January 11, 2011

The keepers lead: an unconventional look at players on field

A detailed analysis of the time spent by players on the field through their career
32

Mark Boucher: most time spent by a wicket-keeper on field
Mark Boucher: most time spent by a wicket-keeper on field © AFP

Abhi had a very unusual request. He wanted me to find a way of determining the number of hours Tendulkar was on field during his international career. This was such an unconventional request that it intrigued me a lot. I set about the methodology, which turned out to be quite a bit tricky. Then, as I am wont to do, I decided to expand the scope of the exercise to all the players. That complicated the exercise further. But the results are fascinating.

First I did the exercise only for Test Cricket. Later I extended the same to ODIs. This article includes both.

I decided to use the balls faced, bowled, kept wicket or fielded as the base for all calculations. This is the most consistent measure and is available completely for most recent matches. I had to do some extrapolating for earlier matches, especially for the balls faced by the batsmen. The bowler balls and the fielder balls are, however, always available.

I decided to split the information into broadly two categories. One is the Active Balls, during which time the player has to be 100% aware and involved all the time and the other is the Passive Balls, during which the player is not at the centre of action. The bowler, batsman, batsman at the non-striker end and the wicket-keeper are always at the centre of action.

Active Balls refer to the following types of activities and can be added with reasonable amount of conviction..

- Batsman facing the bowling directly,
- Batsman at the non-striker end,
- Bowler delivering the ball and
- Wicket-keeper engaged in keeping.

Passive Balls refer to the following type of activities.

- Player fielding.

A few footnotes.

1. It is accepted that the two Batsman-related activities are not necessarily equivalent. In one, the batsman faces the ball, plays the same and then runs, if required. In the other, the player only runs, if required. However these are quite integrated activities and I did not want to affix an ad-hoc % of involvement level. Instead consider this as two sides of one activity, one requiring 120% effort and the other, 80% effort. Since the two numbers are almost the same for most players, this works out very well.

2. The bowler effort is split further into the fast bowler effort, requiring more effort and the spinner deliveries, requiring lesser effort. This takes care of the additional run-up required.

3. The wicket-keeper effort is valued as equivalent to the batsman-at-crease effort in view of the intense effort that is required before, during and after the delivery.

4. The Fielder effort will be taken in terms of time the same as wicket-keeper effort but will be given in a separate table since this represents much less taxing and lighter work-load. No way can we split this as close to the stumps or outfield because of the non-availability of data. Anyhow the close fielders might have to concentrate more but the outfielders would be running more. So this would about cancel out. Let us also ignore the few minutes players take off to get to the pavilion to have one or more breaks. There is no data on that. In all these cases I have avoided any ad-hoc weights.

So it is clear that there is present a certain amount of guesswork and approximation. However the idea is not to strive for unnecessary accuracy but move forward on the uncharted seas.

I will convert each delivery into time by using 42.5 seconds per delivery. This works out well across the years. Maybe they bowled more overs during the early years. But this works to nearly six and half playing hours per day which is the norm. I am not going to sit here and worry about the West Indian pace bowlers, or for that matter, the recent Indian teams, bowling at 12 overs per hour. They stay longer on the field, by choice.

There will be a slight tweaking for bowlers. The pace bowlers' deliveries would be clocked at 45 seconds and the spinners at 40 seconds. This will even out to the magical 42.5 seconds over the millions of deliveries bowled. It is possible that the fast bowlers expend more effort during their bowling efforts than the spinners. However I have decided that the additional seconds assigned will compensate for this partly. I do not want to assign any arbitrary effort related weight. The keepers remain at 42.5 seconds which evens out to their keeping for both types of bowlers.

I will do three tables. The first will be one on the batting and bowling times of players, other than wicket-keepers (who have kept wicket for a minimum of 10000 balls). The second will be on the fielding hours spent by these players. The third will be a special one for wicket-keepers on their keeping and batting duties. All the tables will cover players who have played in 25 or more Test matches or 40 ODI matches. These are long lists with around 500 players. Hence only the top-20 will be shown in the article.

Tests: Non-keeper Player - Batting/Bowling hours table

Player (Bat/Bow) Team Mats  <--Total--> <-Bat:Act-> <-Bat:Pas-> <-Bowling->
Hours Hrs/M Balls Hours Balls Hours Balls Hours

Kallis J.H Saf 145 821.5- 5.67 26416-311.9 25911-305.9 18337-203.7 Tendulkar S.R Ind 177 676.6- 3.82 27123-320.2 25852-305.2 4096- 51.2 Dravid R Ind 150 676.4- 4.51 28492-336.4 28678-338.6 120- 1.5 Border A.R Aus 156 655.9- 4.20 25460-300.6 25855-305.2 4009- 50.1 Kumble A Ind 132 655.1- 4.96 6359- 75.1 5876- 69.4 40856-510.7 Sobers G.St.A Win 93 638.6- 6.87 16884-199.3 16884-199.3 21599-240.0 Warne S.K Aus 145 633.2- 4.37 5411- 63.9 5127- 60.5 40704-508.8 Waugh S.R Aus 168 624.6- 3.72 22495-265.6 23065-272.3 7805- 86.7 Muralitharan M Slk 133 595.9- 4.48 1939- 22.9 1908- 22.5 44040-550.5 Kapil Dev N Ind 131 539.6- 4.12 9798-115.7 9798-115.7 27740-308.2 Gavaskar S.M Ind 125 514.7- 4.12 21641-255.5 21597-255.0 380- 4.2 Chanderpaul S Win 129 513.9- 3.98 20806-245.6 20942-247.2 1680- 21.0 Vettori D.L Nzl 103 497.3- 4.83 7036- 83.1 7337- 86.6 26206-327.6 Ponting R.T Aus 152 494.8- 3.26 20828-245.9 20580-243.0 539- 6.0 Boycott G Eng 108 488.8- 4.53 20258-239.2 20258-239.2 944- 10.5 Botham I.T Eng 102 486.0- 4.76 10341-122.1 10294-121.5 21815-242.4 Atherton M.A Eng 115 472.6- 4.11 19793-233.7 19809-233.9 408- 5.1 Gooch G.A Eng 118 468.8- 3.97 18588-219.4 18625-219.9 2655- 29.5 Hammond W.R Eng 85 467.8- 5.50 16061-189.6 16061-189.6 7969- 88.5 Lara B.C Win 131 464.2- 3.54 20175-238.2 19086-225.3 60- 0.8

The top-3 players based on the hours/match value are given below.

