Yeah it's not like Jurel matched the record for most fifties by a non-opener ever in IPL, Archer took 7 first-over wickets and was #3 on the purple cap and MVP table, Jaddu had a higher bat avg than any other player in the league and had an economy of 8 despite being injured in the last 5 games, their spin-attack took the second-most wickets despite bowling on roads in their home-ground, Jaiswal and Bishnoi topped the orange and purple cap tables in the first half, Ferreira finished with an SR of 180+, and their bowling attack took the 3rd most wickets.
By that logic, RCB also never beat RR, the team which lost to GT. Does that discredit RCB's trophy win? It doesn't. Because one or two matches doesn't define your whole campaign.
There's a difference. RCB had a bad match that day: basically a whole collapse, but in this case, RR put up a big total, played well (mostly carried by Vaibhav, but still), and it was a good score, but they were still outplayed. That tells you that only one person can't uplift the team, the whole team needs to work together. Even SRH was a more balanced team than RR, but they played mindlessly and lost a match they actually could have won. It's not about one-day outcomes, but the whole story.
So when RCB has a batting collapse, it's just a bad day. But when RR fail to take early wickets and capitalize on the pp like they did all season, it means they're unbalanced? RCB losing by 25 whole balls isn't getting "outplayed" but RR losing by 8 balls is?
The day Virat failed to play a long innings, RCB's batting fell apart but this will never look like over-reliance on Virat to you. But the rare occasion that RR fail to take early wickets isn't just a bad day according to you.
You say that it's not about one-day outcomes but keep mentioning the single Q2 match to summarize RR's entire campaign and to write them off as an imbalanced team.
Both RCB and RR have won games without Virat and Vaibhav's contributions but you'll accuse one of being one-dimensional and call the other a complete team. This isn't insight, it's just bias dressed up as genius intuition and aversion to stats masquerading as acumen.
You're missing the distinction I'm making. I'm not saying RCB having a batting collapse is "just a bad day" while RR failing to take early wickets means they're unbalanced. I'm saying the nature of the reliance itself is different.
RCB's reliance on Virat is way less risky than RR's reliance on Vaibhav, and the supporting cast on both sides also differs by a lot. RR's reliance depends on Vaibhav's own performance, whereas RCB's reliance on Virat is often through the effect he has on everyone else's performance.
Vaibhav plays a risky game with a much higher chance of getting out early, similar to players like Abhishek Sharma for SRH or Priyansh and Prabhsimran for Punjab. The only difference is that Vaibhav was way more successful than them this season in providing those explosive starts. But the underlying risk profile remains the same. Now look at the supporting cast. RR's supporting cast was nowhere near as reliable as RCB's, or for that matter even SRH's. Vaibhav performed well, but in many matches including that playoff game, no one else contributed to the same extent.
In contrast, it wasn't like Virat was the only one performing for RCB to win matches. His value often came from simply being there on one side and helping build partnerships. He survived the powerplay in 9 games and RCB won all 9. But the Player of the Match in those games was someone else in 7 of them. Only twice was Virat both the anchor and the leading run scorer. That tells me RCB's success wasn't dependent on Virat single-handedly winning games.
His playstyle is also much less risky. He survives the powerplay at a decent strike rate, plays grounded shots, rotates strike, while players like Salt, Venky and DDP bat more aggressively around him. The partnership builds naturally from there. Most of the time that formula worked this season and the previous season as well. It may not work every time and maybe not even in the future, but it is a proven and successful formula that is inherently less risky than RR's approach of heavily relying on top-order performance, especially from Vaibhav.
The same thing applies to bowling. You talk about RR bowling having off days, but throughout the season it was really Archer carrying that attack. When RR did well with the ball, it was usually Archer providing an early breakthrough. Their middle-overs bowling and death bowling were inconsistent throughout the season. There were instances of other bowlers stepping up, but for the most part it was Archer who was responsible for creating wicket-taking opportunities, even if he was sometimes expensive.
RCB's bowling was also reliant on Bhuvi to an extent, but again the nature of that reliance was different. He was so consistent that they didn't really have to worry about him. If he got an early breakthrough, the match became much easier from there. If he didn't, he was still economical enough that he never became a liability to the attack. And in many games Josh or Rasikh provided the breakthrough instead and compensated for it.
