Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

Strange.


What does this "WASP" stand for? I assume that the last two words are Score Predictor.

bhaveshgor wrote:Selection of umpires are poor consider one is a New Zealand local and the other a Sri Lankan that is hardly recognisable.
2 inexperienced umpires.

It demonstrates the significance placed on this series? Everyone has got to start somewhere. The third ump, who I assume will be on deck the other two games, is someone who is vastly more experienced, but I forget who. Ranjan Madugalle is Ref, very experienced.

GarlicJam wrote:Strange.


What does this "WASP" stand for? I assume that the last two words are Score Predictor.

Win and Score Predictor

for the team batting first it gives a predicted score that changes as the innings goes to reflect whats going on

for the team batting second it gives a percentage chance of winning

was developed by a university in NZ I believe

NZ innings never really got going here, managed to lose wickets fairly regularly

broom has done a good job with that 50 but they need some fireworks from someone in these last 5 overs or this looks a bit light considering how small the boundaries are

how casual was that catch on the boundary by hazlewood ?

just touched the boundary tho so it'll be a 6

rich1uk wrote:Win and Score Predictor

for the team batting first it gives a predicted score that changes as the innings goes to reflect whats going on

for the team batting second it gives a percentage chance of winning

was developed by a university in NZ I believe

Cheers. Is it supposed to predict the winning score, or what NZ will end up with? I have assumed the latter.

GarlicJam wrote:

rich1uk wrote:Win and Score Predictor

for the team batting first it gives a predicted score that changes as the innings goes to reflect whats going on

for the team batting second it gives a percentage chance of winning

was developed by a university in NZ I believe

Cheers. Is it supposed to predict the winning score, or what NZ will end up with? I have assumed the latter.

it predicts what the team batting first will end up with, works similar to duckworth/lewis in that it takes real data from previous games and is updated every ball so if a wicket falls the predicted score will drop etc etc

who is this heazlett guy playing for australia ?

down to come in at #7 on the card but doesn't bowl, i see he has only played 5 list A games domestically, has an impressive average but thats a very small sample size to be selecting someone based on

after my earlier comments about Stoinis he'll probbaly score a match winning hundred now

The par score doesn't change though and can be unrealistic if the commentator don't take it seriously and just give the par score 300 or even 350 now.
Only works if the commentators knows the actual score that gives a team a 50 percent chance of winning the game.
Wasp theory is sound but sadly commentators do ruin it at times, sky Uk were hopeless at it with bumble, knight sometimes getting crazy with the par scores.

If the wasp was used in Nagpur England would be like 80-90% likely to win when nehra was bowling even though everyone knew chasing 20 odd from 12-13 balls would be very very hard.
If the par was set at 180-200.

bhaveshgor wrote:The par score doesn't change though and can be unrealistic if the commentator don't take it seriously and just give the par score 300 or even 350 now.
Only works if the commentators knows the actual score that gives a team a 50 percent chance of winning the game.
Wasp theory is sound but sadly commentators do ruin it at times, sky Uk were hopeless at it with bumble, knight sometimes getting crazy with the par scores.

yeah it can be flawed if the commentators set an unrealistic par score before the innings starts

Maybe Heazlett is the new Stoinis.

The issue about Stoinis against England I think was that he was supposed to be an all rounder, but he batted at eight so it didn't look like he was in for his batting- and made four. And he bowled sixth and only four overs, so it didn't look like he was in for his bowling.

rich1uk wrote:who is this heazlett guy playing for australia ?

down to come in at #7 on the card but doesn't bowl, i see he has only played 5 list A games domestically, has an impressive average but thats a very small sample size to be selecting someone based on

after my earlier comments about Stoinis he'll probbaly score a match winning hundred now

One of those CA selectors' hunch/punts. Sometimes they come off, sometimes they don't.

the par score the commentators set at the start was 280 so they weren't far off

Doesn't feel like it should be enough, but then the Aussie batting line up isn't that convincing.

Looks like another good effort from Neil Broom (I've been trying to sleep so I missed it).