T.W Goddard  (Saf) : 6.99
G.S.A Sobers (Win) : 6.87
V.M,Mankad (Ind)   : 6.84

Tests: Wicket keepers - Keeping/Batting hours table

Player (Keeper)  Team Mats  <--Total-->  <-Keeping->  <-Bat:Act-> <-Bat:Pas->
Hours Hrs/M  Balls Hours  Balls Hours Balls Hours

Boucher M.V Saf 139 1675.2-12.05 121311-1432.1 10596-125.1 9995-118.0 Healy I.A Aus 119 1532.6-12.88 112020-1322.5 8798-103.9 9004-106.3 Knott A.P.E Eng 95 1388.4-14.61 97030-1145.5 10310-121.7 10264-121.2 Marsh R.W Aus 96 1352.6-14.09 99284-1172.1 7646- 90.3 7646- 90.3 Stewart A.J Eng 133 1266.1- 9.52 72712- 858.4 17253-203.7 17279-204.0 Evans T.G Eng 91 1215.4-13.36 90489-1068.3 6232- 73.6 6232- 73.6 Gilchrist A.C Aus 96 1210.0-12.60 88888-1049.4 6796- 80.2 6810- 80.4 Kirmani S.M.H Ind 88 1143.7-13.00 85372-1007.9 5754- 67.9 5754- 67.9 Wasim Bari Pak 81 992.2-12.25 78217- 923.4 2914- 34.4 2914- 34.4 Dujon P.J.L Win 81 966.7-11.93 69050- 815.2 6416- 75.7 6416- 75.7 Parore A.C Nzl 78 936.5-12.01 65280- 770.7 7101- 83.8 6949- 82.0 Jacobs R.D Win 65 892.7-13.73 64901- 766.2 5392- 63.7 5322- 62.8 Flower A Zim 63 877.0-13.92 52923- 624.8 10645-125.7 10715-126.5 Sangakkara K.C Slk 94 875.1- 9.31 44929- 530.4 14732-173.9 14464-170.8 Murray D.L Win 62 864.1-13.94 65426- 772.4 3885- 45.9 3885- 45.9 Waite J.H.B Saf 50 847.2-16.94 58950- 695.9 6405- 75.6 6405- 75.6 Oldfield W.A.S Aus 54 802.3-14.86 61715- 728.6 3122- 36.9 3122- 36.9 Moin Khan Pak 69 801.5-11.62 57193- 675.2 5440- 64.2 5258- 62.1 Smith I.D.S Nzl 63 795.7-12.63 59469- 702.1 3965- 46.8 3965- 46.8 Engineer F.M Ind 46 765.8-16.65 52768- 623.0 6051- 71.4 6051- 71.4

The top-3 players based on the hours/match value are given below.

J.H,B,Waite (Saf)    : 16.94
F.M.Engineer (Ind)   : 16.65
F.C.M.Alexander (Win): 15.57

Tests: Non-keeper Player Fielding hours table

Player (Bat/Bow)    Team Mats  <-Fld Tot--> Fielding
Hours Hrs/Mat  Balls

Tendulkar S.R Ind 177 1997.5-11.29 169199 Waugh S.R Aus 168 1758.4-10.47 148945 Dravid R Ind 150 1746.1-11.64 147902 Border A.R Aus 156 1735.8-11.13 147035 Ponting R.T Aus 152 1684.7-11.08 142706 Lara B.C Win 131 1495.7-11.42 126698 Gavaskar S.M Ind 125 1456.6-11.65 123382 Chanderpaul S Win 129 1408.2-10.92 119287 Laxman V.V.S Ind 120 1381.2-11.51 116997 Gower D.I Eng 117 1339.5-11.45 113463 Cowdrey M.C Eng 114 1322.4-11.60 112019 Boycott G Eng 108 1320.1-12.22 111824 Kallis J.H Saf 145 1320.1- 9.10 111818 Vengsarkar D.B Ind 116 1309.1-11.28 110885 Waugh M.E Aus 128 1301.7-10.17 110259 Lloyd C.H Win 110 1294.1-11.76 109614 Gooch G.A Eng 118 1293.7-10.96 109584 Ganguly S.C Ind 113 1286.4-11.38 108962 Javed Miandad Pak 124 1273.0-10.27 107833 Inzamam-ul-Haq Pak 120 1270.8-10.59 107645

The top-3 players based on the hours/match value are given below.

E.Weekes (Win)       : 15.12
J.B.Stollymeyer (Win): 14.59
A.P.Sheahan (Aus)    : 14.43

ODIs: Non-keeper Player - Batting/Bowling hours table

Player (Bat/Bow) Team Mats  <--Total--> <-Bat:Act-> <-Bat:Pas-> <-Bowling->
Hours Hrs/M Balls Hours Balls Hours Balls Hours

Tendulkar S.R Ind 442 590.2- 1.34 20401-240.8 21095-249.0 8026-100.3 Jayasuriya S.T Slk 443 535.9- 1.21 14719-173.8 14968-176.7 14832-185.4 Kallis J.H Saf 307 471.0- 1.53 15117-178.5 15115-178.4 10270-114.1 Ganguly S.C Ind 311 413.9- 1.33 15416-182.0 15348-181.2 4561- 50.7 Ponting R.T Aus 352 384.6- 1.09 16226-191.6 16214-191.4 150- 1.7 Inzamam-ul-Haq Pak 378 379.8- 1.00 15812-186.7 16299-192.4 58- 0.7 de Silva P.A Slk 308 335.9- 1.09 11443-135.1 11511-135.9 5196- 64.9 Waugh S.R Aus 325 334.6- 1.03 9971-117.7 10041-118.5 8847- 98.3 Haynes D.L Win 238 323.6- 1.36 13707-161.8 13679-161.5 30- 0.3 Waugh M.E Aus 244 307.8- 1.26 11053-130.5 11116-131.2 3687- 46.1 Atapattu M.S Slk 268 306.7- 1.14 12594-148.7 13335-157.4 51- 0.6 Lara B.C Win 298 304.5- 1.02 13086-154.5 12651-149.4 49- 0.6 Mohammad Yousuf Pak 288 304.1- 1.06 12942-152.8 12814-151.3 2- 0.0 Azharuddin M Ind 334 304.1- 0.91 12669-149.6 12568-148.4 552- 6.1 Gayle C.H Win 219 301.7- 1.38 9412-111.1 8925-105.4 6814- 85.2 Chanderpaul S Win 260 301.4- 1.16 12160-143.6 12590-148.6 740- 9.2 Shahid Afridi Pak 306 299.5- 0.98 5676- 67.0 5811- 68.6 13110-163.9 Wasim Akram Pak 356 298.9- 0.84 4208- 49.7 3992- 47.1 18186-202.1 Flower G.W Zim 221 298.1- 1.35 9723-114.8 9745-115.0 5461- 68.3 Hooper C.L Win 227 294.6- 1.30 7517- 88.7 7303- 86.2 9573-119.7

The top-3 players based on the hours/match value are given below.

