Essential Improvements to the Format of 20-Over Match (Cricket)

                                          Essential Improvements to the Format of 20-Over Match (Cricket)

I am not sure that a 20-over match played with a cricket ball (dimensions, weight, pattern of stitching) and a cricket bat (material shall be wood, maximum length, blade widths, blade depths, edge thickness) on a pitch and stumps adhering to the Laws of Cricket can be calledcricket. The two main responsibilities of a cricket batsman are to protect his wicket (the stumps) and score runs with a partner.

In T20I and its domestic versions T20, I am not sure any batsman worries too much about saving his wicket when it comes to scoring runs at Formula 1 pace. There are other nine batsmen in the team. This is the main reason I had ventured into suggesting certain changes (Sep. 19, 2025) in the playing and the rules, and statistical reckoning.

Here I am aiming at things more basic, the constitution of the batting and fielding sides themselves. Why eleven players to a side? Is that merely a vestige of the original game cricket? Could it be that eleven-to-a-side came out of ten-wickets-an-inning? Then, why ten wickets-an-inning?

Let us do some elementary arithmetic stuff. A test match hardly goes the full distance, even the recent nail-biting one between India and England. But, let us talk averages. The opening innings of a test match is taken to sometime after Lunch, nearer to Tea, on the second day. That is about 135 overs. The first innings of the other team may go up to soon after play starts on the 4th day (the score at the end of the third day – 350 for eight or nine wickets), say, 140 overs. To keep our calculations simple, we will take the average as 140. One wicket in 14 overs, protect his wicket against 84 balls and score runs too. We are playing a guessing gamehere, remember.

No, that did not come out right. Let us look at the One Day Internationals (ODI). Fifty overs in 3 ½ hours for, say, 8 wickets; one wicket per 6 ¼ overs. That is not too far from what I am thinking, though it is still far. 

But, look at T20 (as in IPL) and T20I (between nations). Each batsman is offered a dozen balls to whack, and his score budget is a minimum of 30 runs; isn’t that why how many times a batsman has scored 30 runs or more is taken as a relevant metric? Then, get out. Total score per innings, 300! Whoa!

The above numbers are unreal, of course. But, there is a lesson in them. Offering ten wickets per side to survive only 20 overs is an insult to cricket. This is why my opening statement cast doubts on if T20 and T20I are indeed cricket matches. If they are not, why are they being monitored by ICC (internationally), by BCCI (in India)?

OK, take T20 out of the hands of ICC and Indian cricket out of the hands of BCCI. You may as well throw a stone at a beehive and run. To mix metaphors, no one drives away their cash cow! 

Offer only six wickets per innings in a T20/T20I match. The batting team then comprises only seven batsmen. A batsman has to survive three overs and two balls. That is more like it.But with nine fielders on the prowl in the field, that is truly not an attractive offer. 

We can convince the batsmen by limiting the fielding side to eight players, including the bowler and the wicket keeper. Then, it is only six fielders in a field that subtends, say, 340o(the remaining twenty degree wedge is for the wicketkeeper and bowler to take care of, 10oeach). The fielding side do not have anything to grumble about and can be convinced.

The above leads to a team that is split into two sub-teams. This is done in NFL (National Football League in the US, which has offense, defence and special teams). Of course, in an earlier post, I took help from Major League Baseball, and that seemed to have been OK to the few readers. To the same public, taking help from NFL must not create any tension, any at all.

The underlying compulsion is that the crowds at the stadium have to stay till the end (to increase popcorn sales!). With only six fielders as opposed to the nine as at present, there would be enough gaps (particularly taking away the slip cordon) and the batsman can (almost) freely swing their bats and the ball would fly across the fence or a few stuttering bounces to it

How many ever runs the fielding side leaks, there is a better than 50-50 odds for it to recoup when it bats. This would keep the stadium crowd screwed to their seats.

I have a feeling, just a feeling, that the ritual of toss can go for a toss. The role the pitch plays will be reduced as fewer runs would be scored through running between the wickets.

It is a win-win situation for all.

Raghuram Ekambaram