Susantha Jayawardena
REPLY TO YOHAN VASS FOR HIS BASELESS ACCUSATION
(Island Cricket Admin to note this reply)
This is in response to the post of Yohan Vaas (6TH March 2019) ref “ Mythical article, “Lesson Learned from the 1st ODI with SA is full of fake stats” which was in response to my post of 4th March 2019 in which I proposed a change to our opening batting combination for the 2nd ODI. He has mentioned in his post that I have provided some fage & bogus statistics in my article.
In summary I express my total disappointment on Yohan Vaas’s accusation on my post with baseless allegations and on a highly unethical & utterly disgraceful manner. Forum Admin should make a note on this kind of unacceptable behavior of Yohan Vaas with proper corrective action taken to safeguard the freedom of every member in this forum to express their views without facing this kind of harassment through badly worded comments from other members. In this post, I have basically commented on the following three matters.
(a) His allegation that I have provided fage and bogus statistics is not true, baseless. I have proved it as explained below providing with necessary evidences.
(b) As any other member in this forum I have the freedom to express my views on SL cricket or even proposing changes to the SLC system or the team composition.
(c) In my opinion Yohan Vass’s reply comments were given in a highly unethical and disgraceful way with many harsh words as a personal attack on me and should have been given diplomatically with some decency.
Yohan’s post and his complain were containing many baseless arguments, and in my opinion is having no sense of any credibility and his article was full of some irrelevant statistics taken from Cricinfo statguru which are not applicable to the concerned subject matter. Some statistics were presented in a very unprofessional and non standard way to judge the quality and the current form of a batsman. Here is my reasoning for all such facts.
(1) There is no truth whatsoever in Yohan’s allegation that I have provided fage / bogus facts. All the data shown in my previous article was taken from Cricinfo Statguru statistics. In fact it is reproduced again below for everyone’s notice to decide whether my data provided earlier was fage and bogus or not. Basically this table which was an extract of Cricinfo Statguru Statistics which shows the overall performance of Sri Lankan batsmen performed during the last 12 months while occupying batting positions from 1 to 7. This gives a good indication on the current form of a batsman which is the only factor upon which team selections are done. It is very clear that team selections are not based on old & past performances which are irrelevant as you cannot judge the current form of a player from such records.
(2) First of all I am requesting Mr.Yohan to agree to the fact that, the statistical records that I have given in my earlier post are the same as the records provided below. I don’t think there is any reason for him not to agree with that as both are same as taken from Cricinfo Statguru Statistics except for one or two days difference as in Cricinfo they update the stats after every match.
(3) If you still think that my 12 month records given in my last post as well as this post are wrong, as a true cricket fan and respecting ethics of this gentlemen’s game I would request you to log a complain with ICC / Cricinfo complaining against their statistical data.
Primary Team: SRI LANKA Period: Last 12 months, starting date: 8th March 2018
Overall figures Batting Position: 1 to 7 (From Cricinfo Statguru)PlayerMatInnsNORunsHSAveBFSR1005004s6sNLTC Perera1716253514038.21446119.951213824N Dickwella151404959535.3550198.80040645MDKJ Perera1413042710232.8444795.52120535DM de Silva131223128431.2036884.78011288AD Mathews77227397*54.6035477.11020243BKG Mendis151502696017.9330289.07025218LD Chandimal7601668027.6620580.97010112WU Tharanga10901653618.3319385.49001203MD Gunathilaka3301457148.3318777.54010130MD Shanaka7601226620.3313193.1201097S Samarawickrama330905430.0089101.12010120BOP Fernando220804940.009485.1000082GSNFG Jayasuriya330321810.666350.7900110DAS Gunaratne22017118.502860.7100010WIA Fernando110101010.009111.1100011
(4) If you agree that there is no difference in my earlier and the new records provided herewith, I need an apology from you for complaining that I provided fage & bogus statistics and I will respect you for that.
(5) Please note that I have the option to make an official complain against you to “Island Cricket Forum” for blaming its members with baseless and false allegations as I am explaining here, thereby misleading every cricket fan and disregarding the respectability of this forum.
Comparison of Tharanga’s and Kusal’s performances during the last 12 months
(6) Please note that player rankings are always evaluated (as a standard of the ICC) on yearly basis and updated from the last 12 months data. I think It is highly unprofessional nature of you to stick to a particular player’s very old performance data (which is totally irrelevant in evaluating the current form) while ignoring the most important and latest performances during the last 12 months and create some unpleasant situation to fight unnecessarily with a forum member and blame on the selection policies as well.
