Strike Rates

Doesnt matter your score when you not paying attention to strike rate or leaving it to other batters

We can quote records all we want

If you make a big score in limited overs cricket you must have a high strike rate to give your team a chance of setting a challenging total. Run a ball totals are gettable everyday.

Bish and Nikhil was quoting growth mindset because strike rate went from 60something to 80something?

In reply to Halliwell

Hope was ridiculous today.

I did not watch his batting,
but someone in the chat said that he dad 58 out of 118 balls at one time.
That is ridiculously poor.

Hope with his experience should be doing a lot better by now.

Imaging scoring singles off half of those 58 balls or even 20 singles.

In reply to Halliwell

Yes, in modern ODI, a strike rate in a decent pitch is minimum 100 if you are anchoring the innings.

In reply to Emir

No 120 at least if you te anchoring because that means you bat deep into the last ten overs

In reply to Halliwell

But there are 2 “I” in WINDIES, but none in ENGLAND.

In reply to Halliwell

Absolutely...but you generalized the thread .....by not naming individual....to avoid..... backlash.....

Boycott was dropped from match in 80s.... after he scored big runs.....

Back in 2024.....any batsman scoring big runs at slow rate.... resulting in team losing.... should be reprimanded.....either he should amend or dropped...

This England side has regular 4-5 players.....rest totally newbies......

In reply to Onionman0

You right I didn’t call names

Because it obvious who made 40s+

Generalised because it applied day before yesterday and will still apply after tomorrow

Man cannot live by runs alone, but by every dot ball that comes forth and goes hence.

In reply to Halliwell

Brandon King 7 runs @ 70
Evin Lewis 4 runs @ 66
Keacy Carty 71 runs @ 92
Shai Hope 117 runs @ 92
Sherfane Rutherford 54 runs @ 150
Shimron Hetmyer 24 runs @ 218
Roston Chase 20 runs @ 90
Matthew Forde 23 runs @ 209

Visualize this. Hetmyer made 24 runs in 11 balls and then got out. If every bat did exactly that we would be all out after 110 balls and scored 240 runs (plus extras). For Rutherford the math is 54 x (300/36) = 450. For Shai Hope 117 x (300/127) = 276. Matthew Forde 627. Phil Salt 300. Will Jacks all out 120. Jacob Bethel 289.Sam Curran 300. Liam Livingstone 437.

None of the first 4 bats for ENG approach to the game was very different to Carty and Hope. WI were 12 for the loss of 2. ENG was 63 for the loss of 2.

The big difference between the two scorecards is Liam Livingstone batted out 84 balls @ 145 with all the other complimentary bats scoring better but not significantly so than Carty and Hope.



No because his SR went from less than 77 career to 100 in 2023. He has not had a good 2024.

Of the reasons we lost that match Hope's SR isn't #1, #2 or #3. England got a good platform for Livingstone while we got a poor one for Carty and Hope.

In reply to nick2020

Something missing/ hidden in the data....

No. of ball faced.....run scored...

Suppose a batter faced 15 balls scored 2 runs....
His strike rate is very poor but he wasted just 13 balls ...

Another player scored 60 runs from 100 balls...
His strike rate is 60....better than first player but assessment should be based on playing conditions.

Hope scored 117 runs from 127 balls...i.e. 21 overs approx.
Out of 300 legitimate deliveries....consumed 127 leaving...173 balls....i.e. 29 overs approx.for the team...

Team scored 211 runs in remaining 173 balls....i.e. 29 overs approx.

In modern cricket.....A century in batting condition... strike rate at least 110-120.... otherwise...no use..

Look at the England inning...all batters scored at about 100 strike rate... except Cox ..3 in 19 balls...wasted just 16....
And the centurian Livingston scored at 140...

Hope inning would have been appreciable in bowling conditions or had all batters were struggling abd and Hope was holding inning together....

On the contrary, Hope inning put pressure on other batters to go overboard.......

