• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Cricket Thread

Why have some teams played twice and others haven't played at all yet, are they trying to bunch games together for teams so they can get form up or is it just a quirk of the scheduling?
 
It's odd how the importance of 50s and 100s distorts the game and it gets little comment. From a team perspective they are irrelevant, but the importance of the personal targets changes how batsmen play. Players too often get out after getting a 50 or 100, and the pressure of approaching a 100 makes batsmen more conservative or nervous.

Root and Buttler both got out soon after their hundreds. Essentially they lost concentration and focus, which is rather unprofessional, but because they got their centuries that will be overlooked. If the 100 held no importance, England would probably have won, as Root and Buttler were playing well until the personal milestone.
 
jts1882 said:
It's odd how the importance of 50s and 100s distorts the game and it gets little comment. From a team perspective they are irrelevant, but the importance of the personal targets changes how batsmen play. Players too often get out after getting a 50 or 100, and the pressure of approaching a 100 makes batsmen more conservative or nervous.

Root and Buttler both got out soon after their hundreds. Essentially they lost concentration and focus, which is rather unprofessional, but because they got their centuries that will be overlooked. If the 100 held no importance, England would probably have won, as Root and Buttler were playing well until the personal milestone.
Click to expand...
Sounds plausible enough but need a graph showing how often batters get out just after passing 50/100 milestones compared with the rest.
 
Here are some numbers just looking at world cup centuries: List of Cricket World Cup centuries

167 centuries (109 wickets) total up to Buttler's.

Out for 100 - 7 times
Out for 101 - 8 times
Out for 102 - 5 times
Out for 103 - 5 times
Out for 104 - 5 times
Total out for 100-104 - 30 times (28%)
Out for 105-109 - 12 times (11%)

Out for 100-109 - 42 times (39%)
Out for 110-119 - 25 times (23%
Out for 120-129 - 10 times (9%)
Out for 130-139 - 12 times (11%)
Out for 140-149 - 8 times (7%)
Out for >150 - 12 times (11%)

I'm not going to plot it, but over a quarter of the centurions lost their wicket between 100 and 104.
 
Last edited:
jts1882 said:
Here are some number just looking at world cup centuries: List of Cricket World Cup centuries

167 centuries total up to Buttler's.

Out for 100 - 7 times
Out for 101 - 8 times
Out for 102 - 5 times
Out for 103 - 5 times
Out for 104 - 5 times
Total out for 100-104 - 30 times
Out for 105-109 - 12 times

Out for 100-109 - 42 times
Out for 110-119 - 25 times
Out for 120-129 - 10 times
Out for 130-139 - 12 times
Out for 140-149 - 8 times
Out for >150 - 12 times

I'm not going to plot it, but over a quarter of the centurions lost their wicket between 100 and 104.
Click to expand...
Great work, thanks.
 
jts1882 said:
Here are some numbers just looking at world cup centuries: List of Cricket World Cup centuries

167 centuries (109 wickets) total up to Buttler's.

Out for 100 - 7 times
Out for 101 - 8 times
Out for 102 - 5 times
Out for 103 - 5 times
Out for 104 - 5 times
Total out for 100-104 - 30 times (28%)
Out for 105-109 - 12 times (11%)

Out for 100-109 - 42 times (39%)
Out for 110-119 - 25 times (23%
Out for 120-129 - 10 times (9%)
Out for 130-139 - 12 times (11%)
Out for 140-149 - 8 times (7%)
Out for >150 - 12 times (11%)

I'm not going to plot it, but over a quarter of the centurions lost their wicket between 100 and 104.
Click to expand...
Pretty conclusive evidence that. Although maybe it's not always down to letting concentration slide, maybe they're also getting out because once past the mark they're starting to let rip and taking more risks in the process.

But either way it looks like you're right, the landmark is clearly playing too much on their minds.
 
Another thought is, maybe if they did not concentrate so hard on getting to their ton fewer would actually reach the magic number in the first place? :rolleyes:
 
There is also the well documented slow down in the nervous 90s.

For some the 90s is a problem that they struggle with, including some good batsmen.

Statistically, one of the worst victims of the nervous nineties was Australian opener (and now commentator) Michael Slater, dismissed in the nineties 9 times in his test career, and surviving to make a century 14 times.[4] West Indian batsman Alvin Kallicharran's record was similarly poor, dismissed in the nineties 7 times for 12 career centuries.
Click to expand...

But for others it does seem to focus the mind.

Sir Donald Bradman holds the record for most world centuries scored in a career without ever being dismissed in the nervous nineties: a total of 29 centuries. Greg Chappell (24 centuries) and Michael Vaughan (18 centuries) have the next best records.[5]
Click to expand...
 
Another example of a batsman getting out after reaching a milestone. Bairstow gets his 50, barely troubled, and then is out without adding to his score.
 
Warner: 56 runs from 84 balls, his slowest half century in ODIs; 14 dot balls in a row at one point; runs out the batsman who was scoring runs. A terrible innings for Australia when chasing a record world cup score.

But the stats will show another half century.
 
I don't suppose players can get the milestone figures out of the head when they have been with them in mind for their entire career, I was only a second XI club cricketer but I never looked at my score on the board just the total we needed, always had someone at the other end how would tell me if I needed to push on, played with plenty of arseholes who knew exactly what their score was and behaved like kids when they got out, had one bloke would go home when he was out when we batted second.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back