Yes it was by the look of it
189-8 Adshead
189-9 Saxelby (1 ball faced)
189 ao Kirby (1 ball faced)
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Sussex v Gloucestershire Pro40,sun 9th august
- Thread starter the viscount
- Start date
Yes it was by the look of it
189-8 Adshead
189-9 Saxelby (1 ball faced)
189 ao Kirby (1 ball faced)
Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
Lukey gets his 50......53 not out (50 in boundries! off 30 balls)
yes and very well to!
Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
Joyce 50 (off 53 balls....get a move on 
)
Sussux 140/1 off 18
)Sussux 140/1 off 18
The Large One
Who's Next?
Sussex 192/1 and win by nine wickets.
Roughly...
Gloucs 189ao (RR 4.73)
Sussex 192/1 (RR 7.26)
Our net run rate should have improved by about 2.5. Needs confirming, though.
Code:
Teams Mat Won Lost Tied N/R Pts Net RR
Sussex 3 3 0 0 0 6 +0.936
Durham 3 2 1 0 0 4 +1.209
Somers 2 1 0 0 1 3 +0.529
Gloucs 4 1 2 0 1 3 -0.989
Worcs 3 1 1 0 1 3 -1.663
Hampsh 2 1 1 0 0 2 -0.038
Yorksh 4 1 3 0 0 2 -0.133
Notts 1 0 0 0 1 1
Essex 2 0 2 0 0 0 -0.394Snoop Dogg
Member
- Jun 19, 2009
- 173
Top of the table! :yahoo:
Cracking performance boys
Cracking performance boys
The Large One
Who's Next?
Now I really don't get this net Run Rate business.
We score at over 7 runs per over, they score at just over 4, and the Net RR is still below 1.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Now I really don't get this net Run Rate business.
We score at over 7 runs per over, they score at just over 4, and the Net RR is still below 1.
It's quite simple ...
Net Run Rate
A team's net run rate is calculated by deducting from the average runs per over scored by that team, the average runs per over scored against that team. In the event of a team being all out in less than its full quota of overs, the calculation of the net run rate of both teams shall be based on the full quota of overs to which the batting team would have been entitled and not on the number of overs in which the team was dismissed. Only those matches where results are achieved will count for the purpose of net run rate calculations. Where a match is abandoned, but a result is achieved under Duckworth/Lewis, for net run rate purposes Team 1 will be accredited with Team 2's Par Score on abandonment off the same number of overs faced by Team 2. Where a match is concluded but with Duckworth/Lewis having been applied at an earlier point in the match, Team 1 will be accredited with 1 run less than the final Target Score for Team 2 off the total number of overs allocated to Team 2 to reach the target.
Points Table | County Cricket 2009 | Cricinfo.com
The Large One
Who's Next?
Understood. So...
We win today, scoring 190 in 26 overs, at an average of over 7.2, compared with Gloucs' 189 in 40 overs at 4.7, a difference of +2.5.
So how come, bearing in mind we have also won our other two matches, we only have a difference of +0.936?
We win today, scoring 190 in 26 overs, at an average of over 7.2, compared with Gloucs' 189 in 40 overs at 4.7, a difference of +2.5.
So how come, bearing in mind we have also won our other two matches, we only have a difference of +0.936?
Lord Bracknell
On fire
The details are in this version of the table:-
Code:
Teams Mat Won Lost Tied N/R Pts Net RR For Against
Sussex 3 3 0 0 0 6 0.936 683/104.3 672/120.0
Durham 3 2 1 0 0 4 1.209 634/110.0 501/110.0
Somerset 2 1 0 0 1 3 0.529 211/36.5 208/40.0
Gloucs 4 1 2 0 1 3 -0.989 587/97.3 590/84.1
Worcs 3 1 1 0 1 3 -1.663 319/80.0 452/80.0
Essex 3 1 2 0 0 2 0.146 679/98.0 650/95.5
Hampshire 2 1 1 0 0 2 -0.038 453/80.0 456/80.0
Yorkshire 4 1 3 0 0 2 -0.133 785/150.0 788/146.5
Nottm 2 0 1 0 1 1 -0.85 190/40.0 224/40.0The Large One
Who's Next?
Right, so it's not calculated on a match-by-match basis, but over the course of a season?
Got ya.
So you'll mainly gain in net run rate if you bat first, put up a decent total, then wittle the other team out for sod all. e.g. score 240 in your innings, then wittle the other side out for 100, you'll end up with a net run rate of +3.5. It's just that we really got motoring today to knock off our runs in order to gain a decent RR.
Got ya.
So you'll mainly gain in net run rate if you bat first, put up a decent total, then wittle the other team out for sod all. e.g. score 240 in your innings, then wittle the other side out for 100, you'll end up with a net run rate of +3.5. It's just that we really got motoring today to knock off our runs in order to gain a decent RR.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Today's result ...
Gloucestershire 189 in 40 overs (not 39.5 - because they were all out before completing the 40 overs)
Sussex 192 in 26.1 overs
Sussex's net run rate for today is (192/26.1667) - (189/40) = 2.613
The table, of course, takes into account all three games that Sussex have played.
