Test cricket November 1, 2008

# A summary of Test cricket by period (Part 1)

This is a major attempt to generate a set of measures for Test Cricket by period

This is a major attempt to generate a set of measures for Test Cricket by period. The purpose is two-fold. The first is to look at the way the figures change over the years, letting us get a handle on the evolution of the game. The second is to establish a criteria for adjusting any analysis we do which spans across the years. Many a time have I found myself in a situation needing to adjust a particular period's figures and I have re-invented the wheel every time. Now I hope to have a set of figures which can be used as a ready reckoner for such adjustments. Readers who do similar analysis are welcome to use these figures.

Readers should also realize that after I thought of this complex topic, I have put in nearly a month's work, on and off. into preparing this complicated analysis. I would appreciate avoiding of a superficial read and flippant off-the-cuff comments.

The analysis covers various aspects of Test Cricket. Since the article has become too long, it has been split into two parts. The first part covers Matches, Innings, Results, Partnerships and Extras. The second part covers Batting, Bowling, Keeping and Dismissals.

To start with let me divide the 130 years into 8 periods, taking into account the evolution of the game, years and the number of Tests played. The following are the periods.

```1. 1877 - 1914  (Pre World war 1)
2. 1920 - 1939  (In between the two World Wars)
3. 1946 - 1959  (1940s & 1950s)
4. 1960 - 1969  (1960s)
5. 1970 - 1979  (1970s)
6. 1980 - 1989  (1980s)
7. 1990 - 1999  (1990s)
8. 2000 - 2008  (2000s)
```
These are logical and reasonably evenly spaced periods. Anything more will result in too many periods with consequent difficulty in following the tables and anything less will telescope multiple differing periods into one and we will lose out in analysis.

Even the formatting of the article required a lot of thinking. I tried having the periods horizontally. It was difficult to read. There was also the need to present the core data such as runs, wickets, balls, wickets et al to the readers. So I adopted a dual presentation approach. In the main body of the article I show the calculated measures in a grouped form and the base core data in the supporting pages. That way all the information is shown and the main report is not cluttered. I have also avoided showing the variance of each period figure to the all-Test averages to avoid showing too many numbers. That will indeed be the key figure to make adjustments.

Let us get into the analysis results.

First the base Match analysis.

1. Match analysis 1 (Balls/Runs/Wkts per match)

```Period     Mats   B/M  R/M  W/M

Pre-WW1     134  1799  812 33.6
WW1-WW2     140  2171  976 29.9
40s-50s     209  2303  912 30.4
1960s       186  2409 1003 31.1
1970s       197  2259 1014 31.0
1980s       267  1985  949 29.2
1990s       347  2018  963 30.5
2000s       409  1967 1046 31.1

All Tests  1889  2093  973 30.7
```
During the first period, timeless Tests and 3-day Tests alternated. Later 3-day, 4-day, 5-day, 6-day and timeless Tests were played through the years until 1979, from which year almost all the 1000+ tests have been played over 5 days. As recently as 1973, 4-days tests were played between New Zealand and Pakistan. Please remember these pertinent facts while perusing this table.

Surprisingly the Balls per match figure during the first period has been quite high despite the number of 3-day tests. This, despite 4-ball overs during most of these years requiring more change over time. During 1960s the balls per match is the highest. More than the match days, I feel this is certainly a result of lot more drawn matches during this period and to a lesser extent the 1970s.

The runs per match is the highest during the current decade and the lowest during the first period when batting was indeed difficult. The relatively high 1960s and 1970s figure must no doubt be due to the number of drawn matches.

More Wickets per match fell during the first period. Barring this period the figure has remained fairly static.

