Durham v Warwickshire (one day cup)



Do you really think we would have made 250 from 114-4? We could have. But it’s unlikely

I thought today was harsher.

But I look at it quite simply

Wednesday - we were behind the game. We lost.
Today - we were ahead of the game. We won.

It’s far from perfect. It doesn’t take into account pitches or conditions or teams.

But it uses historical stats to provide balance. I’d say it’s worked over 2 games

The other day, a modest total produced a calculation that massively favoured the side batting second.

Today, a modest total produced a calculation that massively favoured the side batting first.

The two don’t match up, quite frankly.

We’ll never know what we would’ve made the other day, I fancied us for 250, but one thing we do know, is Warwickshire didn’t get to 250 today - yet they were granted a far better chance of winning than what we were given the other day.
 
The other day, a modest total produced a calculation that massively favoured the side batting second.

Today, a modest total produced a calculation that massively favoured the side batting first.

The two don’t match up, quite frankly.

We’ll never know what we would’ve made the other day, I fancied us for 250, but one thing we do know, is Warwickshire didn’t get to 250 today - yet they were granted a far better chance of winning than what we were given the other day.
The difference is that one was a modest total

The other was a potential modest total
 
The difference is that one was a modest total

The other was a potential modest total

Which means there was also potential of a large total - so why then, was the calculation less favourable than one where there was no doubt the side batting first had underachieved?

You still haven’t answered whether you thought both calculations were fair.
 
Which means there was also potential of a large total - so why then, was the calculation less favourable than one where there was no doubt the side batting first had underachieved?

You still haven’t answered whether you thought both calculations were fair.
Because we were 114-4 so the probability suggests we wouldn’t. It’s all based on many many many years of stats

Fair? Dunno. Depends how you look at it. Wednesday didn’t feel that far out given our position, we could have easily been 180 all out. Just as likely as 250. Much more likely than 300

Today. Honestly didn’t feel a good one. But I’m not sure what you propose differently.
 
Good win that! Nice to see Clark, Lees and Harte getting a score.
Yes, possibly most pleased for Lees. He's a very good player but has been having a bad time. Turned down captaincy to concentrate on cricket - it looks like the move to Durham is being good for him.
 
Equally pleasing are the performances of both Carse and Potts with the ball.

Both been good throughout the tournament so far, and Trevaskis. Carse can be expensive but has the ability to take important wickets.

Do you really think we would have made 250 from 114-4? We could have. But it’s unlikely

I thought today was harsher.

But I look at it quite simply

Wednesday - we were behind the game. We lost.
Today - we were ahead of the game. We won.

It’s far from perfect. It doesn’t take into account pitches or conditions or teams.

But it uses historical stats to provide balance. I’d say it’s worked over 2 games

DLS is periodically amended to reflect prevailing scoring trends in cricket. It was only just amended last September.

If we go about an innings in a way that is fundamentally old school, e.g. scoring 20 off the opening ten overs, and therefore out of sync with how DLS works, we can't have too many complaints if we get set a difficult DLS score. It may be the conditions or match situation don't allow us to structure our innings in a 'DLS-friendly' way, but that's a risk of having an arbitrary rule to decide games. You know the crack before you take the field and, at CLS at least, they display the DLS par score on the scoreboard, so the team can see if they're on track.

What's the alternative? Endless draws, which cheat the fan out of a result? Some crappy penalty shoot out equivalent?

After pinning us back to 114 from 27.5 overs, Worcs would have felt hard done by if they were asked to chase much over 160 in their 24 overs. We had them 81/5 at one point and could easily have kicked on and won the match. Likewise, that 211 chase looked fairly simple in hindsight and we could have made it with 5-6 overs to spare if we hadn't eased off a bit.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top