Cricket 2012: Cricket has always been a game stuck in the past

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > Cricket 2012: Cricket has always been a game stuck in the past

«‹›1746 »

Cricket This poll is closed.
Blackface in crowd	129	55.36%
References to Lord of the Rings	104	44.64%
Total:	233 votes

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

Spamtheman: May 30, 2005; Effer of the ineffable

Nice 50 for De Kock, hopefuly we can get this done without any more wickets going down.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 09:37

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 16:22

Wandle Cax: Dec 15, 2006

Sad end for SL but at least NZ won't have to play them in the semi final, where after losing to us comfortably for 17 games in a row they would have almost certainly knocked us out of the tournament.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 09:37

Airstream Driver: May 6, 2009

This is sad. Poor Sanga.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 09:48

runoverbobby: Apr 21, 2007; Fighting like beavers.

The winning runs will most definitely come from wides or leg byes.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 09:50

Smorgasbord: Jun 18, 2004; Our review identified changes needed to be made and, in Stephen, we have a coach who has a reputation for demanding the highest standards.

Isn't Sangakarra sticking around for a few more test series?

# ? Mar 18, 2015 10:02

Mister Chief: Jun 6, 2011

Terrible game.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 10:03

BallerBallerDillz: Jun 11, 2009; Cock, Rules, Everything, Around, Me; Scratchmo

The Nards Pan posted:

. . .Quinny returns to form and. . . takes MOM.

Wrong about this too, but you can't deny that Tahir deserved it. Great game, the rest of the tournament is shaping up to be fantastic too. Although I'm a solid Proteas supporter, I don't think there is any shame in losing to this Black Caps side.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 10:11

gay picnic defence: Oct 5, 2009; I'M CONCERNED ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS

subroc posted:

It was JUST ok.

Looks like he's a thalidomide kid from that angle.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 10:12

Wandle Cax: Dec 15, 2006

Smorgasbord posted:

Isn't Sangakarra sticking around for a few more test series?

Yes until August.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 10:16

Drugs: Jul 16, 2010; I don't like people who take drugs. Customs agents, for example - Albert Einstein

This world cup has been trash apart from Afghanistan vs Scotland and all the England losses

# ? Mar 18, 2015 10:23

Wafflecopper: Nov 27, 2004; I am a mouth, and I must scream

Drugs posted:

This world cup has been trash apart from Afghanistan vs Scotland and all the England losses

NZ vs Aus was a great match

# ? Mar 18, 2015 10:53

Mister Chief: Jun 6, 2011

Can Pakistan beat Australia?

# ? Mar 18, 2015 11:02

Lionel Richie: Nov 14, 2004

# ? Mar 18, 2015 11:03

Ratios and Tendency: Apr 23, 2010; MURALI

Drugs posted:

This world cup has been trash apart from Afghanistan vs Scotland and all the England losses

I'd add NZ vs Aus and Pakistan vs South Africa but yeah. 43 matches so far and only ~6 have been good.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 11:03

voiceless anal fricative: May 6, 2007

England v Bangladesh was good too

e: most of Bangladesh's games have been good

# ? Mar 18, 2015 13:11

Lungboy: Aug 23, 2002; NEED SQUAT FORM HELP

Mister Chief posted:

Can Pakistan beat Australia?

It depends who the Pakistani players have bet on.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 13:51

Greyman: Apr 20, 2005

So, one of my students is Sri Lankan and just linked to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSd-ojyDeYw as "a fitting tribute to Kumar Sangakarra". It's certainly different. There's a sales pitch at the end but I thought it was worth a chuckle.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 16:34

IceAgeComing: Jan 29, 2013; pretty fucking embarrassing to watch

England have officially stopped caring about One Day cricket and have announced their squad for the test series to the West Indies

quote:

Alastair Cook (capt), Gary Ballance, Ian Bell, Joe Root, Jos Buttler (wk), Chris Jordan, Stuart Broad, James Anderson, Jonathan Trott, Adam Lyth, Jonny Bairstow (wk), Ben Stokes, Liam Plunkett, Mark Wood, Adil Rashid, James Tredwell

I think its a dumb idea to send both Anderson and Broad to the West Indies myself; but that could just be me. Other than that and them recalling Bairstow for some reason its kinda what I expected... I approve of Rashid because Leg Spin is cool and there needs to be more leg spinners in international cricket; I don't know if he's that good.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 18:04

tarbrush: Feb 7, 2011; ALL ABOARD THE SCOTLAND HYPE TRAIN!

CHOO CHOO

N: Alistair Cook has come out and said that England's performance in the world cup showed that they made a mistake by dropping him

V: lol

# ? Mar 18, 2015 18:36

notaspy: Mar 22, 2009

Who the gently caress is mark wood?

# ? Mar 18, 2015 18:42

serious gaylord: Sep 16, 2007; what.

tarbrush posted:

N: Alistair Cook has come out and said that England's performance in the world cup showed that they made a mistake by dropping him

V: lol

Yeah the mistake was not dropping him a year ago.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 18:53

RideTheSpiral: Sep 18, 2005; College Slice

notaspy posted:

Who the gently caress is mark wood?

