What's new

The fly KAMI in thread....

1) More than 0 per game from drops and missed chances alone, this is enough for me to know there's enough cause for a replacement. In the last match alone he missed a stumping and didn't even attempt to catch another edge from memory.

2) WK's have a dual role, surprisingly, the main one being to keep wickets. Anyone who catches more than Akmal should displace him to cater to Pakistan's strength (bowling). Batting will come with time, Akmal himself is an example.

3) Agree, in which case...

4) ..He shouldn't be costing anything, his runs should be worth the number he scores, not have an after tax deduction to account for his drops. Averaging 26 and missing crucial, game-turning wickets is costing Pakistan and gifting the opposition.

5) Shafiq is already a member in the squads; Malik can be easily switched with him no problem. Kamran has a monopoly over the WK spot.
'Compare to the keeper probability' completely ignores what I wrote: Required order: Observation>Data collection>Conclusions.
Observation first (getting a new keeper in), then weigh up any comparison with Akmal.
 
Last edited:
Theres no point debating with Mr Khan Ji, hes just like any pakistani cricketer - stubborn and not willing to face facts
 
Last edited:
Fly in Kami?? I'm guessing there's a circus going on somewhere, any more details ?
 
JibranAnsari said:
Safe pair of hands are primary requirement for a keeper .. runs are secondary.

play him as a batsman if you want but a tidy keeper is a must.
Click to expand...

They are a primary requirement because of the runs the catches save.

How many in average does he cost per game?
 
Zaz said:
Theres no point debating with Mr Khan Ji, hes just like any pakistani cricketer - stubborn and not willing to face facts
Click to expand...

Im stubborn. .. but only until I hear a coherent argument.... :)
 
Sledger said:
1) More than 0 per game from drops and missed chances alone, this is enough for me to know there's enough cause for a replacement. In the last match alone he missed a stumping and didn't even attempt to catch another edge from memory.

2) WK's have a dual role, surprisingly, the main one being to keep wickets. Anyone who catches more than Akmal should displace him to cater to Pakistan's strength (bowling). Batting will come with time, Akmal himself is an example.

3) Agree, in which case...

4) ..He shouldn't be costing anything, his runs should be worth the number he scores, not have an after tax deduction to account for his drops. Averaging 26 and missing crucial, game-turning wickets is costing Pakistan and gifting the opposition.

5) Shafiq is already a member in the squads; Malik can be easily switched with him no problem. Kamran has a monopoly over the WK spot.
'Compare to the keeper probability' completely ignores what I wrote: Required order: Observation>Data collection>Conclusions.
Observation first (getting a new keeper in), then weigh up any comparison with Akmal.
Click to expand...

1) thats irrational. What's the cost in terms of runs per game.

PS: none of those chances were easy or expected. If we have a super keeper that can take those than I would be willing to take it into account. .. None of the replacements so far have been sharp enough to have taken those.

In fact Kami took some in that series that they wouldn't have taken.

That one flying in front of second slip couldn't have been expected of the others.

2) agree to a certain extent. The main one is to take catches to stop runs

How many runs does he cost per game?

3) in which case you work out an average cost per game. ...

4) ideally he shouldn't be be dropping any. ..

Ideally we should have batsmen averaging 50...

Ideals are nice and easy on paper.... but we have to deal with reality. ...

What's the tax deduction?

5) agreed that shafiq is a member of the squad... but what counts is the probability. ..

We are deciding which theree TTFs to replace the first. ... (replacing 4 is too much in one go)

So probabilities and pay offs are really really important.

6) The probabilities are being decided at a point in time. .. Ie now.

Do all the observing you want and give me probabilities as of now.
 
Last edited:
PS:

I keep saying Sarfaz's playing in the tests.

He's the best of the replacements. ... lets see how he Develops...

I want him to take Kamis spot cos Kami is rubbish.
 
farazaidi said:
Another potential 'support' thread. Mods are requested to rename the title :)
Click to expand...

No.......!!!!!


I don't support him. ... He's rubbish. ...

I just think he needs to be flown when the replacements are worse. ... :)
 
Last edited:
1,2 & 3) If you agree why is it irrational? If keeping is his primary goal and he's costing runs from drops/stumpings per game that's the dealbreaker - no need to slap a guessed number on it when you want a keeper who takes his catches.

4) Ideals are met through trial and error, you select someone from domestic cricket who is most likely to succeed and he gets in ahead of Kamran, the keepers spot is not shut and reserved only for him. Akmal has been trialled and is an error, bring in the next one.

5) You can't on one hand talk about 'reality' and then say Malik and Farhat should be dropped before Akmal in this current team on a merit based system. Two of them have match-contributing runs in recent times, the other has been poor with the bat and behind the stumps. I don't want Malik/Farhat as part of my long-term teams either but you can't relegate Akmal to a 'phase 2' replacement plan and have these two in phase 1; obvious bias is obvious.

