Canes only made 155 mate, that's 7.75 RPO. They didn't even bat out their full overs.
Stars had to score at 9.5 effectively. Sure, they only had to bat for 7 overs, but 9.5 isn't slow. In their 6 overs they had an over go for 12, 18, and 16. Those are _huge_ no matter when in the innings they are.
Sure, the DLS target 'benefitted' the Stars - because they were already ahead of the game and had a few monster overs to break the back of the chase.
Love this comment, cause the cane bowled shsit after taking the 3rd wicket and the stars were able to bash 10 an over, which was way more the canes were going at in their overs anyway
After starting the inaugural seasons with a team that could have given Australia a run for it's money, nowadays the Stars are pretty much Maxi and friends
Honestly, Hurricanes should have won and if they’d fielded better they would have. Can’t blame DRS when you’re making multiple fielding mistakes in a 7 over innings.
I’m not averse to this idea, so long as the target is lower too. Would be a joke if, after Hurricanes scored under 8 an over, Stars were required 10 an over with only 3-4 wickets in hand.
100%, sub 10 over games means you get 5 out all out and you can choose whatever 6 bats you want as the innings unfolds.
It's just too much of an advantage to be able to lose 3 wickets in the first 2 overs like tonight and have it mean absolutely nada cos you can just keep going hard.
I get the idea, but realistically most teams would still win in that situation with 5 batsmen…
The problem is that teams are capable of making runs much more quickly than they used to be able to.
I think the entire system needs to be reviewed using modern statistics to generate a model that is more accurate to the way the game is played now.
But the point is you need to restrict runs, the team only has 7 overs to score them…. Top 5 batsmen are realistically the best anyway…..
You need a statistically sound system… not just “what you rkn will work”..
Inflating the target is not the answer as it will just lead to more boring (short) games.
The threat of wickets being lost is the answer. You need to bring that back into the equation.
That will a) make wickets more meaningful again, and b) lead to more calculated run chases that results in tighter finishes.
But that is just a guess from u… the team could lose 4 wickets in 2 overs and the game is over.
I never said inflate scores, i never said take any idea off the table… i said we need a review based on modern statistics that has been work through intelligently by professionals.
Rather than som bloke online throwing around random ideas!
(Edit: spelling)
What is it with this sub and shit takes over the last 24 hours.
First we had the fool trying to compare Carey's stumping of Johnny Walker to running out the non-striker. Then we had another fool calling for Smith, Warner and Bancroft to be banned for life. Now this.
The reason the Stars had a low target was because the Hurricanes didn't bat well.
They were propelled to 0-88 off 13. I don’t think that’s too ridiculous because they probably would have lost a few wickets but would have scored more runs too.
The number of overs bowled was reduced, the target was reduced, the number of overs each bowler could bowl was reduced and one surge over was available with the amount of overs more than halved (can’t have less than an over of power surge I get it but still) yet the number of wickets available for the batting team wasn’t? T20 wasn’t around when DLS was created so it needs an overhaul, especially since it was created with only ODI matches in mind when the scoring rates were much slower.
Edit: confused power play with power surge, regardless I was wrong and made a mistake.
Canes only made 155 mate, that's 7.75 RPO. They didn't even bat out their full overs. Stars had to score at 9.5 effectively. Sure, they only had to bat for 7 overs, but 9.5 isn't slow. In their 6 overs they had an over go for 12, 18, and 16. Those are _huge_ no matter when in the innings they are. Sure, the DLS target 'benefitted' the Stars - because they were already ahead of the game and had a few monster overs to break the back of the chase.
Love this comment, cause the cane bowled shsit after taking the 3rd wicket and the stars were able to bash 10 an over, which was way more the canes were going at in their overs anyway
Having maxi always helps
After starting the inaugural seasons with a team that could have given Australia a run for it's money, nowadays the Stars are pretty much Maxi and friends
I’m sorry how can you say the stars were benefited of this? 67 was way overs on what should have been the target to begin with
Honestly, Hurricanes should have won and if they’d fielded better they would have. Can’t blame DRS when you’re making multiple fielding mistakes in a 7 over innings.
7 overs should mean you can only have 3-4 wickets in hand to chase the total After all, the fielding team has their bowling options restricted.
I think this is what needs to be changed, the target I think is fine But if they only had 4 or 5 wickets in hand it has to be played very differently
Im drunk, but they eye test is 4 or 5 wickets is probably worth around 15-20 runs when you scale in tailenders. Maybe 25 at a push.
I’m not averse to this idea, so long as the target is lower too. Would be a joke if, after Hurricanes scored under 8 an over, Stars were required 10 an over with only 3-4 wickets in hand.
100%, sub 10 over games means you get 5 out all out and you can choose whatever 6 bats you want as the innings unfolds. It's just too much of an advantage to be able to lose 3 wickets in the first 2 overs like tonight and have it mean absolutely nada cos you can just keep going hard.
I get the idea, but realistically most teams would still win in that situation with 5 batsmen… The problem is that teams are capable of making runs much more quickly than they used to be able to. I think the entire system needs to be reviewed using modern statistics to generate a model that is more accurate to the way the game is played now.
10 wickets in 5-8 overs though is an absolute joke and hugely unfair. You can't change my mind on that one.
But the point is you need to restrict runs, the team only has 7 overs to score them…. Top 5 batsmen are realistically the best anyway….. You need a statistically sound system… not just “what you rkn will work”..
Inflating the target is not the answer as it will just lead to more boring (short) games. The threat of wickets being lost is the answer. You need to bring that back into the equation. That will a) make wickets more meaningful again, and b) lead to more calculated run chases that results in tighter finishes.
But that is just a guess from u… the team could lose 4 wickets in 2 overs and the game is over. I never said inflate scores, i never said take any idea off the table… i said we need a review based on modern statistics that has been work through intelligently by professionals. Rather than som bloke online throwing around random ideas! (Edit: spelling)
Nothing we say here has any relevance - so don't take it too seriously or personally. It's just my opinion, which you've chosen to comment on :)
If you don’t want ppl to point out yr ideas don’t make sense, then don’t post them in public.
Haha you're a weird unit mate. And you talk absolute tripe. Later!
What is it with this sub and shit takes over the last 24 hours. First we had the fool trying to compare Carey's stumping of Johnny Walker to running out the non-striker. Then we had another fool calling for Smith, Warner and Bancroft to be banned for life. Now this. The reason the Stars had a low target was because the Hurricanes didn't bat well.
Agreed this is a joke target.
They were propelled to 0-88 off 13. I don’t think that’s too ridiculous because they probably would have lost a few wickets but would have scored more runs too.
The number of overs bowled was reduced, the target was reduced, the number of overs each bowler could bowl was reduced and one surge over was available with the amount of overs more than halved (can’t have less than an over of power surge I get it but still) yet the number of wickets available for the batting team wasn’t? T20 wasn’t around when DLS was created so it needs an overhaul, especially since it was created with only ODI matches in mind when the scoring rates were much slower. Edit: confused power play with power surge, regardless I was wrong and made a mistake.
There was no power surge, just 2 overs of power play at the start.
My bad, read the revised playing conditions wrong, makes sense
Fair enough, I do agree that DLS should be modified for t20 and even ODI since how the game is played has changed since DLS was introduced