honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Yeah the ICC Vs Home Boards thing is never gonna go away. But if there is money to be made out of WTC for ICC, that can be then sent back to the member boards.
-
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.
Meaningless and stupid cricket statistics
- Thread starter Starfighter
- Start date
Shady Slim
International Coach
i myself have advocated long and hard for the most profitable boards and icc to profit share with the smaller boards more to allow them to play more tests and strengthen their domestic setups, the result of which would obviously be a stronger worldwide game but the greed and lust for power of the icc and the big boards is putting the kibosh on my plan
Red_Ink_Squid
Cricketer Of The Year
Apparently Johnny Bairstow in 2021 has set a new record for 'most scores of 28-30 (inclusive) in a calendar year', surpassing Hashim Amla.
Bijed
International Regular
If he ups his game next year, the 31-35 range could be his, which I presume is currently held by Shane Watson
The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
All LBW. All incorrectly reviewed.
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think Ian Bell might have him beat there
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Prove it
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
He has 12 Watson has 8
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Oh
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
That's not a stupid stat.
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Howe_zat
Audio File
There are 3 kinds of bad stats
1) The Zaltzman
These are the kind of stats that are generally just said for fun. They're silly and pointless and don't really mean anything, like pointing out that a tailender has a higher T20 strike rate than Chris Gayle because he's faced 4 balls and hit one for six in his career. These are often called bad stats by grumpy old huffs who don't know how to use a query button, and are convincing themselves that since the entire internet is the boring **** they have on Facebook that people who take fun in these 'have too much time on their hands' or similar mardy statements, having missed the fact that the stat was never intended to be taken seriously.
2) The tired Sky Sports intern
This is the kind of stat where it's midway through a game, and you have a message from the director that something unusual is happening, we need a stat to describe it. So you load up Statsguru and find that yes, this partnership is pretty unusual, it's actually in the top 5% of stands like this, that's how good it is. But Sky don't want to make Nasser read out that it's roughly the 120th best ODI partnership out of tens of thousands, so you apply a bunch of filters to make it sort of top of something. 'This is the 2nd best 3rd-wicket partnership for South Africa against India in a tri-series". Uh huh, says the director, we'll show that at the next ad break, now start editing the batsman's highlight reel, he's nearly got 50.
3) The disenginous flag-waving tit
This one is for CW mainly but will tend to show up more often on info-graphics that get shared on Twitter a lot. It's where you find a stat that suggests something about a point you had decided on last year, and so will share it. Later, when the point itself, which is invariably something that makes a player from your country better than a player not from your country, is questioned, you wheel out the stat. If the situation regarding the player's record changes, don't worry, just start making arguments on why subsequent events don't count or continue applying filters to weed out stuff that doesn't quite fit. Remember, the stat is there to serve you, and if it doesn't do it's goddam job you'll fire it and find one that will.
1) The Zaltzman
These are the kind of stats that are generally just said for fun. They're silly and pointless and don't really mean anything, like pointing out that a tailender has a higher T20 strike rate than Chris Gayle because he's faced 4 balls and hit one for six in his career. These are often called bad stats by grumpy old huffs who don't know how to use a query button, and are convincing themselves that since the entire internet is the boring **** they have on Facebook that people who take fun in these 'have too much time on their hands' or similar mardy statements, having missed the fact that the stat was never intended to be taken seriously.
2) The tired Sky Sports intern
This is the kind of stat where it's midway through a game, and you have a message from the director that something unusual is happening, we need a stat to describe it. So you load up Statsguru and find that yes, this partnership is pretty unusual, it's actually in the top 5% of stands like this, that's how good it is. But Sky don't want to make Nasser read out that it's roughly the 120th best ODI partnership out of tens of thousands, so you apply a bunch of filters to make it sort of top of something. 'This is the 2nd best 3rd-wicket partnership for South Africa against India in a tri-series". Uh huh, says the director, we'll show that at the next ad break, now start editing the batsman's highlight reel, he's nearly got 50.
3) The disenginous flag-waving tit
This one is for CW mainly but will tend to show up more often on info-graphics that get shared on Twitter a lot. It's where you find a stat that suggests something about a point you had decided on last year, and so will share it. Later, when the point itself, which is invariably something that makes a player from your country better than a player not from your country, is questioned, you wheel out the stat. If the situation regarding the player's record changes, don't worry, just start making arguments on why subsequent events don't count or continue applying filters to weed out stuff that doesn't quite fit. Remember, the stat is there to serve you, and if it doesn't do it's goddam job you'll fire it and find one that will.
smash84
The Tiger King
Well, the stats you talk about might be bad, but they're not meaningless, hence not fit for this thread.
Red_Ink_Squid
Cricketer Of The Year
The Spin | Why studying England’s win/loss ratio can bring selectors some clarity
If you work out the win/loss ratio for England’s recent Test players, you end up with a surprising top five
www.theguardian.com
Keaton Jennings: player of his generation.
Starfighter
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Saw that article this morning and couldn't work out if it was intended to be a joke. I don't read too many articles these days, but it's the direst '''''analysis''''' I've read in a very long time, possibly the worst ever in a published article as opposed to a forum rambling.
HookShot
U19 Vice-Captain
All stats without a proper historical context are near meaningless.
Bert Sutcliffe‘s ‘mere’ 80 runs against South Africa in 1953 is a case in point….
teara.govt.nz
Bert Sutcliffe‘s ‘mere’ 80 runs against South Africa in 1953 is a case in point….
Bert Sutcliffe at Ellis Park, Johannesburg, 1953
Boxing Day 1953 at Ellis Park was an epic day in New Zealand sport. Early in the morning news came that the fiancée of the New Zealand fast bowler Bob Blair had been killed in the Tangiwai rail disaster. When play began New Zealand quickly dismissed South Africa's last two batsmen, so they...