December 14, 2011

Part two of five-wicket hauls in Test cricket: a look across and deep

The second part of an in-depth statistical analysis of five-wicket hauls in Tests
53

Jim Laker: a record of 19 for 90 that is almost impossible to better © PA Photos

This is the follow-up to the previous articles. Another 13 tables have found their place. This is probably a more interesting set of tables since some of the analysis is by innings and relate to result. The comments are given at the end of each tables.

12. Great defensive winning bowling performances in fourth innings


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R WonBy

0073 1902 Aus Eng-120/10 A Trumble H S 4 25.0- 9- 53- 6 W 3 0943 1982 Eng Aus-288/10 A Cowans N.G 4 26.0- 6- 77- 6 W 3 1243 1994 Saf Aus-111/10 A de Villiers P.S 4 23.3- 8- 43- 6 W 5 0019 1885 Aus Eng-207/10 H Spofforth F.R 4 32.1-22- 90- 6 W 6 0009 1882 Aus Eng- 77/10 A Spofforth F.R 4 18.4-15- 44- 7 W 7 0042 1894 Eng Aus-166/10 A Peel R S 4 30.0- 9- 67- 6 W 10 0179 1929 Eng Aus-336/10 A White J.C S 4 64.5-21-126- 8 W 12 1436 1998 Eng Aus-162/10 A Headley D.W 4 17.0- 5- 60- 6 W 12 1442 1999 Pak Ind-258/10 A Saqlain Mushtaq S 4 32.2- 8- 93- 5 W 12 0025 1887 Eng Aus- 97/10 A Barnes W 4 30.4-29- 28- 6 W 13 1720 2004 Ind Aus- 93/10 H Harbhajan Singh S 4 10.5- 2- 29- 5 W 13 0437 1957 Saf Eng-214/10 H Tayfield H.J S 4 49.2-11-113- 9 W 17 0905 1981 Eng Aus-111/10 H Willis R.G.D 4 15.1- 3- 43- 8 W 18 1377 1997 Eng Aus-104/10 H Caddick A.R 4 12.0- 2- 42- 5 W 19 0106 1910 Saf Eng-224/10 H Vogler A.E.E S 4 22.0- 2- 94- 7 W 19 2021 2011 Nzl Aus-233/10 A Bracewell D.A.J 4 16.4- 4- 40- 6 W 7 1422 1998 Eng Saf-195/10 H Gough D 4 23.0- 6- 42- 6 W 23 0390 1954 Pak Eng-143/10 A Fazal Mahmood 4 30.0-11- 46- 6 W 24


This is ordered by the margin of wins. All wins by fewer than 25 runs are considered. Norman Cowans's and Fanie de Villiers's performances are of recent vintage. Fred Spofforth has been responsible for two sub-10 run wins. Bob Willis's mind-blower effort of eight for 43 followed Ian Botham's from-the-edge innings of 149. Saqlain Mushtaq's was after the nearly-innings of Sachin Tendulkar.

Let me devote some space to one specific performance. That is Hugh Tayfield's nine for 113. This was analyzed and concluded as the best ever Test bowling performance in the famous Wisden-100 lists which I had prepared for Wisden. If I do the lists today, I have no doubt that this would be on top. England, trailing by 89 runs in first innings, dismissed South Africa for 142 and England had to score 232 for a win on a turf wicket. Tayfield bowled unchanged for 35 8-ball overs on the last day and never flagged even when England were 147 for 2. He captured the next 8 wickets for nothing and England fell short by 17 runs. This performance had everything. Low total to defend, close margin of win, top order wickets, against a good batting side and the result.

Bracewell's heroics this week were missed out and thanks to Yash, this entry has been added.

12a. Great defensive winning bowling performances in fourth innings - 2

MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R

0706 1973 Ind Eng-163/10 H Bedi B.S S 4 40.0-12- 63- 5 W 28 0906 1981 Eng Aus-121/10 H Botham I.T 4 14.0- 9- 11- 5 W 29 0515 1961 Saf Nzl-166/10 H Pollock P.M 4 20.3- 8- 38- 6 W 30 0058 1899 Eng Saf- 99/10 A Trott A.E 4 27.4-14- 49- 5 W 32 1207 1993 Pak Nzl- 93/10 A Wasim Akram 4 22.0- 4- 45- 5 W 33 1207 1993 Pak Nzl- 93/10 A Waqar Younis 4 13.3- 4- 22- 5 W 33 1945 2010 Aus Pak-139/10 H Hauritz N.M S 4 12.0- 1- 53- 5 W 36 0001 1877 Aus Eng-108/10 H Kendall T.K S 4 22.1-12- 55- 7 W 45 0707 1973 Aus Pak-106/10 H Walker M.H.N 4 21.2- 8- 15- 6 W 52 1382 1997 Saf Pak- 92/10 A Pollock S.M 4 11.0- 1- 37- 5 W 53 0094 1907 Eng Saf- 75/10 H Blythe C S 4 22.4- 9- 40- 7 W 53 0438 1957 Saf Eng-130/10 H Tayfield H.J S 4 32.3- 6- 78- 6 W 58 0895 1981 Ind Aus- 83/10 A Kapil Dev N 4 16.4- 4- 28- 5 W 59 0659 1969 Ind Nzl-127/10 H Bedi B.S S 4 30.5-16- 42- 6 W 60 0028 1888 Aus Eng- 62/10 A Ferris J.J 4 15.2-11- 26- 5 W 61 0028 1888 Aus Eng- 62/10 A Turner C.T.B 4 16.0- 8- 36- 5 W 61 1338 1996 Ind Saf-105/10 H Srinath J 4 11.5- 4- 21- 6 W 64 0052 1896 Eng Aus- 44/10 H Peel R S 4 10.0- 5- 23- 6 W 66 0012 1883 Eng Aus- 83/10 A Barlow R.G 4 23.0-20- 40- 7 W 69 0334 1951 Saf Eng-114/10 A Rowan A.M.B S 4 27.2- 4- 68- 5 W 71 0409 1955 Eng Saf-111/10 H Statham J.B 4 29.0-12- 39- 7 W 71 0817 1978 Nzl Eng- 64/10 H Hadlee R.J 4 17.5- 4- 26- 6 W 72 0112 1911 Aus Saf- 80/10 H Whitty W.J 4 16.0- 7- 17- 6 W 89 1257 1994 Win Eng- 46/10 H Ambrose C.E.L 4 10.0- 1- 24- 6 W 147

This was asked for by Anand. He wanted Srinath-like performances to come in. These are matches in which the winning target was below 200 but the margin is greater than 25. So these performances would have escaped the previous selection. Again these are ordered by the margin of wins.

Look at Bedi's effort, 40 overs for 63 runs. Probably the most important ones in this table are Srinath's 6 for 21 at Ahmedabad against South Africa and the double-barrelled virtuoso performance of Wasim and Waqar against New Zealand, that too away. This also finds a place in table no 21. Shaun Pollock's 5 for 37 was away against Pakistan. The most recent one was Hauritz's effort against Pakistan.

13. Great defensive bowling performances in the fourth innings in close draws


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R Needed

1379 1997 Zim Nzl-275/ 8 H Huckle A.G S 4 32.0- 2-146- 5 = 10 1087 1987 Nzl Aus-230/ 9 A Hadlee R.J 4 31.0- 9- 67- 5 = 16 1052 1986 Aus Ind-347/10 A Matthews G.R.J S 4 39.5- 7-146- 5 = 0 Tie 1052 1986 Aus Ind-347/10 A Bright R.J S 4 25.0- 3- 94- 5 = 0 Tie 0984 1984 Eng Pak-217/ 6 A Cowans N.G 4 14.0- 2- 42- 5 = 25 0498 1960 Win Aus-232/10 A Hall W.W 4 23.5- 3- 63- 5 = 0 Tie 0311 1949 Win Ind-355/ 8 A Jones P.E 4 41.0- 8- 85- 5 = 5


This was the surprise I had mentioned in the Part 1 article. To pick draws in a bowling-centric article is not easy. However these efforts were primarily responsible for the results. This collection also includes the three performances in the two ties. Wesley Hall bowled his heart out and ensured that the Brisbane match was tied. Remember that Australia were 226 for 6, needing only seven more runs. Hall took the key wicket of Richie Benaud and there were three run-outs. Hall also captured four top order wickets. Matthews and Bright shared all the Indian wickets. India were only a single hit away in 1949 but Jones held them at bay.

14. Bowling spells which dismissed teams for low scores in the first innings of match - Away


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R

1370 1997 Aus Eng- 77/10 A McGrath G.D 1 20.3- 8- 38- 8 = 1212 1993 Win Aus-119/10 A Ambrose C.E.L 1 18.0- 9- 25- 7 W 0049 1896 Eng Saf-115/10 A Lohmann G.A 1 20.0- 9- 42- 7 W 1153 1990 Nzl Pak-102/10 A Pringle C 1 16.0- 4- 52- 7  0347 1952 Win Aus-116/10 A Gomez G.E 1 24.0- 3- 55- 7  0681 1971 Eng Nzl- 65/10 A Underwood D.L S 1 15.4- 7- 12- 6 W 0094 1907 Saf Eng- 76/10 A Faulkner G.A S 1 11.0- 4- 17- 6  0303 1948 Aus Eng- 52/10 A Lindwall R.R 1 16.1- 5- 20- 6 W 0415 1955 Pak Nzl- 70/10 A Khan Mohammad 1 16.2- 6- 21- 6 = 0421 1956 Win Nzl- 74/10 A Ramadhin S S 1 21.2-13- 23- 6 W 1462 1999 Nzl Ind- 83/10 A Nash D.J 1 11.0- 3- 27- 6 = 1267 1994 Pak Slk- 71/10 A Waqar Younis 1 14.0- 4- 34- 6 W 0343 1951 Win Aus- 82/10 A Worrell F.M.M S 1 17.1- 3- 38- 6 W 0014 1884 Aus Eng- 95/10 A Boyle H.F 1 16.4- 9- 42- 6 = 0066 1902 Eng Aus-112/10 A Barnes S.F 1 16.1- 5- 42- 6  0346 1952 Eng Ind-121/10 A Tattersall R S 1 21.0- 3- 48- 6 W 0037 1892 Eng Saf- 97/10 A Ferris J.J 1 24.3-11- 54- 6 W 0140 1921 Aus Eng-112/10 A Gregory J.M 1 19.0- 5- 58- 6 W 0275 1946 Aus Nzl- 42/10 A O'Reilly W.J S 1 12.0- 5- 14- 5 W 0031 1889 Eng Saf- 84/10 A Smith C.A 1 9.0- 6- 19- 5 W 1929 2009 Aus Eng-102/10 A Siddle P.M S 1 9.5- 0- 21- 5 W 1871 2008 Saf Ind- 76/10 A Steyn D.W 1 8.0- 2- 23- 5 W 1080 1987 Win Ind- 75/10 A Patterson B.P 1 8.5- 1- 24- 5 W 1566 2001 Zim Bng-107/10 A Friend T.J 1 18.0- 7- 31- 5 = 0186 1930 Eng Nzl-112/10 A Allom M.J.C 1 19.0- 4- 38- 5 W 1354 1997 Eng Nzl-124/10 A Gough D 1 16.0- 6- 40- 5 W 0356 1952 Pak Ind-106/10 A Fazal Mahmood 1 24.1- 8- 52- 5 W


I had to separate the first, almost always opening day, performances into home and away since the criteria were different. For away performances, I have selected all innings in which the concerned bowler dismissed the opposition for a 125 or lower score. The most devastating was Glenn McGrath's 1997 Lord's spell when he ran through a strong English line-up for 77. Then comes the famous Curtly Ambrose blitz in Perth, including 7 for 1 (or was it 6 for 1), which dismissed a strong Australia for 119. Dwell on Chris Pringle's opening day effort in Faisalabad during 1990, which dismissed a tough Pakistani team for 102. That New Zealand lost should not detract anything from his effort. They ran into a gentleman called Waqar Younis, who captured 12 wickets. Of recent vintage is Peter Siddle's five-for at Headingley, although it must be said that Siddle captured the 7-11 wickets. More relevant is Dale Steyn's pre-lunch demolition of India. Makhaya Ntini played an equal part in this.

