Cricket Betting Site Betway

View Poll Results: ...does an ATG fielder save compared to an average one? (per-innings)

Voters
6. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1-5

    2 33.33%
  • 6-10

    2 33.33%
  • 11-15

    1 16.67%
  • 15+

    1 16.67%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 31

Thread: Based on your opinion, how many runs...

  1. #16
    International Vice-Captain robelinda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    at home
    Posts
    4,234
    This thread is reminding me to complete my video of every Mark Waugh catch in international cricket....it goes for 80 mins already and I'm only just over half way......quality viewing.....
    My Youtube cricket channels, thousands of gold old videos

    http://www.youtube.com/user/robelinda2

    http://www.youtube.com/user/robelinda

  2. #17
    International Captain Redbacks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Гурин View Post
    Interesting, I maximized every number to get an extreme value but we're not far away. But I think the average of 40 runs after dropped catch is a bit too high, the average per wicket in the time analized should be used.
    40 could be a bit high I agree. My thinking was biased towards slip catchers and my I feeling is that tail enders don't edge the ball as often. Without some serious investigation of scorecards it will always be tough to say how many more runs dropped players average.

    Quote Originally Posted by Гурин View Post
    However, your link is taking into account every position in cricket, and as I said, for other positions there's more than simple converting chances; so I'd like to know the value for slips and close-in fielders, which I believe should be a little bit higher
    I only looked at the top of the list of all time highets catchers to make a rough guess of 0.7. These tend to be slip/gully fielders and the best players who have made it to 80+ tests. Fielders in the outfiled look like they take ~0.5 catches per innings.

    It will be tough to judge players in the outfield as knowing what should/shouldn't be stopped is hard to judge.

  3. #18
    International Coach Xuhaib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Karachi
    Posts
    10,118
    Quote Originally Posted by robelinda View Post
    He sure did, he wasn't superman. I can probably upload about 10 or so drops of his easily. He dropped some clangers too. Obviously he didn't drop them all, but he was more spectacular at stopping the ball, rarely did he take a spectacular catch.


    I can recall atleast half a dozen and I most probably watched 1/5 of the matches he played.

  4. #19
    International Coach Xuhaib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Karachi
    Posts
    10,118
    I do agree a good slip catcher is more valuable then a cover/point stopper in test cricket.


  5. #20
    Request Your Custom Title Now!
    Suicide Bob Champion!
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Not really needed on CW
    Posts
    30,944
    Dwayne Leverock is an ATG slip fielder

  6. #21
    International 12th Man Debris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    1,604
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemon View Post
    Dwayne Leverock is an ATG slip fielder
    He certainly covered more ground than the average slip fielder.

  7. #22
    Request Your Custom Title Now!
    Suicide Bob Champion!
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Not really needed on CW
    Posts
    30,944
    Always made a huge impact on the field

  8. #23
    International Coach G.I.Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    India
    Posts
    13,059
    Yeah, he was fatastic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athlai View Post
    If GI 'Best Poster On The Forum' Joe says it then it must be true.
    Athlai doesn't lie. And he doesn't do sarcasm either, so you know it's true!


    'You will look very silly said Mr Salteena with a dry laugh.
    Well so will you said Ethel in a snappy tone and she ran out of the room with a very superier run throwing out her legs behind and her arms swinging in rithum.
    Well said the owner of the house she has a most idiotick run.'


  9. #24
    Request Your Custom Title Now!
    Suicide Bob Champion!
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Not really needed on CW
    Posts
    30,944
    Has certainly set the scale really high for the others. The sheer weight of his performances will no doubt have others struggling to match his massive stature as a cricketer.

  10. #25
    School Boy/Girl Captain Гурин's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gurin, Russia
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by Xuhaib View Post
    I do agree a good slip catcher is more valuable then a cover/point stopper in test cricket.
    Well, as I already told Rob... no.