2. Match analysis 2 (Runs/Wkt, Runs/Over)

```Period      RpO    RpW

Pre-WW1    2.71   24.2
WW1-WW2    2.70   32.7
40s-50s    2.37   29.9
1960s      2.50   32.2
1970s      2.69   32.7
1980s      2.87   32.5
1990s      2.87   31.6
2000s      3.19   33.7

All Tests  2.79   31.7
```
The RpO figure is the most important measure we have seen until now. It has varied quite significantly over the years. Surprisingly the Rpo figure was quite high during the first two periods despite the pitches. It fell drastically during the post-112 period, certainly due to a combination of accurate bowling and defensive batting and attitudes. The figure picked up later and has crossed the key value of 3.0 for the current decade, where it is 14% higher than the all-test average. This has been the result of most teams, led by Australia, scoring quickly in a bid to go for a result.

There have been 4/5/8 ball overs at different times in Test cricket, however all RpO figures have been standardized to 6 bpo for this table.

Barring the first period the Runs per wicket figure has remained fairly stable. The figure is highest during current decades. For most of the periods the RpW figure has exceeded 30.

3. Inns Analysis (Runs per completed inns, Low and high scores)

```Period      R/CI  I<100   I>500

Pre-WW1     231  12.71%   2.63%
WW1-WW2     289   3.14%   6.68%
40s-50s     256   6.46%   6.79%
1960s       284   1.93%   5.80%
1970s       276   2.62%   5.24%
1980s       278   2.23%   5.64%
1990s       269   1.71%   5.47%
2000s       282   3.42%   9.87%

All Tests   272   3.84%   6.49%
```
The average completed innings size has followed the pattern. Quite low (15% below all-Test average) during the first period and then around the all-Test average mark subsequently, barring the low-scoring 40s-50s period..

During the first period, there was an extraordinarily high instances of sub-100 innings. Over 12.5% of the innings completed (53 out of 494) were below 100. The second period was a major drop in the sub-100 innings. However the figure almost doubled during the 40s-50s. Then it has settled down. The 1990s had the lowest figure. Surprisingly the current decade's is double that of the previous decade. There have been 36 such instances out of 1052 completed innings.

I was so intrigued by this sudden escalation that I decided to make a detailed study. As expected the culprits were Bangladesh with 8 sub-100 scores and Zimbabwe with 7. However the situation has been worsened by the West Indian decline. They have had 5 sub-100 scores. At the other end, Australia and South Africa have had one instance each.

Predictably there were very few 500+ innings during the first period. Then the % stabilized to the all-Test average during the next 6 periods. There has been a noticeable increase during the current decade with 147 of the 1489 innings crossing 500. Remember that these are not just completed innings but all innings.

Australia leads with 28 500+ scores while India is close with 24. At the other end Zimbabwe has only 2 scores in excess of 500 while Bangladesh has not crossed 500.

The paradoxical current decade situation of high number of 500+ scores and high number of sub-100 scores is a pointer to the wide gap between teams as well as the drive to achieve results.

4. Partnerships analysis (Opening & Last 3 wkts)

```Period     Open OP100+ OPSub10 Last3W

Pre-WW1    29.8   5.9%   37.2%  47.3
WW1-WW2    40.5  11.3%   28.1%  47.5
4os-50s    36.3   8.1%   27.4%  40.7
1960s      38.2   7.5%   24.9%  49.0
1970s      38.3   8.0%   27.0%  47.5
1980s      34.2   6.4%   27.5%  50.0
1990s      35.7   8.2%   30.3%  48.2
2000s      39.0   8.9%   28.7%  49.8

All Tests  36.7   8.1%   28.7%  47.8
```
This is an analysis of two types of partnerships. The first wicket partnership is the most important one since it lays the foundation for the innings. The average first-wicket score has been reasonably scattered around the all-Test average of 36.7 barring the first period when it fell below 30. In between the wars the partnership average went past 40, possibly owing to the strong opening partnerships of England and Australia.

Even though I am not a fan of measuring quality through individual 100s (I always treat the 100th run as nothing more than the run(s) scored around the 99 mark), a 100 partnership is more significant since it delivers a psychological blow for the team. A fairly low number of partnerships during the first period crossed 100. Surprisingly this was followed by a doubling during the next period with over 10% of the partnerships crossing 100 (56 out of 494). There has been a recent increase during the current decade, also at a good scoring rate.

