I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the team
of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.

I vaguely remember South Africa losing a match for the same reason in
World Cup.

=================================================================

https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/how-afghanistan-crashed-out-of-asia-cup-due-to-calculation-error-8926820/

How Afghanistan crashed out of Asia Cup due to calculation error

In their match against Sri Lanka, they had failed to reach their target
of 292 in the stipulated 37.1 overs, but mathematically still had a
chance of going through

Afghanistan had a chance to qualify for the Asia Cup Super Four but
according to them, they weren’t aware of the exact calculations. In
their match against Sri Lanka on Wednesday, they had failed to reach
their target of 292 in the stipulated 37.1 overs, but mathematically
still had a chance of going through.

What happened

At the end of the 37th over, Afghanistan were 289-8. It meant they
needed three runs off one ball to win by bettering Sri Lanka’s net run
rate (NRR). Going for a big hit off Dhananjaya de Silva, Mujeeb Ur
Rahman was caught on the long-on boundary, following which the
non-striker Rashid Khan sank to his knees, presumably in the belief that
Afghanistan had lost their chance to qualify. However, they were still
not out of the competition.

The permutations

Afghanistan would have finished above Sri Lanka on net run rate had they
got to 293 after 37.2 overs, 294 after 37.3, 295 after 37.5, 296 after
38 overs, or 297 after 38.1. They could have achieved these targets if
their No. 11 Fazalhaq Farooqi had hit a four off the second ball of the
38th over; a six off the third, fourth or fifth ball; or taken a single
to allow Rashid – who was batting on 27 off 16 balls – to try and finish
the game himself.

As it turned out, Farooqi blocked two balls from de Silva – including a
full-toss – before he was out lbw while trying to defend again. He
seemed as though he was trying to keep his wicket in hope that Rashid
could finish the game in the next over. It didn’t work out, and
Afghanistan went out of the tournament with defeats in both their Group
B games.

While teams rely on match officials to a certain extent for information,
NRR calculations are fairly straightforward, and are usually the
preserve of the analysts who are part of most high-profile teams’
backroom contingents.

Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
unaware of the calculations.

“We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we were
communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t told what
the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could win in) 38.1
overs was never communicated to us.”

On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
<FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com> wrote:

>
>
>I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the team
>of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.

No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
charge. Each team will / should have an officially trained scorer who
will / should make sure the captain is up to speed with the
requirements.
Umpires are not even supposed to bring the DLS print-out on to the
field with them.

max.it

>
>I vaguely remember South Africa losing a match for the same reason in
>World Cup.
>
>=================================================================
>
>https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/how-afghanistan-crashed-out-of-asia-cup-due-to-calculation-error-8926820/
>
>How Afghanistan crashed out of Asia Cup due to calculation error
>
>In their match against Sri Lanka, they had failed to reach their target
>of 292 in the stipulated 37.1 overs, but mathematically still had a
>chance of going through
>
>Afghanistan had a chance to qualify for the Asia Cup Super Four but
>according to them, they weren’t aware of the exact calculations. In
>their match against Sri Lanka on Wednesday, they had failed to reach
>their target of 292 in the stipulated 37.1 overs, but mathematically
>still had a chance of going through.
>
>What happened
>
>At the end of the 37th over, Afghanistan were 289-8. It meant they
>needed three runs off one ball to win by bettering Sri Lanka’s net run
>rate (NRR). Going for a big hit off Dhananjaya de Silva, Mujeeb Ur
>Rahman was caught on the long-on boundary, following which the
>non-striker Rashid Khan sank to his knees, presumably in the belief that
>Afghanistan had lost their chance to qualify. However, they were still
>not out of the competition.
>
>The permutations
>
>Afghanistan would have finished above Sri Lanka on net run rate had they
>got to 293 after 37.2 overs, 294 after 37.3, 295 after 37.5, 296 after
>38 overs, or 297 after 38.1. They could have achieved these targets if
>their No. 11 Fazalhaq Farooqi had hit a four off the second ball of the
>38th over; a six off the third, fourth or fifth ball; or taken a single
>to allow Rashid – who was batting on 27 off 16 balls – to try and finish
>the game himself.
>
>As it turned out, Farooqi blocked two balls from de Silva – including a
>full-toss – before he was out lbw while trying to defend again. He
>seemed as though he was trying to keep his wicket in hope that Rashid
>could finish the game in the next over. It didn’t work out, and
>Afghanistan went out of the tournament with defeats in both their Group
>B games.
>
>While teams rely on match officials to a certain extent for information,
>NRR calculations are fairly straightforward, and are usually the
>preserve of the analysts who are part of most high-profile teams’
>backroom contingents.
>
>Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
>unaware of the calculations.
>
>“We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we were
>communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t told what
>the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could win in) 38.1
>overs was never communicated to us.”
>

On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> <FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the team
>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>
> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
> charge.

