If you took a simple average of NRR per game, the lopsided games would have an even bigger impact. For example that WI v Pak game would have had affected Pakistan's NRR by -0.66. Right now it's at -0.55.
Dunno if that's ideal.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Who do you have pegged for your 4 semi finalists?
- Thread starter mr_mister
- Start date
Dunno if that's ideal.
Bahnz
Well-known member
While I can see why people support this, I don't really agree with it. Especially in a competition format like the current one, I think performance across the entire group phase should definitely be taken into account when deciding a tie-breaker.
morgieb
Well-known member
Yeah matches like that are a problem. I guess that you could argue New Zealand lost so many wickets as they went hard at the target to win the game quickly for their NRR, but the way the game went that clearly wasn't the case. Admittedly cases like that are pretty rare.
zorax
likes this
The only downside with NRR, IMO, is when teams become pragmatic about conserving it in a losing cause rather than going balls to the wall for a win. Like what India did Vs Eng, or when a fielding side does their best to drag out a runchase.
But it's like DLS. It has it flaws but it's better than all the alternatives.
But it's like DLS. It has it flaws but it's better than all the alternatives.
ankitj
Well-known member
That's OK. You get credit for winning big. Exactly how it should be.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Strongly agree in principle, but head to head tiebreakers do make some sense when there have been washouts.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
I reckon you could create a pretty good differentiator out of Duckworth Lewis - certainly a better one than NRR - but most people hate it enough already so there wouldn't be support for it.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Other sports solve this problem in a much more elegant fashion by simply having points or goal difference (points for minus points against), but the reason we can't do that in cricket is that the turn-based nature of the game means teams batting second win by time rather than runs, and don't actually finish their innings.
Fortunately we have a perfectly good approximating method to project incomplete innings into complete ones, so we can convert wins chasing into wins in terms of runs by projecting these innings using Duckworth Lewis. It's not perfect but it certainly avoids many of the worst problems with NRR - games in which the team batting first wins counting more towards it for both teams, teams who win by (to use an exaggerated example) one wicket with 30 overs to spare getting credited for much bigger wins than they really had, teams batting in shortened innings getting advantages - while offering few new problems itself.
For example, the first game won by a chasing team in the World Cup was the crucial Pakistan/West Indies game. West Indies won by "seven wickets" with a large NRR boost, but their chasing innings of 108/3 (13.4) can be converted using DLS to project them to a score of 321. This means they can be said to have won by the equivalent of 216 runs.
As Howe said in I think a different thread, none of the better alternatives to NRR were likely to put Pakistan ahead of New Zealand anyway due to this one absolute thrashing, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking at changing it to one of those better ones.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
DLS is fine. NRR would make it worse because teams are trying to win, not trying to maximise their NRR projection.
My entire point is that DLS more accurately correlates with what teams trying to win will do than NRR.
Last edited:
is that the DLS algorithm
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Nah it's me trying to post a stupid meme. Not worth it in the end.
zorax
likes this
can you just make shorter and more succinct posts ffs
Agent Nationaux
Well-known member
No. That belongs to Imran, so we aren’t handing that back.
How about we keep the 92 title and enjoy watching the Aussies send your team back home. Let’s face it, you aren’t getting to the finals. I think that will be more fun.
Jokes aside, Pakistani fans shouldn’t be complaining. Everyone knew the rules coming in so you can’t ask for a rule change part way through the tournament to suit your situation. Happy for NZ to be in the semis, as they played more consistent cricket. Pakistan need to become professional and start selecting players on merit as opposed to nepotism (Malik).
Hopefully the changes Imran is making in our infrastructure should help things as well.
Jezroy
Well-known member
Sure were.
Win win win win win against lesser teams.
Bit of rain.
Lose lose lose.
Very consistent