6) It is highly likely that a keeper who has shown form in domestic cricket won't miss as many chances as Akmal, yet it is not certain. Conclusion: it is a risk but a necessary one. Impossible to estimate a number until he's [Akmal] replaced.
 
Sledger said:
1,2 & 3) If you agree why is it irrational? If keeping is his primary goal and he's costing runs from drops/stumpings per game that's the dealbreaker - no need to slap a guessed number on it when you want a keeper who takes his catches.

4) Ideals are met through trial and error, you select someone from domestic cricket who is most likely to succeed and he gets in ahead of Kamran, the keepers spot is not shut and reserved only for him. Akmal has been trialled and is an error, bring in the next one.

5) You can't on one hand talk about 'reality' and then say Malik and Farhat should be dropped before Akmal in this current team on a merit based system. Two of them have match-contributing runs in recent times, the other has been poor with the bat and behind the stumps. I don't want Malik/Farhat as part of my long-term teams either but you can't relegate Akmal to a 'phase 2' replacement plan and have these two in phase 1; obvious bias is obvious.

6) It is highly likely that a keeper who has shown form in domestic cricket won't miss as many chances as Akmal, yet it is not certain. Conclusion: it is a risk but a necessary one. Impossible to estimate a number until he's [Akmal] replaced.
Click to expand...

123)

The irrational bit is saying you want him dropped without even assessing the cost.

If you said he costs 26 runs per game on average. .. then you would be right in saying he should be dropped.

If you said he costs 5 runs per game on average. .. then you would be wrong in saying he should be dropped.

The two examples are both rational....

Saying "I don't know or can't estimate the cost" but because I know it's greater than 0, I want him dropped is irrational.

4) no way is it reserved for him. ... but you make choices based of probability of success....
Especially when u have to choose 3 out of 5/6 that might need replacing.

5) I never ever get bought by flukey one of performances. ..

Thats how these TTFs managed to survive for so long in the first place. ...

I look at performances over a period of time. ..

They barely average 30 after numerous games. ... They need replacing asap.

PS:Its not bias.

I have no innate love for Kami... in fact hes one of the players I least "like"

:yk on the other hand is a true patriot and one of my all time favourite Pakistanis...

Its not bias. Its basic probabilistic analysis.


6) So give me some numbers. .. What's your calculated probabilities....?

Let's see you get concrete with your views.
 
Last edited:
1,2 & 3) You aren't getting it - because I know it's greater than 0, I know it is a cost. Period. What I also know is that it's a keepers duty to NOT drop catches/miss stumpings. Put the two and two together and you come to your conclusion: a keeper costing the team runs needs to be booted and you need to initiate the process of rectifying this = new WK. Putting some trivial number with neither context nor possible comparison is just a weak (and desperate) attempt to divert the issue. As soon as a WK is in run 'debt', ANY VALUE DEBT, like Akmal over the course of 6-7 years he's not doing his job. Simples.

Out of interest, you say 5 is acceptable but 26 is too much - what is your cut off between these two points and is such a number based on any objective rationale?

4) This sounds curiously like an 'ideal' situation.
Pakistan have a keeper problem, when Kamran gets chance after chance this is evident. Therefore, a less cautious/cowardly selection process is needed at present, it is likely that a new WK who has performed in the LA tournaments won't drop as many catches as the record Akmal has built up in recent years (see: Drop Machine thread).

5) Sorry but calling BS on the elongated you have no love for Akmal spiel. Why then did you earlier apply double standards regarding domestic performances/hype over him and Malik (before sort of backtracking but sort of not backtracking). Also, why is Kamran in your phase 2 of replacements? This isn't about one off performances, this is about a MERIT BASED system and in that system you have Farhat and Malik with match-winning knocks and Akmal with a lesser contribution. You do want a merit based system right or just your favourites in the team who you can try to defend after each failure?

Personally, I feel you're very stubborn and have an unconditional affinity for Kamran, such to the point where you're willing to dump all logic and defend nothing scores (18). Your 'probabilistic analysis' is easily laughed at, based on nothing but an extremely vague, scratch that, non specified time frame for replacements to prove themselves (whilst Kamran basks in his phase 2 extension where he (or you) can buy time for a rare fluke knock as solidification of another 10 years). In the mean time, you're looking for trivial context-less numbers - unless of course you answered my above cutoff question (with reasoned objective analysis) - to somewhat distort as a positive for Kamran based on zero facts, as there are none available, from any other potential WKs.

6) If I haven't been clear, my view is rather concrete.
 
It is wasteful to discuss anything with Khan ji on cricket

He has weird ideas of judging a player that are beyond logic.


