-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Cricket
- Thread starter mb64
- Start date
Yeah watching it all, I remember it happening one or twice years ago in the one-day game, it's funny how many sports 'players' don't know some of the basic rules in their game, like in AFL running through the behind posts only to get called to come back and take your kick again mate!!
Last edited:
Calculating away here, if the Aussies can get Ireland out for 118 they'll start getting into a positive run rate from the -1.555 that we currently are.
So anything better than bowling them out for 110, 100, 90's would be a fantastic result.
Australia has Afghanistan still to play so another good chance to give it a big boost as well.
England (0.239 NRR) has two tough games to come - New Zealand and Sri Lanka.
So anything better than bowling them out for 110, 100, 90's would be a fantastic result.
Australia has Afghanistan still to play so another good chance to give it a big boost as well.
England (0.239 NRR) has two tough games to come - New Zealand and Sri Lanka.
How come the Indians always seem to come out on top in umpiring decisions?
The decision to restart the game yesterday was a bit surprising, was still clearly very wet and shown when Das slipped only a few balls into the restart.
D/L also seemed to screw the Bangers.
They had score 66-0 off 7 overs when they were due to restart, were 17 runs ahead of D/L so you'd assume it would be kind to them.
India scored 184 off 20 overs (9.2 runs per over). Bangladesh had scored 66 off 7 (9.4) meaning they only needed 9.1 / over has they batted the full complement of 20 overs. Reduced to 16 and they then had to bat at 9.4 for their whole innings (0.2 runs per over more than India had scored).
I personally don't like D/L as I have no understanding of how the runs required is calculated (and I don't think we have ever been told, think the AFL magic formula, this is crickets). The difference would have only been 4 runs (and Bangers would have lost by a run) but the mentality of the batters may have been different when they went out there.
Anyway, that side of the draw should be done now. India and the Saffers.
Who makes it out of Group A. England (playing SL), Australia (playing Afghans but need a bump in NRR) or NZ (playing Ireland).
I'd think the Kiwis are probably there, they only need to beat Ireland, (no need to worry about NRR), Australia probably need to worry about winning and the NRR (as England play a day after). England will know what they need to do, but they need to beat SL 1st and foremost.
I hope rain doesn't have its say in these last few games. Looks like a better weekend of weather coming up, so hopefully no overs lost.
The decision to restart the game yesterday was a bit surprising, was still clearly very wet and shown when Das slipped only a few balls into the restart.
D/L also seemed to screw the Bangers.
They had score 66-0 off 7 overs when they were due to restart, were 17 runs ahead of D/L so you'd assume it would be kind to them.
India scored 184 off 20 overs (9.2 runs per over). Bangladesh had scored 66 off 7 (9.4) meaning they only needed 9.1 / over has they batted the full complement of 20 overs. Reduced to 16 and they then had to bat at 9.4 for their whole innings (0.2 runs per over more than India had scored).
I personally don't like D/L as I have no understanding of how the runs required is calculated (and I don't think we have ever been told, think the AFL magic formula, this is crickets). The difference would have only been 4 runs (and Bangers would have lost by a run) but the mentality of the batters may have been different when they went out there.
Anyway, that side of the draw should be done now. India and the Saffers.
Who makes it out of Group A. England (playing SL), Australia (playing Afghans but need a bump in NRR) or NZ (playing Ireland).
I'd think the Kiwis are probably there, they only need to beat Ireland, (no need to worry about NRR), Australia probably need to worry about winning and the NRR (as England play a day after). England will know what they need to do, but they need to beat SL 1st and foremost.
I hope rain doesn't have its say in these last few games. Looks like a better weekend of weather coming up, so hopefully no overs lost.
Best club song ever, although, why couldn't they just sing Pass the Dutchie? 
D/L is a straight mathematical formula which is all preset depending on the data.
I've no idea how it works but if you put in the score, balls bowled, wickets lost etc for a first or second innings it gives you the D/L score, so it isn't open to manipulation. It always gives you a slightly harder task batting second, I guess because you have the opportunity to know the scenario whereas the team batting first doesn't.
It's based on the notion of balls left and wickets together constituting how much a team has in the way of "resources" to make a score. There is a table of values cross referencing the two and resulting in a percentage - i.e. how much percentage of your total resources you have left at any given time.
Mathematically, it's pretty much on the money, although I have a suspicion that it is less ideal in the 20-over game than the 50-over game for which it was originally designed. This due to the more dramatic swings in momentum forced by the more compressed nature of the game - wickets can fall much faster which makes the DLS value vary more as well.
And I do agree that India seem to get more than their fair share of the breaks than other teams. They are the Collingwood of international cricket.
Duckworth–Lewis–Stern method - Wikipedia
It's based on the notion of balls left and wickets together constituting how much a team has in the way of "resources" to make a score. There is a table of values cross referencing the two and resulting in a percentage - i.e. how much percentage of your total resources you have left at any given time.
Mathematically, it's pretty much on the money, although I have a suspicion that it is less ideal in the 20-over game than the 50-over game for which it was originally designed. This due to the more dramatic swings in momentum forced by the more compressed nature of the game - wickets can fall much faster which makes the DLS value vary more as well.
And I do agree that India seem to get more than their fair share of the breaks than other teams. They are the Collingwood of international cricket.
Duckworth–Lewis–Stern method - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
The other issue with the D/L potentially is it is 20 years old and the game has changed dramatically in that time.
10 an over at the death was unheard of then, now it is below par.
It was always ideal for 50 over but 20 over format has proved more problematic. However, still the best system.It's based on the notion of balls left and wickets together constituting how much a team has in the way of "resources" to make a score. There is a table of values cross referencing the two and resulting in a percentage - i.e. how much percentage of your total resources you have left at any given time.
Mathematically, it's pretty much on the money, although I have a suspicion that it is less ideal in the 20-over game than the 50-over game for which it was originally designed. This due to the more dramatic swings in momentum forced by the more compressed nature of the game - wickets can fall much faster which makes the DLS value vary more as well.
And I do agree that India seem to get more than their fair share of the breaks than other teams. They are the Collingwood of international cricket.
Duckworth–Lewis–Stern method - Wikipedia
D/L had been amended with the S. 10 an over is not below par, not many totals above 200.
Unless Sri Lanka beats England tomorrow, Australia is out of the T20 World Cup. Another ordinary performance tonight. Barely escaped with a win over Afghanistan.
Hopefully we never see Finch, Wade or Kane Richardson play for Australia again. Serious questions need to be asked of George Bailey's selection panel as well.
Hopefully we never see Finch, Wade or Kane Richardson play for Australia again. Serious questions need to be asked of George Bailey's selection panel as well.
Only just started watching cricket again and have to say I’m super impressed with the talent in the minnow teams, in particular Ireland and Afghanistan. Pat Cummins is almost cooked, should stick to improving his cricket and not leftie agendas