(7) By looking at the below comparison of the last 12 months scores of Tharanga and Kusal it’s very clear to anyone which player is in a better form at present. Another fact is that Tharanga scored all these runs as an opener which included a period of initial 10 overs where field restrictions were in place, but Kusal scored bulk of his runs at no 3 & 4 positions when having more fielders outside the ring and during a run consolidation period where scoring quick runs was not that easy.
- Tharanga (9 inns): 10, 9, 19, 36, 19, 27, 36, 0, 9 = 165 runs av 18.3
- Kusal (13 inns): 33, 8, 102, 4, 43, 30, 11, 17, 81, 12, 27, 51, 8 = 427 runs av 32.8
- (8) It is worth mentioning that during the last 12 month period, out of Kusal’s 13 innings, on 10 occasions while batting mostly at no 3 position he has come to the wicket so early in the inning and within the first 10 PP overs due to SL losing an early wicket or two (our opening partnership scores during the last year were pretty bad). So one can say that he has batted as an opening batsmen facing the new ball so early.
- (9) I will now explain another very recent performance of Kusal where he proved that he has the ability not only to open in ODIs but also to perform the duty as a power hitting batsman. This is one of the aspects of the game that we have up to now not found a suitable power hitting opener in the caliber of Sanath. If you look at Kusal’s epic test inning of 153* and how he scored his last 50 runs while facing South Africa’s best new ball attack of Steyn & Rabada was a good example. After the introduction of the second new ball, even South Africans were sure of taking our last wicket but Kusal had other ideas where he attacked the two bowlers to all parts of the ground in hitting 3 sixes (two of them were pull shots to square leg off good deliveries) and one four. He scored 32 runs off 21 balls with the new ball (at a SR of 152%). If I were a selector, at that moment I would have picked him as an opener in our ODI team.
(10) If we need to be competitive in this WC we need to have 4 Power Hitters in our batting line up. Two in the upper order (1 to 3) and two in the middle order (4 to 7). Kusal’s SR and shot selection is more suitable for the openers power hitting option as he is the best batsman we have who has a vast array of shots to score at a SR of close to 150% during the initial 10 overs in batting tracks. I have a very strong feeling that he will soon get a promotion to open the batting. However with all my comments I am not suggesting that Tharanga should not be in the mix. He also should be one of the 4 openers. In the WC we will come across many flat wickets. So we can keep a rotational system to utilize all 4 openers within the no 1,2 &3, positions
- (11)In your comparison you showed some single digit scores of Kusal for the period from 2013 to 2018 which was of course a long period therefore not indicative of the players current form. Beside you have not looked into the fact how he scored his runs during the same period, checked his other performance parameters like SR, R50, R4 and R6 values. Also you have not checked the single digit scores and other scoring parameters of Tharanga during the same period. Then only you can decide who fared well. In a comparison procedure it is of no use to see the bad performance of only one player and its a case of manupilating the records to support a particular player.Therefore I must mention that your decision on Kusal’s low scores was decided after manipulating some statistical records of Statguru.
- (12) R50 factor (rate of scoring half centuries) is very important in ODI cricket these days. When team totals of 350 runs off 50 overs are being set as target scores, there are some countries with powerful batting line ups such as England, New Zealand and India having 5 to 7 batsmen with very low R50 values below 4.0. For example;
- England have 6 batsmen with R50 below 4.0 (50 in every 4 innings or less) and one batsman with R50 value <2.0
- New Zealand: 4 batsmen with R50 < 4.0 and one batsman with R50 <2.0
- India: 4 batsman with R50 <4.0 and one batsman with R50 <3.0
- Breakdown on number of half centuries (including centuries) scored by each country during the last 12 month period is as follows.
- England 35
- India 34
- West Indies 29
- Bangladesh 28
- Pakistan 27
- South Africa 26
- New Zealand 23
- Afghanistan 22
- Sri Lanka 19 (we are at a poor 9th place)
- Zimbabwe 12
- Above data (taken from Cricinfo Statguru on 8th March 2019, and they are not fage or bogus figures) shows how week is our batting line up for this year’s World Cup. Tharanga is the only batsman in our batting line up who has not scored a half century during the last 12 months (Avishka and Oshada were not considered as they have played in only 1 and 2 matches respectively). When we are looking at a R50 value of 4/5 from our 7 batters he should have scored at least 2 half centuries during this period.
- (13) So I have given all my comments why I ranked Kusal above Tharanga for the very good reasons for his superiority above Tharanga on the current form & performance all based on last 12 months results.
- (14) I have not done this kind of comparison between players before. I hate to do something like that and let down one player but I was dragged into this unnecessary conversation by Mr Yohan’s arrogance and highly unethical way of responding to my post. Anyway I must say sorry to Tharanga for all this unnecessary comparisons for which I am not responsible.