    Just take a look at the simple math I did for Mark Waugh: if we put the contribution of a standard slip at 70% of his, that would mean roughly a wicket less every 3 matches (which translates to 6-7 runs per innings); and Redbacks calculation was not far away (5 and something runs). As good and impressive as it is, if you have some off-side fielder who can stop already 2-3 balls per innings which would have been missed by your average fielder, that's more; also, you have to put runouts into the equation.

    How many times the batsmen didn't take the single because the ball went to Ponting? Quite a few every test match, I believe, and those are runs saved. Put there the strong arm, and the twos became ones. Not to mention the fact that the Tasmanian was above average also in both runouts and catches; so, I'm prone to give him more that those 6 runs of Waugh's.




    Ok then, as I've seen that the topic of this thread doesn't enjoy much interest, I'll push the emergency button (please God forgive me for what I'm going to write, but it's for the best);


    I really believe Ponting is massively underrated as an ATG; the very fact that Tendulkar gets picked more often than him in the various XI is extremely unjust, because people are not taking FIELDING in the equations.

    First of all, I want to make clear that Tendulkar is surely the best batsman of the last 25 years; his technique, his elegance and his astonishing numbers speaks for him. However, Ponting doesn't fall so much behind; avg is 53 to 56, and innings per 100 is 6,74 to 5,84.

    Clearly Tendulkar has the edge, and I believe those 3 or 4 runs per innings of difference between the two to be a fair indicator.

    BUT, and you saw this coming, I think that Ponting is massively screwed by the fact that there's no method to determine the runs one has saved in the field.

    Sure, we know that the aussie boy has taken around 75 more catches in around 25 less matches, and if these were ODIs we'd have to take the Master Blaster's bowling into account (avg of 50 in tests doesn't help him), but the feeling is that the per-fielding-innings between the two is way higher than that 3-4 runs of difference in their batting average.

    The problem being, we don't know how much it is. We don't know where Tendulkar ranks as a fielder. I admit to take this "can of worms" comparison just to shed some light on the problem, because, that's my feeling, great fielders are extremly mistreated whenever it comes down to players rankings, awards and even selections. So, is there any way to solve this problem? I would say that, while perfection is still above horizon, there's massive room for improvement, even only with new scorecards; just by beginning to record "stops" and "drops"; even better if, along with "catches", we divide them for fielding positions. For past games it would be tough, to sit through hundred of test matches to record new data, but it could be done. Of course this should be the boards' job, but I'm wondering if they're

    1- Already doing it
    2- Happy for things to stay as they are


    That's why I made this poll, and I found it amazing that very few people dared to take a punt in the number of runs a player's fielding means to his team (and those who did, were all on absolutely different positions). If nobody knows, can you blame them to avoid using it as a valid metre for measurement? Of course not.


    Last thing, I'll give you one example from baseball (I can't stand to watch a game of that one-shot sport, but they know how to do their stats): Derek Jeter was considered, thanks to his diving catches and stops, to be the best fielder in MLB, winning five time the Golden Glove. Then, when they began to track stats, they discovered that he was, in fact, the WORST fielder in the whole league, costing his team quite a few runs every year. Eyes and highlights can be deceptive.

  11. #26
    Cricket Web Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    27,193
    This is heading to Sabermetrics, isn't it?

    Would be interesting to do a full analysis at some stage of missed/saved runs over a test series - and see how much impact fielders do have, numerically. Although, even just writing this, what's the difference between good fielding and poor running? Or good running versus poor fielding?

    I'm a bit of a greenhorn on baseball stats, but I am assuming much of it is just the error count... am I over-simplifying?
    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

  12. #27
    School Boy/Girl Captain Гурин's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gurin, Russia
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    This is heading to Sabermetrics, isn't it?

    Well, not exactly. Don't forget that, compared to them, we have a much stronger currency to value a player's performance, which is runs. But I wouldn't go now to a comparison between the meaning of a run in the two games. Meanwhile, has the movie of "Moneyball" been released yet? I'm 100% sure that lot of people, and that includes those who made that movie, will misinterpret Bill James a lot (that already happened for the book, which by the way in many aspects was mediocre at best).