Currently as the law stands, you are right.

But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to Umpires
and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a KNOWLEDGEABLE
back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?

Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are NOT rich
enough to hire them.

To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and then
communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?

> Each team will / should have an officially trained scorer who
> will / should make sure the captain is up to speed with the
> requirements.
> Umpires are not even supposed to bring the DLS print-out on to the
> field with them.
>
> max.it
>
>
>>
>> I vaguely remember South Africa losing a match for the same reason in
>> World Cup.
>>
>> =================================================================
>>
>> https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/how-afghanistan-crashed-out-of-asia-cup-due-to-calculation-error-8926820/
>>
>> How Afghanistan crashed out of Asia Cup due to calculation error
>>
>> In their match against Sri Lanka, they had failed to reach their target
>> of 292 in the stipulated 37.1 overs, but mathematically still had a
>> chance of going through
>>
>> Afghanistan had a chance to qualify for the Asia Cup Super Four but
>> according to them, they weren’t aware of the exact calculations. In
>> their match against Sri Lanka on Wednesday, they had failed to reach
>> their target of 292 in the stipulated 37.1 overs, but mathematically
>> still had a chance of going through.
>>
>> What happened
>>
>> At the end of the 37th over, Afghanistan were 289-8. It meant they
>> needed three runs off one ball to win by bettering Sri Lanka’s net run
>> rate (NRR). Going for a big hit off Dhananjaya de Silva, Mujeeb Ur
>> Rahman was caught on the long-on boundary, following which the
>> non-striker Rashid Khan sank to his knees, presumably in the belief that
>> Afghanistan had lost their chance to qualify. However, they were still
>> not out of the competition.
>>
>> The permutations
>>
>> Afghanistan would have finished above Sri Lanka on net run rate had they
>> got to 293 after 37.2 overs, 294 after 37.3, 295 after 37.5, 296 after
>> 38 overs, or 297 after 38.1. They could have achieved these targets if
>> their No. 11 Fazalhaq Farooqi had hit a four off the second ball of the
>> 38th over; a six off the third, fourth or fifth ball; or taken a single
>> to allow Rashid – who was batting on 27 off 16 balls – to try and finish
>> the game himself.
>>
>> As it turned out, Farooqi blocked two balls from de Silva – including a
>> full-toss – before he was out lbw while trying to defend again. He
>> seemed as though he was trying to keep his wicket in hope that Rashid
>> could finish the game in the next over. It didn’t work out, and
>> Afghanistan went out of the tournament with defeats in both their Group
>> B games.
>>
>> While teams rely on match officials to a certain extent for information,
>> NRR calculations are fairly straightforward, and are usually the
>> preserve of the analysts who are part of most high-profile teams’
>> backroom contingents.
>>
>> Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
>> unaware of the calculations.
>>
>> “We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we were
>> communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t told what
>> the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could win in) 38.1
>> overs was never communicated to us.”
>>

On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 01:39:31 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
<FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com> wrote:

>On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>> <FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer@america.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the team
>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>>
>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
>> charge.
>
>
>Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>
>But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to Umpires
>and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a KNOWLEDGEABLE
>back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?
>
>Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are NOT rich
>enough to hire them.
>
>To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
>every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and then
>communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>

It is very complicated. I've seen league secretaries make mistakes in
fractions of runs that resulted in appeals and hearings. That would be
for the result of a league.
Scorers are required by law but their role is pretty limited to
recording runs wickets and overs and checking that the both books
match up, everything else is optional.
I would expect the NRR and DLS and IT staff to operate it would be
provided by the grounds authority (home team) and supplied or
sponsored by the governing body of the competition (ICC) and work very
closely with the scorers.