CONCLUSION
I TRUST THAT EVERY FORUM MEMBER WILL NOW REALIZE THE ACTUAL SITUATION VERY CLEARLY. WE ALL ARE VERY MUCH CONCERNED ON THE PERFORMANCE OF SRI LANKA IN THIS YEAR’S WORLD CUP. BUT LET EVERYONE ACT IN A VERY DIPLOMATICAL WAY IN EXCHANGING THEIR VIEWS AND WHEN RESPONDING TO THE VIEWS /COMMENTS OF THE OTHERS TO EXERCISE SOME DECENCY IN THEIR WRITING.
THANK YOU
SUSANTHA JAYAWARDENA
Attention of IC Admins as well:
Mr. Susantha, Before trying to mislead people again with unrelated jargon deviating from your original post appeared 4 days ago….. First of all, STICK to The precise Point..!.
In that article you have clearly said..“… Although not used as an opener recently, he has been opening for SL in 2016/2017 period (in 80 ODI INNINGS) and performed very well. He has a highest score of 135 runs scored in 128 balls as an opener in 2016…..” Read your article and see for yourself.!
I have pointed out Kusal Perera’s actual career Stats AS OPENER since 2016 with an image of appropriate Cricinfo Statistics page to PROVE that your statement is bogus, since KJP had played ONLY FIFTEEN INNINGS (Not 80 INNINGS as you have grossly fabricated/exaggerated in your original blog article ) and he had only a mediocre Average 28. Also KJP had scored just One Hundred against the WEAKEST minnow IRELAND… nothing big to be bragged about to suggest him as Opener as any one could see.
As I have pointed out (with the image of the correct stats of his entire innings as opener since 2016)
Kusal Perera’s Actual Innings as Opener since (2016- 2018):
15 innings- 421 runs @ 28 Av – 1 x100 vs Ireland – 1 x 50 Vs Zmb
ARE YOU still SAYING the above facts are wrong & that I have no reason to classify your 80 inning STATEMENT as bogus stats ??? ????
Also, I have submitted Kusal Perera’s pathetic overall batting record (again with appropriate image of entire stas related to the point) as Opener to back the following point stated in my article
———————————————- the below statements extracted from my blog article:
” Susantha’s baseless assumptions contradicting the reality & solid facts, proven over 5 yrs by KJP playing as Opener in 59 ODIs.! ”
– Kjp as Opener since 2013: 59 ings – 1,604 @ 27 Av
– 27 of his innings as Opener (27/59 =) almost 50% ended up in single-digit scores, mostly lasted under 10 balls!
KJP’s Single-digit innings as Opener:
27 innings – yielded only an ASTONISHINGLY PATHETIC 98 runs @ 3.76 Av – 51 SR – 9 Highest Score.!
—————————————————————————————
IS THE above record LOOKS LIKE A record belongs to a high profile IMPACT player SUITABLE TO OPEN , as Mr. Susantha Jayawardena had tried to bloated up in his article ?????
Also, I have pointed out many other facts to pin point deliberate concealment, limitations & unreal speculations intending to give superiority to his favorite player over hard-earned real achievements of an individual player, to distort the actual reality with highly misleading speculations without a base .
So What is wrong it to be classified his article as a MYTHICAL Article ..????
SO as a subscriber/reader of Island Cricket forums, I have all my INDEPENDENT Rights to Pinpoint wrong Statistics & express my views on any article appear here, countering any such false or misleading impressions by forwarding CORRECT STATISTICS (with imagery proof) & submitting analytical views backed with mathematical analysis on appropriate facts such as:
——————————————————————————-
4s, 6s & 50s 100s scoring efficacy comparison of OPENERS:
Tharanga –
132 (4s )/ 31 innings x 100 = 425 (4s) per 100 innings – RANK -1
17 (6s) / 31 innings x 100 = 55 (6s) per 100 innings – RANK-1
5 (50s) / 31 innings x 100 = 16.12 ( 50s) per 100 innings – RANK-2
2 (100s) / 31 innings x 100 = 6.45 (100s) per 100 innings- – RANK-2 (100s vs QUALITY SA & Pk)
Dickwella –
148 (4s )/ 35 innings x 100 = 422 (4s) per 100 innings – RANK-2
11 (6s) / 35 innings x 100 = 31 (6s) per 100 innings – RANK-2
8 (50s) / 35 innings x 100 = 22.85 ( 50s) per 100 innings – RANK-1
2 (100s) / 35 innings x 100 = 5.71 (100s) per 100 innings – RANK-3 ( both 100s vs Zmb)
Kusal Perera –
47 (4s )/ 15 innings x 100 = 313 (4s) per 100 innings – RANK-3
5 (6s) / 15 innings x 100 = 33 (6s) per 100 innings – RANK-3
1 (50s) / 15 innings x 100 = 6.66 ( 50s) per 100 innings – RANK-3
1 (100s)/15 innings x 100 = 6.66 (100s) per 100 innings- RANK-1 (kind of a false thanks to IRELAND)
————————————————————————-
Isn’t this the most decent way to counter any point that you don’t agree with..??
