Fighting Zone !

Ankush wrote:Example 3 : In this match not a single indian batsmen except rohit sharma tried to settle in first and then try to free their arms. They aimed to hit big from very first ball hence they kept losing their wickets. If they had tried to settle in 1st, india would have reached closer to the target and they may have won the match also

http://www.espncricinfo.com/world-twenty20-2010/engine/match/412691.html

Check their Strike Rate of every player for Indian team and Check the Target. :O
They are playing an Anchor role only na.

They failed to score because they were not able to hit and some sort of pressure was started building..

If you keep on hitting in the beginning, then only you can survive in this format or else you can say Tata Bye Bye to T20s.

Ankush wrote:@rish even kohli and amla are anchors
do you want to say tht they are not needed in t20?

Virat Kohli has good Strike Rate in this format. :O
An Anchor is a top order batsman who plays defensively and is capable to bat for a long time during the innings. Often, he may become the top scorer of the innings. Generally, batsmen at the No. 3 or 4 position play such a role.

Kohli never plays defensively.
He is fast and used to play long innings.

Rish wrote:

Ankush wrote:Example 3 : In this match not a single indian batsmen except rohit sharma tried to settle in first and then try to free their arms. They aimed to hit big from very first ball hence they kept losing their wickets. If they had tried to settle in 1st, india would have reached closer to the target and they may have won the match also

http://www.espncricinfo.com/world-twenty20-2010/engine/match/412691.html

Check their Strike Rate of every player for Indian team and Check the Target. :O
They are playing an Anchor role only na.

They failed to score because they were not able to hit and some sort of pressure was started building..

If you keep on hitting in the beginning, then only you can survive in this format or else you can say Tata Bye Bye to T20s.

If you keep on hitting in the beginning, then only you can survive in this format or else you can say Tata Bye Bye to T20s.

Worst Statement :O

Ever saw Gayle hitting sixes in the beginning !?
He plays 4-5 overs carefully n then he goes of the kill.

It's not that you have to hit from the first ball !
Many teams play slow n safe in the first 10 overs n then go for the kill in the last 10 overs !

who says anchor need to play defensively?
the role of anchor is to create pressure on opposition by taking quick 1s and 2s which keeps the scoreboard ticking and play as per requirement of team :bitch:

AND indian players were not playing like anchors in example 3 bcz they were aiming for biggies and not rotating strike

Rish wrote:

Ankush wrote:

Saad Shafi Ahmed wrote:

Is it important that A PLAYER SHOULD PLAY ANCHOR ROLE in T20 CRICKET AS WELL ?

NOT JUST HITTING THE BALL OUT OF THE PARK BUT IS IT IMPORTANT THAT A PLAYER SHOULD PLAY ANCHOR ROLE AS WELL ?

NO it is not neccesary
In T20 , A player just have to hit ball out of the park

not at all agreed with you on this buddy. ANCHORS are not need only and only when it is SUPER OVER

No.
What if only anchors batting in T20?? :O
I completely disagree with this fact that we need Anchors in T20.

Laxman has no place in T20s and the reason is he is Anchor.

If you are a Slogger in T20, then only you can play this format. :O

Laxman has no place in T20s and the reason is he is Anchor.

:O :O
First of all understand the difference between SHEET ANCHOR and ANCHOR ROLE

i am not saying that are Sheet anchors necesarry in T20
i am asking is it necesarry to play ANCHOR Role

see Jhonson Charles of West Indies is Nick Named as mini Gayle in Windies Domestic Cricket
He is such a big hitter and when he played in T20 World Cup opening with Chris Gayle
He played an Anchor Role

Anchor doesnt only mean to play defensive mode but it means that to Rotate the Strike and hit some boundaries in some way middle and ease the pressure of BIG hitters to come after him

Jhonson Charles just did that way
He did rotated the strike and gave back to Gayle and Gayle thrashed all of the bowlers

Though Charles just got one fifty but he was the main reason that GAyle got going in T20 Wc
He kept on rotating the strike and hit some boundaries in some way and thus made sure that Runs were coming from his side too that made Chris GAyle pressure less and play his Natural HItting game

Just watch Windies Vs England Match
The way Jhonson played was just awesome

until Gayle was there he just made sure that his Score was Run a Ball and singles were coming and Gayle got going
when Gayle was OUT charles just exploded

He hit some Big hits.and so eased pressure on Samuels

Even Jayawardena does that role whenever Dilshan gets going

That is such an important Role in T20 Cricket because if Both players go for HITTING there is Chance that Wickets will fall much more easily

There are some situations where 50 odd required from 20 balls then both should Start HItting

But when u are batting or even Chasing Target

Right from the start one should play the ANCHOR ROlE which makes sure that there are Wickets in Hand and there wont be pressure on BIG hitters yet to come

CSK was soo succesful just because of this formular

whenever CSK lost wickets early they would send Badri much earlier
Raina used to act as AGGRESSOR and Badri as Anchor

Even Du Plessis was in the same manner
When Wickets were falling at one END he made sure that He didnt throw his wicket cheaply

He just kept going till 12th or 13th over and then Start the BIg Htting

Against Windies
England lost 2 Wickets for just 3 runs but England lost to Windies by very little margin
Thanks to Hales Innings
ALex Hales played the anchor Role where as Eoin Morgan really went after the bowlers

thats what meant of Anchor Role

ANCHOR Role doesnt mean SHEET ANCHOR

where he would be BIG HITTER or any other

Its important one for to play the Anchor Role when the other player is getting runs better than him and hitting it sweet better than him

Madmax wrote:

Rish wrote:

Ankush wrote:

Saad Shafi Ahmed wrote:

Is it important that A PLAYER SHOULD PLAY ANCHOR ROLE in T20 CRICKET AS WELL ?

