Shafted.............

[Goughy]

I don't know - by the time I joined it was just a subject of ridicule - personally I also thought it was an interesting if flawed idea, but being Richard he must have had some stats to start with, mustn't he? PEWS to find the first ever post about

He didn't have any stats. Just the feeling that some batsmen were more fortunate than others. It wasn't really a well fleshed out theory.

 

[Goughy]

Some good shouts on England players in particular - we specialised at messing people around in this regard...

Always thought Rob Bailey deserved another chance - screwed by an umprire in the West Indies.

Steve Watkin was quality on his few performances for England, and certainly did nothing wrong.

Bailey was screwed in WI but he was, IMO, a distance short of being Test quality. Technically flawed without the genius to paper cover the cracks.

 

[GIMH]

He didn't have any stats. Just the feeling that some batsmen were more fortunate than others. It wasn't really a well fleshed out theory.

He posted some for Trescothick once, I'd find the post to prove it but there are rather a few to dig through. Needle and haystack comes to mind.

I don't think he ever did any others though.

 

[Goughy]

He posted some for Trescothick once, I'd find the post to prove it but there are rather a few to dig through. Needle and haystack comes to mind.

I don't think he ever did any others though.

Yeah, a first chance average - or any thing else - is useless without context. With nothing to compare it to it is pointless and that is before you try and decide what a chance is. Is a skier that a fielder loses in the sun and doesn't get a hand to a chance? Is a ball that flies between two slips without either moving? Is a nick to first, when there isn't one there, a chance as he would have been out if a fielder was correctly positioned?

 

[GIMH]

I'm sure Richard has answered all of those questions but suffice to say I agree with you

 

[Top_Cat]

Definitiion of a 'chance' was very narrow, the ball had to go to hand. Questions I had along very similar lines to MAB were dead-batted with that.

Even going to hand is ambiguous; was it really a genuine chance if a greased monkey like like Ricky Ponting managed to lay a hand on it where no-one else would have even been within metres?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I once posed the question as to which was the better innings - the man who plays and misses 50 times without giving a chance or the man who gives one difficult chance in an otherwise flawless innings. The answer was the former because if you play and miss you're never going to be out caught (at least not unless the Australian umpires of the 1980's are around). Not sure what that proves or is even intended to prove. Steve Waugh's great match-winning innings in the World Cup against South Africa was reduced to irrelevant rubble due to the chance he gave to Gibbs - all absolute piffle.

 

[Top_Cat]

Look, I know some shady types have played for Pakistan over the years but Gibbs? Diabolical.

EDIT: Aww.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Look, I know some shady types have played for Pakistan over the years but Gibbs? Diabolical.

Good point.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Only a couple of short ones as far as I recall - I don't think he'd have got them now - would never have had enough infractions, unless getting up Brumby's nose was against the rules - in which case he'd have been perma'd years ago

Think the infraction system if anything would have hindered him; did plenty of little things that weren't ban worthy in isolation, but would have built up quickly.

 

[GIMH]

Ignoring moderator instructions springs to mind

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I-don't-think-Richard-did-much-that-would-have-seen-him-get-a-ban-everything-he-wrote-was-always-careful-and-concise.

 

[Jezroy]

Surprised no one has mentioned the Taylor/McCullum/Hesson thing...

 

[wellAlbidarned]

That's because Taylor is still playing test cricket.

 

[Daemon]

Rajinder Goel

 

[Jezroy]

That's because Taylor is still playing test cricket.

Fair - see what happens when you don't read the original post properly?