2015 World Cup - Day 18 - South Africa v Ireland

KevIRL

the groutch wrote: »

Mooney needs to be dropped for the next game

You clearly didn't see his first five ocers bowling earlier

Beasty

Sparks43 wrote: »

NRR



South Africa



411/50 = 8.22



Ireland say we make 200



200/50= 4



Do we have -4.22 as our NRR or am i missing something

It's nothing to do with NRR per match - you need to look at all matches a team has played

Current standings (including NRR) can be seen here

Pudsy33

the groutch wrote: »

time for Kev to open up on the powerplay

Well well well

Alf Veedersane

the groutch wrote: »

time for Kev to open up on the powerplay

I guess he can still open up emotionally...back in the pavillion.

Rjd2

Rjd2 wrote: »

Bat sensibly please Mooney. :mad:

Horrible innings from really, was not expecting a Kohli special, but it would be nice something somewhat competent. However I would persist with him next game, he started the game bowling pretty well, and overall he offers more than Sorensen.

pajor

Will they make 200?

the groutch

pajor wrote: »

Will they make 200?

Not a chance (saying that because whatever I say the opposite should happen)

Sparks43

pajor wrote: »

Will they make 200?

If they do our nrr will be -1.19 by my calculations

168 atm is -1.42


Need more runs badly

dfx-

pajor wrote: »

Will they make 200?

no, two fresh strike bowlers against 9, 10, 11, worst combination.

Is there value in seeing it out for as long as possible though

Doodah7

If Ireland only make 180 in 40 overs, their NRR would go from +0.338 to -0.953.
If they make 200, the NRR would be -1.206

They need to start scoring quicker if they are going to stay in till nearer the end from a NRR perspective...

BarryD

Steyn and Abbott to polish it off?

Sparks43

dfx- wrote: »

no, two fresh strike bowlers against 9, 10, 11, worst combination.

Is there value in seeing it out for as long as possible though

Yes as if we get bowled out its calculated as 50 overs anyway

More runs we get the better

Deise Vu

Apologies for a rookie question here but are you deemed to have received 50 overs for NRR calculations if you are bowled out early? If not isn't it disastrous for tailenders to be chipping in 1's and two's with the run rate therefore decreasing with every over?

minitrue

For NRR 50 goes into the overs column for us (unless the rain arrives or floodlights fail or something more improbably stops the innings) as it's how many overs we have available, not how many we actually use.

Pudsy33

Deise Vu wrote: »

Apologies for a rookie question here but are you deemed to have received 50 overs for NRR calculations if you are bowled out early? If not isn't it disastrous for tailenders to be chipping in 1's and two's with the run rate therefore decreasing with every over?

You are. So you may as well bat out the overs.

Sparks43

Those 2 4s make a +0.055 differance to our rate

8/144.7

Beasty

They are now back ahead of Pakistan on NRR

the groutch

at least we found out there that AB is human after all

BarryD

Only 25 runs an over needed now - time to start lashing out!!!!

BarryD

See - what did I tell you

pajor

pajor wrote: »

Will they make 200?

Huzzah!

KevIRL

Pudsy33 wrote: »

Forget that, we ain't making 100.

DeVore

How many do we need to make in total from the 50 overs (or whatever) to keep ahead of the Pakistani total?

the groutch

McBrine's first ever runs for Ireland

force eleven

We need so much more game time against these teams. One or two matches a year ( if we're lucky) is just an afterthought. The benefit of regular one day games and hopefully full test matches will make us a far better side in the long run.

Deise Vu

DeVore wrote: »

How many do we need to make in total from the 50 overs (or whatever) to keep ahead of the Pakistani total?

Pakistan are -1.373 we are currently (on 208 runs) at -1.15. Unfortunately Pakistan still have UAE to come. Our narrow squeak against the UAE could be our ultimate undoing. (Still have top beat Zimbabwe of course too!)

Sparks43

RR as it stands

Against

993/150 =-6.62

For 796/145.1 = 5.49

NRR -1.13

Now lets see how close i get:D

DeVore

Whats the equation for the NRR? (Runs For) / 50 - (Runs Against) /50 ?

Deise Vu

All out 210 is a NRR of -1.137 according to excel. Great retrun from the last 5 wickets, horrible from the first 5.

Alf Veedersane

Let's worry about the run rate if we beat Zimbabwe. There are too many matches left to be looking at it yet.

BarryD

Most of our runs coming from Nos 5,7,9 & 10. We could have done with a bit more steel from the top order but doubtless that's when SA were at their most earnest in attack.

Beasty

DeVore wrote: »

Whats the equation for the NRR? (Runs For) / 50 - (Runs Against) /50 ?

