Tristan Holme Response

Participate in discussion with your fellow Zimbabwe cricket fans!
Kriterion_BD
Posts: 7038
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by Kriterion_BD »

pariah wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 5:55 pm

If that is your measure, then Hami, Chigumbura, Vusi (and Taibu & Utseya), have been better match winners for Zimbabwe than Sean, Craig, Malcolm and even Taylor himself.

Your response is very strange because Jarvis isn't exactly young anymore plus has nothing on even a 38 year old Hami as an ODI&T20 player. Madziva and Jongwe are actually better white (not red) ball prospects than Jarvis, but Hami must be culled for Jarvis??? Shocking!
OK lets have a look at who has won matches for Zimbabwe against decently strong opposition, across all 3 formats:

Here's the list of all matches since July 1, 2001: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... ew=innings

Taibu - 2 (WI, NZ)
Chibabha - 4 (AUS, WI, PAK, NZ)
Chigumbura - 5 (AUS, WI, NZ, AUS, PAK)
Utseya - 3 (WI, WI, AUS)
Matsikenyeri - 2
Masakadza - 5 (WI, PAK, PAK, NZ, SL)
Chatara - 2 (PAK, PAK)
Panyangara - 2 (PAK, NZ)
Mawoyo - 1 (PAK)
Mire - 2 (SL, SL)

Taylor - 3 (AUS, SL, NZ)
Cremer - 3 (WI, NZ, SL)
Waller - 3 (NZ, SL, SL)
Williams - 4 (AUS, PAK, WI, SL)...only 1 with the bat
Raza - 3 (WI, SL, SL)
C Ervine - 2 (NZ, SL)

OK yes, the "black" guys have quite a few more match-winning performances than the "whites + Raza".

In particular very surprised by Chigs, Hami, and Chibabha...but you have remember the 3 of them have played a combined 700-800 innings probably and 14 match winning performances out of that is still a very very low percentage.

Utseya chipped in with 3, one of them being his efforts with the bat vs Australia in 2014.

Taylor was surprisingly low, I'll give you that.
Cremer hasn't played a whole lot, so 3 is not bad.
Waller surprising has 3, 2 with bat and 1 with the ball.
Williams has 4, but only 1 of them with the bat...perhaps he really should be considered as a genuine all-rounder...
Craig has 2, but have played very few innings.
Raza has 3, and ditto with the few innings.

Noteably, Matsikenyeri has a couple match winning knocks, and Ray Price probably has a few with the ball in that time period but since they aren't current players, i didn't include them.
Last edited by Kriterion_BD on Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjtuZBykSzM (Noreaga - Blood Money Part 3)

User avatar
CrimsonAvenger
Posts: 9838
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 2:57 am
Supports: Mountaineers
Location: India

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by CrimsonAvenger »

That is some good work right there! Not sure how you decided who (and how many) contributed to a win, but it would be something sensible I'm sure.

You can see why we kept going back to Chigs even when he was woefully out of touch. The lure of a "match winner". He hasn't been there for ages tough.

Also telling that Williams has won us only one match with the bat. Further establishes that his stubborn knocks have mostly come when the horse has bolted and when we are staring at massive defeats. He has rarely shown the ability to carry us home.

Yes, Ervine and Raza have the potential to add many more to their current scores.

By the way, did you miss Vusi or did he not feature there at all? :D (don't bother answering...)

And Vitori?

Jemisi
Posts: 8978
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:04 am
Supports: Southern Rocks

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by Jemisi »

Kriterion, can you conduct the same analysis for all of our victories during the period?

It is important to know the contributors to big wins, but the smaller wins matter too, yeah?

Kriterion_BD
Posts: 7038
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by Kriterion_BD »

CrimsonAvenger wrote:
Thu Aug 17, 2017 2:01 am
That is some good work right there! Not sure how you decided who (and how many) contributed to a win, but it would be something sensible I'm sure.

You can see why we kept going back to Chigs even when he was woefully out of touch. The lure of a "match winner". He hasn't been there for ages tough.