15. Bowling spells which dismissed teams for low scores in the first innings of match - Home


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R

0205 1931 Aus Win- 99/10 H Ironmonger H 1 20.0- 7- 23- 7 W 1073 1987 Ind Pak-116/10 H Maninder Singh S 1 18.2- 8- 27- 7  0025 1887 Aus Eng- 45/10 H Turner C.T.B 1 12.0-11- 15- 6  1516 2000 Aus Win- 82/10 H McGrath G.D 1 20.0-12- 17- 6 W 1811 2006 Eng Pak-119/10 H Harmison S.J 1 13.0- 7- 19- 6 W 0059 1899 Saf Eng- 92/10 H Sinclair J.H S 1 10.0- 4- 26- 6  1528 2001 Saf Slk- 95/10 H Pollock S.M 1 13.4- 6- 30- 6 W 0531 1962 Eng Pak-100/10 H Trueman F.S 1 17.4- 6- 31- 6 W 0430 1956 Pak Aus- 80/10 H Fazal Mahmood 1 27.0-11- 34- 6 W 0050 1896 Eng Aus- 53/10 H Richardson T 1 9.4- 3- 39- 6 W 0101 1909 Eng Aus- 74/10 H Blythe C S 1 23.0- 6- 44- 6 W 0003 1879 Aus Eng-113/10 H Spofforth F.R 1 16.4- 9- 48- 6 W 0034 1890 Eng Aus- 92/10 H Martin F 1 22.3- 9- 50- 6 W 1072 1987 Nzl Win-100/10 H Hadlee R.J 1 12.3- 2- 50- 6 W 1471 1999 Saf Eng-122/10 H Donald A.A 1 15.0- 3- 53- 6 W 0216 1932 Aus Saf- 36/10 H Ironmonger H 1 7.2- 5- 6- 5 W 1561 2001 Slk Bng- 90/10 H Muralitharan M S 1 9.4- 4- 13- 5 W 1495 2000 Eng Zim- 83/10 H Giddins E.S.H 1 7.0- 2- 15- 5 W 1837 2007 Slk Bng- 89/10 H Muralitharan M S 1 7.3- 3- 15- 5 W 0122 1912 Eng Saf- 58/10 H Foster F.R 1 13.1- 7- 16- 5 W 0456 1958 Eng Nzl- 67/10 H Laker J.C S 1 22.0-11- 17- 5 W 0009 1882 Eng Aus- 63/10 H Barlow R.G 1 20.4-22- 19- 5  0029 1888 Eng Aus- 80/10 H Briggs J S 1 24.4-24- 25- 5 W 0122 1912 Eng Saf- 58/10 H Barnes S.F 1 13.0- 3- 25- 5 W 0128 1912 Eng Saf- 95/10 H Barnes S.F 1 21.0-10- 28- 5 W 0043 1895 Aus Eng- 75/10 H Turner C.T.B 1 20.0- 9- 32- 5  0852 1979 Eng Ind- 96/10 H Botham I.T 1 19.0- 9- 35- 5 = 0128 1912 Eng Saf- 95/10 H Woolley F.E S 1 15.3- 1- 41- 5 W


At home, I set tougher criteria. All innings below 100 and innings between 100 and 125 where the bowlers captured 6 or more wickets. The interesting part about Bert Ironmonger is that he kept Clarrie Grimmett at bay, while capturing 7 wickets. Maninder Singh's effort was in Sunil Gavaskar's last Test and the famous all-time classic of 96. India lost narrowly but Maninder more than did his bit. West Indies found that McGrath was unplayable in Brisbane during 2000. As did Pakistan against Steve Harmison in Manchester, a few years later.

16. Bowling spells which dismissed teams for matching low totals in the second innings of match


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R F-Inns

0104 1909 Aus Eng-119/10 A Laver F 2 18.2- 7- 31- 8 = 147 0094 1907 Eng Saf-110/10 H Blythe C S 2 15.5- 1- 59- 8 W 76 0066 1902 Aus Eng- 61/10 H Noble M.A S 2 7.4- 2- 17- 7 W 112 0009 1882 Aus Eng-101/10 A Spofforth F.R 2 24.3-18- 46- 7 W 63 0800 1977 Aus Eng- 95/10 H Lillee D.K 2 17.5- 2- 26- 6 W 138 0471 1959 Pak Win- 76/10 A Fazal Mahmood 2 18.3- 9- 34- 6 W 145 0252 1936 Ind Eng-134/10 A Amar Singh L 2 25.1-11- 35- 6  147 0052 1896 Eng Aus-119/10 H Hearne J.T 2 21.5-10- 41- 6 W 145 1296 1995 Aus Win-136/10 A McGrath G.D 2 21.5-11- 47- 6  128 0390 1954 Pak Eng-130/10 A Fazal Mahmood 2 30.0-16- 53- 6 W 133 0343 1951 Aus Win-105/10 H Johnston W.A S 2 16.0- 0- 62- 6  82 0027 1888 Eng Aus- 42/10 A Lohmann G.A 2 12.4-13- 17- 5 W 113 0027 1888 Eng Aus- 42/10 A Peel R S 2 12.3- 9- 18- 5 W 113 0347 1952 Aus Win- 78/10 H Miller K.R 2 10.2- 1- 26- 5 W 116 0028 1888 Aus Eng- 53/10 A Turner C.T.B 2 16.4- 9- 27- 5 W 116 0101 1909 Aus Eng-121/10 A Armstrong W.W S 2 15.3- 7- 27- 5  74 1633 2002 Ind Nzl- 94/10 A Zaheer Khan 2 13.2- 4- 29- 5  99 0031 1889 Saf Eng-148/10 H Rose-Innes A S 2 12.0- 5- 43- 5  84 1220 1993 Win Pak-140/10 H Bishop I.R 2 15.5- 6- 43- 5 W 127 1073 1987 Pak Ind-145/10 A Iqbal Qasim S 2 30.0-15- 48- 5 W 116 1073 1987 Pak Ind-145/10 A Tauseef Ahmed S 2 27.0- 7- 54- 5 W 116 1080 1987 Ind Win-127/10 H Sharma C 2 13.1- 2- 55- 5  75 0043 1895 Eng Aus-123/10 A Richardson T 2 23.0- 6- 57- 5 W 75 0387 1954 Pak Eng-117/ 9 A Khan Mohammad 2 15.0- 3- 61- 5 = 87


These are the second (in the match) innings spells. It would be silly if I considered Jim Laker's nine for 37, backed by a huge score of 459. Hence I have selected only five-fors in matches where the teams had a cover of 150 runs or less. The best modern spell was Dennis Lillee's top-class effort in the Centenary Test at Melbourne. He had only an innings of 138 behind him and helped secure a lead of 43 which was very crucial since Australia finally won by 45 runs. McGrath did similarly against West Indies although the effort went in vain as did Amar Singh's 60 years earlier. The most recent spell has been Zaheer Khan's five-for while defending a low score of 99 at Hamilton. It can be seen that quite a few of these brave efforts have ended in vain.

17. Match-winning five-fors in third innings when in arrears of over 100 runs


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R Arrears

0320 1950 Aus Saf- 99/10 A Johnson I.W S 3 22.4- 2- 34- 5 W 236 2016 2011 Saf Aus- 47/10 H Philander V.D 3 7.0- 3- 15- 5 W 188 1876 2008 Eng Nzl-114/10 H Panesar M.S S 3 17.0- 5- 37- 6 W 179 1677 2003 Pak Nzl-103/10 A Shoaib Akhtar 3 18.0- 3- 30- 6 W 170 1453 1999 Win Aus-146/10 H Walsh C.A 3 17.1- 3- 39- 5 W 161 0074 1902 Eng Aus-121/10 H Lockwood W.H 3 20.0- 6- 45- 5 W 141 1503 2000 Eng Win- 54/10 H Caddick A.R 3 13.0- 8- 16- 5 W 133 1796 2006 Pak Slk- 73/10 A Mohammad Asif 3 12.0- 6- 27- 5 W 109 1414 1998 Saf Slk-122/10 H Donald A.A 3 13.3- 2- 54- 5 W 103 1455 1999 Eng Nzl-107/10 H Caddick A.R 3 14.0- 3- 32- 5 W 100


Now we come to the third innings of the match. Since two innings have already been played this is the setting innings. Here it is essential that I look for performances which defined the results. Hence I have selected matches in which the third bowling team was in arrears by over 100 runs and went on to win the match.

Ian Johnson's performance set up an unlikely win orchestrated by Neil Harvey's all-time great innings of 151 not out. The most recent spell above is Vernon Philander's effort in his debut Test last month. South Africa were trailing by 188 runs and Philander captured 5 for 15 on that manic Thursday and paved the way for a South African win. Monty Panesar did similarly a few years back. However the most noteworthy spell was Shoaib Akhtar's in the Wellington Test during 2003. Pakistan narrowly avoided follow-on and then Shoaib ran through New Zealand for 103 to set a famous win, cemented by Mohammed Yousuf and Inzamam-ul-Haq. Andy Caddick appears twice with one effort dismissing West Indies for 54. Mohammad Asif's effort was away in Sri Lanka. Trailing by 109, Asif (and Abdul Razzaq) dismissed Sri Lanka for 73 and Pakistan won comfortably.

