World Twenty20 defined by its fickle format, thin margins and big runs

World Twenty20 lived up to fickle format’s reputation but also threw up a few pointers such as surprise tactics and data analytics, writes Osman Samiuddin.

Ben Stokes of England reacts after being hits for six runs in the final over during the ICC World Twenty20 India 2016 Final between England and the West Indies at Eden Gardens on April 3, 2016 in Kolkata, India. (Photo by Gareth Copley/Getty Images)Show less

Afew inches, maybe a foot, but not much more than that – that was probably how much England's Ben Stokes missed his lengths by on the second and third balls of the last over of the World Twenty20.

Get that right and Carlos Brathwaite does not hit both for six. West Indies do not win a second title, Marlon Samuels has nothing to say to Shane Warne and Darren Sammy and his men are not in the bargaining position they are in now with their board over pay rises.

The point of this is to emphasise the fine margins on which this tournament was shaped, so fine sometimes it seemed to be rattling along the edges of a leaf of paper. Fall this way for one result, the other for an entirely different outcome.

Think about those no balls India bowled against the West Indies in the semi-final – a couple of inches in each.

Imagine if Bangladesh batsmen had hit their final balls against India a couple of feet either side of where they did.

What if Afghanistan had not had just one bad over in the field against England? Or if Hashim Amla had been a couple of inches taller and thus able to grab onto a nervy Dinesh Ramdin cut when West Indies were imploding in Nagpur?

Or, indeed, if on Sunday a Samuels’ edge had carried an inch further, or Jos Buttler been better positioned, when he was just 27?

Read more from Osman Samiuddin:

This all makes sense because it is a format of fine margins; each stray dot ball, refused single, flying catch, streaky boundary – the list goes on – has greater and immediate consequence here. It remains a fickle format as was often pronounced through the tournament by a number of captains.

That is true, but it was also a truth of this tournament that more sides than ever before looked like they had unlocked the puzzle of this fickleness, as much as it was possible.

The best teams in this tournament were the ones who were the most honed for it, which sounds obvious, but goes a little deeper. Data analytics is happening already in much franchise cricket but it is difficult to know to what extent it is used internationally.

“With data it’s about how effectively it’s used and how your players respond to that,” Eoin Morgan said before the final.

“Our side, because we are very young and inexperienced, we only choose to use small bits that we think will be effective.”

West Indies are not different.

They use data but also rely on their own learning. Sammy watched England’s openers pummel New Zealand’s faster bowlers in the Powerplay in their semi-final and decided he was going to bowl Samuel Badree out in that period.

In every previous match, the strategy was to bowl two Badree overs within the first six.

Or even how well prepared, if in different ways, both Samuels and Brathwaite were for Stokes in the final over. Samuels bragged about it, telling Brathwaite to stay still because he knew Stokes would miss his lengths a couple of times.

Brathwaite was more respectful, explaining that he knew England had only two plans to work with.

New Zealand, in particular, took pre-match preparation and the subsequent moulding of their strategic approach to each separate environment to an unseen level.

Could any other team have done as they did, in choosing not to play their two widely lauded bowlers at all, because they did not fit into that strategy?

The other prominent thread to emerge was that of the evolutions of batsmanship. The second semi-final and final were useful in showcasing the two broad strains of batting that point a way ahead.

In Virat Kohli and Joe Root, India and England had the two most complete batsmen.

Both build from an orthodox base, but are scarily efficient too, in not wasting balls and running hard and letting others riff off them.

Neither takes a backseat to anyone one in his ability to find the boundary. It is a way that guarantees success no matter what the format.

On the other side, the West Indies employ a less complicated, higher-risk approach.

They are blessed with some of the most muscled hitters in the game but also, as so evident in their two wins against England and one against India, some of the smartest ones.

The consistency and range of boundary-hitting, in pressure situations, is of a kind cricket has not seen before and cannot be thought to be fortunate.

They are two different paths, but they are taking cricket to the same destinations: the future.

Follow us on Twitter @NatSportUAE

Like us on Facebook at facebook.com/TheNationalSport