• 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.

Odd thing with byes.

Nate

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
I`ve got nothing to do, so I was just thinking about extras, whilst looking at the NZ-SL game. And I was thinking how it`s normal to see around 15-20 extras in an innings for a test match... and then I though of the Aussies. 15-20 extras I thought? Australia don`t bowl that many no-balls and wides... so what about byes?

Australia vs New Zealand
1st Test
Australia conceeded 20 byes/leg byes and 5 no-balls/wides in 191 overs.
New Zealand conceeded 15 byes/leg byes and 8 no-balls/wides in 154.5 overs.

2nd Test
Australia conceeded 20 byes/leg byes and 7 no-balls/wides in 98.3 overs.
New Zealand conceeded 12 leg byes/byes and 18 no-balls/wides in 140 overs.

3rd Test
Australia conceeded 32 byes/leg byes and 4 no-balls in 185.4 overs.
New Zealand conceeded 21 byes/leg byes and 11 no-balls in 147.4 overs.


In ratio to Byes/NB`sandW`s there is a huge difference. This may be because of a lot of NBandW`s given away by NZ, but still.

Australia had 72 byes/leg byes compared to 16 no-balls/wides in 478.1 overs. That`s a ratio of 4.5 B/LB to 1 NB/W. A B/LB occurs every 7 overs.
New Zealand had 48 byes/leg byes compared to 37 no-balls/wides in 441 overs. That`s a ratio of 1.3 B/LB to 1 NB/W. A B/LB occurs every 9 overs.

This could be a one-off, but I feel like I see it a lot. What are all these byes given away from? Good bowling at the stumps? Poor `keeping by Gilly? What do you think?

This is also a testament to how controlled the Aussie`s bowling is... not many no-balls and next to nothing in wides.
 
S

Scallywag

Banned
Gillespie and Warne tend to atack the leg stump which makes it hard to stop the leg byes, Gilly would only be responsible for byes and you havent broken them down to see how many there are. Gilly is not responsible for leg byes.

Australia probably tend to bowl at the pads more creating more leg byes and LBWs but that is another story and it backs up why Aus get more LBWs, I know some posters will say its ******** but the evidence is there.
 
Son Of Coco

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nnanden said:
I`ve got nothing to do, so I was just thinking about extras, whilst looking at the NZ-SL game. And I was thinking how it`s normal to see around 15-20 extras in an innings for a test match... and then I though of the Aussies. 15-20 extras I thought? Australia don`t bowl that many no-balls and wides... so what about byes?

Australia vs New Zealand
1st Test
Australia conceeded 20 byes/leg byes and 5 no-balls/wides in 191 overs.
New Zealand conceeded 15 byes/leg byes and 8 no-balls/wides in 154.5 overs.

2nd Test
Australia conceeded 20 byes/leg byes and 7 no-balls/wides in 98.3 overs.
New Zealand conceeded 12 leg byes/byes and 18 no-balls/wides in 140 overs.

3rd Test
Australia conceeded 32 byes/leg byes and 4 no-balls in 185.4 overs.
New Zealand conceeded 21 byes/leg byes and 11 no-balls in 147.4 overs.


In ratio to Byes/NB`sandW`s there is a huge difference. This may be because of a lot of NBandW`s given away by NZ, but still.

Australia had 72 byes/leg byes compared to 16 no-balls/wides in 478.1 overs. That`s a ratio of 4.5 B/LB to 1 NB/W. A B/LB occurs every 7 overs.
New Zealand had 48 byes/leg byes compared to 37 no-balls/wides in 441 overs. That`s a ratio of 1.3 B/LB to 1 NB/W. A B/LB occurs every 9 overs.

This could be a one-off, but I feel like I see it a lot. What are all these byes given away from? Good bowling at the stumps? Poor `keeping by Gilly? What do you think?

This is also a testament to how controlled the Aussie`s bowling is... not many no-balls and next to nothing in wides.
Click to expand...
I think you'd probably have to separate the byes and leg byes before making a statement on Gilly's keeping, etc etc. My guess is that the byes would be lower than the leg byes by quite a bit, but I could be wrong. If Gilly is letting through 15-20 byes every innings then it would definately be down to poor keeping. More leg byes for the Aussies could come from poor balls not being punished off the bat but the batsman being able to get something behind the ball - it could simply be a case of class of batsmen with the Australians more likely to punish something on legs whereas the NZers got pad etc on it more often.

In short...I'm not sure! haha It could be all, some, or none of the above I guess!
 
Nate

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
Yeah, neither am I, hence me starting the thread. :D An I never said that Gilchrist`s wicketkeeping is poor, just asked the question. :)

17 of the 72 were byes by Gilchrist. 17 byes in 478.1 overs. A bye every 28 overs.
10 of the 48 were byes by McCullum. 10 byes in 441 overs. A bye every 44.1 overs.
 
marc71178

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Nnanden said:
This could be a one-off, but I feel like I see it a lot. What are all these byes given away from? Good bowling at the stumps? Poor `keeping by Gilly? What do you think?
Click to expand...
The Aussie batsmen are better so hit the ball more often?
 
Mister Wright

Mister Wright

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Nnanden said:
Yeah, neither am I, hence me starting the thread. :D An I never said that Gilchrist`s wicketkeeping is poor, just asked the question. :)

17 of the 72 were byes by Gilchrist. 17 byes in 478.1 overs. A bye every 28 overs.
10 of the 48 were byes by McCullum. 10 byes in 441 overs. A bye every 44.1 overs.
Click to expand...
There's some food for thought. :-O
 
Nate

Nate

You'll Never Walk Alone
*Sigh*

I hoped this thread would provide some in-depth, serious discussion. But it appears to get some replies in CC these days, you need to make a thread titled "Big Stomach XI". Such is the age, or maturity of posters amongst us.

Thanks to those who replied, trying to give me some answers! :)
 
age_master

age_master

Hall of Fame Member
Mister Wright said:
There's some food for thought. :-O
Click to expand...

indeed, would be interesting to compare the best keepers in recent history to all the current ones in terms of that
 
howardj

howardj

International Coach
Nnanden said:
*Sigh*

I hoped this thread would provide some in-depth, serious discussion. But it appears to get some replies in CC these days, you need to make a thread titled "Big Stomach XI". Such is the age, or maturity of posters amongst us.

Thanks to those who replied, trying to give me some answers! :)
Click to expand...
Firstly, there is the Warne factor. None of the NZ bowlers are as difficult to keep to as Warney - particularly when he bowls around the wicket into the rough. If I recall correctly, he did quite a bit of this in the recently completed series, especially to Hamish Marshall.

Secondly, Im quite sure, have batted so dynamically - three Test Matches of awesome batsmanship - Gilly would have been a little off the boil mentally, and maybe physically, when he came back out to keep wickets. But gee, on balance, he had a stunning series.
 
howardj

howardj

International Coach
age_master said:
indeed, would be interesting to compare the best keepers in recent history to all the current ones in terms of that
Click to expand...
But how many of them had to keep to Warne, especially when he comes around the wicket into the rough? And how many of those other keepers would have felt a little drained after making such enormous contributions with the bat, as Gilly does. There's a whole raft of things that go into that 'byes conceded' stat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top