2019/20 Domestic Cricket Season - Logan Cup, Pro50, Twenty20

[zimbos_05]

bias and twisting of facts and figures to suit your agenda

I invite YOU to critique/debunk the facts and figures that I put forward in these posts below. (As far as i'm concerned, no one, even among those who responded or tried, actually proved the figures wrong/biased/twisted.)

BT & KJ AGAINST PEERS AMONG LOWLY SIDES
viewtopic.php?p=140098#p140098

ZIMBABWE WIN-LOSS SINCE BT & KJ RETURNED
viewtopic.php?p=140101#p140101

PLAYER OF THE MATCH AND LIVE RUBBERS
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15725

Facts are different from opinion based arguments. I think I back up what I say, and most don't address the evidence that I provide in fact based analysis.

To be quite frank mate I have better things to do, honestly. Going through facts and stats the way you do says a lot about how much time you have on your hands.

You know what, I have the day off tomorrow and nothing much to do, I'll be happy to go through this and address your dribble. Despite you clearly ignoring jaybros response on that very thread right under your post, why not have another crack. That is if you have the patience to wait.

[zimbos_05]

Alrighty then. Let us see.

1st claim - Countless batsmen have out-batted Taylor in ODIs.

Taylor is number 1 in Zim for 50s scored, 100s scored, runs scored, 3rd in averages, and 4th in Strike Rate. Him being 3rd in averages is below Sean and Regis. Regis only has 4 matches to his name in this period and those were against UAE. Taylor has played against tougher opposition including the associates. Being 4th in strike rate is below Maruma (2 innings), Zhuwao (8 innings), Mavuta (5 innings). Taylor had 26 innings and what the stats do not tell you is the other three did not face as many balls as BT. They were swing and miss and in some cases scored 4 runs off 1 ball before going out. Hardly anything to get excited about. What this tells me is that BT is the best Zim batsman in ODI as no other batsman has bettered him in any department that matters to a batsman.

2nd claim - Chatara out-bowled Jarvis in ODIs

This is one where you have merit to a degree, and to be honest, I don't think you will find any on here who hate Chatara as such. Chatara took the most wickets and has the best average of the zim bowlers, but is number 6 for economy and 4th for strike rate. These are stats that matter for bowlers. In saying that, Jarvis was number 2 for wickets and average, number 3 for economy and 6th for strike rate. In other words, Jarvis concedes less runs. He is more economical, but perhaps not taking as many wickets as he should. The only other Zimbabwean who came close to their stats was Cremer being 3rd in wickets and average, 2nd in economy, and 3rd for strike rate. What these stats show me is that Chatara and Jarvis are our two best bowlers and them combined can be a good opening pair. They can work off of each other to take wickets and restrict runs and having both of them on the team only enhances our bowling attack,

3rd claim - Taylor is a joke in T20s

Taylor has the 3rd most runs in T20 for Zim players behind Mire and Ervine. The other stats were very hard to find consistency as there are many players with only 1 or 2 matches. Taylor has an average of 18 (which is not ideal) and a strike rate of 113. The Strike rate is not terrible, but he is the only players in double figure innings to have scored significant runs. Mire and Ervine are the only batsmen who have more runs and have a better strike rate. Interestingly, it is Ervine who leads in Strike Rate (136) and averages (48). Him being a player who you have also said is a terrible T20 player. Based on the stats, Ervine is our best T20 batsman. Taylor is not proving himself on the current tour, but then again, he is also batting in a position he is not used to and being asked to do a job that he does not often do.

4th claim - Chatara has outbowled Jarvis in T20s

Jarvis has taken the most wickets from any Zim bowler with Chatara 2nd. Chatara is 2nd for average (19) with Jarvis 4th (21). Chatara is 8th for economy (8.9) and Jarvis 13th (9.3). Their economies are so close they are practically the same. Chatara is top for strike rate (12.5) and Jarvis 2nd with (13.9). Again, much of a muchness here. As with the ODIs, the stats prove that both are good bowlers and their low rankings for economy are more to do with them having bowled more balls the others above them like W Masakadza or T Mutombodzi. Having them both in the team is again excellent as a partnership, but they both need to work on their economies to be truly lethal bowlers. This comes back to the coaching. They do not seem to be instructed or coached on yorkers, slower balls and how to execute and utilising variety in their bowling.