NOT JUST HITTING THE BALL OUT OF THE PARK BUT IS IT IMPORTANT THAT A PLAYER SHOULD PLAY ANCHOR ROLE AS WELL ?

NO it is not neccesary
In T20 , A player just have to hit ball out of the park

not at all agreed with you on this buddy. ANCHORS are not need only and only when it is SUPER OVER

No.
What if only anchors batting in T20??
I completely disagree with this fact that we need Anchors in T20.

Laxman has no place in T20s and the reason is he is Anchor.

If you are a Slogger in T20, then only you can play this format.

Laxman has no place in T20s and the reason is he is Anchor.

First of all understand the difference between SHEET ANCHOR and ANCHOR ROLE

i am not saying that are Sheet anchors necesarry in T20
i am asking is it necesarry to play ANCHOR Role

see Jhonson Charles of West Indies is Nick Named as mini Gayle in Windies Domestic Cricket
He is such a big hitter and when he played in T20 World Cup opening with Chris Gayle
He played an Anchor Role

Anchor doesnt only mean to play defensive mode but it means that to Rotate the Strike and hit some boundaries in some way middle and ease the pressure of BIG hitters to come after him

Jhonson Charles just did that way
He did rotated the strike and gave back to Gayle and Gayle thrashed all of the bowlers

Though Charles just got one fifty but he was the main reason that GAyle got going in T20 Wc
He kept on rotating the strike and hit some boundaries in some way and thus made sure that Runs were coming from his side too that made Chris GAyle pressure less and play his Natural HItting game

Just watch Windies Vs England Match
The way Jhonson played was just awesome

until Gayle was there he just made sure that his Score was Run a Ball and singles were coming and Gayle got going
when Gayle was OUT charles just exploded

He hit some Big hits.and so eased pressure on Samuels

Even Jayawardena does that role whenever Dilshan gets going

That is such an important Role in T20 Cricket because if Both players go for HITTING there is Chance that Wickets will fall much more easily

There are some situations where 50 odd required from 20 balls then both should Start HItting

But when u are batting or even Chasing Target

Right from the start one should play the ANCHOR ROlE which makes sure that there are Wickets in Hand and there wont be pressure on BIG hitters yet to come

CSK was soo succesful just because of this formular

whenever CSK lost wickets early they would send Badri much earlier
Raina used to act as AGGRESSOR and Badri as Anchor

Even Du Plessis was in the same manner
When Wickets were falling at one END he made sure that He didnt throw his wicket cheaply

He just kept going till 12th or 13th over and then Start the BIg Htting

Against Windies
England lost 2 Wickets for just 3 runs but England lost to Windies by very little margin
Thanks to Hales Innings
ALex Hales played the anchor Role where as Eoin Morgan really went after the bowlers

thats what meant of Anchor Role

ANCHOR Role doesnt mean SHEET ANCHOR

where he would be BIG HITTER or any other

Its important one for to play the Anchor Role when the other player is getting runs better than him and hitting it sweet better than him

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_cricket_terms
You will get a proper meaning of Anchor if you will check this. :O
An anchor plays defensively, and is often the top scorer in the innings

Anchor is really good for ODIs and even Tests but not for T20s. :O

Charles has scored 50+ only once and his Strike Rate is brilliant. When he scored 84, even Gayle scored 50 in that match. In rest matches he score near to 20 so what's the use of Anchor role there? :O

If he would have supported Gayle by hitting sixes as well then it would have been brilliant.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/engine/match/533289.html
Gayle failed to score in this match, so as Charles. Now what he was doing in this match?? He must have batted superbly in this match but he was not aggressive at all. Gayle and Charles both failed in this match because of which they lost. :O

Jayawardene is ok according to me. He bats well and score quickly even DIlshan is suppporting him. :O
Check the same match. If your S/R is 130+ then it is ok. :O

In the finale, http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/engine/match/533298.html he batted slowly because he thought target is too less but yet again West Indies won and Sri Lanka were choked. If he would played solid innings, they would have won easily.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/engine/match/533296.html In this match also Jaya and Dilshan both batted slowly but credit goes to their bowling because of which they were able to defend such a low total.


They have loads of players who can score runs quickly but when they dont do, their team loses. :O
You cant be dependent on 1 player only. Comeon yaar... This game is of 11 players out of which, 6 batsmen are there and if only 1 will play aggressively then how you can win any match?? Everyone has to hit in his format and there is just no need to rotate the innings. This is the Myntra of T20 :- Hit out or Get out. :O

Dhoni has extra potential to hit but if he plays too defensively, you will get n no. of criticizers for Dhoni that what he was doing. :O

So I disagree with the fact that we need Anchors in such a fast format. :O

Sorry for using same smiley again and again.

lemme eat my lunch and come

then will answer to ur post

MadMax wrote:lemme eat my lunch and come

then will answer to ur post

Ohhk!! :fun:
I hope I am fighting hard.

Rish wrote:

Madmax wrote:

Rish wrote:

Ankush wrote:

Saad Shafi Ahmed wrote:

Is it important that A PLAYER SHOULD PLAY ANCHOR ROLE in T20 CRICKET AS WELL ?

NOT JUST HITTING THE BALL OUT OF THE PARK BUT IS IT IMPORTANT THAT A PLAYER SHOULD PLAY ANCHOR ROLE AS WELL ?

NO it is not neccesary
In T20 , A player just have to hit ball out of the park

not at all agreed with you on this buddy. ANCHORS are not need only and only when it is SUPER OVER

No.
What if only anchors batting in T20??
I completely disagree with this fact that we need Anchors in T20.

Laxman has no place in T20s and the reason is he is Anchor.

If you are a Slogger in T20, then only you can play this format.

Laxman has no place in T20s and the reason is he is Anchor.