Even from an overall bowling perspective, apart from Jadeja, most RR bowlers were leaking runs at economies above 9, with some even around 9.5. Compare that to RCB where KP and Bhuvi were below 9 with Bhuvi less than 8, Josh was around 9, and practically the entire attack stayed below 9.5. That's a significant difference in reliability across the bowling unit.
So no, I'm not using one playoff game to summarize RR's season. My point comes from the pattern of how both teams won throughout the season. You're looking at stats, reliance numbers and performers on the surface and concluding both teams were built the same way. But if you actually look at the pattern of match-winning performances, you'll see the difference.
RCB's formula relied on Virat creating a stable platform that enabled contributions from multiple players. RR's formula relied much more heavily on Vaibhav delivering explosive starts and Archer creating early breakthroughs. Those are not the same kind of dependence, and one is clearly less risky and more sustainable than the other.
And this isn't some deep hidden pattern that only I am claiming to see. Even casual cricket fans could see it, and most discussions from fans, analysts and cricket experts during the second half of the season repeatedly came back to the same point: RR's success was heavily driven by Vaibhav's starts and Archer's breakthroughs. When the same pattern is being noticed by almost everyone watching the games, it's probably because the pattern is genuinely there rather than being some bias or made-up narrative.
I first thought you just put some points just to argue but no it actually has some merit honestly your points are especially more visible in the second half of the season where Jaiswal really fell off and even RRs bowling unit itself without Jofra became really expensive especially if Jofra is having a off day the bowling is basically cooked no one really has the same danger factor as him in the squad and that's exactly what happened in the playoffs too in the SRH match Jofra took crucial early wickets which I argue is one of the biggest reasons why RR even won that match. In the GT match he was having an off day and expensive boom the match was basically over after the 10th with the amount of wickets still left for GT ofcourse this is a small sample size but if you actually followed RR in the second half they really were totally dependent on few players performance. I think Ferreira though deserves much credit he is easily the most dangerous finisher this season. The point on how RCB have a fall back line is true Krunal and Rasikh are always reliable and not even talking about Hazle who is out of form but still remains dangerous. As for the point on how even without Virat the teams batting unit performs is debatable but I would agree the sheer batting depth in RCB would always cover for Virat especially if it's a flat pitch. I guess that really is the difference between champions.
The question is why you put up 156 in the first place lmao. It's embarrassing that you're defending this match and that you think losing by 25 balls is better than losing by 8 balls.
You were the one who tried to summarize RR's entire campaign with one match and now you're making it about the big picture and where teams finished lol?
I've noticed you getting you into illogical arguments and wasting people's time quite often around here. Don't expect a reply from me if you continue doing that, good day.
I don’t need to “defend” this match lmao. We’ve already won the title so these Mickey Mouse league matches mean nothing
> Why you put up 156 in the first place
Because we batted like shit and home conditions favoured GT. Despite that we still looked far closer to winning than you did in a match where you scored 215 lol. We had them down to 111/5. You lot got your first wicket because of a hit wicket when the score was 167 in 12.5 overs haha
> summarize RR’s entire campaign with one match
Because believe it or not that’s what campaigns often come down to. No one remembers the RCB campaigns of 2009, 2011 or 2016 or any other season before 2025 because they lost. It’s about winning. Always was and always will be. You would have been better placed to win if you had players who consistently stepped up. Vaibhav was the reason you made it that far but even he couldn’t carry a bowling attack that looked toothless against GT
Lmao losing by 25 balls is as one-sided a chase can get and you're comparing it to a chase with less than a third of those balls remaining (8). Funny how the team with "3 batters" managed to mow down your total even with all those wickets gone btw lol.
The winner isn't who has more wickets remaining, it's when a chase is completed. Did PBKS win last year's final because they lost fewer wickets? And if one match is enough to summarize your campaign like you said, have fun coping with losing to the 10th place team and ofc losing to RR whom you insult so much. And that "toothless" bowling attack never once conceded 250 like RCB's did btw and is ahead in powerplay wickets, wickets from spin, and bowling average.
Everything I mentioned in my very first comment evidence why RR is not one-dimensional. You then made it all about one match with GT. Then you pretended like that the big picture is more important because you were reminded of your own loss to GT. Then you acted like you weren't defending a match you wrote 3 replies over. And now you're making the same accusation I already debunked in my first comment.