G.R.Marsh (Aus)  : 1.55
J.H.Kallis (Saf) : 1.53
N.C.Johnson (Zim): 1.52

ODIs: Wicket keepers - Keeping/Batting hours table

Player (Keeper)  Team Mats  <--Total-->  <-Keeping->  <-Bat:Act-> <-Bat:Pas->
Hours Hrs/M  Balls Hours  Balls Hours Balls Hours

Gilchrist A.C Aus 287 1121.5- 3.91 75983- 897.0 9922-117.1 9092-107.3 Boucher M.V Saf 292 1041.5- 3.57 77467- 914.5 5505- 65.0 5253- 62.0 Sangakkara K.C Slk 278 974.1- 3.50 59746- 705.3 11404-134.6 11362-134.1 Flower A Zim 213 805.2- 3.78 49843- 588.4 9097-107.4 9268-109.4 Moin Khan Pak 219 765.4- 3.50 56703- 669.4 4017- 47.4 4118- 48.6 Kaluwitharana R.S Slk 189 720.6- 3.81 51344- 606.1 4776- 56.4 4917- 58.0 Dhoni M.S Ind 172 681.2- 3.96 44727- 528.0 6489- 76.6 6486- 76.6 Dujon P.J.L Win 169 617.6- 3.65 46407- 547.9 2955- 34.9 2955- 34.9 Stewart A.J Eng 170 612.6- 3.60 38299- 452.1 6827- 80.6 6764- 79.9 Healy I.A Aus 168 601.9- 3.58 46818- 552.7 2104- 24.8 2059- 24.3 McCullum B.B Nzl 178 587.7- 3.30 41361- 488.3 4189- 49.5 4234- 50.0 Dravid R Ind 339 585.3- 1.73 18884- 222.9 15124-178.5 15567-183.8 Parore A.C Nzl 179 574.7- 3.21 38949- 459.8 4874- 57.5 4860- 57.4 Rashid Latif Pak 166 564.4- 3.40 43429- 512.7 2237- 26.4 2146- 25.3 Jacobs R.D Win 146 513.0- 3.51 37901- 447.4 2662- 31.4 2895- 34.2 Mongia N.R Ind 140 491.8- 3.51 37766- 445.8 1843- 21.8 2053- 24.2 Taibu T Zim 130 477.1- 3.67 32030- 378.1 4249- 50.2 4131- 48.8 Kamran Akmal Pak 123 462.8- 3.76 33228- 392.3 3011- 35.5 2965- 35.0 Khaled Mashud Bng 126 453.3- 3.60 31732- 374.6 3318- 39.2 3345- 39.5 Richardson D.J Saf 122 426.3- 3.49 33508- 395.6 1304- 15.4 1302- 15.4

The top-3 players based on the hours/match value are given below.

M.S.Dhoni (Ind)     : 3.96
A.C.Gilchrist (Aus) : 3.91
A.Bagai (Can)       : 3.85

ODIs: Non-keeper Player Fielding hours table

Player (Bat/Bow)    Team Mats  <-Fld Tot--> Fielding
Hours Hrs/Mat  Balls

Tendulkar S.R Ind 442 1288.8- 2.92 109168 Jayasuriya S.T Slk 443 1219.1- 2.75 103266 Inzamam-ul-Haq Pak 378 1184.3- 3.13 100318 Ponting R.T Aus 352 1105.8- 3.14 93667 Azharuddin M Ind 334 1046.3- 3.13 88632 Jayawardene D.P.M.D Slk 328 1013.5- 3.09 85847 Waugh S.R Aus 325 959.4- 2.95 81267 Lara B.C Win 298 931.7- 3.13 78924 Ganguly S.C Ind 311 919.3- 2.96 77874 Mohammad Yousuf Pak 288 907.3- 3.15 76850 de Silva P.A Slk 308 907.1- 2.95 76834 Wasim Akram Pak 356 887.9- 2.49 75212 Fleming S.P Nzl 280 873.2- 3.12 73961 Atapattu M.S Slk 268 859.8- 3.21 72830 Muralitharan M Slk 338 857.9- 2.54 72670 Kallis J.H Saf 307 846.5- 2.76 71703 Border A.R Aus 273 842.1- 3.08 71328 Vaas WPUJC Slk 324 838.7- 2.59 71042 Saleem Malik Pak 283 832.4- 2.94 70511 Shahid Afridi Pak 306 814.2- 2.66 68967

The top-4 players based on the hours/match value are given below.

D.I.Gower (Eng)    : 3.41
M.A.Atherton (Eng) : 3.41
A.J.Lamb (Eng)     : 3.39
Fairbrother (Eng)  : 3.39

A final compilation. I have added the Active time spent by players across the two formats and have given below the top 5 players in two classifications. One is the table for non-keepers, based on their batting and bowling times. The other is the table on Wicket-keepers based on their keeping and batting times. Let me add that I might have added different varieties of the fruit, but these are all apples.

Batting/Bowling

J.H.Kallis (Saf) : 1292.5 hours S.R.Tendulkar (Ind) : 1266.8 hours R.Dravid (Ind) : 1261.7 hours (Includes wicket-keeping time in about 65 ODI matches) S.R.Waugh (Aus) : 959.2 hours S.T.Jayasuriya (Slk) : 902.2 hours.

This list would not surprise anyone. Kallis is the supreme all-rounder, having scored 22949 runs and captured 529 wickets. Tendulkar, who, until couple of years back, could be called an all-rounder in ODIs, has scored 32290 runs and captured 199 wickets. Dravid (22828 runs and 5 wickets) is here only because of the 18800+ balls he kept wicket for. Steve Waugh (18496 runs and 287 wickets) and Jayasuriya (20401 runs and 420 wickets) are close to being called all-rounders, at least in ODIs.

WicketKeeping/Batting

M.Boucher (Saf) : 2716.7 hours A.C.Gilchrist (Aus) : 2331.5 hours I.Healy (Aus) : 2133.5 hours A.C.Stewart (Eng) : 1878.7 hours K.C.Sangakkara (Slk) : 1849.6 hours.

This list has three of the greatest keeper-batsmen of all times at the top. Boucher, still counting, with his tally of 437 matches is way ahead of Gilchrist who had played 383 matches. Stewart and Sangakkara have relinquished their keeping duties often but have kept wicket for tens of thousands of balls. This is a recognition of the most demanding task on the field. The keepers are unheralded if they are not the high profile ones like Dhoni and Gilchrist.

