How the PowerPlay has changed ODIs

The batting Powerplay, ODI’s latest feature, has been a fervently debated topic over the last months, now that Cricinfo has done the heavy lifting, I thought I’d put my spin on things. 50-over cricket is a batsman’s game.

Bowlers are often relegated to being a vehicle to deliver the ball as it is the fours and sixes that the crowds want to see more than the slower-balls and bouncers.

And as such, the rules have been adapted to suit.

The introduction of the batting powerplay a little over a year ago was meant to provide batting sides with one thing: an impetus to attack at a time of their choosing. But it has had unforeseen side-effects, the main one being the headaches on deciding when that time should be.

According to the stats, Zimbabwe have been the most effective team using the BaPP, but let’s disregard them for this exercise, as the vast majority of their 35 ODIs since October 2008 have been against Bangladesh, Kenya and Ireland.

Australia has averaged the most with the bat (29.86), with India not far behind (29.75), while England (19.59) and Sri Lanka (19.54) bring up the rear.

Bowling during the BaPP has even more widespread statistical anamolies.

Pakistan have been the most economical (6.48) while the Windies have gone for the most (8.28 an over). As far as averages go, India leads the pack (16.80) while New Zealand is by far the worst (43.28).

Now with the stats out of the way, let’s consider the X factor.

The game situation …

For this point alone I have criticised Ricky Ponting on many occasions, Australia might lead the batting averages in the BaPP but that is more down to individual players batting well than good tactics in my opinion.

Of all the teams, Australia has used the highest percentage of their BaPP’s in the final 10 overs with 79.17% and the least during overs 25-29, with just 12.50%.

What this tells me is that Ponting has been far too one-dimensional in using the BaPP.

He has allowed the middle overs to just roll on by and was content to pick up the singles when he should have been using it as a way to disrupt bowling plans, to force the opposing captains to bring on bowlers he wanted to save until the end, and to be a general nuisance.

That is the key.

Indeed, the Australian captain said recently that the general tactic was take the BaPP in the 43rd over, pile on the runs then, and the last couple of overs get slogged out anyway.

But what is the point of that?

In doing so, if even one wicket falls, a new batsman comes to the crease and the batting side have lost their momentum and the advantage of the BaPP becomes a disadvantage as the close-in field makes it hard for the new batsman to work himself into the game.

The BaPP should be taken at any point between overs 15-35, when two batsmen have been together at the crease for 5-6 overs.

In that time, they should have settled, and with that platform, they should try and throw a spanner in the works for the fielding side.

Captains and individuals must become more comfortable in batting as a team: Bevan, M Hussey and Gilchrist have all been excellent team players in this regard.

Any team that bats out 50 overs should not score under 300 if they learn to use the batting line-up to its fullest. Encourage some hitting, promote a M. Johnson up the order, and forget about the stats.

Cricket is about winning, not record books.