• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment
  • Sport
International Cricket 2016
<<
<
80 of 284
>>
>
Bosox
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bhaveshgor:
“I have no idea why you attacking me when my entire argument and point is that Bangladesh are not shit or crap.

And Facts will show Bangladesh are not crap or shit any more.”

Your argument keeps changing.

Bangladesh are not crap or shit but also they are not a 'top team' as you have repeatedly called them today. They certainly have progressed to the stage that no one should view them as pushovers but the epic choke they committed against India (definitely a case of Bangladesh losing the game rather than India doing anything to win it) showed it's wrong to talk of them as a 'top team' at this stage.
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by swingaleg:
“India doing a good job of dragging this back after the Aussies got over 50 in the first 4 overs”

agree
odd batting from Maxwell.
wonder how much Australia think is enough in this pitch.
In my mind 180 is chase able here.
India should win this with ease.
SULLA
27-03-2016
Didn't even bother to cross ?
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bosox:
“Your argument keeps changing.

Bangladesh are not crap or shit but also they are not a 'top team' as you have repeatedly called them today. They certainly have progressed to the stage that no one should view them as pushovers but the epic choke they committed against India (definitely a case of Bangladesh losing the game rather than India doing anything to win it) showed it's wrong to talk of them as a 'top team' at this stage.”

They choked any team can choke.
AKA South Africa.
I might have Exaggerated them being a top team but they certainly ranked around 5-7
But I would certainly rank them along side West indies, Pak, Sri lanka and maybe NZ when the gun generation retires.

If WI, Sri lanka can win ICC trophies and get to semi final I see no reason why Bangladesh can't either.

Anyway will be interesting to see how Bangladesh do now got some great players coming through Sabbir Rahman is a very classy batsman.
dtcdtcdtc
27-03-2016
I make India slight favs but 160 is a competitive score

Need to make use of the Powerplay when the ball is at it's hardest
Bosox
27-03-2016
Anyone know what cushion England Women have to qualify (ie how quickly would Pakistan Women have to get the 149 in order to knock England Women out on NRR)?

It should hopefully not come down to that as 148 is considerably more than any total achieved by Pakistan Women in their first 3 matches.
SULLA
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by gomezz:
“One way of restoring the balance between bat and ball in T20 would be to only need to take five or six wickets to end an innings. Batters would have to take a little more care in shot selection and you could pick real specialist bowlers rather than compromising on those who can also bat a bit.”

Interesting idea but I can't agree.

Originally Posted by Bhaveshgor:
“LOL you clearly don't watch cricket.
IF bangladesh were in England group they would have probably qualified for the semis.
Bangladesh are a top team now.”

I don't agree.

Originally Posted by Bhaveshgor:
“By the way don't see what wrong with saying Banglandesh would probably qualify from that group when you consider Sri lanka are crap, South africa are in bad form, England and WI are vulnerable.

Anyway the point is Bangladesh are not crap or shit they could probably beat every full member side in limited over cricket these days.

Anyone that calls Bangladesh shit or crap is talking bollocks.”

They are not shit or crap. They are in the top 10 countries.
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by dtcdtcdtc:
“I make India slight favs but 160 is a competitive score

Need to make use of the Powerplay when the ball is at it's hardest”

surprised Aus only got one spinner by the way don't rank Maxwell as a spinner.
160 is a competitive score not sure it will be enough here, pace usually go the distance here.

Faulkner the key bowler here if he goes the distance india will win with ease, he bowls well then he could be a close game if Zampa bowls well.
but can't see how Australia can keep india in check during the middle overs like indian bowlers did.
howard h
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by swingaleg:
“India doing a good job of dragging this back after the Aussies got over 50 in the first 4 overs”

If it rained after (say) 8 overs, and a team reached 80-2, six of those overs would be under field restrictions.
On resumption, the opposition would be set a D/L target off even just 5 overs if that's all the time left. Does the D/L target take account of the fact the first team had 3/4ths of it's innings under PP an adjust accordingly?
Thinking you can't have 3/4ths of 5 overs or a part of an over would be PP and the rest not!
Also, of course, the bowling side in the first innings could have used their two best bowlers for all eight overs, wheres in the reply they would be given one over each?
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bosox:
“Anyone know what cushion England Women have to qualify (ie how quickly would Pakistan Women have to get the 149 in order to knock England Women out on NRR)?