max.it

>
>
>> Each team will / should have an officially trained scorer who
>> will / should make sure the captain is up to speed with the
>> requirements.
>> Umpires are not even supposed to bring the DLS print-out on to the
>> field with them.
>>
>> max.it
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I vaguely remember South Africa losing a match for the same reason in
>>> World Cup.
>>>
>>> =================================================================
>>>
>>> https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/how-afghanistan-crashed-out-of-asia-cup-due-to-calculation-error-8926820/
>>>
>>> How Afghanistan crashed out of Asia Cup due to calculation error
>>>
>>> In their match against Sri Lanka, they had failed to reach their target
>>> of 292 in the stipulated 37.1 overs, but mathematically still had a
>>> chance of going through
>>>
>>> Afghanistan had a chance to qualify for the Asia Cup Super Four but
>>> according to them, they weren’t aware of the exact calculations. In
>>> their match against Sri Lanka on Wednesday, they had failed to reach
>>> their target of 292 in the stipulated 37.1 overs, but mathematically
>>> still had a chance of going through.
>>>
>>> What happened
>>>
>>> At the end of the 37th over, Afghanistan were 289-8. It meant they
>>> needed three runs off one ball to win by bettering Sri Lanka’s net run
>>> rate (NRR). Going for a big hit off Dhananjaya de Silva, Mujeeb Ur
>>> Rahman was caught on the long-on boundary, following which the
>>> non-striker Rashid Khan sank to his knees, presumably in the belief that
>>> Afghanistan had lost their chance to qualify. However, they were still
>>> not out of the competition.
>>>
>>> The permutations
>>>
>>> Afghanistan would have finished above Sri Lanka on net run rate had they
>>> got to 293 after 37.2 overs, 294 after 37.3, 295 after 37.5, 296 after
>>> 38 overs, or 297 after 38.1. They could have achieved these targets if
>>> their No. 11 Fazalhaq Farooqi had hit a four off the second ball of the
>>> 38th over; a six off the third, fourth or fifth ball; or taken a single
>>> to allow Rashid – who was batting on 27 off 16 balls – to try and finish
>>> the game himself.
>>>
>>> As it turned out, Farooqi blocked two balls from de Silva – including a
>>> full-toss – before he was out lbw while trying to defend again. He
>>> seemed as though he was trying to keep his wicket in hope that Rashid
>>> could finish the game in the next over. It didn’t work out, and
>>> Afghanistan went out of the tournament with defeats in both their Group
>>> B games.
>>>
>>> While teams rely on match officials to a certain extent for information,
>>> NRR calculations are fairly straightforward, and are usually the
>>> preserve of the analysts who are part of most high-profile teams’
>>> backroom contingents.
>>>
>>> Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
>>> unaware of the calculations.
>>>
>>> “We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we were
>>> communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t told what
>>> the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could win in) 38.1
>>> overs was never communicated to us.”
>>>

On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> > <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the team
> >> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
> >
> > No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
> > to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
> > charge.
> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>
> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to Umpires
> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a KNOWLEDGEABLE
> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?
>
> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are NOT rich
> enough to hire them.
>
> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and then
> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?

The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in 37.1 overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct) remained the same throughout the innings. The only reason why there are six different targets is because when the team batting second wins, we don't know exactly how many runs they will score, as they can exceed their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6 runs.

If they had batted first, there would only have been one target - they would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which would not have changed from the start of the match unless overs were lost.

The calculations are not really all that complicated.

> > Each team will / should have an officially trained scorer who
> > will / should make sure the captain is up to speed with the
> > requirements.
> > Umpires are not even supposed to bring the DLS print-out on to the
> > field with them.
> >
> > max.it
> >
> >
> >>
> >> I vaguely remember South Africa losing a match for the same reason in
> >> World Cup.

Assuming that it's same match I think you are referring to, that was to do with DL, not NRR, and they were given the DL sheet, but failed to read it correctly, and were (IIRC) one run short when rain stopped play, so not the same at all. AIUI, these days the DL par score is usually shown on the scoreboard, in which case the players know at all times whether the batting side is ahead or behind, and by how much.

On 9/8/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
> On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>>> <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the team
>>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>>>
>>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
>>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
>>> charge.
>> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>>
>> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to Umpires
>> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a KNOWLEDGEABLE
>> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?
>>
>> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are NOT rich
>> enough to hire them.
>>
>> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
>> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and then
>> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>
> The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in 37.1 overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
> 38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct) remained the same throughout the innings. The only reason why there are six different targets is because when the team batting second wins, we don't know exactly how many runs they will score, as they can exceed their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6 runs.
>
> If they had batted first, there would only have been one target - they would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which would not have changed from the start of the match unless overs were lost.
>
> The calculations are not really all that complicated.

Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
unaware of the calculations.

>
>>> Each team will / should have an officially trained scorer who
>>> will / should make sure the captain is up to speed with the
>>> requirements.
>>> Umpires are not even supposed to bring the DLS print-out on to the
>>> field with them.
>>>
>>> max.it
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I vaguely remember South Africa losing a match for the same reason in
>>>> World Cup.
>
> Assuming that it's same match I think you are referring to, that was to do with DL, not NRR, and they were given the DL sheet, but failed to read it correctly, and were (IIRC) one run short when rain stopped play, so not the same at all. AIUI, these days the DL par score is usually shown on the scoreboard, in which case the players know at all times whether the batting side is ahead or behind, and by how much.

On 9/8/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
> On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>>> <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the team
>>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>>>
>>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
>>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
>>> charge.
>> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>>
>> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to Umpires
>> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a KNOWLEDGEABLE
>> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?
>>
>> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are NOT rich
>> enough to hire them.
>>
>> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
>> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and then
>> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>
> The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in 37.1 overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
> 38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct) remained the same throughout the innings. The only reason why there are six different targets is because when the team batting second wins, we don't know exactly how many runs they will score, as they can exceed their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6 runs.
>
> If they had batted first, there would only have been one target - they would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which would not have changed from the start of the match unless overs were lost.
>
> The calculations are not really all that complicated.
>

Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
unaware of the calculations.

