IPL< – >Cricket formats
The third season of ipl has started. Its bigger than first two ipls. IPL format has proved to be hit in the last two seasons. Even when there were serious concerns when IPL was shifted last year to South Africa. IPL proved its worldwide popularity by filling the stadiums even there.
I personally am not so much a cricket purist who sees ipl as destructing test cricket. With the rise of twenty-twenty format there has been ongoing tussle between cricket experts and public whether it is destroying test cricket. I personally am not a fan of any format of cricket. Infact i believe that twenty-twenty or one day or test cricket. All the formats has some serious deficiencies.
I believe that ideal format is one which will allow equal competition with bat and ball. Where there is value for batsman for going for their batsman for going for their shots. When there is value for bowlers for going for wickets. Where there are no redundancies in the game. Where their value for mental grit and determination. Where there is battle between mental strategies of batsman and bowlers. And finally ofcoure where there are lot of four and sixes.
Format | bat vs ball | redundany |value for mental grit | mental games| value for (4s , 6s)
ODI | +bat | little bit| high | average | low
20-20 | ++bat |no | no | no | high
tests | =(suspect)| less | very h | high | almost nothing
I love cricket but personally am a fan of format of tennis. Though i have never played tennis myself. Tennis games are also long but their is value for shot at every point. You can just forget past, have to make your best shot to win the point. While in cricket batsman main focus is not throwing wicket away. Cricket has like a constrain on lenght of the game. However handsomely one team outplays other team it is very rare to see the game finishing before ¾ of the maximum time. In mathematical terms correlation of length of the game to lopsideness of game is much larger in tennis. Hence a very good game of tennis can run for over 5 hours while a lopsided game can finish in 80 minutes.
But there is one speciality of cricket which makes it quite distinct from other major sports of the world. In cricket when batsman plays a ball he has to consider not only the merit of the ball. But he has to take into account the current required run rate. He has to consider if he rotate the strike how much run his partner will make. He has to consider if he gets out how much run his team mates are expected to make. So a batsman has to consistently estimate how much run he wants from an over, depending on that he decides how much risk he can afford to take. So in financial jargon a batsman has to consistently estimate his require returns based on expected returns of his team mates. Based on his required return and his own expected return batsman has to consistently decide how much risk that he is willing to take.
I personally am not so much a cricket purist who sees ipl as destructing test cricket. With the rise of twenty-twenty format there has been ongoing tussle between cricket experts and public whether it is destroying test cricket. I personally am not a fan of any format of cricket. Infact i believe that twenty-twenty or one day or test cricket. All the formats has some serious deficiencies.
I believe that ideal format is one which will allow equal competition with bat and ball. Where there is value for batsman for going for their batsman for going for their shots. When there is value for bowlers for going for wickets. Where there are no redundancies in the game. Where their value for mental grit and determination. Where there is battle between mental strategies of batsman and bowlers. And finally ofcoure where there are lot of four and sixes.
Format | bat vs ball | redundany |value for mental grit | mental games| value for (4s , 6s)
ODI | +bat | little bit| high | average | low
20-20 | ++bat |no | no | no | high
tests | =(suspect)| less | very h | high | almost nothing
I love cricket but personally am a fan of format of tennis. Though i have never played tennis myself. Tennis games are also long but their is value for shot at every point. You can just forget past, have to make your best shot to win the point. While in cricket batsman main focus is not throwing wicket away. Cricket has like a constrain on lenght of the game. However handsomely one team outplays other team it is very rare to see the game finishing before ¾ of the maximum time. In mathematical terms correlation of length of the game to lopsideness of game is much larger in tennis. Hence a very good game of tennis can run for over 5 hours while a lopsided game can finish in 80 minutes.
But there is one speciality of cricket which makes it quite distinct from other major sports of the world. In cricket when batsman plays a ball he has to consider not only the merit of the ball. But he has to take into account the current required run rate. He has to consider if he rotate the strike how much run his partner will make. He has to consider if he gets out how much run his team mates are expected to make. So a batsman has to consistently estimate how much run he wants from an over, depending on that he decides how much risk he can afford to take. So in financial jargon a batsman has to consistently estimate his require returns based on expected returns of his team mates. Based on his required return and his own expected return batsman has to consistently decide how much risk that he is willing to take.
.png)
Comments
Post a Comment