The idea of probability is just :facepalm:
 
Can khan ji name a player who gas lost more matches single handedly for a team than Camy has for Pakistan?
 
Sledger said:
1,2 & 3) You aren't getting it - because I know it's greater than 0, I know it is a cost. Period. What I also know is that it's a keepers duty to NOT drop catches/miss stumpings. Put the two and two together and you come to your conclusion: a keeper costing the team runs needs to be booted and you need to initiate the process of rectifying this = new WK. Putting some trivial number with neither context nor possible comparison is just a weak (and desperate) attempt to divert the issue. As soon as a WK is in run 'debt', ANY VALUE DEBT, like Akmal over the course of 6-7 years he's not doing his job. Simples.

Out of interest, you say 5 is acceptable but 26 is too much - what is your cut off between these two points and is such a number based on any objective rationale?

4) This sounds curiously like an 'ideal' situation.
Pakistan have a keeper problem, when Kamran gets chance after chance this is evident. Therefore, a less cautious/cowardly selection process is needed at present, it is likely that a new WK who has performed in the LA tournaments won't drop as many catches as the record Akmal has built up in recent years (see: Drop Machine thread).

5) Sorry but calling BS on the elongated you have no love for Akmal spiel. Why then did you earlier apply double standards regarding domestic performances/hype over him and Malik (before sort of backtracking but sort of not backtracking). Also, why is Kamran in your phase 2 of replacements? This isn't about one off performances, this is about a MERIT BASED system and in that system you have Farhat and Malik with match-winning knocks and Akmal with a lesser contribution. You do want a merit based system right or just your favourites in the team who you can try to defend after each failure?

Personally, I feel you're very stubborn and have an unconditional affinity for Kamran, such to the point where you're willing to dump all logic and defend nothing scores (18). Your 'probabilistic analysis' is easily laughed at, based on nothing but an extremely vague, scratch that, non specified time frame for replacements to prove themselves (whilst Kamran basks in his phase 2 extension where he (or you) can buy time for a rare fluke knock as solidification of another 10 years). In the mean time, you're looking for trivial context-less numbers - unless of course you answered my above cutoff question (with reasoned objective analysis) - to somewhat distort as a positive for Kamran based on zero facts, as there are none available, from any other potential WKs.

6) If I haven't been clear, my view is rather concrete.
Click to expand...

123)

I get ur point...

Its an irrational view...

But I accept its ur opinion.


In terms of cutoffs...


The cutoff is the point at which the probability of a new keeper getting the net number of runs that Kami contributes (on average) becomes greater than the probability of the new batsmen contributing more than farhat, yk, malik.

4) like I said in 123) and a number of posts....show me the probabilities. ...

Its a sensible view... but show me the probabilities u r making ur judgement on.

5)A) when did I apply double standards? I will have to apologise if I did.

B) My merit based system doesn't consist of the memory of a goldfish.

I don't just flip flop based off the last performance.

You've got to look at overall record.

C) now ur just relying on hyperbole.

Explain to me why probabilities are the wrong way to go. ..

All judgements are based off assessing the probability of something better or worse happening tomorrow. ..

I'm just asking u to quantify the numbers so u can see with clarity the judgements you are making.

D) i am stubborn until someone comes up with a coherent argument.

To give u an example until this SA series I was adamant that fawad should be in the test XI.... now that shafiq has a century against Steyn and co..... I have replaced fawad with shafiq. ..

The probabilities have changed fundamentally after that innings.

E) how can u accuse me of loving Kami. ... That's just so wrong.

I like his cover drives in the PP overs .. but that's about it.

6) your view is concrete. ... but the foundation of the view is less concrete if u cant quantify the probabilities.
 
Last edited:
shah_1 said:
It is wasteful to discuss anything with Khan ji on cricket

He has weird ideas of judging a player that are beyond logic.


The idea of probability is just :facepalm:
Click to expand...

You lost me when you said it was 100% certain that Rizwan would average 30 and drop 0 catches.


Bro, every decision you make in life means that you assess these probabilities in your mind.

If you think about the probabilities better then you will make better decisions in life in general ... forget cricket.....
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
Can u give me your assessment of the number of runs on average that camy costs per game?
Click to expand...

Easily thousands over his career.

And so many crunch games that he has single handedly thrown away.
If I had to give you a number I would guess 35 runs on average in his career. Horriterriawful.

Please answer my question now.
 
Inziquicksingle said:
Easily thousands over his career.

And so many crunch games that he has single handedly thrown away.
If I had to give you a number I would guess 35 runs on average in his career. Horriterriawful.

Please answer my question now.
Click to expand...

If u think it's 35 runs per game then I am not surprised u want him out.... :)

That means he contributes minus 9 runs per game.

