2024 T20 World Cup Finals India vs South Africa

[FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer]

South Africa had 90% odds to win when Klaasen and Miller had to score 26
of 23 balls at 151/4.

Klaasen inexplicably tried to hit the ball which was 3 feet outside the
off stump of Hardik Pandya and edged it to Pant and gave an opening to
India when the optimal course of action was to CUT DOWN on risk to score
the remaining runs and win the championship.

Then Bumrah did his magic and bowled Marco Jansen and then India piled
on the pressure.

And then Suryakumar Yadav took that sensational catch of Miller. It's
almost like God decided to make India win.

South Africa self destructed and lost the game.

In the end, what a close nail biter and what a game.

Probably one of the top three best T20 Worldcup Finals.

[David North]

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
South Africa had 90% odds to win when Klaasen and Miller had to score 26
of 23 balls at 151/4.

According to CI's Win Probability, SA were at over 97% for a few balls a
little earlier, and still over 92% immediately *after* Klaasen was out

I'd like to see a graph plotting these supposed probabilities against
outcomes, because some of them seem rather wide of the mark, this being
a case in point.

A run a ball needed with 5 overs to go and 6 wickets in hand was
strongly in SA's favour, but would they really have been expected to win
97% of the time, especially with 2 of those overs to be bowled by Bumrah?

[FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer]

Post by David North

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
South Africa had 90% odds to win when Klaasen and Miller had to score
26 of 23 balls at 151/4.

According to CI's Win Probability, SA were at over 97% for a few balls a
little earlier, and still over 92% immediately *after* Klaasen was out
I'd like to see a graph plotting these supposed probabilities against
outcomes, because some of them seem rather wide of the mark, this being
a case in point.
A run a ball needed with 5 overs to go and 6 wickets in hand was
strongly in SA's favour, but would they really have been expected to win
97% of the time, especially with 2 of those overs to be bowled by Bumrah?

Yes, cricinfo's win probabilities are almost always way off the mark
except in obvious cases. I have known this for a loooong time.


I honestly expected SA to romp home relatively easily with Klaasen and
Miller going strong and whacking Axar for 24 runs in one over with five
overs left.

But inexplicably Klaasen chose to chase a three feet wide slower ball
from Hardik Pandya, edged it to Pant and GAVE AN OPENING to India when
the optimal course of action at run a ball with six wickets in hand
should have been to CUT DOWN on RISK and push the ball into gaps, run
ones and twos with occasional four or a six of a bad ball and WIN the
championship.

The pitch was easy to bat on and hence 190 was par score. Commentators
and experts EXPECTED the pitch to slow down in SA innings but IT DIDN'T.

Klaasen getting out at 30 of 30 required was the TURNING POINT for India
WINNING the T20 World Cup.

[John Hall]

In message <21c04eb4-1a9e-42bf-b17e-***@america.com>,
FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer <***@america.com>
writes

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer

Post by David North

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
South Africa had 90% odds to win when Klaasen and Miller had to
score 26 of 23 balls at 151/4.

According to CI's Win Probability, SA were at over 97% for a few
balls a little earlier, and still over 92% immediately *after* Klaasen
was out
I'd like to see a graph plotting these supposed probabilities
against outcomes, because some of them seem rather wide of the mark,
this being a case in point.
A run a ball needed with 5 overs to go and 6 wickets in hand was
strongly in SA's favour, but would they really have been expected to
win 97% of the time, especially with 2 of those overs to be bowled by
Bumrah?

Yes, cricinfo's win probabilities are almost always way off the mark
except in obvious cases. I have known this for a loooong time.
I honestly expected SA to romp home relatively easily with Klaasen and
Miller going strong and whacking Axar for 24 runs in one over with five
overs left.
But inexplicably Klaasen chose to chase a three feet wide slower ball
from Hardik Pandya, edged it to Pant and GAVE AN OPENING to India when
the optimal course of action at run a ball with six wickets in hand
should have been to CUT DOWN on RISK and push the ball into gaps, run
ones and twos with occasional four or a six of a bad ball and WIN the
championship.

I suspect that it was due to a lapse in concentration. It was the ball
after a break in play for a few minutes while Pant was treated for a leg
injury.

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
The pitch was easy to bat on and hence 190 was par score. Commentators
and experts EXPECTED the pitch to slow down in SA innings but IT DIDN'T.
Klaasen getting out at 30 of 30 required was the TURNING POINT for
India WINNING the T20 World Cup.

A combination of that and Bumrah's brilliant bowling at the death (and
Arshdeep was very good too). Maharaj was restricted to 2 runs off 7
balls, when if he'd managed even a run a ball things might have played
out differently.

[FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer]

Post by John Hall

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
South Africa had 90% odds to win when Klaasen and Miller had to
score 26 of 23 balls at 151/4.

