[PCCL 2010] Feedback Thread

[Haarithan]

The sim accurately represents Pollard's real life ability. i.e none.

What have you got against him ?? He was world class for Somerset both with bat and ball
So even if he fails on finals day with the bat, he will do the job with the ball

 

[Ollie_H]

What have you got against him ?? He was world class for Somerset both with bat and ball

'World Class'? Yeah okay. He is an overhyped failure much like Useless and the Pie-Chucker and probably Graeme Napier too.

 

[treva]

Just to list his stats in the T20 comp this Summer

- 309 runs @ 28.09
- 14th highest strike rate in the comp: 174.57 (He batted at least 7 times more than anyone above him)
- Most sixes: 27 (3 more than Scott Styris)
- 2nd most wickets: 28 @ 14.96 (Only behind fellow Somerset bowler Alfonso Thomas)
- 8th best bowling performance: 4 for 15 from 3.3 overs.

Hardly a useless pie chucker.

 

[WestIndian]

Am happy to see West Indies Sensation Kieron Pollard has so many admires, as expected there will be a hater or two out there, but he can't be bothered he got one or two down here as well, so what!!

 

[Ollie_H]

Just to list his stats in the T20 comp this Summer

- 309 runs @ 28.09
- 14th highest strike rate in the comp: 174.57 (He batted at least 7 times more than anyone above him)
- Most sixes: 27 (3 more than Scott Styris)
- 2nd most wickets: 28 @ 14.96 (Only behind fellow Somerset bowler Alfonso Thomas)
- 8th best bowling performance: 4 for 15 from 3.3 overs.

Hardly a useless pie chucker.

You know what those stats show? Your biasedness towards him . In every other stat bar the first you said where he was on the list. Care to tell us where he was on the run scoring list? The average of 28.09 is inflated by 3 NO's.

Whilst he may be able to do something on the domestic stages he certainly doesn't turn up for the Internationals.

 

[treva]

I would have, if I could be bothered to count the amount of batsmen above him (I would guess about 30, but Tresco was 4th and Hildreth about 15th). Still, I'd take a player who can average 30 runs per innings, hit 27 sixes and take 28 wickets @ 15 a piece.

 

[Ollie_H]

Sohum, the fact is that the sim and the site are fantastic but this whole crashing thing is really screwing it up. In both the games today that crashed, the team who were miles ahead before the crash then went on to lose. Which is completely stupid considering the Bandits and the Llamas were completely on the ropes yet they still manage to get a second chance and then they go on to win. I know it's only virtual and all that, but it would be nice to have a sense of reality. If the game crashes it should be seen as a 'rained off game' and just give both teams one point.

That has to be the only fair way to do it in my opinion.

 

[Pranav]

Not at all happy with what happened the last night. The Smashers were comfortably winning the match, until it got stuck. And to our disappointment, we lost the one which started later.

This happened in the pre-season tournament as well. Llamas were losing the two LIVE matches which later got stuck, and won the third one that was played on cricsim. It was due to THIS match that we missed the finals!

I didn't feel like complaining about it at that time, considering that it was a 'pre-season' tournament, but now that it's getting frequent, I have to. I know that you've done some fantastic work to get the site up and manage the entire tournament, but if you want the tournament to be fair, you might as well look into this matter.

Cheers.

 

[treva]

I can see your frustration but just because we were 170/8 does not mean we were 'losing' the match. That is not a fair assumption until both sides have batted. There is no reason why we couldn't have won the first match, none at all.

I do feel sorry for you guys but at the end of the day I'd rather see all the games played even if there is a crash rather than counting them as a NR.

 

[Pranav]

I can see your frustration but just because we were 170/8 does not mean we were 'losing' the match. That is not a fair assumption until both sides have batted. There is no reason why we couldn't have won the first match, none at all.

Well, if you ask any bookmaker to make you odds for that match, in 90% of the cases, the odds would fovour the Smashers. The Llamas might not have 'lost' the game, but they were definitely 'losing' it.

You will obviously try to defend your case, because you ended up being on the winning side.

Honestly, I didn't care much when the first time it happened, but now that it's happened twice, and at both the situations we were the ones who were on the receiving end, I am not at all pleased.

 

[Covvy]

TBH, it's only a game. Obviously frustuating though, but I'm sure Sohum's not doing this on purpose.

 

[treva]

Even if we lost the game, I'd still rather see a full game played rather than calling it a draw.

 

[Themer]

Well, if you ask any bookmaker to make you odds for that match, in 90% of the cases, the odds would fovour the Smashers. The Llamas might not have 'lost' the game, but they were definitely 'losing' it.

I'd disagree. 170 is a defendable score had they been 120/8 then you could say they were clearly losing but the score being what it was I'd say that yes the Smashers were on top but not that you were clearly winning.

 

[Pranav]

Obviously frustuating though, but I'm sure Sohum's not doing this on purpose.

Haha! I am sure about that as well!

As I said, he has done a fantastic job in managing the entire tournament.

Even if we lost the game, I'd still rather see a full game played rather than calling it a draw.

I am rather happy with Olie's idea. At least one would be happy to have gained a point!

I'd disagree. 170 is a defendable score had they been 120/8 then you could say they were clearly losing but the score being what it was I'd say that yes the Smashers were on top but not that you were clearly winning.

I see you agree with the first part of the quoted text, and disagree with the latter.

Opinion respected.

 

[sohum]

If it happens again I'll look into marking crashed games as abandoned. As of now I don't know what new code is causing the bug (it seemed to be working earlier). Concurrency issues are notoriously difficult to debug.

I wouldn't stress out about it, though. It is just an online game and to be absolutely honest, the only person whose lost time from the entire endeavor is me.