He would be at the top of the list for the chop in that case!!!!






Can you show me how u got to 35?

Just to put that into context.....

The last 2 series have consisted of 10 games.

He would have had to have 350 runs worth of dropped catches for you to be right....


I counted 0 runs as there were no clear drops.



To put that into further context.

For your average to work... if he cost 0 runs over the last 10 games. ... he would had to have 700 runs worth of drops in the previous 10 games....



To put that further into context. ..

For that average to work on a net basis the replacement player would have to have had 0 drops in that 20 game period.
 
Last edited:
Not irrational, unless you prove to me why your desire for a random number is rational. As I asked before which you ignored, what is your cutoff, what evidence is that number based on and what reasoning can be applied to say it's valid?

You've previously stated your borders, not mine, as 5 runs per game and 26 per game so what's the middle number then and how did you come to it? Convince me your question is worth answering and not an attempt to steer the discussion to unfounded data and I will.

4) To repeat, Pakistan have arguably never had a poorer keeper than Akmal, it's likely that a new keeper won't be as consistently bad as him. Do you not think drops and miss stumpings since 06 is going to be a tough act to follow? Therefore what we know = probability of a replacement's success is likely, of which a number cannot be put to, what we also know is Akmal is counterproductive to the teams chances at present. Obvious conclusion.

5) The double standards have been explained in #552 already.

Apparently you don't understand what a merit system is. If players are set for long-term replacement and you want to do it in phases, you get rid of the greater of the evils first. It's a fact you'll have to swallow that Malik and Farhat BOTH have had better performances than Akmal recently and are retained on those grounds under any fair system.

"Got to look at overall record" Interesting, I'll be further interested to hear your honest comments on this non-updated, damning thread then.

No hyperbole, I'm just sharing my opinion. You need to understand that there aren't many conclusions left when someone defends innings of 18, desperately tries to steer conversations toward meaningless probability numbers with no available data and is wanting to apply double standards and a non-fair phasing systems to give one player as much leeway as possible.

I'm not saying probabilities are the wrong way to go, I have an issue with you trying to put a number to it which likely means nothing - there's no 'clarity' unless you can show me how these numbers are useful data (start by following up your 5-26 run borders that you stated, whats the threshold in the middle?)

If you can't convince me, why should I give you a subjective playing field when we can deal with facts? Kamran Akmal has been missing chances for 7 years. I've already said I think there's an element of risk but I don't think that outweighs the damage Akmal does to the team.

So you say Shafiq changed your opinion AFTER his int. innings and yet here you are showing a great reluctance to try another WK on the same grounds. This has been my argument throughout: New WK - Observation>Data collection>Conclusions. As you've said the probabilities 'changed fundamentally', shows how pointless/what little they prove if they can be rearranged after just a few special hours of international cricket. It's a shame you haven't learnt anything from your past experience.
 
Sledger said:
Not irrational, unless you prove to me why your desire for a random number is rational. As I asked before which you ignored, what is your cutoff, what evidence is that number based on and what reasoning can be applied to say it's valid?

You've previously stated your borders, not mine, as 5 runs per game and 26 per game so what's the middle number then and how did you come to it? Convince me your question is worth answering and not an attempt to steer the discussion to unfounded data and I will.

4) To repeat, Pakistan have arguably never had a poorer keeper than Akmal, it's likely that a new keeper won't be as consistently bad as him. Do you not think drops and miss stumpings since 06 is going to be a tough act to follow? Therefore what we know = probability of a replacement's success is likely, of which a number cannot be put to, what we also know is Akmal is counterproductive to the teams chances at present. Obvious conclusion.

5) The double standards have been explained in #552 already.

Apparently you don't understand what a merit system is. If players are set for long-term replacement and you want to do it in phases, you get rid of the greater of the evils first. It's a fact you'll have to swallow that Malik and Farhat BOTH have had better performances than Akmal recently and are retained on those grounds under any fair system.

"Got to look at overall record" Interesting, I'll be further interested to hear your honest comments on this non-updated, damning thread then.

No hyperbole, I'm just sharing my opinion. You need to understand that there aren't many conclusions left when someone defends innings of 18, desperately tries to steer conversations toward meaningless probability numbers with no available data and is wanting to apply double standards and a non-fair phasing systems to give one player as much leeway as possible.

I'm not saying probabilities are the wrong way to go, I have an issue with you trying to put a number to it which likely means nothing - there's no 'clarity' unless you can show me how these numbers are useful data (start by following up your 5-26 run borders that you stated, whats the threshold in the middle?)

If you can't convince me, why should I give you a subjective playing field when we can deal with facts? Kamran Akmal has been missing chances for 7 years. I've already said I think there's an element of risk but I don't think that outweighs the damage Akmal does to the team.

