Resources Season 01 - Fixture, Ladder and Statistics

[boncer34]

Season 01 Fixture

---

Round 1 – Sunday, 5th January 2025​

• Qoalas Qricket Club (QQC) vs Western Stars (WST) at Outback Stadium
• Keptin Mafia (KEP) vs Fulmina Qricket Club (FUL) at ChippyBet Stadium, Keptin Reserve
• West Gate Trolls (WGT) vs Darkness Eternal (DAR) at Spotswood Oval

---

Round 2 – Sunday, 12th January 2025​

• Western Stars (WST) vs Keptin Mafia (KEP) at Bainlea Oval
• Darkness Eternal (DAR) vs Qoalas Qricket Club (QQC) at Dark Park
• Fulmina Qricket Club (FUL) vs West Gate Trolls (WGT) at Fulmina Recreation Reserve

---

Round 3 – Sunday, 19th January 2025​

• Keptin Mafia (KEP) vs Darkness Eternal (DAR) at ChippyBet Stadium, Keptin Reserve
• Qoalas Qricket Club (QQC) vs West Gate Trolls (WGT) at Outback Stadium
• Western Stars (WST) vs Fulmina Qricket Club (FUL) at Bainlea Oval

---

Round 4 – Sunday, 26th January 2025​

• Darkness Eternal (DAR) vs Western Stars (WST) at Dark Park
• Fulmina Qricket Club (FUL) vs Qoalas Qricket Club (QQC) at Fulmina Recreation Reserve
• West Gate Trolls (WGT) vs Keptin Mafia (KEP) at Spotswood Oval

---

Round 5 – Sunday, 2nd February 2025​

• Qoalas Qricket Club (QQC) vs Keptin Mafia (KEP) at Outback Stadium
• Darkness Eternal (DAR) vs Fulmina Qricket Club (FUL) at Dark Park
• Western Stars (WST) vs West Gate Trolls (WGT) at Bainlea Oval

---

Grand Final – Sunday, 9th February 2025​

• Top 2 Teams after Round 5 will play in the Grand Final at Boncers Castle.

The two teams with the highest points (or net run rate in case of a tie) will qualify for the Grand Final to determine the season champion.

 

[Mobbs]

Hello everybody! Here is the washup from Round 1 of the inaugural Sweet Cricket Association!

Out at Chippybet oval aka Keptin Reserve, the Mafia stood strong to defeat Fulmina by 4 wickets.

Just outside town at Outback Arena, the Qoalas were bundled out in a dismal 2nd innings, losing by 107 runs to the Western Stars.

And at Spotswood Oval, the West Gate Trolls failed to overhaul the Darkness Eternal total, falling short by 62 runs.

After Round 1, the definitely exactly correct and not at all subject to ME JUST LEARNING HOW THIS BRUTAL CALCULATION WORKS WITHIN THE LAST HOUR, ladder appears (lol) to be as follows:



(any corrections gladly welcomed)

 

[Mobbs]

And here's some Top 10s to cluck over. Maybe a couple of numbers are vaguely off-centre due to balls being a sixth of an over and not a tenth, but it should be pretty solid:



FootyGuy13 , myblueroan , sausageroll , boncer34 , tgrs , Pie 4 Life

More Top 10s might be added in future. Maybe 5-fers can come in next round.

 

[sausageroll]

bazballroll batting style from me

 

[Robertio]

Great work Mobbs

 

[Chipmunk]

Seconded, nice one Mobbs !

 

[Pugsley]

Love it Mobbs. Got my Fraser-McGurk on. Difference being I make runs.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

And here's some Top 10s to cluck over. Maybe a couple of numbers are vaguely off-centre due to balls being a sixth of an over and not a tenth, but it should be pretty solid:

View attachment 2199745
View attachment 2199746
FootyGuy13 , myblueroan , sausageroll , boncer34 , tgrs , Pie 4 Life

More Top 10s might be added in future. Maybe 5-fers can come in next round.

And then the round after that, a cricinfo style breakdown for each player, right?

Also, I'm screenshotting that Top 10 Batting Averages. There's no way I'll be anywhere near it ever again in my qricket career.

 

[Mobbs]

And then the round after that, a cricinfo style breakdown for each player, right?

Also, I'm screenshotting that Top 10 Batting Averages. There's no way I'll be anywhere near it ever again in my qricket career.

Sorry I don't know what cricinfo is.

 

[The Majestic]

Well done on the stats, Mobbs

I hope to be in more top tens next time being more useful.

 

[boncer34]

And then the round after that, a cricinfo style breakdown for each player, right?

Also, I'm screenshotting that Top 10 Batting Averages. There's no way I'll be anywhere near it ever again in my qricket career.