“We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we were
communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t told what
the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could win in) 38.1
overs was never communicated to us.”

>>> Each team will / should have an officially trained scorer who
>>> will / should make sure the captain is up to speed with the
>>> requirements.
>>> Umpires are not even supposed to bring the DLS print-out on to the
>>> field with them.
>>>
>>> max.it
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I vaguely remember South Africa losing a match for the same reason in
>>>> World Cup.
>
> Assuming that it's same match I think you are referring to, that was to do with DL, not NRR, and they were given the DL sheet, but failed to read it correctly, and were (IIRC) one run short when rain stopped play, so not the same at all. AIUI, these days the DL par score is usually shown on the scoreboard, in which case the players know at all times whether the batting side is ahead or behind, and by how much.

On 08/09/2023 16:13, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 9/8/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
>> On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1,
>> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>>>> <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the
>>>>> team
>>>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>>>>
>>>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
>>>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
>>>> charge.
>>> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>>>
>>> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to Umpires
>>> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a KNOWLEDGEABLE
>>> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?
>>>
>>> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are NOT rich
>>> enough to hire them.
>>>
>>> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
>>> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and then
>>> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>>
>> The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the
>> innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in 37.1
>> overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
>> 38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct) remained the
>> same throughout the innings. The only reason why there are six
>> different targets is because when the team batting second wins, we
>> don't know exactly how many runs they will score, as they can exceed
>> their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6 runs.
>>
>> If they had batted first, there would only have been one target - they
>> would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which would not
>> have changed from the start of the match unless overs were lost.
>>
>> The calculations are not really all that complicated.
>
> Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
> unaware of the calculations.
>
> “We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we were
> communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t told what
> the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could win in) 38.1
> overs was never communicated to us.”

They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they have
someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and spreadsheets
are allowed.

You add up the runs you have scored in all of your matches in the group,
and add up the overs available, or the overs faced in matches where you
won batting second. Then you divide the total runs by the total overs,
which gives you your run rate.

Do the same for the runs and overs in your opponents' innings and
subtract the result from your run rate to give your net run rate.

Obviously if they had scored 297, they would have scored 5 more runs in
total than if they had scored 292, so they could have afforded more
overs to divide by to arrive at the same run rate.

By the way, both Afghanistan and Sri Lanka had an advantage over
Bangladesh, the other team in the group, who played their second and
final group match two days earlier, so had no way of knowing what they
needed to do to get through on net run rate if Afghanistan beat Sri Lanka.

--
David North

On 10/09/2023 06:31, David North wrote:
> They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they
> have someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and
> spreadsheets are allowed.

Calculators and spreadsheets may be slightly unusual parts of
a cricketer's equipment, but I'd say it's a fair bet that at least one
of the team, inc management, has a mobile 'phone with a calculator app!

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Jessel

In message <udjrp9$g981$1@dont-email.me>, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
writes
>On 10/09/2023 06:31, David North wrote:
>> They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they
>> have someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and
>> spreadsheets are allowed.
>
> Calculators and spreadsheets may be slightly unusual parts of
>a cricketer's equipment, but I'd say it's a fair bet that at least one
>of the team, inc management, has a mobile 'phone with a calculator app!
>

But are they allowed to use them? I thought that they were banned from
bringing their phones to the ground, for fear that they might
communicate with match-fixers.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On 9/9/2023 10:31 PM, David North wrote:
> On 08/09/2023 16:13, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> On 9/8/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
>>> On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1,
>>> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>>>>> <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM the
>>>>>> team
>>>>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>>>>>
>>>>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
>>>>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
>>>>> charge.
>>>> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>>>>
>>>> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to Umpires
>>>> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a KNOWLEDGEABLE
>>>> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?
>>>>
>>>> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are NOT
>>>> rich
>>>> enough to hire them.
>>>>
>>>> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
>>>> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and then
>>>> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>>>
>>> The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the
>>> innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in
>>> 37.1 overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
>>> 38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct) remained
>>> the same throughout the innings. The only reason why there are six
>>> different targets is because when the team batting second wins, we
>>> don't know exactly how many runs they will score, as they can exceed
>>> their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6 runs.
>>>
>>> If they had batted first, there would only have been one target -
>>> they would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which
>>> would not have changed from the start of the match unless overs were
>>> lost.
>>>
>>> The calculations are not really all that complicated.
>>
>> Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
>> unaware of the calculations.
>>
>> “We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we were
>> communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t told what
>> the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could win in)
>> 38.1 overs was never communicated to us.”
>
> They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they have
> someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and spreadsheets
> are allowed.
>
> You add up the runs you have scored in all of your matches in the group,
> and add up the overs available, or the overs faced in matches where you
> won batting second. Then you divide the total runs by the total overs,
> which gives you your run rate.
>
> Do the same for the runs and overs in your opponents' innings and
> subtract the result from your run rate to give your net run rate.
>
> Obviously if they had scored 297, they would have scored 5 more runs in
> total than if they had scored 292, so they could have afforded more
> overs to divide by to arrive at the same run rate.
>
> By the way, both Afghanistan and Sri Lanka had an advantage over
> Bangladesh, the other team in the group, who played their second and
> final group match two days earlier, so had no way of knowing what they
> needed to do to get through on net run rate if Afghanistan beat Sri Lanka.
>

