Remove this Banner Ad

The Cricket Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter eldorado
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

This from the ABC. Where every catch was taken during the Ashes Series.

"This infographic shows the field position of each of the 133 catches taken during this summer's Ashes series.
Green dots represent where an Australian fielder caught an English batsman. Blue dots show where English fielders caught Australian batsmen."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-06/every-catch-from-this-ashes-series/5186698
ashes-catches-visualised-data.png
 
grizzlym said:
This from the ABC. Where every catch was taken during the Ashes Series.

"This infographic shows the field position of each of the 133 catches taken during this summer's Ashes series.
Green dots represent where an Australian fielder caught an English batsman. Blue dots show where English fielders caught Australian batsmen."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-06/every-catch-from-this-ashes-series/5186698
ashes-catches-visualised-data.png
Click to expand...

That's an awesome graphic, I'm sure the coaches have had access to similar for a long time, but it really solidifies a few things you noticed whilst watching.

1. English back-foot play - Fine Leg, Deep backward square, bat pad, leg gully, etc. ONE Australian dismissal.
2. Australian slips stand closer - suprising as point 1 would suggest more short stuff.
3. Australian's cut square, and in the air. Whereas the English cut finer to a more traditional gully, the Australians have been caught on full-blooded square cuts.
4. Slips a key for both sides, but the Australians had a heck of a lot more to the keeper.

Australian 'nicks' went far squarer - suggesting greater movement hence shorter pitched delivery, with the English nicks going finer.
 
Simon_Nesbit said:
That's an awesome graphic, I'm sure the coaches have had access to similar for a long time, but it really solidifies a few things you noticed whilst watching.

1. English back-foot play - Fine Leg, Deep backward square, bat pad, leg gully, etc. ONE Australian dismissal.
2. Australian slips stand closer - suprising as point 1 would suggest more short stuff.
3. Australian's cut square, and in the air. Whereas the English cut finer to a more traditional gully, the Australians have been caught on full-blooded square cuts.
4. Slips a key for both sides, but the Australians had a heck of a lot more to the keeper.

Australian 'nicks' went far squarer - suggesting greater movement hence shorter pitched delivery, with the English nicks going finer.
Click to expand...

Hey Simon!

You seen much of Doolan? Indeed, was it you telling me about him in grade cricket.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Looks better like this although I think a heatmap of where each team's fielders were placedwould help us further understand the image. Cook set very defensive fields, VERY! Clarke attacked almost exclusively throughout the series.

ashes-catches-visualised-data_EDIT_zps877590c6.png
 
Sack Watson
 
Not convinced about the selections of this OD team. The bowling attack looks extremely pedestrian. Not a fan of Maxwell, Faulkner, Coulter-Nile. Doherty can be economical but is not dangerous. McKay goes OK. And doesn't the batting look brittle? Finch looks great when he is flying, as does Warner. But they are 50-50 propositions getting past 10 runs. Same for Watson.

That said, they will probably cream the Poms.
 
arupist said:
Not convinced about the selections of this OD team. The bowling attack looks extremely pedestrian. Not a fan of Maxwell, Faulkner, Coulter-Nile. Doherty can be economical but is not dangerous. McKay goes OK. And doesn't the batting look brittle? Finch looks great when he is flying, as does Warner. But they are 50-50 propositions getting past 10 runs. Same for Watson.

That said, they will probably cream the Poms.
Click to expand...

I think both Pattinson and Johnson will come into that side. Batting looks very, very strong to me.
 
grizzlym said:
I think both Pattinson and Johnson will come into that side. Batting looks very, very strong to me.
Click to expand...

Batting is very strong if viewed from their capability. However, I think they are not consistent enough. They are hitters, not stayers. Hence my 'brittle' call. I guess we have been spoiled a bit by the likes of Bevan and Hussey being a reliable foil late in the order. Would also like to see Steve Smith in there.

Just MHO.
 
arupist said:
Batting is very strong if viewed from their capability. However, I think they are not consistent enough. They are hitters, not stayers. Hence my 'brittle' call. I guess we have been spoiled a bit by the likes of Bevan and Hussey being a reliable foil late in the order. Would also like to see Steve Smith in there.