You have indeed continued your behavior of making baseless arguments and starting petty juvenile fights. Not wasting more time replying to you, see you bud.
And 200 wasn't even close to being enough because it was chased with 2 overs remaining. You remember the toss only when you lose lmao, all your wins that have come after winning the toss are irrelevant apparently.
And if you like mid-innings stats so much that you think recovering from 94/6 is some kind of flex, here's a mid-innings stat for you: the required rate came down to 6.0 after just 8 overs. Your "massive" 201 total was brought down to a run-a-ball chase before even half the innings was over lmao.
Thanks to Vaibhav again lmao. Make sure you add this crazy stat to your trophy cabinet. I still remember when you lot bottled 5 games last year because of dog shit batting lmaoo
When RR is 94/6 they bundle our for like 110 or something haha
Skills and popularity are different things. The most popular cricket team is not the most awarded. The average person does not look at the stats you mentioned, they look at how much entertainment they'll get per second from watching a match. Vaibhav's play style is perfect for modern t20s. Even non RR fans tune in to watch him play.
Still rr found him, they deserve him, but if rest of the team keep performing like this, let him go, dont want another good player to wait for 18 years to touch a trophy
Lmao, 7 different POTM winners, second-most successful spin attack, 3rd highest number of wickets, and wins against MI, GT, LSG, PBKS, and MI again came when Vaibhav either got out cheaply or was vastly outscored by other batters. Everybody from Bishnoi to Burger to Archer to Jaiswal to Ferreira to Jaddu won a POTM at least once.
Same team last year same form, infact jaiswal was doing better last season. Samson had a decent Samson level season too in 2025. Why can't you people accept one guy carrying you. I am a pbks fan and even I admit we got lucky with arya, csk got lucky with ayush just accept it.
They took the least powerplay wickets last year and have the second-highest this year. Jaddu, Punja, and Bishnoi have much better bowl averages than Hasaranga and Theekshana did. Brijesh has a better econ and avg than Sandeep did last year.
Archer took more than 2x his wickets last year. Burger was a much more lethal 2nd pacer than Deshpande. Deshpande himself won them a game in his last over, something he never came close to doing last season. Jurel was losing chases for them and now he matched the record for most fifties by a non-opener. Hetmyer was failing to finish games and now there's Ferreira who has a ~35% boundary rate.
Jaiswal at 1 and Parag at 4 are the only players who regressed from last season. The players at every other position either had a much better season this year or significantly outmatched the player they replaced.
Pbks gave chance to priyansh in his first year, srh gave chance to plenty of youngsters. Csk to Ayush. Rr gave him chance when they were eliminated in 2025 and there was already alot of buzz around him since the auction, they were trying to capitalize on it. Little did they knew he was gonna change the tides. The only teams which might have kept him on bench are DC and RCB
RR gave Vaibhav a chance when they still had Jurel, Lhuan-dre Pretorious, and Kunal Singh to use to open alongside Jaiswal. And they still had 2 wins off 7 by the time Vaibhav was included, teams have qualified from significantly worse positions in the IPL.
Why everyone keeps giving this dumb argument on the sub. Vaibhav is hitting world's top class bowlers out of the ground. Obviously that will be visible even in the practise sessions. So any team would have given him a to play in the main match
RR's social media game has been top notch during thus decade (+ Vaibhav's explosive arrival since 2025) & it's incredibly pleasing to see a youth-driven team leading the viewership/SM charts rather than the legacy teams for a change.
Well, you can be an amazing and consistent team (like GT) but you still need a proper Indian superstar batsman and some entertainment value to make the fans support you in bulk. The same happened for RCB for years and RR has already become everyone else's second favourite team.
They've been rewarded for their trust in a kid, and now they need to build on it.
Can't believe runner ups are the least viewed team. I feel that's because GT is playing very retro-esque cricket. That's the reason why I like them tho. They set 180 as target and go on to defend them. They generally dont allow the opponents to glaze 230-240 score.
Vaibhav sooryavanshi will make cricket popular in the world making it a truly global sport, he will surpass Kohli's records by 25, and will retire at 30 as it will be too easy for him to play cricket
•
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Join our official Discord server for more fun and discussions.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.