Indian Premier League (IPL)

[Kumar]

Bouncers & wide in DRS are atleast better then nonsense sub rule as it does'nt change the dynamics of the game. Sub rule is just use for entertainment, money, protect the game from being one sided by issuing a extra talent for last time in the game, only a fool will ask to put it in ICC. If it had purpose then other boards who have started experimenting their leagues before IPL should have adopted earlier.Once Kohli wanted Eliminator & Play off rule of IPL after 2019 WC defeat but it appeared to be foolish.

To tell the truth, i am not a big fan of impact player rule. I was never a fan of DH (baseball reference). So i am as conservative as it comes.

It is a serious question for BCCI. Having different rules at IPL and the ICC tournaments does have some impact. Is it all negative? Does it advance the talent level of players? Batsman now have to face primarily bowlers than bits and pieces player who can bowl a bit. Is that better gauge both the performance of batsman and bowler?

Is it possible that by not having the need for that all rounder, teams will no longer prioritize giving opportunities to all rounder who may have that promise, but has not realized it? I would anticipate that even with five full time bowlers, another player who can bowl a over or two is absolutely essential in this IPL world. Or has the pendulum so far to batsman side that part time bowlers are no longer a threat and plus, but a negative? I remember some comments from team mgmt once about how the part time bowlers are no longer having the impact

How do teams decide who to sub out? I see teams like CSK sub out Dube who can bowl if their main bowlers get hit. But they strangely seem to not even give that opportunity. He had a fantastic ranji season with ball as well. Is it because they are using analytics that clearly highlights he is such a liability on field that it overpowers any advantage he may give with the ball?

[prasen9]

You saw what happens when the dibbly dobblies get the ball. Pant hit every ball in Venkatesh Iyer's over to the boundary. These folks have no control, no guile, not much except maybe in England where the weather does the job for them, etc. 28 runs in the over. Iyer never went back to him correctly. They are not here to run a charity.

I really don't like allrounders. They really take up positions in a team and most of them cannot get into the team either as bowlers or batters. In tests, we have had great allrounders while playing at home. I don't like them per se because they bring the quality of the game down. Except if they are an Imran Khan or a Jadeja in the late years who would walk into the side either as a batter or a bowler (the latter in India only as a bowler). Stokes played as a pure bat. He would struggle to play as a pure bowler though in some cases, he may have made their team only as a bowler.

Seeing pitchers flail while batting and bring a rally down or walking a batter to get to the pitcher and strike him out by sheer speed was not fun. I, at least, did not enjoy Maninder Singh bat. Or Siraj flail with the bat. Etc. We pay money to see specialists bat and bowl. I would be fine with having a specialist batting team, and a specialist fielding and bowling team even. I would love to see 10 gun fielders with a super bowler and a super batter batting. Next over, sub the bowler out and put in another bowler. Etc. Like in the NFL. The quality of the game will be much better, imho, from a pure bowling and batting quality perspective. Imagine the NFL with a constraint that someone has to play both offense and defense. Maybe a corner back can play as a running back. And, offensive lines as defensive lines but the specialization and therefore the quality of the skill would go down. As it is with allrounders - they are poor man's batter and bowler rolled into one - not so fun to watch for me. And, logically, requiring one person to do two things is going to be almost always producing poorer results than two specialists doing that thing.

[Kumar]

And, logically, requiring one person to do two things is going to be almost always producing poorer results than two specialists doing that thing.

May be true.. but is it entertaining if u say only specialist should bat and bowl?

I think NFL the injury risk for a player playing both offense and defense is too high.

You may be right , but I think the decisions that are being made in context of game is as entertaining as the game itself. When a manager pulls a pitcher, not because he is not pitching well but he does not want to kill a rally is interesting on its own. We may talk about the brain fade from manager who made a bad decision for days after the game.. but with specialist at all positions , game would lose its inherent charm. Don’t we remember and reminisce more when a bowler does something extraordinary with a bat and takes the team to win? Would u not call that entertaining? With all specialist, game will become more monotonous

Imagine 11 super batsman playing , do we really think 11 best bowlers will have advantage over the batsman. There may never be all outs in cricket any more. U may have to tweak the rules of cricket to make it even between ball and bat

[prasen9]

If you restrict the overs to 20, then there will be more hitting. Perhaps 10-12 runs/over will be par. Fine with me.

I am not saying that there is zero entertainment value in seeing an amateur look like a fool among specialists (imagine Maninder or Siraj or Bedi batting with Tendulkar). And, yes, Shakespeare wrote Launcelot Gobbo in his play as comic relief. But, the question really is what is the overall benefit. How many Tendulkar innings do you remember vs how many rearguard action by Srinath? When it happens it is a rarity and looks awesome and people remember. But, to get that we had to sit through hours of Srinath flailing with the bat when a bowler bowls a bouncer to his throats in SENA. Or Bumrah swiping or Anderson not picking up the googly. Not very pleasant for me. My argument is not that there is zero entertainment value, but there is less entertainment value than watching a Pant bat.