Just MHO.
Click to expand...

I was very impressed with Finch's batting tonight. He scored everywhere, with good shots. Thought he batted, not just scored, amazingly well. As did Warner, but he looked more uncomfortable. If those two could get something going up the top, it would be huge. Our one day side has been surprisingly good and consistent for a while now.

Know what you mean about hitters comprising the batting line up. A guy like Maxwell is in there for is batting purely. He's not an allrounder in my book. Very expensive and doesn;t look dangerous with the ball. I guesstime will tell there. A guy like Dan Christian might put pressure on Maxwell.
 
Brishawk said:
Maxwell has a surprisingly good strike rate with the ball...economy rate on the other hand...

We really never looked challeneged while batting. Knocked it around with ease and hit boundaries regularly. Can we do 10-0?

Sent from my HTC One XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Is there another team here this year for one day matches?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

grizzlym said:
Is there another team here this year for one day matches?
Click to expand...
No.... Last game against England is a T20 on the 2nd Feb.
First test against SA is 12 Feb.
 
Been watching a bit of the clown cricket. Gotta say, I like Mark Waugh as a commentator. He's says some really perceptive things, plus he's got a bit of real cheek and fun about him too.
 
grizzlym said:
Been watching a bit of the clown cricket. Gotta say, I like Mark Waugh as a commentator. He's says some really perceptive things, plus he's got a bit of real cheek and fun about him too.
Click to expand...
He was openly barracking against the Melbourne stars the other night which was disappointing. Apart from that he's pretty good
 
Junior is rapt the thunder won!
 
I bet he is.
 
Watched Simmons belt 100 off 38 balls. Was some incredibly clean striking for some very wild shots. He actually hit some into the upper tiers. The pitch must have been concrete to enable that kind of hitting. As spectacular as it was to watch I can't help feel this format is just contrived to suit batting. Feels more like baseball in that regard.

Glad Clarke isn't playing in these matches. I'd prefer he missed the one day matches too...
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Brishawk said:
Watched Simmons belt 100 off 38 balls. Was some incredibly clean striking for some very wild shots. He actually hit some into the upper tiers. The pitch must have been concrete to enable that kind of hitting. As spectacular as it was to watch I can't help feel this format is just contrived to suit batting. Feels more like baseball in that regard.

Glad Clarke isn't playing in these matches. I'd prefer he missed the one day matches too...
Click to expand...


Agree. Its just a homerun hitting contest. I find the format as boring as batshit.

As we saw last night in the ODI, the longer format gives the side a chance of recovering from an poor start. I reckon in 95% of T20 games, the result is known after the batting side has faced 2 overs.

No thanks... not my cup of tea.
 
Really smart innings by Faulkner. Didn't panic and just blaze away looking for the boundary every ball. Waited for the short boundary to come into play and knocked it around when it wasn't. Aided by some poor length bowling by Stokes.
 
Henry Jr said:
Agree. Its just a homerun hitting contest. I find the format as boring as batshit.

As we saw last night in the ODI, the longer format gives the side a chance of recovering from an poor start. I reckon in 95% of T20 games, the result is known after the batting side has faced 2 overs.

No thanks... not my cup of tea.
Click to expand...

You couldn't drag me kicking and screaming to a T20 match, it offers nothing to the thinking cricket supporter. It's a games that caters for people with short attention spans and even less knowledge of the finer points of cricket.

Every time I think of T20, I'm reminded of a scene from Married With Children where Al Bundy receives a serious head injury. He's sitting in a wheelchair at the casino with a stunned look on his face, then looks up and says, "Oooooohhhhhhh .... look at the pretty lights!!!!".

Any game where bowlers are limited to only 4 overs and have to bowl to a strike zone with restricted fields, where a rope marks a boundary which is 2/3 the size of the ground, where top edges and mistimed drives continue to lob over the line for 6, where sixes come so often you can't be bothered applauding. is not the kind of game I'm interested in.

I'm not a huge fan or the 50 over game either, but at least it does bear some resemblance to cricket.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom