Congrats Mohammed Yousuf for breaking Viv's record

[33/3from3.3]

Can I be the first to call it his annus mirabilis?

You're calling his anus what now?

 

[Richard]

Yousuf this year has been a far cry, scoring wise from last year so far. It's almost as if the incident with his wife or the break from cricket had a massive effect on his purple patch. I can't imagine the ICL and possible recriminations, captaincy and Twenty20 frustrations would be helping either.

Anyways in 2007 and since his short break he has scores of 32, 18, 83, 18, 25, 63*, 27, 18 and 6 so far. Hope he turns it around tbh.

What d'you expect, it was almost impossible that he'd have the number of dropped catches he had between Dec '05 and Nov '06 on an ongoing basis TBH. And while he was lucky in 2006, he still played several superb knocks and that was never going to last forever.

 

[Fiery]

What d'you expect, it was almost impossible that he'd have the number of dropped catches he had between Dec '05 and Nov '06 on an ongoing basis TBH. And while he was lucky in 2006, he still played several superb knocks and that was never going to last forever.

You always go on about how many times people are dropped. The more runs a batsman scores the more times they'll be dropped. The law of averages doesn't let one batsman get dropped more than others over a long period of time anyway

 

[Richard]

You always go on about how many times people are dropped.

Yes, because it makes a huge impact on how many runs they score.

The more runs a batsman scores the more times they'll be dropped.

Other way around.

The law of averages doesn't let one batsman get dropped more than others over a long period of time anyway

11 months isn't a long period of time. If you honestly believe one batsman can't get dropped - lots - more than another over such a short period of time you're not paying attention.

 

[pasag]

What d'you expect, it was almost impossible that he'd have the number of dropped catches he had between Dec '05 and Nov '06 on an ongoing basis TBH. And while he was lucky in 2006, he still played several superb knocks and that was never going to last forever.

Knew this response before it would even come out. Funny how you write off such prolific run scoring so easily. Flat tracks, weakened attacks, dropped catches etc etc. The thing that doesn't add up about your arguments is that you're so stats and output obsessed when it suits you and when it doesn't you'll come up with any theory you can to disprove something. Same with Hayden and whoever and I see no consitency here at all. You know I'm not trying to have a go here, but I think you use certain arguments to suit certain players you like, dislike etc, when it suits you.

 

[Richard]

I always talk down big periods of run-scoring if lots of dropped catches are involved, there's no inconsistency there whatsoever.

You say that as though I somehow made-up the idea that Yousuf was dropped a lot. I didn't. I showed set-in-stone facts about the catches which were dropped and the scores which were enabled because of it.

You also seem to have the idea that it suits me to disprove that Yousuf played remarkably well in 2006 - why? The thing happens, I form my opinion on it - not the other way around.

 

[pasag]

My point is that you use certain arguments that in my eyes contradict each other, when it is convenient for you. Like in one case you'll say that output is the only thing that matters and in another you'll discredit performances because of dropped catches.

My point is this - I can't see how you can reconcile the two. If output is all that matters, who cares if the player was dropped? All that matters is how much he scored. Perhaps I am being dense, but it seems like a massive contradiction to me.

 

[Richard]

If players were dropped loads, clearly this means you need a different method to interpret their output. More often than not, the scorebook-average is sufficient, but not always.

This doesn't happen very often, though. It's rare that you get players who have a year of being dropped loads (Vaughan in 2002, Yousuf in 2006 being the only examples that come to mind). Is it the irregularity with which I talk about this that bothers you?

 

[NZTailender]

What bothers me is that dropped catches are a fact in the game of cricket. Maybe we should start discounting players innings when they play and miss because that could be a potential catch. Or the fact they don't connect in the first place means they musn't be good enough.

But then it depends what you call lucky when it comes to dropped catches. If a player scores 100 with 7 dropped catches, I wouldn't call it a good innings. However, if he had 3, I'd say it was okay.

Yousuf had an excellent 2006, dropped catches or not.

 

[pasag]

If players were dropped loads, clearly this means you need a different method to interpret their output. More often than not, the scorebook-average is sufficient, but not always.

This doesn't happen very often, though. It's rare that you get players who have a year of being dropped loads (Vaughan in 2002, Yousuf in 2006 being the only examples that come to mind). Is it the irregularity with which I talk about this that bothers you?

I still don't see how you've reconciled the two points. Again, maybe I'm being dense, but it seems like you're having your cake and eating it too, imo.

 

[NZTailender]

I still don't see how you've reconciled the two points. Again, maybe I'm being dense, but it seems like you're having your cake and eating it too, imo.

Sums up Richard for mine. Convenient arguments for pet situations. No consistency in that regard, unlike Yousuf.

 

[Richard]

How's it to Yousuf's credit that he had catches dropped consistently off him?

 

[Richard]

What bothers me is that dropped catches are a fact in the game of cricket. Maybe we should start discounting players innings when they play and miss because that could be a potential catch. Or the fact they don't connect in the first place means they musn't be good enough.

But then it depends what you call lucky when it comes to dropped catches. If a player scores 100 with 7 dropped catches, I wouldn't call it a good innings. However, if he had 3, I'd say it was okay.

I seriously cannot believe that. Virtually no-one ever gets dropped 3 times in an innings.

Yousuf had an excellent 2006, dropped catches or not.

He had a good year, but it wasn't anywhere near as good as it would have been had catching off him been "normal".

 

[Richard]

I still don't see how you've reconciled the two points. Again, maybe I'm being dense, but it seems like you're having your cake and eating it too, imo.

If I find that scorebook stats have been thrown-out from giving an accurate reflection, I don't use them. If I find them reasonably accurate - which is most of the time - I use them.

I don't just like to say "good scorebook-average = good performance". It's far too simplistic.