I must admit I’m bit confused with the data entry requirements for Partnerships when a batsman retires following the addition of the new Retried Batsman Audit report.
For example if you are 2 wickets down in an innings and Batsman #1 and Batsman #4 are batting together with the score at 2/182 and then Batsman #1 is injured and retires does the FOW become the 3rd wkt at 182 and then the next wkt that is dismissed is also the 3rd FOW wkt? See below.
Then in the Retired (notout) section do you also need to enter the Batsmans #1 name, the FOW and the score in the “Retired at” section and leave the “Returned at” section blank if the batsman does not bat again? Does it make any difference to the partnership records/reports if this section is left blank?
See this example
https://www2.cricketstatz.com/ss/runreport2.aspx?club=17696&mode=100&match=200929
cheers
Does Q5 at https://www.cricketstatz.com/support-forum/questions/frequently-asked-questions explain it? (if not, happy to provide more detail)
Mark I feel an example (like a screenshot of above) of the FOW/partnerships with a retired batsman done correctly in the data entry form would greatly help to fully explain this.
I would prefer to fix the FAQ description since it will become the place to go to learn how to do this correctly (and will get lost if I post up in this thread). Can you let me know what is not clear in the FAQ and I will fix?
When rereading the FAQ for the retired batsman section, i think that part is clear (which i haven't done in the above example), its just clearer details are required for the FOW section and how to enter a retired batsman for the partnerships to calculate correctly.
Eg in the above example have i entered the right FOW (eg 3rd wkt) for retired batsman Dave Spencer? and the next actual FOW (Alex Ninkov) is also the 3rd wkt.
Thanks - I have added more detail to the FAQ
thanks - i was obviously doing it wrong. I'll fix up my retired batsman by finding them with the Retired Batsman Audit report.
You're actually doing it ok - it will give the same result. Your way is the old way, before I introduced the retired at fields. The new way is what people asked for and is a bit more logical for people reading the scorecards.