18. Five-fors in each innings & 14-plus wkts in match


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R

0428 1956 Eng Aus H Laker J.C S 9 for 37 & 10 for 53 W 0131 1913 Eng Saf A Barnes S.F 8 for 56 & 9 for 103 W 1089 1988 Ind Win H Hirwani N.D S 8 for 61 & 8 for 75 W 0699 1972 Aus Eng A Massie R.A.L 8 for 84 & 8 for 53 W 1423 1998 Slk Eng A Muralitharan M S 7 for 155 & 9 for 65 W 0032 1889 Eng Saf A Briggs J S 7 for 17 & 8 for 11 W 0047 1896 Eng Saf A Lohmann G.A 7 for 38 & 8 for 7 W 0094 1907 Eng Saf H Blythe C S 8 for 59 & 7 for 40 W 0234 1934 Eng Aus H Verity H S 7 for 61 & 8 for 43 W 1029 1985 Nzl Aus A Hadlee R.J 9 for 52 & 6 for 71 W 0079 1904 Eng Aus A Rhodes W S 7 for 56 & 8 for 68 W 1539 2001 Ind Aus H Harbhajan Singh S 7 for 133 & 8 for 84 W 0009 1882 Aus Eng A Spofforth F.R 7 for 46 & 7 for 44 W 0372 1953 Eng Aus H Bedser A.V 7 for 55 & 7 for 44 = 0011 1883 Eng Aus A Bates W S 7 for 28 & 7 for 74 W 0927 1982 Pak Slk H Imran Khan 8 for 58 & 6 for 58 W 0483 1959 Ind Aus H Patel J.M S 9 for 69 & 5 for 55 W 0133 1914 Eng Saf A Barnes S.F 7 for 56 & 7 for 88 = 0781 1976 Win Eng A Holding M.A 8 for 92 & 6 for 57 W 1572 2001 Slk Win H Vaas WPUJC 7 for 120 & 7 for 71 W 0215 1932 Aus Saf H Grimmett C.V S 7 for 116 & 7 for 83 W


What does one say of Laker? The 400 might very well be beaten one day by an attacking batsman, ordinary attack, shorter boundaries and two+ day's time availability. The 952 for 7 might be beaten one day by a bloody-minded captain and equally bloody-minded batsmen. The 10-wicket capture might be equalled, as I have already prophesied, probably around 2050. Some one might take a double hat-trick in a match. An Indian may win Wimbledon. India might qualify for the football World Cup. Someone might do the Grand Slam in Tennis. Wigan Athletic might win the Premier Division title. Okay I will stop here.

But no one is going to capture all 20 wickets in a match. Everyone must co-operate. The other bowlers, the umpires and the opposing team's batsmen. No sir, not in a thousand years.

Narendra Hirwani's and Bob Massie's were on debut only for the two to fade away. Muralitharan's is probably the best bowling effort in a match over the past 13 years, after Richard Hadlee's efforts against Australia in 1985, which in turn was the best match effort for nine years, after Holding's 14-wicket effort at The Oval shirt-front. These three, and Massie's, are the defining bowling efforts during the past 35 years.

19. Two bowlers who got five-fors & ran through the batting team


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R

1207 1993 Pak Nzl- 93/10 A Wasim Akram 4 22.0- 4- 45- 5 W 1207 1993 Pak Nzl- 93/10 A Waqar Younis 4 13.3- 4- 22- 5 W

0911 1981 Ind Eng-102/10 H Kapil Dev N 4 13.2- 0- 70- 5 W 0911 1981 Ind Eng-102/10 H Madan Lal S 4 12.0- 6- 23- 5 W

0760 1975 Aus Eng-101/10 A Walker M.H.N 2 17.3- 5- 48- 5 W 0760 1975 Aus Eng-101/10 A Lillee D.K 2 15.0- 8- 15- 5 W

0667 1969 Ind Aus-107/10 H Bedi B.S S 3 23.0-11- 37- 5 W 0667 1969 Ind Aus-107/10 H Prasanna E.A.S S 3 24.2-10- 42- 5 W

0354 1952 Eng Ind- 98/10 H Bedser A.V 2 14.5- 4- 41- 5 = 0354 1952 Eng Ind- 98/10 H Trueman F.S 2 16.0- 4- 48- 5 =

0128 1912 Eng Saf- 95/10 H Woolley F.E S 1 15.3- 1- 41- 5 W 0128 1912 Eng Saf- 95/10 H Barnes S.F 1 21.0-10- 28- 5 W

0122 1912 Eng Saf- 58/10 H Foster F.R 1 13.1- 7- 16- 5 W 0122 1912 Eng Saf- 58/10 H Barnes S.F 1 13.0- 3- 25- 5 W

0068 1902 Aus Eng- 99/10 H Noble M.A S 3 24.0- 7- 54- 5 W 0068 1902 Aus Eng- 99/10 H Saunders J.V S 3 24.1- 8- 43- 5 W

0028 1888 Aus Eng- 62/10 A Turner C.T.B 4 16.0- 8- 36- 5 W 0028 1888 Aus Eng- 62/10 A Ferris J.J 4 15.2-11- 26- 5 W

0027 1888 Eng Aus- 42/10 A Peel R S 2 12.3- 9- 18- 5 W 0027 1888 Eng Aus- 42/10 A Lohmann G.A 2 12.4-13- 17- 5 W


This has been reverse-chronologically listed. I have also taken only innings of 110 and fewer. Wasim Akram and Waqar did this double-act away against New Zealand. Kapil Dev and Madan Lal needed no one else, during 1981 at home. Max Walker and Lillee, in England, were too much for the home team. Wonderful to see the great spin combination of Bishen Bedi and Erapalli Prasanna over 40 years back, keeping Australia (and S Venkataraghavan) at bay. Alec Bedser's and Fred Trueman's combined effort is the only dual-performance which did not help their team win.

19a. Two bowlers who get 4/6 wkts & run through the batting team

MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R

1755 2005 Slk Win-113/10 H Muralitharan M S 3 21.0- 8- 36- 6 W 1755 2005 Slk Win-113/10 H Vaas WPUJC 3 18.0- 9- 15- 4 W

1406 1998 Saf Pak-106/10 H Donald A.A 2 13.0- 3- 47- 4 W 1406 1998 Saf Pak-106/10 H de Villiers P.S 2 11.5- 5- 23- 6 W

1267 1994 Pak Slk- 71/10 A Waqar Younis 1 14.0- 4- 34- 6 W 1267 1994 Pak Slk- 71/10 A Wasim Akram 1 14.2- 4- 32- 4 W

1072 1987 Nzl Win-100/10 H Chatfield E.J 1 18.0- 8- 30- 4 W 1072 1987 Nzl Win-100/10 H Hadlee R.J 1 12.3- 2- 50- 6 W

1055 1986 Pak Win- 53/10 H Abdul Qadir S 4 9.3- 1- 16- 6 W 1055 1986 Pak Win- 53/10 H Imran Khan 4 13.0- 5- 30- 4 W

0800 1977 Aus Eng- 95/10 H Walker M.H.N 2 20.0- 3- 54- 4 W 0800 1977 Aus Eng- 95/10 H Lillee D.K 2 17.5- 2- 26- 6 W

0430 1956 Pak Aus- 80/10 H Fazal Mahmood 1 27.0-11- 34- 6 W 0430 1956 Pak Aus- 80/10 H Khan Mohammad 1 26.1- 9- 43- 4 W

0153 1924 Eng Saf- 30/10 H Tate M.W 2 6.0- 1- 12- 4 W 0153 1924 Eng Saf- 30/10 H Gilligan A.E.R 2 6.3- 4- 7- 6 W

This was asked for by Abdulla. An excellent idea to extend the 10 wicket split to 6 and 4. Three Pakistani pairs have done this. I have removed the 9 pre-WW1 pairs since the table would have been too long. Waqar and Wasim dismissed Sri Lanka for 71. However look at the last entry, the lowest innings score until "overtaken" by New Zealand in 1955 and briefly threatened by Australia a few weeks back.

20. Five-fors in lost matches


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R

0967 1983 Ind Win-201/10 H Kapil Dev N 3 30.3- 6- 83- 9 * 0683 1971 Win Ind-352/10 H Noreiga J.M S 2 49.4-16- 95- 9 * 0461 1958 Ind Win-222/10 H Gupte S.P S 1 34.3-11-102- 9 * 1398 1998 Eng Win-191/10 A Fraser A.R.C 2 16.1- 2- 53- 8 * 0036 1892 Eng Aus-145/10 A Lohmann G.A 1 43.2-18- 58- 8 * 1899 2008 Aus Saf-281/10 H Johnson M.G 2 24.0- 4- 61- 8 * 0074 1902 Aus Eng-183/10 A Trumble H S 2 31.0-13- 65- 8 * 0703 1972 Ind Eng-200/10 H Chandrasekhar B. S 2 41.5-18- 79- 8 * 0082 1904 Eng Aus-247/10 A Braund L.C S 1 29.1- 6- 81- 8 * 1027 1985 Slk Pak-259/10 A Ratnayeke J.R 2 23.2- 5- 83- 8 * 1444 1999 Ind Pak-316/10 H Srinath J 3 27.0- 6- 86- 8 * 1110 1988 Aus Win-349/ 9 H Hughes M.G 3 37.0- 9- 87- 8 * 0057 1898 Eng Aus-239/10 A Richardson T 2 36.1- 7- 94- 8 * 0990 1984 Eng Win-245/10 H Botham I.T 2 27.4- 6-103- 8 * 0323 1950 Win Eng-312/10 A Valentine A.L S 1 50.0-14-104- 8 * 1077 1987 Eng Pak-353/10 H Foster N.A 2 46.2-15-107- 8 * 1510 2000 Zim Nzl-338/10 H Strang P.A S 2 51.5-12-109- 8 * 1002 1984 Aus Win-356/10 H Lawson G.F 1 40.0- 7-112- 8 * 0755 1975 Aus Eng-529/10 H Walker M.H.N 2 56.2- 7-143- 8 * 1892 2008 Aus Ind-441/10 A Krejza J.J 1 43.5- 1-215- 8 *


Wonderful efforts, only captures of eight or more wickets included, but in a losing cause. I have mentioned in Part one about the three 9-wicket captures of Kapil, Jack Noreiga and Subhash Gupte which finished on the losing side. Now come the eight-wicket captures. The other notable bowling performance in this table is that of Javagal Srinath, whose eight wickets, with another five-for in the second innings had the best figures in a losing match, i-e., 13 for 132. However he was in good company, since three others, SF Barnes, Merv Hughes and Tom Richardson all captured 13 wickets and lost. During 2008, two Australian bowlers, Mitchell Johnson and Jason Krejza, captured eight wickets but lost the match.

21. Six or more Bowled dismissals in a five-for


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R Bowled

0032 1889 Eng Saf- 43/10 A Briggs J S 3 9.4- 5- 11- 8 W 8 0026 1887 Eng Aus- 84/10 A Lohmann G.A 2 16.4-12- 35- 8 W 7 0047 1896 Eng Saf- 93/10 A Lohmann G.A 2 13.1- 6- 38- 7 W 7 0020 1885 Aus Eng-269/10 H Giffen G S 1 34.4-14-117- 7 W 6 0032 1889 Eng Saf- 47/10 A Briggs J S 2 12.5-11- 17- 7 W 6 0050 1896 Eng Aus- 53/10 H Richardson T 1 9.4- 3- 39- 6 W 6 0226 1933 Eng Nzl-158/10 A Bowes W.E 1 19.0- 5- 34- 6 = 6 0662 1969 Pak Nzl-274/10 H Mohammad Nazir S 2 30.1- 3- 99- 7 = 6 0781 1976 Win Eng-435/10 A Holding M.A 2 33.0- 9- 92- 8 W 6


This is easy. But Briggs deserves his own paragraph. He neither needed the umpire nor his fielders to capture his eight wickets. This was after the first innings in which Briggs bowled six of his seven victims, making a total of 14 in the match. And the 15th wicket, well he made the umpire raise his hand, to uphold a Lbw claim. And let me continue, all these 15 wickets were captured in one day, 26 March 1889.

