FEATURES
Follow UsRoyal Challengers Bangalore have finished at the top of the points table only once, in 2011. That year they won 83.3% of their home games, winning five of the six matches at Chinnaswamy.
In a league with a 40% mathematical chance of making the playoffs and a history in which only once a team outside the top two has won in the last 12 editions, the objective of a team harbouring the dream to lift the trophy should be straightforward. No matter the adrenaline rush of getting certain scenarios in your favour during the last leg to sneak into the playoffs, there has to be a systematic effort to ensure a finish in the top two. And that cannot happen without making one's home ground a fortress.
The two most successful teams in the league, Chennai and Mumbai, are dominant at home with a win percentage of 70.3% and 62.8% respectively. These numbers have gone higher in certain years when they lifted the trophy. Chennai won eight out of eight home games in 2011 while Mumbai did the same in 2013. In other examples. Kolkata won all four games at the Eden Gardens after IPL returned home from UAE in 2014.
In comparison, Bangalore have won only 50% of the completed games at home (40 out of 80). And even if we look at numbers from 2018, to assess the present, the number is still the same (10 wins in 20 completed games).
Various theories are laid out for RCB’s mediocre home record. Let us address them one by one. Let us start with the lies and we will follow it up with two truths.
Lie 1: RCB are stronger while chasing
Of the 80 completed games RCB have played at their home venue, they have chased in 36 games (45%). But of these 36 games, they have won only 20 (55.5%). For context, RCB have won an equal number of matches batting first but over more games (20 out of 44: 45.4%). The percentage difference isn't big enough to call RCB a chasing side in the first place.
This is a worry since Chinnaswamy is a chasing ground. In 21 games played here since 2018, no captain has opted to bat first after winning the toss. Though RCB have batted first in most of those games (13) and lost half of the completed ones, they have lost an equal proportion of the games (4 out of 8) chasing as well.
If anything, RCB have faltered on their perceived stronger suit. They have had four seasons in which their record batting first has been better as compared to when they were chasing. Three have been in the era when perhaps the best chaser in white ball cricket has been with the team (2015, 2017 and 2023).
So numbers do not do justice to the assumption that RCB are a stronger chasing side.
Lie 2: RCB have a death-over problem
To avoid getting into historical data that might be irrelevant to the way T20 is played now, let us limit our analysis from 2018.
In this period, RCB bowlers have leaked runs at an economy of 11.8 in overs 16-20 at Chinnaswamy. Only two bowlers have done considerably better than the average in these years: Yuzvendra Chahal (econ 9.8 in eight innings) and Vyshak Vijay Kumar (econ 10.8 in four innings).
While batting, they have scored runs at 11.2. So assuming that both innings lasted a full 30 balls at the death, RCB have averaged 3.0 runs fewer at death. But that is not a difference that can be covered up elsewhere in the innings. If anything, RCB bowlers are able to create a bigger positive impact upfront.
While bowling in the powerplay, RCB bowlers have given runs at an economy of 8.1 while their batters have scored at a rate of 9.0. This is a positive difference of 5.4 runs across six overs. The biggest difference maker in this regard has been Mohammed Siraj (econ of 5.6 across 11 innings). So RCB are a net positive bowling team when we take out the negative impact for their bowlers at the death with a positive impact in the powerplay.
That leaves us with middle-overs. Across the 20 completed games, RCB bowlers and batters have negated each other out in overs 7-15, averaging 8.9 runs an over.
But let us lift the layers a bit more.
Let us split the numbers by games RCB have won versus those they have lost at home. The difference between the runs they have scored and the runs they have given in powerplay in games has been net positive irrespective of the result. The difference though reduces from 6.7 to 3.1.
For the elephant in the room - the death overs - the difference remains negative in both cases. Assuming all innings would have gone on till the end of the 20th over, RCB have a difference of -0.5 at the death in games won which worsens to -6 in losses. But cancelling this out with the positive powerplay numbers even in losses, this is a difference of 2.9 runs which by no means is decisive.