When I'm back at my desk our league stats will make cricindias look amateurish.

 

[Ljp86]

Hello everybody! Here is the washup from Round 1 of the inaugural Sweet Cricket Association!

Out at Chippybet oval aka Keptin Reserve, the Mafia stood strong to defeat Fulmina by 4 wickets.

Just outside town at Outback Arena, the Qoalas were bundled out in a dismal 2nd innings, losing by 107 runs to the Western Stars.

And at Spotswood Oval, the West Gate Trolls failed to overhaul the Darkness Eternal total, falling short by 62 runs.

After Round 1, the definitely exactly correct and not at all subject to ME JUST LEARNING HOW THIS BRUTAL CALCULATION WORKS WITHIN THE LAST HOUR, ladder appears (lol) to be as follows:

View attachment 2199743

(any corrections gladly welcomed)

Good work boncer34 and Mobbs.

However, because we are playing a multi-day competition, we should be using quotient instead of net run rate (NRR) to determine ladder position for clubs with the same amount of points. Quotient (also known as runs per wicket) is calculated as follows:



This rewards teams who win more effectively, either as they scored more runs in the game or lost fewer wickets. NRR is only used for one-day competitions and is less effective for multi-day competitions as it is entirely plausible for teams to win having scored at a slower rate than their opponent.

A good example of this is Team A bats first and is bowled out after scoring 350 runs from 100 overs. Team B bats next and are bowled out for 150 from 25 overs. Team B is asked to follow on and are again bowled out for 180 from 30 overs.

Team A has convincingly won the match by an innings and 20 runs, but has a NRR of -2.50 (i.e., (350/100 = 3.50) / ([150+180 = 330]/[25+30 = 55] = 6). Despite dominating the match, Team A has an inferior NRR as they scored their runs more slowly, and perhaps their line-up put more value on their wicket. This therefore makes no sense as Team A were clearly the better side.

I've calculated the quotient for each club based on Round One results as follows:

Team                RS   WL  Bat Avg    RC    WT  Bowl Avg    Quotient

Keptin Mafia       734   16   45.875    733   20   36.65      1.251705
Western Stars      602   20   30.10     495   20   24.75      1.216162
Darkness Eternal   598   20   29.90     536   20   26.80      1.115672
West Gate Trolls   536   20   26.80     598   20   29.90      0.896321
Qoalas             495   20   24.75     602   20   30.10      0.822259
Fulmina FCC        733   20   36.65     734   16   45.875     0.798910

Note:

RS = runs scored
WL = wickets lost
RC = runs conceded
WT = wickets taken
Quotient = Bat Average / Bowl Average (rounded to six decimal places).

Totally up to you guys what you would like to do, but the above process is used by various first-class (multi-day) competitions in domestic cricket.

Happy to also help out with any calculations/guidance on this if needed.

 

[Mobbs]

Good work boncer34 and Mobbs.

However, because we are playing a multi-day competition, we should be using quotient instead of net run rate (NRR) to determine ladder position for clubs with the same amount of points. Quotient (also known as runs per wicket) is calculated as follows:

View attachment 2200046

This rewards teams who win more effectively, either as they scored more runs in the game or lost fewer wickets. NRR is only used for one-day competitions and is less effective for multi-day competitions as it is entirely plausible for teams to win having scored at a slower rate than their opponent.

A good example of this is Team A bats first and is bowled out after scoring 350 runs from 100 overs. Team B bats next and are bowled out for 150 from 25 overs. Team B is asked to follow on and are again bowled out for 180 from 30 overs.

Team A has convincingly won the match by an innings and 20 runs, but has a NRR of -2.50 (i.e., (350/100 = 3.50) / ([150+180 = 330]/[25+30 = 55] = 6). Despite dominating the match, Team A has an inferior NRR as they scored their runs more slowly, and perhaps their line-up put more value on their wicket. This therefore makes no sense as Team A were clearly the better side.

I've calculated the quotient for each club based on Round One results as follows:

Team                RS   WL  Bat Avg    RC    WT  Bowl Avg    Quotient

Keptin Mafia       734   16   45.875    733   20   36.65      1.251705
Western Stars      602   20   30.10     495   20   24.75      1.216162
Darkness Eternal   598   20   29.90     536   20   26.80      1.115672
West Gate Trolls   536   20   26.80     598   20   29.90      0.896321
Qoalas             495   20   24.75     602   20   30.10      0.822259
Fulmina FCC        733   20   36.65     734   16   45.875     0.798910

Note:

RS = runs scored
WL = wickets lost
RC = runs conceded
WT = wickets taken
Quotient = Bat Average / Bowl Average (rounded to six decimal places).

