What's new

Do you rate performance of players in dead rubbers or JAMODIs?

axis

Debutant
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Runs
258
Many times in the last few Test matches of an already decided Test series, some players score big hundreds, and/or take 5 wicket hauls, thus improving their overall stats and reputations.

Similar is the case in ODI series tournaments.. many times when your team has already lost the series, or thrown out of the tournament, and can't make it to the next stage, players perform in such ODIs.

How do you rate these performances ? Should we neglect all of them.. or do they carry some weight as some teams want to win every match they play and some teams want to avoid whitewash .. and such performances play a role in that.

In the context of a single match, a dead match is when the match is already decided.. and your effort is only going to delay the inevitable.. but not change the course of the match.. do you rate such an innings and/or wickets taken in that context ?

Discuss.
 
Of course not. Players should intentionally lose matches or fake injuries in dead rubbers. Even though they are still representing their country, still taking money from their board and the match still has a win or a loss
 
Did Anwar's 194* come in a dead rubber ?

Was it not a JAMODI? And in one thread you were bringing up performances in important matches, and then then you brought up that 194 by Anwar :))
 
Every match representing your country is important. Why shouldn’t innings be token account? World tournament are not the only way to judge a player as it is a small period of time where a player could hit a purple patch but not show any consistency in the overall career.
 
Was it not a JAMODI? And in one thread you were bringing up performances in important matches, and then then you brought up that 194 by Anwar :))

An India Pak encounter in a tournament can't be called Jamodi as long as the match is played in a live tournament where match result is still important to the tournament result.
 
Of course not. Players should intentionally lose matches or fake injuries in dead rubbers. Even though they are still representing their country, still taking money from their board and the match still has a win or a loss

Not sure what is your point.. no one is asking players to lose it.. but it is a fact that teams try their reserve bench players in such matches.. and once the series is decided, winning team's players aren't exactly at the top of their intensity.
 
An India Pak encounter in a tournament can't be called Jamodi as long as the match is played in a live tournament where match result is still important to the tournament result.

That match was not at all important for Pakistan. Pakistan had already made it to semi finals of the tournament by that stage. What's your next excuse now?
 
That match was not at all important. Pakistan had already made it to semi finals of the tournament by that stage. What's your next excuse now?

Bhai.. 4 teams played that tournament.. so how can Pakistan be in Semi final already ? May be you should have looked at the tournament fixtures.

Pakistan won 2 and lost 1 in that tournament.. if this match was dead rubber.. and had India won that match, would it not matter to India and/or Pakistan for their progress in the finals ?
 
Bhai.. 4 teams played that tournament.. so how can Pakistan be in Semi final already ? May be you should have looked at the tournament fixtures.

Pakistan won 2 and lost 1 in that tournament.. if this match was dead rubber.. and had India won that match, would it not matter to India and/or Pakistan for their progress in the finals ?

Sorry, there were no semis in that tournament. It was a tournament of best of 2 finals. That match where Anwar scored 194 was pretty much a JAMODI, in the sense that it wasn't one of those 2 finals. If it wasen't, then neither would matches in a bialeteral tournament be JAMODIS. Look at the meaning of the term, JAMODI = Just Another Meaningless One Day International. It's referred to meaningless ODI matches, matches that aren't QF, SF or Finals of a tournament.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, there were no semis in that tournament. It was a tournament of best of 2 finals. That match where Anwar scored 194 was pretty much a JAMODI, in the sense that it wasn't one of those 2 finals.

I am still not sure of your point .. let's have a look again.

This was the last (6th) match in the tournament's league stage. Before this match the standing was that SL had won 2 matches and qualified for finals with 4 points.. while NZ was out with 1 win and 2 losses.

Pakistan and India both had won 1 match each by then (out of their 2 matches, Pak beat SL and India beat NZ, while they had lost to NZ and SL respectively).

Winner of this match between India and Pakistan would have got 2 wins and thus would have qualified for the finals.. so it was a virtual semi final, right ?

How can it be a dead rubber or meaningless match ?
 
I am still not sure of your point .. let's have a look again.

This was the last (6th) match in the tournament's league stage. Before this match the standing was that SL had won 2 matches and qualified for finals with 4 points.. while NZ was out with 1 win and 2 losses.

Pakistan and India both had won 1 match each by then (out of their 2 matches, Pak beat SL and India beat NZ, while they had lost to NZ and SL respectively).

