What makes our 20/20 team click ?

[Ram]

Apart from the fact it is much younger when compared to the 50 overs team , i do wonder what makes us such a good 20/20 team. I think our team chemistry has in a strange way , mixed well the requirements of the 20/20 game. We seem to have the right players coming at the right time , be it batting or bowling. Good job they kept out the Trimurti ! :two_thumbs_up:

[Yuvraj4Captaincy]

because everyone has the opportunity to be a star and no ones bigger than the game...when there are other superstars in the team, you dont feel that good abt urself i think

[yoda]

I agree it is the chemistry. Everyone understands the sense of urgency. They either keep the scoreboard ticking or get the hell out. We need to have a similar approach in the ODIs, of course extrapolated for the 50 over format. A lot of times I see that we get very complacent in ODIs and think that preserving wickets alone will win us games. It doesn't against the better teams.

[Ram]

Its not just having a team full of young , energetic and hard-hitting batsman and useful bowlers. Theres gotto be more to it than that. The current team members seem to be well informed about the art of 20/20 batting. They adapt well , whether chasing or batting first or a situation where there are lots of quick wickets.

[Bumper]

Apart from the fact it is much younger when compared to the 50 overs team , i do wonder what makes such a good one-day team. I think our team chemistry has in a strange way , mixed well the requirements of the 20/20 game. We seem to have the right players coming at the right time , be it batting or bowling. Good job they kept out the Trimurti ! :two_thumbs_up:

Our weaknesses in ODIs (leaking 8 rpo while bowling and getting bowled out for 200 in batting), are our strengths in this format. :cantstop: On a more serious note, i think the pace of this format suits us. It forces our batsmen to bludgeon the bowlers from the start. We play poorly when we pu$$y foot our way to the target. The defensive bowling tactics of the opponents also play a big role. While bowling the emphasis is not in picking wickets (which is where we struggle in ODIs), rather in containing the batsmen. Hence the diff between our bowling lineup and the ones of higher quality becomes negligible in this format. Ofcourse because we have kicked all the oldies out, our fielding, running between the wickets, catching all go up a notch, making us even better

[yoda]

I think we will win more ODIs just by being a little more aggressive at the top during powerplays.

[Predator_05]

Simple. Unlike the ODI side, these guys have made winning a habit.

[ludhianvi]

20 overs instead of 50. Less time for collapses and less time for the bowlers to be fully exposed. But hey, we are the world champions :tounge_smile:

[novpj]

Its chemistry, running between the wickets, and fielding. Did you see Gambhir and Utthappa's RBTW - now imagine Ganguly and Utthappa batting together :-) momentum killer isnt it?

[yoda]

A related question. Why does Gambhir do well in 20/20, but suck in ODIs? Playing too cautiously perhaps?

[Ram]

A related question. Why does Gambhir do well in 20/20' date=' but suck in ODIs? Playing too cautiously perhaps?[/quote'] Its just 4,5 good innings he has played. He has shown that sort of form in one-dayers before , only to peter out silently. Gambhir is that sort of player , he oscillates between mediocrity and excellence. Dont be surprised if he goes through a form slump in 20/20 too. His' is a high-risk game,all his shots have a high risk quotient. If they come off , they look good , if not he looks pathetic. I think 20/20 has given him that extra license to go after the bowling with that little bit of more mental freedom , hence taking a bit of pressure off him.

[Dravid]

I like how after every good stop other players go up to the fielder..do high fives and stuff... oldies just clap from their position..:P

[fineleg]

Gambhir is that sort of player , he oscillates between mediocrity and excellence.

Most of our players (save for a rare few) do that. Dont they? Even YS has done this sorta oscillation, Pathan has, ZK has, name the player!

[Ram]

Most of our players (save for a rare few) do that. Dont they? Even YS has done this sorta oscillation, Pathan has, ZK has, name the player!

They do , just that Gambhir can go from the sublime to the ridiculous in a matter of a couple of games. :D

[gs]

They do ' date=' just that Gambhir can go from the sublime to the ridiculous in a matter of a couple of games. :D[/quote'] That's the genius/flair/unpredictability of subcontinental cricketers!!:D

[Bumper]

Chemistry et al is not the reason, merely a byproduct of the success we've had in this format. Biggest difference, IMO, is that in this format the difference in the quality of batting, bowling lineups between the two opponents, becomes negligible. Hence Aussies look beatable more often than not. Scoring at 8 rpo for 20 overs is far easier than scoring 300 in 50 overs. If you are reduced to 30/4 in 5 overs, in T20, you will likely end up with 145 odd (7 rpo, which is decent). But from that position, more often than not, you will get bowled out for 150 in ODIs. You can make a comeback in T20 quickly, inspite of early setbacks. Its much harder to do it in a 50 over game.

[Ram]

Chemistry et al is not the reason, merely a byproduct of the success we've had in this format. Biggest difference, IMO, is that in this format the difference in the quality of batting, bowling lineups between the two opponents, becomes negligible. Hence Aussies look beatable more often than not. Scoring at 8 rpo for 20 overs is far easier than scoring 300 in 50 overs. If you are reduced to 30/4 in 5 overs, in T20, you will likely end up with 145 odd (7 rpo, which is decent). But more often than you will get bowled out for 150 in ODIs. You can make a comeback in T20 quickly, inspite of early setbacks. Its much harder to do it in a 50 over game.

Your reason is plausible enough , but isnt it the same for all teams ? I stil think its got something to do with the way our batsman are adapting well to the 20/20 requirements.

[Bumper]

Your reason is plausible enough ' date=' but isnt it the same for all teams ? I stil think its got something to do with the way our batsman are adapting well to the 20/20 requirements.[/quote'] Ofcourse we have a good team, thats why we are winning. With Uthappa, Sehwag, Yuvraj & Dhoni in our top order, we have a plethora of big hitters. But innings building is not this batting lineup's forte, which is a very important aspect of batting in ODIs. Bhajji is a classic example for the point am making about bowling. His spell, 4-0-17-1 was brilliant today (was even match winning). That spell could have been the difference between the two sides. But a 10-0-41-1 in an ODI could hardly change the game. More often than not, Bhajji goes for the E/R than wickets. He can get away with it in T20, but not in ODIs.

[MundaPakistani]

Ofcourse we have a good team' date=' thats why we are winning. With Uthappa, Sehwag, Yuvraj & Dhoni in our top order, we have a plethora of big hitters. [b']But innings building is not this batting lineup's forte, which is a very important aspect of batting in ODIs. Bhajji is a classic example for the point am making about bowling. His spell, 4-0-17-1 was brilliant today (was even match winning). That spell could have been the difference between the two sides. But a 10-0-41-1 in an ODI could hardly change the game. More often than not, Bhajji goes for the E/R than wickets. He can get away with it in T20, but not in ODIs.

i was about to say the exact same thing that may be because in 20-20 cricket there is no such thing as "middle overs" where you have to build an innings or try to take wickets.

[The Outsider]

Biggest factor lies in bowling. Not picking up wickets and bowling a strictly defensive line is not a disadvantage in T20.