What's A Safe Total On A Belter ??

hadlle chappell series

Can some sane person tell me why a supposed , I use this term loosely, frontline bowler would bowl full tosses to a batsman who is seeing the ball like a giant football & in rare form in the last over of a very close game!! Bracken is just not up up to it!! grossly over rated.

If the two teams are both quality then anything one team can get the other team can also get - that's just cricket. The team batting second also gets the benefit of seeing what they're capable of scoring and also gets to improve on the timing of their innings over how the other team batted.

That SA v Australia match SA could have chased down practically anything up to 500 the rate they were scoring in the first 20-30 overs - if they'd kept the wickets in tact.

Redball said:

Can some sane person tell me why a supposed , I use this term loosely, frontline bowler would bowl full tosses to a batsman who is seeing the ball like a giant football & in rare form in the last over of a very close game!! Bracken is just not up up to it!! grossly over rated.

Click to expand...

Obviously the execution was off on that occasion for Bracken, I still think he had the right idea trying for the yorker as opposed to dropping short or bowling a length ball to McCullum at that stage. I think you are being a tad harsh as he was clearly the most economical bowler, and if it wasn't his fault that NZ only needed 7 off his last over

Redball said:

Can some sane person tell me why a supposed , I use this term loosely, frontline bowler would bowl full tosses to a batsman who is seeing the ball like a giant football & in rare form in the last over of a very close game!! Bracken is just not up up to it!! grossly over rated.

Click to expand...

Well I'm sure the ball wasn't intended to be a full toss.

If one team can score a score in certain conditions, and those conditions for the most part don't change, there's no reason why the other team, if relatively evenly matched, can't chase down that total.

So if Australia score 434, there's no real reason nowadays why South Africa can't either. Same with NZ, India, West Indies, Pakistan etc. Obviously its happening more and more lately, because for example when Australia scored 350+ in the World Cup final against India, that was deemed impossible and India had no idea how to go about chasing it, thinking you had to attack from ball one. In the present time we know that wickets in hand are the key, as anything within 90-110 is gettable in the last 10 overs.

The real question is, how high can teams getting with their scores on a consistent basis. Will 330 become the new 300?

Scaly piscine said:

If the two teams are both quality then anything one team can get the other team can also get - that's just cricket.

Click to expand...

Good job I read the thread, as I was about to post the very same thing.

i suppose it depends on the competency of the opposition batsmen to focus and believe they can chase the target and whether or not the bowling attack is up to it.

Craig said:

Yeah once upon a time (go back 4-5 years) it was considered in ODIs that anything above 350 was unchasable, what will be the next safe unchasable target? 450 to win?

Click to expand...

Pffffft. I remember when 250 was a great score.

1975?

Redball said:

Can some sane person tell me why a supposed , I use this term loosely, frontline bowler would bowl full tosses to a batsman who is seeing the ball like a giant football & in rare form in the last over of a very close game!!

Click to expand...

Err, you think it was a deliberate Full-Toss?

Bracken is just not up up to it!! grossly over rated.

Click to expand...

So the fact that he's been one of the best ODI bowlers going around the past year (and was even better before that) means nothing?

If Bracken's overrated I dread to think what Lee, Watson, Clark, Johnson, Tait, etc. are!

Richard said:

1975?

Click to expand...

No. 15 years ago chasing 250 was a tough ask.

Haha, yeah, but it also was in 1975, even in (over here) 60 overs.

16 tins of Spam said:

No. 15 years ago chasing 250 was a tough ask.

Click to expand...

I think the 1987 World Cup was a bit of a turning point (certainly on a worldwide stage anyway)...250 was still a tough ask but was considered possible...but that was the subcontinent

Back in 1981 ish 220 was a tough ask.
I remember when NZ chased down 290odd vs England in 1983, that felt like the cricketing world had flipped on its axis

Richard said:

Haha, yeah, but it also was in 1975, even in (over here) 60 overs.

Click to expand...

True, but I wouldn't know for sure. I'm not that old...

I wouldn't dream of suggesting such a thing...

Swervy said:

I think the 1987 World Cup was a bit of a turning point (certainly on a worldwide stage anyway)...250 was still a tough ask but was considered possible...but that was the subcontinent

Back in 1981 ish 220 was a tough ask.
I remember when NZ chased down 290odd vs England in 1983, that felt like the cricketing world had flipped on its axis

Click to expand...

I remember NZ vs Australia in Hamilton, where Jeff Wilson led the kiwis to a target of 250-odd. That seemed like a huge deal at the time.

Here's the scorecard.

Swervy said:

I remember when NZ chased down 290odd vs England in 1983, that felt like the cricketing world had flipped on its axis

Click to expand...

Well it felt something pretty similar when NZ chased-down Australia's 330-plus scores twice in a row (and they damn near did a similar thing 2 years ago, remember).

Richard said:

I wouldn't dream of suggesting such a thing...

Click to expand...

Wasn't even born then, for your information

16 tins of Spam said:

I remember NZ vs Australia in Hamilton, where Jeff Wilson led the kiwis to a target of 250-odd. That seemed like a huge deal at the time.

Here's the scorecard.

Click to expand...

That wonderful opening-attack of Merv Hughes and Tony Dodemaide...

What's the odds on Tait, Hilfenhaus et al turning-out like him and David Gilbert?

16 tins of Spam said:

Wasn't even born then, for your information

Click to expand...

Well I wasn't born for another 10 years, so...