This is something that's been frustrating me for a while. In the NZ - Aus game yesterday for 90-100% of the first 35 overs McCullum only had 2 or 3 men outside the circle, hence pretty much the whole time Australia were effectively in a batting powerplay. Then it gets taken and the commentators start discussing how the batting team should play during this time, and I'd just like one of them to point out that the field is exactly the same as it has been. I've noticed this on quite a few occasions recently as well, especially with McCullum and his aggressive nature as captain. It also happened in the NZ - SL game, again 90-100% of the first 34 overs McCullum only had 2 or 3 men outside the circle, and around the 30 over mark the commentators start going on about how they should take the batting powerplay early to take advantage of it. It just annoys me because these oldie commentators just don't get it, and how it only actually matter if a team is say 175 for 2 after 35 overs and they can really accelerate which hasn't really been happening a lot lately.
You can apply the same logic to the players. Batsmen like Voges yesterday having a slog 2nd or 3rd ball of it when he's had the exact same field for the previous 5 or so overs (only 3 players out). And the bowling team bringing back their strongest bowlers for these overs, which at least McCullum had the initiative not to do yesterday because he understood the situation of the game.
So my point is has this batting powerplay actually done anything for 50 over cricket? Tbh I'd just like to go back to the 15 overs at the start of the innings, because that allows the batting team to build for the first 5 - 10 overs like they do atm, and then if they haven't lost any wickets they can attack from 10 - 15 overs with only 2 men outside the circle. Atm despite all of the hype that goes with it (from the commentators every game), if you actually stop and look at it very really does it actually have any effect on how the game should be played. Alternatively would it be better if they made it more meaningful and only allowed 2 fielders out during it?
You can apply the same logic to the players. Batsmen like Voges yesterday having a slog 2nd or 3rd ball of it when he's had the exact same field for the previous 5 or so overs (only 3 players out). And the bowling team bringing back their strongest bowlers for these overs, which at least McCullum had the initiative not to do yesterday because he understood the situation of the game.
So my point is has this batting powerplay actually done anything for 50 over cricket? Tbh I'd just like to go back to the 15 overs at the start of the innings, because that allows the batting team to build for the first 5 - 10 overs like they do atm, and then if they haven't lost any wickets they can attack from 10 - 15 overs with only 2 men outside the circle. Atm despite all of the hype that goes with it (from the commentators every game), if you actually stop and look at it very really does it actually have any effect on how the game should be played. Alternatively would it be better if they made it more meaningful and only allowed 2 fielders out during it?