Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

alfie wrote:As for the other business about signal cards from the balcony : well really not so terrible different from sending out a runner with a drink or a change of gloves so doesn't bother me in an ethical sense : but it does annoy me in that you surely appoint a captain because you think he has or can learn a proper feel for the game and can make sensible decisions on the field ...all this overdone advice from analysts must undermine him to an extent : and quite often seems to be quite useless anyway ! If the analysts said Topley shouldn't bowl I am saying right now they were absolutely wrong ! And proven to be

On the first point, I really dont see what the fuss is about. Pretty much all sports have coaches which involve themselves in the game, so how this was classed as "unethical" is just nonsense. Its a nothing thing.... like it was years ago when Bob Woolmer and Hansie Cronje wore ear pieces to communicate. If teams want to do that, then let them - it doesnt take time out the game.

Ben Stokes has retired from ODIs. So after losing Captain Morgan England will have to refit their middle order.

it's the logical one to go, if you still fancy a bit of IPL moola

alfie wrote: ...all this overdone advice from analysts must undermine him to an extent : and quite often seems to be quite useless anyway ! If the analysts said Topley shouldn't bowl I am saying right now they were absolutely wrong ! And proven to be

I know I have made it clear in the past that I am a dedicated disciple of data analytics, but data is one of those dangerous things that can steer idiots into all kinds of wonderful conclusions; and if you ever had the misfortune of reading his book on the subject, Nathan Leamon has some bonkers ideas coming from his inability/fixation of raw data outcomes.

I guess he would argue that the data of each bowlers production in batches of over/match situation would provide an argument for bowling a certain order - but only a total prat would leave a bowler with an econ of 4 with 3 unbowled overs while Pant and Hardik were smoking the ball half way around the country... only a total prat would leave a guy who's breaking partnerships all over the place with 3 overs left when you have taken 5 wickets, hes bowled well all series, and you badly need a wicket.

Leamon seemingly stepping up in influence is a worry. As stated, some of his conclusions about the game he has written about dont strike me as very well thought out. And while he himself leads the brigade of self-congratulations on re-defining the way our ODI team plays, he pretends like he took over the job after the 2015 WC and its all been success - lectures us about why all this data showed it was obvious to begin with.... Flower hired him in 2009. It took you 6-7 years in the job to realise this, at a time we were utterly terrible and batting like it was 1970s. Im inclined on that fact alone to think Leamon's data wizardry has is probably not great, and has been validated by an excellent team.

Some of the conclusions he has in his book are bizarre. He seems to think that bowling dictates nothing in ODI success, and its all batting; but that's just a rather dramatic conclusion made my choice. One could equally phrase the data the opposite way.... the bowling failure is equal to batting success, so bowling failure losses matches. Wickets stop the flow of runs. These does add up. He then says the next metric for success is experience, but says that there is no link between how consistent an 11 is and success - but surely more caps over the team itself is proof of a very base level of consistency?

By the time he started quoting Buddhist proverbs and trying to argue the best place to bowl was 19 feet outside offstump at head level, the book went in the bin

19 feet outside off at head height is probably where I'd end up bowling the ball

Durhamfootman wrote:The last I heard up here, Wood is very close to fitness. There is speculation about whether he'll be allowed to turn out for Durham to build match fitness, but I doubt he'll be allowed to, personally. I have no doubt he'll be allowed to play in the 'guaranteed until 2028' hundred

now they are saying he needs more surgery on his elbow to give him the best possible chance of playing in the WC, although they don't say which WC