Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => Your Cricket => Topic started by: AJ2014 on February 19, 2019, 11:49:30 PM
-
For me,
Batting : Average
Bowling : Strike Rate
Would like know how you guys think about.
-
Average and Economy Rate for myself. Personally feel more accomplished getting an ER below 2 an over than going at more than 6 an over but getting a couple of wickets. (Normally am one of the more experienced bowlers in the side, so will have to set the tone with tight bowling)
Batting wise, I tend to be in with just over half the innings left to go, so strike rate isn't always important - but don't want to get too bogged down. The way I see it is if you guys don't get bowled out, you should really aim to have a SR above 70, unless you're batting on a tough wicket and opening/have lost early wickets, in which case you're batting to make sure your team gets the full innings worth of deliveries to score from
-
Too many variables for it to be a clear cut choice between batting average and strike rate. Especially at amateur level
-
For me it’s trying to score as many runs as I can before the inevitable brain fart and trying not to bowl too many crap balls.
If those two things go well the average and strike rate will take care of themselves.
-
batting wise - i look at runs per game rather than average, i noticed as i got older and kept more - batting at 7/8 whereas when i was younger i was an opener that my average went up even though i was probably scoring about 35% of the runs i did when i was younger - so i look at how many i've scored per number of innings - doesn't matter if i'm not out or not
bowling wise - on the odd occasion i am forced to bowl - trying to go for less than 20 an over!!!!
-
I play forty over games, what matters is scoring hundreds (well 75+ scores really). If someone scores a ton, their team usually wins.
It takes about 30+ overs to score an average hundred, so having a few people who can bat consistently for more than 20 overs is the most important thing.
Not strike rate but reflected in a decent 30+ average...
-
Batting - average
What's better for the team - someone with an average of 40+ at a strike rate of say 70, or someone with an average of 5 but a strike rate of 250...
Bowling - harder to call
I look at economy more than anything. If bowling first did I go below the innings run rate? If yes I bowled well, if no I didn't do a good job.
If defending a score I want to keep my economy below the required run rate to try and win the game.
Again, what's better:
8 overs 0-15 and successfully defending a low score or 8 overs 3-50 in a losing effort?
-
Think taking wickets makes feel good about contributing to the team, otherwise bowling tight is the way to go, most of the times they will come to spinners, therefore bowling correct line and length is essential.
Last season I was the most economical bowler, we promoted, so even not getting many wickets i still fell good
-
Batting - average
What's better for the team - someone with an average of 40+ at a strike rate of say 70, or someone with an average of 5 but a strike rate of 250...
Bowling - harder to call
You've gone to an extreme there, not sure there is anyone on the planet with SR 250 and average of 5
A fairer dilemma would be say
1. SR of 150, average of 25 vrs
2. SR of 100, average of 35 vrs
3. SR of 50, average of 45
Ive played with batsmen in each category. I was SR 85ish average 34 ish last season
What I will say is that the bottom stats might be handy in lower club or village cricket where the pitches might be suspect or a tail might start at 6. When you start to play a higher level of limited overs cricket on better pitches a SR of 50 is most definitely not acceptable when batting first.
I bat 3 or 4 and Id much rather have the 1. stats listed above batting before me than number 3.
With bowling I think if you keep the runs down chances will come. Obviously an attacking strike bowler is great to have in your arsenal but give me 3 or 4 line and length merchants any day. Set the field properly and take your catches
-
@LateBloomer yes my example was extreme, but deliberately so.
My question was essentially "would you rather have someone assured score a few, or someone come in who may bludgeon a few quickly but fails more often than not"
Having played at a reasonable level, batsmen with a strike rate of 50 simply don't get a game in the win/lose format. They can however be very valuable in timed/draw matches.
As far as bowling goes, a strike bowler is a luxury, someone who can keep it tight is a necessity.
-
I don't think that much has changed in that the best way of keeping the run rate down is to take wickets. I would much rather have a low strike rate over a low economy rate whatever the format
-
I don't think that much has changed in that the best way of keeping the run rate down is to take wickets. I would much rather have a low strike rate over a low economy rate whatever the format
And the best way to take wickets is build pressure by restricting runs and force the batsman into a mistake ;)
-
so i look at how many i've scored per number of innings - doesn't matter if i'm not out or not
Probably the best way to actually look at it. Gives your true value to the side with no ‘If only’ scenarios
-
And the best way to take wickets is build pressure by restricting runs and force the batsman into a mistake ;)
Only if the format suits simply bowling dry. Bowling dry won’t help you win a draw game
-
@LateBloomer
Having played at a reasonable level, batsmen with a strike rate of 50 simply don't get a game in the win/lose format. They can however be very valuable in timed/draw matches.
An example of why the game is losing players too. There is no place for a group of players so they are lost from Jnr to snr level as they have no place
-
Anyway..
Win lose
Batting
Ideally 30+ avg with SR 70+
Bowling
Economy all the way as that’s what the format is about. 10-2-20-0 over 10-0-50-3
Draw cricket
40+ with SR 50+
Bowling
SR as it’s about being able to take wickets or you won’t win ..
