03 Mar 2008 13:41:00
Crapats (TM)
Rating a batsman's innings

In another thread I rated Tendulkar's ton using three categories i.e.
Style, Domination and Control. I gave him marks out of 10 based on my
observations.

Style - How good a batsman looked while at the crease. It doesn't
matter if a batsman hit every ball to a fielder and got out for a duck
he could still techinquely get 10/10 here.

Domination: A player could score 0/10 for style because all he was
doing was blind eyed slogging but if he was getting 4s and 6s then he
could score highly in the Domination stakes.

Control: General demeanour of a batsman at the crease. Includes
running between wickets, judgement on shots, body language, pacing of
innings, mentoring junior partners etc.

What other categories can we add to this list?

I gave Tendulkar the following marks:

Style: 6
Domination: 5
Control: 9.5
Total: 20.5

In contrast McCrapum (TM) hit 170 off 100 odd balls in the State
Shield final. I'd give him the following marks:

Style: 9 (a couple of streaky shots in his 20+ boundaries)
Domination: 10 (a hundred off 52 balls says it all)
Control: 10 (he led Otago to a complete victory)

Total: 29/30


03 Mar 2008 13:44:15
Southpaw
Re: Rating a batsman's innings

On Mar 3, 1:41=A0pm, "Crapats (TM)" <crapats...@yahoo.com.au > wrote:
> In another thread I rated Tendulkar's ton using three categories i.e.
> Style, Domination and Control. I gave him marks out of 10 based on my
> observations.
>
> Style - How good a batsman looked while at the crease. It doesn't
> matter if a batsman hit every ball to a fielder and got out for a duck
> he could still techinquely get 10/10 here.
>
> Domination: A player could score 0/10 for style because all he was
> doing was blind eyed slogging but if he was getting 4s and 6s then he
> could score highly in the Domination stakes.
>
> Control: General demeanour of a batsman at the crease. Includes
> running between wickets, judgement on shots, body language, pacing of
> innings, mentoring junior partners etc.
>
> What other categories can we add to this list?
>
> I gave Tendulkar the following marks:
>
> Style: 6
> Domination: 5
> Control: 9.5
> Total: 20.5
>
> In contrast McCrapum (TM) hit 170 off 100 odd balls in the State
> Shield final. I'd give him the following marks:
>
> Style: 9 (a couple of streaky shots in his 20+ boundaries)
> Domination: 10 (a hundred off 52 balls says it all)
> Control: 10 (he led Otago to a complete victory)

Whereas Tendulkar only won 1 game of a best-of-3 finals. He would've
gotten a 10 if his innings had won the 2nd final on the night of the
1st one itself.

-Samarth.


03 Mar 2008 14:00:26
Brijesh
Re: Rating a batsman's innings

On Mar 3, 1:41=A0pm, "Crapats (TM)" <crapats...@yahoo.com.au > wrote:
> In another thread I rated Tendulkar's ton using three categories i.e.
> Style, Domination and Control. I gave him marks out of 10 based on my
> observations.
>
> Style - How good a batsman looked while at the crease. It doesn't
> matter if a batsman hit every ball to a fielder and got out for a duck
> he could still techinquely get 10/10 here.
>
> Domination: A player could score 0/10 for style because all he was
> doing was blind eyed slogging but if he was getting 4s and 6s then he
> could score highly in the Domination stakes.
>
> Control: General demeanour of a batsman at the crease. Includes
> running between wickets, judgement on shots, body language, pacing of
> innings, mentoring junior partners etc.
>
> What other categories can we add to this list?
>
> I gave Tendulkar the following marks:
>
> Style: 6
> Domination: 5
> Control: 9.5
> Total: 20.5
>
> In contrast McCrapum (TM) hit 170 off 100 odd balls in the State
> Shield final. I'd give him the following marks:
>
> Style: 9 (a couple of streaky shots in his 20+ boundaries)
> Domination: 10 (a hundred off 52 balls says it all)
> Control: 10 (he led Otago to a complete victory)
>
> Total: 29/30

I'd give him 8 on style, but agree with the other two.
Agree on the McCullum rating too



03 Mar 2008 14:05:19
Crapats (TM)
Re: Rating a batsman's innings

On Mar 4, 10:44=A0am, Southpaw <arbi...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Whereas Tendulkar only won 1 game of a best-of-3 finals. He would've
> gotten a 10 if his innings had won the 2nd final on the night of the
> 1st one itself.

