April 26, 2014

Chalk and cheese in the same ODI innings

Instances of huge contrasts between batting strike rates or bowling economy rates within the same ODI innings
20

Wavell Hinds and Runako Morton were both guilty of extreme slow-scoring in ODIs in which their team-mates scored far more quickly © Getty Images

At the end of the Indian innings in the 2014 World Twenty20 final, I did my usual strike-rate comparison between the best and worst batsmen in the team. I can do this calculation in my mind and I worked out that Virat Kohli was striking at around 2.5 times that of Yuvraj Singh. I remembered that Dwayne Bravo was also at a similar level against Marlon Samuels in their semi-final match against Sri Lanka. I was certain that Kohli and Bravo, having scored more runs at 2.5 times the strike rate of the other batsman, would be seething within, despite contrary public utterances, because the matches were lost. On a whim, I looked up the 2012 World Twenty20 final. Samuels' strike rate clocked in at 7.4 times that of Gayle. But all sins are forgotten in a Gangnam dance if the team wins. Then I suddenly realised that I had the material for a nice and easy-to-understand article. I also remembered Mohan's comment on my last article that he loved the simpler ones which he could understand clearly. I reminded myself that I should do these simple anecdotal and low-key analytical articles more often.

I took a major decision. I decided that I would go with the ODI analysis first. I wanted to wet my feet initially on the longer limited-overs format since the T20 format is a sharp and unforgiving format: both on the playing and analytical arenas. The time is so short that one performs or perishes. So my cut-offs as well as metrics in T20s have to be radically different from those of the ODI game. So I have covered the ODI game here. I promise you that the T20 analysis, which will be a far sharper one, will follow, in due course.

The idea is simple. Set reasonable cut-offs for the (batting) innings and (bowling) innspells. Find the best and worst and ratio between both as the HL_Index. Order these on the basis of the Index values. The great thing about the analysis is that anyone can determine the Index value in two minutes flat by perusing any scorecard. The USP of this article is its essential simplicity.

The pleasing aspect of this analysis is that it is a true peer comparison. I agree that there could be early-morning support for the pace bowlers, the drying of pitch and consequent help to spinners, the dew factor in the evening games, the post-rain skid factor and so on. But everything is capsuled into the 200 minutes of an ODI innings. Conditions might change by about 10% but not more. If the opening batsmen need some time to settle down, they also have attacking fields to help in scoring runs. If they take 20 balls to break their duck, they are expected to convert this to a 70-ball-50, not a 30-ball-1. And let us not forget that all comparisons are within a single innings.

BATTING

But cut-offs have to be set. I cannot let Sunil Narine's (yes, you got the name right) cameo of 6-ball-24 or James Franklin's 8-ball-31 or Brendon McCullum's 9-ball-32 et al disturb the balance of the idea. These are freakish cameos. So I decided on a cut-off of 20 balls. This is essential since I wanted to cross the 20-ball mark to give the batsman some more time to get his innings back on track. We are not looking for low-scoring in 20 balls or so but getting out soon after. On the faster side, there is only one innings below 20 that merits inclusion: Afridi's 18-ball-55. I have checked this innings and made sure that the index for this team innings is below the selection mark.

Twenty balls represents more than 50% of the average innings size of 31 balls. It allows the batsman to settle down and score reasonably quickly to finish with a 100+ strike rate. On the slower side, 20 balls represents sufficiently long batting stint to settle down and score at least at around 33.3%.

