Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 72

Thread: Aceptable econmy rates in ODIS

  1. #16
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131
    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.
    Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick once and you suck forever...

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi, a true legend of CW

    Quote Originally Posted by Boobidy View Post
    Bradman never had to face quicks like Sharma and Irfan Pathan. He wouldn't of lasted a ball against those 2, not to mention a spinner like Sehwag.

  2. #17
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,857
    Originally posted by Craig
    Alright Marc, give me what define acceptable. I want to know this one.
    We don't judge bowlers on statistics.
    MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
    CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
    ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

    Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

    Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

  3. #18
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131
    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.

  4. #19
    State 12th Man
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    787
    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).


  5. #20
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,857
    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.

  6. #21
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    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.
    Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."


  7. #22
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,785
    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.
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  8. #23
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131
    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:

  9. #24
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    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).
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  10. #25
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131
    Good to see you here Richard.

  11. #26
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Originally posted by Craig
    Good to see you here Richard.
    Incidentally - when did you become a Glamorgan member?

  12. #27
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    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.

  13. #28
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Mr Mxyzptlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad)
    Posts
    36,795
    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.

  14. #29
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    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.

  15. #30
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,785
    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.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •