Cricket Player Manager
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 91 to 104 of 104

Thread: Wicketkeeping standards

  1. #91
    International Coach
    Suicide Bob Champion!
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Not really needed on CW
    Posts
    13,012
    In that post he said he played no further than the QLD 2nd XI though..

    Stop the suspense JBMAC!

  2. #92
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,859
    Er, boys, Country Cricket is not Test Cricket...
    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. #93
    SJS
    SJS is offline
    Hall of Fame Member SJS's Avatar
    Virus 2 Champion!
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Mumbai India
    Posts
    19,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    Er, boys, Country Cricket is not Test Cricket...
    :o)

  4. #94
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,747
    Quote Originally Posted by SJS View Post

    . . . and I think that bit about being reduced to an "arm chair umpire" is an oblique reference to his being one of the first international match referees.
    I may be being thick, but how can...

    I have played Grade with the likes of Ken Mackay, Your namesake, and still count among my friends Jeff Thompson and Wesley Hall who I played both with and against at Grade level. I have played on the SCG and the Gabba in a "second" QLD 11 but was never good enough to go beyond that.
    ... possibly lead to the conclusion that the mystery man is a test cricketer?


  5. #95
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,859
    Anyway, to get back on the topic. I've been keeping wicket for eight years now, admittedly only at mid-low league level, but if I could bat I'd be playing higher. I've also done a lot of coaching at county/district rep level in the junior age groups, and this has included working with a number of ex-FC players and coaches. I'm looking forward to a 90-minute workshop on coaching keepers with Simon Guy at the ECB coaches' conference next weekend. So that's where I'm coming from...

    Working at this lower level, I'm often left identifying potential wicketkeepers and developing inexperienced keepers; it is a point of principle that this is one position where we're not going to be out-played. I have looked down the years - as a mathematician/statto at coming up with a way to inform my coaching and our performance, but I have really got nowhere beyond eyes and instinct.

    The first aspect that I look for is their balance when they catch - stable base, good balance, level head, watching it into their hands. From here, the biggest target to develop in their first seasons as a keeper is the weight transfer (i.e. weight on the balls of their feet) and ability to stand up to the stumps, hopefully developing confidence in their ability in the process.

    Longer-term, you are looking for a keeper to be a heartbeat of the fielding team, taking the ball after 90% of deliveries, sweeping up poor throws (or ensuring there is a backer-up to cover a wild one) and supporting the captain/leaders in geeing up fielders. There has never been a good team with a poor keeper; laissez-faire glovework spreads like a virus across the team. There aren't any stats for that.

    It's also imperative that a keeper knows how to judge a wicket, and when to stand up or back to the medium-pacers; it's something that I love doing and, for my money, is the most satisfying part of the job - the thin edge standing up, or the born-of-frustration stumping when you've stood up to the opening bowler because the batsman loves a wander. Yes, you get something in the "st" column, but nothing for the guy who chipped it to mid on, because he didn't get over the ball, because he didn't get to the pitch, because he was thinking about you. There aren't any stats for that.

    Then there's the support and feedback you provide to the skipper; the fact that you're the first to know when the bowler's lost his zip, or how much it's swinging, seaming or turning, or that sometimes you manage a well-placed word that persuades the batsman to try mashing the next ball over the top, only to miss it completely. There aren't any stats for that.

    The stats we have are catches and byes: I've had four in a game once: three that I'd have been roundly abused had I spilled and one leg side blinder at full length off an inside edge. I've kept like a drain and recorded zero-bye days before, and on other afternoons I've been at the top of my game and the bye tally has shown double-figure leakage due to either crap umpiring or legside-happy bowling. Also, as has already been mentioned, some keepers will get to catches that others won't... no stats for that, either.

    As much as I applaud the initiative, I don't agree that the measures that you are using are representative enough of wicketkeeping quality/performance to be particularly valid in terms of revising long-held opinions. Comparing Dravid's catches/match stat to Mongia & More should be enough to settle that.

  6. #96
    School Boy/Girl Captain Гурин's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gurin, Russia
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    (...) There aren't any stats for that
    Yes, that's the problem. Currently available stats are not good enough to give us a measure of how much a keeper contributes towards a win (or a loss) of his team. Lot of reasons really, from subjectivity in distinction between a bye and a wide to variables like the pitch or the bowlers. We'd need probably some of the technology available in baseball (I invite you to check the wiki about pitch FX), but that's extremely expensive, and it would not be worth it to implement it even at CC level. I'm sure that eyes and instinct will still be the best cost-effective tools, expecially when we talk about tactical and team skills.

    However, should not stop people to try to improve things a bit with what's available. Maybe we'll move out objective knowledge about glovesmen from 20 to 30%, but it would still be something.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    As much as I applaud the initiative, I don't agree that the measures that you are using are representative enough of wicketkeeping quality/performance to be particularly valid in terms of revising long-held opinions.
    I don't want to revise long held opinions. If those opinions are right, I'm only happy about it. I'd just love to know more about the matter, just trying to put some objective perspective on it, and I won't deny that it's also because I'm annoyed at how much keeping is overlooked by the general public.

    In a bad team, if you are a great batsman, you'll still have runs to show, and if you're a great bowler, you'll still have wickets to show. If you're a great keeper, people will maybe only remember those two catches that you dropped with the tip of your fingers (and on which lots of other keepers wouldn't have come even close), while lots of other catches you had taken comfortably thanks to your lateral footwork will be deemed as 'easy catches' and the merit will entirely go to the bowler; on the other side some guy who moves less but everytime rolls on the ground after and easyish catch will be deemed a 'quality keeper'. If I can in some way demonstrate that with a certain keeper the bowlers will take more wickets, I'll be a happy man.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    Comparing Dravid's catches/match stat to Mongia & More should be enough to settle that.
    For instance. Catches/Match or Byes/Match are completely useless stats, they really have TOO many variables; some side will tend to stay more or less in the field, some side will play with three spinners, some has Mitchell Johnson. Would be as useful as 'runs per match'. That's why I'm trimming it down only at 'same player, same keeper', considering only dismissals in which the keeper was personally involved, and every how many balls are they able to physically produce a wicket togheter (as weird as it may sound ). While not perfect, by a statistical point of view is surely better, the question is by how much? Will it be enough?

    Yes, I agree, keepers sometimes will stand up, sometimes will stay back (would be interesting ti see batsmen averages and strike rates in such situations, if some of them particularly suffer the keeper standing up to medium pace. Actually I was thinking also something on the melody of 'average per stroke played' or 'per zone where the ball bounced', but that's something else for some other year ), some keepers read the pitch better and give more valuable advices (strangely however nobody never considers that when comparing bowlers), and again we have the pitches, but about them I had half an idea about comparing the delta in balls/caught behind between the seamers of the various county attacks, to get a rough and primitive idea.*

    That's all; I'm simply looking for tendencies and correlations in a quest to give a bit of respect to the art. It will take lot of time, as I'm graduating this year while also having a full time job so don't expect anything soon, but I'll be doing it, if anything to demonstrate myself that I was wrong.


    *EDIT: I might not explain myself perfectly in english, what I mean is the delta in the numbers of members of the same attack on the same ground and then on the other grounds
    Last edited by Гурин; 19-01-2013 at 03:23 PM.

  7. #97
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    12,028
    yeah well written neil
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    I just love all kinds of balls.

  8. #98
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,859
    Quote Originally Posted by Гурин View Post
    Yes, that's the problem. Currently available stats are not good enough to give us a measure of how much a keeper contributes towards a win (or a loss) of his team. Lot of reasons really, from subjectivity in distinction between a bye and a wide to variables like the pitch or the bowlers. We'd need probably some of the technology available in baseball (I invite you to check the wiki about pitch FX), but that's extremely expensive, and it would not be worth it to implement it even at CC level. I'm sure that eyes and instinct will still be the best cost-effective tools, expecially when we talk about tactical and team skills.
    I have casually watched the last couple of summers of baseball so I'm quite aware of that kit (by nature if not by name); I wonder how different it is to the Hawk-Eye tracking?

    I'm annoyed at how much keeping is overlooked by the general public. In a bad team, if you are a great batsman, you'll still have runs to show, and if you're a great bowler, you'll still have wickets to show. If you're a great keeper, people will maybe only remember those two catches that you dropped with the tip of your fingers (and on which lots of other keepers wouldn't have come even close), while lots of other catches you had taken comfortably thanks to your lateral footwork will be deemed as 'easy catches' and the merit will entirely go to the bowler; on the other side some guy who moves less but everytime rolls on the ground after and easyish catch will be deemed a 'quality keeper'. If I can in some way demonstrate that with a certain keeper the bowlers will take more wickets, I'll be a happy man.
    Have you read my rants about keeping? The latest is Cricket Web - Features: Playing for Keeps

    I find that taking stumpings off opening bowlers is usually enough to get noticed. Either that or dealing with leg-side tripe whilst standing up.