Lets play the guess who Mark Wood is game. My money is on right arm medium pacer who can't swing it.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 18:59

IceAgeComing: Jan 29, 2013; pretty fucking embarrassing to watch

Apparently he's one of the faster county bowlers. Which means

RideTheSpiral posted:

right arm medium pacer who can't swing it.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 19:05

Madkal: Feb 11, 2008; Fallen Rib

Stayed up til nearly 2 in the morning watching the game.One thing that dawned on me that SA reached the total under 20 overs (while SL took over 35 overs to get it). Imagine if SA did the same thing while batting first.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 22:10

Mister Chief: Jun 6, 2011

Madkal posted:

Stayed up til nearly 2 in the morning watching the game.One thing that dawned on me that SA reached the total under 20 overs (while SL took over 35 overs to get it). Imagine if SA did the same thing while batting first.

That's not how it works.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 23:15

Madkal: Feb 11, 2008; Fallen Rib

Mister Chief posted:

That's not how it works.

In my dream scenario it always works!

# ? Mar 18, 2015 23:36

Mister Chief: Jun 6, 2011

In the AU vs NZ game 11 runs were scored off the first ball therefore if NZ batted first they would have scored 3289.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 23:44

Noxin of Shame: Jul 25, 2005; Our Dan

South Africa batting first in a world cup quarter final, reaching 134 in 18 overs, then declaring with the plan of bowling out a Sri Lankan team wanting to send off their two best batsmen in style ...

Have you ever thought about coaching?

# ? Mar 18, 2015 23:46

Noxin of Shame: Jul 25, 2005; Our Dan

Mister Chief posted:

In the AU vs NZ game 11 runs were scored off the first ball therefore if NZ batted first they would have scored 3289.

Hmm, but if the first ball was a no-ball, I think you'll find that their projected score was infinity runs.

# ? Mar 18, 2015 23:52

Jon Von Anchovi: Sep 5, 2014

Noxin of Shame posted:

Hmm, but if the first ball was a no-ball, I think you'll find that their projected score was infinity runs.

I did the math and it checks out. duckworth lewis was off the charts

# ? Mar 19, 2015 01:10

webmeister: Jan 31, 2007; The answer is, mate, because I want to do you slowly. There has to be a bit of sport in this for all of us. In the psychological battle stakes, we are stripped down and ready to go. I want to see those ashen-faced performances; I want more of them. I want to be encouraged. I want to see you squirm.

Noxin of Shame posted:

Hmm, but if the first ball was a no-ball, I think you'll find that their projected score was infinity runs.

You should get a job on the Pakistan cricket board

# ? Mar 19, 2015 01:17

Thinking: Jan 22, 2009

Madkal posted:

Stayed up til nearly 2 in the morning watching the game.One thing that dawned on me that SA reached the total under 20 overs (while SL took over 35 overs to get it). Imagine if SA did the same thing while batting first.

Very few teams retire in one-day cricket

# ? Mar 19, 2015 01:22

Noxin of Shame: Jul 25, 2005; Our Dan

webmeister posted:

You should get a job on the Pakistan cricket board

I would be so loving corrupt. It'd be amazing.

# ? Mar 19, 2015 01:37

webmeister: Jan 31, 2007; The answer is, mate, because I want to do you slowly. There has to be a bit of sport in this for all of us. In the psychological battle stakes, we are stripped down and ready to go. I want to see those ashen-faced performances; I want more of them. I want to be encouraged. I want to see you squirm.

This article is pretty funny, it explains exactly why (stats-wise) Sri Lanka did absolutely everything perfectly against SA:

http://www.espncricinfo.com//icc-cricket-world-cup-2015/content/story/852149.html

quote:

Modern international teams are resourced with support staff in a way that their predecessors could only have dreamed of. Or had nightmares about, depending on the way they liked to prepare for and play their cricket. South Africa's backroom includes, one assumes, a fortune teller. Not to have one would seem counter-intuitive in a sporting world where nothing can be left to chance.

If South Africa's in-house soothsayer had informed them that today's SCG quarter-final would be a close-to-perfect replica of the 2011 quarter-final in Dhaka, the players would have stuck their fingers in their ears, sung a medley of their favourite songs as loudly as possible, and whimpered a nervous prayer to any available deity. That soothsayer, however, would have been proved right - almost eerily right.

Fortunately for South Africa, there were two quarter-finals in Dhaka four years ago. South Africa's notorious rapid-onset meltdown against New Zealand was one, but the other, between Pakistan and West Indies, took an almost identical path to today's Sydney showdown.

That day, West Indies won the toss, chose to bat, lost early wickets, (including being 16 for 2 in the sixth over) and rebuilt slightly before subsiding catastrophically in the middle order and setting a trifling target which their opponents chased with ease. As sporting imitations go, today's game was uncanny. South Africa were superb, but for the neutral, it was a similar anticlimax to West Indies' supine subsidence in 2011.