They were batting on two pitches a continent apart: Index 20 and above
HL-Index Year ODI Team Res Batsman in zone BPos Score High S/R Batsman struggling BPos Score Low S/R
36.6920021898WinCL Hooper 738 (29)131.0WW HindsOB1 (28) 3.6
33.3320052276ZimCK Coventry 735 (21)166.7BRM TaylorOB1 (20) 5.0
32.0020062422WinDR Smith 830 (30)100.0RS Morton 30 (31) 3.1
30.4419991524IndWRobin Singh 745 (34)132.4SR TendulkarOB1 (23) 4.3
28.2920133401SafQ de KockOB27 (21)128.6F Behardien 61 (22) 4.5
27.161990 610PakWasim Akram 786 (76)113.2Imran Khan 51 (24) 4.2
25.2819961053UaeJA Samarasekera 829 (39) 74.4V Mehra 41 (34) 2.9
25.001984 274SlkWPA de Silva 750 (54) 92.6S WettimunyOB1 (27) 3.7
24.1519981335BngHasibul Hossain1021 (20)105.0Athar Ali KhanOB0 (22) 4.3
23.921983 182NzlBL Cairns 852 (25)208.0JV Coney 52 (23) 8.7
23.9019981335IndWSR TendulkarOB33 (29)113.8R Dravid 31 (21) 4.8
23.5020031973WinRR Sarwan 447 (44)106.8BC Lara 31 (22) 4.5
22.4420021807PakWAbdul Razzaq 746 (41)112.2Inzamam-ul-Haq 41 (20) 5.0
22.421983 171EngWAJ Lamb 4108 (106)101.9G FowlerOB0 (21) 4.5
22.3720001657ZimA Flower 451 (57) 89.5SV Carlisle 31 (25) 4.0
21.981991 685PakWSaleem Malik 487 (95) 91.6Aamer SohailOB1 (24) 4.2
21.5520113168SlkWDPMD JayawardeneOB79 (77)102.6AD Mathews 61 (21) 4.8
20.8020001591SafWL Klusener 852 (50)104.0G KirstenOB1 (20) 5.0
20.211994 938WinBC Lara 332 (38) 84.2PV Simmons 50 (23) 4.2
20.1220031951IndHarbhajan Singh 928 (32) 87.5R Dravid 41 (23) 4.3

The table represents the top entries while the potted scores below are for ten matches involving the major teams. While it is of interest to know that Samarasekera of UAE scored 25 times faster than Mehra, it is unlikely to be of further interest to anyone, including the UAE cricket followers.

At the turn of the century West Indies tried many opening batsmen. No one was really good enough to hold their place for a long time. This is reflected in a couple of entries at the top. Wavell Hinds was one and Runako Morton was another. Hinds laboured to 1 in 28 and Morton to 0 in 31 (taken as 1 in 32, for calculation purposes). Their scoring rates were abysmally low 3 or so. Carl Hooper scored at 131 and outscored Hinds by over 36 times. Smith scored at 100 and outscored by a mere 31 times. There is a personal take on the Hinds-Hooper match, chronicled later.

Robin Singh outscored his more illustrious team-mate Sachin Tendulkar by 30 times. Imagine Wasim Akram outscoring the normally quick-scoring Imran Khan by 27 times. And in another match, Tendulkar, despite opening the batting, outscored his second-wicket partner, Rahul Dravid, by 24 times. But it can be seen that many of the slow scoring batsmen have opened. Allan Lamb's performance is praiseworthy since he has scored a hundred at better than run-a-ball and outscored Graeme Fowler, who did not open his account in 21 balls, by a margin of 21 times.

It can be seen that more matches are lost than won in these matches. It is clear that the quicker scoring batsman has not always been able to undo damage done by the slow-scoring batsmen. The top teams seem to find ways of undoing the damage more than the teams in the lower rung.

Potted Scores

ODI # 1898. India vs West Indies. India won by 3 wickets.
Played on 21 November 2002 at Jodhpur. Mom: Agarkar A.B.
West Indies: 201 all out in 46.3 overs
   WW Hinds             1  in  28 (  3.6)
   CL Hooper           38  in  29 (131.0)
India: 202 for 7 wkt(s) in 46.2 overs

The Jodhpur match, the top one in the table, was one of the matches in which I did television work with Doordarshan. Just out of interest I looked back at my notes, still preserved carefully, for this match. I have written there "Hooper 36 times faster than Hinds. Discuss with Greenidge". I remember talking to Greenidge about it and Greenidge's discomfiture at a West Indian opening batsman dawdling. He also mentioned that Javagal Srinath was good but Ajit Agarkar and Sanjay Bangar were only medium pacers. His grouse was at Hinds getting out at 1. Little did I realise that one day this match would be the leading entry in a list.

What followed was even more painful to watch. Samuels scored 3 in 28 balls. So the 2 and 3 batsmen accumulated an incredible tally of 4 in 56 balls: less than half a run per over. West Indies lost the match and it is certain that Hinds and Samuels have to be considered responsible. Not to forget Ramnaresh Sarwan's contribution: 14 in 38 balls, making a total of 18 in 84 balls.

