• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

What's A Safe Total On A Belter ??

What's A Safe Total On A Belter That You Could Back Your Team To Defend

  • 300-310

    Votes: 1 3.0%
  • 310-320

    Votes: 1 3.0%
  • 320-330

    Votes: 6 18.2%
  • 330-340

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 340-350

    Votes: 5 15.2%
  • 350+

    Votes: 20 60.6%

  • Total voters
    33

irfan

State Captain
In recent times, scores in excess of 300 have been chased down with alarming regularity particularly if Australia is 'defending' the total.

The most astonishing fact is even if early wickets go down teams are still able to summon all their middle and lower order strength to overhaul these huge totals. Even as recent as 2 years ago this was highly unlikely, if not impossible to chase down this totals if you didn't get off to a blinder.

So... If the pitch was an absolute belter, what total would you be comfortable defending ??
 

Somerset

Cricketer Of The Year
Considering the J'burg game and the two recent games in NZ amongst others in the past year or so, I honestly don't think there can be a safe total on a belter.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
I think we've seen recently that no total is safe if you've got a flat wicket and a small boundary or two. One of the major advancements in ODI batting in recent times has the ability of batsmen to improvise shots to exploit a short boundary at one or two points on the ground, and in a lot of the biggest scores you see, that's part of it (though not today AFAIK). That definitely played a big role in Jo'burg.

As far as being comfortable is concerned, I think anything above 325 should be comfortable. If you bowl and field decently you should defend that, and there's no way you can blame the score if you don't. As far as "safe" goes though, I'd say you'd want to be well over 350 if it's a genuinely flat wicket, and even that isn't safe, as we've seen.
 

irfan

State Captain
I personally think 320-330 is enough to defend comfortably if you bowl accurately and smartly.
 

Craig

World Traveller
Yeah once upon a time (go back 4-5 years) it was considered in ODIs that anything above 350 was unchasable, what will be the next safe unchasable target? 450 to win?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Not to mention paucity of bowling.

Ground size = far more important than pitch-type IMO.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
It is difficult in New Zealand because we play most of our games on rugby grounds, like at Eden Park I think it was only 45m to one of the boundaries which is absolutely ridiculous.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Eden Park's very much an anomaly, though, isn't it?

I mean, WestPac Trust Park (and the others) which I was watching today seemed perfectly normal for a cricket-ground, just a smaller one.

I've always been amazed that average-score isn't ridiculously big at Eden Park.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
You get flat pitches all the time.

When the highest four chases are all on postage stamps, 2+2.

Australia are claustrophobic?
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Well there was one near-highest chase at some ground in India, which I presume wasn't exactly small, too. :p
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Eden Park's very much an anomaly, though, isn't it?

I mean, WestPac Trust Park (and the others) which I was watching today seemed perfectly normal for a cricket-ground, just a smaller one.

I've always been amazed that average-score isn't ridiculously big at Eden Park.
Thats because traditionally Eden Park pitches are slow and low. That Eden Park pitch for the 2nd ODI was easily the most batsmen friendly pitch i've ever seen there. So its no coincidence that huge total was scored
 

Fiery

Banned
Eden Park's very much an anomaly, though, isn't it?

I mean, WestPac Trust Park (and the others) which I was watching today seemed perfectly normal for a cricket-ground, just a smaller one.

I've always been amazed that average-score isn't ridiculously big at Eden Park.
The pitches at Eden Park have being generally pretty bowler-friendly up till now. Even the Outer Oval is not the minefield it once was.

Edit: Stole my thunder there zinny
 

Top