T20 cricket is often seen as a batsman’s game: short boundaries, flat wickets, and powerplays that favour hitting. But the approach to building an innings has evolved enormously. Is it fair to view T20 through the same lens as we do cricket? The simple answer would be, yes, as the bat, the ball and 11 players on each side are present in T20, but the fact that ten wickets are available to be spent in 120 balls fundamentally alters the risk and reward, arguably making it an entirely different game. T20 cricket is considered the most volatile form of cricket.
In test and even ODI cricket, 90-95 per cent of the time the best sides generally go on to win the game. However, in T20 cricket, it’s fairly random. In T20 cricket, even the best teams will have a win percentage of 70 or 75 and the worst will have a percentage of 40-45, so, the gulf in quality is not massive, and it’s very random and on top of that you have a short season.
So judging teams on their tactics and intent is a much better metric than results because results in T20 cricket can be very random. Because time is limited, each ball in T20 is a high-leverage event. Teams try to optimise every delivery, making the format heavily managed. Historically, multiple players would adopt the role of an anchor — someone who batted conservatively to stabilise the innings. But modern T20 tends to limit this role to one or two players. “It all comes down to knowing your game and the opposition’s,” says ILT20 analyst Kieran Parmley. “There’s almost no batter who can’t score at a strike rate of over 160 in the last four overs once set. But if you take 45 balls to get there, what use is that?”
He cites Chris Gayle, who may take time early but knows exactly which bowlers to target later, as an example of effective pacing. Maximising 120 balls and 10 wickets is the key. The worst T20 innings? Scoring 160/2 — because preserving wickets is pointless if you don’t maximise your total. A famous example is Ajinkya Rahane’s knock in the 2016 T20 World Cup semi-final.
His 40 off 35 balls looked steady on paper, but it took up nearly a third of the innings for just 20 per cent of the runs, slowing the scoring rate and preventing more explosive batsmen from getting a chance. India posted 192/2 but still lost comfortably.
Despite the drawbacks, many teams still use anchors. Freddie Wilde, an analyst for Royal Challengers Bangalore, argues that selecting an anchor is a defensive tactic — like Jose Mourinho’s football approach. “It lowers a batting side’s ceiling but also reduces the chance of collapse.” He believes anchors become more valuable as the standard of cricket improves. Players like Virat Kohli and Kane Williamson are better suited to top-tier leagues like the IPL than second-tier competitions like England’s T20 Blast, where raw power is often enough.
A team’s choice to include or omit an anchor reflects its philosophy. England, for instance, left out technically solid Joe Root in favour of power hitters like Jos Buttler and Jonny Bairstow, aiming to out-hit opponents. Australia, with a stronger bowling attack, often used Steve Smith as an anchor, comfortable defending slightly lower totals. The strategy paid off with their first T20 World Cup title in 2021.
Another key debate in T20 strategy is when to deploy your best batsmen. Some argue they should be open to exploit field restrictions, but others like analyst Alagappan Vijaykumar believe the best should bat in the middle overs.
“A number four batter needs to be versatile: if they come in at 10/2, they must rebuild cautiously; at 100/2, they must attack immediately. They face the dual pressure of maintaining momentum while protecting wickets.”
Fluid batting orders have become common since the mid-2000s when Rahul Dravid and Greg Chappell experimented with adjusting the lineup based on the game context. Now, with data-driven match-ups, teams often hold bowlers back for specific batsmen, complicating the job of middle-order players even more.
A number six batter’s role is also particularly tough. Unlike a number four, they rarely get time to settle. “You used to need just range as a finisher,” says Vijaykumar. “Now you need brute power to counter high-speed, hard-length deliveries, or you need to pair different skill-sets — like Dinesh Karthik’s range with Andre Russell’s power at KKR.” T20 is often portrayed as a bowler’s nightmare, but the reality is more nuanced. While batting techniques have improved, bowling has also advanced through analytics, smarter variations like the wobble seam, and faster pitches. “If you watch dismissals from the ‘50s and ‘60s, you’d be shocked at how poor some shots were. Today’s bowlers are as sharp as the batters,” says Vijaykumar. Ultimately, T20 is a distinct format requiring distinct tactics. Each delivery carries weight.
Picking when, and how to deploy your best players — anchors, power hitters, or middle-order maestros — determines success more than sheer batting or bowling quality. In a game defined by volatility and thin margins, understanding the interplay of roles and risk is what separates the merely good from the truly great sides.
(The writer is a sports journalist. Views are personal)