-
Produce match influencing performances. Runs, wickets, catches, any combination
-
When you start to play a higher level of limited overs cricket on better pitches a SR of 50 is most definitely not acceptable when batting first.
this must be dependent on the quality of the batters - if your top 6 are going to average 25 all season with 150 strike rate, your probably going to lose more games than you win, unless your tail is going to get you 100 runs ever innings (i suppose at that strike rate they will have plenty of overs to do it :D :D) or you are a gun bowling side/bat on a minefield
always been of the opinion of balance to a batting order is best - if you have a mix of your 3 options in a top 6 then you will be a good side, however the last time i played a high level was 2010 so things may have massively changed!!!
-
this must be dependent on the quality of the batters - if your top 6 are going to average 25 all season with 150 strike rate, your probably going to lose more games than you win, unless your tail is going to get you 100 runs ever innings (i suppose at that strike rate they will have plenty of overs to do it :D :D) or you are a gun bowling side/bat on a minefield
always been of the opinion of balance to a batting order is best - if you have a mix of your 3 options in a top 6 then you will be a good side, however the last time i played a high level was 2010 so things may have massively changed!!!
A lot of teams just rely on someone coming off rather than intentionally putting more steady players in. It’s win lose cricket somthere isn’t much reward for teams to play steady bats.. win big or lose big
I only get a gig as WEPL is a dire standard really and the team I play for only really has two other decent bats.. the rest are mediocre. There isn’t sadly a formst for my style anymore so it’s not really that much fun but I will currently play to the game. That is getting less fun each season though sadly as I don’t feel a bowler or oppo ever actually get me out. It’s always when having to biff
-
Think only 1st and 2nd XIs have really good fielders, lower than that it's 50-50 and then most of the times only very easy catches are taken in our league, umpire doesn't see the difference between straight or a turning one, last 3 seasons gone past, 3 or 4 lbw given on my bowling, keepers are good but there are 5-6 keepers been used due to availability, looking at all these factors, need to adapt bowling accordingly, for an off spinner only getting wickets by bowled or snicked are the main options
-
@RPC/Blueroom Cricket - Adie - the'win big lose big' mentality is one my clubs first team defo go for, they have just got promoted to WEPL 2 - so it must work to a certain extent, i will be interested how they are in a better standard, Glos Premier looks an odd league from what i have seen (5 decent teams and 5 not great teams), whether that approach still works against sides with stronger bowling attacks
-
For me,
Batting : Average
Bowling : Strike Rate
Would like know how you guys think about.
For a clubbie batsman who plays 40 over limited ("win/lose") games, here are my thoughts:
- These indicators are somewhat useful individually but don't provide a good enough picture and require a lot of discernment from captain and fellow batsmen.
- No accounting for dot balls/boundaries/sixes in the average and strike rate. Is the batsman a big hitter with a solid defense or someone who regularly rotates strike? I can't tell that by looking at just strike rate or average.
- They don't factor in opposition bowling standards and relative ranking (percentile) in the division/league tables.
- They don't factor in the batting position. An opener averaging 25 with a strike of 95 v/s a low middle order batsman average 40 with a strike rate of 45 doesn't look very good but maybe a far superior batsmen seeing off quicks and a moving new ball.
- They don't factor in pitch and outfield conditions. Some of our league grounds have very high grass and ground shots are pretty useless. Scoring grinds to a halt for both sides. No relative/comparative assessment of a players performance is available.
These indicators are relics of simpler days when "all else being equal" was the mantra and scoring/accounting was done by part-timers or retired people.
We need today are performance factors based on:
- Dot ball count and frequency of 1s, 2s, 3s, 4s, and 6s.
- batting order position
- quality of bowling and bowlers faced
- pitch and ground conditions
- comparative rating to other batsmen for that position against same bowling attack and conditions.
-
Strike rate!!!
Everyone loves a good ton, and applauds it, but get that Ton in 15 overs and the oppos heads are down and they have already lost the game.
Last year I averaged 34...... but at an SR of 140 plus.
I opened.
I won the first teams batting averages.
We won the league.
We are in the top league in our division(not premier league standard mind).
Recently a lot of the oppo in our league have started opening with more aggressive batsman and have looked to do the same.
Quick starts and try and demoralise the oppostion early.
-
Recently a lot of the oppo in our league have started opening with more aggressive batsman and have looked to do the same.
Quick starts and try and demoralise the oppostion early.
That's our strategy as well but doesn't always work.
Does your side bat first or second? Are these win-lose games?
-
In most cases balance in the order is key I would argue, if you're going to have two openers looking to score quickly - have a more stoic bat at 3 to anchor the innings if it goes sour, else you soon end up 4 or 5 down with 20 on the board and your slower scoring players coming in.
When I was younger my approach was to try and knock off singles and twos early doors, keep the score ticking over whilst I got my eye in. Then once I was feeling a bit more 'in', I would start to play a bit more expansively. These days I aim to hit a boundary within my first five or six balls then go from there, game's changed a lot.