Before the tournament, Sri Lanka's lower middle order looked to be a potentially fatal flaw, the statistics suggesting it was the weakest of the major contenders. As it was, the damage on Wednesday was largely done by the failings of the top six, in particular the careless terminal strokes of Mahela Jayawardene and Angelo Mathews. However, the rapid disintegration that followed confirmed the suspicion that if Sri Lanka ever found themselves in a position where they needed significant runs from their number 7 to 11 in a crucial match, they would be effectively checking in to the next available flight home.

You might be tempted, after a walloping such as this, to ask whether there was anything Sri Lanka did right. The answer is: yes. There was plenty. Every team has keys to success, statistical goals which are all, incontrovertibly, key to achieving success. I do not know what the officially sanctioned keys to success were for this game, but Sri Lanka might consider that they succeeded in achieving the following keys so successfully that the keys opened the wrong door.

1. Keep South African pacers down to a maximum of three wickets: ACHIEVED

South Africa have lost 74% of the ODIs in which their pace attack has taken fewer than four wickets. At 4 for 2, with Abbott and Steyn probing relentlessly and Morkel still to come, Sri Lanka must have feared the worst. But they lost only one more wicket to pace, thus decisively creating the opportunity to use their finely-honed subcontinental skills to make hay against the historically less threatening South African spinners.

2. Numbers 3 and 4 to both score at least 40: ACHIEVED

The noble science of Cricketostatistics shows that teams whose numbers 3 and 4 both reach 40, win 78% of ODIs, and 74% of World Cup matches. Lahiru Thirimanne flayed some glorious off-side boundaries in his 41, and Sangakkara painstakingly accumulated his way to 45. Regardless of the clatter of wickets at the other end, victory had been 78% and/or 74% assured - even more so when their South African counterparts failed even to come close to the hallowed 40-run threshold. Faf du Plessis managed only 21, whilst Rilee Rossouw failed even to get off the mark.

3. Stop South Africa hitting sixes: ACHIEVED

South Africa hit no sixes against India, and lost. They hit six against Pakistan, and lost. They hit seven, 11, 12 and 14 sixes in their other four games, all of which they won. Sri Lanka needed to follow their Asian predecessors and keep South Africa below seven maximums. As it was, they entirely prevented South Africa from clearing the ropes. Not one single South African six. Against a batting line-up containing the likes of Rossouw, AB de Villiers and Miller, that was a notable performance.

4. Keep de Villiers down to less than 50 runs: ACHIEVED

Arguably too well.

5. The recalled Nuwan Kulasekara not to concede too many runs: ACHIEVED

The medium-pacer had been in horrible form for months until his 3 for 20 against Scotland, but the stats showed that Sri Lanka had won 75% of the matches in which Kulasekara had conceded no more than 25 runs. South Africa could only muster 13 runs off the fading swingster. That they did so in the one over he bowled was surely immaterial - another three-quarters of a win was in the bag.

6. Make South Africa think about their previous failings: ACHIEVED

South Africa had lost 100% of the World Cup knock-out games in which they had bowled first and had the opposition 16 for 2 after six overs. Admittedly, this is from a statistical sample of one. In 2011, South Africa began their quarter-final by reducing New Zealand to 16 for 2 in the first six overs. So, when Sri Lanka were 8 for 2 after 5.3 today, Thirimanne knew exactly what was needed. He laced Abbott for two sumptuous fours, then blocked the sixth ball. 16 for 2 after six. Bang on target. Book the flights to Auckland, this goose was in the oven.

Thanks be to the stats.

# ? Mar 19, 2015 02:35

markgreyam: Mar 10, 2008; Talk to the mittens.

Noxin of Shame posted:

Hmm, but if the first ball was a no-ball, I think you'll find that their projected score was infinity runs.

webmeister posted:

4. Keep de Villiers down to less than 50 runs: ACHIEVED

AND HOW

# ? Mar 19, 2015 03:41

Ratios and Tendency: Apr 23, 2010; MURALI

COME ON YOU MIGHTY TIGERS OF BANGLADESH WOO!!

# ? Mar 19, 2015 04:32

voiceless anal fricative: May 6, 2007

India are smart to bat first I think.

# ? Mar 19, 2015 04:38

Smorgasbord: Jun 18, 2004; Our review identified changes needed to be made and, in Stephen, we have a coach who has a reputation for demanding the highest standards.

This "'Key to Sucess" and "weak zone/strong zone" drivel is the most pathetic excuse for 'analysis' I've ever seen in sports broadcasting.

# ? Mar 19, 2015 04:41

EMC: Aug 17, 2004

Smorgasbord posted:

This "'Key to Sucess" and "weak zone/strong zone" drivel is the most pathetic excuse for 'analysis' I've ever seen in sports broadcasting.

# ? Mar 19, 2015 04:43

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 16:22

Butt Wizard: Nov 3, 2005; It was a pornography store. I was buying pornography.

Smorgasbord posted:

This "'Key to Sucess" and "weak zone/strong zone" drivel is the most pathetic excuse for 'analysis' I've ever seen in sports broadcasting.

My favourite was the mid-corner speed analysis charts for F1 drivers during a race that also included a dude who crashed under braking and went through the corner backwards:

# ? Mar 19, 2015 04:51

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > Cricket 2012: Cricket has always been a game stuck in the past

«‹›1746 »