So you say Shafiq changed your opinion AFTER his int. innings and yet here you are showing a great reluctance to try another WK on the same grounds. This has been my argument throughout: New WK - Observation>Data collection>Conclusions. As you've said the probabilities 'changed fundamentally', shows how pointless/what little they prove if they can be rearranged after just a few special hours of international cricket. It's a shame you haven't learnt anything from your past experience.
Click to expand...

1) There is a cut off point at which the probability of the replacement player doing better in total than the incumbent makes the payoff worthwhile.

I have a number in my mind. ... I can't prove it s there is no data... but I have a number that I am making my conclusion on.

You are telling me that you don't care what the number is. ... Thats irrational.

4) So back up what u r saying with some probabilities and numbers. ...
Point 4 has merged in to point 1.

5) I agree that we should get rid of the worst first.

But need to take account of the probabilities that the replacement doing better than the incumbent!!!!



The other trap you have fallen into is getting excited by a couple of games. ...

Farhat has excited you after a couple of games. ..

Malik is exciting you after a couple of games. ...


One or two games mean nothing. .. Look at their records over a long time. .. then talk.

6) probabilities are really important. ... something PPers generally fail to grasp the concept of.

7) Re Shafiq. I don't know what point u r making. ...


You have to calculate the probabilities at any given point in time. .. And make a decision.


If u were making the decision before the series. Fawad had a better probability of success. .. after the series Shafiqs probability is higher.

Shafiq performing doesn't change the probabilities before the series. .. nor does it prove that the probabilities were wrong before the series.

You can't cheat and improve the probability calculation now.




Probabilities are probabilities. ..

The chances of winning the lottery are 1 in 14 million. .

But one person will be that one... Despite the liklihood.
 
Last edited:
It seems like we both agree that Kami needs replacing. ..

You think his net cost is higher than the net cost of each of the three batters.

I think the net cost of the batters is more. ..


We are more likely to gain more runs by replacing Farhat Malik and Younis. ... With known players. ..

Than by replacing Kami with an unknown player. .

Probabilities. ..probabilities. ...
 
Khan ji I'm actually pretty much on the same side as you when it comes to a decision on kami for the CT. But your argument against Sledger is weak IMO. You can't just make up numbers and expect people to believe they are correct.

If you want to convince people in cricket, you need to use real stats. If not, at least real examples (e.g in this case show an example of when playing an experienced player who may not have great overall stats has paid off on the big stage). If you can't present any of these, no one will be persuaded.

In this case I would present Kamis tournament stats, especially those outside Asia.
 
talha3 said:
Khan ji I'm actually pretty much on the same side as you when it comes to a decision on kami for the CT. But your argument against Sledger is weak IMO. You can't just make up numbers and expect people to believe they are correct.

If you want to convince people in cricket, you need to use real stats. If not, at least real examples (e.g in this case show an example of when playing an experienced player who may not have great overall stats has paid off on the big stage). If you can't present any of these, no one will be persuaded.

In this case I would present Kamis tournament stats, especially those outside Asia.
Click to expand...

Who's making up numbers?
 
Yes and I'm asking for the number of that cutoff - you admit you can't prove it so surely you see my issue. I'm not going to guess a number to counter your guessed number and go back and forth for 5 more pages when I have facts and what has already been observed on my side.

Why would I want to drag myself into a your word vs my word argument when I can use what I know to argue my case: Kamran's track record. I haven't said I don't care what the number is, if these probabilities were available and justifiable I'd use them. As such they are irrelevant, therefore a gamble needs to be taken on selecting a new keeper to observe new data from which you can extrapolate what you want.

No, believe me, nothing at all excites me about Malik or Farhat. I have stated several times now I want all three out of the team in the long-term. However, under a fair merit based system you don't replace players who have just performed over non-performers, probability is a moot point and another diversion attempt in such a case.

Again you talk about overall records, where were your comments regarding the Drop Machine thread?

Repeating again, I haven't said probabilities aren't important.

The point I'm making with Shafiq is that probabilities aren't set in stone and are subject to change/often wrong, you can't put all your eggs in this one basket when somebody has a track record of performing poorly for 7 years. Using probability as the root cause for retaining Kamran presents an extremely weak argument, especially when you've admitted that you can't prove any of them.
 
talha3 said:
Well your argument is based on probability calculations. Where are these calculations?
Click to expand...

At the moment i would assess probabilities as follows.:

Umar Akmal doing better than yk - 80%
Jamshed doing better than farhat - 65%
Shafiq doing better than Malik - 50%
Shahzad doing better than Malik -35%
Harris doing better than Malik - 20%
Amin doing better than Malik -20%
X doing better than kami - 30%


These are relative numbers.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
Who's making up numbers?
Click to expand...

