Aceptable econmy rates in ODIS

[Craig]

Originally posted by marc71178
Don't forget the way the game has evolved in favour of the batsman.

I'm not putting Garner down here, but it's a lot harder nowadays, a lot more work for bowlers (relative to batsmen) and the fielding restrictions.

I know what you are saying Marc, but you cant discredit it because of higher margin of error because of the height he was delievering the ball and BTW the fielding restrications came in because of World Series Cricket.

[Neil Pickup]

Originally posted by Craig
Alright Marc, give me what define acceptable. I want to know this one.

We don't judge bowlers on statistics.

[Craig]

Ok Neil, who do you mean 'we'? You mean everybody or at Cricket Web? Unless something happened about a year and a half ago and didnt know about.

[royGilchrist]

Yeah I agree with you Marc, Garner was playing in an era when there werent that mnay runs (low scoring average in general) scored in general, for whatever reason, players plan innings better, no ball over shoulder, field restrictions, 60 overs matches, no Jayasuria

Still Garner was the best among a crop of very good bowlers in his time so he must be good (the 'Bradman argument' you might call it. Secondly this and other discussions also highlight how good players like Wasim Akram are, as they have good rpo, are playing in an era with high batting averages for teams, always bowled in the death overs (this is remarkable).

[Neil Pickup]

Originally posted by Craig
Ok Neil, who do you mean 'we'? You mean everybody or at Cricket Web? Unless something happened about a year and a half ago and didnt know about.

Not sure what you're getting at here. I meant Marc and I for the most part.

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by Neil Pickup
Not sure what you're getting at here. I meant Marc and I for the most part.

In general I disagree with making wholesale judgements on any players based purely on stats.

[marc71178]

Originally posted by Craig
Alright Marc, give me what define acceptable. I want to know this one.

Look at match conditions etc.

Someone who plays predominantly on wickets with small boundaries and quick outfields may well be happy with 5.5, but 5.5 in other places is not good.

Think of it this way.

A team scores 330 in 50 overs - the bowler who conceded 45 from his 10 overs has done well.

A team scores 130 in 50 overs - now the 45 from 10 doesn't look good.

It is impossible ot be subjective.

[Craig]

Originally posted by Neil Pickup
Not sure what you're getting at here. I meant Marc and I for the most part.

I just didnt know what you meant 8D :saint:

[Richard]

OK, a few thoughts:
1, 5-an-over is too expensive at any time. Any full-time bowler should be disappointed to have gone for 5-an-over in any one-day game. To accept 5-an-over, for me, is an acceptance of mediocrity.
2, no, you can't just judge bowlers on statistics, but an economy-rate for 5 overs or more is usually a fair reflection of how accurate someone has bowled. For me, I only ever give credit for wickets that have been taken with what I would call good deliveries.
3, bowling has always to be taken in context. Anything over 4-an-over in what I'd call favourable conditions is too expensive (eg seamers in typical English, Kiwi conditions or fingerspinners in typical Sri Lankan). 4.4-an-over is perfectly acceptible for someone bowling in typically unfavourable conditions (eg fingerspinners in England). For someone regularly bowling in the last 10 overs, an extra 0.1-an-over is added to the acceptible and good.
4, yes, the one-day game in the 70s and 80s is not far from incomparable to that of '92 onwards. But Garner's record would still probably be about 3.7-an-over if he bowled today if you ask me.
5, James Kirtley is not a good one-day bowler IMO. He has played ODIs for a long while now, I never thought he should have been selected in the first place as his List-A economy-rate is over 4.6-an-over. And his ODI record is dreadful, no two ways about that.
6, Waqar Younis is nowhere near the one-day bowler he used to be. Since he took the Pakistan captaincy his accuracy has just gone to pot. Take a look at his county record last season. An international bowler should be going at less than 4-an-over in OD and 3-an-over in FC cricket, when he gets into domestic stuff. Waqar went at at about 0.8-an-over more than that. I was very disappointed in him.
7, Simon Jones' one-day credentials are, for me, summed-up by the fact of 5 one-day games in 5 seasons at the club (excluding 2003, as he didn't play First-Team cricket), and the record that accompanies it. I don't think he'll ever be a good one-day bowler, but eventually he'll play another one-day game and we'll see if anything has changed from 4 years ago (the last time he played a List-A one-day game).

[Craig]

Good to see you here Richard.

[Richard]

Originally posted by Craig
Good to see you here Richard.

Incidentally - when did you become a Glamorgan member?

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by Richard
6, Waqar Younis is nowhere near the one-day bowler he used to be. Since he took the Pakistan captaincy his accuracy has just gone to pot.

I agree to an extent, but his economy rate was 4.57 before the captaincy was given to him and since it has been 5.05. That's a big difference, but his initial economy was still not acceptable by the standards of some people. Interestingly, his SR went down by almost 2 points in that period.

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by Richard
Incidentally - when did you become a Glamorgan member?

If you are referring to his signature, it's for a virtual management league we have on Cricket Web called World Club Cricket.

[Richard]

Originally posted by Mr Mxyzptlk
If you are referring to his signature, it's for a virtual management league we have on Cricket Web called World Club Cricket.

Ah, thank you, that clears that up.

[marc71178]

Originally posted by Richard
5-an-over is too expensive at any time. Any full-time bowler should be disappointed to have gone for 5-an-over in any one-day game. To accept 5-an-over, for me, is an acceptance of mediocrity.

5 an over is in a lot of cases well below the average scoring rates in one day cricket. To go for 5 an over is not bad, and can be acceptable in any score over 250 from 50 overs.

Originally posted by Richard
For someone regularly bowling in the last 10 overs, an extra 0.1-an-over is added to the acceptible and good.

Only 0.1? that seems a very tight thing, and your suggesting if someone bowls 5 of the last 10 overs, they should only concede an extra half run than they did in the first 5 they bowled!

I think you should AT LEAST 1 an over on.