And the last table. I have added the Passive times from the Test and ODI tables and given the top-5 here. These timings might vary, fielders fielding in the slips, point, mid-on or long-off might have varying levels of activity. At least they would be different varieties of bananas to justify the addition. First slip might not be Passive, but nothing can be done about it. The time spent off filed is also ignored. No data is available. Kallis might have spent time off the field but so would the other players. The following table represents the total fielding time spent on field. I am not going to add the Active and Passive times. The readers can do that after applying a factor to the passive times.

Fielding times for non-keepers

S.R.Tendulkar: 3286.3 hours R.T.Ponting: 2790.5 hours S.R.Waugh: 2717.8 hours A.R.Border: 2577.9 hours Inzamam-ul-haq: 2455.1 hours

To view/down-load the complete Player on-field times tables of all players who have played over 25 Tests/40 ODIs, please click on links given below.

Tests: Non-keeper player - Batting/Bowling times table, please click/right-click here.
Tests: Wicket-keeper - Keeping/Batting times table, please click/right-click here.
Tests: Non-keeper player - Fielding times table, please click/right-click here.

ODIs: Non-keeper player - Batting/Bowling times table, please click/right-click here.
ODIs: Wicket-keeper - Keeping/Batting times table, please click/right-click here.
ODIs: Non-keeper player - Fielding times table, please click/right-click here.

Anantha Narayanan has written for ESPNcricinfo and CastrolCricket and worked with a number of companies on their cricket performance ratings-related systems

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Tony Purcell on February 11, 2011, 1:30 GMT

    I'm trying to decipher what the fielding averages mean. If a player has a high average in terms of hours fielding per game that means that the opposing team batted longer on average per innings while that player was on he field. Which would seem to be a negative measure. Yes, the player did spend a lot of time in the field but that would seem to indicate they had a negative impact on their team's ability to take wickets (which is odd, Paul Sheahan was a famously good fieldsman). It is vaguely possible it means that their presence in the field significantly slowed the opposition's scoring rate.

    In ODI's a low average time in the field might result from either the opposition being dismissed quickly or knocking off the required runs very fast.

    It would be interesting I think to see the players at the other end of the spectrum to see if there's any sort of trend down that end.

    Ananth, have you any insights that might help clarify things? [[ When I did the match recording development work for Wisden I incorporated recording of runs saved/lost as also run-out assists and catch type and positions. However these are all not in public domain data, barring run out info. Ananth: ]]

  • Abhi on January 16, 2011, 7:47 GMT

    Ananth, THanks. Was so caught up in other stuff (and the tit for tat with alex in the previous blog) that i didn't even look at this till now!

    It seems to me that unless Kallis keeps himself exceptionally fit and rations himself properly by spreading matches out well he is due for a massive downturn just about now...This may sound strange since he seems to be on a high right now.But that's normally the way it goes. [[ This applies to both Kallis and Tendulkar. Irrespective of what happens in the WC, both must announce their retirement from ODIs and play only Tests. In the last five ODI innings, Tendulkar has scored one 200 and has had four failures.Unfortunately the IPL is too cash-rich to retire from. Ananth: ]]

  • Rajesh on January 15, 2011, 20:48 GMT

    Ananth,

    The 'groupies' line in my previous comment was meant in a humorous vein. Guess it did not come off too well. Apologise for any hurt feelings.

    Trust me, I have the utmost respect for your efforts and knowledge of the game.

    Peace!! [[ No problems, Rajesh. Diversity of opinion is the strength of this blog. Every comment adds value to my own thinking process. Ananth: ]]

  • Rajesh on January 15, 2011, 14:03 GMT

    My earlier comment was not well taken. But while people appreciate the hard work that has gone into this analysis, looking at the way people are struggling to draw some insights out of it just reinforces my earlier point. The only points that can be gleaned from this huge analysis is that: (1) Wicketkeepers have a tough job on the field - plainly obvious without need for any analysis [[ That is fine. However before the analysis would you have known that Boucher was ahead of Gilchrist in this regard. Ananth: ]]

    (2) Cricketers who have played more matches and spent more time on the field have worked harder than those who have played less number of matches. Again, plainly obvious. [[ Again obvious. But do you know which cricketer and by how much would top the table. Ananth: ]]

    Hence my earlier remark that this whole exercise was futile and did not lead to any new insights. But the author and his groupies may not appreciate this criticism. Before I get banned on this blog, let me reiterate that I have enjoyed most of Ananth's earlier efforts. [[ For every article one could say that there are no insights. New insights are what individual readers to draw. Some might derive insights and some might not. there is no problem in sending a comment to this effect. And I would respond in the same tone, in this case, in a very mild tone. And some readers would repond. You have to accept that. I will not allow anyone to cross the line. You will get banned from this site if you foul-worded me, another reader or any player. That is all. And I can assure you there are no groupies. That is a derogatory term. Howver I will let go. One pereson who countered your your comment was a first time visitor. Ananth: ]]

  • unni on January 15, 2011, 11:34 GMT

    On the first read from office(recently they started allowing browsing cricinfo from office !!) , I didn't realize importance of it. But, on second read, this seems to be a solid base for lot of other interesting trends. Some points which comes to mind (some of which might have been commented by others above)

    1. Who is more efficient, less efficient (maybe seperately for bowlers, batsman)? 2. Who has been workforces for each team over the years (or more coarse, 5 year blocks)? 3. Which teams had skewed work distribution (maybe sri lanka?), which had balanced (aussies might come to mind; but that might be because, I have seen only that)? 4. How come India has 3 workhorses in the same timespan eventhough India doesn't seem to play more tests than England/Aus.? Is it that Tendulkar,Dravid shared the load evenly in alternate matches? [[ Just published so that others can read. Will add responses later. Ananth: ]]

  • John vd W (South Africa) on January 13, 2011, 10:04 GMT

    This is great analysis, lots of hard work and interesting to read. The best part of the whole piece though, is the author's remark to Rajesh on 12 January - I could not have said it better ! Nice work.

  • Siddharth Rallapalli on January 13, 2011, 7:07 GMT

    Hi Ananth, I am not personally a stats man, but yours and your co-contributors' blogs have made for some very very entertaining and informative reading. Thanks very much.

    Just wondering if the proliferation of international cricket in the last two decades contributed to a skew. It seems that players from this era dominate the top 5-7 positions in each list. Particularly in the modern era, teams tend to shun prepatory first class matches on international tours (or play the bare minimum). How would the list change if First class and List A matches were taken into consideration? Apologies if I have misread your stats and missed the answer to my question (I laid out my disclaimer in the first line of the post :-) )

    Also, on a separate note, I would be very very interested to know your thoughts on the MVP for 2010. How would you go about assigning the variables to measure a players "value" over the course of 2010.