Well I'm yet to see any reasoning behind the 5-26 barriers you included, I'm yet to see you explicitly name your guessed number in the middle and you admit to being unable to prove any of these, yet you still want me to 'back up' and 'get concrete' with my views by incorporating these stab in the dark numbers in my arguments. Not happening.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
At the moment i would assess probabilities as follows.:

Umar Akmal doing better than yk - 80%
Jamshed doing better than farhat - 65%
Shafiq doing better than Malik - 50%
Shahzad doing better than Malik -35%
Harris doing better than Malik - 20%
Amin doing better than Malik -20%
X doing better than kami - 30%


These are relative numbers.
Click to expand...

Good. But it's your opinion. Full stop. Not going to convince anyone.
 
talha3 said:
Good. But it's your opinion. Full stop. Not going to convince anyone.
Click to expand...

Probabilities. .. definitely an opinion. ..did anyone say it wasn't?

But if someone tells me it's 100% sure that someone will do X...

Then I know it's BS.
 
Sledger said:
Well I'm yet to see any reasoning behind the 5-26 barriers you included, I'm yet to see you explicitly name your guessed number in the middle and you admit to being unable to prove any of these, yet you still want me to 'back up' and 'get concrete' with my views by incorporating these stab in the dark numbers in my arguments. Not happening.
Click to expand...

They weren't barriers... They were examples.

Let me give you another example. ...


Say it was -26.... Ie Kamis net contribution was 0...

Then we could say with 99% certainty that player X will do better.




I'm not asking to give me a "right" answer.... Just "an answer". ... It will always be an opinion. ..

Concrete doesnt mean "right"... It means "put your money where your mouth is".....

List out the probabilities like I have.....!!!!!
 
By saying you're basing your whole selection criteria on probability then I should be very worried if you aren't looking for the 'right' answer. If you want to leave all selection open to such 'opinion' after having argued for probability numbers as some sort of fact this whole time, then I can easily refer you back to my original argument as saying I think the probability of the new keeper is greater than of Akmal and that's enough. The onus was on you to show me why assigning these numbers to the probabilities are so important and are based on evidence which will be the most imperative selection criteria. They aren't.

You've failed to convince me what these probabilities show and are now essentially admitting they show very little other than an opinion/guess. Therefore, what will be the point of me putting up such random numbers to further the discussion when I've presented everything what I think about Akmal based on his past performances so far.
 
Sledger said:
By saying you're basing your whole selection criteria on probability then I should be very worried if you aren't looking for the 'right' answer. If you want to leave all selection open to such 'opinion' after having argued for probability numbers as some sort of fact this whole time, then I can easily refer you back to my original argument as saying I think the probability of the new keeper is greater than of Akmal and that's enough. The onus was on you to show me why assigning these numbers to the probabilities are so important and are based on evidence which will be the most imperative selection criteria. They aren't.

You've failed to convince me what these probabilities show and are now essentially admitting they show very little other than an opinion/guess. Therefore, what will be the point of me putting up such random numbers to further the discussion when I've presented everything what I think about Akmal based on his past performances so far.
Click to expand...

I am looking for the right answer. ...

Using probabilities gives you better answers. ..

One persons probabilities might be more right than another's.... Thats opinion and can be debated. ...



But someone that hasn't even thought about the probabilities has clearly made a fundamental mistake in analysis....

Thats the point im making. ...


Think about the probabilities. .. lets hear them. ..

Then we can have an informed debate about which "might" be more right.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
At the moment i would assess probabilities as follows.:

Umar Akmal doing better than yk - 80%
Jamshed doing better than farhat - 65%
Shafiq doing better than Malik - 50%
Shahzad doing better than Malik -35%
Harris doing better than Malik - 20%
Amin doing better than Malik -20%
X doing better than kami - 30%


These are relative numbers.
Click to expand...
Khan Ji, they aren't probabilities, they are a fans views quantified in percentage form :))
 
SOSami said:
Khan Ji, they aren't probabilities, they are a fans views quantified in percentage form :))
Click to expand...

Which is a fans view of the probabilities. ...;)


I'd really be interested to see what probabilities you have for each of these players being better than their incumbents. ...
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
Using probabilities gives you better answers.
Click to expand...
No they don't. :))
That's the point I've been getting at, show me what the probabilities are based on and what gives them any form of credence above stating any other opinion. I'm still waiting.

MR__KHAN__JI said:
But someone that hasn't even thought about the probabilities has clearly made a fundamental mistake in analysis....
Click to expand...
You must be talking about someone else, I've already thought and posted about probabilities using non-quantified known data (Akmal).

MR__KHAN__JI said:
Think about the probabilities. .. lets hear them. ..