Lohmann twice bowled seven of the hapless batsmen, once out of eight wickets he captured. That puts Holding's six bowled, out of eight, in the flat Oval track in perspective. One of only two occurrences during the last 80 years.

22. Five or more Lbw dismissals in a five-for


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R Lbw

1143 1990 Win Eng-191/10 H Ambrose C.E.L 4 22.4-10- 45- 8 W 5 1342 1996 Pak Nzl-168/10 H Mohammad Zahid 3 20.0- 3- 66- 7 W 5 1647 2003 Eng Zim- 94/10 H Johnson R.L 2 12.0- 4- 33- 6 W 5 1831 2007 Eng Win-437/10 H Panesar M.S S 2 36.1- 3-129- 6 = 5 1134 1990 Aus Pak-336/10 H Alderman T.M 4 33.5- 6-105- 5 W 5


These five Lbws in one innings occurrences are all modern, clearly indicating the drastic changes in Lbw law. Previously batsmen could stick their pad with immunity, not now. Alderman's Lbw exploits during the England tour are well known. Then Ambrose did it. The most recent occurrence is by Panesar (what happened to him - is his fielding so bad he is out of the frame).

23. Seven or more Bowled/Lbw dismissals in a five-for


MtId Year For Vs  Score HA Bowler          BT I <--Analysis--> R B+L

0032 1889 Eng Saf- 43/10 A Briggs J S 3 9.4- 5- 11- 8 W 8 0781 1976 Win Eng-435/10 A Holding M.A 2 33.0- 9- 92- 8 W 8 0026 1887 Eng Aus- 84/10 A Lohmann G.A 2 16.4-12- 35- 8 W 7 0047 1896 Eng Saf- 93/10 A Lohmann G.A 2 13.1- 6- 38- 7 W 7 0483 1959 Ind Aus-219/10 H Patel J.M S 2 35.5-16- 69- 9 W 7 0583 1965 Ind Nzl-262/10 H Venkataraghavan S 1 51.1-26- 72- 8 W 7 0032 1889 Eng Saf- 47/10 A Briggs J S 2 12.5-11- 17- 7 W 7 0942 1982 Pak Ind-197/10 H Imran Khan 3 20.1- 4- 60- 8 W 7


Now the combination. On Briggs and Lohmann we have talked about enough. Holding, at Oval, got all his eight wickets unaided, two with Lbws. Venkataraghavan's was in his debut match.

24. Matches in which bowler captured 10 or more top-order wickets


MtId Year For Vs HA Bowler          BT  Inns1   Inns1  R  TopOrder
1  2 Mat

0428 1956 Eng Aus H Laker J.C S 9/ 37 & 10/ 53 W 5 6 11 0131 1913 Eng Saf A Barnes S.F 8/ 56 & 9/103 W 6 5 11 0133 1914 Eng Saf A Barnes S.F 7/ 56 & 7/ 88 = 5 5 10 0009 1882 Aus Eng A Spofforth F.R 7/ 46 & 7/ 44 W 5 5 10 0754 1975 Eng Aus A Underwood D.L S 7/113 & 4/102 * 6 4 10 ... and quite a few 9 top order captures later 0910 1981 Aus Pak H Lillee D.K 5/ 81 & 4/ 51 W 5 4 9


This was asked for by Rameshkumar. This adds the top order wickets (1-6) of both innings and orders the table based on this measure. No surprise that Laker tops with 11 top order wickets. Jim Burke managed to get dismissed by Lock, the only non-Laker wicket in the match. The other bowler to capture 11 top order wickets was SF Barnes during 1913. Barnes dismissed 10 top order batsmen the next year, before the fighting took over. Spofforth had done this way back. The last one to capture 10 top order wickets was Underwood, during 1975. This seems to be a tough feat to achieve. So if I lowered the bar to 9 top order wickets, this would have allowed a few recent bowlers like Hirwani, Holding, Kumble, Hoggard, Waqar, Asif and Lillee to come in. But I am going to keep the bar high to preserve the sanctity of achievement. However look at Lillee's feat. All the 9 wickets he captured were top order ones.

Finally a summary of 5-wicket and 10-wicket captures. All these, and more, are available in StatsGuru of Cricinfo. I have just given a summary to round off the articles.

1. Muralitharan has captured five-fors in an innings 67 times. He has achieved this once in every 1.99 Tests. The only bowlers ahead of him are all from way back: Barnes - 1.12, CTB Turner - 1.55 and Grimmett - 1.76. At the other end, Abdul Razzaq has achieved this once in 46 Tests.

2. Muralitharan has captured 10 or more wickets in a match 22 times. Mind-blowing it is, this s one every six Tests. That is like scoring a double-century every six Tests.

3. SF Barnes has captured five-fors in six consecutive Tests. These were the last six Tests he played. CTB Turner also had a run of six Tests: this time, his first six Tests. The third bowler to do this in six consecutive Tests was Alec Bedser. Muralitharan and Waqar Younis have had runs of four Tests, on two separate occasions in their careers.

4. CTB Turner has captured five-fors in six consecutive innings. T Richardson has had a run of five consecutive innings in which he captured five or more wickets.. 10 other bowlers have had runs of four consecutive five-fors.

This has been one huge exercise and inarguably the most comprehensive analysis I have ever done on a single topic. Unfortunately the reader reaction is muted. Not surprising since batsmen get 75% of the attention.

Readers' selections:

Maximum of five per reader, to be given in the form (this is my selection)
Tayfield 9/113, Holding 14/149, Laker 10/53, Hadlee 9/52, Murali 9/65
Also short names, not "cricket-follower-from-pietermaritzburg" ???
Must be limited to a single line.
Can include innings or match performances.

Ranga: Murali 9/52, de Villiers 6/43, Ambrose 6/23, Saqlain 5/93, Steyn 5/23.
Navin: McGrath 7/27, Kumble 10/74, Srinath 5/21, Harbhajan 13/213, Srinath 13/132.
Pavan: Kumble 10/74, Saqlain's 10/xxx, Srinath 6/21, Steyns 8/xx (Nagpur) & Mcgrath 5/53
Boll: Marshall, Lillee, Warne, Ambrose, Hadlee.
Anand: Kumble 10/74, McGrath 8/77, Srinath 6/21, Pollock 5/37 and Steyn 5/23.
Iain: Ambrose 7/25, Devilliers 6/43, Warne 8/71, Hadlee 9/52, McGrath 8/38.
Obelix: McGrath 10/27, Warne 11/77, Ambrose 9/97, Murali 11/110, Marshall 9/41.
Gerry: Warne 7/161, Qadir 6/16, Ambrose 6/74, Mathews 5/146, Davidson 6/87.
Ganesh: Ambrose 7/25, Kapil 9/83, Holding 8/62, Sarfraz 9/86, Wes Hall 5/63
Aditya: Holding 14/149, Chandra 6/38, Hadlee 9/52, Lillee 8/29, Ambrose 7/25
Harsh: Holding 14-149,Imran 8-60,Willis 8-43,Lillee 11-164,Sarafraz 9-86.
OE: Holding 14-149; Ambrose 7-25; Marshall 5-21; Fazal Mahmood 12-99; Walsh 6-74.

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

  • Ramesh Kumar on December 26, 2011, 6:04 GMT

    Gerry/Alex,

    Gavaskar was a compulsive hooker(relative scale) in the first 3 years. He injured his finger in a Ranji match vs Maharashtra(Salgoankar-1974 and it was reported that he changed his stance a bit which made his hook very difficult. He unleashed his hooks against WI both in 1978 and in 1983 home series.

    On the Adelaide match, it was the first innings failure both bat & ball which costed the match. Chasing 400+ without Gavaskar contribution was difficult those days and I somehow remember that we were actually trying to save the match--impossible without Gavaskar contribution as it was a 6 day match.

    Also, I remember our frustrations on our famous spinners inability to clean up tailenders esp in overseas matches.

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 24, 2011, 3:51 GMT

    Ananth, now that you mention, i went back to the scorecard and checked. As you say it is not very clear. Amarnath made 86 in 317 minutes. That would have certainly meant the initiative shifting to the opposition.

    I remember being very frustrated especially since the 70s which had been a quite successful period for India, started turning bad. A few months earlier we had got walloped 3-1 by England, including a test where Dennis Amiss made 179 and the entire Indian team 122. So this chance to win a series being missed so narrowly felt terrible. I was not aware then, being too young, that this was not a full strength Australian team.

    In video replays since available, one can see Jeff Thompson bowl violently fast in the first spell and then bowl at fast medium generally.

  • Alex on December 23, 2011, 16:42 GMT

    @Gerry: Gavaskar did hook occasionally in the period 1978-83. Maharashtra Times, a real partisan of Mumbai players, printed a montage of 7-8 photos from SMG's 205 scored vs WI in '78. I clearly remember that one of those had him hooking and one other had him sweeping. Also, he was struck on head trying to hook Marshall during 147* in WI (1983).

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 23, 2011, 10:59 GMT

    In that 1977-78 series, Gavaskar missed out in teh final innings of the series. Jeff Thompson was unavailable due to injury, the series was 2-2, and India needed 493. Of all things to happen, Gavaskar hooked impatiently and his failure cost India the match. Normally he would have weighed in with important runs in a run chase in a test, but this was a glaring failure (also Delhi test in 1980 against Pakistan, where similarly he failed when Imran was injured and India fell short by 26 runs and drew chasing 390).

    His contribution (he was the only batsman to fail) would most likely have resulted in an Indian win (they lost narrowly in the end), and become only the second instance in history of a 0-2 changed to 3-2 after Bradman's 1936-37 series.

    After this Gavaskar did not hook for another 5 years. [[ I am not sure, Gerry, that Gavaskar's dismissal cost India the match. It happened too early in the innings for us to come to this conclusion. Gavaskar, after a hectic start, was out at 40 with his score being 29. The three defining scores, 86 by MA, 73 by DV, 78 by GRV came after this. Who knows what would have happened. If Gavaskar had stayed on one of them might have failed since the course of the match would have changed. Ghavri scoring 23, Prasanna 10 and Bedi 10: well we had already out-performed by about 100%. Where were we going to get another 48 runs. Easy to say Gavaskar could have scored 60/70 and we would have won. But things do not happen that way. On the other hand, I will be the first to agree with you that if Gavaskar not been dismissed at 389 for 3, at Oval, a few months later, India would have won. That dismissal started a slide. Ananth: ]]

    India had similarly lost to WI at home 3 years earlier but the last match was not so close, because Lloyd blasted a double century.

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 23, 2011, 9:02 GMT

    Ananth, since this article is already 9 days old, there is a risk that this debate gets cut off by the next article. I will hence refrain from providing the stats which prove the point i am trying to make (which is completely different from your point). I will merely state the principle i believe in (thanks to your having drilled BQI into my head).

