"Stats"

[Neil Pickup]

Re: Re: Re: "Stats"

Scores are a stat!!!!
That's exactly the point!

Scores, i.e. match results?

Extra stats, averages etc, aren't that important

 

[marc71178]

Not surprisingly, Bradman was asked about how he would have fared in modern cricket on MANY occasions and his answer was a gem. He said that taking into account that pitches were far better in his day and that that opposition strengths and weaknesses are nearly a science in modern cricket, he said he would not have averaged 99.94 if he played in the modern era. Of course this made everyone in the room gasp until he added one more bit;

".....but, I still would've scored many more runs than the guy who came second!"

I heard that the 2nd part was something along the lines of "But I am 80"

 

[Richard]

Re: Re: Re: Re: "Stats"

Scores, i.e. match results?

Extra stats, averages etc, aren't that important

Well, but for them no-one would know who the best players were.
Match-results, incidentally, are a stat like anything else. You don't keep a record of wins, losses, draws, you don't get series results, league tables, etc.
Like it or not, cricket is nothing without stats.

 

[luckyeddie]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "Stats"

Like it or not, cricket is nothing without stats.

never a truer word spoken

 

[Craig]

But you could also say sport in general wouldnt be the same with stats. Stats play a big part in all sports.

For example Inter Milan's 0-0 draw with Roma in the Serie A was Inter's 3rd nil-all draw of the season.

 

[Richard]

Well, when you put it like that, Craig - you're right.
0-0 in itself is a stat. A scoreline. And so is a collection of them.
Sport is understood by stats and interpretation of them. You could play it without them, but it wouldn't have any meaning.
I just said "cricket" because this is a cricket forum, but it's perfectly true of every sport probably to exist. How many sports have no scoring of any type?