First of all understand the difference between SHEET ANCHOR and ANCHOR ROLE

i am not saying that are Sheet anchors necesarry in T20
i am asking is it necesarry to play ANCHOR Role

see Jhonson Charles of West Indies is Nick Named as mini Gayle in Windies Domestic Cricket
He is such a big hitter and when he played in T20 World Cup opening with Chris Gayle
He played an Anchor Role

Anchor doesnt only mean to play defensive mode but it means that to Rotate the Strike and hit some boundaries in some way middle and ease the pressure of BIG hitters to come after him

Jhonson Charles just did that way
He did rotated the strike and gave back to Gayle and Gayle thrashed all of the bowlers

Though Charles just got one fifty but he was the main reason that GAyle got going in T20 Wc
He kept on rotating the strike and hit some boundaries in some way and thus made sure that Runs were coming from his side too that made Chris GAyle pressure less and play his Natural HItting game

Just watch Windies Vs England Match
The way Jhonson played was just awesome

until Gayle was there he just made sure that his Score was Run a Ball and singles were coming and Gayle got going
when Gayle was OUT charles just exploded

He hit some Big hits.and so eased pressure on Samuels

Even Jayawardena does that role whenever Dilshan gets going

That is such an important Role in T20 Cricket because if Both players go for HITTING there is Chance that Wickets will fall much more easily

There are some situations where 50 odd required from 20 balls then both should Start HItting

But when u are batting or even Chasing Target

Right from the start one should play the ANCHOR ROlE which makes sure that there are Wickets in Hand and there wont be pressure on BIG hitters yet to come

CSK was soo succesful just because of this formular

whenever CSK lost wickets early they would send Badri much earlier
Raina used to act as AGGRESSOR and Badri as Anchor

Even Du Plessis was in the same manner
When Wickets were falling at one END he made sure that He didnt throw his wicket cheaply

He just kept going till 12th or 13th over and then Start the BIg Htting

Against Windies
England lost 2 Wickets for just 3 runs but England lost to Windies by very little margin
Thanks to Hales Innings
ALex Hales played the anchor Role where as Eoin Morgan really went after the bowlers

thats what meant of Anchor Role

ANCHOR Role doesnt mean SHEET ANCHOR

where he would be BIG HITTER or any other

Its important one for to play the Anchor Role when the other player is getting runs better than him and hitting it sweet better than him

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_cricket_terms
You will get a proper meaning of Anchor if you will check this. :O
An anchor plays defensively, and is often the top scorer in the innings

Anchor is really good for ODIs and even Tests but not for T20s. :O

Charles has scored 50+ only once and his Strike Rate is brilliant. When he scored 84, even Gayle scored 50 in that match. In rest matches he score near to 20 so what's the use of Anchor role there? :O

If he would have supported Gayle by hitting sixes as well then it would have been brilliant.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/engine/match/533289.html
Gayle failed to score in this match, so as Charles. Now what he was doing in this match?? He must have batted superbly in this match but he was not aggressive at all. Gayle and Charles both failed in this match because of which they lost. :O

Jayawardene is ok according to me. He bats well and score quickly even DIlshan is suppporting him. :O
Check the same match. If your S/R is 130+ then it is ok. :O

In the finale, http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/engine/match/533298.html he batted slowly because he thought target is too less but yet again West Indies won and Sri Lanka were choked. If he would played solid innings, they would have won easily.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/engine/match/533296.html In this match also Jaya and Dilshan both batted slowly but credit goes to their bowling because of which they were able to defend such a low total.


They have loads of players who can score runs quickly but when they dont do, their team loses. :O
You cant be dependent on 1 player only. Comeon yaar... This game is of 11 players out of which, 6 batsmen are there and if only 1 will play aggressively then how you can win any match?? Everyone has to hit in his format and there is just no need to rotate the innings. This is the Myntra of T20 :- Hit out or Get out. :O

Dhoni has extra potential to hit but if he plays too defensively, you will get n no. of criticizers for Dhoni that what he was doing. :O

So I disagree with the fact that we need Anchors in such a fast format. :O

Yes Charles did fail in other matches i agree to that
But in most of the Matches Charles scored 15 to 20 but What about Gayle ?
Gayle scored over 30 and even if Gayle scored 20 odd he scored in about 10-15 balls

if Charles also went to big hitting then he would have dismissed even before and that builds pressure on GAYLE

Whenever West Indies got some great starts Charles played an ANCHOR ROLE

ANCHOR doesnt mean Defensive player
i am saying ANCHOR ROLE that means as per modern era ANCHOR means who takes 1s and 2s and hits boundaries in middle too (as per T20 is Concerned)

and Guys like Jhonson Charles,Jayawardena,Virat Kohli,Badrinath,Ambati Rayudu etc are all anchors

I hope u saw match of mumbai indians when Pollard and Rayudu added 80 odd runs to 6th wicket

Then Rayudu played an anchor role
He made sure that his score was run a ball and hit some boundaries as well Pollard being an aggressor

You need this kinda stuff in T20 to build the innings

While Batting 1st

If u have two openers one being aggressor and other being Anchor helps u a lot Just as Windies had in T20 WC
At one side the ANCHOR keeps rotating the strike and gets the odd boundary and eases pressure on Aggressor and makes sure that Scoreboard is ticking
and aggressor plays his natural game..so that there are wickets left in hand for the Death overs and no pressure on BIG HITTERS coming next

India have same kind of openers but Sehwag always failed
If gambhir and sehwag had succeded in this way then India could have put on a Brilliant Performance

While Batting 2nd
Even in batting 2nd one has to play the ANCHOR ROLE because if both goes for hitting then there are lot mre chances to lose wickets but at end One keeps rotating the strike and other goes for the KILL that suits better so that even if the aggresor loses his wicket the ANCHOR will be remained UNBEATEN and then he can go for BIG HITTIng as he is Set Batsman

Jayawardena did a right job playing Slow innings in Finale
The Target was just 138
and Dilshan was dismissed so early
that made Jayawardena bat Sensibly and build a partnership with Sangakkara because SL were dependent on TOP 3 batsman sanga,Dilshan and Mahela

So Dilshan being dismissed they both played slowly and put on a partnership and then looked for hitting

If Mahela also went for hitting then he would hardly get 3 or 4 boundaries and then ?? OUT
He did the right job by keeping he scoreboard ticking and ensured that they built a partnership

The moment he was there SL were going smoothly as they have FIRE POWER in their dugout for the death overs

once mahela gone thats it the team Collapsed..