I was thinking about a "pressure" rating but it is going to be highly
subjective. I realise the entire ratings system I've come up with is
subjective but I feel a "pressure" rating will be overly so. Let's
look at the Tendulkar and McCrapum (TM) examples again.

Tendulkar pressure points
Must win - No (India could still win the series even if they lost the
first game)
Individual to perform - Yes (Tendulkar's been copping some flak for
his lack of match winning efforts)
Target rating - No (240 is not a big total these days and the pitch
looked good)
Demanding RRQ when first at crease - No (RRQ was under 5 all along)
Wickets in hand - No (opened the batting)

McCrapum (TM) pressure points
Must Win - Yes (it was a final!)
Individual to perform - No (McCrapum's (TM) form has been very good to
date. He was allowed a failure)
Target to chase - Not sure (310 is a big total but the ground was
small and the pitch was very good)
Demanding RRQ when first at crease - Yes (over 6 from first ball)
Wickets in hand - No (opened the batting)

So it would appear that McCrapum (TM) would be under more pressure to
perform than Tendulkar but I honestly don't think he was! Big chases
are a double edged sword just like steep RRQ. You can go in with a
"nothing to lose" attitude and come up trumps. Due to the ebbs and
flows of a match "pressure" is difficult to quantify.


04 Mar 2008 11:30:11
Andrew Dunford
Re: Rating a batsman's innings


"Crapats (TM)" <crapats007@yahoo.com.au > wrote in message
news:122da8c9-2b39-4c89-86e4-2cda3a29d5b7@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> In another thread I rated Tendulkar's ton using three categories i.e.
> Style, Domination and Control. I gave him marks out of 10 based on my
> observations.
>
> Style - How good a batsman looked while at the crease. It doesn't
> matter if a batsman hit every ball to a fielder and got out for a duck
> he could still techinquely get 10/10 here.
>
> Domination: A player could score 0/10 for style because all he was
> doing was blind eyed slogging but if he was getting 4s and 6s then he
> could score highly in the Domination stakes.
>
> Control: General demeanour of a batsman at the crease. Includes
> running between wickets, judgement on shots, body language, pacing of
> innings, mentoring junior partners etc.
>
> What other categories can we add to this list?
>
> I gave Tendulkar the following marks:
>
> Style: 6
> Domination: 5
> Control: 9.5
> Total: 20.5
>
> In contrast McCrapum (TM) hit 170 off 100 odd balls in the State
> Shield final. I'd give him the following marks:
>
> Style: 9 (a couple of streaky shots in his 20+ boundaries)
> Domination: 10 (a hundred off 52 balls says it all)
> Control: 10 (he led Otago to a complete victory)
>
> Total: 29/30

My seven-year-old son scored 9* off four balls on Saturday. I'd give him a
7 for style (he looks rather fetching in the Collegians sleeveless jumper
his mother knitted for him), 8 for domination (there was one ball he didn't
score off, although it was about five yards wide and he did chase it hard)
and 9 for control (he didn't wet his pants). He didn't lead his team to a
complete victory but that's because he and his mates can barely lead each
other from one end of the pitch to the other.

The relevance? Your method contains about as much intellectual rigour as one
of my son's science 'projects'.

Andrew



03 Mar 2008 14:56:25
Crapats (TM)
Re: Rating a batsman's innings

On Mar 4, 11:30=A0am, "Andrew Dunford" <adunf...@artifax.net > wrote:
> My seven-year-old son scored 9* off four balls on Saturday. =A0I'd give hi=
m a
> 7 for style (he looks rather fetching in the Collegians sleeveless jumper
> his mother knitted for him), 8 for domination (there was one ball he didn'=
t
> score off, although it was about five yards wide and he did chase it hard)=

> and 9 for control (he didn't wet his pants). =A0He didn't lead his team to=
a
> complete victory but that's because he and his mates can barely lead each
> other from one end of the pitch to the other.
>
> The relevance? Your method contains about as much intellectual rigour as o=
ne
> of my son's science 'projects'.

As I've said the ratings are subjective, though thanks for your input
Dungford (TM). I didn't expect you to miss out on an opportunity to
belittle someone's opinions.

Oh, and congrats to Dungford Jr (TM).


04 Mar 2008 15:03:40
Rod
Re: Rating a batsman's innings

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 13:41:00 -0800 (PST), "Crapats (TM)"
<crapats007@yahoo.com.au > wrote:

>I gave Tendulkar the following marks:
>
>Style: 6
>Domination: 5
>Control: 9.5
>Total: 20.5

Opposition strength and contribution to victory would be two I would
consider important.

Cheers,
Rod.