince Hardik to stop coming in at 3 and ruin his talent?’

I think this is a harsh question. Hardik has really impressed me with his captaincy of Gujarat and he’s clearly been keen to take on extra responsibility. Because they have other strong finishers, there’s not such a need for him to play that role, and he’s clearly identified a role for him in the team which he thinks they will benefit from.

Felice: ‘Would like to know whether, if two players have the same average (ie 30) and same strike rate (ie 150) but one player essentially scores all this runs in one match and the other the same number of runs in each match, which is more helpful for the team in T20?

I think a lot depends on who the other players in their team are before you can definitively decide. If you have a team of consistent players, then having the x-factor of a hero/zero performer could be really useful. The reverse argument also applies.

Ultimately, if a batter wins two matches virtually single-handedly in a T20 tournament then you’d probably take that, but I’d also pay good money (as would anyone!) for a batter who could score at 30/150 on a consistent basis. Probably a nice problem for any team to have!