jonathan_L: Been watching for this thread all morning. Let's go boys! Get some runs!What do we reckon would be the minimum target for England before Oz' next innings? Current lead is 134, I'd love to see 250+.
whizbangthedirtfarmer: I knew a guy who took a job offer in England. He was going to be there for three years. He swore that he would leave understanding cricket. When he came back, he said he still had no idea what the hell was going on, and that's after watching matches, talking to fans, and watching sports shows.It is probably the most lingo-dense sport out there. Hell, I downloaded Cricket Revolution on Steam to see if I could "get it." I know some of the basics, but I'll be damned if I understand half of what that link tells me.
ThunderChild: It depends completely on Bell and Prior staying together though, as there's not much batting talent after them.
jonathan_L: What are the numbers in parentheses after the batman's name?eg: Bell 48 (118)
jonathan_L: jonathan_L: What are the numbers in parentheses after the batman's name?eg: Bell 48 (118)Never mind: looks like balls faced?
jonathan_L: Never mind: looks like balls faced?
WhyteRaven74: jonathan_L: Never mind: looks like balls faced?Yep, and the closer to a 1 to 1 ratio the better, and better than that ie more runs than balls faced is even better, though in test cricket it's rare. In ODI and Twenty20 where the limits on overs causes more aggressive batting you routinely see players with more runs than balls faced. In ODI the record for fewest balls faced for hitting a century, 100 runs, is 37. In test cricket the record for fastest century is 56 balls. And four players have scored fifty in less than 20 balls in ODI, hasn't happened in test cricket. Another measure of aggressive batting is the number of runs in an over, the test record is 28, the ODI record is 36, the maximum possible facing six balls. And five players have had 30 runs in an over in ODI.
FrancoFile: You'll see statistics like "Eng RR" = average number of runs per over by England. A good way to get a feel for how aggressive the batters are being.
jonathan_L: Thanks Franc and Whyte. Great info.
FrancoFile: I wish I understood placing of the fielders better. Other than "put in slips and try to get a catch, and we don't care if the other team gets run", I don't get fielding strategy at all.
ThunderChild: It's all starting to settle down a bit now. England's run rate is pretty dire, but they've got two whole days left, so no reason to hurry. They should be pretty pleased with how things have gone so far today./Of course, the last time I posted, Aus took a wicket about 30 seconds later, so that could all change
PowerSlacker: ENG is 201 ahead with 6 wickets remaining. That might already be enough unless the Aussie batsmen bother to show up tomorrow.
FrancoFile: PowerSlacker: ENG is 201 ahead with 6 wickets remaining. That might already be enough unless the Aussie batsmen bother to show up tomorrow.6 wickets down. only 4 remaining.
TheEndIsNigh: I follow a fair bit of ODI on cricinfo, so I think I mostly understand the game at a reasonable level for an American.But for Test matches, what does the "minimum overs remaining" indicate (up in the Run Rate section)? It's Test, so that can't mean "if we don't get this far we go to Duckworth-Lewis." It doesn't seem to mean "we're playing at least this many more today", because it was still a positive number at Stumps yesterday. So what does that number mean?
TheEndIsNigh: It doesn't seem to mean "we're playing at least this many more today", because it was still a positive number at Stumps yesterday. So what does that number mean?
johnny queso: another noob question. what happens if australia is still trailing and isn't out at the end of day 5? draw?is there some point where england would want to lay down to ensure that there is enough time to get australia out completely?
jonathan_L: Warning for the English batters? For what?
Norfolking Chance: jonathan_L: Warning for the English batters? For what?Running on the wrong part of the wicket (pitch) I would guess.
PowerSlacker: Wow. Aleem Dar needs to be investigated for match fixing after that decision.
Norfolking Chance: And that ladies and gentlemen is why you don't waste your reviews on speculative stuff because when you do the umpire makes a howler and misses a simple catch
macadamnut: Why wouldn't the square leg umpire chime in on that?
aaronx: How was that not a wicket? Oh, wait, it was a wicket. It just wasn't called a wicket.
jonathan_L: This would be the perfect moment for Koman Coulibaly to pop into a cricket thread.
PowerSlacker: jonathan_L: This would be the perfect moment for Koman Coulibaly to pop into a cricket thread.That would be a first for the greatest alt handle in the history of Fark.
Want more stories with less ads? Try
It's what the cool kids are doing.It's also how we pay the bills.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Oct 21 2017 23:43:14
Runtime: 0.409 sec (409 ms)