pleasw endorse OR pick holes in the following alternative suggestions to the current baffling run rate sytem?

Question

i think any system that is so complex you are waiting for the mathematicians to reveal who has finished where, after the final round of games..doesnt allow the spectators and followers of the tournament to participate fully in the excitement as the finale approaches

what are the merits of the these scenarios.

1. the winning team earns a run ratio of the runs they scored divided by the wickets they lost

ie: 300 for 3 earns a ratio of 100 losers score zero
250 for 5 earns a ratio of 50 losers score zero
360 for 6 earns a ratio of 60 losers score zero

if the same team had won all three above matches their run ratio would be 70 [ie 100 +50+60= 210 divided by 3]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


alternatively, if a value could be determined& assigned for one wicket..in terms of its value when set against runs..then the winning team could get two points for a win
+ an additional score based on the..

combination of the margins of victory in terms of runs and wickets..ie:

if the value of one wicket equalled 22 runs...

if team A scored 249 runs and team B scored 250 for 5 [in whatever over of the game] they would score

1 pt for margin of runs
+ 110 [5x22] for the margin of wickets[they had in hand when they won]
so.. in total 1 +110 = 111 pts for the Margin of Victory [mv] score

ie team a scores 0 [mv=0]
team b scores 2 [mv 111]

this system would properly reward the margin of victory which im not sure the more confusing current system does.

Answer 1

I can see one main problem with your calculation, and that is that you don't take into account the type of pitch being played on. In cricket, there are clear occasions when a wicket would favour the batsmen and others when it would favour the bowlers.

If I understand your system correctly, then a team who plays most of their matches on bowling wickets will be at a serious disadvantage. Sometimes, the condition of the wicket makes it very difficult for a team to post a large total (e.g., during the South Africa vs. New Zealand match, the wicket clearly favoured the bowlers, which is why the run rate for both sides was barely at 4 rpo.)

Although the Net Run Rate calculation can be confusing, it is at least fair. A team's NRR shows how quickly a team scores runs in comparison to their opponents. Therefore it doesn't matter whether or not a wicket favours the batter or the bowler, as it will act in a similar way for both sides (although the condition of the pitch will obviously deteriorate over the course of a match.)

I would suggest simply trusting the statisticians who calculate these things. They should know before a match starts what margin of victory is needed to get a certain NRR. I know it's not pretty, but it works!

Answer 2

I think your suggestion about a margin of victory is a good one, as I have to admit I do get slightly baffled by the current Net Run Rate calculations, especially as I am not much of a statistician, and the current system caculates NRR against all the teams each team plays against - too complicated!

With your margin of victory calculation, teams are rewarded for keeping wickets in hand, and likewise, teams who lose wickets are accordingly penalised. The current system merely rewards against the relative speed of scoring runs.

Anyway, I think there should be 4 quarter-finals, 2 semis and a grand finale, not this Super Eight nonsense.

Answer 3

And that is easier to work out than the current system???

It's quite easy. Number of runs scored divided by number of overs batted (or 50 if bowled out) minus runs conceded divided by number of overs bowled (or 50 if they bowl a side out). It only comes in to play ifteams are tied on points at the end of the group anyway.

Your system dosnt allow credit for tems chasing down small totals, duckwort/lewis matches, etc. If a team bowls an opposition out for 50 and passes it for no wicket, they don't get as much credit as a team that chases a higher sore or bats first.

Answer 4

We had the keep down the line on the nook of the subsequent block. a minimum of another day there appeared a reason to make the holiday. My grandmother knew the value of roughly each little thing that they had that we would want so there became into seldom extra advantageous than a nickle left. i might decide on what ever i ought to get the main of for that nickle. it continually made it style extra advantageous once you acquire to %. it out. there became right into a save around the line from our college. They carried paper, word books, pencils, all the traditional college issues, and all varieties of candy you need to think of of. They have been all in slanted jars with metallic lids and the 1st 2 rows have been a penny each, the subsequent row became into 2 cents each the third row 2 or 3 for a nickle, and that they went up from there i do no longer think of I ever offered any component above those first 3 rows. I used to maintain my nickle because of the fact the keep via the school had extra to compliment between. you would be able to additionally get an ice chilly Coke from the soda fountain for a nickle. It wasn't very massive yet made you experience actual significant to sit down down up there the place the youngsters from the highschool sat and to hearken to all their talk with regards to the youngsters they went to college with. This has been relaxing answering the questions immediately, I even have have been given to go down reminiscence lane countless situations. thank you for asking.

Answer 5

I do not find any flaw in the present system of calculating the Net Run Rate and hance do not envisage any change required.