Ground statistics are useless

[Armadillo]

One thing that you often hear before or during a match is how often the home team has won on a particular ground, or how a player has performed. In my opinion, all of these statistics are of absolutely no relevance to the match in question. If someone played on a ground 2 or 3 years ago and did well, it doesn't mean that they will do the same thing when they play on the same ground. If they do play well it is by 1. their consistency or 2. coincidence. Also if a team has won on a ground previously, doesn't mean they will again, a prime example could be the Karachi test that is currently going on. If Pakistan lose this match, which is very possible, (50/50 at the moment) then it will go against their record of only losing once at the National Stadium. So I think that ground statistics in most instances should be scrapped.

Comments?

 

[Neil Pickup]

Let's be honest, all statistics are only good for trotting out in arguments.

 

[honestbharani]

That may be but players and teams do generally feel good when they are at a ground where they have done well previously.

 

[Armadillo]

Okay maybe there's the superstition factor, but in most cases that doesn't carry much value.

 

[honestbharani]

Okay maybe there's the superstition factor, but in most cases that doesn't carry much value.

u call it superstition. I call it psychological.

 

[open365]

I sort of agree,but as a player myself and from reading a fair few autobiographies,it does matter.

There's a ground that i play on every year for my school and i've got a fifty every time,and i can honestly say that playing there greatly enhances my performance.

Why?because it's a great place to play cricket it in,and it allways relaxes me so i don't feel nervous before i bat.It's really open with no buldings over 2 stories blocking the view.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I agree with honestbharani that it is a psychological thing. A player who has scored runs at a particular venue would feel more comfortable playing there than at other grounds. You back yourself more when you think you've done the job there before, and therefore that you can certainly do it again regardless of the opposition.

There are also factors like the home ground and home crowd. A player may be more inclined to confidence in front of a known and comfortable crowd.

Concering team records on a particular ground, it's the same thing there too. For years the Kensington Oval was regarded as a safe haven for the West Indies. They felt confident that the nature of the pitch would allow them to rise to victory from any level of adversity. A great deal of the sport is played in the mind.

 

[Matteh]

Let's be honest, all statistics are only good for trotting out in arguments.

There are lies, there are damned lies and then there's statistics - Disraeli
and i bet i've misquoted it too

There's always the home crowd/ground phenomenon....there's no physical edge with playing at home (although it could be argued that e.g. England are always going to be disadvantaged in the sub continent) yet home teams always stand a better chance of winning....

on a personal level there's no place i play where i think wow, i feel like i could do really well here....

 

[Armadillo]

Concering team records on a particular ground, it's the same thing there too. For years the Kensington Oval was regarded as a safe haven for the West Indies. They felt confident that the nature of the pitch would allow them to rise to victory from any level of adversity. A great deal of the sport is played in the mind.

This may be true but it doesn't mean that the West Indies will have more of an advantage to the West Indies when they play there. There is a different team every time the West Indies turn out, so apart from Lara, Sarwan, Chanderpaul and Gayle, I don't think even if there is a psychological thing, that the team will be affected.

 

[Jono]

If you look at Jayasuriya and the SCG, its not irrelevant. It definitely means something, and as has already been mentioned, probably is psychological. Obviously the conditions there will have a direct impact as well.

 

[age_master]

Let's be honest, all statistics are only good for trotting out in arguments.

pretty much

 

[luckyeddie]

There are lies, there are damned lies and then there's statistics - Disraeli
and i bet i've misquoted it too

Strangely enough, it has been found that 67.5% of the population misquote Disraeli within statistical arguments.

And on home advantage... the obvious answer is familiarity with surroundings and conditions (just plain old being used to them and playing your 'normal' game accordingly)

 

[Langeveldt]

What I hate is when commentators talk about F Bloggs's average at the 'Gabba with his wife sitting in Row Z whilst batting at number 3 and the bowlers name if Fred, and how that is oh so relevent.. it means nothing, so live with it..

 

[luckyeddie]

What I hate is when commentators talk about F Bloggs's average at the 'Gabba with his wife sitting in Row Z whilst batting at number 3 and the bowlers name if Fred, and how that is oh so relevent.. it means nothing, so live with it..

Is this turning into the third conspiracy thread of the day?

 

[Langeveldt]

Is this turning into the third conspiracy thread of the day?

no, im denying that accusation..

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

This may be true but it doesn't mean that the West Indies will have more of an advantage to the West Indies when they play there. There is a different team every time the West Indies turn out, so apart from Lara, Sarwan, Chanderpaul and Gayle, I don't think even if there is a psychological thing, that the team will be affected.

Lara, Chanderpaul, Sarwan and Gayle and every West Indian seam bowler. It's the pitch that a seamer expects to do well on, and when you're playing on dead West Indian pitches for the most part, you get excited. It's all mental. Besides, Lara, Sarwan, Chanderpaul and Gayle make up the nucleus of the West Indies team, so I don't see your point. The fact is that the team has done traditionally well at the venue and that's due to past success and the confidence that goes along with it.

 

[luckyeddie]

no, im denying that accusation..

Plausible deniability, eh?