    Runs scored against a lower BQI are more creditable. Usually, for a given set of bowlers, just like Home BQI is lower than Away BQI by ~10%, in exactly the same way, you will find that the Team IInd innings BQI is ~10% lower than the Team Ist innings BQI.

    Hence just like 100 runs scored against a set of bowlers away from batsmen's home is more creditable than 100 runs scored at home against the same bowlers, in exactly the same way, 100 runs scored in Team IInd innings is more creditable than 100 runs scored in Team Ist.

    This Ist/IInd innings BQI delta is true across decades, throughout history, and true for most bowlers individually. [[ Gerry, calling for some patience. The next three articles are on BQI, PQI and Batting against BQI/PQI combination. SO tehre is going to be enbough time to discuss this for any length of time. Ananth: ]]

  • Boll on December 20, 2011, 14:59 GMT

    http://media.smh.com.au/sport/sports-hq/australia-v-india-197778-2847921.html?from=newsbox

    Apologies for all of you not interested in the forthcoming Aus/ind series... thought this might be of interest to many though... [[ Boll, thanks for the wonderful Hanlon piece. Thia was a Test series followed by me mainly through Radio and newspaper reports. The way Australia played, although decimated by Packer, led by aging Simpson was amazing. Maybe only Thomson was certain of his place in the full Australian team. (Anyhow, how and why did he stay out of the Packer net.) The final reult was a surprise although I must say, with my recollections that, we were indeed very happy at how close the series was, rather than ruing lost opportunities. Playing the game in the right spirit was more important then. In the last innings of the series, India reached 445 with a high score of 86 and 4 fifties. 10 batsmen reached double figures. Man of the match, a non-existent word those days, would have been Simpson. And probably Man of the series too. Ananth: ]]

  • Alex on December 19, 2011, 15:46 GMT

    @Ananth: SRT's stats over the last 7 tests read:

    7 tests, 13 innings, 491 runs, 0 100's, 4 50's, ave=38.

    He has crossed 34 in 7 innings, i.e., in 53% of innings. For this year, his average is a respectable 47. I think it is just a case of an ill-timed WC hangover. He had a phenomenal phase of 2008-10 and maybe some dip was due anyway. I still think that, if he wants, he can play for a marathon 26 years and is a certainty for 17,000 runs & 60 centuries in tests. I am not sure about Dravid but no need to worry about him ... his Don Bradman speech gives all indications that he will make a super admin+ambassador: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr4bK63WxXY.

  • Yash Rungta on December 19, 2011, 11:18 GMT

    Hey Ananth,

    Sorry to go off track. I really like your articles since I love cricket stats. However, for a change it would be great if you could add a little bit of trivia stats in your articles. Like writing an article based on data which you'd normally not be able to find on cricinfo. For eg. an article on weight of cricket bats used by international cricketers. I'm sure if you research with Cricinfo's influetial contacts, you could find what weight of bats do players use. For eg. Sachin, Klusener, Gooch, Clive Llyod, Hick all used heavy bats. On the other hands, players like Azhar and perhaps Lara used lighter bats. Kambli used 9 grips on his bat at a particular time. Now, you could ask for weights for many batsmen and then compare their modes of dismissal, averages, strike rates. Conclusion could be whether using a heavy bat is good or a lighter one is better. What is the optimum size of a bat for a normal batsmen? What say? [[ While your suggestion is good, I lack the facilities or time to do these. Best would be to identify specific queries and "Ask Steven", who has the entire Cricinfo resources at his disposal. Of course, I could do any trivia work which is based on perusal of the scorecards. Ananth: ]]

  • Ranga on December 19, 2011, 6:45 GMT

    Another twist:I know I have filed in my nominations, but let me see if there is scope to scrape through a couple more!!

    By pacemen:Ambrose 7/25, R J Hadlee 9/52, de Villiers 6/43, Steyn 5/23, D Malcolm 9/57

    By Spinners: Murali 9/52, Warne 8/71, Saqlain 5/93, Kumble 10/74, Bhajji 8/84 [[ All these are great - as were your initial ive !!! Ananth: ]]

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 18, 2011, 3:02 GMT

    Ananth, that would be something to look forward to. Why dont you consider giving a 5% weightage to (team) 1st innings bowling performances and a -5% to (team) IInd inn performances. Correspondingly a -5% and a 5% in the case of batsmen? I have often posted stats in proof of the hypothesis that IInd inn batting performances are more valuable compared to Ist inn as bowling averages are lower in IInd. Batsmen like VVS Laxman will not get their due in your analysis, if Team Ist is not distinguished from the more difficult (for batsmen) team IInd. [[ Gerry, what I m doing is to analyze runs scored against two non-contextual factors, bowling attack and pitch. Why bring in a contextual factor like innings. The minute we bring innings in,valid questions will be raised like "in what context runs were scored". If the first innings score is 100, then the responding batting performances have to be weighted more. If the first innings score is 500+, then the responding bowling performances have to be weighted more. If the third innings of the match is started with a lead of 200, the batting performances should get a lower weight while if there was a deficit of 200, the bowling performances should get more weight. And so on. All these, and more, would come in a Batting Rating exercise. Ananth: ]]

  • Ramesh Kumar on December 26, 2011, 6:04 GMT

    Gerry/Alex,

    Gavaskar was a compulsive hooker(relative scale) in the first 3 years. He injured his finger in a Ranji match vs Maharashtra(Salgoankar-1974 and it was reported that he changed his stance a bit which made his hook very difficult. He unleashed his hooks against WI both in 1978 and in 1983 home series.

    On the Adelaide match, it was the first innings failure both bat & ball which costed the match. Chasing 400+ without Gavaskar contribution was difficult those days and I somehow remember that we were actually trying to save the match--impossible without Gavaskar contribution as it was a 6 day match.

    Also, I remember our frustrations on our famous spinners inability to clean up tailenders esp in overseas matches.

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 24, 2011, 3:51 GMT

    Ananth, now that you mention, i went back to the scorecard and checked. As you say it is not very clear. Amarnath made 86 in 317 minutes. That would have certainly meant the initiative shifting to the opposition.

    I remember being very frustrated especially since the 70s which had been a quite successful period for India, started turning bad. A few months earlier we had got walloped 3-1 by England, including a test where Dennis Amiss made 179 and the entire Indian team 122. So this chance to win a series being missed so narrowly felt terrible. I was not aware then, being too young, that this was not a full strength Australian team.

    In video replays since available, one can see Jeff Thompson bowl violently fast in the first spell and then bowl at fast medium generally.

  • Alex on December 23, 2011, 16:42 GMT

    @Gerry: Gavaskar did hook occasionally in the period 1978-83. Maharashtra Times, a real partisan of Mumbai players, printed a montage of 7-8 photos from SMG's 205 scored vs WI in '78. I clearly remember that one of those had him hooking and one other had him sweeping. Also, he was struck on head trying to hook Marshall during 147* in WI (1983).

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 23, 2011, 10:59 GMT

    In that 1977-78 series, Gavaskar missed out in teh final innings of the series. Jeff Thompson was unavailable due to injury, the series was 2-2, and India needed 493. Of all things to happen, Gavaskar hooked impatiently and his failure cost India the match. Normally he would have weighed in with important runs in a run chase in a test, but this was a glaring failure (also Delhi test in 1980 against Pakistan, where similarly he failed when Imran was injured and India fell short by 26 runs and drew chasing 390).

    His contribution (he was the only batsman to fail) would most likely have resulted in an Indian win (they lost narrowly in the end), and become only the second instance in history of a 0-2 changed to 3-2 after Bradman's 1936-37 series.

    After this Gavaskar did not hook for another 5 years. [[ I am not sure, Gerry, that Gavaskar's dismissal cost India the match. It happened too early in the innings for us to come to this conclusion. Gavaskar, after a hectic start, was out at 40 with his score being 29. The three defining scores, 86 by MA, 73 by DV, 78 by GRV came after this. Who knows what would have happened. If Gavaskar had stayed on one of them might have failed since the course of the match would have changed. Ghavri scoring 23, Prasanna 10 and Bedi 10: well we had already out-performed by about 100%. Where were we going to get another 48 runs. Easy to say Gavaskar could have scored 60/70 and we would have won. But things do not happen that way. On the other hand, I will be the first to agree with you that if Gavaskar not been dismissed at 389 for 3, at Oval, a few months later, India would have won. That dismissal started a slide. Ananth: ]]

    India had similarly lost to WI at home 3 years earlier but the last match was not so close, because Lloyd blasted a double century.

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 23, 2011, 9:02 GMT

    Ananth, since this article is already 9 days old, there is a risk that this debate gets cut off by the next article. I will hence refrain from providing the stats which prove the point i am trying to make (which is completely different from your point). I will merely state the principle i believe in (thanks to your having drilled BQI into my head).

    Runs scored against a lower BQI are more creditable. Usually, for a given set of bowlers, just like Home BQI is lower than Away BQI by ~10%, in exactly the same way, you will find that the Team IInd innings BQI is ~10% lower than the Team Ist innings BQI.

    Hence just like 100 runs scored against a set of bowlers away from batsmen's home is more creditable than 100 runs scored at home against the same bowlers, in exactly the same way, 100 runs scored in Team IInd innings is more creditable than 100 runs scored in Team Ist.

    This Ist/IInd innings BQI delta is true across decades, throughout history, and true for most bowlers individually. [[ Gerry, calling for some patience. The next three articles are on BQI, PQI and Batting against BQI/PQI combination. SO tehre is going to be enbough time to discuss this for any length of time. Ananth: ]]

  • Boll on December 20, 2011, 14:59 GMT

    http://media.smh.com.au/sport/sports-hq/australia-v-india-197778-2847921.html?from=newsbox

    Apologies for all of you not interested in the forthcoming Aus/ind series... thought this might be of interest to many though... [[ Boll, thanks for the wonderful Hanlon piece. Thia was a Test series followed by me mainly through Radio and newspaper reports. The way Australia played, although decimated by Packer, led by aging Simpson was amazing. Maybe only Thomson was certain of his place in the full Australian team. (Anyhow, how and why did he stay out of the Packer net.) The final reult was a surprise although I must say, with my recollections that, we were indeed very happy at how close the series was, rather than ruing lost opportunities. Playing the game in the right spirit was more important then. In the last innings of the series, India reached 445 with a high score of 86 and 4 fifties. 10 batsmen reached double figures. Man of the match, a non-existent word those days, would have been Simpson. And probably Man of the series too. Ananth: ]]

  • Alex on December 19, 2011, 15:46 GMT

    @Ananth: SRT's stats over the last 7 tests read:

    7 tests, 13 innings, 491 runs, 0 100's, 4 50's, ave=38.

    He has crossed 34 in 7 innings, i.e., in 53% of innings. For this year, his average is a respectable 47. I think it is just a case of an ill-timed WC hangover. He had a phenomenal phase of 2008-10 and maybe some dip was due anyway. I still think that, if he wants, he can play for a marathon 26 years and is a certainty for 17,000 runs & 60 centuries in tests. I am not sure about Dravid but no need to worry about him ... his Don Bradman speech gives all indications that he will make a super admin+ambassador: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr4bK63WxXY.

