Cricketers know two kinds of pressure — the pressure of playing away from home, and the pressure of playing at home.
Away, conditions are less familiar, crowds tend to be hostile, routines are different and travel can be a bother. At home, there is the pressure of getting the best out of familiar conditions, excessive public expectations, demanding crowds and annoying enquiries about winning. Both are real.
The concept of home advantage is one of the most fascinating in sport. It seems logical, even obvious, that knowing the conditions is the first step towards conquering them. But the jury is out on the issue.
Empirical evidence suggests that it does exist. Scientists, however, interpret the figures and conclude both that it does and doesn’t. The former theory has evolved from a platitude to a statistic. Popular sentiment is that crowds make a difference. They cheer the home team, raise their spirits and in doing so lower the morale of the visitors. Winning captains tend to thank the crowds for their support. Public relations or measurable fact?
It is easier, and more popular, to talk of crowds influencing a match. It gives fans a sense of importance, and the media a ready-made cliché.
The 50-over World Cup had been played for 21 years before a host country (Sri Lanka, one of three hosts, actually) won it. >No host country has won the T20 World Cup ye t.
Not a myth It is tempting to conclude, therefore, that >India’s ‘home advantage’ in next week’s World T20 is actually a disadvantage. But that would be too simplistic. Recent research has shown that home advantage is not a mythical state dreamed up by visiting teams looking for an excuse for poor performance. Teams in various sports tend to win between 54 and 60 per cent of their home matches. Large crowds do spur the home team on; more importantly, they influence the referees and umpires psychologically.
In their book Scorecasting , Tobias Moskowitz and Jon Wertheim, professors at Chicago and Princeton respectively say, “The bigger the crowd, the worse the bias. In fact, officials’ bias is the single most significant contributor to home advantage.” So crowds do make a difference, however indirectly.
With technology having established itself as the umpire’s helper in cricket, personal biases (or incompetence) have been ironed out, even if > India’s reluctance to accept the DRS (Decision Review System) means that they reduce their chances of replays correcting umpires’ errors.
But unlike in soccer and other team games, cricket’s home-and-away play is unique to the sport. A 22-yard strip decides team selection, decision to bat or field first, ideal placement of fielders and thus has a greater influence on the outcome than in sports where coaches pick their best teams regardless of where the match is played.
Home advantage has been influential in recent Test matches, thanks in the main to the pitches. It has led some captains, Ricky Ponting notably, to suggest doing away with the toss and allowing the visiting team first use of the track (a different formula will have to be worked out for World Cup matches, though). In the 1980s, about 30 per cent of matches played away led to losses; this decade the figure is closer to 50 per cent.
How will all this influence India’s chances at the World T20? The thumb rule is that the shorter the format, the smaller the role of match conditions. Teams play in similar conditions since innings are separated by just 20 overs.
This was brought home dramatically in th >e India-Pakistan encounter in the Asia Cup where Pakistan, dismissed for 83 , hit back strongly and were stymied only by the superior batsmanship of Virat Kohli.
The only change — and that particularly in matches which commence at 3 p.m. — might be the amount of dew on the field, which will affect the spinners of the team bowling last. But even here, the games are scheduled to finish early enough not to make a big difference. From India’s point of view, however, that is merely academic since they do not have a 3 p.m. match.
Crowd support can be a double-edged sword, as India have realised in the past.
Since the start of the IPL, many top players around the world have established an understanding with Indian conditions that will serve them well at the World T20. Familiarity breeds respect. In the hot and dry weather (March-April) during the tournament, wickets are likely to be dry and dusty and assist spinners. But the playing field is level for all that.
For the T20 star — who plays with equal felicity in India, Australia, Bangladesh, South Africa or England — there is no away ground, and therefore no away disadvantage.
>In 2011, India came to terms with whatever the pressures of playing at home are to win the 50-over World Cup in some style. Half that team is in the current squad for the World T20. They know how to do it, and that’s important.