The real difference makers are the middle-overs that have been conveniently overlooked owing to there being no overall difference as noted above. However, in wins, RCB have been +9.1 across both innings in overs 7-15 but a staggering -8.8 in losses.
If ever there was an example of chalk and cheese, this is it. There is a fair argument to be made that RCB are losing games in the middle-overs at home as opposed to the common narrative around their death bowling.
Since Yuzvendra Chahal, who gave runs at 7.4 at Chinnaswamy even in losses, RCB have failed to find a proper bowler for this phase. Unsurprisingly, the bowler with the most overs for them in this phase after Chahal has been Siraj. One of the biggest failure of the management has been their inability to find a spin spearhead or groom a pace bowler with skills to counter boundary hitters in the middle overs. In the games that RCB have lost, the opposition has hit a boundary every 5.1 deliveries, even when this phase not considered as a boundary-hitting phase.
Truth: RCB batters do not hit sufficient boundaries
Since 2018, RCB have won seven out of eight games where they have hit more boundaries than the opposition at Chinnaswamy. And they have lost eight of the nine games when the opposition have hit more boundaries.
RCB have been poor at boundary-hitting home and away. In this period, RCB have a balls per boundary record of 5.9 overall across all venues. This is better than only one team, the one with the poorest win percentage in this period, Sunrisers Hyderabad (6.2). Despite boasting an enviable batting line-up, RCB have been unable to hit sufficient boundaries. And this has hurt them at their home ground.
Their boundary-hitting numbers at home have been immune to wins and losses: 4.9 vs 5.0 balls per boundary. The opposition, however, have hit a boundary every 4.5 balls against them in wins and every 5.4 balls in losses.
To make a further case for there being no considerable difference in RCB’s numbers while batting first or second, their balls per boundary record have remained largely the same: 4.8 while chasing and 5 while batting first.
Overall, RCB have actually played at a higher run rate (9.6 vs 9.3) in losses at home. But the oppostion have scored at 10.1 in wins and only 8.6 in losses. This implies that when pushed, RCB have managed to up their run rate but have done so predominantly through reducing dot balls (30.6% dot balls in losses versus 34.4% in wins) and not replacing them with boundaries.
Let us lift the layers on this aspect as well. If we look at RCB batters against pace, they have hit a boundary every 4.2 balls in wins and every 4.0 balls in losses. So if anything they have gone marginally harder in tough games.
Against spin, they have hit a boundary every 6.4 balls in wins but every 6.6 balls in losses. So they have been marginally slower against spin in losses. Data suggests that their way out against spin in losses has been strike rotation. Their dot balls against spin has been 35.8%. In losses, this has drastically reduced to 27.8% but yet did not result in a better balls per boundary record.
When RCB have lost, the opposition have scored at a lower run rate than them against pace (10.5 versus 10.6) but at a far superior run rate against spin (9.3 versus 8.5). And while RCB have not fed the opposition with a lot of spin (only 32.15% of total balls bowled), the opposition have exploited the lack of spin hitters in RCB and have fed them with 45.5% balls of spin.
So the truth that RCB batters do not hit sufficient boundaries should be accepted with a nuance. Their batters do not hit sufficient boundaries against spin.
The obvious must be stated here. If we take out Glenn Maxwell’s 4.2 balls per boundary at Chinnaswamy, the spin-hitting situation for RCB will be even dire. Two of their top run-getters at this venue since 2018, Virat Kohli and Faf du Plessis, have had an underwhelming record of 7.5 and 7.7 balls per boundary against spin.
Net-net the difference between RCB’s spin hitting and that of the opposition is resulting in a difference of 10 runs per game in every game RCB have lost. So if RCB understandably cannot improve their spin game overnight, they need to make up for those 10 runs against the opposition pacers. In a league where every team is pushed to their extreme, this is easier said than done.
