Roar Rookie
Joined July 2014
24.3k
Views
13
Published
51
Comments
Published
Comments
This will make you laugh. The other day I saw one of those all-time best Aussie Test XIs and they’d picked Steve Smith instead…
In the joyous moments after Ash Barty’s Wimbledon win she was photographed in front of the honours board with her name already on it…
India’s fielding was poor in the first Test, but just how bad was it? It frustrates me that there is no effective fielding measure…
Seven decades ago, the newly independent nation of India came up against Australia in Test cricket for the first time. It was the beginning…
Australia has demolished South Africa in Cape Town in the third and final T20 to win the series two-one. This match bore a remarkable…
Well, what a rollicking game of cricket that was! Three and a half hours of quality entertainment in front of a capacity crowd set…
Night T20s in South Africa are a tough ask for Australian fans: this one started at 3 am in Sydney and Melbourne and finished…
Modern cricket is a madcap game. No other sport has such a bewildering number of formats. In short-form cricket alone there are 50-over, 20-over…
Can you name every country in which the Cricket World Cup has been played? If that’s too easy - and it might be harder…
The charms of the Sydney Cricket Ground are well known: the stands are a delightful mix of old and new, the atmosphere is loud…
Imagine this scenario. For five years the Australian cricket team has been forced to play all their ‘home' matches in, say, Canada. David Warner…
As a Sydneysider, I have come to admire the AFL. Did you know that it has the fourth highest average crowds for any domestic…
Do you like dead rubbers? Then you are going to love the cricket World Cup. Why? Because the entire 42-match group phase of this…
Yes, that was implicit – Waugh was a fine player but obviously not a top-team contender.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
I agree. The point of the article was to say it’s absurd to consider Waugh over Smith so why is it accepted that we do it for keepers?!
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
The ‘old maxim’ is one I made up – I tried to think of the silliest one I could to emphasise the article was satirical 😛
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
Funnily enough, this very morning I have been reading about Wilfred Rhodes’ comeback test match at the Oval in 1926.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
I don’t think the name matters. By analogy do you insist on saying dummy half play is just a bonus, your hooker in rugby league must be picked on their ability to win scrums against the feed?
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
Thanks Dwanye! Nice to hear.
CricViz do something a bit similar although they take into account how many actual runs a player cost by dropping a catch based on how many they ended up scoring.
But even they don’t tend to publicise their own metric very much, which puzzles me.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
Most people probably agree with you.
But without any numbers to back it up I remain sceptical. If there was a proper wicket-keeping metric (along the lines of batting average) and if it showed Wade was substantially worse than other wicket-keepers (taking into account his batting and keeping average) then I would enthusiastically agree with you.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
It’s hard work, sure. But I’m saying the impact of any difference in glovework standard between top keepers is probably no greater than the impact of any difference in slips fielders. Yes keepers touch the ball much more often, but most of what they do is routine (routine for top keepers that is). When catches do come to the slips they are much more likely to be dropped because of the lack of gloves and so good slippers stand out.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
Yep, Gilchrist is one of the very first I would pick in my best side too. It drives me crazy when people pick Healy instead.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
Yes – that is the whole point of my article. It would be absurd to pick Mark Waugh over Steve Smith based on perceived catching ability, yet so many people do it for wicketkeepers.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
Yep, of course it’s the runs that matter. My point is that it’s clearly crazy to pick number 4 based on catching yet it’s an accepted truism to do so for keeping.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
Definitely! My point is that all the arguments used to say that you have to pick your best gloveman as a keeper can be just as easily applied to the slips – which is clearly silly.
I once did come up with a fielding metric which addresses most of your concerns. It’s here if you’re interested:
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!
Yet it is your place to object to my objection?
'Outdated and insulting': It's time to update the Wimbledon honours board
No that’s not right.
It’s not the Cawley I object to – it is the use of her husband’s first initial rather than her own. If it were ‘Mrs E Cawley’ that would be one thing but it isn’t. It’s ‘Mrs R Cawley’ because her husband’s name of Roger Cawley.
'Outdated and insulting': It's time to update the Wimbledon honours board
As I said in the article I’m not advocating for the board to be destroyed.
'Outdated and insulting': It's time to update the Wimbledon honours board
Obviously if any one of them didn’t want it changed I wouldn’t want it changed either.
'Outdated and insulting': It's time to update the Wimbledon honours board
You are correct. I wrote this at 3 am and it shows! I have asked them to correct it to 1980.
'Outdated and insulting': It's time to update the Wimbledon honours board
True but this is the same for batting average and bowling average. Paine’s 70-odd runs in the first Test were worth more than many centuries but they’ll only count as 70 to his average.
Cricket needs a fielding score. How about this one?
I think both would be valid. One that measures pure fielding ability and one that measures the impact of fielding on an actual match.
Cricket needs a fielding score. How about this one?
Fair enough.
I’d see it as more of an in-between-games thing though. Eg two batsmen are both in line for a spot in the side and both average 40. But one has a +4 fielding average; the other -2.
Cricket needs a fielding score. How about this one?
Yep – it’s a good point. I deliberately decided against this though because I want a measure of fielding skill not how much a fielder’s performance affected an individual game: if Warner makes a direct hit to run a batter out by a centimetre I am not bothered whether the batsman was Kohli or Bumrah. But it would be valid and interesting to introduce another measure that does take into account the skill of the player dismissed.
Cricket needs a fielding score. How about this one?
True. I thought of taking into account the quality of the batsman dropped but decided not to. But there is no reason it couldn’t be done that way as well – although this would result in yet another stat 😛
The measures we have for batting and bowling also don’t take into account game situation or players involved: five wickets for a bowler count the same regardless of whether it was five tail-enders or five top-order players. And a century scored as the game meanders to a draw on day 5 against a weak attack counts the same as a century scored on a minefield on day 1 in a deciding Ashes Test.
Cricket needs a fielding score. How about this one?
Cheers mate.
Fair enough – although I would add that rather than beating Paine about the head for taking seven straightforward chances this approach elevates Saha from being thought to have had a poor match to realising he did quite well. And maybe next game Paine will be in the same situation.
Cricket needs a fielding score. How about this one?
Thanks!
Yes, fielding position would definitely have an impact. Maybe in time if a fielding metric became common fielding position would become factored in. Eg – she has an average fielding score of +7 per game, which is incredible for someone usually at fine leg.
Cricket needs a fielding score. How about this one?
No doubt most people agree with you. And I would never advocate picking a poor keeper. But I think generally the first class keepers are all pretty similar in standard and although keepers do touch the ball a hell of a lot the overwhelming majority of touches are routine.
Steve Smith over Mark Waugh? Pick your best catcher – runs are a bonus!