ODI # 2422. Australia vs West Indies. Australia won by 127 runs. 
Played on 24 September 2006 at Kuala Lumpur. Mom: Clarke.
Australia: 240 for 6 wkt(s) in 50.0 overs
West Indies: 113 all out in 34.2 overs
   RS Morton            0  in  31 (  3.1)
   DR Smith            30  in  30 (100.0)

What does one say of Morton? 31 balls to score 0 and then getting out. Granted, he walked in at 0 for 1 with Gayle getting out first ball. Granted, the bowling was top class: Glenn McGrath, Brett Lee, Nathan Bracken and Shane Watson. But surely a forgettable performance, resulting in a big loss. It is possible that even if Morton had scored a few more runs, West Indies would have lost.

ODI # 1524. India vs New Zealand.  India won by 14 runs.
Played on 11 November 1999 at Gwalior. Mom: Ganguly S.C.
India: 261 for 5 wkt(s) in 50.0 overs
   SR Tendulkar         1  in  23 (  4.3)
   Robin Singh         45* in  34 (132.4)
New Zealand: 247 for 8 wkt(s) in 50.0 overs

Tendulkar, opening, scored 1 in 23 and Robin Singh, coming in at 7, scored at 132. A factor of 30. However Sourav Ganguly scored a majestic run-a-ball 150-plus and India won well.

ODI # 3401. Sri Lanka vs South Africa. Sri Lanka won by 128 runs. 
Played on 31 July 2013 at Colombo. Mom: TM Dilshan.
Sri Lanka: 307 for 4 wkt(s) in 50.0 overs
South Africa: 179 all out in 43.5 overs
   Q de Kock           27  in  21 (128.6)
   F Behardien          1  in  22 (  4.5)

This was a recent match. Quinton de Kock, free and flowing in the opening position, scored at 128. Farhaan Behardien, coming in at 6, scored at below 5. Surely South Africa could do better than Behardien. The match was lost anyhow.

ODI # 610. Australia vs Pakistan. Australia won by 7 wickets. 
Played on 23 February 1990 at M.C.G. Mom: Not awarded.
Pakistan: 162 all out in 47.5 overs
   Imran Khan           1  in  24 (  4.2)
   Wasim Akram         86  in  76 (113.2)
Australia: 163 for 3 wkt(s) in 45.5 overs

The mercurial Imran Khan scored at just over 4 and Akram at 113. Pakistan lost comfortably. This was a peculiar match. Ijaz Ahmed scored a 34-ball-7 and Javed Miandad a 26-ball-2. So no one was comfortable, barring Wasim.

ODI # 274. Sri Lanka vs New Zealand. Sri Lanka won by 4 wickets. 
Played on 3 November 1984 at Colombo. Mom: de Silva P.A.
New Zealand: 171 for 6 wkt(s) in 45.0 overs
Sri Lanka: 174 for 6 wkt(s) in 39.4 overs
   S Wettimuny          1  in  27 (  3.7)
   PA de Silva         50* in  54 ( 92.6)

Sidath Wettimuny's dawdle at the beginning was offset by Aravinda de Silva's brilliant innings resulting in a win. Maybe the low target prompted Wettimuny to see through the fast bowlers. So we cannot really blame him.

ODI # 182. Australia vs New Zealand.  Australia won by 149 runs.
Played on 13 February 1983 at M.C.G. Mom: Hughes K.J.
Australia: 302 for 8 wkt(s) in 50.0 overs
New Zealand: 153 all out in 39.5 overs
   JV Coney             2  in  23 (  8.7)
   BL Cairns           52  in  25 (208.0)

This is chalk with a vengeance and cheese likewise. One batsman scores at 8 and the other at 200+. At 44 for 6, Lance Cairns threw his bat around, and connected. It did not matter. Neither innings could save New Zealand. Jeff Crowe scored a 48-ball-27 and Chatfield, at the end, a 36-ball-10. The bowling was awesome: Dennis Lillee, Rodney Hogg and Geoff Lawson.

ODI # 1335. India vs Bangladesh.
Played on 25 May 1998 at Mumbai. India won by 5 wickets. Mom: Kumble A.
Bangladesh: 115 all out in 36.3 overs
India: 116 for 5 wkt(s) in 29.2 overs
   SR Tendulkar        33  in  29 (113.8)
   R Dravid             1  in  21 (  4.8)

Now Tendulkar is on the other side. He blazes away and Dravid goes into his shell. The scoring rates speak for themselves. But let us not forget that the target was only 116. And Ajay Jadeja's 47-ball-17 led to a laboured win.