CSK were soo succesful just because of this strategy
Badri being ANCHOR and Raina being aggressor

Even in IPL final
http://www.espncricinfo.com/indian-premier-league-2012/engine/match/548381.html

Bisla took on the bowlers and went for big hitting where as Kallis remained as an ANCHOR and gave strike back to Bisla and got some odd boundaries

if Kallis went for the KILl right from start then what if he was dismissed for 30 odd runs ? then CSK would have won the match easily
But he didnt do so and remained CALM till Bisla got out and the moment Bisla got out he started to go after bowlers because he was the SET batsman

thats what more important in any form of Cricket

u need to build the partnership and make sure that even if one wicket falls u have SET batsman at the other end to carry on

and in this match another example

http://www.espncricinfo.com/indian-premier-league-2012/engine/match/548324.html

Rahane was bit aggressive using the FIELD restrictions
Dravid played good innings by supporting him

He remained as an ANCHOR and made sure no wickets fell

He and Rahane put on 62 Runs for the First wicket in ten overs

Then Dravid got out and rahane was the set batsman
then RAHANE became even more aggressive and with BIG HITTER owaish Shah with him they both murdered the bowlers of RCB

If in case Dravid went for the hitting at start and thrown his wicket away then Owaish Shah would have been under pressure and even Rahane

thats the thing with ANCHOR ROLE in T20 Cricket

one being the aggressor the other guy has to support him by taking 1s and 2s and getting the odd boundary and not letting him alone do the work and not throwing his wicket by going for KILL right from Start

I am just going to say a couple of lines:

Yes, T20 is a hitter's game, but when the so called "superstar sloggers" of the team fail, then who saves the team?
The Sheet Anchors do so, who slowly build their innings under pressure and take their team to a good total.

So yes, I think Sheet ANchor role is necessary in T20 cricket.

Anurag wrote:I am just going to say a couple of lines:

Yes, T20 is a hitter's game, but when the so called "superstar sloggers" of the team fail, then who saves the team?
The Sheet Anchors do so, who slowly build their innings under pressure and take their team to a good total.

So yes, I think Sheet ANchor role is necessary in T20 cricket.

Right !!

Yet another point that proves that ANCHORS are really important in Hitters game as well :d

Yes Charles did fail in other matches i agree to that
But in most of the Matches Charles scored 15 to 20 but What about Gayle ?
Gayle scored over 30 and even if Gayle scored 20 odd he scored in about 10-15 balls

if Charles also went to big hitting then he would have dismissed even before and that builds pressure on GAYLE

Whenever West Indies got some great starts Charles played an ANCHOR ROLE

ANCHOR doesnt mean Defensive player
i am saying ANCHOR ROLE that means as per modern era ANCHOR means who
takes 1s and 2s and hits boundaries in middle too (as per T20 is
Concerned)

If Charles also went to big hitting, then he would have dismissed even before???
LOL!! :O
He has scored near to 10s and 20s only. :O

He scored 87 aggressively and that should be the aim for every player in this short format. :O
Gayle is that kind of player who wont stop and that's why he is the most successful player in this format. Even Warner and Mcca are best players in this format because they only want to hit biggies in this format.

Charles is not that good player according to me so his Anchor support is not enough for this kind of format.

and Guys like Jhonson Charles,Jayawardena,Virat Kohli,Badrinath,Ambati Rayudu etc are all anchors

I hope u saw match of mumbai indians when Pollard and Rayudu added 80 odd runs to 6th wicket

Then Rayudu played an anchor role
He made sure that his score was run a ball and hit some boundaries as well Pollard being an aggressor

You need this kinda stuff in T20 to build the innings

While Batting 1st

If u have two openers one being aggressor and other being Anchor helps u a lot Just as Windies had in T20 WC
At one side the ANCHOR keeps rotating the strike and gets the odd boundary and eases pressure on Aggressor and makes sure that Scoreboard is ticking
and aggressor plays his natural game..so that there are wickets left in hand for the Death overs and no pressure on BIG HITTERS coming next

India have same kind of openers but Sehwag always failed
If gambhir and sehwag had succeded in this way then India could have put on a Brilliant Performance

Kohli is not anchor. :O
He always play aggressively even if it is ODIs. He is unstoppable and always hit when needed. He never rotates the strike according to me.. :O

Please give me that Match link of Mumbai Indians one so that I can talk about that even in better way..

Okk to some extent I agree that Anchor is ok if you have a good slogger on other side but what if you dont have a good slogger on other side??
At times even Slogger fails to score, then anchor must perform na??
If he continue batting like that then you cant expect a good score to defend. :O

While Batting 2nd
Even in batting 2nd one has to play the ANCHOR ROLE because if both goes for hitting then there are lot mre chances to lose wickets but at end One keeps rotating the strike and other goes for the KILL that suits better so that even if the aggresor loses his wicket the ANCHOR will be remained UNBEATEN and then he can go for BIG HITTIng as he is Set Batsman

Jayawardena did a right job playing Slow innings in Finale
The Target was just 138
and Dilshan was dismissed so early
that made Jayawardena bat Sensibly and build a partnership with Sangakkara because SL were dependent on TOP 3 batsman sanga,Dilshan and Mahela

So Dilshan being dismissed they both played slowly and put on a partnership and then looked for hitting

If Mahela also went for hitting then he would hardly get 3 or 4 boundaries and then ?? OUT
He did the right job by keeping he scoreboard ticking and ensured that they built a partnership

The moment he was there SL were going smoothly as they have FIRE POWER in their dugout for the death overs

once mahela gone thats it the team Collapsed..