So Mr. Susantha, before crying, complaining and accusing me of any foul-play…. Isn’t it better to find a way to counter the reality that I have pinpointed in my article….that you find hard to digest,???
if you want to oppose it , why don’t you come up with some hard facts precisely APPROPRIATE to the TOPIC ????? :)))
READ MY ARTICLE again PROPERLY & Submit APPROPRIATE FACTS & precise answers if you can deny what I have said here with your stats & myth, as I clearly I did here & in my article.!
Firstly, guys get a room…
Second, forum admins – seriously can we please have a “Upul Tharanga” sub forum so conversations likes this are isolated and protected from the rest of us. It’s never ending. I have been coming to this site for about 2-3 years now and every other day there is a thread about UT. Even after the site re-design this crap re-appears on a regular basis. It’s diluting this page, its not contributing to anything other than mud slinging and pointless arguments.
I think we should not lose our sleep over UT or KJP ,UT is a good experienced player with decent record,so he should be in the mix.kusal Perera is a player with different batting style.India managed to take him out of T20 world cup equation by having a fake lab test when he was in his best form.I think he has come back strong and performing decently now.The main problem in SL is not the lack of talent,but the inability to be strong and focused mentally under pressure.it could be due to external factors as well.so hope the sports minister take necessary action so that they will have a better environment to only focus on cricket when representing SL,specially in the world cup.
Not another Tharanga debate? What the hell?? I am not a UT fan boy but I can understand why people are so angry UT is out from the side. The great Aravinda scored 11 ODI centuries in his career and Tharanga has more ODI hundreds than Aravinda! Tharanga and Jayasuriya will be remembered in history as the two greatest ODI openers in SL cricket history and Tharanga is the island’s best opener at the moment. Many feel he should be playing every game and this was the same for Aravinda and Sanath too many years ago when selectors dropped them. My choice to open for World Cup is Tharanga and Kusal Janith Perera but stupid selectors didn’t give them a chance since 2015 World Cup to build an opening partnership and gain confidence. They were changing after every match almost.
Mr Vaas, It’s very unfortunate to note that you still haven’t realized your biggest mistakes that you have made in your post which were very clearly explained in my last post of yesterday. (They are given herewith once again with my reasons as well).
(1) Providing some old statistical records (outside the last 12 months period) is totally IRRELEVANT TO JUDGE THE CURRENT FORM OF A BATSMAN. Even the ICC standard on Player Ranking is to first determine the ranking of a batsman based on their performances during the last 12 months, and update the ranking on a regular basis. That too after taking into consideration only the last 12 months records. “IF YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE ASPECT OF CRICKET STATISTICS AND ICC STANDARD” my God what more I can do to convince you? and what’s going to happen to the quality/standard of this wonderful Cricket Forum. Isn’t it going to mislead or misguide and frustrate the forum members?
(2) YOUR SECOND MISTAKE WAS; R4 (Boundary Rate) & R6 (Sixes Rate) VALUES WERE NOT CORRECT. (i) ONCE AGAIN YOU HAVE INCLUDED OLD AND IRRELEVANT RECORDS & (ii) EVEN THE R4 & R6 VALUES WERE WRONGLY CALCULATED.
(Reasons): It’s a useless way to divide the total number of boundaries by the total number of innings as you have done. Method of calculation on R4 & R6 was defined in my first post. Ratio for both R4 & R6 has to be calculated by dividing the runs scored in boundaries & sixes divided by the innings score. Then only the batsman’s true ability to score quickly in an inning (and in turn achieve a higher SR) can be evaluated.
PLEASE ALSO NOTE THAT R4, R6, R50 & R100 RATIOS ARE ALL PROPOSED BY ME AS ADDITIONAL PARAMETERS TO EVALUATE THE TRUE POTENTIAL OF A BATSMAN (i) TO PLAY IN AN ODI, (ii) WHAT BATTING POSITION IS MORE SUITABLE ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITIES & STRENGTH & (III) WHETHER HE IS A POWER HITTING OPTION FOR THE TOP ORDER (1&2) OR FOR THE LOWER ORDER (6&7).