    Thanks mate!

  • Vish on January 13, 2011, 5:28 GMT

    This might be an odious conclusion to arrive at. I see the hours/match as a a determinant of the real value of the player to the team (after ignoring the special characteristics of the player). I would question the selection of a player whose value is still under 2 (maybe even 2.5) after a certain accepted number of matches. Are they in the team becuase we don't have other players for their spot? [[ Yes, this sort of norm could be acceptable for established teams such as India or Australia.By participating in one of the three basic functions, explained in response to your pervious comment, the players are contributing to team cause. Ananth: ]]

  • Vish on January 13, 2011, 5:13 GMT

    BTW, it seems like the higher the Hours/Match for a player, the more value he is to a team. Knowing their individual batting prowess etc. it would seam that Kallis is more valuable to his team than Tendulkar is to his. In fact, for the purpose of selection into a team, the higher value is desirable over lower value after having considered the individual merits (like skill and capability of the player as well as a specific requirement for a playing position and so on..). If we ignore all these special characteristics of a player, Azhar would have been more valuable than Sachin. Ganguly a bit less and Gavaskar's a bit more. Bradman's value was immense to his team as was Sobers. Could this have been used to decide who to play in a match for Raina, Kohli, Pujara, Rohit Sharma? [[ In general, the more hours/match the players seem to be more valuable since the time is derived from runs scored/balls bowled/runs supported. May be a bit unfair to the quicker scorers. Ananth: ]]

  • Vinish on January 13, 2011, 5:11 GMT

    Ananth

    What an effort! This shows that Love is actually a strength and not a weakness... your efforts reflect your love for the game. And cricket followers like me are delighted, regularly, consistently.

    Just as we have basic level index for rating batsmen by *Runs scored X Balls faced* in test cricket (OR *Runs scored X Strike rate* in ODIs), can we have an index for text cricket batsmen with combined values from *Runs Scored X Balls Faced X Time Spent" ?

    B/R Vinish [[ Since the Battying time spent is a function of the Balls faced, there would be double counting. Ananth: ]]

  • Tony Purcell on February 11, 2011, 1:30 GMT

    I'm trying to decipher what the fielding averages mean. If a player has a high average in terms of hours fielding per game that means that the opposing team batted longer on average per innings while that player was on he field. Which would seem to be a negative measure. Yes, the player did spend a lot of time in the field but that would seem to indicate they had a negative impact on their team's ability to take wickets (which is odd, Paul Sheahan was a famously good fieldsman). It is vaguely possible it means that their presence in the field significantly slowed the opposition's scoring rate.

    In ODI's a low average time in the field might result from either the opposition being dismissed quickly or knocking off the required runs very fast.

    It would be interesting I think to see the players at the other end of the spectrum to see if there's any sort of trend down that end.

    Ananth, have you any insights that might help clarify things? [[ When I did the match recording development work for Wisden I incorporated recording of runs saved/lost as also run-out assists and catch type and positions. However these are all not in public domain data, barring run out info. Ananth: ]]

  • Abhi on January 16, 2011, 7:47 GMT

    Ananth, THanks. Was so caught up in other stuff (and the tit for tat with alex in the previous blog) that i didn't even look at this till now!

    It seems to me that unless Kallis keeps himself exceptionally fit and rations himself properly by spreading matches out well he is due for a massive downturn just about now...This may sound strange since he seems to be on a high right now.But that's normally the way it goes. [[ This applies to both Kallis and Tendulkar. Irrespective of what happens in the WC, both must announce their retirement from ODIs and play only Tests. In the last five ODI innings, Tendulkar has scored one 200 and has had four failures.Unfortunately the IPL is too cash-rich to retire from. Ananth: ]]

  • Rajesh on January 15, 2011, 20:48 GMT

    Ananth,

    The 'groupies' line in my previous comment was meant in a humorous vein. Guess it did not come off too well. Apologise for any hurt feelings.

    Trust me, I have the utmost respect for your efforts and knowledge of the game.

    Peace!! [[ No problems, Rajesh. Diversity of opinion is the strength of this blog. Every comment adds value to my own thinking process. Ananth: ]]

  • Rajesh on January 15, 2011, 14:03 GMT

    My earlier comment was not well taken. But while people appreciate the hard work that has gone into this analysis, looking at the way people are struggling to draw some insights out of it just reinforces my earlier point. The only points that can be gleaned from this huge analysis is that: (1) Wicketkeepers have a tough job on the field - plainly obvious without need for any analysis [[ That is fine. However before the analysis would you have known that Boucher was ahead of Gilchrist in this regard. Ananth: ]]

    (2) Cricketers who have played more matches and spent more time on the field have worked harder than those who have played less number of matches. Again, plainly obvious. [[ Again obvious. But do you know which cricketer and by how much would top the table. Ananth: ]]

    Hence my earlier remark that this whole exercise was futile and did not lead to any new insights. But the author and his groupies may not appreciate this criticism. Before I get banned on this blog, let me reiterate that I have enjoyed most of Ananth's earlier efforts. [[ For every article one could say that there are no insights. New insights are what individual readers to draw. Some might derive insights and some might not. there is no problem in sending a comment to this effect. And I would respond in the same tone, in this case, in a very mild tone. And some readers would repond. You have to accept that. I will not allow anyone to cross the line. You will get banned from this site if you foul-worded me, another reader or any player. That is all. And I can assure you there are no groupies. That is a derogatory term. Howver I will let go. One pereson who countered your your comment was a first time visitor. Ananth: ]]

  • unni on January 15, 2011, 11:34 GMT

    On the first read from office(recently they started allowing browsing cricinfo from office !!) , I didn't realize importance of it. But, on second read, this seems to be a solid base for lot of other interesting trends. Some points which comes to mind (some of which might have been commented by others above)

    1. Who is more efficient, less efficient (maybe seperately for bowlers, batsman)? 2. Who has been workforces for each team over the years (or more coarse, 5 year blocks)? 3. Which teams had skewed work distribution (maybe sri lanka?), which had balanced (aussies might come to mind; but that might be because, I have seen only that)? 4. How come India has 3 workhorses in the same timespan eventhough India doesn't seem to play more tests than England/Aus.? Is it that Tendulkar,Dravid shared the load evenly in alternate matches? [[ Just published so that others can read. Will add responses later. Ananth: ]]

  • John vd W (South Africa) on January 13, 2011, 10:04 GMT

    This is great analysis, lots of hard work and interesting to read. The best part of the whole piece though, is the author's remark to Rajesh on 12 January - I could not have said it better ! Nice work.