Jayawardene must have fired if he saw that no 1 is hitting. :O Sri Lanka were over-confident because of which they failed to even score 132. How he can play slowly even if he know that they are losing their path to win the cup?

what nonsense is that???


If he would have batted aggressively, we might have seen new champs.

if he wud have get 3-4 boundaries, the middle order and lower order would have got singles because of which they would have won. :O

CSK were soo succesful just because of this strategy
Badri being ANCHOR and Raina being aggressor

Even in IPL final
http://www.espncricinfo.com/indian-premier-league-2012/engine/match/548381.html

Bisla took on the bowlers and went for big hitting where as Kallis remained as an ANCHOR and gave strike back to Bisla and got some odd boundaries

if Kallis went for the KILl right from start then what if he was dismissed for 30 odd runs ? then CSK would have won the match easily
But he didnt do so and remained CALM till Bisla got out and the moment Bisla got out he started to go after bowlers because he was the SET batsman

thats what more important in any form of Cricket

u need to build the partnership and make sure that even if one wicket falls u have SET batsman at the other end to carry on

and in this match another example

http://www.espncricinfo.com/indian-premier-league-2012/engine/match/548324.html

Rahane was bit aggressive using the FIELD restrictions
Dravid played good innings by supporting him

He remained as an ANCHOR and made sure no wickets fell

He and Rahane put on 62 Runs for the First wicket in ten overs

Then Dravid got out and rahane was the set batsman
then RAHANE became even more aggressive and with BIG HITTER owaish Shah with him they both murdered the bowlers of RCB

If in case Dravid went for the hitting at start and thrown his wicket away then Owais Shah would have been under pressure and even Rahane

thats the thing with ANCHOR ROLE in T20 Cricket

IPL Final was too close. :O
Kallis was not firing because he was feeling restless but then also he batted aggressively (Check his strike rate). The way he batted was sufficient and you cant say that he batted like an anchor because anchor used to bat defensively (Anchor means to be the highest scorer of that match by batting defensively) If he would have batted even more slowly, CSK might have won that match. :O So Kallis did a brilliant job by playing his own innings as Slogger and not Anchor. :O


one being the aggressor the other guy has to support him by taking 1s and 2s and getting the odd boundary and not letting him alone do the work and not throwing his wicket by going for KILL right from Start



A true player never feel the pressure if his team mate loses his wicket. :O Instead he gets more power which means more responsibility. If Dravid would have batted aggressively as well, then they would have scored even 210+. :O

Shah and Rahane both batted aggressively no doubt. :O
What if Rahane would have batted slowly or would have lost his wicket in the beginning?

Definitely RR would have lost that match.

You gonna have to agree on that point that this is not Anchors game. :O
You just need sloggers who need to hit well if they want their team to win this with no problems.

Hit Out or Get Out!
Thnx!

5th Topic

5.Is it important that A PLAYER SHOULD PLAY ANCHOR ROLE in T20 CRICKET AS WELL ?

NOT JUST HITTING THE BALL OUT OF THE PARK BUT IS IT IMPORTANT THAT A PLAYER SHOULD PLAY ANCHOR ROLE AS WELL ?

Well being an anchor is also important

COnsider a situation:
Team batting is 20/4...if the new batsman is a slogger,is it fine to try 4 6 everyball??
In t20,mercurial players r the best

Eg:Mike Hussey

Rish wrote:

Yes Charles did fail in other matches i agree to that
But in most of the Matches Charles scored 15 to 20 but What about Gayle ?
Gayle scored over 30 and even if Gayle scored 20 odd he scored in about 10-15 balls

if Charles also went to big hitting then he would have dismissed even before and that builds pressure on GAYLE

Whenever West Indies got some great starts Charles played an ANCHOR ROLE

ANCHOR doesnt mean Defensive player
i am saying ANCHOR ROLE that means as per modern era ANCHOR means who
takes 1s and 2s and hits boundaries in middle too (as per T20 is
Concerned)

If Charles also went to big hitting, then he would have dismissed even before???
LOL!! :O
He has scored near to 10s and 20s only. :O

He scored 87 aggressively and that should be the aim for every player in this short format. :O
Gayle is that kind of player who wont stop and that's why he is the most successful player in this format. Even Warner and Mcca are best players in this format because they only want to hit biggies in this format.

Charles is not that good player according to me so his Anchor support is not enough for this kind of format.

and Guys like Jhonson Charles,Jayawardena,Virat Kohli,Badrinath,Ambati Rayudu etc are all anchors

I hope u saw match of mumbai indians when Pollard and Rayudu added 80 odd runs to 6th wicket

Then Rayudu played an anchor role
He made sure that his score was run a ball and hit some boundaries as well Pollard being an aggressor

You need this kinda stuff in T20 to build the innings

While Batting 1st

If u have two openers one being aggressor and other being Anchor helps u a lot Just as Windies had in T20 WC
At one side the ANCHOR keeps rotating the strike and gets the odd boundary and eases pressure on Aggressor and makes sure that Scoreboard is ticking
and aggressor plays his natural game..so that there are wickets left in hand for the Death overs and no pressure on BIG HITTERS coming next

India have same kind of openers but Sehwag always failed
If gambhir and sehwag had succeded in this way then India could have put on a Brilliant Performance

Kohli is not anchor. :O
He always play aggressively even if it is ODIs. He is unstoppable and always hit when needed. He never rotates the strike according to me.. :O

Please give me that Match link of Mumbai Indians one so that I can talk about that even in better way..