NB. Mr Vaas please do not once again produce any IRRELEVANT data or records outside the last 12 month period and keep on arguing over & over again. If you do that again it will only frustrate me as well as other members I believe.
I have never taken into account any statistical records outside the last 12 months. Probably I might have mentioned few points or incidents in my discussions as supporting facts. Like I mentioned that Kusal was batting as an opener in 2016 and scored a century, but I have not considered that score in my statistical analysis as it is irrelevant for Kusal’s current form. So I am not going to answer any of your questions which are raised after using these old records.
GIVEN BELOW IS WHAT I SAID (on my first post of 4th March 2019) ON THE FOUR OPENERS ON THEIR CURRENT STATUS OF FORM & INTERNAL RANKING THAT CAN BE USED AS A GUIDE LINE FOR THEIR SELECTION FOR FUTURE MATCHES
Proposed New Parameters for Power Hitting Ability of a Batsman
R4 – Boundary Rate – Runs scored in boundaries expressed as a percentage
R6 – Sixes Rate – Runs scored in sixes expressed as a percentage
R4,6 – Total of R4 & R6
R50 – Rate of scoring 50s in terms of innings per half century
Strength of Openers in terms of Av, SR, R4, R6 & R50 (last 12 months)
M (Inn) Runs Ave SR R4 R6 R4,6 R50
Dickwella 14(13) 489 27.6 100 52 6 58 3.2
Kusal P 13(12) 419 35.0 99 51 7 58 6.0
Tharanga 10(9) 165 18.3 85 48 11 59 0.0
Avishka (List A*) 21(20) 1030 51.5 100 41 17 58 4.0
*Due to no ODI records are available for Avishka, List A & recent practice match performances are considered. Rankings of the four opening batsmen (Only for the purpose of team selection for the 2nd ODI with SA). Above 4 openers can be ranked according to their current aggressiveness & power hitting ability as discussed below.
Kusal Perera (Ranked 1)
Although not used as an opener recently, he has been opening for SL in 2016/2017 period (in 80 ODI innings) and performed very well. He has a highest score of 135 runs scored in 128 balls as an opener in 2016. Although he can play all the shots of Snath (some commentators used to calling him as a “Duplicate of Sanath”). Being a wicket keeper he has a great eye, hand & body coordination and he is ideally suited to exploit the field restrictions during the first 10 overs. His R6 is only 7% but he achieved this as a middle order batsman. If he opens the inning I would expect him to raise that mark to at least 12% or even 20%.
Avishka Fernando (Ranked 2)
This is with the assumption that he will give a similar performance as shown in the practise match. From the records of his List A performances and the recent ODI matches in SL with Ireland, I think he is a very good prospect for our Power Hitting option 1. Only drawback we have with all our openers is that the ability of scoring sixes during the first 10 overs is not very good when compared with the opening batsmen from other countries. That comparison will be provided in my next articles.
By the way R6 of Chris Gayle (worlds most powerful opening batsman) is 52% which is very very high.
Niroshan Dickwella (Ranked 3)
His shot selection is very good so is the ability of scoring boundaries (which is the highest of the four at 52%). Most of the time he is throwing away his wicket so that is why he cannot maintain a high average. Please note that batting averages of the first 5 batters of the other top teams are mostly above 40.0.
Upul Tharanga (Ranked 4)
As of late Thanranga’s performance has been pretty ordinary and during the last 12 month period he has failed to score a single half century in 10 matches. Even his major weakness of nicking the ball during the initial stage of his innings has not disappeared as we witnessed in the the last match with SA. But as there has to be a mix of four openers with 3 of them in the squad, we need to play Tharanga on rotation basis to iron out this deficiency in his technique as he has every other ability to play as the second power hitting option.
CONCLUSION
2nd ODI with SA– Kusal Perera & Avishka Fernando
3rd OdI with SA – Kusal Perera & Niroshan Dickwella
Selectors may not play Kusal as an opener as they will find it difficult to answer the question why he was not tried during the last 12 months as an opener. Anyway everyone will have to realize one factor, that our power hitting options of the opening stand are so weak and we will not be a competitive team in the WC unless it is improved.
CONCLUSION:
AS EXPLAINED CLEARLY ONCE AGAIN, I MAINTAIN MY EARLIER DECISION THAT YOUR ACCUSATION WAS BASELESS AS YOU HAVE DECIDED EVERYTHING BASED ON OLD & IRRELEVANT DATA / STATISTICS OUT SIDE THE LAST 12 MONTH PERIOD.
I hope we stop this argument herewith as if we continue with it anymore It will only increase frustration of forum members
SUSANTHA JAYAWARDENA