  • Yash Rungta on December 19, 2011, 11:18 GMT

    Hey Ananth,

    Sorry to go off track. I really like your articles since I love cricket stats. However, for a change it would be great if you could add a little bit of trivia stats in your articles. Like writing an article based on data which you'd normally not be able to find on cricinfo. For eg. an article on weight of cricket bats used by international cricketers. I'm sure if you research with Cricinfo's influetial contacts, you could find what weight of bats do players use. For eg. Sachin, Klusener, Gooch, Clive Llyod, Hick all used heavy bats. On the other hands, players like Azhar and perhaps Lara used lighter bats. Kambli used 9 grips on his bat at a particular time. Now, you could ask for weights for many batsmen and then compare their modes of dismissal, averages, strike rates. Conclusion could be whether using a heavy bat is good or a lighter one is better. What is the optimum size of a bat for a normal batsmen? What say? [[ While your suggestion is good, I lack the facilities or time to do these. Best would be to identify specific queries and "Ask Steven", who has the entire Cricinfo resources at his disposal. Of course, I could do any trivia work which is based on perusal of the scorecards. Ananth: ]]

  • Ranga on December 19, 2011, 6:45 GMT

    Another twist:I know I have filed in my nominations, but let me see if there is scope to scrape through a couple more!!

    By pacemen:Ambrose 7/25, R J Hadlee 9/52, de Villiers 6/43, Steyn 5/23, D Malcolm 9/57

    By Spinners: Murali 9/52, Warne 8/71, Saqlain 5/93, Kumble 10/74, Bhajji 8/84 [[ All these are great - as were your initial ive !!! Ananth: ]]

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 18, 2011, 3:02 GMT

    Ananth, that would be something to look forward to. Why dont you consider giving a 5% weightage to (team) 1st innings bowling performances and a -5% to (team) IInd inn performances. Correspondingly a -5% and a 5% in the case of batsmen? I have often posted stats in proof of the hypothesis that IInd inn batting performances are more valuable compared to Ist inn as bowling averages are lower in IInd. Batsmen like VVS Laxman will not get their due in your analysis, if Team Ist is not distinguished from the more difficult (for batsmen) team IInd. [[ Gerry, what I m doing is to analyze runs scored against two non-contextual factors, bowling attack and pitch. Why bring in a contextual factor like innings. The minute we bring innings in,valid questions will be raised like "in what context runs were scored". If the first innings score is 100, then the responding batting performances have to be weighted more. If the first innings score is 500+, then the responding bowling performances have to be weighted more. If the third innings of the match is started with a lead of 200, the batting performances should get a lower weight while if there was a deficit of 200, the bowling performances should get more weight. And so on. All these, and more, would come in a Batting Rating exercise. Ananth: ]]

  • OpulentEmpire on December 17, 2011, 19:27 GMT

    Hey Ananth,

    This analysis was great; I look forward to your article on bowling performances versus batting quality (i.e. the inverse of the batting performance). I have one request. People today continually speak about the amount of cricket fast bowlers have to play. However, during the 80s, bowlers like Marshall and Hadlee bowled not only for their countries but also for clubs and counties (often in more than one country). Does any data exist on the annual number of overs bowled by these 80s bowlers compared with today's bowlers? I would be surprised if there is a large difference. My five:

    Holding 14-149; Ambrose 7-25; Marshall 5-21 (or the five wicket hall he took one-handed in 1984); Fazal Mahmood (his 12-fer? in England in the mid-50s that resulted in Pakistan's famous victory); Walsh (+ Ambrose if possible) 6-74 (+ 1-22) vs England in 2000, simply for the romance.

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 16, 2011, 10:09 GMT

    Ananth, while this may not be a comprehensive innings performance rating exercise, would you be able to post the batting index in some form alongside some of these tables? [[ Gerry, that is a door I am scared to open. Without understanding that this is not a Ratings exercise there would be hundred comments on some innings or other. Let me do it properly next year. Incidentally the next couple of articles are very important. These cover a re-vamped BQI (based on Career-todate-Home/Away values and Recent form adjustments). Also Pitch index based on top-7 batsmen performances. And finally a composite Batsman analysis based on runs scored against a combination of BQI and Pitch Index. It is shaping up very well. Ananth: ]]

  • arijit on December 15, 2011, 18:30 GMT

    ananth, you have missed this in table 19a: Ambrose: 24.4-7-34-6 Walsh: 22-10-31-4 It came in 1992, Test 1188, the first ever WI vs SA Test. South Africa collapsed from 123 for 2 to 148 all out to lose by 52 runs. [[ Arijit, for a minute I had a shock since the programs should never fail. Then I checked the scorecard. I have gone strictly by the book The target has to be 200 or below. Here the target is 201. Contd.. No I am slightly off track. The target does not come in 10a. It comes in 12a. Here the cut-off is only 120 or lower scores. Ananth: ]]

  • Anand on December 15, 2011, 16:50 GMT

    (continued) can bring out impactful bowlers. I am not askinng for a rating of bowlers taking economy rate (I think you analysis of bowlers already did that), but just seeing say sub 1.2 kind of economy rates in tests and looking for 5 wicket hauls by the same or other bowlers in the same test or comparing with the overall runrate in the innings or match in the same test and checking what the impact of the bowler was. The score cards do not really reveal the situation before a bowler started a spell and after the bowler completed the spell, so we cant measure impact in the "easiest possible way" (i.e., spell by spell analysis) but is there any other way of defining it? This will bring a list of bowlers who may not have been super stars but still very productive for their teams (I guess Bapu Nadkarni, may be Karsan Ghavri, even Shane Watson, and names like that to pop up in that list). Or something like say the difference in the impact caused by a Wasim or McGrath vs Waqar [[ You have pushed in a lot at me. Let me look at it. Ananth: ]]

  • Anand on December 15, 2011, 16:41 GMT

    Thanks Ananth for adding the table. Looking at the table made me feel guilty because I missed out mentioning gems like Botham's 5-11 and Kapil's 5-28. I also second the request for tables where bowlers initiated collapses. There is also a tall ask I have. This may be a separaet topic altogether for you if it is feasible. Is there a possibility fo analyze "impactful" bowling performances. I was always thinking of Bapu Nadkarni's 32-27-5-0 bowling analysis. Although the wickets column didnt show anything, what kind of imapct did it have on the match? Could that have converted a defeat to a draw or something like that? I am not sure of this particular match and am not even sure if my hypothesis is true, but a starting point could be economy rates. I know economy rates mean nothing in tests but surely a performance like Bapu Nadkarni is not a frequent occurence. Combined with wickets e.g., Botham's 5-11 in 14 overs and many of McGrath's performances (continued)

  • agni on December 15, 2011, 15:04 GMT

    Regarding the table 19.a: One match in which two bowlers combined and took 19 wickets.... and the other was a run-out!! and they miss the criteria in both innings.. so just wanted to mention here..

    ENG vs PAK 2006 at Old Trafford.

    Brief scores follow..

    2nd Test: England v Pakistan at Manchester - Jul 27-29, 2006 Pakistan 119 (SJH: 6/19 and MSP 3/21) and 222 (SJH:5/57 and MSP 5/72); England 461/9d England won by an innings and 120 runs

    Dunno if there is another instance like this...(of course Jim L took 19/90!!!) [[ That is great. And the odd wicket in the second innings, Kaneria was run out as the 10th wicket. Harmison and Panesar. At least panesar has come back. My feeling is that during the early years there might be a few occurences like this. Ananth: ]]

  • Harsh Thakor on December 15, 2011, 11:42 GMT

    My best 5 are Holdings 15-149,Imran 8-60,Willis 8-43,Lillee 11-164,Sarafraz 9-86.

  • Ananth on December 15, 2011, 11:29 GMT

    Anand/Abdulla: The two tables you had asked for have been completed and incorporated as 12a. and 19a. respectively.

  • Harsh Thakor on December 15, 2011, 11:25 GMT

    in combined innings I gave my list earlier.The most memorable performances to win matches in the 4th innings were 1.Bob Willis 8-43 at Leeds v.Australia in 1981 2.Sarafras Nawaz's 9-86 v.Australia at Melbourne in 1978=79 3.Curtly Ambrose's 6-52 at Barbados in 1992 v.South Africa 4.Curtly Ambrose's 6-46 at Trinidad in 1994 v.England. 5.Ian Botham's 5-11 at Edgbaston v.Australia 6.Kapil Dev's 5-28 at Melbourne in 1981. 7.Jaggaval Srinath's 6 wickets at Ahmedabad v.South Africa in 1996-97 8.Richard Hadlee's 7-23 at Dunedin v.India in 1976 in the 3rd test. 9.Anil Kumble's 10 wickets v.Pakistan in Delhi in 1999. 10.Shoaib Akhtar's 6-46 v.India at Calcutta in 1999.

    The best combined effort was that of Waqar and Wasim in 1993 v.Newzealand when chasing a meagre target of 133 the kiwis collapsed for a mere 95.

  • Harsh Thakor on December 15, 2011, 11:10 GMT

    My best innings performances are 1.Imran Khan's 8-60 versus India at Karachi in 1982-83 2.Michael Holdings 8-92 at the Oval in 1976 3.Bob Willis's 8-43 at Headingley v.Australia in 1981 4.Dennis Lillee's 6-26 at Melbourne v.West Indies in 1981-82 5.Curtly Ambrose's 7-33 at Perth in 1992-93 6.Malcolm Marshall's 7-22 at Old Trafford in 1988 7.Richard Hadlee's 9-52 at Brisbane 8.Shane Warne's 8-29 v.England in 1994-95 9.Murlitharan's 8wickets in England in 1998 10.Sarfraz Nawaz's 9-86 at Perth in 1978-79 11.Joel Garner's 5-38 at Adelaide in 1981-82 12.Abdul Qadir's 9-56 at Faisalabad in 1987

    Imran and Holding ripped through great batting line ups on dead pitches,Willis brilliantly won a test in the 4th innings exploiting a wearing pitch,Lillee brilliantly used seam and cut on a dead surface,Ambrose superbly exploited condition son a bouncy track,Sarfraz brilliantly ran through an Aussie batting line up and Murli,Warne and Qadir were virtually unplayable.

  • Ranga on December 15, 2011, 10:29 GMT

    The presence of Kapil Dev in many of these tables pleasantly surprised me. My memories about this great man was only after 1985. And I used to find him moody and inconsistent. And the lasting memory, is of course, his stretch-the-432ndwicket term of 1992-94, before he finally hung up. I used to always feel that he was an underachiever (Yes, blasphemous statement about a 5000 run-434 wicket legend). However, many of these tables suggest that he indeed, was the most valuable cricketer for India during his times. Again, he was brought up on Indian dustbowls. The exposure those days were also less. He still made use of the conditions. He got support rather late, in the form of Srinath. One one hand, an ageing champ and onthe other, a rookie tearaway. The best memories I have still is his 91-92 Aus tour when he took 25 wickets and should have retired after WC 92. [[ Yes, he retired 10 matches too late. The obsession we have with numbers. Maybe blasphemous, but what is going to happen if Tendulkar misses a hundred in the first 3 Test matches. Ananth: ]]

  • Santosh Sequeira on December 15, 2011, 9:30 GMT

    Ananth

    Would it be possible to come up with a table where the batting team have been threatning to put up a huge total with the score board reading something like 220/1 or 270/2 and someone producing a 5-for thereafter to dismiss them cheaply, lets say for an additional 50-60 runs irrespective of the result? That would actually qualify as a bowler running through a side on a good batting pitch.