5th claim - Hamilton has out-batted Taylor in tests

Hamilton is number one for runs scored and Taylor is 2nd. Hamilton has scored 50 more runs, and their averages are 40 and 38 respectively. Taylor has a better strike rate at 54 and Hammy at 51. Again, the stats are so close it is extremely unfair to say out-batted. Taylor clearly rotates the strike more as his strike rate suggests, but a difference of 50 runs between them would suggest that they have both delivered in the ten innings they have played, but perhaps not delivered enough. Hammy clearly enjoys when he has time as why Taylor was miles ahead of him in T20s and ODIs.

6th claim - Chatara has out bowled Jarvis

Again, I don't think anyone dislike Chatara. However, here we go again. Let's see. Jarvis has the most wickets (16), Chatara has 5th most (4). Chatara is 1st for averages (19.5) and Jarvis is 2nd (19.8). Wow, 0.3 of a difference. Chatara is top with economy of 1.88 and Jarvis is 2nd with an economy of 2.6. The thing going against Jarvis is that he has played in 7 innings as opposed to Chataras 3, which would suggest more opportunity for batsmen to score off of him hence why less economical, and more wickets, but again, this does not suggest anything to say he has been out bowled. Rather that they are Zims best bowlers across the board being interchangeable for 1st and 2nd in a lot of areas and formats. Having both of them on the team is beneficial to Zim.

Taking in to account all three Formats:

Taylor is top in runs scored, 2nd behind Williams for averages. And, of the recognised batsmen, 3rd behind MIre and Williams for strike rate.

Jarvis is top for wickets, 2nd behind Mutombodzi for average (Tino only bowled in 1 innings, Jarvis in 44), and 4th behind Cremer, Raza and Williams for economy.

I did not include players from other nations as that is not an accurate reflection of your argument, which is that Taylor and Jarvis have been of no benefit to Zim, which means you need to look at their stats for Zim, not their stats compared to some random player from PNG. Players from countries like Hong Kong, Nepal, PNG, USA, Bermuda...they were only having stats to their name for as little as 1 game, but also are only playing amongst themselves. Players from Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Ireland are not eligible for Zim, so it is irrelevant what they do or how they do for their country. Zim should pick the best players from their selection pool for their country. These 3 countries also have much better run administrations. This means that their players are getting proper coaching, infrastructure, domestic scenes, equipment, exposure, wages etc, and are therefore able to focus on performing their jobs and not where their next meal comes from. Considering how much Zim lose, one could argue that without Taylors runs and Jarvis's wickets, Zims losses would have been much worse than they are, and in fairness, they are terrible.

In conclusion. Taylor is the best batsman in the Zim team according to stats across all three formats. Jarvis is better than Chatara across all 3 formats, but in essence they are so close to each other, they are interchangeable. Having Chatara and Jarvis in the team is beneficial to Zim as a whole as together they are often neck and neck and provide a good front line pairing for Zim.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk. I'll be handing out serviettes as you leave.

[encore]

zimbo, (like that other colourful young fellow) you have neither dismissed nor disproven what I said - you have merely chosen to ignore it. Even then, you have essentially agreed with me in the process(which is encouraging), while also painstakingly disagreeing with yourself and adopting me as your alter ego.

What is of great concern is that even your own words betray the very same facts that you seek to present.

5 Undeniable truths
1. Since Jarvis returned, Chatara has outbowled him in every format.
2. Since Jarvis and Taylor returned, Zimbabwe's Win-Loss Ratio in each format has considerably worsened.(something you did not touch on)
3. Zimbabwe players' peers that have been superior yet are vastly underpaid in comparison, have proven that Taylor and Jarvis salaries were money wasted - this was the argument.
4. Since they returned, Taylor and Jarvis have not been Zimbabwe's best batsman or best bowler in any format(live rubber or not ).
5. Apart from Chatara, all of Zimbabwe's top players have fallen way behind their peers amongst the lower sides (both when playing amongst each other, as well against better sides. Like I've been saying, Tendai Chatara is currently the only Zimbabwe player of international worth across all formats.

If whatever "facts" you have before you tell you a different story, then let us respectfully agree to disagree. Tristan, Liam or Firdose(?) on the other hand for example, would not dare to dispute those truths.

NB: In future you must understand why filters(which that other young fellow ridiculed) are important. It's so you can avoid criticising e.g. Regis and Maruma for small sample sizes. History doesn't matter. David Warner kept his place in the XI during the Ashes because of history and it amounted to nothing. Taylor has been pathetic in T20s since he returned - likewise saying Hami(a former top 10 T20 bastman in the world) has been pathetic over that period as well does not make Taylor good. If you bothered to respect the low sides' players you would see that they did not get their stats against Bermuda and PNG. They got them against the very same players molesting Zimbabwe and even superior players - eg the young Scot Munsey, the Irishman Balbirnie, and the Pakistani-Emirati Shahzad.

