Super over stats

[Red]

I'm guessing these aren't officially recorded anywhere, which is another reason why this system is incredibly flawed.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Do you really care if super over stats are stored or not? I don't

 

[cnerd123]

I for one am extremely disappointed that Sehwag and Uthappa's 100% strike rate in bowl-outs have not been recorded anywhere

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Sunil Narine once bowled a maiden over in a super over. ..

 

[mr_mister]

Jimmy Neesham is a super over bully

 

[NUFAN]

I would like to see free hit strike rates if they were available.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Are you saying that the runs and wickets etc don't count in the batsman's/bowlers stats? That makes the fact that we won the trophy by not winning the match, and with stats that don't even count, even better.

 

[GIMH]

So because they don't count towards career stats, the system is flawed?

That's a jump in logic if ever I saw one.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

I would like to see free hit strike rates if they were available.

That's kinda like hitters average with the bases loaded in baseball.

 

[Red]

So because they don't count towards career stats, the system is flawed?

That's a jump in logic if ever I saw one.

Yeh. Deciding a six week tournament based off a completely unrelated process, a process so so unrelated to the actual six week comp that the stats for it aren't even officially recorded, is a "jump in logic".

 

[GIMH]

Yeh. Deciding a six week tournament based off a completely unrelated process, a process so so unrelated to the actual six week comp that the stats for it aren't even officially recorded, is a "jump in logic".

In footy two World Cup finals have been decided on penalties, goals in them don’t count to stats either. I’m sure other sports would have similar comparisons.

What’s your preferred method?

It not counting to stats is not because it’s not akin to cricket, its neither here nor there but it certainly has zero relevance to whether it’s a good tiebreaker.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

The Super Over is just a gimmick tossed over from the T/20. Just decide it on boundaries scored in the 50 overs.

 

[Bijed]

Never understood why the stats aren't recorded tbh. I mean, they wouldn't be useful for much at all, but might as well keep track of them for the sake of people like me who like their cricket stat trivia

 

[mr_mister]

Just add the runs to their ODI stats

 

[NZTailender]

I don't care if they're added to player stats, but I wanted to go back and review what was scored in the super overs, specifically, and can I find it anywhere on the Cricinfo scorecard? No. Ridiculous.

 

[NUFAN]

That's kinda like hitters average with the bases loaded in baseball.

Nah, its very different IMO.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeh. Deciding a six week tournament based off a completely unrelated process, a process so so unrelated to the actual six week comp that the stats for it aren't even officially recorded, is a "jump in logic".

Bro I'm sure most agree that Super Over to decide a World Cup isn't ideal, but using "the stats aren't recorded" as the reason why is strange

 

[mr_mister]

I actually think the super over is perfect, sure a super powerplay of 5 overs perhaps more suitable for an ODI WC final, but whatever. The only issue (and it's a major issue) is giving up on finding an outright winner after only one is tied

 

[Red]

Bro I'm sure most agree that Super Over to decide a World Cup isn't ideal, but using "the stats aren't recorded" as the reason why is strange

No it's not. The reason the stats aren't recorded is because the system has no relation to the actual contest.

 

[Red]

I actually think the super over is perfect, sure a super powerplay of 5 overs perhaps more suitable for an ODI WC final, but whatever. The only issue (and it's a major issue) is giving up on finding an outright winner after only one is tied

How on earth could anyone think that a system, to decide the winner of a six week premier tournament, that has nothing in common with the tournament, is perfect?