    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    Would be interesting to do a full analysis at some stage of missed/saved runs over a test series - and see how much impact fielders do have, numerically. Although, even just writing this, what's the difference between good fielding and poor running? Or good running versus poor fielding?
    Againg, it's all mainly about percentage plays against average; and you can measure them only on a fair enough lenghty sample size. Let's say that you take a single after a fast shot to short cover; if you run, that leads to a runout, say, 40% of time. So, even if you made it or not, that IS bad running: you've might have just been lucky. But let's say now that the guy at short cover is slow and has a weak arm, so his success rate is 5%: that means that he's a bad fielder (and probably shouldn't play there). And so on, for every shot and every position. I hope you understood the big picture here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    I'm a bit of a greenhorn on baseball stats, but I am assuming much of it is just the error count... am I over-simplifying?
    Sorry, but yes you are.

    Errors mean nearly nothing; I'll just give you an example, ther ar two guys fielding at deep square leg; 5 balls comes toward them. One of them reaches all of them 5, but mishandles 2; that's 2 errors. The other one reaches only 2, but catches them both.

    So your first guy catches 3, and by dropping the other 2 probably saves some runs; the second catches 2, doesn't make any error, but allows three boundaries. We could have put stops instead of catches, I think you got what I mean: range is often more important than catching, moreso in deep fielding positions (less for close-in catching and slips). A problem for us is that fields et captaincy comes into the picture, but I don't think that's anything unsolvable.

  13. #28
    State Vice-Captain akilana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Quebec
    Posts
    1,492
    Quote Originally Posted by Гурин View Post
    I really believe Ponting is massively underrated as an ATG; the very fact that Tendulkar gets picked more often than him in the various XI is extremely unjust, because people are not taking FIELDING in the equations.
    ok

  14. #29
    School Boy/Girl Captain Stefano's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    193
    Errors mean nearly nothing; I'll just give you an example, ther ar two guys fielding at deep square leg; 5 balls comes toward them. One of them reaches all of them 5, but mishandles 2; that's 2 errors. The other one reaches only 2, but catches them both.

    So your first guy catches 3, and by dropping the other 2 probably saves some runs; the second catches 2, doesn't make any error, but allows three boundaries. We could have put stops instead of catches, I think you got what I mean: range is often more important than catching, moreso in deep fielding positions (less for close-in catching and slips). A problem for us is that fields et captaincy comes into the picture, but I don't think that's anything unsolvable.
    This point is fundamental in judging fielding / defense in baseball. For many years, fielding average (putouts and assists / total chances) was considered the best measure to judge defensive players and their skills on the field. However, there is one fundamental element which fielding average does not consider: RANGE. And this is what Гурин wants to underline. Let's consider this (ok, we are talking about baseball).

    Player #1: 100 balls are batted into his area.
    a) 90 putouts
    b) 5 errors
    c) 5 base hits.

    Player #2: 100 balls are batted into his area.
    a) 80 putouts
    b) 2 errors
    c) 18 base hits

    Player #3: 100 balls are batted into his ara.
    a) 50 putouts
    b) no error
    c) 50 base hits.

    If we consider the FA, Player #3 is by far the best one (1.000). Player # is ok (.975). Player #3 is the worst of them all (.947). Is it true that Player #3 is the best defender? Not really. He has basically no range, since 50 balls have gone past him, allowing the batsman to reach 1st base. Player #1, instead, has made 5 errors, but he has registered 90 putouts. An error, of course, is annoying but there are two elements to consider:

    1) You can't make an error if you don't reach the ball.
    2) A passed ball could have never been an out. An error could have been an out.


    So, making an error is better than letting the ball to pass you. Player #1 has the best range: 90 balls out of 100 have been transformed into an out! And that's the task of a defender: take the ball and prevent the batsman to reach 1st base. Altogether he had 95 chances; Player #2 had 82 chances; Player #3 only 50.