That's all fine and dandy but what I said is that Match officials SHOULD
ALSO also have the RESPONSIBILITY to inform the teams of the
requirements to WIN in rain affected DLS and NRR deciding matches.

Obviously Coach Jonathan Trott played cricket for a long time for
England and hence should have been on top of the situation and HELPED
Afghanistan batsmen to understand the WIN requirements.

Like I said before, a few teams CANNOT AFFORD to hire back room ANALYSTS.

>>>>> Afghanistan would have finished above Sri Lanka on net run rate
had they got to 293 after 37.2 overs, 294 after 37.3, 295 after 37.5,
296 after 38 overs, or 297 after 38.1. They could have achieved these
targets if their No. 11 Fazalhaq Farooqi had hit a four off the second
ball of the 38th over; a six off the third, fourth or fifth ball; or
taken a single to allow Rashid – who was batting on 27 off 16 balls – to
try and finish the game himself.

As it turned out, Farooqi blocked two balls from de Silva – including a
full-toss – before he was out lbw while trying to defend again. He
seemed as though he was trying to keep his wicket in hope that Rashid
could finish the game in the next over. It didn’t work out, and
Afghanistan went out of the tournament with defeats in both their Group
B games.

While teams rely on match officials to a certain extent for information,
NRR calculations are fairly straightforward, and are usually the
preserve of the analysts who are part of most high-profile teams’
backroom contingents. <<<<

On 10/09/2023 10:09, John Hall wrote:
> In message <udjrp9$g981$1@dont-email.me>, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
> writes
>> On 10/09/2023 06:31, David North wrote:
>>> They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they
>>> have someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and
>>> spreadsheets are allowed.
>>
>>       Calculators and spreadsheets may be slightly unusual parts of
>> a cricketer's equipment, but I'd say it's a fair bet that at least one
>> of the team, inc management, has a mobile 'phone with a calculator app!
>>
>
> But are they allowed to use them? I thought that they were banned from
> bringing their phones to the ground, for fear that they might
> communicate with match-fixers.

The NRR calculations could have been done as soon as the previous match
finished two days earlier. I think the target overs batting second would
have varied a bit depending on how many Sri Lanka made batting first, so
it might have been necessary to produce a sheet of targets if doing it
before the match.

--
David North

On 10/09/2023 11:34, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 9/9/2023 10:31 PM, David North wrote:
>> On 08/09/2023 16:13, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>> On 9/8/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
>>>> On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1,
>>>> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>>> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>>>>>> <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM
>>>>>>> the team
>>>>>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the wicket
>>>>>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
>>>>>> charge.
>>>>> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>>>>>
>>>>> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to
>>>>> Umpires
>>>>> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a
>>>>> KNOWLEDGEABLE
>>>>> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?
>>>>>
>>>>> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are NOT
>>>>> rich
>>>>> enough to hire them.
>>>>>
>>>>> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
>>>>> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and
>>>>> then
>>>>> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>>>>
>>>> The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the
>>>> innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in
>>>> 37.1 overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
>>>> 38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct) remained
>>>> the same throughout the innings. The only reason why there are six
>>>> different targets is because when the team batting second wins, we
>>>> don't know exactly how many runs they will score, as they can exceed
>>>> their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6 runs.
>>>>
>>>> If they had batted first, there would only have been one target -
>>>> they would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which
>>>> would not have changed from the start of the match unless overs were
>>>> lost.
>>>>
>>>> The calculations are not really all that complicated.
>>>
>>> Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team was
>>> unaware of the calculations.
>>>
>>> “We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we
>>> were communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t told
>>> what the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could win
>>> in) 38.1 overs was never communicated to us.”
>>
>> They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they have
>> someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and spreadsheets
>> are allowed.
>>
>> You add up the runs you have scored in all of your matches in the
>> group, and add up the overs available, or the overs faced in matches
>> where you won batting second. Then you divide the total runs by the
>> total overs, which gives you your run rate.
>>
>> Do the same for the runs and overs in your opponents' innings and
>> subtract the result from your run rate to give your net run rate.
>>
>> Obviously if they had scored 297, they would have scored 5 more runs
>> in total than if they had scored 292, so they could have afforded more
>> overs to divide by to arrive at the same run rate.
>>
>> By the way, both Afghanistan and Sri Lanka had an advantage over
>> Bangladesh, the other team in the group, who played their second and
>> final group match two days earlier, so had no way of knowing what they
>> needed to do to get through on net run rate if Afghanistan beat Sri
>> Lanka.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> That's all fine and dandy but what I said is that Match officials SHOULD
> ALSO also have the RESPONSIBILITY to inform the teams of the
> requirements to WIN in rain affected DLS and NRR deciding matches.

