SA Footy

Corona Man wrote:

MW wrote:Not sure what that means but my point is how do you adjust points given for votes in games due to the opposition and venue you are playing at...

Allan Border is entitled to comment on an award named in his honour. I believe his point is more weighting should be applied to test match cricket than T20. Nothing to do with quality of opponents or venue..... and while we are at it why not eliminate the journos votes!

Fair call, i probably quoted the wrong comment but it is more directed to the commentary that his performance in England meant he should not get the award.

The Bedge wrote:The fact all three formats carry the same weighting system shows how flawed it is.

How many players are there that participate in all three formats, and rarely miss a game? Just by opportunity alone Warner is already well ahead of the rest.

They are weighted different.
Tests attract twice the amount of votes as ODI’s and 3 times the amount as T20’s.
For example a 3-2-1 vote becomes
18-12-6 for tests
9-6-3 for ODI’s
6-4-2 for T20’s

Jim05 wrote:

The Bedge wrote:The fact all three formats carry the same weighting system shows how flawed it is.

How many players are there that participate in all three formats, and rarely miss a game? Just by opportunity alone Warner is already well ahead of the rest.

They are weighted different.
Tests attract twice the amount of votes as ODI’s and 3 times the amount as T20’s.
For example a 3-2-1 vote becomes
18-12-6 for tests
9-6-3 for ODI’s
6-4-2 for T20’s

Ah thanks! Thought they were all the same, that makes a little more sense.. but still.. those who play all 3..

The Bedge wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

The Bedge wrote:The fact all three formats carry the same weighting system shows how flawed it is.

How many players are there that participate in all three formats, and rarely miss a game? Just by opportunity alone Warner is already well ahead of the rest.

They are weighted different.
Tests attract twice the amount of votes as ODI’s and 3 times the amount as T20’s.
For example a 3-2-1 vote becomes
18-12-6 for tests
9-6-3 for ODI’s
6-4-2 for T20’s

Ah thanks! Thought they were all the same, that makes a little more sense.. but still.. those who play all 3..

For the qualification period

Cummins
T20: 7
ODI’s: 16
Tests: 12
TOTAL: 35 games

Warner
T20: 11
ODI’s: 10
Tests: 10
TOTAL: 31 games

C'mon Bedge, are you really holding it against Warner for being good enough to play all 3 formats?

Everyone is allowed to play all three, the fact he is one of only a small group that are good enough to shouldn't be held against him.

Hate him all you want, but you're off the mark in terms of him having an unfair leg up for this award.

Trader wrote:C'mon Bedge, are you really holding it against Warner for being good enough to play all 3 formats?

Everyone is allowed to play all three, the fact he is one of only a small group that are good enough to shouldn't be held against him.

Hate him all you want, but you're off the mark in terms of him having an unfair leg up for this award.

If you see my stats above you will see that Cummins played more games across the 3 formats than Warner

Trader wrote:C'mon Bedge, are you really holding it against Warner for being good enough to play all 3 formats?

Everyone is allowed to play all three, the fact he is one of only a small group that are good enough to shouldn't be held against him.

Hate him all you want, but you're off the mark in terms of him having an unfair leg up for this award.

I don't hate Warner at all haha, but I do feel like the medal favours those who play all three formats, and that group would have to be quite small without looking into it.

Sure everyone might be allowed to play all three - doesn't mean they get to.

The AB medal is an award designed to recognise Australia's best cricketer across all three formats.
Yes, the voting favours those that play all three formats.

Why is that worth pointing out?

MW wrote:

Corona Man wrote:

MW wrote:Not sure what that means but my point is how do you adjust points given for votes in games due to the opposition and venue you are playing at...

Allan Border is entitled to comment on an award named in his honour. I believe his point is more weighting should be applied to test match cricket than T20. Nothing to do with quality of opponents or venue..... and while we are at it why not eliminate the journos votes!

Fair call, i probably quoted the wrong comment but it is more directed to the commentary that his performance in England meant he should not get the award.