    For instance. Catches/Match or Byes/Match are completely useless stats, they really have TOO many variables; some side will tend to stay more or less in the field, some side will play with three spinners, some has Mitchell Johnson. Would be as useful as 'runs per match'. That's why I'm trimming it down only at 'same player, same keeper', considering only dismissals in which the keeper was personally involved, and every how many balls are they able to physically produce a wicket togheter (as weird as it may sound ). While not perfect, by a statistical point of view is surely better, the question is by how much? Will it be enough?
    Same opposition? Same ground? It just doesn't feel statistically valid. I know there was this nonsense going around for years that Gilchrist was a sub-par gloveman (no, he wasn't, Wade is a sub-par gloveman) but it really doesn't feel sensible to conclude that he was significantly better than Healy: I cannot think of anything within the skill-set of the game itself that would explain that away ergo I am loath to subscribe to this particular model.

    Yes, I agree, keepers sometimes will stand up, sometimes will stay back (would be interesting ti see batsmen averages and strike rates in such situations, if some of them particularly suffer the keeper standing up to medium pace. Actually I was thinking also something on the melody of 'average per stroke played' or 'per zone where the ball bounced', but that's something else for some other year )
    England have already been doing that for some years, I think, certainly in proper cricket, and I think it is new statistics and new analysis that will be the way forward rather than parsing old scoreboards, as they give nothing of the game situation that's so essential to analysing any passage of play.

  9. #99
    School Boy/Girl Captain Гурин's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gurin, Russia
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    I have casually watched the last couple of summers of baseball so I'm quite aware of that kit (by nature if not by name); I wonder how different it is to the Hawk-Eye tracking?
    Nice to hear that, do you know these websites? They are really good if you're interested in analysis. I expecially recommend anybody interested to take a look at their statistical glossary, just to understand how much advanced is the statistical understanding of rounders.

    It's different because hawk-eye it's usually looked upon more for predicting the path of deliveries hitting the pads than anything. You often hear commentators saying how a delivery was outswinging or inswinging or an off-cutter (sometimes calling it wrong); just to say, we all know that Anderson, Steyn and Ishant Sharma can bowl outswingers, but nobody really analyzes by how much and how effective those single deliveries are. "He has an outswinger and an inswinges" is hardly enough, if they have no control nor command over them.

    Well, Pitch-FX could tell us accurately and numerically by how many degrees does every delivery turn, the amount and the direction of that turn (on both axis, noth only laterally), and how much before and after it bounces on the ground (recording bounce also). Could be helpful for rating pitches and balls aswell. Also, there is Field FX that could tell us reaction times of fielders and how much ground they covers; all things that I'd love to see, just like RPS for spinners. Yet, even if they collect them, you don't find anywhere those raw data available for crowdsourcing. Pity.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    Have you read my rants about keeping? The latest is Cricket Web - Features: Playing for Keeps

    I find that taking stumpings off opening bowlers is usually enough to get noticed. Either that or dealing with leg-side tripe whilst standing up.
    I've read that. But taking stumpings off pacers it's something extra, (very) good if you do but I doubt that we should rank county or test keepers based (only) on their ability to pull out something extraordinary; I'd prefer much more to reward those extremely solid in fundamentals. By eye you couldn't recognize if some dude is able to gain an extra wicket (or creating one chance more) every 25 instead of every 30 overs just thanks to his better execution of basics or his longer arms; and that's what I want to know.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    Same opposition? Same ground? It just doesn't feel statistically valid. I know there was this nonsense going around for years that Gilchrist was a sub-par gloveman (no, he wasn't, Wade is a sub-par gloveman) but it really doesn't feel sensible to conclude that he was significantly better than Healy: I cannot think of anything within the skill-set of the game itself that would explain that away ergo I am loath to subscribe to this particular model.
    Same opposition, same ground, because I'm looking for the discrepances between teammates, ex. between Somerset seamers at Taunton and away, Derbyshire seamers at the Conty Ground and away and so on, how big the discrepance is inside the various sides. Sample size of only around 15 games (I doubt they'll play all of the 16 games) is my biggest worry, but over 2 or 3 seasons it could be interesting.