It should hopefully not come down to that as 148 is considerably more than any total achieved by Pakistan Women in their first 3 matches.”

about 13 overs.
Bosox
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bhaveshgor:
“about 13 overs.”

Oh, cheers. That seems somewhat unlikely then

Especially given they are now 29/3 off 5 overs!
Bosox
27-03-2016
Are these win predictor percentages just totally made up?
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bhaveshgor:
“about 13 overs.”

Sorry I was wrong assumed pak had a bad NRR and England a good NRR.
the NRR is very close so if pakistan win and win by a over to spare they should qualify.
It is possible any win is enough since a double whammy will happen England NRR goes down and pak NRR goes up so basically every run is worth double to the NRR calculations.

Can't believe seasoned journalist said yesterday only a massive win by pakistan would see England out.

looking at the table any victory by paksitan should see england go home.
Also a close victory for pakistan will see WI go out which makes no sense since WI womens are already qualified.
I would love it if England lose this in the last ball just to see what happens surely England and pakistan qualify and WI go home.
Bosox
27-03-2016
England Women looking good for the win regardless with Pakistan Women reeling at 34/4 off 6 overs.

Should be no need for calculators today.
iamsofired
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bosox:
“Are these win predictor percentages just totally made up?”

That was funny - 89% India win or something.
Bosox
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by iamsofired:
“That was funny - 89% India win or something.”

And it was 4 balls into India's innings with them having scored 6 runs!
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by iamsofired:
“That was funny - 89% India win or something.”

it was based like that because the par score on this wicket is 180 by the market and probably Cricviz.
Bosox
27-03-2016
Pakistan Women currently losing a wicket every over, now 35/5 off 7 overs.

England Women look like they might finally be putting together a complete performance across the whole 40 overs.
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bosox:
“And it was 4 balls into India's innings with them having scored 6 runs!”

that because the market has given india 7 runs advantage and basically india need to be -2 in the first over for the market to consider Australia being favourites.
India needs to be 29/0 in first 6 overs for Australia to be favourites.
Bosox
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bhaveshgor:
“that because the market has given india 7 runs advantage and basically india need to be -2 in the first over for the market to consider Australia being favourites.
India needs to be 29/0 in first 6 overs for Australia to be favourites.”

I like the analytical approach to looking at predicting outcomes in sport but the way they do it in cricket is embarrassing. It doesn't stand up to any sort of scrutiny to say India were 90% favourites at that stage of their innings.

Same as Sky's WASP thing they used to use (hopefully they have ditched it now) which would always throw up percentages that anyone watching could see were garbage.
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bosox:
“I like the analytical approach to looking at predicting outcomes in sport but the way they do it in cricket is embarrassing. It doesn't stand up to any sort of scrutiny to say India were 90% favourites at that stage of their innings.

Same as Sky's WASP thing they used to use (hopefully they have ditched it now) which would always throw up percentages that anyone watching could see were garbage.”

issue is they never release the method or model to how they get the numbers so the number look random and not make sense.
If you want a table for how the game is going here the even money table for india innings.
http://ix.io/v0m
Bhaveshgor
27-03-2016
WASP was a good method but wasn't made for betting purposes and so it failed.
Cri viz looks good on paper but no one as any idea how they get the numbers.
Based on ODDs, players records, ground and then variable condition imput.
Bosox
27-03-2016
WASP depended too much on the initial input from the commentary team about what a par score would be that day. So if they thought 180 was a par score then even if it became clear that the pitch/conditions would never allow that sort of scoring and the team batting first did incredibly well to get to 140 WASP would say that the team batting second was a huge favourite long after it was clear they weren't going to win.
dtcdtcdtc
27-03-2016
With Raina's wicket:

4/7 Australia
13/10 India
dtcdtcdtc
27-03-2016
Originally Posted by Bosox:
“WASP depended too much on the initial input from the commentary team about what a par score would be that day. So if they thought 180 was a par score then even if it became clear that the pitch/conditions would never allow that sort of scoring and the team batting first did incredibly well to get to 140 WASP would say that the team batting second was a huge favourite long after it was clear they weren't going to win.”

During last summer, it became apparent that they were waiting for the spread firms to put the market up and they just copied it
<<
<
80 of 284
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map