    In addition: a great defender is not the one who makes spectacular catches or amazing throws out of balance. Actually, this is a perfect description of a defender with no range. A good defender reaches the ball without diving and he always throws with both feet on the ground. Гурин has mentioned Jeter. I can mention Adam Everett: he has never won a Gold Glove, his plays are seldom shown on "Plays of the Week". But his range is amazing: in his prime he was able to reach balls all over the field and most of the time he didn't need to jump or dive! And everytime he had to throw the ball, he had both his feet on the ground. Very often, he wasn't very spectacular at all!

    Is it possible to shift this kind of analysis to cricket? I think it is more problematic.

    1) Range. In baseball, defensive positions are extremely fixed. Every defensive player has his own zone, which is clearly (or almost) delimited. In cricket, the field is much bigger, while defensive positions are not fixed.

    We might try to calculate the "distance run by each outfielder" to reach the ball. For example, a fielder at deep is able to reach the ball which has been batted far away from his position. And even though he will drop the catch, but he will definitely save a boundary. A similar procedure can be used for infielders. Think about a fielder at gully who is able to reach a ball which is far from the position where he initially stood; maybe he won't make a catch, but the ball will not leave the infield and no runs will be scored. Even though it is extremely complicated, calculating the range of each fielder would be a terrific addition to statistics.

    2) Preventing runs. Гурин underlines another point. If you have a good arm, batsmen will not score an extra run. Sometimes, they won't even try to run. So, two interesting pieces of statistics could be considered:

    a) Runs scored / balls batted towards a specific fielder.

    100 balls are batted towards fielder #1 and 200 runs are scored out of them. 100 balls are batted towards fielder #2 and 150 runs are scored out of them. I can assume that fielder #2 is better at preventing runs.

    b) Tries to score runs / balls batted towards a specific fielder.

    100 balls are batted towards fielder #1: the two batsmen attempt to score runs 60 times.
    100 balls are batted towards fielder #2: the two batsmen attempt to score runs 50 times.

    I can assume that fielder #2 is more feared than fielder #1.

    However, cricket games are extremely long! How many balls are batted in one test match? More than 2,500! Much more than baseball. So, preparing accurate statistics definitely requires lots of time.

    In addition, I would suggest tha these kinds of calculation might not be that useful for TM or FCC : preventing runs is important, but the main focus is taking wickets. But for LOI and especially T20, these kinds of statistics would give a tremendous help and teams should start considering them.
    Last edited by Stefano; 05-10-2011 at 04:32 PM.
    Proud member of the "Twenty20 is Boring Society."

  15. #30
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend zorax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    22,863
    Good post

    2 problems with that.

    Firstly, more runs may be scored off one fielder compared to another because the fielder may be set deeper in the field. A man at long-on is likely to have a lot more runs scored off balls batted to him compared to a man at short cover.

    Secondly, how many times a batsman attempts to score runs off a fielder will also depend on where the fielders are placed, as well as the match situation and the batsmen in question. Yuvraj and MSD chasing 8 RPO will react differently to Amla and Kallis needing 4 RPO to a ball batted to the same fielder.

    But overall, it's on the right track, and would be excellent for T20 and possibly LO cricket.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. International Cricket Captain General Thread of Miscellany
    By NZTailender in forum Cricket Games
    Replies: 560
    Last Post: 08-04-2019, 01:55 AM
  2. Ashes Draft
    By Blakus in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 481
    Last Post: 21-12-2010, 03:56 AM
  3. Mystery Draft V.2 (1989-2009)
    By Mupariwa_Magic in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 492
    Last Post: 21-11-2009, 01:00 PM
  4. Mouth-watering analysis this
    By Zinzan in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 09-05-2009, 12:06 AM
  5. Club Cricket 9-10 Results
    By Mr Mxyzptlk in forum CW Offseason Club Cricket
    Replies: 964
    Last Post: 27-04-2006, 03:41 PM

Posting Permissions

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