ODI # 1973. Sri Lanka vs West Indies. Sri Lanka won by 6 runs. 
Played on 28 February 2003 at Cape Town. Mom: Vaas WPUJC.
Sri Lanka: 228 for 6 wkt(s) in 50.0 overs
West Indies: 222 for 9 wkt(s) in 50.0 overs
   BC Lara              1  in  22 (  4.5)
   RR Sarwan           47* in  44 (106.8)

No one seems to be exempt from this malaise. One can never accuse Brian Lara of scoring slowly. But in this match against Sri Lanka, he dawdled and might even have caused West Indies the match. He scored a single in 22 balls as against Sarwan's fluent 44-ball-47. That too in the World Cup with possibly a place in the next round at stake.

ODI # 1807. Pakistan vs West Indies. Pakistan won by 4 wickets.
Played on 14 February 2002 at Sharjah. Mom: Abdul Razzaq.
West Indies: 190 all out in 48.3 overs
Pakistan: 193 for 6 wkt(s) in 46.1 overs
   Inzamam-ul-Haq       1  in  20 (  5.0)
   Abdul Razzaq        46* in  41 (112.2)

And the malaise runs wide. Inzamam-ul-Haq outscored 22 times by Abdul Razzaq. But the target was a low one and Inzamam's dawdle did not cost the match.

BOWLING

For the bowlers I decided that I would consider only the bowling accuracy for comparison. The strike rates do not mean much and bowlers who come at the end and capture couple of wickets in an over will cause havoc. The bowling accuracy, on the other hand, is a stable measure. The cut-offs here are dicey. After a lot of deliberation I have decided to go with two cut-offs. 5 overs for the accurate bowlers and 3 overs for the expensive bowlers. The reason is simple. I want the accurate bowlers to maintain their accuracy for an extra over or two. 5-0-10-0 is tougher to achieve than 4-0-8-0 or 3-0-5-0. On the other hand the expensive bowlers can easily concede tons of runs in 3 overs: (e-g) Ravi Rampaul 64 in 3, Sreesanth 48 in 3, Rangana Herath 43 in 3 and so on. Now on to the tables.

They were bowling on two pitches a continent apart: Index 7 and above
HL-Index Year ODI Team Res Bowler in zone Analysis Low RpO Bowler struggling Analysis High RpO
14.2920031990KenAY Karim8.2-6-7-3 0.84MA Suji3.0-0-36-012.00
13.0019991512WinWCEL Ambrose10.0-5-5-1 0.50SL Campbell8.0-0-52-2 6.50
11.731986 406PakWWasim Akram7.2-4-4-2 0.55Manzoor Elahi5.0-0-32-1 6.40
10.831981 104AusWDK Lillee5.0-2-3-1 0.60LS Pascoe4.0-0-26-1 6.50
10.371992 782WinWPV Simmons10.0-8-3-4 0.30KCG Benjamin9.0-1-28-2 3.11
9.751989 558IndN Kapil Dev7.0-4-4-0 0.57K Srikkanth4.4-1-26-3 5.57
9.5320011781ZimTR Gripper7.0-4-6-0 0.86HK Olonga6.0-0-49-0 8.17
9.0720092860KenPJ Ongondo7.0-3-9-0 1.29NN Odhiambo3.0-0-35-011.67
8.691984 268AusCG Rackemann8.0-4-7-3 0.88JN Maguire5.0-0-38-0 7.60
8.2120133389WinJO Holder10.0-4-13-4 1.30SP Narine3.0-0-32-010.67
7.9620021826SlkM Muralitharan10.0-3-9-5 0.90WPUJC Vaas6.0-0-43-0 7.17
7.8820113222PakWSaeed Ajmal7.0-4-6-2 0.86Shahid Afridi4.0-0-27-0 6.75
7.861992 726EngDA Reeve5.0-3-2-1 0.40PAJ DeFreitas7.0-1-22-2 3.14
7.801975 24IndWBS Bedi12.0-8-6-1 0.50M Amarnath10.0-0-39-2 3.90
7.7320072539IreWAC Botha8.0-4-5-2 0.62KJ O'Brien6.0-0-29-1 4.83
7.6720072640KenWTM Odoyo7.0-3-7-3 1.00NN Odhiambo3.0-0-23-0 7.67
7.5820021830SlkWWPUJC Vaas7.0-2-8-2 1.14ST Jayasuriya3.0-0-26-0 8.67
7.5020092876IreWAR Cusack5.0-2-3-0 0.60AR White4.0-0-18-1 4.50
7.2420001558SafWSM Pollock8.0-4-7-3 0.88N Boje3.0-0-19-0 6.33
7.2220052264SlkWMF Maharoof10.0-5-9-3 0.90UDU Chandana10.0-0-65-1 6.50
7.201984 237WinWMD Marshall6.0-4-5-1 0.83WW Daniel10.0-2-60-2 6.00
7.181973 9WinWLR Gibbs11.0-4-12-1 1.09KD Boyce6.0-0-47-0 7.83
7.1420082766ZimWRW Price10.0-5-7-0 0.70C Zhuwawo3.0-0-15-0 5.00
7.1420042165IndHarbhajan Singh10.0-2-14-2 1.40AB Agarkar6.0-0-60-110.00
Karim-Suji pair resulted in an index value of just above 14. The match was lost, as happened with many of the lesser teams.