    About Gilly, I never said that he was surely better than Healy; only, that when he was keeping every bowler had an increase in his Caught Behind strike rate (apart from MacGill) and every spinner had an improvement in his balls-per-stumping ratio; this is noticeable even in bowlers like Gillespie that were averaging better under Healy. Maybe Australia changed the strategy of the attack in the time, I don't know, and I have not factored even simple things like runouts, but then there are people who say that Gilchrist was average (not bad, mind, average) while Healy was the best keeper they ever saw. This gulf is something that I now find hard to believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    England have already been doing that for some years, I think, certainly in proper cricket, and I think it is new statistics and new analysis that will be the way forward rather than parsing old scoreboards, as they give nothing of the game situation that's so essential to analysing any passage of play.
    Happy to hear about England (I'd still like to look into those averages, but that's simple nerdy greed), and I agree 100% with the rest. Only, to get new analysis we'll need an increase in the collection and processing of datas; and that's not up to us.

    Just a thing, by proper cricket do you mean test or first class? Counties (and states for other countries) are the ones that I think have the biggest potential, more games in more homogeneous conditons in my opinion means that a new statistic and data collection trial should be done at that level first.
    Last edited by Гурин; 19-01-2013 at 06:46 PM.

  10. #100
    School Boy/Girl Captain Гурин's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gurin, Russia
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
    I cannot think of anything within the skill-set of the game itself that would explain that away ergo I am loath to subscribe to this particular model
    Sorry if I'm here doing multiple posts, but don't you think that his much bigger reach could be a reason, more than compensating for his agility deficit? That's the first thing that came to my mind apart from reflexes.

    By the way, just as an aside: if you've seen yesterday game between saffers and kiwis, what do you think about De Kock?

  11. #101
    International Coach uvelocity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    seamy road
    Posts
    12,028
    neil loves de kock

  12. #102
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,859
    Quote Originally Posted by Гурин View Post
    Nice to hear that, do you know these websites? They are really good if you're interested in analysis. I expecially recommend anybody interested to take a look at their statistical glossary, just to understand how much advanced is the statistical understanding of rounders.
    Yeah, I'd heard of the websites through reading Moneyball (long before the film was even conceived) having been turned on to it by the Malcolm Gladwell books. I've glanced at the ideas, but I'm not into baseball enough to really have the motivation to struggle through pages of raw data.

    It's different because hawk-eye it's usually looked upon more for predicting the path of deliveries hitting the pads than anything. You often hear commentators saying how a delivery was outswinging or inswinging or an off-cutter (sometimes calling it wrong); just to say, we all know that Anderson, Steyn and Ishant Sharma can bowl outswingers, but nobody really analyzes by how much and how effective those single deliveries are. "He has an outswinger and an inswinges" is hardly enough, if they have no control nor command over them.

    Well, Pitch-FX could tell us accurately and numerically by how many degrees does every delivery turn, the amount and the direction of that turn (on both axis, noth only laterally), and how much before and after it bounces on the ground (recording bounce also). Could be helpful for rating pitches and balls aswell. Also, there is Field FX that could tell us reaction times of fielders and how much ground they covers; all things that I'd love to see, just like RPS for spinners. Yet, even if they collect them, you don't find anywhere those raw data available for crowdsourcing. Pity.
    I'm not sure how much coverage you get in Italy, but the Sky feeds over the last few years, and Channel 9 too, have included degrees of turn, bounce comparison, pace of delivery before/after bounce, reaction times for close fielders. It's certainly not available - I'd love it to be out there for crowdsourcing like a lot of the Premier League statistics now are. We need our own Bill James!

    By eye you couldn't recognize if some dude is able to gain an extra wicket (or creating one chance more) every 25 instead of every 30 overs just thanks to his better execution of basics or his longer arms; and that's what I want to know. Same opposition, same ground, because I'm looking for the discrepancies between teammates, ex. between Somerset seamers at Taunton and away, Derbyshire seamers at the County Ground and away and so on, how big the discrepancy is inside the various sides. Sample size of only around 15 games (I doubt they'll play all of the 16 games) is my biggest worry, but over 2 or 3 seasons it could be interesting.
    Can't argue with the principle - David Brailsford's theory of marginal gains and all that - and agree that the sample size (and the infinite variation provided by the British summer) may well make any stats void.

