Deep Backward Point

Many trolls lurk in the depths of Cricinfo. The environmentalists at Deep Backward Point fear for their health. So I feed them periodically, with blog posts like this one.

Previously: Feeding the Trolls in the Cricinfo Comments: Part I

This time, I found many insightful Cricinfo comments that were too long for the average attention span. So, as a service to the reader, I provide a paraphrased shorter version. Enjoy.

Iyer  writes about Ashwin in the first India v. WI ODI:

“Ashwin cannot be criticized. The asking rate was only 3 an over with another 15 overs to go, and a such a cheeky second run wasn’t required at that situation. Ashwin was playing more maturedly and didn’t see a merit in such risky running between the wickets. Rohit should be criticized for not listening to Ashwin’s NO. Also rohit should be criticized for losing his wicket at the end without ensuring India’s victory. Rohit should also be criticized for taking too many first ball singles and leaving vinay exposed to face the rest of the over. It was a very risky strategy, and luckily vinay didn’t get out. Instead of criticizing all this, the commentators (gavaskar and arun lal) were picking soft target – Ashwin. Gavaskar is also partial bcos rohit plays for bombay.”

Shorter version: I’m from Tamil Nadu.

∞

khiladisher shouts from the rooftops:

“THE WORLD CHAMPIONS INDIA ARE VIRTUALLY UNBEATABLE IN INDIA EVEN WITHOUT GREAT ONE DAY PLAYERS AND FINISHERS LIKE SACHIN-DHONI AND YUVRAJ.THEY HAVE NOW HAD THEIR 10TH CONSECUTIVE WIN AND THE THE ONLY LOSS THEY SUFFERED THIS YEAR WAS AT THE HANDS OF SOUTH AFRICA{A MATCH THEY SHOULD HAVE EASILY WON} WHEN THEY WERE 267-1 IN THE 39TH OVER AND WERE ALLOUT FOR 296-WITH SOUTH AFRICA WINNING WITH 2 BALLS TO SPARE. EVEN AT 59-5 THEY HAD A FUTURE GREAT ROHIT SHARMA AND THE FAST LEARNING ALL ROUND CRICKETER RAVINDRA JADEJA AT CREASE-WITH THE BOWLERS UMESH YADAV AND VARUN AARON PROVIDING THE FINISHING TOUCHES. INDIA SHOULD NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE WINDIES AND SHOULD WORK HARD FOR A SERIES WIN AND IF LUCKY A 5-0 RESULT.”

Shorter version: I have discovered the CAPS LOCK key. I have the power.

∞

ramps_wi riffs:

“Gayle scored a Hundred in Zimbabwe when that should of been in India in today’s match, martin favored over narine, when narine was one of the best bowlers in the champions league. But I guess the selectors ensuring that too much trinis cannot be on the team. And now we left to wonder where we going wrong. Sammy has been proven time and time again, that he cannot win matches. Today’s match could of been won by better captaincy and woth narine bowling”

Shorter version: I can name more than three West Indian players.

∞

piyo_thanda_jiyo_thanda fails to live up to his name:

“I think Pakistan can be happy only by beating minnows. Once they run into better teams, they will be found out. Enjoy it while it lasts (not for too long, i bet)”

Shorter version: I have short term memory loss. Sorry. Wait, who are you?

∞

Stephon Joel Ramlogan says, while rubbing his eyes:

“ok kinda wierd because last time i watch cricket chris G was playin for west indies in world cup ….WHATS GOING ON PEOPLE how he playin in zim ..and not wi”

Shorter version: I have been asleep for 7 months. Literally. Asleep. I woke up, and it seemed really important to me to come to a page about domestic Zimbabwe domestic cricket. And then write this comment. No, I’m not curious why I fell asleep for 7 months. No, it doesn’t seem odd that I have no clue what happened in the interim. You’re saying people don’t comment on web pages about Zim cricket all the time? Who are you? Stop paraphrasing me! Stop! Stop it! *snore*

∞

Ok, that last one wasn’t shorter.

Previously: Feeding the Trolls in the Cricinfo Comments: Part I

A couple of short months ago, the idea of a web site began as a series of conversations across four time zones over Twitter, email and Skype. The idea was for a fan-driven, magazine-style web site for a broad range of opinions. Opinionated, passionate but always fair.

Today, we launched The Sight Screen.

There is a section for Opinions called The Late Cut, where Karachi Khatmal’s article on cricket in Pakistan is a real masterpiece. There is a section called Replay for nostalgia, where Minal and Aashish (co-founders of The Sight Screen) address the lost promise of Sanjay Manjrekar. There’s a Stadiapedia, where we will catalog details about cricket stadiums around the world. And finally there’s the section that I’m proud to have named: Damned Lies and Statistics. It’s empty at the moment, but you’ll see something interesting from me and other authors there very soon.

So look around and let me know what you think. We’re very new, so there are bound to be glitches. Help us whack the bugs.

And finally, if you want to write about cricket, give us a shout. We want great articles from all walks of life. And here are our Editorial Guidelines.

∞

Congratulations to the awesome core team: Aashish, Minal, Dilip, Masuud, Subash and Shrikant.

Hypothesis: Jonathan Trott’s game is not suited to the 50 over game. His good batting in certain types of matches skews his figures, specifically matches where England bats first. England are setting themselves up failure when it will matter.

The above statement is my intuition. I proceeded to dig through the facts to confirm my claim. Or invalidate it.

Of course, Trott can disprove all of this in tomorrow’s match. So it goes.

The Data

The strike rates are generally not too interesting. He’s always around 80. Except when batting second and England lose.

Trott Strike Rate in ODIs

The averages tell a better story: 67 when batting first 37 when batting second. And most astonishingly, when he bats first and plays a long innings, England loses. He has an average of 87 when batting first in matches that England lost. Think about that.

Trott Average in ODIs

Theory

Jonathan Trott is a good batsman, on his way to possible Test greatness. In the 50 over game, he is suited to playing the anchor role. This role requires other batsmen to keep the scoring rate up. If he runs out of other batsmen, the jig is up, he needs to increase his scoring rate and he gets out sooner.

This mode of operation is especially well-suited to batting first, when there is no specific target total. When chasing a large total, the anchor role is fine a stop-gap but a strike rate in the 70s will not get the job done.

In fact, when England bats first and he makes a large score, they are more likely to lose the match. This may be because he takes up the bulk of the overs at a slower strike rate. Overs that in the hands of a better ODI batsman would have resulted in a higher score.

Conclusion, for now

This is not the last word. The broad data seems to confirm my hypothesis, but I’m open to change my mind. I am going through every match Trott has played to see which ones fit my theory and which don’t. Especially if Trott helps England chase down 350 in the next match.

Source

• StatsGuru for Jonathan Trott