Okk to some extent I agree that Anchor is ok if you have a good slogger on other side but what if you dont have a good slogger on other side??
At times even Slogger fails to score, then anchor must perform na??
If he continue batting like that then you cant expect a good score to defend. :O

While Batting 2nd
Even in batting 2nd one has to play the ANCHOR ROLE because if both goes for hitting then there are lot mre chances to lose wickets but at end One keeps rotating the strike and other goes for the KILL that suits better so that even if the aggresor loses his wicket the ANCHOR will be remained UNBEATEN and then he can go for BIG HITTIng as he is Set Batsman

Jayawardena did a right job playing Slow innings in Finale
The Target was just 138
and Dilshan was dismissed so early
that made Jayawardena bat Sensibly and build a partnership with Sangakkara because SL were dependent on TOP 3 batsman sanga,Dilshan and Mahela

So Dilshan being dismissed they both played slowly and put on a partnership and then looked for hitting

If Mahela also went for hitting then he would hardly get 3 or 4 boundaries and then ?? OUT
He did the right job by keeping he scoreboard ticking and ensured that they built a partnership

The moment he was there SL were going smoothly as they have FIRE POWER in their dugout for the death overs

once mahela gone thats it the team Collapsed..

Jayawardene must have fired if he saw that no 1 is hitting. :O Sri Lanka were over-confident because of which they failed to even score 132. How he can play slowly even if he know that they are losing their path to win the cup?

what nonsense is that???


If he would have batted aggressively, we might have seen new champs.

if he wud have get 3-4 boundaries, the middle order and lower order would have got singles because of which they would have won. :O

Of course Charles has scored 10 to 20's only but his partnership with gayle was above 30..and some times even 40 because Gayle used to get going

thats wat i said
he scored 10's and 20's but those were important because he rotated the strike and gave back to Gayle and gayle freed his arms ..thats simple as that

and more over

Kohli is not anchor.
He always play aggressively even if it is ODIs. He is unstoppable and always hit when needed. He never rotates the strike according to me..

Of course buddy KOhli is an ANCHOR
I already said and i am saying again

AS PER MODERN DAY CRICKET ERA ANCHOR DOESNT MEAN HE IS ONLY DEFENSIVE
ANCHOR MEANS ROTATING THE STRIKE AND GETTING AND ODD BOUNDARY
Kohli is such a player

He always rotates the strike and he gets the odd boundary

Do always watch Kohli right from start

At first he plays some dot balls and then he keeps rotating the strike

if a bad ball is been bowled he puts that away to the fence...
That is what KOhli does ..he is an ANCHOR and he is not an aggressor

Okk to some extent I agree that Anchor is ok if you have a good slogger on other side but what if you dont have a good slogger on other side??
At times even Slogger fails to score, then anchor must perform na??
If he continue batting like that then you cant expect a good score to defend

abey pehle mein kya likha woh seedhe se pad phir reply kar

thats what i said
SOME TIMES YOU EVEN LOSE THE SLOGGER AND THEN THE ANCHOR WILL BE A SET BATSMAN
SO A SET BATSMAN SHOULD BE THERE AND THEN IF A WICKET FALLS HE HAS TO ACCELERATE

thats what even i said
if a slogger fails and wickets fall at other end you will have a set batsman so ANCHOR WIll shift the gears
thats as simple as that
You need to have SET batsman to accelerate

Jayawardene must have fired if he saw that no 1 is hitting. Sri Lanka were over-confident because of which they failed to even score 132. How he can play slowly even if he know that they are losing their path to win the cup?

what nonsense is that???


If he would have batted aggressively, we might have seen new champs.

if he wud have get 3-4 boundaries, the middle order and lower order would have got singles because of which they would have won.

The right thing at that moment was to build the partnership and exactly Mahela did that along with Sanga

the middle order didnt perform thats it
He laid the foundation but the middle and lower order didnt contribute
Mathews,Perera,Chandimal all failed at once

Kula fought at the end but it was too late

Another example is Dhoni. He can be a finisher as well as a sheet anchor.

When he sees that the top order is hitting the ball and scoring big, then he promotes himself up the order to finish the innings in style.

But when the top order collapses, then he bats slow and steady and plays the Anchor role and builds a partnership.

Pure bullcrap it is, whoever says there is no room for Anchors in T20.

Rish wrote:

CSK were soo succesful just because of this strategy
Badri being ANCHOR and Raina being aggressor

Even in IPL final
http://www.espncricinfo.com/indian-premier-league-2012/engine/match/548381.html

Bisla took on the bowlers and went for big hitting where as Kallis remained as an ANCHOR and gave strike back to Bisla and got some odd boundaries

if Kallis went for the KILl right from start then what if he was dismissed for 30 odd runs ? then CSK would have won the match easily
But he didnt do so and remained CALM till Bisla got out and the moment Bisla got out he started to go after bowlers because he was the SET batsman

thats what more important in any form of Cricket

u need to build the partnership and make sure that even if one wicket falls u have SET batsman at the other end to carry on

and in this match another example

http://www.espncricinfo.com/indian-premier-league-2012/engine/match/548324.html

Rahane was bit aggressive using the FIELD restrictions
Dravid played good innings by supporting him

He remained as an ANCHOR and made sure no wickets fell

He and Rahane put on 62 Runs for the First wicket in ten overs

Then Dravid got out and rahane was the set batsman
then RAHANE became even more aggressive and with BIG HITTER owaish Shah with him they both murdered the bowlers of RCB

If in case Dravid went for the hitting at start and thrown his wicket away then Owais Shah would have been under pressure and even Rahane

thats the thing with ANCHOR ROLE in T20 Cricket

IPL Final was too close. :O
Kallis was not firing because he was feeling restless but then also he batted aggressively (Check his strike rate). The way he batted was sufficient and you cant say that he batted like an anchor because anchor used to bat defensively (Anchor means to be the highest scorer of that match by batting defensively) If he would have batted even more slowly, CSK might have won that match. :O So Kallis did a brilliant job by playing his own innings as Slogger and not Anchor. :O


one being the aggressor the other guy has to support him by taking 1s and 2s and getting the odd boundary and not letting him alone do the work and not throwing his wicket by going for KILL right from Start



A true player never feel the pressure if his team mate loses his wicket. :O Instead he gets more power which means more responsibility. If Dravid would have batted aggressively as well, then they would have scored even 210+. :O

Shah and Rahane both batted aggressively no doubt. :O
What if Rahane would have batted slowly or would have lost his wicket in the beginning?