Winner of this match between India and Pakistan would have got 2 wins and thus would have qualified for the finals.. so it was a virtual semi final, right ?

How can it be a dead rubber or meaningless match ?

Do you even know the difference between a dead rubber and a JAMODI? Go, learn it first. They aren't the same. Your thread title is -

Do you rate performance of players in dead rubbers or JAMODIs ?

Yes, it was very much a JAMODI.
 
Do you even know the difference between a dead rubber and a JAMODI? Go, learn it first. They aren't the same. Your thread title is -

Do you rate performance of players in dead rubbers or JAMODIs ?

Yes, it was very much a JAMODI.

I don't rate SF of a tournament as JAMODI.. thank you.
 
I described my definition of JAMODI in the thread opening post itself.

Similar is the case in ODI series tournaments.. many times when your team has already lost the series, or thrown out of the tournament, and can't make it to the next stage, players perform in such ODIs.
 
That match was not at all important for Pakistan. Pakistan had already made it to semi finals of the tournament by that stage. What's your next excuse now?

Here is your quote ..

I proved that the match was very much important for both Pakistan and India.. you are just refusing to own up to your own statements.
 
I described my definition of JAMODI in the thread opening post itself.

Similar is the case in ODI series tournaments.. many times when your team has already lost the series, or thrown out of the tournament, and can't make it to the next stage, players perform in such ODIs.

So who exactly brought up the term JAMODI in the thread title? You expect people to go by your personal definition of the term rather than with what that term really means? Yea, great :)))
 
Here is your post -



Are you really this fond of making a fool out of yourself?

Please read my previous post where I clarified the whole scenario.. I assumed you read it properly and hence I didn't repeat the virtual word again.

This is what I said in the previous post .. and I assumed the context was already set..


Winner of this match between India and Pakistan would have got 2 wins and thus would have qualified for the finals.. so it was a virtual semi final, right ?
 
So who exactly brought up the term JAMODI in the thread title? You expect people to go by your personal definition of the term rather than with what that term really means? Yea, great :)))

The title can't explain everything.. that's why I clearly explained the meaning of JAMODI.. I don't know if the whole world considers a virtual semi final as a JAMODI..

Brother, I could have pointed out a lot of your mistakes which you made and called you names like fool or something.. for saying Pakistan already had qualified for semi final.. I don't do things like that because I ignore the side mistakes of the person and concentrate on the crux of his argument.. I would request you to abstain from name calling and concentrate on the issue. That will help both of us have civil discussion.
 
[MENTION=133315]Hitman[/MENTION],

Please read post number 7 and 9 again.. I assumed we had setup the context of the discussion of JAMODI already.. but it seems there was a gap.. do you want to revisit the definition ?

I have offered my definition of JAMODIs in an ODI tournament.. if you want to differ from that, and don't consider a virtual SF as meaningful, please say so.
 
How should we rate Rohit's 208 against Sri Lanka? It was do or die situation. India had lost first match of 3 match series and if India had lost the 2nd one the series was gone.
 
The title can't explain everything.. that's why I clearly explained the meaning of JAMODI.. I don't know if the whole world considers a virtual semi final as a JAMODI..

Brother, I could have pointed out a lot of your mistakes which you made and called you names like fool or something.. for saying Pakistan already had qualified for semi final.. I don't do things like that because I ignore the side mistakes of the person and concentrate on the crux of his argument.. I would request you to abstain from name calling and concentrate on the issue. That will help both of us have civil discussion.

Apologies for getting personal. Your posts confuse me. At times you make such sensible posts, and then in another thread you post things that speaks volumes regarding your bias. Kind of like a person with split personality disorder. For a change try to keep your bias aside while debating. It'll do you a ton of good and make other posters respect you. It's not about having bias for Pakistani players, it's about being biased against Indian players.

I can tell first hand that you have been watching cricket for at least as long as I have. Why not then let the bias go away and contribute to the betterment of the debates with your knowledge, which you are very much capable of.
 
How should we rate Rohit's 208 against Sri Lanka? It was do or die situation. India had lost first match of 3 match series and if India had lost the 2nd one the series was gone.

Of course it was a critical innings.. but why ask this ? Did anyone say otherwise?
 
Apologies for getting personal. Your posts confuse me. At times you make such sensible posts, and then in another thread you post things that speaks volumes regarding your bias. Kind of like a person with split personality disorder. For a change try to keep your bias aside while debating. It'll do you a ton of good and make other posters respect you. It's not about having bias for Pakistani players, it's about being biased against Indian players.