Now look at what Curtly Ambrose did. He completed his innings spell with an RpO value of 0.5. The part-time bowling of Sherwin Campbell had an RpO value of 6.50. It could as well have been Nixon McLean who conceded 5 runs per over. We now come to Wasim Akram's way-out innspell of 7.2-4-4-2 compared with Manzoor Elahi's 5-0-32-1. Then comes Lillee's five-over burst conceding 3 runs against Len Pascoe's 26 runs in 4 overs. The two bowling efforts of Lillee and Pascoe disguise the match-winning effort by Greg Chappell who had figures of 9.5-5-15-5.

The next entry is, arguably, the most incredible one. During the 1992 World Cup, Phil Simmons bowled, what I consider one of the most devastating spells ever, against Pakistan. He finished with the unbelievable figures of 10-8-3-4. All four were top-order dismissals. This is the only instance of eight maiden overs in a ten-over spell. Note Bishan Bedi's bowling figures, albeit against East Africa. He shares the record of eight maidens with Simmons, although in 12 overs. Kenny Benjamin's 9 over spell at 3.11 was over 10 times more expensive than Simmons'. Pakistan had no answer to the extraordinary bowling effort of Simmons and lost by a big margin. Incidentally Jimmy Adams had figures of 4-2-2-1.

Kapil Dev's RpO was nearly 10 times better that of Kris Srikkanth. But that was certainly in vain as West Indies won quite comfortably. This is the first match, involving major teams, which has been featured here which was lost.

There is a missing entry which deserves special mention. It did not qualify because Courtney Walsh bowled 4.3 overs. This was the 1986 match in Sharjah between West Indies and Sri Lanka. How can anyone ever understand Walsh's analysis: 4.3-3-1-5? The nearest to this piece of magic was Herath's spell in the World T20 against New Zealand. With the type of bowling accuracy of Walsh, a figure of 0.22, almost any other spell would form the other half of the HL-Index pair. It fell to Malcolm Marshall's fairly accurate spell of 5-1-16-1 to complete the pair. The index works out to 14.4.

It can be seen that most of the matches have been won by the bowling teams. Hence I will not be presenting any potted scores.

The bowling side of this analysis leaves very little room for further nuanced looks. First the index values have a much narrower range than the batting index values. Look at the highest index values: 36+ and 14+. Possibly because the bowling performances are limited to 5/6 bowlers in an innings. Also most of the matches involving the A-teams have resulted in wins for the considered bowling combinations.

The reason could very well be that the bowling stint of the top bowler normally represents a fifth of the team effort and if that is outstanding, say like Simmons' 10-8-3-4, that effort straightaway puts the team on the ascendancy. And this spell is also indicative of a track which is somewhat helpful to the bowlers. The combination of these factors normally leads to wins. Of course, in a combination like Harbhajan Singh's 10-2-14-2 and Agarkar's 6-0-60-1, Agarkar's nightmare effort effectively cancelled Harbhajan's spell and the team lost. But the instances are far and few in between.

Incidentally for the 6874 innings, the average Batting HT-Index value is 2.59. The average Bowling HT-Index value is 2.14. These are the average spreads between the best and worst performances. There seems to be a more balanced distribution amongst the Bowling index values. There are 2638 Bowling index values above the average while there are only 2127 Batting index values above the average, even though the high Batting index values are much higher.

