Further thoughts on the WC so far and specifically as the influence of the toss and success rate of those batting second is concerned
The winner of the toss is indicated by ** and the winner of the game is in bold:
151-7 v 152-0** 171-4 v 172-5** 55-10 v 56-4** 118-9 v 121-5** 44-10 v 45-0** 125-8** v 126-2 122-10** v 123-2 181-7** v 97-10 171-7 v 101-10** 164-4 v 166-4** 153-10** v 127-9 165-9** v 148-10 96-10 v 100-3** 106-10 v 107-3** 140-9 v 134-7** 129-9 v 131-0**
From the results: (1) The winner of the match has been the side batting second in 11 of the 16 games including all of the 4 Super Sixes matches to date and all of the last 7 games. All of the 11 wins by those sides batting second were won by a minimum of 5 wickets and 7 of those sides won by 7 wickets or more
(2) Of the 11 sides that elected to bat second, only two lost - one was Ireland against Sri Lanka and the other was Bangladesh who lost by just 6 runs to Scotland
(3) Of the 5 sides that elected to bat first, 3 won - Bangladesh against Oman, Bangladesh against PNG and Scotland against PNG
(4) 12 of the 16 sides winning the toss also won the match
Historically, the Betfair Exchange has always shortened the odds for the winner of the toss and the Bookies have also reacted accordingly. The Sky experts have always discussed the toss and why a side might have elected to bat or field, I'm not sure, though, that they will want to major on the influence of the toss if the results continue as they have done. And they will probably be praying that they don't do so because who wants a World Cup decided on the toss of a coin?
A few other stats from today's India/Pakistan clash. Due to the massive divide between the two countries on an international level and the fact that they don't play in their respective franchises, prior to this game, India's batsmen had faced a total of 26 deliveries from bowlers in the Pakistan squad while Pakistan batsmen had faced a total of 150 balls from their Indian counterparts. This was also the first time that Jasprit Bumrah had ever bowled against Babar Azam in a T20.
One can only imagine, for example, how many thousands of balls, by comparison, the likes of Bairstow, Buttler, Roy. Morgan, Moeen Ali etc etc have been delivered in international T20s and the IPL by Indian bowlers.
Afghanistan win the toss and elect to bat. Interesting given the recent results but they are obviously confident that they can get enough runs on the board and defend that total with their world class spinners.
Scotland his a high of 4.5 and a low of 3.75 but currently sit at 3.90, a reflection of Afghanistan's decision to bat.
Most of his recent returns have been against the lesser cricketing nations but, even so, as with all of Mark Watt's efforts, he bowled superbly today especially taking into account Afghanistan's total of 190-4
I had a small interest in Afghanistan before the tournament began at 80 on Betfair simply because of the nature of these wickets and their bowling attack. You can still get 40 plus on them. Assuming they beat Namibia, they will still need to defeat two from India, Pakistan and NZ to make the semis but given that they will have won, following this game, 17 T20 internationals at this ground on the bounce, that isn't totally out of the question.
I'm annoyed Scotland are in the other side of the draw. We still owe them one
I'm not sure how they worked out the qualifying rules but our side of the draw seems to have more decent teams than the other. Like the football WC where the 3rd side in a group of 4 is a South American side like Mexico when other groups get a Middle East side like Sudai Arabia.
Combined figures for Mujeeb and Rashid: 6.2-0-29-9
If you can't read these two out of the hand then you have to try and play them off the pitch but they are too quick to do that. So the next option is the sweep and reverse sweep but on these pitches that is a very risky option
Bit of an imbalance in the groups. Potential banana skins from the qualifiers in Group A in the form of Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, especially on these pitches whereas the likes of Scotland (notwithstanding the fact that they did beat Bangladesh) and Namibia really should not offer the same sort of threat. "Should" being the operative word:
A Australia England South Africa West Indies Bangladesh Sri Lanka
B Afghanistan India New Zealand Pakistan Namibia Scotland
That's especially clear when you look at the net run rates of the 4 qualifying teams
Sri Lanka 3.754 Scotland 0.775 Namibia -0.523 Bangladesh 1.733
Scotland did brilliantly to beat Bangladesh and win the group, but 9 times out of 10 you'd expect them to lose that match
I'm annoyed Scotland are in the other side of the draw. We still owe them one
I'm not sure how they worked out the qualifying rules but our side of the draw seems to have more decent teams than the other. Like the football WC where the 3rd side in a group of 4 is a South American side like Mexico when other groups get a Middle East side like Sudai Arabia.
It's because Scotland managed to win their qualifying group. If Bangladesh had beaten them, as you would expect 9 times out of 10, we'd have had Scotland instead of Bangladesh
Comments
The winner of the toss is indicated by ** and the winner of the game is in bold:
151-7 v 152-0**
171-4 v 172-5**
55-10 v 56-4**
118-9 v 121-5**
44-10 v 45-0**
125-8** v 126-2
122-10** v 123-2
181-7** v 97-10
171-7 v 101-10**
164-4 v 166-4**
153-10** v 127-9
165-9** v 148-10
96-10 v 100-3**
106-10 v 107-3**
140-9 v 134-7**
129-9 v 131-0**
From the results:
(1) The winner of the match has been the side batting second in 11 of the 16 games including all of the 4 Super Sixes matches to date and all of the last 7 games. All of the 11 wins by those sides batting second were won by a minimum of 5 wickets and 7 of those sides won by 7 wickets or more
(2) Of the 11 sides that elected to bat second, only two lost - one was Ireland against Sri Lanka and the other was Bangladesh who lost by just 6 runs to Scotland
(3) Of the 5 sides that elected to bat first, 3 won - Bangladesh against Oman, Bangladesh against PNG and Scotland against PNG
(4) 12 of the 16 sides winning the toss also won the match
Historically, the Betfair Exchange has always shortened the odds for the winner of the toss and the Bookies have also reacted accordingly. The Sky experts have always discussed the toss and why a side might have elected to bat or field, I'm not sure, though, that they will want to major on the influence of the toss if the results continue as they have done. And they will probably be praying that they don't do so because who wants a World Cup decided on the toss of a coin?
One can only imagine, for example, how many thousands of balls, by comparison, the likes of Bairstow, Buttler, Roy. Morgan, Moeen Ali etc etc have been delivered in international T20s and the IPL by Indian bowlers.
Scotland his a high of 4.5 and a low of 3.75 but currently sit at 3.90, a reflection of Afghanistan's decision to bat.
Watt's figures have been:
4-0-23-1- (Afghanistan)
4-0-23-1 (Oman)
4-0-23-1 (PNG)
4-0-19-1 (Bangladesh)
4-0-34-2 (Namibia)
3.5-0-10-4 (Netherlands)
4-0-11-2 (Namibia)
Total: 27.5-0-143-12
Out LBW first ball
Look at the prices they have paid for the franchises
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/59043141
Sorry to all our Scottish fans.
😁😁😁
And I bet, Covid willing, Ahmedabad sells out every single one of their 132,000 seats!
Still we have something much better than that and is the envy of the hierarchy in India. It's called The Hundred.
If you can't read these two out of the hand then you have to try and play them off the pitch but they are too quick to do that. So the next option is the sweep and reverse sweep but on these pitches that is a very risky option