 According to CI's Win Probability, SA were at over 97% for a few
balls a little earlier, and still over 92% immediately *after*
Klaasen was out
 I'd like to see a graph plotting these supposed probabilities
against outcomes, because some of them seem rather wide of the mark,
this being  a case in point.
 A run a ball needed with 5 overs to go and 6 wickets in hand was
strongly in SA's favour, but would they really have been expected to
win  97% of the time, especially with 2 of those overs to be bowled
by Bumrah?

Yes, cricinfo's win probabilities are almost always way off the mark
except in obvious cases. I have known this for a loooong time.
I honestly expected SA to romp home relatively easily with Klaasen and
Miller going strong and whacking Axar for 24 runs in one over with
five overs left.
But inexplicably Klaasen chose to chase a three feet wide slower ball
from Hardik Pandya, edged it to Pant and GAVE AN OPENING to India when
the optimal course of action at run a ball with six wickets in hand
should have been to CUT DOWN on RISK and push the ball into gaps, run
ones and twos with occasional four or a six of a bad ball and WIN the
championship.

I suspect that it was due to a lapse in concentration. It was the ball
after a break in play for a few minutes while Pant was treated for a leg
injury.

Possibly yeah the break made Klaasen wanting to finish the game quickly
and ended up playing a loose shot.

Post by John Hall

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
The pitch was easy to bat on and hence 190 was par score. Commentators
and experts EXPECTED the pitch to slow down in SA innings but IT DIDN'T.
Klaasen getting out at 30 of 30 required was the TURNING POINT for
India WINNING the T20 World Cup.

A combination of that and Bumrah's brilliant bowling at the death (and
Arshdeep was very good too). Maharaj was restricted to 2 runs off 7
balls, when if he'd managed even a run a ball things might have played
out differently.

[John Hall]

Post by David North

Post by FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
South Africa had 90% odds to win when Klaasen and Miller had to
score 26 of 23 balls at 151/4.

According to CI's Win Probability, SA were at over 97% for a few balls
a little earlier, and still over 92% immediately *after* Klaasen was out
I'd like to see a graph plotting these supposed probabilities against
outcomes, because some of them seem rather wide of the mark, this being
a case in point.
A run a ball needed with 5 overs to go and 6 wickets in hand was
strongly in SA's favour, but would they really have been expected to
win 97% of the time, especially with 2 of those overs to be bowled by
Bumrah?

I wonder whether the algorithm used for calculating win probabilities
actually takes who is going to bowl the remaining overs into account. I
didn't stay to watch the post-match stuff, but I hope that Bumrah won
the player of the match award.

[David North]

Post by John Hall

Post by David North

  South Africa had 90% odds to win when Klaasen and Miller had to
score 26  of 23 balls at 151/4.

According to CI's Win Probability, SA were at over 97% for a few balls
a little earlier, and still over 92% immediately *after* Klaasen was out
I'd like to see a graph plotting these supposed probabilities against
outcomes, because some of them seem rather wide of the mark, this
being a case in point.
A run a ball needed with 5 overs to go and 6 wickets in hand was
strongly in SA's favour, but would they really have been expected to
win 97% of the time, especially with 2 of those overs to be bowled by
Bumrah?

I wonder whether the algorithm used for calculating win probabilities
actually takes who is going to bowl the remaining overs into account.

Apparently it does (or at least who has overs left in their quota -
obviously you can never be absolutely certainly that they will bowl
them) - see the last question on Forecaster here:

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/launching-superstats-the-new-language-for-cricket-analysis-1178276

Post by John Hall
I
didn't stay to watch the post-match stuff, but I hope that Bumrah won
the player of the match award.

In Kohli's last T20I? Not likely!

Bumrah was the player of the tournament, though.

[John Hall]

Post by David North

Post by John Hall

Post by David North

  South Africa had 90% odds to win when Klaasen and Miller had to
score 26  of 23 balls at 151/4.

According to CI's Win Probability, SA were at over 97% for a few
balls a little earlier, and still over 92% immediately *after*
Klaasen was out
I'd like to see a graph plotting these supposed probabilities
against outcomes, because some of them seem rather wide of the mark,
being a case in point.
A run a ball needed with 5 overs to go and 6 wickets in hand was
strongly in SA's favour, but would they really have been expected to
97% of the time, especially with 2 of those overs to be bowled by Bumrah?

I wonder whether the algorithm used for calculating win
probabilities actually takes who is going to bowl the remaining overs
into account.

Apparently it does (or at least who has overs left in their quota -
obviously you can never be absolutely certainly that they will bowl
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/launching-superstats-the-new-language
-for-cricket-analysis-1178276

Thanks.

Post by David North

Post by John Hall
I didn't stay to watch the post-match stuff, but I hope that Bumrah
won the player of the match award.

In Kohli's last T20I? Not likely!

Ah, I'd forgotten that it was his last match.

Post by David North
Bumrah was the player of the tournament, though.

Good.