In the case of DLS, the teams are told the new target after every
reduction in overs from the end of the first innings, and AIUI, the par
score is usually on the scoreboard throughout the second innings. I
don't know whether they are given any further information, or what
further information you would want them to be given. The match officials
don't know if and when there are going to be any further interruptions
anhy more than the players do.

> Obviously Coach Jonathan Trott played cricket for a long time for
> England and hence should have been on top of the situation and HELPED
> Afghanistan batsmen to understand the WIN requirements.
>
> Like I said before, a few teams CANNOT AFFORD to hire back room ANALYSTS.

I don't know why you think they would need to hire anyone extra just to
do some fairly straightforward arithmetic. Are all of the people they
already have innumerate?

--
David North

On 9/12/2023 12:15 AM, David North wrote:
> On 10/09/2023 11:34, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> On 9/9/2023 10:31 PM, David North wrote:
>>> On 08/09/2023 16:13, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>> On 9/8/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1,
>>>>> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>>>>>>> <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM
>>>>>>>> the team
>>>>>>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the
>>>>>>> wicket
>>>>>>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he is in
>>>>>>> charge.
>>>>>> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to
>>>>>> Umpires
>>>>>> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a
>>>>>> KNOWLEDGEABLE
>>>>>> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated calculations?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are
>>>>>> NOT rich
>>>>>> enough to hire them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
>>>>>> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand and
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>>>>>
>>>>> The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the
>>>>> innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in
>>>>> 37.1 overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
>>>>> 38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct) remained
>>>>> the same throughout the innings. The only reason why there are six
>>>>> different targets is because when the team batting second wins, we
>>>>> don't know exactly how many runs they will score, as they can
>>>>> exceed their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6 runs.
>>>>>
>>>>> If they had batted first, there would only have been one target -
>>>>> they would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which
>>>>> would not have changed from the start of the match unless overs
>>>>> were lost.
>>>>>
>>>>> The calculations are not really all that complicated.
>>>>
>>>> Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team
>>>> was unaware of the calculations.
>>>>
>>>> “We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we
>>>> were communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t
>>>> told what the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we could
>>>> win in) 38.1 overs was never communicated to us.”
>>>
>>> They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they have
>>> someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and
>>> spreadsheets are allowed.
>>>
>>> You add up the runs you have scored in all of your matches in the
>>> group, and add up the overs available, or the overs faced in matches
>>> where you won batting second. Then you divide the total runs by the
>>> total overs, which gives you your run rate.
>>>
>>> Do the same for the runs and overs in your opponents' innings and
>>> subtract the result from your run rate to give your net run rate.
>>>
>>> Obviously if they had scored 297, they would have scored 5 more runs
>>> in total than if they had scored 292, so they could have afforded
>>> more overs to divide by to arrive at the same run rate.
>>>
>>> By the way, both Afghanistan and Sri Lanka had an advantage over
>>> Bangladesh, the other team in the group, who played their second and
>>> final group match two days earlier, so had no way of knowing what
>>> they needed to do to get through on net run rate if Afghanistan beat
>>> Sri Lanka.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That's all fine and dandy but what I said is that Match officials
>> SHOULD ALSO also have the RESPONSIBILITY to inform the teams of the
>> requirements to WIN in rain affected DLS and NRR deciding matches.
>
> In the case of DLS, the teams are told the new target after every
> reduction in overs from the end of the first innings, and AIUI, the par
> score is usually on the scoreboard throughout the second innings. I
> don't know whether they are given any further information, or what
> further information you would want them to be given. The match officials
> don't know if and when there are going to be any further interruptions
> anhy more than the players do.
>
>
>> Obviously Coach Jonathan Trott played cricket for a long time for
>> England and hence should have been on top of the situation and HELPED
>> Afghanistan batsmen to understand the WIN requirements.
>>
>> Like I said before, a few teams CANNOT AFFORD to hire back room ANALYSTS.
>
> I don't know why you think they would need to hire anyone extra just to
> do some fairly straightforward arithmetic. Are all of the people they
> already have innumerate?
>

Then WHY did Afghanistan coach "Jonathan Trott" COMPLAIN that they were
NOT properly informed about the NRR requirements TO WIN the match.