To download/view the part list of the HT_Index tables, please 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

  • AnanthNarayanan on May 7, 2014, 11:34 GMT

    [[
    Robert, Your comment made me think that I have not undertaken a proper article dedicated to Batsmen Consistency. I have covered that subject only peripherally. I have done couple of days work now and can do a rather interesting post on that fascinating subject. Will schedule it after I finish my current brace of T20 articles, due this Saturday and next Saturday. Many thanks for this.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on May 5, 2014, 15:04 GMT

    Mr Narayanan, have you ever considered some kind of "consistency algorithm"? For example, a batsman can have a good average, but his innings might alternate between huge knocks and tiny ones. Whereas another batsman might not give large scores, but consistently give you 40-60 runs. Which would you say is more consistent? I ask because some others were discussing this on another thread. People were saying that Tendulkar was more consistent than Lara, but someone pointed out that 56 percent of Tendulkar's scores were below 40 runs, whilst 54 percent of Lara's scores were below 40 runs, so surely Lara was slightly more consistent? What's your take on this?
    [[
    Robert, I have done a lot of work on consistency of batsmen (and bowlers). But there seems to be no clear answer. No one knows whether a 100 & 0 is better than a 50 & 50. As far as consistency is concerned, the later batsman wins this hands down. But the first one might have won the match. But I attempted something like a consistency analysis on Bradman in an article titled "What made Bradman click?", which was published during 2012. Pl have a look at it. The link is given below.
    http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/621403.html
    There are other batting related articles which have also touched upon this topic.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • McWheels on April 28, 2014, 14:02 GMT

    Ananth, a nice comparison and pleasingly simple to understand. I think what Pawan suggests is a very insightful step forward, and might I offer an idea myself?

    Where the resource of balls remaining is known, the slowness of the scoring could be linked to the R/R required, either over the entire innings, or from the point of the slow batsman's dismissal. This way we could see whether the delta between their scoring and the target rate either lost them the game, or was acceptable as it was a small chase and circumspection was needed. For batting first, one could use the speed by which the opposition won as a measure of the required R/R, or perhaps the overall R/R of both inns? The final nuance might be to not treat the whole inns with the same R/R requirement. DuckWorth-Lewis expects R/R to increase the closer to inns end-point one gets, so perhaps a sliding scale of the impact of slow scoring would be appropriate?
    [[
    The problem in ODIs is that such information is not available for almost the entire first 1000 matches. In many cases we do not even know when a batsman was dismissed. Similarly ball-by-ball data is non-available.
    On the other hand we have ball-by-ball data as well as complete fall-of-wicket information available for all 400 T20-International matches. So anything and more is possible in T20-Is.
    But I have something very exciting on the anvil on T20-Intls Bowling analysis: Something almost never done anywhere.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 28, 2014, 9:58 GMT

    This article gives more weightage to balls consumed as a resource. What will make this analysis more interesting is extending this article to a comparison of balls consumed- score differential (with a low cut off, say max 15-20 runs variance). Perhaps, in that case may we be better able to judge the true extent of slowness of a one day innings
    [[
    Some interesting comments here.
    Your take is that, say a 10/68(Shastri) compared with a 60/60(Srikanth) is quite bad, worse than a 1/28(Hinds) compared to 38/29(Hooper). As per my current method the former will have a HTIdx of 6.8 and the later, a HTIdx of 36.69. What you are saying is that even if not worse, the difference between the two cases cannot be a factor of 5.5.
    I can see the thinking behind this. Does the Ball-Score differential take care of this. Shastri(58) & Srikanth(0) lead to a differential of 58, indicating that Shastri consumed 58 more balls. Hinds(27) and Hooper(9) will lead to Hinds having a differential of 18. This will certainly put Shastri's innings at much worse light than Hinds. Exactly what is required.
    Let me take the Jayasuriya-Dharmasena comparisons. Currently the ratio is 14.66. The BD of Dharmasena will be 22 and Jayasuriya will be 48. The differential will be 26. Places this in between the above two cases. Again perfect.
    Finally Gavaskar will be 138. Viswanath will be 22. The difference will be 116. Old is -21. The difference will be 159. Mind-boggling. But I understand that once I work on it, I can iron out the kinks.
    As I expected: one more sequel. But, Pawan, a great idea.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 28, 2014, 9:48 GMT