Definitely RR would have lost that match.

You gonna have to agree on that point that this is not Anchors game. :O
You just need sloggers who need to hit well if they want their team to win this with no problems.

Hit Out or Get Out!
Thnx!

Kallis was feeling restless ?

Buddy dont give such replies
Kallis acted as ANCHOR till Bisla got out
The moment bisla got out Kallis took on the bowlers

ANCHOR doesnt mean playing defensively
dont talk about Sir Len Hutton's era Definitions

Talk About Gayle's era definitions

According to Modern day Cricket ANCHOR doesnt just mean Batting defensively
It means taking 1s and 2s and getting ODD boundary

thats what Anchor mean in this format of the game

Mumbai Indians Vs Chennai Super Kings game remember ?
Dhawal Kulkarni got 2 wickets in 2 balls
CSK were 0/2
1st over was bowled by Harbhajan to Hussey ..it was Maiden
Raina Went out FOR GOLDEN DUCK
Vijay too scored 0

Then came in Badrinath along with Michael Hussey

The ball was swinging
If they both went for hitting straight from the moment...then they would have got out that moment itself..

But instead they built the partnership till 12 overs by rotating strike and getting some boundaries

Badri got out for some 60 odd

Then Hussey was SET Batsman

the Ms came in he would have also HIT OUT as he is also big hitter but instead he gave strike to SET batsman and Hussey became aggressor when Hussey got out

Dhoni started hitting

this is what ANCHOR means and it is very much important in any format of the game

NOT JUST SLOGGING RIGHT FROM THE START

MadMax wrote:

Rish wrote:

CSK were soo succesful just because of this strategy
Badri being ANCHOR and Raina being aggressor

Even in IPL final
http://www.espncricinfo.com/indian-premier-league-2012/engine/match/548381.html

Bisla took on the bowlers and went for big hitting where as Kallis remained as an ANCHOR and gave strike back to Bisla and got some odd boundaries

if Kallis went for the KILl right from start then what if he was dismissed for 30 odd runs ? then CSK would have won the match easily
But he didnt do so and remained CALM till Bisla got out and the moment Bisla got out he started to go after bowlers because he was the SET batsman

thats what more important in any form of Cricket

u need to build the partnership and make sure that even if one wicket falls u have SET batsman at the other end to carry on

and in this match another example

http://www.espncricinfo.com/indian-premier-league-2012/engine/match/548324.html

Rahane was bit aggressive using the FIELD restrictions
Dravid played good innings by supporting him

He remained as an ANCHOR and made sure no wickets fell

He and Rahane put on 62 Runs for the First wicket in ten overs

Then Dravid got out and rahane was the set batsman
then RAHANE became even more aggressive and with BIG HITTER owaish Shah with him they both murdered the bowlers of RCB

If in case Dravid went for the hitting at start and thrown his wicket away then Owais Shah would have been under pressure and even Rahane

thats the thing with ANCHOR ROLE in T20 Cricket

IPL Final was too close. :O
Kallis was not firing because he was feeling restless but then also he batted aggressively (Check his strike rate). The way he batted was sufficient and you cant say that he batted like an anchor because anchor used to bat defensively (Anchor means to be the highest scorer of that match by batting defensively) If he would have batted even more slowly, CSK might have won that match. :O So Kallis did a brilliant job by playing his own innings as Slogger and not Anchor. :O


one being the aggressor the other guy has to support him by taking 1s and 2s and getting the odd boundary and not letting him alone do the work and not throwing his wicket by going for KILL right from Start



A true player never feel the pressure if his team mate loses his wicket. :O Instead he gets more power which means more responsibility. If Dravid would have batted aggressively as well, then they would have scored even 210+. :O

Shah and Rahane both batted aggressively no doubt. :O
What if Rahane would have batted slowly or would have lost his wicket in the beginning?

Definitely RR would have lost that match.

You gonna have to agree on that point that this is not Anchors game. :O
You just need sloggers who need to hit well if they want their team to win this with no problems.

Hit Out or Get Out!
Thnx!

Kallis was feeling restless ?

Buddy dont give such replies
Kallis acted as ANCHOR till Bisla got out
The moment bisla got out Kallis took on the bowlers

ANCHOR doesnt mean playing defensively
dont talk about Sir Len Hutton's era Definitions

Talk About Gayle's era definitions

According to Modern day Cricket ANCHOR doesnt just mean Batting defensively
It means taking 1s and 2s and getting ODD boundary

thats what Anchor mean in this format of the game

Mumbai Indians Vs Chennai Super Kings game remember ?
Dhawal Kulkarni got 2 wickets in 2 balls
CSK were 0/2
1st over was bowled by Harbhajan to Hussey ..it was Maiden
Raina Went out FOR GOLDEN DUCK
Vijay too scored 0

Then came in Badrinath along with Michael Hussey

The ball was swinging
If they both went for hitting straight from the moment...then they would have got out that moment itself..

