• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Dire Times Ahead For England

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
No, it isn't.
Occasionally you get catches taken that have no right to be taken. This is exactly the same as a bad Umpiring decision.
A chance is something that should be taken.
A lucky catch counts as a not-out in the first-chance average.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:

A lucky catch counts as a not-out in the first-chance average.
You defy belief!

Next you'll be saying a false shot for 4 doesn't count as any runs?

Thank God only one person in the World pays attention to this ridiculous notion.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Rest assured it's far more than that.
False shots happen too often to be bothered about. If you keep track of all of them, you're analysing to a degree never imagined by the best.
And are you really saying that all catches deserve to be taken?
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
Rest assured it's far more than that.
Oh really?

How come I've never heard of anyone else talk of these farcical numbers then?

A batsman can only be judged by what is phyically scored in the book.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
Richard said:
The inside-edge:drag-on ratio remains constant, no matter how good or bad the technique or the number of runs scored per inside-edge.
Tripe. All depends on the strength of the grip.

And also, edged runs shouldn't count, runs made off pies don't count...
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Neil Pickup said:
And also, edged runs shouldn't count, runs made off pies don't count...
Then most batsmen's tallies would be cut far more significantly than they usually are by first-chance averages.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Neil Pickup said:
And they follow exactly the same principles.
Yes, but if everyone averaged 20 or so you wouldn't have much difference.
First-chance averages vary as much as scorebook averages.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Did I dispute that?
If you can be bothered to work-out those things exactly, you're a better analyst than I am! Anyway, some batsmen (Richardson eg) score runs off little but pies.
Plus, if you criticise batsmen for avoiding getting out through their own skill (which inside-edges are, dropped catches are not) I think that's a bit unfair.
 

Neil Pickup

Cricket Web Moderator
But why do batsmen deserve credit for edging runs?

Also, first chance averages may be unfair as some players face different bowlers.

Hence, I suggest that all batsmen and bowlers have separate averages kept against all the bowlers they face.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Neil Pickup said:
But why do batsmen deserve credit for edging runs?

Also, first chance averages may be unfair as some players face different bowlers.

Hence, I suggest that all batsmen and bowlers have separate averages kept against all the bowlers they face.
Batsmen don't deserve credit for edging runs - but who is going to be bothered to keep a tally of "edged runs" and "intentional runs"?
Likewise, how difficult is it to make a massive set of averages for different bowlers?
First-chance and all-chance averages are simple and easy to work-out. All these ridiculously complicated other things are quite simply beyond the "can-be-bothered-to-do" range.
But if you wanted to do it, for no money, as Bazza says, I'll listen...
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Richard said:
Batsmen don't deserve credit for edging runs - but who is going to be bothered to keep a tally of "edged runs" and "intentional runs"?
Who is bothered to keep a tally of "first chances" since a chance is subjective and cannot be fairly quantified? :P
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Me.:D
And more people than not don't give it the value I do, so it doesn't matter that there is a small chance of disagreeing over what should and shouldn't be out.
Really, would you classify the Butcher drop off Jayawardene a chance? Something he should have caught.
 
Re: Re: Dire Times Ahead For England

marc71178 said:
I would defintitely not call Giles a tail ender, he is definitely good enough to bat 8 in Tests.
disagree vehemently. so giles blocks out 100 balls or whatever it was on a sloooow turning pitch & he`s suddenly a #8? keep it in perspective
 

Top