On 12/09/2023 09:08, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 9/12/2023 12:15 AM, David North wrote:
>> On 10/09/2023 11:34, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>> On 9/9/2023 10:31 PM, David North wrote:
>>>> On 08/09/2023 16:13, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>>> On 9/8/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1,
>>>>>> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>>>>>>>> <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM
>>>>>>>>> the team
>>>>>>>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room ANALYSTS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the
>>>>>>>> wicket
>>>>>>>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he
>>>>>>>> is in
>>>>>>>> charge.
>>>>>>> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to
>>>>>>> Umpires
>>>>>>> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a
>>>>>>> KNOWLEDGEABLE
>>>>>>> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated
>>>>>>> calculations?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are
>>>>>>> NOT rich
>>>>>>> enough to hire them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements changing
>>>>>>> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand
>>>>>>> and then
>>>>>>> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the
>>>>>> innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in
>>>>>> 37.1 overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
>>>>>> 38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct) remained
>>>>>> the same throughout the innings. The only reason why there are six
>>>>>> different targets is because when the team batting second wins, we
>>>>>> don't know exactly how many runs they will score, as they can
>>>>>> exceed their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6 runs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If they had batted first, there would only have been one target -
>>>>>> they would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which
>>>>>> would not have changed from the start of the match unless overs
>>>>>> were lost.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The calculations are not really all that complicated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team
>>>>> was unaware of the calculations.
>>>>>
>>>>> “We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we
>>>>> were communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t
>>>>> told what the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we
>>>>> could win in) 38.1 overs was never communicated to us.”
>>>>
>>>> They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they
>>>> have someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and
>>>> spreadsheets are allowed.
>>>>
>>>> You add up the runs you have scored in all of your matches in the
>>>> group, and add up the overs available, or the overs faced in matches
>>>> where you won batting second. Then you divide the total runs by the
>>>> total overs, which gives you your run rate.
>>>>
>>>> Do the same for the runs and overs in your opponents' innings and
>>>> subtract the result from your run rate to give your net run rate.
>>>>
>>>> Obviously if they had scored 297, they would have scored 5 more runs
>>>> in total than if they had scored 292, so they could have afforded
>>>> more overs to divide by to arrive at the same run rate.
>>>>
>>>> By the way, both Afghanistan and Sri Lanka had an advantage over
>>>> Bangladesh, the other team in the group, who played their second and
>>>> final group match two days earlier, so had no way of knowing what
>>>> they needed to do to get through on net run rate if Afghanistan beat
>>>> Sri Lanka.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That's all fine and dandy but what I said is that Match officials
>>> SHOULD ALSO also have the RESPONSIBILITY to inform the teams of the
>>> requirements to WIN in rain affected DLS and NRR deciding matches.
>>
>> In the case of DLS, the teams are told the new target after every
>> reduction in overs from the end of the first innings, and AIUI, the
>> par score is usually on the scoreboard throughout the second innings.
>> I don't know whether they are given any further information, or what
>> further information you would want them to be given. The match
>> officials don't know if and when there are going to be any further
>> interruptions anhy more than the players do.
>>
>>
>>> Obviously Coach Jonathan Trott played cricket for a long time for
>>> England and hence should have been on top of the situation and HELPED
>>> Afghanistan batsmen to understand the WIN requirements.
>>>
>>> Like I said before, a few teams CANNOT AFFORD to hire back room
>>> ANALYSTS.
>>
>> I don't know why you think they would need to hire anyone extra just
>> to do some fairly straightforward arithmetic. Are all of the people
>> they already have innumerate?
>>
>
>
>
> Then WHY did Afghanistan coach "Jonathan Trott" COMPLAIN that they were
> NOT properly informed about the NRR requirements TO WIN the match.

Who said that he complained? That seems to be just your hype.

The report says that he "confirmed that his team was unaware of the
calculations." "Confirmed" suggests that a reporter asked him. Merely
answering a question does not constitute a complaint. The report also
doesn't say who told them that they "needed to win in 37.1 overs." It
could have been anyone.

