Y/N - you could explain Net run rate in detail to someone without googling

[Groundking]

Depends on what you mean by 'in detail' I understand the concept behind it but I don't have a scoobie about the maths behind it so I voted no.

 

[honestbharani]

We've all been watching cricket for decades, but who the **** understands Net run rate. The decimals throw me, I don't know if takes wickets into equation as well as runs, I'm a solid nope

Its (runs scored/overs faced)-(runs conceded/overs bowled)

If a team is bowled out, overs faced is assumed to be the max limit they were supposed to face.


It really is extremely simple.

 

[honestbharani]

Should allow teams to bat their full fifty even when they've chased the score down. Then just do simple Run Difference. Easy.

What we call in Tamil, Gajee.............

 

[honestbharani]

I wonder if there's a loophole in the rules if you declare your innings early. Say you're chasing a total and you know you won't make it, just declare and then boost your NRR because the whole 50 overs doesn't count.

Declaring would count as 50 overs though coz there is no real declaration in LO cricket, just calling an innings closed, which means they assume you are bowled out.

 

[GIMH]

I wonder if there's a loophole in the rules if you declare your innings early. Say you're chasing a total and you know you won't make it, just declare and then boost your NRR because the whole 50 overs doesn't count.

Worcestershire v Somerset, 1979 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

I always think of this game as highlighting one of the big failures of NRR. NZ scrape home by 1 wicket, yet get a huge boost on the NRR because they weren't bowled out.

NZ vs AUS Cricket Scorecard, 20th Match, Pool A at Auckland, February 28, 2015

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get New Zealand vs Australia 20th Match, Pool A, cricket scorecard, ICC Cricket World Cup 2014/15 dated February 28, 2015.

www.espncricinfo.com

I think NRR makes sense if you view wickets in ODIs as an expendable resource that's secondary to the main goal of scoring as fast as possible. If you think they should be considered, you're probably better off using some variation of DLS for the chasing team to predict a score after 50 overs.

 

[Third_Man]

Its (runs scored/overs faced)-(runs conceded/overs bowled)

If a team is bowled out, overs faced is assumed to be the max limit they were supposed to face.


It really is extremely simple.

That's exactly how to explain it simply.

 

[Molehill]

I think NRR makes sense if you view wickets in ODIs as an expendable resource that's secondary to the main goal of scoring as fast as possible. If you think they should be considered, you're probably better off using some variation of DLS for the chasing team to predict a score after 50 overs.

I don't disagree with the calculations, but this game was ultra close yet it wasn't on NRR.

 

[trundler]

A lot of the times teams throw away their wickets to pursue an increase in NRR. Wickets lost is pretty irrelevant batting first if you play out your overs too. Going from 240/2 to 340/9 between overs 40 and 50 isn't worse than a steady 260/2 to 340/4 in that same span. You end up at the same score.

 

[GIMH]

A lot of the times teams throw away their wickets to pursue an increase in NRR. Wickets lost is pretty irrelevant batting first if you play out your overs too. Going from 240/2 to 340/9 between overs 40 and 50 isn't worse than a steady 260/2 to 340/4 in that same span. You end up at the same score.

Agree with this but I think the point is more in relation to tight chases because if team A is bowled out for 150 in 25 overs, their RR goes down as 3, and if team B chasing it down 9 down in 25 overs, it goes down as 6.