Across 3 matches

For 796 in 145.1666667 (ish!) overs = 5.483
Against 993 in 150 = 6.620

net -1.137

Deise Vu

Sparks43 wrote: »

RR as it stands

Against

993/150 =-6.62

For 796/145.1 = 5.49

NRR -1.13

Now lets see how close i get:D

The .1 in the 145.1 is actually .1667 (1 run out of 6). Which slightly changes your calculation.

yours in nerdiness.
DV

DeVore

But also there could never been a 145.16667 divisor ... could there?? Even if we are bowled out we still get a 150 divisor... so its a little misleading to use it, better to use 150 imho and let the run rate increase as the runs are scored...

But thanks for the example!

Deise Vu

DeVore wrote: »

But also there could never been a 145.16667 divisor ... could there?? Even if we are bowled out we still get a 150 divisor... so its a little misleading to use it, better to use 150 imho and let the run rate increase as the runs are scored...

But thanks for the example!

We beat West Indies after 45 overs and one ball, hence 145 overs and one ball after three matches.

Sparks43

DeVore wrote: »

But also there could never been a 145.16667 divisor ... could there?? Even if we are bowled out we still get a 150 divisor... so its a little misleading to use it, better to use 150 imho and let the run rate increase as the runs are scored...

But thanks for the example!

1st match we faced 45.5 overs and won
2nd match we faced 49.2 overs and won
3rd match bowled out so 50 overs

so we only faced 145.1 overs in the 3 matches which is the 145.16667 divisor

DeVore

It really brings home the "its our ball and you cant play with it" attitude of the "Test" nations... They play against each other in their little club year in year out with Associates getting one or two test games in a year if they are lucky. Then they invite us in to the world cup, wallop us and then use that to justify why Associates shouldn't be allowed test status. Its actually pretty awful and a disgrace imho.
If anything this loss is a good argument why we SHOULD have full status, you only get better when you play better opponents (plus we wouldn't lose our best players to foreign test nations).

Look at Italy in the 6 nations... at one time it was a matter of how many runs everyone would get against them. Now its a tough match and they are creeping up on the standard (witness Scotland this year!) .... if they hadn't been allowed into the 6 nations, they wouldn't be half the team they are today.

DeVore

Ah I get the NRR equation now.... thanks lads.

Sparks43

How do runs get scored in the 6 nations:D

Lovely Bloke

DeVore wrote: »

They play against each other in their little club year in year out with Associates getting one or two test games in a year if they are lucky.

0 tests for Assocs.

BarryD

DeVore wrote: »

It really brings home the "its our ball and you cant play with it" attitude of the "Test" nations... They play against each other in their little club year in year out

You forgot to add that they also like to suck up the better Associate players into their national teams, further copper fastening their superiority. We could do with the likes of Morgan & Rankin etc

The whole setup stinks but it ain't gonna change anytime soon. Suits the big Asian countries like India who have huge TV audiences. TV has had a dominant effect on cricket politics all the way back to Kerry Packer etc.

res ipsa

So it looks like we're going to face NZ in Wellington at best. Little chance of finishing 3rd in the group now.... I'm. very happy if someone disagrees.

ItsChecoTime

The bad of that match:
Bowling let's us down again, resulting in the batsmen having to go for it and the subsequent collapse.

The good of it:
Balbirnie's half century means 6 of our top 7 have scored half centuries, hopefully this will bode well for the nex few matches.
Also the tail enders got some potentially valuable facing time against top quality bowlers and did a respectable job.
Small things but could be beneficial

BarryD

ItsChecoTime wrote: »

The bad of that match:
Bowling let's us down again, resulting in the batsmen having to go for it and the subsequent collapse.

The good of it:
Balbirnie's half century means 6 of our top 7 have scored half centuries, hopefully this will bode well for the nex few matches.
Also the tail enders got some potentially valuable facing time against top quality bowlers and did a respectable job.
Small things but could be beneficial

The opening batsmen didn't have to go for it - there was absolutely no way we were going to hit 400+ off the SA attack. Surely, we just needed to occupy the crease for the full 50 overs and score as many as possible. Lasted longer than I thought we would though

Pudsy33

res ipsa wrote: »

So it looks like we're going to face NZ in Wellington at best. Little chance of finishing 3rd in the group now.... I'm. very happy if someone disagrees.

Probably but sure look, we would have taken that at the start. 3rd would get us Aus.

res ipsa

Pudsy33 wrote: »

Probably but sure look, we would have taken that at the start. 3rd would get us Aus.

Or Sri Lanka.

Pudsy33

Off topic but what's the protocol on sky for games that clash? Pak/SA kicks off at 1 Saturday morning and Ireland 3 hours later. Will both be shown?

KevIRL

Pudsy33 wrote: »

Off topic but what's the protocol on sky for games that clash? Pak/SA kicks off at 1 Saturday morning and Ireland 3 hours later. Will both be shown?

Ireland game will be behind the red button until the other game is over or is a foregone conclusion

Pudsy33

Bollox

KevIRL

Pudsy33 wrote: »

Bollox

Not good for us UPC subscribers alright. Although I am going to be in the wilds of Kerry this weekend with the wife and 4 month old child. Currently am vexed about how I might be able to stream it in a hotel room without waking everyone and hence end up in the doghouse