Also telling that Williams has won us only one match with the bat. Further establishes that his stubborn knocks have mostly come when the horse has bolted and when we are staring at massive defeats. He has rarely shown the ability to carry us home.

Yes, Ervine and Raza have the potential to add many more to their current scores.

By the way, did you miss Vusi or did he not feature there at all? :D (don't bother answering...)

And Vitori?
Glad to answer your questions!

1) I decided arbitrarily, but I tried to be fair and also reasonable (proof of my fairness is that players who I [still] don't rate like Hamilton and Chigs featured highly). Of course they have also played ~300+ innings across formats. Each.

My basic method was for a batsman, did he either
a) score a large volume of runs at a decent strike rate relative to the opposition total. So on a 300 wicket an innings of 80 off 160 would not make the cut, but 50 off 35 at the end of the innings probably would. 20 off 6 would not because the volume is too low. 90 off 105 would make it. Slight bonus for being not out, but not much.

b) score fast enough (kind of mentioned above).

For bowlers did he either grab 3+ wickets in an innings or bowl with an exceptionall low economy rate. So again 0-30 from 10 overs on a 300 wicket would count as "match-winning" but 3-70 on a 220 surface would not count despite bagging some wickets.

2) Williams is one of rare white players who I don't rate for that reason. Here I will agree with HHM/pariah. He's got talent, but lacks the intellect to put it to use. But his bowling - which seems to be a lot better recently - means he can still contribute one way or another. He's a poor man's Sikander Raza for now.

3) Regarding, Vusi, I may have missed some performances since I went through the scorecards quickly and without revision. But I think I may have left out a knock of Hamilton, or Chigs, or Matsikenyeri. I am quite sure that Vusi has a duck as far as this list goes.

4) Vitori had 2 match winning performances with the ball. Did he have one in the Test win vs PAK? If he did, then that would make 3. Otherwise 2.

An important side note: cricket is a team game, and sometimes a player plays very well but the rest of the team is unable to get the win. Case in point Jarvis' 5 fer vs WI and Taylor's 4th innings ton vs NZ. Those were not included because they are technically not match-winning, having lost the game. But IMO, they ought to to count. So you can really add one more to BRMT's score. But then Hamilton might get a few more and so might Chigs - given that they have played so many innings.

Corrections:

Looks like Raza has a total of 3. And due to typo, Mire has 2 as well. I am correcting in the original post above. Thanks.
Last edited by Kriterion_BD on Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjtuZBykSzM (Noreaga - Blood Money Part 3)

Kriterion_BD
Posts: 7038
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by Kriterion_BD »

Jemisi wrote:
Thu Aug 17, 2017 4:11 am
Kriterion, can you conduct the same analysis for all of our victories during the period?

It is important to know the contributors to big wins, but the smaller wins matter too, yeah?
Can't make any promises. Those big wins numbered 25 or 26 and I was able to go through them in about an hour.

The small wins including Bangladesh will push that number to an additional 70-100 matches, maybe more. I will try, but can't make any promises.

Of course if you are willing to wait a long time...your chances of eventually getting it increase markedly :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjtuZBykSzM (Noreaga - Blood Money Part 3)

pariah
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:27 pm
Supports: Matabeleland Tuskers

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by pariah »

Nice work Kriterion, but you could've gotten all of that from my posts over time. :)

Very funny Crimson that bit about Vusi. Without even going into detail and other cases, how on earth could you forget one of Zimbabwe's most famous wins ever? :lol:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/1332 ... we-1st-ODI

Going back to Kriterion's very strange "criteria" and methodology (which can't be referenced :D ), how does he weigh this particular scorecard?
http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/1197 ... an-1st-ODI

What I can personally say is that for me most of these things are from memory. Musakanda for instance has just come onto the scene and has played a big role in not only winning matches, but a (admittedly flawed)series as well - same applies to Mire, but of course he's older and more experienced. Anyway, most guys here won't realise that in a future debate when I say for example Musakanda is a matchwinner, but Moor and Burl are not - assuming of course things continue as they are now. The arguments will be "Moor has hit some memorable big ones out of the park".