  • Siddharth Rallapalli on January 13, 2011, 7:07 GMT

    Hi Ananth, I am not personally a stats man, but yours and your co-contributors' blogs have made for some very very entertaining and informative reading. Thanks very much.

    Just wondering if the proliferation of international cricket in the last two decades contributed to a skew. It seems that players from this era dominate the top 5-7 positions in each list. Particularly in the modern era, teams tend to shun prepatory first class matches on international tours (or play the bare minimum). How would the list change if First class and List A matches were taken into consideration? Apologies if I have misread your stats and missed the answer to my question (I laid out my disclaimer in the first line of the post :-) )

    Also, on a separate note, I would be very very interested to know your thoughts on the MVP for 2010. How would you go about assigning the variables to measure a players "value" over the course of 2010.

    Thanks mate!

  • Vish on January 13, 2011, 5:28 GMT

    This might be an odious conclusion to arrive at. I see the hours/match as a a determinant of the real value of the player to the team (after ignoring the special characteristics of the player). I would question the selection of a player whose value is still under 2 (maybe even 2.5) after a certain accepted number of matches. Are they in the team becuase we don't have other players for their spot? [[ Yes, this sort of norm could be acceptable for established teams such as India or Australia.By participating in one of the three basic functions, explained in response to your pervious comment, the players are contributing to team cause. Ananth: ]]

  • Vish on January 13, 2011, 5:13 GMT

    BTW, it seems like the higher the Hours/Match for a player, the more value he is to a team. Knowing their individual batting prowess etc. it would seam that Kallis is more valuable to his team than Tendulkar is to his. In fact, for the purpose of selection into a team, the higher value is desirable over lower value after having considered the individual merits (like skill and capability of the player as well as a specific requirement for a playing position and so on..). If we ignore all these special characteristics of a player, Azhar would have been more valuable than Sachin. Ganguly a bit less and Gavaskar's a bit more. Bradman's value was immense to his team as was Sobers. Could this have been used to decide who to play in a match for Raina, Kohli, Pujara, Rohit Sharma? [[ In general, the more hours/match the players seem to be more valuable since the time is derived from runs scored/balls bowled/runs supported. May be a bit unfair to the quicker scorers. Ananth: ]]

  • Vinish on January 13, 2011, 5:11 GMT

    Ananth

    What an effort! This shows that Love is actually a strength and not a weakness... your efforts reflect your love for the game. And cricket followers like me are delighted, regularly, consistently.

    Just as we have basic level index for rating batsmen by *Runs scored X Balls faced* in test cricket (OR *Runs scored X Strike rate* in ODIs), can we have an index for text cricket batsmen with combined values from *Runs Scored X Balls Faced X Time Spent" ?

    B/R Vinish [[ Since the Battying time spent is a function of the Balls faced, there would be double counting. Ananth: ]]

  • Vish on January 13, 2011, 4:55 GMT

    @Rajesh, you kidding man? This monumental work may very usher the change required in cricketing metrics and statistics. We can see where we need to pay attention to capturing pure numbers rather than assuming them. This may very well take the guess work of the value of a player when co-related with the $$ they have received so far (IPL - any takers?). Also, it may also point to some training budget required to add a quanta of value to a players capability (?). Maybe it will take the guess work and bias out of the selection process. [[ I was so upset with the IPL auction process and the completely lopsided selections that, although I do not like iPL myself, I may very well do a performance-payment analysis. Might be quite interesting. Ananth: ]]

    Ananth, I am wondering if Hours/Inning would have been better granularity if you were to look for players focus in a match? For example, if a player stays off the field for a complete inning due to injury, hours/innings may automatically ignore the lack of involvement during the said times.

    Also, would it be ok to assume, the balls/hour quotient is the level of focus by a player and thereby a teams focus in wins and losses? [[ Then we cannot combine the two formats since an innings in ODI is 200 minutes and in test cricket could go right past 15 hours. Ananth: ]]

  • Faraz on January 13, 2011, 3:50 GMT

    Great job!Fantastic

    It would be great, if we also see an analyses of the time spent by the bowlers in doing appeals that turned down. I suspect spinners will be on top.

    A final thought is about poor Umpires...

  • dr.shrikant.desai on January 12, 2011, 18:14 GMT

    Fantastic figures by a knowledgeable person.Great effort indeed. dr.shrikant.j.desai

  • Sundar on January 12, 2011, 13:17 GMT

    How did you pull this off mate....Good job

  • Rajesh on January 12, 2011, 12:40 GMT

    Unlike some of your earlier endeavours, I find this to be an absolute waste of time!! No doubt you have undertaken a mammoth task, but the whole point of your exercise was......what?? [[ If you have not understood the idea behind the article after going through it, no amount of explaining on my part will convince or educate you. Ananth: ]]

  • Richard on January 12, 2011, 7:43 GMT

    Hi Ananth,

    Excellent work as always. Something I have always wondered about and thought perhaps it might make a good subject for you is somehow working out where the 'easiest' runs around the world are scored.

    Obviously there are a myriad of factors involved including quality of bowling attacks, climatic conditions, quality of batsman involved, the flatness of the wickets and many more.

    The reason I ask is that we are consistently told about the flat pitches of the subcontinent (and how typically these batsman have higher averages than batsman from Aus, Eng etc but struggle overseas on perhaps juicier pitches), the difficulty of batting against swing in England and New Zealand etc. I was simply wondering how true these stereotypes are and if its possible to test them somehow.

    Using statsguru it is poss to see that the batting av for all bats in India is almost 2 runs higher than elswhere, poss backing this stereotype up.

    Thoughts? Cheers Richard.

    [[ Worth looking at a matrix of period/location wise batting/bowling. Let me see. Ananth: ]]

  • Karthik on January 12, 2011, 6:59 GMT

    Ananth- This is an interesting information. 1. Can you also do a comparison between # of matches played vs hours clocked per match? This would really tell if the current lot of players are actually clocking more time when compared to earlier? [[ A similar request is elsewhere. Let me see. Ananth: ]]

    2. In your analysis, do you also consider No Balls, Wides? These would typically mean extra balls for all. [[ Would not make much of a difference. Also individual nb/w are available only for the past few years. Ananth: ]]

    3. If a non-keeping fielder was involved in a dismissal, could you not consider it as 'Active' rather than 'Passive'? I do understand data about who effected run-out is not always available. At least catches could be considered. [[ SRT 109168 balls and 106 catches. Not even 0.1%. Think of the infinestimal difference this change will make. Ananth: ]]

  • laura eastman on January 12, 2011, 1:41 GMT

    Excellent work.

