Fielding Statistics: A New Approach

[Greenlite]

That's true, some tailenders run themselves out in the last few balls of the innings to try to pinch extra runs and that shouldn't be compared to their average.

For a dropped catch, the number of runs scored afterwards is probably easier to use and more evident on its effect in the game.

Maybe for runouts, you could draw a zone and calculate the percentage or something, eg when Ponting has one stump to aim on either side he has a 50% hitting and when he has 3 stumps it goes to 90% etc.

 

[viriya]

Maybe for runouts, you could draw a zone and calculate the percentage or something, eg when Ponting has one stump to aim on either side he has a 50% hitting and when he has 3 stumps it goes to 90% etc.

No possible way to do this with just text commentary - not worth the complication anyway imo.

The most pressing issue is that sometimes this method misses events because of relatively ****ty commentary standards - this would be much simpler if there was a standard code for drops/great catches/misses etc.

 

[G.I.Joe]

A massive effort from the looks of it. Good luck!

 

[marc71178]

Those numbers don't look at all like what's actaully happened. Far too low in almost every case particularly dropped catches.

 

[fredfertang]

Those numbers don't look at all like what's actaully happened. Far too low in almost every case particularly dropped catches.

Sssshhhh Marc - Don't mention dropped catches !!!!!!!

 

[viriya]

Yes I think I am missing some dropped catches but I think misfields/direct hits are being picked up pretty well.. The issue with drops is the lack of consistency - sometimes there is no mention of who dropped the catch, instead the fielding position is used "dropped by the point fielder"..

There are a few ways to resolve some of the other missed cases though so need to revisit that.

 

[scooter185]

Remember in baseball, all advanced fielding stats are compiled after the game by rewatching video.

 

[sledger]

****ing hell. Talk about finding a way to simultaneously make a relatively straightforward activity both unecessarily complicated and less interesting.

 

[viriya]

How exactly is pulling in fielding events of 8 years worth of matches a straightforward activity?

 

[viriya]

Remember in baseball, all advanced fielding stats are compiled after the game by rewatching video.

Didnt know that - makes sense.. I'd imagine that would happen in cricket within the next few years..

 

[hendrix]

Didnt know that - makes sense.. I'd imagine that would happen in cricket within the next few years..

It would be a pretty nice opportunity for some guy to hire some cheap labour and collect all the data. Say starting at the world cup...

Pretty sure broadcasters would readily pay for it.

 

[viriya]

It would be a pretty nice opportunity for some guy to hire some cheap labour and collect all the data. Say starting at the world cup...

Pretty sure broadcasters would readily pay for it.

The issue with that is there is subjectivity in fielding.. what constitutes a great catch? Is it a drop if a great fielder barely gets his fingers on the ball? How many runs did a great stop actually save? It's not a huge issue but I feel an established organization like cricinfo would have to do it for broadcasters to adopt it.. Then again we see meaningless ratings in broadcasts all the time so maybe I'm overthinking the issue.

The issue of watching the match and keeping track of fielding events is not that big imo - going forward any cricket fan could do it easily. The issue of past matches is a one-off - sure that's a ****load of video but once that's done there's no need to go back. Only problem is it's like 2.5 years+ worth of video to watch just for ODIs.

If it's just for future matches that's very doable.

 

[hendrix]

The issue with that is there is subjectivity in fielding.. what constitutes a great catch? Is it a drop if a great fielder barely gets his fingers on the ball? How many runs did a great stop actually save? It's not a huge issue but I feel an established organization like cricinfo would have to do it for broadcasters to adopt it.. Then again we see meaningless ratings in broadcasts all the time so maybe I'm overthinking the issue.

No need to define a great catch when you have variables:
- How far did the fielder move from the time the ball was delivered until it reached him
- How long was the ball in the air
- What position was the fielder located
- Is the fielder RH or LH
- Was it a one handed or two handed catch, and which hand was used
- Reaction times
- etc etc

 

[viriya]

No need to define a great catch when you have variables:
- How far did the fielder move from the time the ball was delivered until it reached him
- How long was the ball in the air
- What position was the fielder located
- Is the fielder RH or LH
- Was it a one handed or two handed catch, and which hand was used
- Reaction times
- etc etc

Yea but even with video all that information isn't easily drawn out. Eventually yes but not currently.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Wouldn't bother with great catches. Go the baseball route and only count the errors. Trying to accommodate a dozen variables is a waste of time.

 

[viriya]

Wouldn't bother with great catches. Go the baseball route and only count the errors. Trying to accommodate a dozen variables is a waste of time.

Yea it's minor, but in the commentary it's possible to figure out the quality of the catch sometimes so might as well.

 

[Greenlite]

You are going to watch the past videos? You should get paid man. Talk to Sky Sport or something, ESPN etc.

 

[viriya]

You are going to watch the past videos? You should get paid man. Talk to Sky Sport or something, ESPN etc.

No way. Just text commentary.. past videos is something that would/should be done after fielding stats are shown to have value.

 

[sledger]

How exactly is pulling in fielding events of 8 years worth of matches a straightforward activity?

I didn't say it was, berk.

 

[marc71178]

Yes I think I am missing some dropped catches but I think misfields/direct hits are being picked up pretty well.

How do you know that without watching the game?