Australia name Chappell-Hadlee Trophy squad

[bryce]

if your not taking wickets you cannot keep the runs down no matter how good your economy is, it's called 'cricket logic'.

 

[Richard]

Err, no, that's called "lack of logic".
As long as you've got a limited number of overs, you don't need to take wickets to keep the runs down - though almost invariably if you do keep them down, wickets will result.

 

[Mister Wright]

Err, no, that's called "lack of logic".
As long as you've got a limited number of overs, you don't need to take wickets to keep the runs down - though almost invariably if you do keep them down, wickets will result.

Have you taken a batsman's strike rate versus a bowlers economy into the ewquation at all Richard?

 

[Richard]

Fairly obviously in any given game they're going to be the exact inverse of each other.

 

[marc71178]

Err, no, that's called "lack of logic".

Which is why it happens so often isn't it?

Side with wickets in hand ups tempo at end of innings.

 

[Mister Wright]

Fairly obviously in any given game they're going to be the exact inverse of each other.

What I meant is - if Gilchrist is on the rampage it is not going to matter what your career economy rate is. If you get him out you have more of a chance to slow down the team scoring rate. If you don't, there is a chance he can put on a massive score like his 172 against Zimbabwe.

 

[Richard]

Which is why it happens so often isn't it?

Side with wickets in hand ups tempo at end of innings.

Yes, but not always anywhere near as significantly as might be predicted by D\L.
And, of course, occasionally not at all.

 

[Richard]

What I meant is - if Gilchrist is on the rampage it is not going to matter what your career economy rate is. If you get him out you have more of a chance to slow down the team scoring rate. If you don't, there is a chance he can put on a massive score like his 172 against Zimbabwe.

Yes, and if you keep him quiet you've got a good chance of getting him out, because in ODIs especially he tends to not like having 3 or 4 dot-balls bowled at him in a row and like anyone that can mean he plays a stupid shot resulting in dismissal.
I don't think too many of the Zimbabwe bowlers had especially outstanding economy-rates going into that game, though - one of the reasons for the innings.

 

[marc71178]

Yes, but not always anywhere near as significantly as might be predicted by D\L.
And, of course, occasionally not at all.

D/L shows that it happens much more often than not.

 

[Richard]

It happens when the bowling isn't very good, it doesn't happen when the bowling is good.

 

[marc71178]

It happens far more often than not, hence the D/L model, against all bowling as a whole.

 

[Richard]

It happens far more often than not

Which simply shows that more often than not the bowling is not very good in the last 10 overs, something that has been far more pronounced of late.

 

[marc71178]

Yes, it's always something being wrong with one thing or the other, never the nature of the game changing.

 

[Richard]

Yes, things have changed - as a general rule, there are less good bowlers around at the present time.