My strong point is memory, and I only use stats to corroborate what is already established by what we ALL watched ball-by-ball on live TV, and witnessed the outcome we remember. You also need to simply go through the forum and the match threads to realise that most guys here were part of these performances. Yet the strange thing is later in dicsussions, you'll find that certain players are actually immortalised for their performances during losses which were already doomed, but matchwinners are forgotten or ignored. Our arguments should actually be relatively in synch where matters of fact are concerned, but for one reason or another we are not always on the same frequency or wavelength.

I'm equally harsh on Chigumbura as I am in my praise of him, but I won't shy away from saying he has more matchwinning pedigree that an Andy Blignaut, although they both have roughly equal talent. Similarly, Vusi has more matchwinning pedigree than Sean Williams, again even though there's arguably similar talent. I say those statements, which are unintentionally polarising but fair. Certain players just seem to thrive in lost or near causes, which don't count in this world. Whether Bangladeshis like it or not, Mohammad Ashraful remians its biggest match-winner (batting alone, even though most Zimbabweans will recall he's won BD quite a few with the ball too) - more than Tamim and Sakib. The boy singlehandedly got Bangladesh Test status. He's perhaps the greatest cricekter in that regard! :lol:

The reason why Taylor hasn't been involved in more is again a point that I raised. There's a time Taylor was doing well as an opener, playing brilliantly. But then he had a few low scores, and decided he didn't want to open when it was unnecesary but he was afforded the privilege and latitude. Again whenever a quick wicket fell in trying conditions, Taylor would never promote himself, even if the openers had laid a decent-ish platform. So in terms of seizing the opportunity, that's not his style, hence he often missed out even though he was part of those experiences. Away Zimbabwe has always been 2 down or 3 down very fast, so even if you want to stick to position 4/5, those insecurities follow you. That's part of why he struggles away.

One of my arguments about Matsi was that, in my view, considering the quality of batsmen Zimbabwe often faced, he was an excellent spinner. But today you see Raza, Sean and Malcolm being allowed to bat at 6/7 - in order to be called "allrounders" and kept in the side - a position Matsi was often removed from even though he often delivered in against vastly superior players. So again stats shouldn't suprise you when you find out that Matsi was a better allrounder than Williams. Poor Malcolm Waller does not even compare!!! Again guys will not believe that off the bat because for whatever reason - even though our memory is drawn from the same source - what is memorable to me is not "memorable" to another.

NB: In ODI matches played(minimum of 10 so it's at least relevant), where a bowler bowled a minimum of 5 overs(30 balls) per innings, Matsi Averages 36.91 at a 49 Strike Rate. Better than both Raza and Williams who have largely faced much weaker opposition as spinners, and largely did so while older and/or more experienced. Of course that doesn't mean he's a better bowler that Utseya or even Grant Flower. :D

Kriterion_BD
Posts: 7038
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by Kriterion_BD »

That match, pariah...Id say Chatara (bowling) and Hamilton (batting) were clear match winners vs Pakistan. Williams is fifty-fifty but I didnt count him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjtuZBykSzM (Noreaga - Blood Money Part 3)

Jemisi
Posts: 8978
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:04 am
Supports: Southern Rocks

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by Jemisi »

By not counting a 95 off 160 odd it makes things a bit iffy. If a bloke anchors the innings and the team wins and he tops scores...

Perhaps it needs to be rendered, "Kriterion's definitive match winning performances"

Or another layer added. Match winners and Other Major contributors.

Kriterion_BD
Posts: 7038
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:41 am

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by Kriterion_BD »

Jemisi wrote:
Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:24 am
By not counting a 95 off 160 odd it makes things a bit iffy. If a bloke anchors the innings and the team wins and he tops scores...

Perhaps it needs to be rendered, "Kriterion's definitive match winning performances"

Or another layer added. Match winners and Other Major contributors.
If a guy anchors and you win by a large margin, the anchoring loses value, especially in a chase.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjtuZBykSzM (Noreaga - Blood Money Part 3)

Jemisi
Posts: 8978
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:04 am
Supports: Southern Rocks

Re: Tristan Holme Response

Post by Jemisi »

Loses value, sure, but still a significant contribution against a major team in a win.

Post Reply