    The presentation would improve if you could take the data and present it in spreadsheet-like format, using rich formatting, instead of the csv style.

    Of course I don't know the analysis tool's output, but if it's csv it would easy to paste into any spreadsheet program. [[ I incorporate so many tables that I can just about manage to organize the same in the text file format. I use the html tag of pre-formatting for presentation. The Cricinfo Editors also cannt find time to present this in a better format. My diownload files are text files which can easily be imported into any Excel sheet. Ananth: ]]

  • Pawan Mathur on January 11, 2011, 20:01 GMT

    Sir, An excellent analysis this, i would suggest you to elaborate this further and if possible calculate the players playing hour as a percentage of the total time played by his team in all the matches in which he was involved. I often here commentators saying from anybodyb:"You cant keep him out of the game". Through your stats, it could be revealed the MR. WHO actually could not be kept out of the game. Thanks [[ Good suggestion. Will try and do it, if possible. Ananth: ]]

  • Software Star on January 11, 2011, 19:24 GMT

    is it possible to do an analysis on bowlers who bowled the longest spells. we could break it down to fast bowlers and spinners.. i am curious about Walsh, one of the greatest bowlers ever who isn't given his due because of his more illustrious partners Ambrose, Marshall etc. but i heard that he once bowled 27 overs on the trot for Gloucester.. i bet it was a nightmare for batsmen to face over after over of hostility from Walsh never knowing when it would end.. [[ I do not have information of bowling spells. Ananth: ]]

  • Arun on January 11, 2011, 19:03 GMT

    Extra ordinary effort......

  • Swapnil on January 11, 2011, 18:32 GMT

    Dravid's faced most balls and Kumble's bowled more than anybody else in test cricket.

    Bangalorians have Balls!

  • Ad on January 11, 2011, 16:14 GMT

    Very unique analysis, must have taken some effort!

    I was wondering if the minutes information in the scorecards could be used directly. For batsmen, this would avoid the need for extrapolating the no. of balls faced as minutes information is generally available in older scorecards (active and passive time spent has anyway been assigned equal weight). The start and end times are also available so fielder/keeper times could also be calculated (I'm not sure if information is available for rain interruptions). Only for bowlers, the no. of balls would have to be used.

    The current method is also very good. I was just curious if there was any specific reason why you decided to use no. of balls. [[ On the contrary minutes information is not available for most of the tests. For some of the older tests, the information has been appended well after I picked up the scorecards and created my database. It would be a monumental task to go back and pick up the minutes from those of the scorecards in which the same has been added. I have no resources to do that. For current matches the minutes info is not available. I have worked on the best available method. May not be 100% correct but I am reasonably sure of 90% accuracy across the board. More for recent matches and less for earlier matches. Also Balls metric is valid across all five types of activities. Ananth: ]]

  • JK on January 11, 2011, 14:32 GMT

    Applying the logic of approx 7 hours of play per day, Tendulkar has approximately been on field for 650 days in 21 years of cricket life - which translates to about 31 days on field each year. Is this a fair extrapolation? If yes - seems too low!!! [[ That is all. Please try and find holes in the calculations. All the balls Tendulkar (for that matter all players) have been involved, batting, batting-other-end, bowling and fielding have been included. And the average of 42.5 secs leads to 6 and half hours per day. Please remember that if Tendulkar was out for single digit score in a ODI game (over 120 times, over 25% of his innings) he would have been on the fileld for just half a day. So your conclusions have to be derived rather carefully. Ananth: ]]

  • Bala on January 11, 2011, 13:16 GMT

    Great work..I just cant imagine where I wud start if i were to compile this work...First class, T20I, IPL would add much more to already himalayan numbers...

  • Alex on January 11, 2011, 11:53 GMT

    Ananth - a few academic questions:

    1. If a player A is substituted by a player B (for whatever reasons), are you able to take that into account properly? [[ No. No substitutions of any kind, even including the silly Super-sub rule which was in force for 100 matches, has been considered. Impossible to do so also. Ananth: ]]

    2. If a player A acts as the runner for a player B, are you able to take that into account properly? [[ No. No records available, even for last week's matches. Ananth: ]]

    3. Overs in Australia were 8-ball overs for a long time. Have you made allowance for it? [[ Balls are balls. Overs do not come in at all. All my data is in the form of balls. Ananth: ]]

    The reason I ask is that such data is quite difficult to obtain from the score-boards. [[ The very reason I couldn't include these !!! Ananth: ]]

  • David Reinecke on January 11, 2011, 11:47 GMT

    The fact that Kallis and Tendulkar's bodies have held up as long adds further weight to their legendary status. Especially Kallis considering the time spent in the slips and the fact that he is a fast bowler. Let's not forget these guys are also doing vast amounts of physical conditioning and have practice sessions in between matches. Astounding! Aside: Does this mean Kallis and Tendulkar are the most experienced international cricketers of all time? [[ Do not forget to include Boucher and Gilchrist to your duo of cricketers. Ananth: ]]

  • CricketPissek on January 11, 2011, 11:34 GMT

    very interesting indeed. maybe you should break it down by decade or something, since the number of tests played have changed so much over time. slightly off topic, i remember that Sri Lanka's Brenden Kuruppu not only stayed on the field all 5 days of a test match (againt NZ i think), he was also wearing pads the whole time! if this was a tiredness meter, wonder how he'd fare against Kallis & co :) [[ In terms of effort this was amongst the toughest ones I have undertaken so far. Impossible to replicate this effort at lower levels. Readers have the knowledge to derive their own conclusions. Ananth: ]]

  • danny on January 11, 2011, 10:20 GMT

    very interesting analysis in ODI cricket, no pure bowlers appear in the batting/bowling table as a bowler can at most bowl 60 balls (for most of ODI history anyway)

    what i love is that Geoff Marsh has the highest average and he never bowled a ball. this is because he faced a whopping 67 balls per innings, higher than anyone else i know of. its enough to have him ahead of johnson and kallis both of whom bat high in the order and bowl alot.

    the test averages show the true workhorses in sobers, goddard and mankad and how 'involved' they were (sobers was extremely gifted but still a workhorse)

    one comment on the test averages for fielders - weekes and stollmeyer played in an era where lots of spin was bowled at very fast over rates. therefore their 'hours' per game is high, but the reality is they just got thru more overs per game

    finally, the top four averages for fielders in ODI cricket are the four poms - is this because of 55 and some 60 over cricket in their games? [[ That is an excellent observation. When I was compiling the figures this struck me and I came to the same cponclusion. Then I forgot to add those observations. You are absolutely correct. England played more ODI matches than the others during the first 10 years or so when 55-60 over matches were in place. Ananth: ]]

  • stefan on January 11, 2011, 10:16 GMT

    Very well analysed. Shows what experience really means. All those hours!!!

