Competitions 2024 IPL RDT Fantasy- RD1: Saturday 23rd March-12:30am AEST
- Thread starter Professor
- Start date
Punjab Kings have won the toss and opted to bowl
Bairstow out
Punjab Kings (Playing XI): Rilee Rossouw, Prabhsimran Singh, Sam Curran(c), Jitesh Sharma(w), Liam Livingstone, Shashank Singh, Ashutosh Sharma, Harpreet Brar, Harshal Patel, Kagiso Rabada, Arshdeep Singh
Mumbai Indians (Playing XI): Rohit Sharma, Ishan Kishan(w), Suryakumar Yadav, Tilak Varma, Hardik Pandya(c), Tim David, Romario Shepherd, Mohammad Nabi, Gerald Coetzee, Shreyas Gopal, Jasprit Bumrah
Bairstow out
Punjab Kings (Playing XI): Rilee Rossouw, Prabhsimran Singh, Sam Curran(c), Jitesh Sharma(w), Liam Livingstone, Shashank Singh, Ashutosh Sharma, Harpreet Brar, Harshal Patel, Kagiso Rabada, Arshdeep Singh
Mumbai Indians (Playing XI): Rohit Sharma, Ishan Kishan(w), Suryakumar Yadav, Tilak Varma, Hardik Pandya(c), Tim David, Romario Shepherd, Mohammad Nabi, Gerald Coetzee, Shreyas Gopal, Jasprit Bumrah
Interesting discussion going on during the call around the current state of IPL games. I haven't ever really heard the commentators ever make (maybe even be allowed to make?) this kind of critical analysis before, but they seem to be very critical of the impact player and the effect it's had on run rates and the game balance.
I do wonder who a sequence of 200+ games actually serves. There's a couple of related things I've been thinking about lately:
* Firstly, as we've observed as fantasy players, there are very few true all-rounders because the impact player means you can play an extra genuine batter. That's a key role that just isn't being prepared for, which leads me to...
* Second, it's difficult to see how it's going to help India win a major tournament. If the next T20 World Cup was played in India under these playing conditions, there's actually a very real chance Kohli wouldn't be best XI. His main strengths are completely nullified in this tournament because him batting through at 140-150 (which is historically a very good strike rate!) and picking out twos are less valuable than multiple players just swinging for the fences. Yes, he's had a personally strong tournament, but you could argue it's cost RCB at least two games.
Part of this is an aesthetic "I'd like there to still be a place in the game for that kind of player" but I think it's pragmatic too - in a World Cup situation where India doesn't have total control over pitch preparation and ground conditions, you don't want to be sidelining your most adaptable players or forcing them into the same mould as everyone else.
Hopefully this still makes sense when I read it back in the morning
I do wonder who a sequence of 200+ games actually serves. There's a couple of related things I've been thinking about lately:
* Firstly, as we've observed as fantasy players, there are very few true all-rounders because the impact player means you can play an extra genuine batter. That's a key role that just isn't being prepared for, which leads me to...
* Second, it's difficult to see how it's going to help India win a major tournament. If the next T20 World Cup was played in India under these playing conditions, there's actually a very real chance Kohli wouldn't be best XI. His main strengths are completely nullified in this tournament because him batting through at 140-150 (which is historically a very good strike rate!) and picking out twos are less valuable than multiple players just swinging for the fences. Yes, he's had a personally strong tournament, but you could argue it's cost RCB at least two games.
Part of this is an aesthetic "I'd like there to still be a place in the game for that kind of player" but I think it's pragmatic too - in a World Cup situation where India doesn't have total control over pitch preparation and ground conditions, you don't want to be sidelining your most adaptable players or forcing them into the same mould as everyone else.
Hopefully this still makes sense when I read it back in the morning
Interesting discussion going on during the call around the current state of IPL games. I haven't ever really heard the commentators ever make (maybe even be allowed to make?) this kind of critical analysis before, but they seem to be very critical of the impact player and the effect it's had on run rates and the game balance.
I do wonder who a sequence of 200+ games actually serves. There's a couple of related things I've been thinking about lately:
* Firstly, as we've observed as fantasy players, there are very few true all-rounders because the impact player means you can play an extra genuine batter. That's a key role that just isn't being prepared for, which leads me to...
* Second, it's difficult to see how it's going to help India win a major tournament. If the next T20 World Cup was played in India under these playing conditions, there's actually a very real chance Kohli wouldn't be best XI. His main strengths are completely nullified in this tournament because him batting through at 140-150 (which is historically a very good strike rate!) and picking out twos are less valuable than multiple players just swinging for the fences. Yes, he's had a personally strong tournament, but you could argue it's cost RCB at least two games.
Part of this is an aesthetic "I'd like there to still be a place in the game for that kind of player" but I think it's pragmatic too - in a World Cup situation where India doesn't have total control over pitch preparation and ground conditions, you don't want to be sidelining your most adaptable players or forcing them into the same mould as everyone else.
Hopefully this still makes sense when I read it back in the morning
I do wonder who a sequence of 200+ games actually serves. There's a couple of related things I've been thinking about lately:
* Firstly, as we've observed as fantasy players, there are very few true all-rounders because the impact player means you can play an extra genuine batter. That's a key role that just isn't being prepared for, which leads me to...
* Second, it's difficult to see how it's going to help India win a major tournament. If the next T20 World Cup was played in India under these playing conditions, there's actually a very real chance Kohli wouldn't be best XI. His main strengths are completely nullified in this tournament because him batting through at 140-150 (which is historically a very good strike rate!) and picking out twos are less valuable than multiple players just swinging for the fences. Yes, he's had a personally strong tournament, but you could argue it's cost RCB at least two games.
Part of this is an aesthetic "I'd like there to still be a place in the game for that kind of player" but I think it's pragmatic too - in a World Cup situation where India doesn't have total control over pitch preparation and ground conditions, you don't want to be sidelining your most adaptable players or forcing them into the same mould as everyone else.
Hopefully this still makes sense when I read it back in the morning
It’s good to see some more balanced commentary on the IPL.