    My observation is that the low batting scores are in single digits. I would recommend fixing a cut off of say 15 runs for the lower innings cut off. in this case, the HSI would way beyond the 36 that tops the list. Moreover, my reckoning is that a slow 10-15 plus score (SR <30)has the same (or even greater impact) than a25 ball 2. The Shastri innigs mentioned in the comments is a case in point. 2) taking cue from one of the comments regarding over the match duel innings comparison, I looked at possibly the slowest ODI innigs ever- Gavaskar's 36 of 174 balls. For England Chris Old scored 51 of 30 balls . The HSI is around 8.22 with score difference of 15 runs. In the article, the innings score difference rarely touches below 30. 3) at other end of spectrum, I looked into the three fastest hundreds scorecard (SRS of 278, 255, and 216 respectively). in all three cases, one of the opposition batsmen has scored 50 plus runs at a strike rate of over 100. (contd)

  • SLSup on April 27, 2014, 16:32 GMT

    Anantha, you've done justice to the gist of what I was saying even with your editing. I guess the point can be made the kind of drastic pitch/grounds scenario I've exampled are in the minority. In both instances the changes in conditions during the innings was quite drastic - more than the 10% identified in the preamble.
    [[
    Yes, many of these changes are much more than 10%. Win the toss, win the game. The proliferation of day-night games in locations north of Nagpur, during winter, has made these games lotteries.
    Ananth
    ]]
    How true it is of Greenidge/Haynes rates and high strikes rates of today! I am also surprised that NZs Ewen Chatfield doesn't feature in bowlers column that doesn't take strike rate into consideration. He played 114 ODIs at 3.57 an over. He does appear in your link to HT_Index in a peer comparison on 0.4 balls bowled by Martin Crowe! I feel that's a peer comparison that's a "bit" off balance.
    [[
    Chatfield appears twice in the full table which has to be downloaded and viewed. His HTIndex was 5.25 times against Coney (10 overs) and 5.19 times against the occasional bowling of Martin Crowe (4 overs). A very accurate bowler indeed.
    Ananth
    ]]
    Looking him up for this post, I was shocked to read Chatfield actually DIED on the pitch - on his debut Test! Had no idea! Thought that amuzing in the context of your article on peer comparisons!

  • drinks.break on April 26, 2014, 12:59 GMT

    Another reason why the bowling indexes are lower & with a narrower range is because of the relative achievability or otherwise of the "perfect" innings/innspell.

    Getting extremely close to the perfect bowling accuracy of 0 runs conceded is much more than just a theoretical possibility - as the Walsh and Simmons spells demonstrate. However, who has ever got anywhere near a batting SR of 600 for an innings of 20+ balls faced?
    [[
    Yes, a very good point. Narins has the highest strike rate with a minimum of 6 balls faced. He scored 24 in 6 (400). At 20 balls, the highest is McCullum's once-in-lifetime innings of 80 in 28: still less than 300. Possibly more relevant is the innings I have referred to in the article. Afridi's 55 in 18: a s/r of 305.
    Your bowling comments seem to be valid in T20s also: remember the spells of Mendis and Herath.
    Ananth
    ]]

    In other words, the close proximity of the "perfection ceiling" to the best bowling analyses squeezes all the innspells closer to each other. However, with batsmen, the opposite picture has the effect of spreading the data out.
    [[
    David, thanks for a very nice comment.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • ThinkingCricket on April 26, 2014, 7:52 GMT

    One interesting fact is that almost all the innings on your list are from long ago. This is possibly indication of the fact that such selfish batting is no longer considered acceptable in this day and age, and that batsmen who play like this will nowadays find themselves being dropped.
    [[
    Also an indication of the changing game and the overall lowering of scoring rates. Attacking batsmen like Greenidge and Haynes had scoring rates of 65. Today Amla has a scoring rate of 90, higher than all but 10 batsman .
    Ananth
    ]]

  • drummoni on May 8, 2014, 13:43 GMT

    Hi Ananth,

    Would it be possible to analyse the batting criteria if some sort of run criteria was placed upon it - for example both batsmen reached 5 or 10 runs. It struck me that a lot of the list contained innings of 0 or 1 off 20 - 30 balls.

    Ian
    [[
    Yes, Ian, there is already a comment or two on these lines. If you see Pawan's comments he has suggested a way of using the ball difference as a comparison measure. Pl read my reply also.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • Kunal.thedevil on May 5, 2014, 19:35 GMT

    Sir, I have been reading and enjoying your articles for quite some time now. Thanks a lot! I particularly remember watching the ODI 1524 on DD. It was a real struggle for Sachin Tendulkar that day. Just a few days earlier, in ODI 1523 he had hit 186 not out and Rahul Dravid had hit 153 and it was an incredible partnership. I was quite young at that time and remember getting very frustrated seeing Sachin struggling, especially since the 186 was realy fresh in my mind. Thanks a lot for reviving the memories. This could even be 1 more idea for a small article (maybe).