  • nair ottappalam on January 11, 2011, 10:02 GMT

    Dear Ananth, Terrific dedication in retrieving these figures. One couldnt just imagine how to come across this. Well one would simply think that by virtue of appearing in the most number of test matches and odis Tendulkar should naturally be the one who has been on field for most of the time. But the parameters you mentioned is hard to come across the mind of the commoners. Kudos.

  • Aadhish Kohli on January 11, 2011, 8:21 GMT

    An arduous task but an interesting one. please add a footnote saying how many hours you spend doing this research :-) [[ Many many. On and off for the last 3/4 weeks !!! Ananth: ]]

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Aadhish Kohli on January 11, 2011, 8:21 GMT

    An arduous task but an interesting one. please add a footnote saying how many hours you spend doing this research :-) [[ Many many. On and off for the last 3/4 weeks !!! Ananth: ]]

  • nair ottappalam on January 11, 2011, 10:02 GMT

    Dear Ananth, Terrific dedication in retrieving these figures. One couldnt just imagine how to come across this. Well one would simply think that by virtue of appearing in the most number of test matches and odis Tendulkar should naturally be the one who has been on field for most of the time. But the parameters you mentioned is hard to come across the mind of the commoners. Kudos.

  • stefan on January 11, 2011, 10:16 GMT

    Very well analysed. Shows what experience really means. All those hours!!!

  • danny on January 11, 2011, 10:20 GMT

    very interesting analysis in ODI cricket, no pure bowlers appear in the batting/bowling table as a bowler can at most bowl 60 balls (for most of ODI history anyway)

    what i love is that Geoff Marsh has the highest average and he never bowled a ball. this is because he faced a whopping 67 balls per innings, higher than anyone else i know of. its enough to have him ahead of johnson and kallis both of whom bat high in the order and bowl alot.

    the test averages show the true workhorses in sobers, goddard and mankad and how 'involved' they were (sobers was extremely gifted but still a workhorse)

    one comment on the test averages for fielders - weekes and stollmeyer played in an era where lots of spin was bowled at very fast over rates. therefore their 'hours' per game is high, but the reality is they just got thru more overs per game

    finally, the top four averages for fielders in ODI cricket are the four poms - is this because of 55 and some 60 over cricket in their games? [[ That is an excellent observation. When I was compiling the figures this struck me and I came to the same cponclusion. Then I forgot to add those observations. You are absolutely correct. England played more ODI matches than the others during the first 10 years or so when 55-60 over matches were in place. Ananth: ]]

  • CricketPissek on January 11, 2011, 11:34 GMT

    very interesting indeed. maybe you should break it down by decade or something, since the number of tests played have changed so much over time. slightly off topic, i remember that Sri Lanka's Brenden Kuruppu not only stayed on the field all 5 days of a test match (againt NZ i think), he was also wearing pads the whole time! if this was a tiredness meter, wonder how he'd fare against Kallis & co :) [[ In terms of effort this was amongst the toughest ones I have undertaken so far. Impossible to replicate this effort at lower levels. Readers have the knowledge to derive their own conclusions. Ananth: ]]

  • David Reinecke on January 11, 2011, 11:47 GMT

    The fact that Kallis and Tendulkar's bodies have held up as long adds further weight to their legendary status. Especially Kallis considering the time spent in the slips and the fact that he is a fast bowler. Let's not forget these guys are also doing vast amounts of physical conditioning and have practice sessions in between matches. Astounding! Aside: Does this mean Kallis and Tendulkar are the most experienced international cricketers of all time? [[ Do not forget to include Boucher and Gilchrist to your duo of cricketers. Ananth: ]]

  • Alex on January 11, 2011, 11:53 GMT

    Ananth - a few academic questions:

    1. If a player A is substituted by a player B (for whatever reasons), are you able to take that into account properly? [[ No. No substitutions of any kind, even including the silly Super-sub rule which was in force for 100 matches, has been considered. Impossible to do so also. Ananth: ]]

    2. If a player A acts as the runner for a player B, are you able to take that into account properly? [[ No. No records available, even for last week's matches. Ananth: ]]

    3. Overs in Australia were 8-ball overs for a long time. Have you made allowance for it? [[ Balls are balls. Overs do not come in at all. All my data is in the form of balls. Ananth: ]]

    The reason I ask is that such data is quite difficult to obtain from the score-boards. [[ The very reason I couldn't include these !!! Ananth: ]]

  • Bala on January 11, 2011, 13:16 GMT

    Great work..I just cant imagine where I wud start if i were to compile this work...First class, T20I, IPL would add much more to already himalayan numbers...

  • JK on January 11, 2011, 14:32 GMT

    Applying the logic of approx 7 hours of play per day, Tendulkar has approximately been on field for 650 days in 21 years of cricket life - which translates to about 31 days on field each year. Is this a fair extrapolation? If yes - seems too low!!! [[ That is all. Please try and find holes in the calculations. All the balls Tendulkar (for that matter all players) have been involved, batting, batting-other-end, bowling and fielding have been included. And the average of 42.5 secs leads to 6 and half hours per day. Please remember that if Tendulkar was out for single digit score in a ODI game (over 120 times, over 25% of his innings) he would have been on the fileld for just half a day. So your conclusions have to be derived rather carefully. Ananth: ]]

  • Ad on January 11, 2011, 16:14 GMT

    Very unique analysis, must have taken some effort!

    I was wondering if the minutes information in the scorecards could be used directly. For batsmen, this would avoid the need for extrapolating the no. of balls faced as minutes information is generally available in older scorecards (active and passive time spent has anyway been assigned equal weight). The start and end times are also available so fielder/keeper times could also be calculated (I'm not sure if information is available for rain interruptions). Only for bowlers, the no. of balls would have to be used.

    The current method is also very good. I was just curious if there was any specific reason why you decided to use no. of balls. [[ On the contrary minutes information is not available for most of the tests. For some of the older tests, the information has been appended well after I picked up the scorecards and created my database. It would be a monumental task to go back and pick up the minutes from those of the scorecards in which the same has been added. I have no resources to do that. For current matches the minutes info is not available. I have worked on the best available method. May not be 100% correct but I am reasonably sure of 90% accuracy across the board. More for recent matches and less for earlier matches. Also Balls metric is valid across all five types of activities. Ananth: ]]