    I guess 350/2 or 400/3 wouldn't qualify as it is a biggish total already

    Cheers

    Santosh [[ A special request. Will see. The trick lies in setting up the selection criteria. Too tough, very few will come in. Too easy, a ton of matches will come. Ananth: ]]

  • Vinny on December 15, 2011, 8:51 GMT

    In your selection example don't you mean Holding 14/149?. [[ Yes, will be corrected. Ananth: ]]

  • John Ng on December 15, 2011, 7:32 GMT

    I am surprised that S. Warne doesn't appear more in these charts especially as he had McGrath etc in the same side. [[ Funny, you have probably given the reason yourself. Warne does not appear BECAUSE he had McGrath in the side. Ananth: ]]

  • Shafiq on December 15, 2011, 6:19 GMT

    Thanks for great analysis.... There was a bowler from a village, named Fazal Mahmood --- who used to fazzled the mighty oppositions, missing in any description.

    My nostalgia takes me few great pleasures as a pakistan fan;

    1. Wasim in England 1992, against NZL 1996, against Dravid, Tendulkar (youtube moments. 2. Waqar's all youth 3. Imran challenging WI, and Indian on flat pitches of pakistan 4. Shoaib against Australia and New Zealand, Asif against SL, and peterson in 2010. 5. Qadir, Saqlain and Mushi spinning the world against them.

  • Aditya Nath Jha on December 15, 2011, 5:59 GMT

    Holding 14/149, Chandra 6/38, Hadlee 9/52, Lillee 8/29 (or 6/26), Ambrose 7/25

  • Ganesh on December 15, 2011, 5:43 GMT

    My selection is as follows : Ambrose 7/25, Kapil 9/83, Holding 8/62, Sarfraz 9/86, Wes Hall 5/63

    I think that most of these are self selections. I saw Kapil's 9/83 at ahmedabad and have never seen a greater lone spell by any bowler in my life . In that innings if there was even one bowler to support him even of the calibre of Sreesanth, R P singh etc. the game may have been one by India.

    I heard sarfraz's innings commentary on radio. Astounding Australia went down from 305 for 2 to 310 all out . Quite incredible.

    Ambrose and Holdings bowling efforts were among the only 2 great lone bowler efforts by the WI teams bookending their start and decline as the finest team ever. . ( As an aside 2 great bowlers namely Marshall and Imran do not have any stand out efforts as above probably because they were consistent througout).

  • Ranga on December 15, 2011, 5:30 GMT

    @Obelix: Reg 11/77 of Warne @ Gabba '95 - If I am not wrong, Warne destroyed the career of Basit Ali. Basit was touted to be the next Miandad - and the youngster has modelled himself on the old fox. Basit also had the talent and temperament of the great Miandad. He had a great 1994, which included excellent performances in NZL on seaming wickets against a reasonable quick bowling unit of Morrison & Co. Warne destroyed his confidence and hence, his career. I remember Warne plotted his dismissals, particularly a last ball bowled-between-legs. No wonder, Australia used to be the test that separated men from boys. Basit never really recovered from them on. He could have probably formed the nucleus of Pak batting, which was richly talented, but highly inconsistent (barring the Fab 3: Inzy, Youhana & Younis)

  • Ranga on December 15, 2011, 5:24 GMT

    @ Iain: I am pleased to see Warne's 8/71 ('94 Ashes @ Gabba) . . . It was a wonderful spell and I was itching to include that in my list. Agreed that Eng those days used to intimidate themselves when they faced Aussies wherever. However, on a pacy Gabba wicket, Warne just kept making fun of a hapless Eng lineup. That was the growth of Shane Warne as a mesmerising bowler. He announced his revival in 1993 in England and he kept growing in stature since then. In that test, all those 8 wickets came when Warne knew exactly where he was going to bowl, anticipating the batsman's reactions and placing the right trap. The stump microphones sometimes used to reveal his conversations with Healy. It was if we can say, a scaled up version of Ishant v/s Ponting of 07/08. The latter was 1 v 1, but the former was a similar stuff in a much larger plot.

  • Abhinandan on December 15, 2011, 5:07 GMT

    Thanks Ananth.... The efforts you put into your articles are really appreciated. Not just this one, but all of them. I read all of them (as cricket is, ultimately, a set of statistics and numbers in the end), except when the meanings elude me. The length and complexity of your articles are indicators enough of the efforts you would be taking to write them. I personally am enthralled by Barnes based on whatever i have read about him. But none of my friends seem to appreciate his achievements when i speak of them, saying i'm reading too much into the past. So i was wondering if it would be possible to get an analysis of his career and extrapolating it to see where he might have reached if not for WW I (and a payment system that satisfied him) - just to bring his success to the notice of the present generation. Today, in general, i think very few people know about him and most remain ignorant of his achievements. He remains forgotten. There can be no bigger insult, i feel, to his memory.

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 15, 2011, 4:54 GMT

    Table 12, 13 and 16 are awesome. Thank you very much for this. In table 23, you have mentioned Holding got all his wickets unaided...but not Imran?? Just joking, of course. [[ I always mean what I say. I only meant 6 bowled + 2 Lbw of Holding. Imran got 7 through his own efforts and had a catch by Wasim Bari. Nothing else should be drawn from these. Ananth: ]]

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 15, 2011, 3:42 GMT

    Actually, in my last post, in teh second list, I would like to pull out Hall's 5/63 in tied test and replace it with Shoaib Akhtar, 5/21 against Australia in Colombo, 2002. He just blasted the best batsmen on the planet out. Gilchrist dismissal was especially thrilling. He knew he would be clean bowled first ball he faced from Akhtar.

  • Gerry_the_Merry on December 15, 2011, 3:19 GMT

    Very nice. My selection (limited to less known spells): Warne 7/161, Qadir 6/16, Ambrose 6/74, Mathews 5/146

    Warne spell came in cape town, turning around the test single handedly and bowling non-stop through the day. Australia won. Quadir was against West Indies in Faisalabad. West Indies were knocked out in 30 minutes, unthinkable in those days. Imran started the onslaught, but Qadir tore them apart. Ambrose in Adelaide, 1992-93, defending small totals in both the innings, enabling victory by 1 run, squaring the series in the 4th test. Greg Mathews, 1986, bowling unchanged, in the tied test in Madras, but for which the very powerful Indian line up would have walked all over the inexperienced Australian bowling and chased down 348 on the last day easily. Mathews gave a very courageous performance.

    4 is too few, so to chance my arm again: Lillee 7/83, Harbhajan 8/84, Davidson 6/87 and Hall 5/63.

    Must dig into the article now.

  • Avinash on December 15, 2011, 1:46 GMT

    I bet this would`nt have been the viewer reaction had you put more pakistani bowlers in those tables...but then this is what it is...nice analysis. [[ I certainly do not know that. To me the country is just an additional field. Nothing ever gets selected on the basis of the country unless otherwise it is a country-based analysis. Ananth: ]]

  • ObelixtheFat on December 15, 2011, 0:35 GMT

    Hmmm 5 best I have seen: McGrath 10/27 (6/17 and 4/10) vs WI Brisbane 2000 Warne 11/77 (7/23 and 4/54) vs Pak Brisbane 1995 Ambrose 9/97 (7/25 and 2/54) vs Aus Perth 1993 Muralitharan 11/110 (5/84 and 6/26) vs Ind SSC 2008 Marshall 9/41 (2/19 and 7/22) vs Eng Manchester 1988 [[ You have been consistent in thinking of the match as the unit since the match performances define the way in which the match went. Ananth: ]]

  • Iain on December 14, 2011, 20:38 GMT

    Based only on performances I have seen. Ambrose 7/25, Devilliers 6/43, Warne 8/71, Hadlee 9/52, McGrath 8/38. [[ Great collection. Would be happy to own this list. Ananth: ]]

    Ambrose's spell was the most aggressive lethal spell of fast bowling anybody could watch. I remember seeing the look on some of the Aussies batsmen when going out to bat, (they looked scared) and kind of relieved when returning.

    I know it is hard to do stats wise but is it possible to do stats on a spell of bowling (unrested)during a game for example in Pattinsons second spell in Brisbane in the second innings he took 4 for 7 in 5 overs before being rested. There would be numerous examples in the history of test cricket, but for me these are momentum of the game changing performances [[ Iain, tough. As I have mentioned quite a few times I do bnot have access to balldata and extracting this from the scorecard is fraught with pitfalls. For recent scorecards possible, but not for the fierst 1100 or so. I will keep this on the plate. Ananth: ]]

  • Anand on December 14, 2011, 20:21 GMT

    Ananth: My list

    (i) Kumble 10/74 (ii) McGrath 8/77 (iii) Srinath 6/21 (iv) Pollock (5/xxx vs Pakistan in 1997) and (v) Steyn (5/23)

  • Matthew on December 14, 2011, 18:55 GMT

    Sorry to hear that the reaction is muted; I enjoyed reading your analyses. Pity that the first table on the page is already out of date! [[ No, Mathew. Bracewell has already gone in, within hours of publication. Ananth: ]]

  • Imran on December 14, 2011, 18:27 GMT

    Thanks a lot Anantha for this indepth analysis.. One of the most engrossing part of following cricket is being enveloped in its unending statistics.. You dig deeper and come up with better moments each time.. Just a little request.. Compile a similar analysis for performances of the last two decades.. [[ Very tough, Imran. THis requires so much time that limiting it to a period means repeating all the work. Also the cut-offs have to be redone. But I will do it when I am at a loose end. What I can do now is to limit the period and come out with a composite table of great bowling performances, under various criteria. Will take a few days, though. Ananth: ]]

  • Anand on December 14, 2011, 17:46 GMT

    Ananth: Excellent article as always. Thanks for this follow up article and thyanks to all the readers whose comments motivated you to do this exercise. I understand Srinath's 6-21 against SAF in Ahmedabad does not meet your criteria to be mentioned in the first set of tables (match winning 4th innings 5-fors). But I still believe it deserves special praise because India was defending a very low score (170) in Indian wickets where fast bowlers are not expected to make the ball talk. Similarlt Shaun Pollock vs Pak in 1997. Could you add a table where less than 200 was successfully defended due to a five-for? If there are too many then atleast 10 of the performances or a reader's list? Moreover, in the light of what happened later, it was a series winning performance too. Similarly, herath's performance against India in the third test in 2010 (Laxman special levelled the series for India). Also without sounding to be nit-picking I think Srinath's 8-for againt Pak was in the 2nd innings:-) [[ Yes, Srinath's 8-86 was in the second innings. Corrected. Srinath's 6 for 21 was a match-winning performance while defending a low total. However the problem is where to draw the line. I felt then margin was more important. Hence I have set a margin of 25 and selected all. At the end of the day, this was a comfortable win (64 runs), despite the low total defended. Your idea is worth considering. Let me see. Sub-200 totals and margin >25. I can always do a further selection to lower the number of entries to a manageable proportion. Ananth: ]]

  • Boll on December 14, 2011, 16:07 GMT

    4.Curtley Ambrose - has there been a more frightening proposition than this? - the bowler I would least like to face; the bowler responsible for the most vicious spells I`ve seen; His spell at Perth remains legendary - on an (admitedly) tough track he bowled the best spell I`ve had the misfortune to watch. Terrifying through the TV 3000 miles away.

