• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** Australia in South Africa + South Africa in Australia 2016/17

AndyZaltzHair

AndyZaltzHair

Hall of Fame Member
TheJediBrah said:
lol yeah

People taking it a bit overboard. It was pretty much what I'd bet 90% of people expected to happen, the commentators were talking it up all day as well, as they did in last years day night test as well.

Definitely an interesting move, but hardly a stroke of genius
Click to expand...
If Smith did it, you would have said he's more genius than Albert Einstein
 
Daemon

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
AndyZaltzHair said:
If Smith did it, you would have said he's more genius than Albert Einstein
Click to expand...
AZH, I want you to reflect on this post and whether it was necessary. Also before you reply, have look at this -




TJB as well, just look into that qt's eyes and ask yourself whether we need more love or war in this world before you reply.
 
Last edited:
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Daemon I want you to reflect on the number of times you have personally attacked Weldone and called him a **** before you make these posts.
 
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
indiaholic said:
He has clearly made a turn for the better. Unfair to bring up his past.
Click to expand...
The day he starts standing up for his enemy (Weldone) against his own clan (the RANDI) and the CW status quo who pick on him and bully him is the day I will accept him as Gandhi.
 
Last edited:
Scaly piscine

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Declaration was bollocks frankly. It's not like you had two crappy tailenders playing and missing every other ball and at best they're going to scrape another 10-15 runs in half an hour.

You had a batsman who was unbeaten on a century at 72 SR and a guy with 18* off 23. The partnership was 39 off 5.5 overs - batting was only getting easier. There were 14 overs left (minus two for change of innings). So you lose the odd over if you bat on and get out quickly - that's your worse case scenario - so what? You still get a decent bowl and you score more runs. At that point you would expect on average to add another 20-30 runs for the loss of 4-5 overs. And you still get 7-8 overs to bowl. And that extra 20-30 runs in what is likely to be a fairly low scoring match is huge. Obviously there's an outside chance the luck goes with you and you score another 50 runs with that partnership. I guess probabilistically a further 50 runs occurs about 10-15% of the time?

Most of the 'experts' and so on haven't got the brains to even contemplate game theory and it shows with these morons heaping praise upon Faf for a blatantly stupid move.
 
flibbertyjibber

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Must admit the declaration took me by surprise, maybe they could have had 2 overs just swinging at absolutely everything, sneaking another 10 runs before the wicket may be useful at the end of the match.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing though.
 
kykweer.proteas

kykweer.proteas

International Debutant
Scaly piscine said:
Declaration was bollocks frankly. It's not like you had two crappy tailenders playing and missing every other ball and at best they're going to scrape another 10-15 runs in half an hour.

You had a batsman who was unbeaten on a century at 72 SR and a guy with 18* off 23. The partnership was 39 off 5.5 overs - batting was only getting easier. There were 14 overs left (minus two for change of innings). So you lose the odd over if you bat on and get out quickly - that's your worse case scenario - so what? You still get a decent bowl and you score more runs. At that point you would expect on average to add another 20-30 runs for the loss of 4-5 overs. And you still get 7-8 overs to bowl. And that extra 20-30 runs in what is likely to be a fairly low scoring match is huge. Obviously there's an outside chance the luck goes with you and you score another 50 runs with that partnership. I guess probabilistically a further 50 runs occurs about 10-15% of the time?

Most of the 'experts' and so on haven't got the brains to even contemplate game theory and it shows with these morons heaping praise upon Faf for a blatantly stupid move.
Click to expand...
If the series was level Faf would never have declared, I think even if we were playing Ireland we would not have declared. Faf declared in the context of the series and to put all the pressure on Australia, Khawaja and Renshaw played well so fair play to them.

And the last wicket partnership was 39 runs, how would they score another 20-30 runs on average? Is the average last wicket partnership at Adelaide 69 runs?
 
Last edited:
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Scaly piscine said:
Declaration was bollocks frankly. It's not like you had two crappy tailenders playing and missing every other ball and at best they're going to scrape another 10-15 runs in half an hour.

You had a batsman who was unbeaten on a century at 72 SR and a guy with 18* off 23. The partnership was 39 off 5.5 overs - batting was only getting easier. There were 14 overs left (minus two for change of innings). So you lose the odd over if you bat on and get out quickly - that's your worse case scenario - so what? You still get a decent bowl and you score more runs. At that point you would expect on average to add another 20-30 runs for the loss of 4-5 overs. And you still get 7-8 overs to bowl. And that extra 20-30 runs in what is likely to be a fairly low scoring match is huge. Obviously there's an outside chance the luck goes with you and you score another 50 runs with that partnership. I guess probabilistically a further 50 runs occurs about 10-15% of the time?

Most of the 'experts' and so on haven't got the brains to even contemplate game theory and it shows with these morons heaping praise upon Faf for a blatantly stupid move.
Click to expand...
The difference between having 12 overs to bowl and 7 or 8 overs to bowl could have been 2-3 wickets on another day. You underestimate the difference between batting under lights and during the day, especially with the new ball.
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
kykweer.proteas said:
If the series was level Faf would never have declared, I think even if we were playing Ireland we would not have declared. Faf declared in the context of the series and to put all the pressure on Australia, Khawaja and Renshaw played well so fair play to them.

And the last wicket partnership was 39 runs, how would they score another 20-30 runs on average? Is the average last wicket partnership at Adelaide 69 runs?
Click to expand...
That's not how averages work.
 
Son Of Coco

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
kykweer.proteas said:
If the series was level Faf would never have declared, I think even if we were playing Ireland we would not have declared. Faf declared in the context of the series and to put all the pressure on Australia, Khawaja and Renshaw played well so fair play to them.

And the last wicket partnership was 39 runs, how would they score another 20-30 runs on average? Is the average last wicket partnership at Adelaide 69 runs?
Click to expand...
Don't bother. SP thinks any declaration where the team is less than 600 is 'bollocks'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top