Today's Stat of the Day, as requested by Brad, is to look at the team's results based on how many players we have.
Eight players is a full team, and most of the time we have had that many. Although it does often feel that we have a disproportionately good record when we are missing players - which should be a disadvantage.
Here's what the stats tell us:
Players | Matches | Wins | Losses | % Won |
EIGHT | 90 | 59 | 31 | 66% |
SEVEN | 35 | 25 | 10 | 71% |
SIX | 12 | 7 | 5 | 58% |
FIVE | 4 | 3 | 1 | 75% |
The total for games played with less than 8 players is then: 35 wins from 51 games (69%).
We do in fact, win more games when missing players. Not by much, but we can certainly say that we are not disadvantaged!
Here's something a little strange that I noticed, also. Take a look at the same stats, but just for games so far this season:
Players | Matches | Wins | Losses | % Won |
EIGHT | 2 | 2 | 0 | 100% |
SEVEN | 4 | 3 | 1 | 75% |
SIX | 4 | 0 | 4 | 0% |
FIVE | 2 | 2 | 0 | 100% |
Yes, that's right, we've only played 2 out of 12 games this season with a full team. But the unusual thing is that the amazing correlation between player numbers and match result. It seems that if we stopped playing games with 6 players, we'd be nearly unbeatable. Perhaps next time we have 6, we should drop someone just to make it 5.
Now for the reverse scenario. How do other teams go against us? Here's the same table again, but looking at it from the point of view of our opponents:
Players | Matches | Wins | Losses | % Won |
EIGHT | 98 | 37 | 61 | 38% |
SEVEN | 31 | 8 | 23 | 26% |
SIX | 8 | 1 | 7 | 13% |
FIVE | 3 | 1 | 2 | 33% |
FOUR | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0% |
Our old rivals from Weston, The 4Skins are the only ones to have beaten us with 5 players. And somehow, back in 2010, the Boonies actually played a game against us with only 4! Can't say I remember that one, but a double-check of the scorecard does indeed show that they only used 4 batsmen and bowlers.
Of course, GG did play with 4 players one day, and crushed the (drunk) opponents by more than 300 runs, but that was in a 6-a-side game.
No comments:
Post a Comment