Excellent analysis. I guess the spotlight is on VK because:-
- He is currently the best all format batsman in the world today with an amazing batting averages across all formats.
- RCB's dismal IPL performances.
- The lack of ICC WT20 silverware in team India's trophy cabinet since 2007.
- Finally average is an obsolete metric for T20, and increasingly overall strike rate could be as well.
I suspect if you compare VK to other such anchors he will be ahead. I think the real question is do anchors like VK need to ( if already not ) train differently to go ballistic in the first 20 balls within the first 10 overs- especially on flat belters. Alternatively, anchors could be utilized to set up par scores by coming down the order if the designated power hitter(s) have failed at the top.
To those interested I would highly recommend reading "Cricket 2.0" to understand how and why T20 is different from ODIs. Power hitting is indeed the future of the game.
For example notice the 2016 ICC WT20 Semi India vs West Indies- here VK actually played incredibly well. But again he scored 50 off 33 ( SR 151) then next 39 runs came of 15 balls ( 200+ strike rate). I am absolutely nit picking but he could have taken bigger risks in his first 30 balls especially with Rahane struggling at the other end. Rahane's was a joke of an innings 40 ( 35) with just 2 fours tells you that he scored 32 off 33 in 1/2/3s. Basically ate up 29% of the balls to score only 20% of team runs with the team's REAL power hitters NOT even getting to bat. A clear case of anchoring gone horribly wrong. I know this was an extreme example :-) but would love to understand anchoring in T20 if it exists. Can it afford to?
Why is Kohli considered an anchor but players like Rohit and Dhawan are not? Kohli is quite clearly the best Indian batsman ever in t20 so far and has many proven international performances. Pant has terrible stats in international and Kohli actually has a higher t20 SR than most other Indian batsman despite being an anchor.
I sense the reason KK and upto an extent you have angered the fans is the singling out of Kohli, rather than all anchors. You both agree that Kohli is exceptional at being an anchor, but the role of anchor itself is a dying one. I agree with that.
How about
1. Doing a full analysis of all such anchors?
2. Testing the hypothesis of anchors enabling the Russels and Pants to go wild. Do RCB lose more wickets per match than the average team?
3. Are anchors similarly bad while chasing or is it a first innings phenomenon?
4. Identifying the current limit on maximum strike rate without losing too many wickets. There is likely an inverse relation between strike rate and number of balls faced. What is the ideal strike rate where a batsman faces 17 balls, to be down by 7 wickets by end of the innings. How worse are anchors at that?
This has been at the back of mind for some time now. I am mulling over this to gradually construct a method to isolate the effects of anchors. It's tough to disentangle the effects of slow pitches and other factors on individual innings, but I'm getting to it.
Excellent analysis. I guess the spotlight is on VK because:-
- He is currently the best all format batsman in the world today with an amazing batting averages across all formats.
- RCB's dismal IPL performances.
- The lack of ICC WT20 silverware in team India's trophy cabinet since 2007.
- Finally average is an obsolete metric for T20, and increasingly overall strike rate could be as well.
I suspect if you compare VK to other such anchors he will be ahead. I think the real question is do anchors like VK need to ( if already not ) train differently to go ballistic in the first 20 balls within the first 10 overs- especially on flat belters. Alternatively, anchors could be utilized to set up par scores by coming down the order if the designated power hitter(s) have failed at the top.
To those interested I would highly recommend reading "Cricket 2.0" to understand how and why T20 is different from ODIs. Power hitting is indeed the future of the game.
For example notice the 2016 ICC WT20 Semi India vs West Indies- here VK actually played incredibly well. But again he scored 50 off 33 ( SR 151) then next 39 runs came of 15 balls ( 200+ strike rate). I am absolutely nit picking but he could have taken bigger risks in his first 30 balls especially with Rahane struggling at the other end. Rahane's was a joke of an innings 40 ( 35) with just 2 fours tells you that he scored 32 off 33 in 1/2/3s. Basically ate up 29% of the balls to score only 20% of team runs with the team's REAL power hitters NOT even getting to bat. A clear case of anchoring gone horribly wrong. I know this was an extreme example :-) but would love to understand anchoring in T20 if it exists. Can it afford to?
Why is Kohli considered an anchor but players like Rohit and Dhawan are not? Kohli is quite clearly the best Indian batsman ever in t20 so far and has many proven international performances. Pant has terrible stats in international and Kohli actually has a higher t20 SR than most other Indian batsman despite being an anchor.
I sense the reason KK and upto an extent you have angered the fans is the singling out of Kohli, rather than all anchors. You both agree that Kohli is exceptional at being an anchor, but the role of anchor itself is a dying one. I agree with that.
How about
1. Doing a full analysis of all such anchors?
2. Testing the hypothesis of anchors enabling the Russels and Pants to go wild. Do RCB lose more wickets per match than the average team?
3. Are anchors similarly bad while chasing or is it a first innings phenomenon?
4. Identifying the current limit on maximum strike rate without losing too many wickets. There is likely an inverse relation between strike rate and number of balls faced. What is the ideal strike rate where a batsman faces 17 balls, to be down by 7 wickets by end of the innings. How worse are anchors at that?
Many thanks for the suggestions!
This has been at the back of mind for some time now. I am mulling over this to gradually construct a method to isolate the effects of anchors. It's tough to disentangle the effects of slow pitches and other factors on individual innings, but I'm getting to it.