First Chance Average?

[GotSpin]

I had a very good player once tell me that if you are going to swing, swing hard, because chances are that if the ball goes to hand, the fielder has a much higher chance of dropping it.

How does the FCA method account for the chances that a batsman forces a fielder to miss because of the extra power in his shots? How does this method even make sense?

Yeah I agree. If you're going to play a shot, play it bloody hard and make it more difficult just in case you do hit the edge or reach a fielder.

 

[Burgey]

I think we should use the FCA to measure the success of posters in CW, tbh..

Haha.. If a post says "last edited by..." at the bottom, it shouldn't count, as there has been a mistake.

Like it, though I'd have about 800 posts I think.

 

[Furball]

I'd guess no, because there are still dropped catches.

That's what I don't get about this theory, good fielding is as much a skill as good batting or bowling.

Saying you expect all catches to be taken is as stupid as saying you expect all batsmen to avoid offering catches in the first place.

 

[Checkmate]

It sort of makes sense if you judge a batsman's ability considering only his performance against the opposition bowling, rather than against the whole opposition team.

 

[honestbharani]

It helps if you are evaluating the batsman's skill level and being able to bat without giving chances of being dismissed by the opposition. But then, any close LBW shout etc need to taken into account as well.

 

[GotSpin]

It helps if you are evaluating the batsman's skill level and being able to bat without giving chances of being dismissed by the opposition. But then, any close LBW shout etc need to taken into account as well.

It's just simply ridiculous

 

[TumTum]

Chances and close calls are part of cricket. Although I am a firm believer that a batsman (or bowler) can make his luck work for him, in other words reducing his chances of getting out.

It is close to impossible to bat a flawless innings.

 

[honestbharani]

It's just simply ridiculous

Not necessarily.. In terms of evaluating the particular inning, I think it has some value but only if you include all close calls there.. Otherwise, just for taking dropped catches into account, yeah it doesn't mean much.

 

[GotSpin]

Not necessarily.. In terms of evaluating the particular inning, I think it has some value but only if you include all close calls there.. Otherwise, just for taking dropped catches into account, yeah it doesn't mean much.

I'm completely against any facet of the FCA tbh

 

[honestbharani]

I'm completely against any facet of the FCA tbh

yeah.. wholistically I agree..

 

[Blaze 18]

The theory does appear to be intrinsically flawed, but the same is true for all theories based on numbers alone.