[karr]

Other sports have subs as well, though you could argue that they are there for other reasons.
Soccer allows a limited # - arguably, a more physical sport given the miles that many players run. The # has changed over time from 1 to the current 5. Hockey has rolling substitution I think.
Other Sports seem to be iterating over the concept of substitution and I think Cricket too should, specifically in the shorter formats. ODIs and T20s were created to get a more diverse fan following. My wife will absolutely not follow a test match, but I can tempt her with a T20. Its important for a game to tinker with what works and doesn't. Rajkumar - yes, super subs were tried and discontinued. That's an example of attempting something and ditching it if it doesn't work out. T20s are a different format, and the current rule, imo, is working. Teams are leveraging it better in Year 2. If it continues to work well, that would be the trigger for potentially other T20 leagues to copy and for the international game to them adopt. I agree with Prasen that that BCCI should influence the ICC based on data collected from IPL last year/this year. That data could be the "impact" of the impact-sub.

Intuitively, the value of the sub, across all sports, is that it elevates the quality of play. Soccer could continue with only the original 11, but players will fall dead in the last quarter and the level of play dips. Two new strikers for a team that has to win, OR two new defensive backs for a team that needs to preserve a draw, gives additional tactical options for a manager and makes it more interesting from a fan's perspective. Like with football, basketball and every other sport that allows substitutes. All rounders seem like one of those romantic ideas that we all think we like, but no one will actually put their money on. The Venky Iyer analogy was spot on. And the beauty of Cricket is that we have different formats. So we always Test matches for the purist form, and I absolutely love Tests. Keep it that way. Iterate with T20s, take the best and then iterate with ODIs. And for the really good wins, consider it for Tests. That will elevate the sport, get more fans in, and allow players with exceptional skills to showcase them.

[Atithee]

Karr, what a refreshing change! Please post more often.

[Rajkumar Sharma]

I dont think Venky Iyer is the only pace bowling allrounder who plays T20. There are Russells, Holders, Rutherfords, Stoinis, Green whose dual services are needed for the team. IPL is domestic tournament and there is no where mentioned skills could'nt be tried, so if Venky & Dube goes for run that does'nt mean they should'nt be allowed to ball again. Its harsh that Allrounders future in IPL are decided based on impact player.

[prasen9]

super subs were tried and discontinued. That's an example of attempting something and ditching it if it doesn't work out.

Do we really know it did not work out. It seemed someone implemented it and then someone else just came and dismantled it. Can anyone provide any evidence as to why it did not work out except there was no administrator willing to continue it?

All rounders seem like one of those romantic ideas that we all think we like, but no one will actually put their money on.

Putting the hat on the other side, there is value for multi-talented athletes. Decathalon is an example. The quality of sprints, long jumps, etc. are poorer although in some cases very close to say Olympic standard. We marvel at how good someone is to be reasonable in multiple aspects. However, I think the benefits of wow-he/she-can-both-bat-and-ball is imho lower than seeing the ridiculous feat of Siraj flailing with the bat or an Iyer bowl an over in a competitive game. That is not quality. Nor much entertainment. Seeing someone fail and laugh at them or smirk is not quality entertainment.

The Venky Iyer analogy was spot on. And the beauty of Cricket is that we have different formats. So we always Test matches for the purist form, and I absolutely love Tests. Keep it that way. Iterate with T20s, take the best and then iterate with ODIs. And for the really good wins, consider it for Tests. That will elevate the sport, get more fans in, and allow players with exceptional skills to showcase them.

Well, if someone says that they are conservative or want things like old times and enjoys horse buggies, then it is their choice. Nothing to argue. But, substitutes will elevate the game in test matches too especially given that the conditions vary a lot. I have seen teams rue the fact that they chose only two pace bowlers and were asked to bowl first on what turned out to be assisting pacers because rain came after an hour of the toss. Or the pitch is unexpectedly swinging and the spinners were getting no purchase. Having subs in tests will mean that you can play as many pacers when the conditions favor and if they are not doing well, then you can replace them. Leave aside the haggardly spectacle of seeing an injured batter running while limping. At least for visible bodily injuries in the game, there should be substitutes allowed. Case in point is the concussion sub in test matches. That did nothing to kill the game and instead has worked very well. If we get the traditionalists to think a bit rationally and accept that change may not always be bad, then we will see that substitutes will improve the test match quality much more than having bits and pieces players do their gig.

