How T20I cricket evolved past anchors and made strike rate the only metric that matters?

Since its genesis on February 17, 2005, T20I cricket has come a long way. Despite being the newest format of the game, T20I has undergone major evolution.

While multiple things about the format have changed, the obsolescence of anchors stands out as the most notable one.

The onset of ODI cricket had given rise to anchors, and the role continues to have its weight in gold in the format. At the time of inception, T20Is were considered a condensed version of the 50-over format, and therefore, anchors took to it like fish to water; however, the situation has evolved drastically.

What does it mean to anchor the innings?

Anchoring the innings, in its traditional sense, means holding one end up and taking the game as deep as possible while allowing the batters at the other end to accelerate.

Anchors found their footing in T20Is initially as they allowed others in the batting line-up to go all guns blazing on flat tracks, and proved valuable on tough surfaces and in tricky chases.

There was no set template in the early years of T20, as scores ranging from 170 to 190 were considered winning totals. Therefore, players like Steve Smith, Joe Root, KL Rahul, and Babar Azam were assured of their place in the playing XI and even led their sides.

How T20Is outgrew anchors?

The proliferation of T20 leagues worldwide accelerated the evolution of the shortest format at the international level, and teams started outplaying each other by flexing their power-hitting muscle.

From preserving wickets against the new ball in the powerplay, sides started utilising the first six overs (with just two fielders allowed outside the 30-yard circle) to rack up as many as possible on the scoreboard without any fear of losing wickets.

The introduction of match-ups took it to a totally different horizon. Unlike Tests, where strategic play unfolds over longer periods of time, the breakneck speed of T20 forced teams to eke out even the smallest edge.

Therefore, teams started pitting batters against their favourable match-ups - a right-hander against a right-arm off-spinner and a left-hander against a slow left-arm orthodox or a leg-spinner, looking for a 10 to 15-run advantage, often decisive in the context of the game.

The grooming of spin-hitters started adding more pressure on anchors, forcing them to play against their nature and ultimately leading to their undoing.

Strike rate is the new currency

The days of rotation of strike with an odd boundary every over are long gone, as it led to irreparable loss. The final of the ICC Men's T20 World Cup 2022 at the MCG is a quintessential example.

Batting first, Pakistan needed Babar Azam to set the tempo early on and put pressure on the English bowlers. However, Babar scored 32 off 28 balls at a strike rate of 114.29, and the team could only manage 137 for the loss of eight wickets in 20 overs.

Consequently, England were never bothered about the required run rate and scaled the target down, with an over and five wickets to spare to clinch the title.

Therefore, a batter with a 150-plus strike rate is considered more valuable compared to someone who averages in excess of 40 in the modern era of T20 cricket, as teams are looking to wrestle momentum in their favour and shut the door down in the opponent's face.

Therefore, the likes of Smith, Root, and Babar, who could once easily slide into their respective T20I sides, have now become an afterthought for selectors and have either been phased out or are struggling to cement a place in the playing XI.