    5. Richard Hadlee. Kiwi - Sir- played with crappy bowlers...yeah,yeah. At his best Hadlee was more in control of his craft than anyone - accurate, relentless, cunning and driven - and a style which could be shown to young fast bowlers everywhere. Brilliant, and often unplayable, he carried an attack as only Murali has done. Brisbane performance perhaps the most dominant ever - often disregarded when talk of all-time best XIs comes around - certainly not of the reckoning for an all-time side.

  • Pavan on December 14, 2011, 16:05 GMT

    My selections would be Kumble 10/74 Saqlain's 2 five wicket hauls in Chennai,Srinath 6/21 vs Southafrica in 4th innings Kanpur defending a total of 170 ,Steyns 8 for in Nagpur and Mcgrath 5 for in Lords 2005 where he took the first 5 wickets to reduce them to 21/5 after aussies were bowled out for 190.

    I have only selected performances i have watched live.

  • Boll on December 14, 2011, 15:42 GMT

    3. Shane Warne - poor record in India, slimming drugs, foul outbursts, sexting? Yep, but the most exciting bowler I`ve seen - the complete entertainer, and the ultimate matchwinner - for all his faults, one of the special few.

  • Sushant Aggarwal on December 14, 2011, 15:26 GMT

    I am always interested by the kind of analysis that you do. I hope more Indian Performances should be featured.

  • Boll on December 14, 2011, 15:17 GMT

    Very tough to choose the 5 best bowling performances I`ve seen - slightly easier to choose the 5 greatest bowlers. In the last 35 years I`d hand it to these gentlemen.

    1. Malcolm Marshall - take your pick of his 5-wicket performances; quite simply the most complete fast bowler I`ve seen - fast, skillful, intimidating and mercurial. RIP - a widely respected and loved man.

    2. Dennis Lillee - for anyone who watched him, the chant of his surname remains an indelible memory. Charismatic, brilliant and brave,(and for a generation of Australian schoolboys the epitome of cool) Lillee`s classsical action and trademark appeal made him the most recognisable player of his era.

  • Abdullah on December 14, 2011, 15:09 GMT

    Hi Ananth Very interesting set of analyses. Brings to light a fair few memorable performances. A couple of suggestions 1. Five-fors in losing causes where the margin of loss was 2 or less than 2 wickets. This would highlight close losses where a bowler almost bowled their team to victory. One such example would be Wasim's 6 wickets against WI in 2001. [[ What you are saying is to lower the wicket cut-off but stiffen thye margin. Good idea. Let me see. Ananth: ]]

    2. When doing the bowling pair analysis, can you do something similar for 6-4 combinations (i know its an article on 5-fors, but would go nicely with that table) [[ This is an excellent idea. I will do this and add the table soon. Ananth: ]]

    keep up the good work

  • Navin Agarwal on December 14, 2011, 13:50 GMT

    My choice India centric and contemporary era all

    McGrath 7/27, Kumble 10/74, Srinath 5/21, Harbhajan 13/213(?)Kolkata 2001, Srinath 13/132.

  • Ali Rehman on December 14, 2011, 13:28 GMT

    it is interesting to note that very few of these great bowling performances have come recently, what is the reason, is it pitches around the world being more batter friendly?

  • charith on December 14, 2011, 12:28 GMT

    WOW,when it comes to stats you are like bradman. Readers won't comment much because you haven't left anything out for us to comment. great work Mr.Ananth [[ Bradman made his runs himself because he was one in a billion. I am certainly not that. I started in a certain way and the readers have made the rest of whatever good things that this blogspace can claim. Ananth: ]]

  • Raj Balakrishnan on December 14, 2011, 11:57 GMT

    Hi Ananth,

    Nice analysis. One probable addition to the first table:

    Bracewell's 6 for 40 in the recent Hobart test, NZ won by 7 runs. [[ If you see the tables now it has been added. The analysis was prepared last week-end. Ananth: ]]

  • Vyasa on December 14, 2011, 9:31 GMT

    Anantha, I'm a huge fan of your style of stat analysis. Arguments about which innings or wicket haul was better is very subjective based on bias for various conditions. I appreciate the depths at which you go to arrive at these figures. I concur with you that cricket is a batsman's game- the sheer monstrosity of runs over wickets turns half the characters away. I feel 4wickets in an innings is a more fair comparision to a 100 by a batsman. I have no basis for this (yet).

    I have to ask for one more query. I remember you did batting averages based on bowling quality in tests and ODIs. Are there articles in the pipeline for the converse? Where we can see how bowlers fared w.r.t quality of batters? I would be quite interested to see that. And also, the RPO for these in ODI cricket would yield some interesting results, for sure! [[ This has been asked for in the last article or the one before and is right at the top of the "Analysis to do". Ananth: ]]

    All the best and thanks! Vyasa.

  • Ranga on December 14, 2011, 9:21 GMT

    If there is no real cut off for # of wkts/inns, these are my pick from what I have seen:

    Murali (9 wkts Oval), De Villiers (6/43 SCG 93-94), Ambrose (6/23 v Eng '93-94), Saqlain (5/93 in Chennai 1999), Steyn (5/23 v Ind 2010)

    Some great Indian spells (IMHO, they dont stand near any of the top spells I have seen): Kumble (6/78 Jamaica 2006), Kapil (5/28 MCG '81), Sreesanth (5/40 SAF 2006), Chandra (6 /38 Oval '71) and a surprising Agarkar (6/43 Adelaide 03/4)

  • Yash Rungta on December 14, 2011, 8:12 GMT

    Not too sure why Doug Bracewell isn't in the list of defending scores with margins less than 25 runs.. In his case, he took 6-40 and NZ won by 7 runs. [[ Good point, Yash. The tables were prepared last week and the work involved is so much that I could not repeat the same with a fresh run after the last two Tests were played. Will add. Thanks. Ananth: ]]

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Yash Rungta on December 14, 2011, 8:12 GMT

    Not too sure why Doug Bracewell isn't in the list of defending scores with margins less than 25 runs.. In his case, he took 6-40 and NZ won by 7 runs. [[ Good point, Yash. The tables were prepared last week and the work involved is so much that I could not repeat the same with a fresh run after the last two Tests were played. Will add. Thanks. Ananth: ]]

  • Ranga on December 14, 2011, 9:21 GMT

    If there is no real cut off for # of wkts/inns, these are my pick from what I have seen:

    Murali (9 wkts Oval), De Villiers (6/43 SCG 93-94), Ambrose (6/23 v Eng '93-94), Saqlain (5/93 in Chennai 1999), Steyn (5/23 v Ind 2010)

    Some great Indian spells (IMHO, they dont stand near any of the top spells I have seen): Kumble (6/78 Jamaica 2006), Kapil (5/28 MCG '81), Sreesanth (5/40 SAF 2006), Chandra (6 /38 Oval '71) and a surprising Agarkar (6/43 Adelaide 03/4)

  • Vyasa on December 14, 2011, 9:31 GMT

    Anantha, I'm a huge fan of your style of stat analysis. Arguments about which innings or wicket haul was better is very subjective based on bias for various conditions. I appreciate the depths at which you go to arrive at these figures. I concur with you that cricket is a batsman's game- the sheer monstrosity of runs over wickets turns half the characters away. I feel 4wickets in an innings is a more fair comparision to a 100 by a batsman. I have no basis for this (yet).

    I have to ask for one more query. I remember you did batting averages based on bowling quality in tests and ODIs. Are there articles in the pipeline for the converse? Where we can see how bowlers fared w.r.t quality of batters? I would be quite interested to see that. And also, the RPO for these in ODI cricket would yield some interesting results, for sure! [[ This has been asked for in the last article or the one before and is right at the top of the "Analysis to do". Ananth: ]]

    All the best and thanks! Vyasa.

  • Raj Balakrishnan on December 14, 2011, 11:57 GMT

    Hi Ananth,

    Nice analysis. One probable addition to the first table:

    Bracewell's 6 for 40 in the recent Hobart test, NZ won by 7 runs. [[ If you see the tables now it has been added. The analysis was prepared last week-end. Ananth: ]]

  • charith on December 14, 2011, 12:28 GMT

    WOW,when it comes to stats you are like bradman. Readers won't comment much because you haven't left anything out for us to comment. great work Mr.Ananth [[ Bradman made his runs himself because he was one in a billion. I am certainly not that. I started in a certain way and the readers have made the rest of whatever good things that this blogspace can claim. Ananth: ]]

  • Ali Rehman on December 14, 2011, 13:28 GMT

    it is interesting to note that very few of these great bowling performances have come recently, what is the reason, is it pitches around the world being more batter friendly?

  • Navin Agarwal on December 14, 2011, 13:50 GMT

    My choice India centric and contemporary era all

    McGrath 7/27, Kumble 10/74, Srinath 5/21, Harbhajan 13/213(?)Kolkata 2001, Srinath 13/132.

  • Abdullah on December 14, 2011, 15:09 GMT

    Hi Ananth Very interesting set of analyses. Brings to light a fair few memorable performances. A couple of suggestions 1. Five-fors in losing causes where the margin of loss was 2 or less than 2 wickets. This would highlight close losses where a bowler almost bowled their team to victory. One such example would be Wasim's 6 wickets against WI in 2001. [[ What you are saying is to lower the wicket cut-off but stiffen thye margin. Good idea. Let me see. Ananth: ]]

    2. When doing the bowling pair analysis, can you do something similar for 6-4 combinations (i know its an article on 5-fors, but would go nicely with that table) [[ This is an excellent idea. I will do this and add the table soon. Ananth: ]]

    keep up the good work

  • Boll on December 14, 2011, 15:17 GMT

    Very tough to choose the 5 best bowling performances I`ve seen - slightly easier to choose the 5 greatest bowlers. In the last 35 years I`d hand it to these gentlemen.

    1. Malcolm Marshall - take your pick of his 5-wicket performances; quite simply the most complete fast bowler I`ve seen - fast, skillful, intimidating and mercurial. RIP - a widely respected and loved man.

    2. Dennis Lillee - for anyone who watched him, the chant of his surname remains an indelible memory. Charismatic, brilliant and brave,(and for a generation of Australian schoolboys the epitome of cool) Lillee`s classsical action and trademark appeal made him the most recognisable player of his era.

  • Sushant Aggarwal on December 14, 2011, 15:26 GMT

    I am always interested by the kind of analysis that you do. I hope more Indian Performances should be featured.