I thought his performances in England, or lack of them should have had him out of the team...... we could have blooded a younger bloke and got the same output, and then let that new bloke ton up on home decks against pop gun attacks. It's a game of opportunity, some get them some don't!

Corona Man wrote:

MW wrote:

Corona Man wrote:

MW wrote:Not sure what that means but my point is how do you adjust points given for votes in games due to the opposition and venue you are playing at...

Allan Border is entitled to comment on an award named in his honour. I believe his point is more weighting should be applied to test match cricket than T20. Nothing to do with quality of opponents or venue..... and while we are at it why not eliminate the journos votes!

Fair call, i probably quoted the wrong comment but it is more directed to the commentary that his performance in England meant he should not get the award.

I thought his performances in England, or lack of them should have had him out of the team...... we could have blooded a younger bloke and got the same output, and then let that new bloke ton up on home decks against pop gun attacks. It's a game of opportunity, some get them some don't!

Like all those other blokes that peeled off runs against the pop gun attacks?
Burns, Smith, Wade, Head etc all batted the same amount of times as Warner this summer against this pop gun attacks that you speak of and didn’t get anywhere near the same amount of runs.
Warner had a shocking tour of England but who hasn’t had a bad series every now and then?

Jim, please.

Warner made 335 against Pakistan in Adelaide, Trav Head sat and watched in the pavilion. He was a DNB!

Game of opportunity!

Corona Man wrote:Jim, please.

Warner made 335 against Pakistan in Adelaide, Trav Head sat and watched in the pavilion. He was a DNB!

Game of opportunity!

And in the first test against Pakistan?
That’s right Warner made 150 whilst Smith and Head failed dismally against the same attack

Jim05 wrote:

Corona Man wrote:Jim, please.

Warner made 335 against Pakistan in Adelaide, Trav Head sat and watched in the pavilion. He was a DNB!

Game of opportunity!

And in the first test against Pakistan?
That’s right Warner made 150 whilst Smith and Head failed dismally against the same attack

Oh well, better give him another AB Medal, an MBE, and the keys to kirribilli house then.

Jim05 wrote:

Corona Man wrote:Jim, please.

Warner made 335 against Pakistan in Adelaide, Trav Head sat and watched in the pavilion. He was a DNB!

Game of opportunity!

And in the first test against Pakistan?
That’s right Warner made 150 whilst Smith and Head failed dismally against the same attack

Wasting your time talking to these blokes, they will never see that Warner was the standout cricketer for Australia in the last 12 months and by a fair margin. Thought he would've won by more but I guess Cummins playing a lot more games got him a bit closer than he otherwise would've been. Warner was sat idle for the 1st 3 months of the voting period, huge win
Its just a shame we missed out on seeing 12montyhs of him in his prime because of the tall poppy syndrome that is rife here in Australia. Don't see the same uproar in South Africa, England or the sub continent when they polish the ball in a questionable manner

Corona Man wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

Corona Man wrote:Jim, please.

Warner made 335 against Pakistan in Adelaide, Trav Head sat and watched in the pavilion. He was a DNB!

Game of opportunity!

And in the first test against Pakistan?
That’s right Warner made 150 whilst Smith and Head failed dismally against the same attack

Oh well, better give him another AB Medal, an MBE, and the keys to kirribilli house then.

Well put lad, he's a grubby filthstain. Politics awaits.

The England Lions absolutely piled on the runs against the CA 11 in Hobart.
EL 8/613 declared
Jennings 141
Sibley 103
Doggett 4/60
Pope 33 overs, 1/190

CA 11 2/146
Sangha 69*
Lehmann 37*

The Dark Knight wrote:The England Lions absolutely piled on the runs against the CA 11 in Hobart.
EL 8/613 declared
Jennings 141
Sibley 103
Doggett 4/60
Pope 33 overs, 1/190

CA 11 2/146
Sangha 69*
Lehmann 37*

I was wondering where Jennings was these days, remember watching his ton on debut in India, thought he was going to a be a regular after that

Lehmann 107no

Jim05 wrote:Lehmann 107no

Knocking on the door for national duties.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Lehmann 107no

Knocking on the door for national duties.

Knocking on the door for state duties maybe