Gloucestershire 189 in 40 overs (not 39.5 - because they were all out before completing the 40 overs)
Sussex 192 in 26.1 overs
Sussex's net run rate for today is (192/26.1667) - (189/40) = 2.613
The table, of course, takes into account all three games that Sussex have played.
the viscount
New member
- Thread starter
- #40
Gloucestershire Gladiators slumped to a crushing nine-wicket defeat at Horsham where Sussex reached a victory target of 190 in just 26.1 overs.
The first seven Gloucestershire batsmen fell to catches after Alex Gidman had won the toss, leading to suggestions the ball was stopping on the pitch.
But there was no sign of that as Ed Joyce smashed 66 not out and Luke Wright an unbeaten 95 to lead the reigning Pro40 champions to a thumping victory.
The Gladiators total, curbed by a Yasir Arafat hat-trick in the final over, was made to look woefully in adequate as Rory Hamilton-Brown and Joyce got Sussex off to a fast start.
Richard Dawson found himself in the attack after only seven overs and struck with his first ball as Hamilton-Brown danced down the track and was easily stumped by Steve Adshead for 28, made off just 18 balls, with 4 fours and a six.
But there was no further success for the Gladiators as Wright produced a sensational innings, featuring 18 fours and a six to finish five short of a century off only 62 deliveries.
Joyce was no slouch himself in hitting 9 fours in his 77-ball knock and the outcome was clear long before the winning runs were hit.
It was a tough afternoon for the Gloucestershire seamers. Steve Kirby went for 43 off five overs, Ian Saxelby 26 off three and James Franklin 25 off three.
There was nothing skipper Gidman could do to stem the flow of runs, even though he used seven bowlers.
Earlier, Gloucestershire had been given a bright start by Will Porterfield, who hit 4 fours in scoring 17 off 15 balls.
But James Kirtley (3-29) then removed Porterfield, Gidman and Kadeer Ali in quick succession to make it 35-3.
Frankliin (36) and Hamish Marshall, who hit 50 off 57 balls, did their best to provide a platform and at 139-4 Gloucestershire looked to have moved into a reasonable position.
But Chris Taylor (25) and Marshall then fell in quick succession and when Dawson was run out it was 176-7.
Opening bowler Arafat finished things off with an amazing final over of the innings, having Adshead caught for 24 and then bowling Saxelby and Kirby with his next two deliveries.
After the game Gidman told this website: "It was a real off-day for us and we are not sure why.
"It came at the end of a tough week of Championship cricket and maybe that had an effect, although I wouldn't offer it as an excuse.
"Our top order batting, including myself, failed and that handed Sussex the initiative. They grew in confidence and bowled well.
"We didn't bowl as we can either and all in all it was a game to quickly put behind us."
The first seven Gloucestershire batsmen fell to catches after Alex Gidman had won the toss, leading to suggestions the ball was stopping on the pitch.
But there was no sign of that as Ed Joyce smashed 66 not out and Luke Wright an unbeaten 95 to lead the reigning Pro40 champions to a thumping victory.
The Gladiators total, curbed by a Yasir Arafat hat-trick in the final over, was made to look woefully in adequate as Rory Hamilton-Brown and Joyce got Sussex off to a fast start.
Richard Dawson found himself in the attack after only seven overs and struck with his first ball as Hamilton-Brown danced down the track and was easily stumped by Steve Adshead for 28, made off just 18 balls, with 4 fours and a six.
But there was no further success for the Gladiators as Wright produced a sensational innings, featuring 18 fours and a six to finish five short of a century off only 62 deliveries.
Joyce was no slouch himself in hitting 9 fours in his 77-ball knock and the outcome was clear long before the winning runs were hit.
It was a tough afternoon for the Gloucestershire seamers. Steve Kirby went for 43 off five overs, Ian Saxelby 26 off three and James Franklin 25 off three.
There was nothing skipper Gidman could do to stem the flow of runs, even though he used seven bowlers.
Earlier, Gloucestershire had been given a bright start by Will Porterfield, who hit 4 fours in scoring 17 off 15 balls.
But James Kirtley (3-29) then removed Porterfield, Gidman and Kadeer Ali in quick succession to make it 35-3.
Frankliin (36) and Hamish Marshall, who hit 50 off 57 balls, did their best to provide a platform and at 139-4 Gloucestershire looked to have moved into a reasonable position.
But Chris Taylor (25) and Marshall then fell in quick succession and when Dawson was run out it was 176-7.
Opening bowler Arafat finished things off with an amazing final over of the innings, having Adshead caught for 24 and then bowling Saxelby and Kirby with his next two deliveries.
After the game Gidman told this website: "It was a real off-day for us and we are not sure why.
"It came at the end of a tough week of Championship cricket and maybe that had an effect, although I wouldn't offer it as an excuse.
"Our top order batting, including myself, failed and that handed Sussex the initiative. They grew in confidence and bowled well.
"We didn't bowl as we can either and all in all it was a game to quickly put behind us."