But instead they built the partnership till 12 overs by rotating strike and getting some boundaries

Badri got out for some 60 odd

Then Hussey was SET Batsman

the Ms came in he would have also HIT OUT as he is also big hitter but instead he gave strike to SET batsman and Hussey became aggressor when Hussey got out

Dhoni started hitting

this is what ANCHOR means and it is very much important in any format of the game

NOT JUST SLOGGING RIGHT FROM THE START

exactly

Charles did nothing except rotating the strike which was not enough. We saw his brilliant performance so why he cant hit when he get full chance. :O
Anchors not good for this format. Hit and Go..

Yuvi is best example for this.
Remember his 6 sixes.. He scored 50 off just 12 balls and then lost his wicket so if you even try to play like that, it is brilliant as you can help your team to go past 200.




Kohli is not anchor. :O
He never hits odd boundary instead he tries to hit boundary off every over when he used to get that chance.
Why Kohli will be anchor if no 1 else is hitting from his team when he is batting on other hand??

India always fails because they are dependent on Sehwag only. :O You remember India vs. South Africa in which Yusuf scored 100+ by coming at last and he was unstoppable. He was just firing and on the other hand he was not getting good support you have to agree. That was ODI but match was turning out to be like a T20 Match.

When you get high target, you have to bat aggressively or else you will lose with a big gap.
When you get a low target, you still have to bat aggressively. Who knows there will be a twist and turn and again you need more runs as compared to no. of balls left. If one player continue batting like an Anchor, then no use of that because on one side, you see players coming and going and other side, you have 1 batsman who is taking his time. :O

When you bat first then no doubt you have to give a huge target or else team batting 2nd will troll you by chasing that target easily. :O




Yea same thing I am informing you. Jayawardene is really good batsman. If he would have accelerated the innings, then the ones who were coming to bat might have supported him but he was playing slowly and lower order was again in pressure. :O

So we need Sloggers only in this format and not Anchors.

I am saying this again and again :- Hit out or Get Out!

Sloggers only??? :bitch:
Anchrs are very important in every format...

Sanjay wrote:Sloggers only???
Anchrs are very important in every format...

Not in T20. :O
If you disagree then you have to give strong answers to support your opinion.

LOl RIsh that slogan is in Stick Cricket :bitch:

In T20 cricket, in damp pitches, it is almost impossible to slog, yet how do the teams reach good totals?

Anurag wrote:LOl RIsh that slogan is in Stick Cricket

In T20 cricket, in damp pitches, it is almost impossible to slog, yet how do the teams reach good totals?

Nothing is Impossible in Cricket. That's what I think. :O
They are big cricketers and they can hit easily even it is Damp Pitches although it will be tough for them but still you need to slog in such a format. :O

Just Anchoring wont help in team.
That's what I feel.

You definitely need sloggers only.

Even Sloggers can bat well and stay for long if they play effective cricket. :O

What if you get a target of 175 when you are batting at Damp Pitch?
You will take singles only to reach that target or you will try your best to hit biggies off every ball???

Think over it again..

Rish wrote:Charles did nothing except rotating the strike which was not enough. We saw his brilliant performance so why he cant hit when he get full chance. :O
Anchors not good for this format. Hit and Go..

Yuvi is best example for this.
Remember his 6 sixes.. He scored 50 off just 12 balls and then lost his wicket so if you even try to play like that, it is brilliant as you can help your team to go past 200.




Kohli is not anchor. :O
He never hits odd boundary instead he tries to hit boundary off every over when he used to get that chance.
Why Kohli will be anchor if no 1 else is hitting from his team when he is batting on other hand??

India always fails because they are dependent on Sehwag only. :O You remember India vs. South Africa in which Yusuf scored 100+ by coming at last and he was unstoppable. He was just firing and on the other hand he was not getting good support you have to agree. That was ODI but match was turning out to be like a T20 Match.

When you get high target, you have to bat aggressively or else you will lose with a big gap.
When you get a low target, you still have to bat aggressively. Who knows there will be a twist and turn and again you need more runs as compared to no. of balls left. If one player continue batting like an Anchor, then no use of that because on one side, you see players coming and going and other side, you have 1 batsman who is taking his time. :O

When you bat first then no doubt you have to give a huge target or else team batting 2nd will troll you by chasing that target easily. :O




Yea same thing I am informing you. Jayawardene is really good batsman. If he would have accelerated the innings, then the ones who were coming to bat might have supported him but he was playing slowly and lower order was again in pressure. :O

So we need Sloggers only in this format and not Anchors.

I am saying this again and again :- Hit out or Get Out!

Do you know one thing ?
Charles is Named as GAYLE OF WINDIES DOMESTIC CRICKET

How much of hitting requires to get that name ?
But still he did rotated the Strike because on other you have CHRISTOPHER HENRY GAYLE

Just like that you need to do in t20

Give the Strike to the Slogger
rotate the strike

Sloggers work is to hit out or get out

So as per ur idea T20 is HIT OUT or GET OUT

Not every day is sunday isnt it
So at one day one team can score 200 and one day they can even get all out even before 100 runs so that means that team doesnt deserve to called as CHAMPIONS and lacks consistency

You need to have that Consistency in T20 format as well

For that Consistency you need to have --------->ANCHORS

Just answer me one thing
with all Sloggers did CSK won 2 IPL Titles,1 Clt20 Title and emerged as 2 times runners of IPL ?

All CSK players are SLOGGERs ?
The ans would be NO
because their most consistent batsman after Raina is an ANCHOR
The reason why they won 2011 IPL was Michael Hussey who is an ANCHOR
the reason why they came to Finals in 2012 was Faf Du Plessis who acted as an ANCHOR Some times and even as SLOGGER some times

The only Non-famous and Non-t20 Specialist to play Most matches after Raina for CSK is Badrinath is an ANCHOR

The reason why India won T20 World Cup 2007--thanks to 50 by Gambhir is an ANCHOR

The reason why England got Soo Close to the target Vs West Indies in T20 World Cup 2012 even after being 4/2 was innings of ALex Hales acted as ANCHOR while Morgan was aggressor.