The Cricket Thread

**BonnieShels** · 03/03/2015, 9:55 AM

210 is remarkable considering how awful our opening 5 were.

**swinfordfc** · 03/03/2015, 11:32 AM

Yes 210 is good considering what happen earlier - the game on Sunday morning is huge now! - have to win it

**BonnieShels** · 03/03/2015, 3:08 PM

We're better than Zim. We should beat them. COYBIG.

**bennocelt** · 03/03/2015, 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by BonnieShels

We're better than Zim. We should beat them. COYBIG.

Yeah agreed, will be tight though in the end with all the run rates etc. Im sure South Africa will also hammer Pakistan as well, but god knows what India will do to us.....

**BonnieShels** · 04/03/2015, 1:25 AM

I'm hoping the India game is moot by the time we get there. HOPE against hope.

**mypost** · 04/03/2015, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

They would have been better off being all out for 80 after 10 overs, than this.

This is pointless - why aren't they swinging at everything ?

No it wouldn't. The net run rate would have taken a hammering. Indeed it did, just not as bad as it could have been. Pakistan's routine win over the Abu Dhabis meant we dropped to fifth with a game in hand.

Saturday is a huge day in the group, with SA playing Pakistan, and us against Zimbabwe in the later game. We will still have a game in hand on all the above after it, but we still need to win.

**Real ale Madrid** · 04/03/2015, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by mypost

No it wouldn't. The net run rate would have taken a hammering. Indeed it did, just not as bad as it could have been. Pakistan's routine win over the Abu Dhabis meant we dropped to fifth with a game in hand.

Yeah I think I mistook the NRR as being the actual RR - but say if we were all out for 80 after 10 overs isn't our RR 8.00 as opposed to say 200 after 45 overs - making it 4.44 ??

**passinginterest** · 04/03/2015, 1:19 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_run_rate

If the team is bowled out it's the total divided by 50 to calculate the run rate so in your scenario it's 80/50 = 1.6 or 200/50 = 4.0 so batting for longer is better even if the scores are not that high.

I think.

**Real ale Madrid** · 04/03/2015, 2:16 PM

I think the mistake I was making was - I was taking our NRR for the SA game and adding it to what was already there - instead of calculating it over the whole tournament. Which makes more sense!

Goal difference for cricket me @rse!

**swinfordfc** · 04/03/2015, 3:46 PM

The NRR will make no difference as long as we beat Zimb. on Saturday morning!

**swinfordfc** · 05/03/2015, 7:36 AM

Scotland could not do England a favour this morning ..... England really up against it now ..... they have to win on Monday morning or they going home!

**Real ale Madrid** · 05/03/2015, 7:56 AM

Originally Posted by swinfordfc

The NRR will make no difference as long as we beat Zimb. on Saturday morning!

If we beat Zim and lose to Pak - it does come down to NRR between ourselves / Pak / and WI - only 2 out of 3 to go through.

**mypost** · 05/03/2015, 9:49 AM

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

I think the mistake I was making was - I was taking our NRR for the SA game and adding it to what was already there - instead of calculating it over the whole tournament. Which makes more sense!

Goal difference for cricket me @rse!

It is extremely complicated, but it's calculated by the amount of runs scored so far and the overs faced, against the amount conceded and the overs bowled.

So far we've played 145.1 Overs and bowled 150. We've scored 796 runs and conceded almost a thousand. You then divide the runs scored against the Overs played.

796/145.1 = 5.48
993/150.0 = 6.61

So 5.48-6.61 =

-1.13 NRR after 3 games.

**Wolfman** · 05/03/2015, 9:57 AM

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

I might be on my own but I shout for England in the cricket when I'm not shouting for Ireland - especially with one of our own as captain - christ the abuse from the Brit media is, as per usual, disgusting - I hope he sticks away 100 tomorrow and England win.

Why??