In reply to Onionman0

You on de ball bro.

Hope anchor dragged the boat down and sunk it.

In reply to Onionman0

Stupid forum ate my reply and I do not have the heart to put that out again.

Long story short 12-2 and Carty having the same SR I guess is in invisible ink.

Twist it and turn it all you want... visualize and do all kinda things... it won't change the fact that those two dudes s/r should have been higher.

The minimum score on that pitch should have been 350... the set batsman lacked intent and forced the new batsmen to go from one end alone just so he could get that ton, after all he was having a horrible year to date in ODIs.

After getting past 300 should it not be the fielding and bowling to blame for not defending 325 ? Even 365 looked gettable by England in the end, so how much would have been enough?

In reply to jacksparrow

They played an extra batsman.. they supposed to get at least 350 on that pitch. 325, was at best par on that pitch.

Conditions were really good for batting, our jokey bowling can't defend 325 in those conditions.

Exactly.

I get how things work around these parts and the hope/hype man gets the most cussing when he fails but what about the bowlers? The openers? Carty?

I am not happy about 117 @ 92 but I am less happy about some other aspects.

But with great hope comes great responsibility.

In reply to anthonyp



So what happened to all our other batsmen not named Sherfane?

Congrats to Rutherford as I did not get to post that in the last series. Really in fine form.

EEDIOTS WORSTINDIES AINT WINNING IT EVEN THEY MAKE 400. THEIR BOWLING WAS SHITE AS ALWAYS.

DEDING WID LAF.

In reply to Halliwell

The early wicket had quite a bit of moisture. Then we were struggling at 12 for two. The wicket dried out quite nicely and England had the best of it. If we had batted second I think we would have won easily

In reply to nick2020

Champ the two dudes that got set and faced majority of the balls failed to accelerate and up the run rate. That's how the top teams operate.

If we wanna be competitive that's how we have to operate.. Carty and Hope innings were poor. Yes, they scored runs but their s/rs should be at least 120.

In my opinion Hety got out at the wrong time too, he's also being wasted at #6. Management needs to move away from that mindset of treating him as a finisher. Give him more responsibility and let him try to build an innings. He could easily score at 120+ in the middle overs. Just look at the recent CPL as an example, he batted at #4 for the entire tournament and look at the results.

In reply to nick2020



I wonder what the score would have been had he scored at a run a ball coming in at the 40th over. I’m sure the message from the dressing room at that stage of the match was to up the tempo.
The real issue is rotating the strike. Obviously Carty and Hope shouldn’t be batting together at that stage of a match. Ideally Hetmyer should be batting between those two, followed by Rutherford.

In reply to anthonyp

HOW IS YOUR ENDORSED KEVLON ANDERSON DOIN AT LIST A?

DEDING WID LAF ANTHONYP EEDIOT, SHAMELESS EEDIOT ENDORSE HIS COUNTRY MEN EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE SHITE.

In reply to anthonyp

Yes, the batting line up needs to be considered. perhaps Hope, Hety, Carty, Rutherford, Chase? We need to get the full value from Hety and that means giving him a lot of balls to face while Ruthers is in good form so he can get into gear more quickly.

In reply to PalsofMine

All I know is that Hope needs to go back to the opener slot... #3 belongs to Pooran when he is available and #4 to Hety.

In reply to nick2020



Bro!!

As far as 12-2.....there can be no argument regarding consolidation.....Carty & Hope consolidated.....both score half century...
Carty 62...
Hope 66..
.
Hope next 50 required 52 balls...

Now compare Livingston... England lost 4 wickets early..needed consolidation....

Scored 50 runs in 60 balls...
Next 74 runs in 29 balls...

It's all about how a player accelerate..Hope failed to accelerate...reached his century in 46 overs...came in to bat in 4 th overs...

It's all about planning different phases of inning... according to match situation...

In reply to TanteMerle



This is not true. I watched the entire inning.