Then we can have an informed debate about which "might" be more right.
Click to expand...
Nope, answer me why assigning a number with no available data is valid and reasoned and then we'll see how 'informed' these views are.
 
Last edited:
Sledger said:
No they don't. :))
That's the point I've been getting at, show me what the probabilities are based on and what gives them any form of credence above stating any other opinion. I'm still waiting.


You must be talking about someone else, I've already thought and posted about probabilities using non-quantified known data (Akmal).


Nope, answer me why assigning a number with no available data is valid and reasoned and then we'll see how 'informed' these views are.
Click to expand...

Ok.

Lets see your probabilities for each of the players I listed out....
 
You make an assessment of the data. ..

Some assessment is better than no assessment. ...

Thats my point. .



Lets see your probabilities. .. then we can analyse the basis of those.
 
I'm not posting anything until I'm convinced it's relevant, I'm interested in available data and not interested in debating made up numbers for 5 more pages. Let's not forget it's your argument and not mine which highlights how important these said numbers are to your selection. I'm not satisfied with this and think it's just a diversion from the available facts so prove me wrong, show me your objective rationale/validation and I'll put them up.

If you can't back up your argument on your own, don't rely on others to post anything to help you.
 
Sledger said:
I'm not posting anything until I'm convinced it's relevant, I'm interested in available data and not interested in debating made up numbers for 5 more pages. Let's not forget it's your argument and not mine which highlights how important these said numbers are to your selection. I'm not satisfied with this and think it's just a diversion from the available facts so prove me wrong, show me your objective rationale/validation and I'll put them up.

If you can't back up your argument on your own, don't rely on others to post anything to help you.
Click to expand...

I really don't get what u want?

My point is that you said you didn't even try and calculate (or have a view on) how many runs Kami costs us on average per game.


I just want you to have a go at it.

U dont have to tell me what it is. .. Just tell me you have done it.


Last I heard you said "I'm not bothered"... I want him dropped as he "drops too many"....



I would really like to see ur probabilities. .. as that's ultimately what we are debating .. who's most likely to improve our side through changes.

I've posted my probabilities up. ..
 
Last edited:
My point is I think there is enough likelihood of a new keeper dropping less than Akmal, sufficient enough for him to replace Akmal ASAP based on Akmal's 7 years of gaffs. Secondly, a keeper shouldn't be costing his team any runs consistently which I think Kamran is doing: doesn't matter about the number, if it's above 0 it goes from an N command to Y command.

I therefore do not see your point of adding a numerical figure to this and I see even less of your point when you're asking me to calculate it without any available data for a new keeper to contextualise it with; hence why I consider it a diversion.
 
99% probability that Muhammad Rizwan will do better than this faltu hack
 
Sledger said:
My point is I think there is enough likelihood of a new keeper dropping less than Akmal, sufficient enough for him to replace Akmal ASAP based on Akmal's 7 years of gaffs. Secondly, a keeper shouldn't be costing his team any runs consistently which I think Kamran is doing: doesn't matter about the number, if it's above 0 it goes from an N command to Y command.

I therefore do not see your point of adding a numerical figure to this and I see even less of your point when you're asking me to calculate it without any available data for a new keeper to contextualise it with; hence why I consider it a diversion.
Click to expand...

I see ur point. It's binary.



Let's just see ur probabilities that result from your binary analysis.. humour me....
 
You understand my POV then. 'Probabilities' from a binary analysis with no context are meaningless/guess work and are therefore not probabilities at all, no interest in posting such subjective numbers because neither of us will agree with the other.
 
So with that in mind, an argument cannot be concluded on selection based on probabilities at this point in time and it's therefore no different to any other opinion. The selectors need to make an investment and take a risk with a new WK to initiate - Observation>Data collection>Conclusions.
 
Sledger said:
You understand my POV then. 'Probabilities' from a binary analysis with no context are meaningless/guess work and are therefore not probabilities at all, no interest in posting such subjective numbers because neither of us will agree with the other.
Click to expand...

I understand the pov about binary ness on kami keeping.

I disagree with the approach but understand....



I can't understand you not having the guts to say with what probabilities you think each of the players would to better than the incumbents. ....
 
shah_1 said:
99% probability that Muhammad Rizwan will do better than this faltu hack
Click to expand...

Fine.

And what about the other players that I listed out in my other post?

Since we can't replace everyone at once.
 
Last edited:
Re-read this page and look at the earlier posts - the point is about the relevance of 'probabilities' which are no different to my opinion, just with guessed numbers included. The conclusion is that they aren't relevant and cannot be proved.
 
Sledger said:
Re-read this page and look at the earlier posts - the point is about the relevance of 'probabilities' which are no different to my opinion, just with guessed numbers included. The conclusion is that they aren't relevant and cannot be proved.
Click to expand...

Every decision made is a based on a probability. .. You must have a probability in mind.