The next is a measure of opening failures. These are the sub-10 (single digit) partnerships. This includes only instances where the first wicket has fallen. During the early days, especially during the first period, well over a third of the partnerships have been failures. This figure improved over the years but has picked up now and we are back to a fairly high (either side of) 30% figure. It may have to do with the attacking attitude of the opening batsmen nowadays. I could have done a "opener dismissed at 0" analysis. However I feel that a single digit partnership is a failure and a 0 is no worse than a 5 or 9.

The next measure is the number of runs added for the last 3 wickets. This has not varied much barring the 40s-50s when it fell to around 40. For the current decade the value is around 50, indicating a more committed late order batting set-up with better techniques and application.

5. Extras Analysis - per 1000 balls (Extras/Byes/LegByes/NoBalls/Wides)

```Period     E/Tb B/Tb L/Tb N/Tb W/Tb

Pre-WW1    22.6 12.8  6.5  2.3  1.0
WW1-WW2    21.2  9.3  8.6  2.8  0.5
40s-50s    16.8  7.6  6.3  2.3  0.5
1960s      18.9  6.6  7.3  4.4  0.5
1970s      27.9  6.5  9.2 11.3  1.0
1980s      32.0  6.0 11.8 12.5  1.7
1990s      33.1  5.9 12.4 13.4  1.4
2000s      34.0  6.9 11.9 12.2  2.9

All Tests  27.4  7.1  9.9  8.9  1.4
```
All the extras calculations have been done per 1000 balls. This is just a convenient measure and is to be used only as a relative measure for comparison. All the extras components have been analyzed.

The number of Extras per Tb has increased over the years and the current decade figure is the highest, about 20% higher than the all-Tests average.

The Byes per Tb started at a high figure and now stands around the all-Test average. Have the keepers become that much better?

Leg Byes follows the reverse pattern. Starting at a low level it is now at a fairly high level.

No Balls per Tb have increased significantly. They were extremely low during the first 70 years and suddenly zoomed up during the 1970s and have remained there. Possibly the changing of the No ball rule during the 1960s must have contributed to this increase.

Wides per Tb have also increased during the current decade, almost double of the all-Test average and the previous period of value. Possibly the bowlers are striving for too much. May also be that the unmpires, no doubt influenced by the ODI experience, are calling wides more often now.

The increase in LB/Nb/Wides per Tb has more than odffset the drop in Byes per Tb and this has resulted in the overall increase in Extras per Tb.

6. Results Analysis (Results/HomeWins/AwayWins)

```Period     Res% HW % AW % Dr %

Pre-WW1    82.1 44.0 38.1 17.9
WW1-WW2    62.9 35.7 27.1 37.1
40s-50s    65.1 36.8 28.2 34.9
1960s      52.2 30.6 21.5 47.8
1970s      57.4 35.0 22.3 42.6
1980s      53.9 32.6 21.3 46.1
1990s      64.3 40.9 23.3 35.7
2000s      77.0 46.2 30.8 23.0

All Tests  64.9 38.6 26.3 35.1
```
This is a very interesting table. The overall Results % started at an incredible 82+ value during the first period, dropped to a low 50+% during the miserable 1960s and has risen again now to a near-80% value. Australia might be stuttering now. However they are the team which started the equivalent of "total cricket", hard, attacking and always striving for results. Due credit should be given to them for changing the face of Test cricket, especially after the miserable 1960s-1980s periods.

A similar pattern emerges in the Home wins measure. The first and last periods have high Home wins % values.

The best period for Away wins was the first one when the 3 month sea travel seemed to have done something good since 38% of the matches finished with Away wins. This value has since dropped and stood at its lowest during the 1960s when "Not to lose" was the motto. The value has picked up significantly during the current decade with over 30% Away wins.

The Draws % shows low values during the first and last periods. The most boring period in Test history was during 1960s when nearly half of the matches ended in draws, not all of them the exciting ones.