Domestic Cricket 17/18
-
-
@hydro11 google tells Chapman plays for Hong Kong. Is that the same player you are referring to? Are no restrictions on players swapping between teams like Hong Kong and NZ? Yes, I am too lazy to look that up myself.
-
@crazy-horse if i recall Hong Kong is an associate member ( like tier 2 in rugby). Years ago I went through a qualification period to play for an associate team.
Took 4 years of 183 days present in the country per year. Back then they checked and added passport stamps.
2 players only in the 12 for 4 year qualification and then 7 years at the same 183 days for full qualification
I notice that Jofra Arthur has another 2-4 years in england to qualify. He's from Barbados, so maybe the rules are the sameHaving said that, it wouldn't surprise if a kiwi passport (if he has one) and other considerations make it easier to go from an associate nation to a test playing one.
I remember hearing his name when playing in HK. He was a wunderkind with Jamie Atkinson -
-
@gunner said in Domestic Cricket 17/18:
Stags limped to 99/8.
It’s a tough pitch to bat on but all the Knights need is one batsmen to come off and she’s game over.
Limited overs cricket's biggest issue is that it's basically impossible to win the game batting first. No matter how well a team does, the chasing team always has a chance to win (see Australia scoring 434 vs South Africa), and I think this is particularly the case for T20 cricket. Martin Crowe used to say you should never bat first in T20 for that reason.
It makes me wonder about the old Crowe idea of two innings. To prevent it being too much of a hit and giggle you could make it one innings split into two (i.e. the batsmen in resume in the first over of the second innings). Also means that the team batting second has some more interesting decisions to make in their first innings - if the team batting first has got off to a flier do you try and match them, not knowing if they might collapse in the second innings? Likewise if you've bowled well in their first innings do you take it easy and risk having them finish fast and leave yourselves too much to do in the final few overs?
-
Well done boys!
Hopkins has made an impact in his first year as the ND 20/20 coach.
BTW, I read that CD batted first in every game bar one before the final, and lost the only game they fielded first. They obviously preferred to set a target and defend it.
-
@cyclops said in Domestic Cricket 17/18:
@gunner said in Domestic Cricket 17/18:
Stags limped to 99/8.
It’s a tough pitch to bat on but all the Knights need is one batsmen to come off and she’s game over.
Limited overs cricket's biggest issue is that it's basically impossible to win the game batting first. No matter how well a team does, the chasing team always has a chance to win (see Australia scoring 434 vs South Africa), and I think this is particularly the case for T20 cricket. Martin Crowe used to say you should never bat first in T20 for that reason.
It makes me wonder about the old Crowe idea of two innings. To prevent it being too much of a hit and giggle you could make it one innings split into two (i.e. the batsmen in resume in the first over of the second innings). Also means that the team batting second has some more interesting decisions to make in their first innings - if the team batting first has got off to a flier do you try and match them, not knowing if they might collapse in the second innings? Likewise if you've bowled well in their first innings do you take it easy and risk having them finish fast and leave yourselves too much to do in the final few overs?
Bollox. That claim just fails the eye test. Would love to see the stats.
-
@baron-silas-greenback said in Domestic Cricket 17/18:
Would love to see the stats.
Whomever this is gets their data from cricinfo apparently.
https://truii.com/data-curio/sports-statistics/t20-cricket-should-you-bat-first/
Not a lot in it, certainly not "basically impossible to win the game batting first". In a day / night match should definitely bat first.
A bigger difference in ODIs and a bigger statistical sample.
https://truii.com/data-curio/sports-statistics/odi-cricket-should-you-bat-or-field-first/
-
@snowy said in Domestic Cricket 17/18:
@baron-silas-greenback said in Domestic Cricket 17/18:
Would love to see the stats.
Whomever this is gets their data from cricinfo apparently.
https://truii.com/data-curio/sports-statistics/t20-cricket-should-you-bat-first/
Not a lot in it, certainly not "basically impossible to win the game batting first". In a day / night match should definitely bat first.
A bigger difference in ODIs and a bigger statistical sample.
https://truii.com/data-curio/sports-statistics/odi-cricket-should-you-bat-or-field-first/
It's not impossible to win batting first. My point was that if you bat first and bat poorly then the contest is over, whereas bowling first even if you bowl poorly you're still in the game.
-
Isn't that just like saying you can't win a game of rugby in the first half? You can go a long way towards winning but the other team always has a chance of coming back.
Ive played in plenty of cricket games, particularly finals, where we have batted first and got what appeared to be a shit total. Only for us to roll the other team for much less.
What it proves is batsmen are just flakey pricks who can't handle pressure.