[prasen9]

Russell was hit too. His bowling is no great shakes. To the extent that Shreyas decided to gamble and go with the specialist bowlers because he guessed correctly that if he got a wicket or two then Punjab would not last the full quota of overs. He kept only one over of Starc just in case. He only brought back Russell for the second last over or so when he absolutely had to with Ishant Sharma and Nortje or whoever was playing looking liker jokers they are with the bat.

But, generally, yes, Russell is perhaps the best allrounder in the IPL at least in these three games. There are exceptions. However, that is not the point. The point is that most other players in the top say Batting Impact/Game are nowhere in the Bowling Impact/Game list. And vice-versa.

Allowing substitutes does not mean that the true allrounders like Russell will be replaced. See Shohei Ohtani in MLB. He pitches and bats. No problem. The crappy allrounders are the ones who will be substituted. If there is a genuine allrounder who holds his or her place in the XI because they are both a genuinely good batter and bowler, then a team would be an idiot to substitute them. They don't need to. The sub rule gives you the option to take a player out but does not compel you to do so. KKR never subs Russell, case in point. But, CSK subs out Dube because he cannot really bowl that well. This is exactly what we want. The junk weeded out and the quality to improve.

[Rajkumar Sharma]

Rohit Sharma is the only star, one dimmensional who is playing real T20 atleast he is not eating up balls in first 10 overs to look for his personal achievement then other one dimmensional stars. Gill, KL, Kohli, Iyer all are eyeing T20WC spot by becomming top run getters in IPL 2024, irrespective of their team result.

[prasen9]

I am very glad to see Kohli, Gill play quite well in this IPL. Rahul has been doing well too. Samson is the only keeper doing better than him.

Highest Impact (qual: 2 matches, sorted by impact/match):

Batter: Abhishek, Parag, Kohli, Samson, Gill, Dube, Pandya, Tilak, Sashank
Backup keeper: Prabhsimran (Kumar will say he does not keep, I say make him, he will be fine)

Of course, admitting that impact/match is biased towards the top-order batters because they get more chances. I have included total impact here and not tried to use batting impact only because I want the Abhishek, Parag, Dube, Pandya, Tilak, Samson's of the world to gain from their secondary skills too.

Interesting to see the junior stars Abhishek, Parag breaking out. Tilak is doing okay too. A lot of India players already in form.

Bowler: Mayank Y, Yuzi, Rana, Natarajan, Kuldeep, Bumrah, Brar, Vyshak

Not a bad crop. Interesting to see old guy Yuzi come back up. I don't know. He has failed us time and again in the big matches and series and has been expensive in LOIs. But, if the others are worse ... what do you do. I guess we select some of Kuldeep, Brar, Abhishek, Parag, etc. and move on.

[Rajkumar Sharma]

More Kohli, Gill goes for personal milestone more chance of India to loose the game, just like RCB & GT lost because of them going slow from begining. Its better not to talk about KL, even Pant will slowly & steadily progress to T20 level batting then him. Modern T20 is comming from KKR & SRH. KL, Gill, Kohli with this set of mindset will be a disaster in WC, all these players requires an aggressor at other end who will come and blast 12 ball 30 or 18 ball 50 to make their innings look like match winning.

[Rajkumar Sharma]

Ishan Kishan is scoring runs with SR of 182, Samson at SR of 164. But KL with 112 SR in first 10 over, is best keeper to go with in T20WC.. He is not even playing a one day innings.

[prasen9]

Well, this is just too much data. Actually, the huge image shows how huge Ishan Kishan is. We do not need a whole inning. We need only one ball. Ishan hit a 6. So, his SR is 600. And, Rahul played a dot ball. His SR is 0. QED. The smaller the data size the better it is for small brains that cannot understand the importance of sample size. We need to choose the smallest sample size, one ball and beat the statistic until it tells us what we want.

A terrible inning by Rahul though. In this IPL's four matches, Ishan has played much faster than Rahul overall. His average has been poor, 23 for an opener. However, Ishan also got flat wickets where teams scored over 200 multiple times. Anyway, neither have made that much impact.

[prasen9]

So, the impact scores/match (qual: 2 matches) after 4 matches (some 5) remains about the same.

Batter+batting-allrounder: Abhishek, Parag, Kohli, Sanju, Dube, Krunal, Prithvi, Sashank, Gill

Interesting to see Krunal and Prithvi move up.

Bowling: Mayank, Yuzi, Rana, Natarajan, Kuldeep, Bumrah, Brar

Rana actually played 3 matches but got injured on his shoulders and did not bowl. And, he is not a batter. So, his /match is actually obtained in 2 matches but distributed over 3. I suppose staying fit is a required skill. So, fair enough to dock him for that.