There are no certainties...



The "lucky dip" method usually results in disaster. ...
 
I appreciate u r not willing/able to reveal. .. so will rest my case at this point.

If at any point you r able to reveal. .. I would be really interested in hearing them.
 
Last edited:
Binary. I have the probability set at likely, at that point, given Akmal's requirement to accommodate the position, I need not qualify it further and I'm especially not going to try to qualify it with a few lousy percentages and then try to present it as some sort of proof when it's just my opinion expressed in a needless and unprovable way.
 
Sledger said:
Binary. I have the probability set at likely, at that point, given Akmal's requirement to accommodate the position, I need not qualify it further and I'm especially not going to try to qualify it with a few lousy percentages and then try to present it as some sort of proof when it's just my opinion expressed in a needless and unprovable way.
Click to expand...

Its just a net expression of all ur thoughts....

Not meant to be a proof...


Its hard for me to appreciate your thoughts on the relative merits of replacing each of those players without the probabilities.
 
Last edited:
lol, my thoughts have already been expressed about six times in this thread in the clearest way, no confusion through random guess work - just references to the observations at hand.

And you spent several posts trying to convince me said probabilities were meant to 'back up' my views but have now swiftly degraded it to just another expression.
 
Sledger said:
lol, my thoughts have already been expressed about six times in this thread in the clearest way, no confusion through random guess work - just references to the observations at hand.

And you spent several posts trying to convince me said probabilities were meant to 'back up' my views but have now swiftly degraded it to just another expression.
Click to expand...

Let's see the the probabilities then. .


What's the net output of all the hard work you have done?

We have been talking about the relative merits of replacing which players first.
 
See #698, #700

And under a fair merit based system, where you want to use phases, you drop non-performing players before performing players.
 
How long do we think before Kami flies back in?

Do we think the dropping is permanent?
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
How long do we think before Kami flies back in?

Do we think the dropping is permanent?
Click to expand...

He'll be back, all right. The new kid will fail for a game or two and the resultant uproar will carry him right back into the team. Always happens.
 
His keeping sucked but Kami the batsman was always sexy.
 
Oh man, 4 years ago.

Yet Pak cricket still sucks :(

At least we had that Razzaq innings to cheer us up.
 
MRSN said:
Please do. He's literally the best opening option.
Click to expand...

No. No No No No No No. NO!!

Shehzad is a a set opener for us, at least for now. You can play Babar Azam with him or Hafeez. Don't think Sami should be playing T20's yet.

Shehzad
Hafeez
Haris
Umar
Nasim
Maqsood
Afridi
Tanvir
Wahab
Raza
Junaid

Babar and Hammad Azam the reserve batsmen.

No place for Kami 'Cobra' Akmal.
 
This is the system where idiots like Kamran akmal get free pass into the team even after 10 years of disgracing our country yet players on merit like Sarfaraz are kept on the bench and delibrately kept unsettled so that they never make it back.
Sarfaraz gets one clear run in the team and has made everyone look like a hack whoever was in the the keeping spot before him.
 
I hate to say it but on Oz pitches, Kamran is as likely to succeed as any opener. I'd back him above Jamshed or Hafeez tbh, neither of whom I think will handle the bounce of Aussie pitches well.
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
I hate to say it but on Oz pitches, Kamran is as likely to succeed as any opener. I'd back him above Jamshed or Hafeez tbh, neither of whom I think will handle the bounce of Aussie pitches well.
Click to expand...

Yes! he will slash it straight to the point fielder not to mention his shoddy keeping
 
Kianig89 said:
Yes! he will slash it straight to the point fielder not to mention his shoddy keeping
Click to expand...

But he's had some success in Australia, I'm not sure Sarfraz will cope with the bounce with his technique. He was struggling even yesterday in the opening overs. There are no guarantees that Sarfraz' style will work on more bowler friendly pitches. Same goes for Hafeez for that matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BouncerGuy
[VIDEO] Tazeem 'Taz' Ali, Zen Malik and Hamza Shaikh during Ramadan on tour with Warwickshire
Replies
1
Views
192
MenInG
MenInG
M
BCCI’s influence over the ICC
2 3
Replies
178
Views
3K
sweep_shot
sweep_shot
FearlessRoar
Deccan Gladiators (110/2) triumph in Abu Dhabi T10 2024, defeating Morrisville Samp Army (104/7) by 8 wickets to claim their third title
2
Replies
90
Views
2K
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
M
  • Article Article
Kamran Akmal speaks the truth
Replies
16
Views
1K
Bhaag Viru Bhaag
Bhaag Viru Bhaag
Justcrazy
Question for Abu Dhabi peers !
Replies
0
Views
100
Justcrazy
Justcrazy
Back
Top