I can tell first hand that you have been watching cricket for at least as long as I have. Why not then let the bias go away and contribute to the betterment of the debates with your knowledge, which you are very much capable of.

Thanks for your comment... let's shake hands and hopefully have a better and civil discussion which enhances both of our knowledge.

I am new to the forum and hence not aware of all the rules or definitions .. so can be using wrong terms for already established norms at PP.
 
Many called it a meaningless knock in a JAMODI

Let's define a JAMODI..

In my opinion, once an ODI series is scheduled, it can't be called a JAMODI series. It is not for the players to decide.. if some spectators only care about WC KO and call every other ODI as JAMODI, it is their personal opinion.. I am no one to call them wrong, but I don't agree with them. I refuse to agree to their definition else we would not have any ODI moment outside the purview of the WC KO matches. In my opinion, theirs is a very limited and narrow view.

Having said that, however individual matches in that series can be JAMODIs, specially when they are dead rubbers.. the 3rd match or 5th match when the series is already won or lost.. is my definition of JAMODI..

Even my definition is also not fully correct as I pointed out in my opening post.. some teams want to avoid whitewashes or complete whitewashes of the opposition and thus such matches can assume a lot of importance for that context..

However, most of the last matches of the 4 match series where the winning team is leading 3-0, players play the last match just to complete the formalities.. and should we really give weightage to performances in these matches is the intention of my thread here.
 
Haha OP caught in his own web!

A JAMODI is a JAMODI (i.e any one day match), it's a term purists used to mock shorter formats of cricket. Don't try to redefine what a JAMODI is.
 
Thanks for your comment... let's shake hands and hopefully have a better and civil discussion which enhances both of our knowledge.

I am new to the forum and hence not aware of all the rules or definitions .. so can be using wrong terms for already established norms at PP.

Nahin, bhai! You can post anything you want, I'm no one to say anything. But being such a knowledgeable poster who has followed cricket since such a long time, some of your posts make a lot of sense. So why not let all of your posts remain that way and contribute to the knowledge about the game among younger posters who haven't followed the game for as long as you. I have personally known a lot of things about cricket prior to the 90's from posters who have been watching the game from those times. I can tell first hand that you have been a very avid follower of the game since the 90's just like me, a lot of your posts are a testimony to it.

It doesn't matter if you joined the forum a few days ago. You are a very knowledgeable poster, someone who can contribute a lot to the forum. I honest wish you remain active in this forum for a long, long time. And in the process contribute to this community with your knowledge, which you are extremely capable of.
 
You can't just judge a player in ODIs off the WC. A tournament that is held every 4 years and about 10/12 games depending on the length of the tournament. ICC tournament elevate your status. Bilaterals show your consistency and impact.
 
What is a JAMODI? Is it players getting stuck in a traffic jam before coming to the ground? Guess they are tired so performances shouldn't be counted. Yeah I agree.
 
What is a JAMODI? Is it players getting stuck in a traffic jam before coming to the ground? Guess they are tired so performances shouldn't be counted. Yeah I agree.

Just Another Meaningless ODI ....
 
Just Another Meaningless ODI ....

In that case mate, how can playing an international match for your country be "meaningless" for a player? Even a List A game is not meaningless, let alone an international one.
 
Dead rubber runs are overrated.

The likes of Amla and Cook have scored many dead rubber runs. So, I dont rate those runs, particularly when they went missing whole series and only got runs in the final useless test of the series.
 
If someone cares for LOI - he will care for JAMODIs.

For Purists - ODIs are like cupcakes. A little snack to tide you over until the main course. No legends form in LOI alone. Shine in the 5 day game or perish!
 
In tests there are no dead rubbers. Every single test is important especially overseas.

ODIs have lost the charm post 2011 WC because of the nature of the contest. Now I only care about the ODI WC. But if pitches are balanced I will always tune in, this Asia Cup had perfect balance between bat and ball. Most ODIs in England and some in India/Australia are ridiculous these days where bowlers have everything stacked against them. The India vs SA series earlier this year had balanced pitches and I enjoyed them very much. Likewise the India-NZ ODI series in 2016. But the India-Australia 2013 7 match ODI series was a big turn off.
 
Last edited:
In that case mate, how can playing an international match for your country be "meaningless" for a player? Even a List A game is not meaningless, let alone an international one.

And you are right!
 
Back
Top