Scorecard Draft

[Jarquis]

Waqar - 4.49
Laker - 4.19
Dev - 3.31
Worrell - 1.35

= 13.34

Owells.

 

[honestbharani]

can anyone do for me.. struggling to open cricinfo here..

 

[kingkallis]

can anyone do for me.. struggling to open cricinfo here..

Give me your bowler's names...

 

[G.I.Joe]

can anyone do for me.. struggling to open cricinfo here..

Billy Barnes - 2.42 wpm
Wally Hammond - 0.97 wpm
Richard Hadlee - 5 wpm
Johnny Briggs - 3.5 wpm
Shoaib Akhtar - 3.86 wpm
Doug Walters - 0.66 wpm

Total - 16.41 wpm


Of course, all these calculations for our teams don't factor in Strike rate. No use having an attack that picks 20 wickets if they can't do it within 5 days.

 

[weldone]

so frustrating

I wrote a long and immensely interesting reply here, but by the time I hit Submit, CricketWeb had logged me off again. It's so annoying! Will try again tomorrow...

...can try clicking on 'Remember my password' the next time you login...

 

[kingkallis]

But still the calculation takes you pretty close...

 

[Noble One]

Glenn McGrath 4.54
Brian Statham 3.60
Clarrie Grimmett 5.84
Andrew Flintoff 2.86
Martin Crowe 0.18
Victor Trumper 0.17

Total = 17.19.

I was only planning on adding a batsman who could bowl part-timers later on in the draft. So in summary my team is doomed.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Don't think we need to strictly aim at 20 wpm.

For example, an attack of McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Warne, clarke and Symonds adds up to 18.39 wpm. 17.14 if only the first 4 are counted. And we all know the Aussies won pretty much every game despite that.

 

[G.I.Joe]

EDIT: What are the stats for run-outs per test, all-time?

2 run outs per Test could easily make up the remainder for most teams.

 

[Himannv]

EDIT: What are the stats for run-outs per test, all-time?

2 run outs per Test could easily make up the remainder for most teams.

Aha, now thats an idea. Race for Jonty.

 

[weldone]

Don't think we need to strictly aim at 20 wpm.

For example, an attack of McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Warne, clarke and Symonds adds up to 18.39 wpm. 17.14 if only the first 4 are counted. And we all know the Aussies won pretty much every game despite that.

I'm pretty sure that the number will be pretty same or less (in some cases, much less) for any group of bowlers who played together in many tests.

This is simply because of the fact that an average is an average. The highest this number could go upto is 20 (in matches they won). And in drawn or lost matches this no. would be less than 20. So, the average is bound to be less than 20.

That's why I think this criterion doesn't make much sense. I mean there have been many matches where the team (those Aussies, for example) won the match within 3 or 4 days. So, they were able to take 20 wickets in less than available time. So, it's quite common-sensical that had they bowled till end-of-day-5 they would have got much more wickets (25-30 in some cases).

Having said all that, I'm almost certainly going to end up with a combination of bowlers with more than 20 wpm. That's not the point, though.

 

[Himannv]

I'm aiming for 19 wpm. That last tailender will finish me off.

 

[Jamee999]

It's almost as if this is a useless thing to work out.

 

[Blakus]

S.Barnes 7.00
F.Spofforth 5.22
I.Bishop 3.74
B.Simpson 1.15
K.Barrington 0.36
V.Richards 0.27
Z.Abbas 0.04
Total 17.78

Given that I'm probably going to pick a spinner as my next bowler, I'll have well over the 20 wicket margin. Hooray for Barnes

 

[Cevno]

Frank Tyson -4.47 Wpm
Curtley Ambrose - 4.14 Wpm
Allan Donald - 4.59 Wpm
Bobby Peel - 5.05 Wpm
Wilfred Rhodes - 2.2 Wpm
W.G Grace - 0.42 Wpm


So 20.87 Wickets Per Match.
Beat that......

 

[Himannv]

So far Cevno and pskov with the best bowling attacks. Others have a pick or two left.

 

[weldone]

Lohmann: 6.22 wpm
Bond: 4.83 wpm
Benaud: 3.94 wpm
Ulyett: 2 wpm

For the sake of it,

Chappell: 0.27 wpm
Boycott: 0.06 wpm

Total: 17.32 wpm

So, 2.68 wpm remaining. Another bowler will be more than enough.

 

[kingkallis]

Don, Cowdrey, Amiss didnt bowl much...

In Sehwag, Amiss, Don, Cowdrey, Faulkner and Marsh - it seems I have a nice batting line up!

Lemme concentrate on getting 20 wickets now

 

[Michaelf7777777]

Arthur Morris - 0.04 wpm
Desmond Haynes - 0.01 wpm
Clive Lloyd - 0.09 wpm
Frank Woolley - 1.30 wpm
Shaun Pollock - 3.90 wpm
Colin Croft - 4.63 wpm
Colin Blythe - 5.26 wpm

Total: 15.23 wpm

Still have 1 or possibly even 2 bowlers to come as well

 

[nick-o]

It's almost as if this is a useless thing to work out.

Hi, yeah, probably fairly useless, but not completely useless I think.

I guess all your teams are going to end up being fairly impressive, on aggregate expected to score between 350 and 450 runs per innings and take wickets at up to about 25 runs per wicket. They'll all be really good teams. And obviously I understand the fun is in the selection of the team, not in fine-tuning some formula to decide which is best.

But if you are trying to compare teams that are within broadly similar ranges, the ability to take 20 wickets has to be a factor. If both Team X and Team Y are going to score 350 runs per innings and concede 275 runs per innings, then the team that can bowl the opposition out twice is undoubtedly the better team.

To give an example, Cevno just listed his bowlers, who will take 20 wickets a match at about 21 runs per wicket. Somerset's bowlers will also go at about 21 runs per wicket, but his team will only take 10 wickets a match. Somerset's batting is much stronger, but it will be easier for Cevno to make up ground in the batting than it will for Somerset to make up ground in the bowling.

So it could be an indication separating relatively evenly matched teams.

That's all I wanted to say, not like it was meant to be the sole deciding factor. But it seems it has stimulated some discussion, which is cool.