India tour of New Zealand - Jan to Feb 2014

[Ohm]

Every Cricketer should think of their duty in respect to their team instead of looking for self stuffs like hair style, etc. I remember, Ishant had dropped Cook's catch in November 2011 (in a test match) beacuse his hairs came across his eyes when he completed his bowling action and bowl came close to him instantly. Cook was looking dangerous and Ishant missed a great opportunity.

 

[asprin]

49%

That's pretty high. I was expecting more along the lines of 20-30%.

 

[playkid12]

WASP is useless. It's pretty obvious on most occasions which team is on top. It uses data from up to 2006 for each team to base its odds, which is way too long. Most cricket teams are completely different from then. It may be more reliable if it keeps it at ~2 years. However, the way it's implemented is awful. It should just be one statistic brought up between the innings.

The way it's used now - I see it as the equivalent of looking at the Required Run Rate when there's fewer and fewer balls remaining. The RRR becomes too unreliable, and it becomes a lot more logical to look at just the number of balls remaining and the number of runs required separately.

 

[Ohm]

WASP is a BS thing. It is useful for people who don't watch Cricket regularly (No, not for them too). We can predict things much better than it..... Its like Sensex; keeps up & down cycle depends upon how the scoring rate is and wicket falling. I'm not really impressed with that.

 

[Biggs]

WASP is the equivalent of a man tossing a coin every ball and someone yelling "heads" and it lands on tails. Then, when one team is winning he switches to a double-heads or double-tails sided coin. When it's close, it's meaningless and when the game is all-but over it's irrelevant.

 

[Chewie]

Chewie, this Indian side is one of the better fielding outfits in the world currently. Raina, Jadeja, Kohli, Rahane and Rohit Sharma are all superb fielders. If you saw the Champions Trophy, India were by far the best fielding side.

Doesn't change what I said though

I couldn't watch the NZ innings and would like to know what speeds was Aaron generating? Consistently above 140 kmph?

Also, anyone remember what the WASP % was up until the last over of the Indian innings?

He was consistently around 140kph but mostly below iirc

WASP is useless. It's pretty obvious on most occasions which team is on top. It uses data from up to 2006 for each team to base its odds, which is way too long. Most cricket teams are completely different from then. It may be more reliable if it keeps it at ~2 years. However, the way it's implemented is awful. It should just be one statistic brought up between the innings.

The way it's used now - I see it as the equivalent of looking at the Required Run Rate when there's fewer and fewer balls remaining. The RRR becomes too unreliable, and it becomes a lot more logical to look at just the number of balls remaining and the number of runs required separately.

It has nothing to do with the teams who are playing, it's based on the ground and what usually happens on that ground. It doesn't take into account the players at all.

 

[surendar]

Just saw the highlights of second innings, just couldn't believe the way Jadeja has batted. It's the first time I am seeing him like that, in particular the last over.

Wouldn't blame anyone - everyone tried to pull the strings together & tie is fabulous to achieve in the end. Chasing 315 overseas is no joke after we being put up in 0-2 situation. This reminds me Uthappa's last over thriller Vs England in England ODI series.

 

[SaiSrini]

In a way, this is good exposure for our players with just a year to go for the World Cup, which will be held in this part of the world. I just wish India use up the next two games very smartly and use the proper resources. For one, I wouldn't want Dhoni to give up on Varun Aaron. Give him the next two games to showcase himself.

Ashwin salvaged himself with that performance and will probably pick himself in the rest of the games. Hope he also gets better because his overseas record is in the horror zone.

 

[asprin]

Just finished watching the last over highlights of the game. I can't see how those 2 wides weren't wides. They were down the legside, they didn't hit any part of the batsman - how are those not wides? In fact, the second wide was even more pleasing to watch because the reflex from the batsman was brilliant.

 

[scratch978]

Just finished watching the last over highlights of the game. I can't see how those 2 wides weren't wides.

Did you watch on youtube ? Please can you post the link ?

 

[asprin]

Did you watch on youtube ? Please can you post the link ?

 

[abhi_jacko]

I agree about those two last over wides. I don't see what the controversy was all about (unless the wides being referred to are not the 2 last over ones) ! These two seemed to be going down the legside and jadeja just made sure he did not touch the delivery. Same way a batsman leaves a very wide delivery on the off so that it can be given a wide.

 

[CG123]

At the stadium it felt like there were more Indian supporters than Kiwi ones :/

I watched the end on the Western side of the South stand, at least 9/10 of the people there were Indian supporters, that six off the second to last ball was the loudest noise I've ever heard. I'm pretty sure the West stand was the only place where there were more New Zealand supporters.

It was a great game at to be at, pretty gutting to let it slip like that at the end though. Never though I'd see 28,000 people at a cricket match in New Zealand, so at the end of the day "Cricket was the winner".

----------

I agree about those two last over wides. I don't see what the controversy was all about (unless the wides being referred to are not the 2 last over ones) ! These two seemed to be going down the legside and jadeja just made sure he did not touch the delivery. Same way a batsman leaves a very wide delivery on the off so that it can be given a wide.

My problem with some of the wides (not sure if these were the last over ones) is that some of the Indians were batting outside leg stump, so the bowler bowls a yorker at their feet but then the batsmen are jumping inside it so it goes just down leg side but in reality it was bowling straight at where they were originally standing.

No one has ever been able to tell me why the wide lines are different in Test and ODI cricket, when the definition of a wide is still the same. If a ball is just down leg side and it's not too wide in a Test why is it too wide in an ODI?

----------

What's with all the WASP hate as well? Because in New Zealand there is a limited cricket watching public it's just a gimmick to help non cricket watchers out. In other sports you can easily tell who's winning, but in cricket you often can't. Yes it's sometimes not very realistic because it doesn't take into account the batsmen/bowlers, but it does it's job. Just ignore it if you want, I personally find it quite interesting comparing my predictions to it etc.

 

[ferg512]

I'm not sure we can afford the luxury of sitting out Mills anymore, I still think hes probably our best one day bowler. I'd lean towards leaving out McClenaghan.

 

[playkid12]

It has nothing to do with the teams who are playing, it's based on the ground and what usually happens on that ground. It doesn't take into account the players at all.

This is incorrect. It uses team data from each team up to 2008 to determine what the "average" team accomplishes. I never claimed that it took into account what teams were playing, so I'm not sure why you've brought up that tidbit.

CC: You use a bit of historical data and bring it into equation. Why was 2008 used as the starting date for the data? Lots of things have changed since then such as the teams itself for example, Sachin Tendulkar isn?t playing for India now and nor is Daniel Vettori a regular in the New Zealand ODI side.

SB: One thing about WASP is that it takes into account the average batting team taking on the average bowling team. It doesn?t take into account the players out there or their quality. For example, when MS Dhoni and Virat Kohli were batting in the first ODI, WASP showed that India?s chances of winning were nine per cent. Now, we know that they are fantastic players, especially while chasing, but WASP doesn?t factor that. Both India and New Zealand may have changed their players since 2008, for example, Daniel Vettori isn?t currently in the side. But, WASP takes into consideration that there would be an able replacement, although no two players can be the same. We thought 2008 would be the right mark. Taking only the previous game into account wouldn?t give a proper reading, nor would it be right to take the 43 odd years of one-day cricket into the equation.


Source: WASP takes playing conditions into consideration unlike D/L method, say creators - Latest Cricket News, Articles & Videos at CricketCountry.com

What I was saying was a 2008 cutoff for data to determine average performance worldwide is too far away. It would probably be more accurate around 2 years.