--
David North

On 9/16/2023 7:47 AM, David North wrote:
> On 12/09/2023 09:08, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> On 9/12/2023 12:15 AM, David North wrote:
>>> On 10/09/2023 11:34, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>> On 9/9/2023 10:31 PM, David North wrote:
>>>>> On 08/09/2023 16:13, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/8/2023 6:02 AM, David North wrote:
>>>>>>> On Friday, 8 September 2023 at 09:39:37 UTC+1,
>>>>>>> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/8/2023 12:09 AM, max.it wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 23:55:16 -0700, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
>>>>>>>>> <FBInCIAnNSATe...@america.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think it's the "RESPONSIBILITY of match officials" to INFORM
>>>>>>>>>> the team
>>>>>>>>>> of the NRR calculations to WIN, NOT the team's back room
>>>>>>>>>> ANALYSTS.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No no, it's the job of the batting captain / or batsman at the
>>>>>>>>> wicket
>>>>>>>>> to make sure he understands fully how many runs are needed, he
>>>>>>>>> is in
>>>>>>>>> charge.
>>>>>>>> Currently as the law stands, you are right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But what I am saying is the responsibility should be changed to
>>>>>>>> Umpires
>>>>>>>> and Match Officials because HOW MANY TEAMS can "AFFORD" a
>>>>>>>> KNOWLEDGEABLE
>>>>>>>> back room ANALYST to up come with all these complicated
>>>>>>>> calculations?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Afghanistan, Ireland, Netherlands, Nepal, Zimbabwe's boards are
>>>>>>>> NOT rich
>>>>>>>> enough to hire them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To be honest, this NRR calculation and winning requirements
>>>>>>>> changing
>>>>>>>> every ball in the end is really very complicated to understand
>>>>>>>> and then
>>>>>>>> communicate it to the batsmen after every ball, don't you think so?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The NRR requirements do not change at all after the start of the
>>>>>>> innings unless overs are lost. Afghanistan's requirements (292 in
>>>>>>> 37.1 overs, 293 in 37.2, 294 in 37.3, 295 in 37.5, 296 in
>>>>>>> 38, or 297 in 38.1, assuming that the article is correct)
>>>>>>> remained the same throughout the innings. The only reason why
>>>>>>> there are six different targets is because when the team batting
>>>>>>> second wins, we don't know exactly how many runs they will score,
>>>>>>> as they can exceed their opponents' score by anything from 1 to 6
>>>>>>> runs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If they had batted first, there would only have been one target -
>>>>>>> they would have needed to win by a specific number of runs, which
>>>>>>> would not have changed from the start of the match unless overs
>>>>>>> were lost.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The calculations are not really all that complicated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Afghanistan head coach Jonathan Trott has confirmed that his team
>>>>>> was unaware of the calculations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “We were never communicated those calculations,” he said. “All we
>>>>>> were communicated was we needed to win in 37.1 overs. We weren’t
>>>>>> told what the overs in which we could get 295 or 297. (That we
>>>>>> could win in) 38.1 overs was never communicated to us.”
>>>>>
>>>>> They could have worked it out for themselves. I assume that they
>>>>> have someone who can add, divide and subtract. Calculators and
>>>>> spreadsheets are allowed.
>>>>>
>>>>> You add up the runs you have scored in all of your matches in the
>>>>> group, and add up the overs available, or the overs faced in
>>>>> matches where you won batting second. Then you divide the total
>>>>> runs by the total overs, which gives you your run rate.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do the same for the runs and overs in your opponents' innings and
>>>>> subtract the result from your run rate to give your net run rate.
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously if they had scored 297, they would have scored 5 more
>>>>> runs in total than if they had scored 292, so they could have
>>>>> afforded more overs to divide by to arrive at the same run rate.
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way, both Afghanistan and Sri Lanka had an advantage over
>>>>> Bangladesh, the other team in the group, who played their second
>>>>> and final group match two days earlier, so had no way of knowing
>>>>> what they needed to do to get through on net run rate if
>>>>> Afghanistan beat Sri Lanka.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's all fine and dandy but what I said is that Match officials
>>>> SHOULD ALSO also have the RESPONSIBILITY to inform the teams of the
>>>> requirements to WIN in rain affected DLS and NRR deciding matches.
>>>
>>> In the case of DLS, the teams are told the new target after every
>>> reduction in overs from the end of the first innings, and AIUI, the
>>> par score is usually on the scoreboard throughout the second innings.
>>> I don't know whether they are given any further information, or what
>>> further information you would want them to be given. The match
>>> officials don't know if and when there are going to be any further
>>> interruptions anhy more than the players do.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Obviously Coach Jonathan Trott played cricket for a long time for
>>>> England and hence should have been on top of the situation and
>>>> HELPED Afghanistan batsmen to understand the WIN requirements.
>>>>
>>>> Like I said before, a few teams CANNOT AFFORD to hire back room
>>>> ANALYSTS.
>>>
>>> I don't know why you think they would need to hire anyone extra just
>>> to do some fairly straightforward arithmetic. Are all of the people
>>> they already have innumerate?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Then WHY did Afghanistan coach "Jonathan Trott" COMPLAIN that they
>> were NOT properly informed about the NRR requirements TO WIN the match.
>
> Who said that he complained? That seems to be just your hype.
>
> The report says that he "confirmed that his team was unaware of the
> calculations." "Confirmed" suggests that a reporter asked him. Merely
> answering a question does not constitute a complaint. The report also
> doesn't say who told them that they "needed to win in 37.1 overs." It
> could have been anyone.
>

The QUESTION is NOT whether Jonathan Trott COMPLAINED or merely CONFIRMED.

The POINT is, as Afghanistan's Coach HE DIDN'T KNOW the CALCULATIONS
which he is SUPPOSED to KNOW, which means he is "INCOMPETENT".

You are FOCUSING on irrelevant "words" I used.