The Tactics of Powerplays

[Uppercut]

So this comes up in the commentary box during every ODI series.

Captains seem to take the batting powerplay around the 38-42 over mark, or if the innings is going badly, they just take it at the end. A lot of commentators go with the idea that it should be taken when there's two set batsmen at the crease that can take advantage of it.

Personally I think the men on the ground have got this one 100% right. Taking it early is pointless, if you lose an early wicket you'll have to revert to defensive tactics and the powerplay will go to waste.

The bowling powerplay seems to have become rather set in stone. Mahela Jayawardene experimented rather successfully with taking it a bit later some of the time, but he had Murali. There aren't really any middle-overs bowlers left who you'd like to use to attack a partnership hard with the field in. I think there are a few situations where the powerplay should be delayed, but they're quite specific to the players on each side. If you set the field back for big-hitting openers then bring it in when middle-order men who like to work singles arrive at the crease, you can really mess with opposition plans.

Thoughts?

 

[Migara]

Change the rules, and force captains to complete the batting powerplay before 40th over. That will end up in about 30 overs of attacking cricket. Sides will be pressed to field five proper bowlers, or otherwise the **** 5th bowlers will bleed runs. Totals will be little lesser that this, but who cares whether it is 290 or 270? It will enhance place of the all rounders as well.

 

[Uppercut]

ODIs definitely need more complex and intricate rule changes.

 

[Jarquis]

Wasn't there talk of India taking one early against New Zealand some time in the last few years and Tendulkar and Yuvraj went nuts?
Sounds stupidly obvious but take it when it optimises your chances of winning the game, I'll need to find the match I just mentioned on Cricinfo, but if those took took 50 off the powerplay in the middle of the innings then obviously it would have given India some real momentum for the rest of their innings and those two will have been well set with New Zealand's bowlers put onto the back foot.

 

[Shri]

Wasn't there talk of India taking one early against New Zealand some time in the last few years and Tendulkar and Yuvraj went nuts?
Sounds stupidly obvious but take it when it optimises your chances of winning the game, I'll need to find the match I just mentioned on Cricinfo, but if those took took 50 off the powerplay in the middle of the innings then obviously it would have given India some real momentum for the rest of their innings and those two will have been well set with New Zealand's bowlers put onto the back foot.

3rd ODI: New Zealand v India at Christchurch, Mar 8, 2009 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

???

 

[Jarquis]

3rd ODI: New Zealand v India at Christchurch, Mar 8, 2009 | Cricket Commentary | Cricinfo.com

They actually took 69 off it, going from 121/2 after 22 to 190/2 after 27.
Can't argue too much about that.

 

[Debris]

ODIs definitely need more complex and intricate rule changes.

Yes they do. We can all use the laugh as the captains try to figure them out.

 

[Uppercut]

3rd ODI: New Zealand v India at Christchurch, Mar 8, 2009 | Cricket Commentary | Cricinfo.com

They actually took 69 off it, going from 121/2 after 22 to 190/2 after 27.
Can't argue too much about that.

Yeah, Yuvraj and Tendulkar are both much better with the field in. Using the batting powerplay with Dhoni at the crease would be a waste of the powerplay and a waste of Dhoni, the best batsman in the world at knocking the ball around with the field back.

India are a bit of a unique case, just because their batting is so, so good. I think a lot of the time if there's 20 overs gone and you're two wickets down with two hitters at the crease and some nurdlers still to come, rather than looking at taking the powerplay early, you should look at whether your batsmen are in the right order.

 

[Matt79]

Scrap them - a pointless gimic that's added nothing to the game. That said, my proposal would be to have fielding restrictions in place for the entire innings, if there were to be a change.

 

[Pothas]

Yeah never been a big fan of powerplays.

Hampshire took theirs early in the pro40 this year with Carberry and Adams in and going really well, both batsmen scored centuries but not sure how much difference it made, was a great pitch and we would have probably got a huge score anyway.

One thing that I could see as a benefit would be that taking it unusually early could make the opposition bowlers think about who to bowl instead of just turning automatically to the spinners.

 

[Scaly piscine]

It does depend on a few things as others say.

I think too much is made of how many runs are scored during the powerplay, it's how many *extra* runs are scored that is important.

If I was up against England and Yardy and Swann were choking the life out of the run-rate you'd be quite happy to bring on a powerplay during that period, get them taken off and get 6-7 an over for 5 and make things more awkward for England at the death. If you take the powerplay at the death with plenty of batting left and you score 10 an over... well you'd probably score 10 an over anyway so why bother.

I'm surprised teams don't take the batting powerplay more often immediately after the ball is changed. Particularly with batsmen in hand. I'd be tempted to take the batting powerplay before the 25 over mark if a team had a rubbish seam attack/strong spin and it was a dusty surface (a fairly frequent sub-continent scenario).

The problem I feel is batsmen simply over-attack during the powerplays. Most games I've seen you'd be lucky if the batting powerplay is worth an extra 5-10 runs. They need to look towards targeting the odd boundary not an avalanche.

 

[outbreak]

didn't NZ take there's early against india just last week in this current tri series with styris and taylor at the crease?

 

[Spark]

It does depend on a few things as others say.

I think too much is made of how many runs are scored during the powerplay, it's how many *extra* runs are scored that is important.

If I was up against England and Yardy and Swann were choking the life out of the run-rate you'd be quite happy to bring on a powerplay during that period, get them taken off and get 6-7 an over for 5 and make things more awkward for England at the death. If you take the powerplay at the death with plenty of batting left and you score 10 an over... well you'd probably score 10 an over anyway so why bother.

I'm surprised teams don't take the batting powerplay more often immediately after the ball is changed. Particularly with batsmen in hand. I'd be tempted to take the batting powerplay before the 25 over mark if a team had a rubbish seam attack/strong spin and it was a dusty surface (a fairly frequent sub-continent scenario).

The problem I feel is batsmen simply over-attack during the powerplays. Most games I've seen you'd be lucky if the batting powerplay is worth an extra 5-10 runs. They need to look towards targeting the odd boundary not an avalanche.

Agree with this. A boundary, four singles and a two is very easily achievable without too much risk and nets you 10 in the over which is basically what you want.

 

[vcs]

Yeah, Yuvraj and Tendulkar are both much better with the field in. Using the batting powerplay with Dhoni at the crease would be a waste of the powerplay and a waste of Dhoni, the best batsman in the world at knocking the ball around with the field back.

India are a bit of a unique case, just because their batting is so, so good. I think a lot of the time if there's 20 overs gone and you're two wickets down with two hitters at the crease and some nurdlers still to come, rather than looking at taking the powerplay early, you should look at whether your batsmen are in the right order.

That's an interesting point, why do you think that? Is it because you think he is good at pushing 1's and 2's or hitting boundaries and clearing the field consistently?