[zimbos_05]

You know what encore, i blame myself. You said that people do not want to disprove you or engage with you to prove you otherwise. Instead they only want to throw insults and attack you. So i thought, "you know what, let me actually see what he is talking about". So i clicked on the links you provided. I did not go to alternate sources or anywhere else, I used your evidence.

What I then found was that Taylor has been Zims best batsmen since he returned and Jarvis has been Zims best bowler. These are not my own views or ideas, these are the stats as shown on Cricinfo by the links you have provided. It also proved a few other things such as the claims against Ervine and Williams, but that is irrelevant to this discussion for now.

Zimbabwe's form can quite easily be put down to the fact that it is an 11 man game. Every player has to pull their weight and unfortunately that is not happening. The stats show that Taylor and Jarvis have, but that the others are either past it, or too inconsistent. This can be put down to terrible administration, selectors, and coaches.

I do respect the low sides, but their stats are irrelevant. The argument is against paying Taylor and Jarvis to come back to Zim because they have done nothing, whilst the stats prove them to be the best.

So, I really do blame myself. Everyone has always said it, and here I thought I would try to engage. Unfortunately you have proven yourself to be a racist argumentative agenda driven individual who does not care about the greater good. I feel sorry that you live with so much hate in your heart. As your greatest enemy once said, "we are not born to hate. We are taught to hate." I can only apologise that you lead such a life.

[Jemisi]

Whilst learning a lesson that hhm will do what hhm always does, don't be too hard on yourself mate.

You still provided some nice stats. Thanks.

It isn't rocket science to suggest that Jarvis, Chatara and Cremer + 1 were our best attack recently.

Or that BRMT, Williams, Ervine, Raza and Hami should be in every team.

So no surprises from the stats but a nice clean job of presenting them.

*wipes brow with serviette*

[zimbos_05]

Whilst learning a lesson that hhm will do what hhm always does, don't be too hard on yourself mate.

You still provided some nice stats. Thanks.

It isn't rocket science to suggest that Jarvis, Chatara and Cremer + 1 were our best attack recently.

Or that BRMT, Williams, Ervine, Raza and Hami should be in every team.

So no surprises from the stats but a nice clean job of presenting them.

*wipes brow with serviette*

Cheers mate. Just surprised someone could be so close minded and, i guess, arrogant. Really shouldn't surprise me in todays world.

Although, you know your points are valid when the comeback is lacking in facts and basically just reiterates what you've already refuted.

[zimfan1]

Draft domestic has a five team comp with AC academy included.

T20 comp in October over a week.
Then 8 rounds per team of Logan Cup from November to start of Feb
Then 8 rounds of Pro 50.

Let's see if these fixtures happen.

Club cricket was played in the capital and Bulawayo this weekend so there is hope.

[encore]

Draft domestic has a five team comp with AC academy included.

T20 comp in October over a week.
Then 8 rounds per team of Logan Cup from November to start of Feb
Then 8 rounds of Pro 50.

Let's see if these fixtures happen.

Club cricket was played in the capital and Bulawayo this weekend so there is hope.

Thank you zimfan

Not bad by ZC. Well done Givemore Makoni! I'm confident they'll pull it off.

I'll be keenly watching the team grants though. Got to hand it to AC. He understands money, and will do abslutely anything for it. Those on the ground must follow Bvute and Viljoen. If they're somehow there then AC has partners in this. This partly makes me happy because Kirsty and Mlotshwa will sit down now unless they have AC in their crosshairs as well. I noted with concern as no pressure was applied on ZC until the dust settled after AC's departure. Back to square one.

[Kriterion_BD]

Encore, Taylor has performed very well since his return. Jarvis has does decently.

The one area they could improve on is developing a killer attitude, one that allows them to take important games by the scruff and win them no matter what (that UAE game for example).

But putting the W/L ratio argument onto 1 or 2 players is unfair. Zimbabwe's problem from time immemmorial is that in any given game only 1 of the playing XI decides to show up and perform. If Williams scores runs, then its almost guaranted that Taylor, Ervine, Raza, Hamilton, Regis/Mutumbami/Chigumbura/Burl will go cheaply. If Taylor or Raza score, then the other 6 batters will contribute very little. The day the bowlers play well, the batsman all stink it up, and when the batsmen put a decent total on the board, the bowlers all spray it all over the place.

That is not just a Taylor or Jarvis problem, going by the stats, they are the LEAST guilty of it.