Totally up to you guys what you would like to do, but the above process is used by various first-class (multi-day) competitions in domestic cricket.

Happy to also help out with any calculations/guidance on this if needed.

Thanks Ljp86 , and yes I think this would make more sense. Test matches should reflect runs against wickets, while limited overs matches could reflect runs against overs.

I'm happy to switch this over (just a small formula change) but it's ultimately a call for boncer34 to make !

 

[boncer34]

Good work boncer34 and Mobbs.

However, because we are playing a multi-day competition, we should be using quotient instead of net run rate (NRR) to determine ladder position for clubs with the same amount of points. Quotient (also known as runs per wicket) is calculated as follows:

View attachment 2200046

This rewards teams who win more effectively, either as they scored more runs in the game or lost fewer wickets. NRR is only used for one-day competitions and is less effective for multi-day competitions as it is entirely plausible for teams to win having scored at a slower rate than their opponent.

A good example of this is Team A bats first and is bowled out after scoring 350 runs from 100 overs. Team B bats next and are bowled out for 150 from 25 overs. Team B is asked to follow on and are again bowled out for 180 from 30 overs.

Team A has convincingly won the match by an innings and 20 runs, but has a NRR of -2.50 (i.e., (350/100 = 3.50) / ([150+180 = 330]/[25+30 = 55] = 6). Despite dominating the match, Team A has an inferior NRR as they scored their runs more slowly, and perhaps their line-up put more value on their wicket. This therefore makes no sense as Team A were clearly the better side.

I've calculated the quotient for each club based on Round One results as follows:

Team                RS   WL  Bat Avg    RC    WT  Bowl Avg    Quotient

Keptin Mafia       734   16   45.875    733   20   36.65      1.251705
Western Stars      602   20   30.10     495   20   24.75      1.216162
Darkness Eternal   598   20   29.90     536   20   26.80      1.115672
West Gate Trolls   536   20   26.80     598   20   29.90      0.896321
Qoalas             495   20   24.75     602   20   30.10      0.822259
Fulmina FCC        733   20   36.65     734   16   45.875     0.798910

Note:

RS = runs scored
WL = wickets lost
RC = runs conceded
WT = wickets taken
Quotient = Bat Average / Bowl Average (rounded to six decimal places).

Totally up to you guys what you would like to do, but the above process is used by various first-class (multi-day) competitions in domestic cricket.

Happy to also help out with any calculations/guidance on this if needed.

Makes sense to me mate.

 

[sabso]

Good work boncer34 and Mobbs.

However, because we are playing a multi-day competition, we should be using quotient instead of net run rate (NRR) to determine ladder position for clubs with the same amount of points. Quotient (also known as runs per wicket) is calculated as follows:

View attachment 2200046

This rewards teams who win more effectively, either as they scored more runs in the game or lost fewer wickets. NRR is only used for one-day competitions and is less effective for multi-day competitions as it is entirely plausible for teams to win having scored at a slower rate than their opponent.

A good example of this is Team A bats first and is bowled out after scoring 350 runs from 100 overs. Team B bats next and are bowled out for 150 from 25 overs. Team B is asked to follow on and are again bowled out for 180 from 30 overs.

Team A has convincingly won the match by an innings and 20 runs, but has a NRR of -2.50 (i.e., (350/100 = 3.50) / ([150+180 = 330]/[25+30 = 55] = 6). Despite dominating the match, Team A has an inferior NRR as they scored their runs more slowly, and perhaps their line-up put more value on their wicket. This therefore makes no sense as Team A were clearly the better side.

I've calculated the quotient for each club based on Round One results as follows:

Team                RS   WL  Bat Avg    RC    WT  Bowl Avg    Quotient

Keptin Mafia       734   16   45.875    733   20   36.65      1.251705
Western Stars      602   20   30.10     495   20   24.75      1.216162
Darkness Eternal   598   20   29.90     536   20   26.80      1.115672
West Gate Trolls   536   20   26.80     598   20   29.90      0.896321
Qoalas             495   20   24.75     602   20   30.10      0.822259
Fulmina FCC        733   20   36.65     734   16   45.875     0.798910

Note:

RS = runs scored
WL = wickets lost
RC = runs conceded
WT = wickets taken
Quotient = Bat Average / Bowl Average (rounded to six decimal places).

Totally up to you guys what you would like to do, but the above process is used by various first-class (multi-day) competitions in domestic cricket.

Happy to also help out with any calculations/guidance on this if needed.

Love this Ljp86 . Who’d have thought anantha narayanan was on bigfooty

 

[boncer34]

Ljp86 do you just want to do the ladder as you did/do(?) for the SFA?