FCA goes mainstream

[Zinzan]

The other weakness of the theory as Richard used to present it is there was no value to any runs after a drop/false lbw etc. So a batsman dropped on 0 who scored 3 would generate the same FCA points as one dropped on 0 going on to score 391.

I recall pointing out this very same flaw to him, only to receive a 20,000 word essay in return.

 

[marc71178]

Then there's the "falsely given out" thing that he failed to acknowledge.

At the end of the day, this article and the whole theory is completely redundant because there is no clear definition of what a dropped chance is and as soon as you rely on more than one person's interpretation of different events, there is no consistency to go on so any data is inherently flawed.

 

[GIMH]

tbf Marc, he did acknowledge the falsely given out thing. Counted them as a not out.

 

[Howe_zat]

I don't think there's really much flaw in looking for missed chances, yes there are borderline cases but they're a big minority and it's usually pretty clear how often a batsman has been dropped in the immediate aftermath of an innings.

The larger problem for me is that a dropped catch or missed stumping is just really another way that a fielding side can be too poor to dismiss a batsman on that particular delivery, and no more so than any other way that doesn't get special exception.

Short version - yes, it's lucky to nick one and get dropped, but it's not luckier than having the opposition bowl you a nice long hop.

 

[Daemon]

I don't think there's really much flaw in looking for missed chances, yes there are borderline cases but they're a big minority and it's usually pretty clear how often a batsman has been dropped in the immediate aftermath of an innings.

The larger problem for me is that a dropped catch or missed stumping is just really another way that a fielding side can be too poor to dismiss a batsman on that particular delivery, and no more so than any other way that doesn't get special exception.

Short version - yes, it's lucky to nick one and get dropped, but it's not luckier than having the opposition bowl you a nice long hop.

Yeah, good point.

I think FCA only for umpiring errors is probably as far as I would take it.

 

[viriya]

This is basically using the same method I used for my fielding stats last year:
http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/65351-fielding-statistics-new-approach.html

Mine also does ODIs and FT20s.

 

[viriya]

On FCA, I didn't bother to do that systematically but it would be relatively easy to do if there's enough interest since the data is already there.

 

[Furball]

Richard had no appreciation of the art of fielding.

 

[GIMH]

I don't think there's really much flaw in looking for missed chances, yes there are borderline cases but they're a big minority and it's usually pretty clear how often a batsman has been dropped in the immediate aftermath of an innings.

The larger problem for me is that a dropped catch or missed stumping is just really another way that a fielding side can be too poor to dismiss a batsman on that particular delivery, and no more so than any other way that doesn't get special exception.

Short version - yes, it's lucky to nick one and get dropped, but it's not luckier than having the opposition bowl you a nice long hop.

I agree mate, but I don't think Richard would disagree either.

He often made the point that a side who fields badly deserved to lose. His point was always more about the batsman's individual stats than anything to the contrary.

 

[GIMH]

My biggest peeve about Richard's FCA theory was that he would count a batsman who was dismissed by a no ball as being out.

 

[Jono]

Just shows how much of an impact he made here that all you ****s still go on about him. He dominated.

 

[fredfertang]

Just shows how much of an impact he made here that all you ****s still go on about him. He dominated.

Absolutely - wish he'd come back - stimulated debate in a way that no one else ever has - I'd love to know his views on Kohli and Ashwin, to name just two

 

[Flem274*]

i'd love him to come back so we could get him into the heftier OT threads like AmPol and the various "issue of the day" threads.

 

[Shri]

i'd love him to come back so we could get him into the heftier OT threads like AmPol and the various "issue of the day" threads.

Driving Crowe away wasn't enough of a thrill for you, fam?

 

[Jono]

This is usually the type of thread where OS recounts a story of Richard from like 2009, and people are like "wait, I thought you only joined in 2013" and then OS panics

 

[Burgey]

This is usually the type of thread where OS recounts a story of Richard from like 2009, and people are like "wait, I thought you only joined in 2013" and then OS panics

Brilliant.

 

[grecian]

Just shows how much of an impact he made here that all you ****s still go on about him. He dominated.

Well it was one of his fans that started this thread. Not surprising he dominated when he made about 500 posts a day. He was appalling FTR, he didn't start interesting new discussions he stifled them utterly by making every single thread about him and his ****ing half-****ed theories ALL invented to slag off players he hated (Harmison, Colly, Tres, Hayden, Sehwag), and to speak up for players he loved (Cork, Hussain, Atherton, Bell). FCA was the clearest most biased of the lot, even his fanboys realised it was madness, the Test when he ignored Bell's dismissal from his FCA because of the match being over by then, but counted a Collingwood one, that basically was an LBW shout that may well have missed leg or be high, about 10 runs earlier just showed what utter toilet it all was..

Just an opinion like.

 

[GIMH]

Good petrol salesman though tbf

 

[Jono]

Well it was one of his fans that started this thread. Not surprising he dominated when he made about 500 posts a day. He was appalling FTR, he didn't start interesting new discussions he stifled them utterly by making every single thread about him and his ****ing half-****ed theories ALL invented to slag off players he hated (Harmison, Colly, Tres, Hayden, Sehwag), and to speak up for players he loved (Cork, Hussain, Atherton, Bell). FCA was the clearest most biased of the lot, even his fanboys realised it was madness, the Test when he ignored Bell's dismissal from his FCA because of the match being over by then, but counted a Collingwood one, that basically was an LBW shout that may well have missed leg or be high, about 10 runs earlier just showed what utter toilet it all was..

Just an opinion like.

You don't have to make a positive impact to make an impact. The amount of people who still reference him years and years later is extraordinary.

First entrant into the CW hall of fame. Second entrant being Francis.

 

[grecian]

You don't have to make a positive impact to make an impact. The amount of people who still reference him years and years later is extraordinary.

First entrant into the CW hall of fame. Second entrant being Francis.

It's not extraordinary if you make that many posts, in such a short time. Of course when anyone digs a thread he'll be all over it. His impact a bit like how dominant the Black Death was for the 14th century.