How about criticizing Hamilton for only scoring one decent innings vs Nepal or Hong Kong in the WCQ? Had he, with all his experience and supposed class, scored 20-25 more runs, Zimbabwe wins that game.

[encore]

Encore, Taylor has performed very well since his return. Jarvis has does decently.

The one area they could improve on is developing a killer attitude, one that allows them to take important games by the scruff and win them no matter what (that UAE game for example).

But putting the W/L ratio argument onto 1 or 2 players is unfair. Zimbabwe's problem from time immemmorial is that in any given game only 1 of the playing XI decides to show up and perform. If Williams scores runs, then its almost guaranted that Taylor, Ervine, Raza, Hamilton, Regis/Mutumbami/Chigumbura/Burl will go cheaply. If Taylor or Raza score, then the other 6 batters will contribute very little. The day the bowlers play well, the batsman all stink it up, and when the batsmen put a decent total on the board, the bowlers all spray it all over the place.

That is not just a Taylor or Jarvis problem, going by the stats, they are the LEAST guilty of it.

How about criticizing Hamilton for only scoring one decent innings vs Nepal or Hong Kong in the WCQ? Had he, with all his experience and supposed class, scored 20-25 more runs, Zimbabwe wins that game.

Check the annals of the forum. I've been through these stats-arguments before(with you even), and showed that ZIM have almost always won whenever Hami, Elton, Chatara, Panyangara and Utseya have done very well. You very seldom see ZIM losing when those guys have done well. Not so with the others because on average their stats have been ok, but ZIM failed to win, so mostly face saving performances(like Raza ton v PAK).

That other guy here mocked me for saying ZIM generally do well when the openers do well. He ignored the import of that statement. There was a time when Taylor was the only one turning up most of the time, Craig, Sean, Malcolm and Regis/Mutumbami failing, and Elton left with too much to do in the end. So generally each time Hami and Vusi did well, Taylor's efforts amounted to something as a result in some of those wins(Elton also singlehandedly stood tall against top class attacks from SA & IND in ODI losses - should have one that IND one if I recall).

I'm not putting the W/L ratio down to two guys. That wouldn't make sense in sports. My simple argument was lots of money was paid for these two guys, and most of the forum's "favourites" have played most games (i.e. reverse quotas). And yet, the team has regressed embarassingly. i'm sorry but there's no sugar coating that one. Instead you should be trying to answer why Zimbabwe have gone backwards since Taylor and Jarvis returned, and selection has largely been "favourable". Especially considering the fact that the opposition has been weaker in that time.

In the farmers/rebels' era even then a handful of players did well, but those few who stood up made the perfromances count - against top shelf opposition. So it's no excuse. Some even make arguments of Taylor being Zimbabwe's all-time great in ODIs. He had plenty shots at NED & IRE. Not once did he take the game by the scruff of its neck - think Elton in wins in ZIM vs India(T20) & Pakistan(ODI). That's significant(even if we ignore BT's away record - which is a fact whether one likes it or not).

Anyway, I think there's enough stats in this forum on pretty much all the players (ZIM has used very few over the years). So any arguments are littered all over the place, and the links still active and relevant to this day(if not worse).

What you and I should be looking forward to is the "new" generation now - new slates. Except some have racked up an undeserved number of internationals already. I will never understand how Moor got to so many internationals, but he did! Especially when the likes of Wellington(restricting), Mavuta(attacking) and Jongwe(pure allround excellence) who are truly talented and definite long-term XI material for this level have not received as much. Anyway, it will be very hard for some of them to recover from those stats, so in a way they are like the Matsi, Hami and Chibhabhas of old even if they get some good scores.

Name and Internationals
Moor 76
Burl 31
Jongwe 30
Wellington 27
Madziva
Musakanda 22
Mutombodzi 20
Chari 18
Mavuta 12
Ngarava 9
Murray 5
Ndlovu 5
Mumba 4
Kamunhukamwe 3
Kaia - R 0, I 0
Kasuza 0

At least the new season will give plenty guys a game. I think Myers and that other youngster got a game or two at XI/A level, so not full internationals, but depending on who's around ZIM will have a big local season. In a way I think there's a clearer path of what needs to be done than BD. AFG pasting BD at all levels so you guys must be frustrated and spirits dampened a bit.

For SA I'm stoked. After the WC disapointment, we have legal quotas(better than ZIM), and even our 2nd rate players like Beuran and Fortuin getting the better of India! All with JP and Amla gone, plus even with no Philander or Parnell in the squads. Something the Springboks should have learnt - more Cheslin Kolbes. Exciting times!- more