[Frankie]

I've no idea how that system works Baz but it's probably run by some Indian based statistician. So nothing makes sense mathematically plus India getting more points for winning a Test sounds about right.

[bazzap]

Well, the IPL circus starts tonight (Thai Time). The only show in town for the next two months. Totally innocuous to me. The same as all the other T20 leagues around the world. You can add the T10s and Hundred as well. Actually, I have never watched a game of the "Hundred" because it has no appeal to me.


The IPL tv coverage seems to be getting copied everywhere now. Screaming commentators (EVERYTHING is fantastic, tremendous, superb), 3 or 4 crowd shots after every ball, every ball is replayed etc etc. Does anybody give a fuck who wins or loses?


It is all show. Just "entertainment" like a circus. It is a play thing for the owners of the franchises and for the players, it is only about the money which is understandable.


No wonder why Daryl Mitchell is playing in it


This, after losing two Tests against Australia recently








That's up there with Harry Brook's "moral victories" and just about anything that comes out of Ben Duckett's mouth. "We can chase down anything" and then proceeds to lose by an innings and 64 runs.


Even Ben Stokes is still on the happy juice

From the BBC website after the recent series loss to India


" We're very disappointed, but write this team off, write me off at your own peril."

"The media use the name Bazball - everyone says 'What is it?'," said Stokes. "In my opinion it's wanting to be a better player. In the face of defeat and failure, Bazball will hopefully inspire people to become better players and become even better than what we are."


May I suggest that Stokes have a look at the current Test Championship ladder?


Yes, I am being selective with these quotes but they did say it.


Maybe Mitchell wants a "participation" medal like the kids get?


To most Australian cricket followers, they would probably find all this gibberish totally laughable. Especially to the older generations like me.


There is only one acceptable result from a game of cricket. No matter how you get there as long as it is within the rules.


Rant over







On another subject, I somehow missed this from last year


Australia is no longer alone in losing a Test after enforcing the follow-on








We welcome the Poms to a very select club

[bazzap]

Originally Posted by Frankie

I've no idea how that system works Baz but it's probably run by some Indian based statistician. So nothing makes sense mathematically plus India getting more points for winning a Test sounds about right.

I must have a bit of Indian in me somewhere coz I finally nutted it out.


You get 12 points for a win and 4 points for a "No Result" which everybody else calls a draw. Look at the 2nd graphic.


You do get deducted points for slow over-rates. There may be other ways to get points deducted but I don't know what they are.



This is the current table (Friday morning 25/3/24 Thai Time)






So look at India. Played 9 games so a possible maximum of 108 points. So 6 wins and 1 draw gives them 76 points minus a 2-point deduction for slow over rates in their loss in the 1st Test against South Africa

So 74 out of a possible 108 is 68.51%


Australia lost 10 points for a slow over-rate in the drawn Test at Manchester


England are the worst culprits as they lost points in 4 out of the 5 Ashes Tests for slow over-rates


It can be seen here







If Sri Lanka beat Bangladesh later today, England will be last on the table. However, if, and it is a big if, England win their next 6 Tests at home against the Windies and Sri Lanka this northern summer, they will improve to 48.43% (93 points out of a possible 192 points), good weather and no slow over-rate penalties permitting.


Just wondering if slow over rates are still a tactic in Test cricket? The West Indies always did it in the 70s & 80s before the rules were changed to a minimum amount of overs in a day's play. They got it down to 8-9 overs per hour. How can you score runs if you don't face enough balls?



Surely, in the "Spirit of Cricket", England would not stoop to these tactics?









Just a wind-up, lads