The Women’s Premier League is yet to witness its first centurion, although Smriti Mandhana came agonisingly close to the landmark earlier this season. In terms of precedents, however, the league has already crossed a different threshold — that of its first ‘retired out’, swiftly followed by a second. The incidents have sparked a moralistic discourse, akin to the one after Ravichandran Ashwin had ran Jos Buttler out at the non-striker’s end in the Indian Premier League.
The first incident happened during the match between Gujarat Giants and Mumbai Indians, where Gujarat batter Ayushi Soni was retired out after a laborious 14-ball 11. Though the Giants were defeated in that fixture, the decision, in isolation, proved to be right, as Soni’s replacement Bharti Fulmali scored an unbeaten 15-ball 36.
It was followed by a similar incident in the match between UP Warriorz and Delhi Capitals, where Harleen Deol was retired out. This time around, however, the decision did not yield the desired result, as coming in for Deol, Chloe Tryon could only add a solitary run to the team’s total.
Interestingly, both Warriorz and Giants ended up on the losing side, but regardless of the outcome, there is a debate on whether forcibly retiring a batter — a trend not rare in franchise cricket anymore, with Mohammad Rizwan meeting the same fate in the Big Bash League — is morally justifiable.
The Quint had asked the question to JioStar expert Saba Karim, during a Media Day organized by JioStar. Here’s what he had to say:
What is your opinion on the growing trend of ‘retired outs’?
I think we will see more and more of this. Once you introduce a rule like this, especially in the T20 format, teams and captains will increasingly look to use it because it can be effective. There will always be different schools of thought on when to take that call, how to take it, and whether it is right or wrong, but in the end it comes down to the intent the team wants to show on the field, particularly in terms of scoring runs at a high strike rate. The second important factor is communication with the batter who is out there at that point. As long as the management has taken a call and the player is in sync with that decision, it becomes easier to execute. In T20 cricket, even one ball can make a big difference, and we’ve seen that in the past. So teams will want to use every opportunity available to them, even if it means taking a tough call.
Is forcing a batter off the pitch not harsh on her or him?
I understand that a batter might feel disappointed initially, but if it is a management decision taken for the benefit of the team, players will slowly start to accept it and eventually appreciate it. It is also a good opportunity for introspection. If a batter has been retired out, it gives them a chance to reflect on their game and understand what aspect — especially power-hitting — needs improvement.
How would you evaluate the efficacy of retired outs?
I would like to point out that we often judge decisions purely by the outcome, which I don’t think is correct. A decision should be evaluated based on the situation and the intent at that point in time. Whether you get the desired result or not is a different matter. If the decision aligns with the vision and intent of the team management, one should be fine with it.
Given how quickly T20 cricket is evolving, do you see tactical tools like ‘retired outs’ becoming a necessary part of staying competitive in the modern game?
The modern T20 game is a very rapidly changing environment. It is probably the format that is evolving the fastest. When team managements sit down for meetings, they need to be in sync with the demands of the game. If a rule like this helps you get closer to what T20 cricket requires today, then so be it. In this format, teams are always trying to stay one step ahead of the opposition — through their skill sets, their talent, their resources, and even through such rules. If you can gain an advantage in any of these ways, then why not use it? That said, it is equally important to have these conversations within the team. When players are made aware of such possibilities in advance and are taken into confidence during team meetings, it becomes much easier for everyone to accept these decisions when they arise.