    About Gilly, I never said that he was surely better than Healy; only, that when he was keeping every bowler had an increase in his Caught Behind strike rate (apart from MacGill) and every spinner had an improvement in his balls-per-stumping ratio; this is noticeable even in bowlers like Gillespie that were averaging better under Healy. Maybe Australia changed the strategy of the attack in the time, I don't know, and I have not factored even simple things like runouts, but then there are people who say that Gilchrist was average (not bad, mind, average) while Healy was the best keeper they ever saw. This gulf is something that I now find hard to believe.
    Unless opposing players became worse at judging when to play and leave outside off stump between the eras of Healy and Gilchrist due to the proliferation of shorter formats, consequently leading to a rise in the general incidence of caught-behind as a method of dismissal, and a reduction of average innings length...

    Just a thing, by proper cricket do you mean test or first class? Counties (and states for other countries) are the ones that I think have the biggest potential, more games in more homogeneous conditons in my opinion means that a new statistic and data collection trial should be done at that level first.
    Was mainly being sarcastic about Test v ODI cricket, as it's impossible to believe that anyone with half a statistical brain can keep picking J*** D*******, but answering the question properly, I know that England went through every single game of the 2007 World Cup and analysed where all the balls went in the field - because I met the guy that did the job - and the same guy (having been fielding coach at Northants) analysed every fielder's role on a game-by-game basis in terms of runs saved/conceded, broken down in terms of catches and stops, then again further as high/low, left/right... but as you say, it's not yet public domain. It's the ECB National Coaches' Conference next weekend - I wonder what I can find out.
    Last edited by Neil Pickup; 19-01-2013 at 07:08 PM.

  13. #103
    Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Neil Pickup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Posts
    26,859
    Quote Originally Posted by Гурин View Post
    Sorry if I'm here doing multiple posts, but don't you think that his much bigger reach could be a reason, more than compensating for his agility deficit? That's the first thing that came to my mind apart from reflexes.

    By the way, just as an aside: if you've seen yesterday game between saffers and kiwis, what do you think about De Kock?
    Having been busy "teaching" (read: supervising boarders on a snow day) for much of proceedings, I watched the (vastly reduced) highlights on Sky an hour ago whilst trying to write a Maths Test (I avoided the temptation to include "Jade concedes 6.2 runs every over. If he bowls 100 overs, how many abusive tweets will be posted?") and didn't see enough to judge. I did wonder quite how he failed to get his gloves on that nick off Steyn at nine down, but didn't see an angle to check his footwork / weight balance well enough.

    Interesting you mention Gilly's extra reach; would that not be countered by an increased difficulty staying down/getting down with low balls? Keepers have always traditionally been short, but the Oxford University keeper last year was 6'6 or something ridiculous like that... statistically, I can't imagine it's ever been investigated. So hard to control something like that...!

  14. #104
    School Boy/Girl Captain Гурин's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gurin, Russia
    Posts
    195
    Zero coverage down here, we have either to be a bit creative or head to some pub to catch SS Uk (latter option can turn quite expensive, a pint in Rome goes for 6€)


    Australia Bowling stats under Healy (between bracket are those post 1992): 28.67 @2.78 (27.97 @2.76)

    Australia Bowling stats under Gilchrist: 27.55 @3.09


    I will search for percentages of type of dismissals, but not tonight, I'm not sober enough for that. Until then, there is nothing much to get from these numbers, apart from a slight improvement in bowling average and an increase in ER.


    Goalkeepers in football have always been over 1.80 (often 1.90), but then they can make saves on low balls with their legs, WK have not that luxury. But then again, isn't the vast majority of balls taken by the keeper above his knees? And does it really make some difference when you're not up to the stumps and have time to adjust? I'd say that you can afford to miss a few central-low ones (on lateral ones tall guys might hold the advantage again) if you are able to catch more above waist height, but that's a big if. Here Field FX would really be handful, never seen hawk-eye tracing up to the point where the keeper takes the ball.


    Keep us informed if anything interesting comes out of that conference!
    Last edited by Гурин; 19-01-2013 at 08:03 PM.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Trott in a slump, by his standards
    By ViruTheBest in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-11-2012, 12:26 PM
  2. Wicketkeeping as one rises through the levels
    By Arachnodouche in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 27-04-2012, 08:13 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-06-2010, 06:23 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
  •