I thought that ball grounded on the replay tbh
ICC T20 World Cup 2024
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
England will make up the whole NRR deficit against these useless farmers.
Is bowling first the best way to up your NRR? Bowl them out cheap and chase quick, rather than score a monster score and bowl them out quick?
Hopefully we can wrap up our batting innings in 2 overs.
I’m pretty sure they can’t. Suppose they bowl Oman out in 1 over for nothing and chase it in a ball, the numerator and denominator both change by tiny amounts dwarfed by the stats of the previous game.
If you bat first, you add 20 overs of runs, and that can have an impact. It’s not in englands interest to bowl them out for a low score and chase it in a couple overs.
Not 100% sure on this but this was my understanding of nrr.
Edit: this may be partly incorrect because they will average out Oman’s score over 20 overs so one component wil go down.
Net Run Rate = (total runs scored / total overs faced) – (total runs conceded / total overs bowled). If you're bowled out you've played full quota of your overs.
Pure theoretically batting first is better. Because you could score 720 runs and bowl the opposition out for 0. Those sheer amount of runs are worth more than bowling opposition out for 0 and chasing it in 1 ball.
But in reality it depends on the situation. In England's case chasing works fine.
I don't see how that's correct. If a chasing team wins with many overs left, they surely have a huge +NRR. That's sort of the whole point.
If England bowled them out for 0 and chased it in 1 ball it would look like this:
Scotland's NRR is 2.1.
Realistically, Oman make 50 and England chase it in 5 overs:
Doesn't matter anyway as Scotland will beat Australia on the weekend.
Well 48 is what's needed. Reckon they do it in 4 overs.
England need to chase this in 5.2 overs to surpass the run rate.
Question to the NRR nerds. Do wickets in hand count towards NRR ?
For example, If England go 48-0 in 5 overs or if they go 48-2, does it make a difference in NRR ?
For example, If England go 48-0 in 5 overs or if they go 48-2, does it make a difference in NRR ?
Irrelevant. You're confusing it with DLS.
After Hazlewood's comments I don't think they can afford to lose it. The scrutiny will be too much.
Hahaha
I got slightly different.
Currently 3.964 behind Scotland.
Oman scored 47/13.2 (13.333) = 3.525
So England need to score at 3.525+3.964 = 7.489.
Assuming they scored 48 then it's 6.40 (or about 6 overs and 2 balls).
Not sure if I'm wrong. Also surely there could be scenarios where a chasing team could take a single to level the scores instead of an easy two to win, in order to have an extra delivery to hit a boundary. Or, if needing 4 to win, hitting a couple singles first before going for a boundary.
Oman scored 47/20. You don't get rewarded for being all out.
And if they don’t, their run rate will likely nose dive, unless Australia really do try and help them out.
Hopefully we level the scores then hit a 6 off the next ball.
I only went off what they mentioned on Cricinfo.
If that's how it works then it'd be more like 8 overs for England to surpass Scotlands NRR.
Jacks is absolute pony. Better players than him not getting picked.
He done ok in the IPL, scored a great 100 in one of the games I saw. Think he has potential but needs to be more consistent for England although they are just slogging here.
Nearly in 3 overs.
What were the comments?
Have that @Mr Pigeon and @RedSky . Git Tae fook
What is this thread?
If Australia lose their last match the whole WC will feel tainted now. Such unbelievably stupid comments to make. Good to know the old Aussies are back though.
Something similar happened in the Asia Cup. Afghans thought they had to chase 292 in 37.1 overs. They weren't aware they could also score 295 in 37.4 and still progress. So when they failed to chase it in 37.1, Rashid Khan was crying at the non-striker's end thinking the qualification was gone, while the no. 11 batter blocked out the remaining 3 balls wanting Rashid to take the strike in the following over. Lost the game in the process too
Have what? I'm sorry but I have absolutely zero interest in watching grown ups play a more boring version of the rounders we played in primary school when the PE teacher was hungover and didn't want us to do anything that required any real physical or mental effort.
My dad took me to a Scotland cricket match in Arbroath when I was a kid and we left after 15 minutes.
If this was a rounders thread i'd be far more interested. A much better game.
Ye wee jimmies ure noo downplaying it fur yer scared o' th' mighty englain.
bonus points for the languageSomething similar happened in the Asia Cup. Afghans thought they had to chase 292 in 37.1 overs. They weren't aware they could also score 295 in 37.4 and still progress. So when they failed to chase it in 37.1, Rashid Khan was crying at the non-striker's end thinking the qualification was gone, while the no. 11 batter blocked out the remaining 3 balls wanting Rashid to take the strike in the following over. Lost the game in the process too
That's awesome
That's pretty impressive, to be fair, but he looked like he was facing peak Curtly and Courtney in Antigua rather than what Oman had to offer.
Bairstow, Buttler, and Salt were virtually scoring a boundary a ball but he seemed to be having trouble.
Last edited:
Looks like South Africa gave Nepal a big cricketing lesson - choking 
Brutal.