  • AnanthNarayanan on May 7, 2014, 11:34 GMT

    [[
    Robert, Your comment made me think that I have not undertaken a proper article dedicated to Batsmen Consistency. I have covered that subject only peripherally. I have done couple of days work now and can do a rather interesting post on that fascinating subject. Will schedule it after I finish my current brace of T20 articles, due this Saturday and next Saturday. Many thanks for this.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on May 5, 2014, 15:04 GMT

    Mr Narayanan, have you ever considered some kind of "consistency algorithm"? For example, a batsman can have a good average, but his innings might alternate between huge knocks and tiny ones. Whereas another batsman might not give large scores, but consistently give you 40-60 runs. Which would you say is more consistent? I ask because some others were discussing this on another thread. People were saying that Tendulkar was more consistent than Lara, but someone pointed out that 56 percent of Tendulkar's scores were below 40 runs, whilst 54 percent of Lara's scores were below 40 runs, so surely Lara was slightly more consistent? What's your take on this?
    [[
    Robert, I have done a lot of work on consistency of batsmen (and bowlers). But there seems to be no clear answer. No one knows whether a 100 & 0 is better than a 50 & 50. As far as consistency is concerned, the later batsman wins this hands down. But the first one might have won the match. But I attempted something like a consistency analysis on Bradman in an article titled "What made Bradman click?", which was published during 2012. Pl have a look at it. The link is given below.
    http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/621403.html
    There are other batting related articles which have also touched upon this topic.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • McWheels on April 28, 2014, 14:02 GMT

    Ananth, a nice comparison and pleasingly simple to understand. I think what Pawan suggests is a very insightful step forward, and might I offer an idea myself?

    Where the resource of balls remaining is known, the slowness of the scoring could be linked to the R/R required, either over the entire innings, or from the point of the slow batsman's dismissal. This way we could see whether the delta between their scoring and the target rate either lost them the game, or was acceptable as it was a small chase and circumspection was needed. For batting first, one could use the speed by which the opposition won as a measure of the required R/R, or perhaps the overall R/R of both inns? The final nuance might be to not treat the whole inns with the same R/R requirement. DuckWorth-Lewis expects R/R to increase the closer to inns end-point one gets, so perhaps a sliding scale of the impact of slow scoring would be appropriate?
    [[
    The problem in ODIs is that such information is not available for almost the entire first 1000 matches. In many cases we do not even know when a batsman was dismissed. Similarly ball-by-ball data is non-available.
    On the other hand we have ball-by-ball data as well as complete fall-of-wicket information available for all 400 T20-International matches. So anything and more is possible in T20-Is.
    But I have something very exciting on the anvil on T20-Intls Bowling analysis: Something almost never done anywhere.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 28, 2014, 9:58 GMT

    This article gives more weightage to balls consumed as a resource. What will make this analysis more interesting is extending this article to a comparison of balls consumed- score differential (with a low cut off, say max 15-20 runs variance). Perhaps, in that case may we be better able to judge the true extent of slowness of a one day innings
    [[
    Some interesting comments here.
    Your take is that, say a 10/68(Shastri) compared with a 60/60(Srikanth) is quite bad, worse than a 1/28(Hinds) compared to 38/29(Hooper). As per my current method the former will have a HTIdx of 6.8 and the later, a HTIdx of 36.69. What you are saying is that even if not worse, the difference between the two cases cannot be a factor of 5.5.
    I can see the thinking behind this. Does the Ball-Score differential take care of this. Shastri(58) & Srikanth(0) lead to a differential of 58, indicating that Shastri consumed 58 more balls. Hinds(27) and Hooper(9) will lead to Hinds having a differential of 18. This will certainly put Shastri's innings at much worse light than Hinds. Exactly what is required.
    Let me take the Jayasuriya-Dharmasena comparisons. Currently the ratio is 14.66. The BD of Dharmasena will be 22 and Jayasuriya will be 48. The differential will be 26. Places this in between the above two cases. Again perfect.
    Finally Gavaskar will be 138. Viswanath will be 22. The difference will be 116. Old is -21. The difference will be 159. Mind-boggling. But I understand that once I work on it, I can iron out the kinks.
    As I expected: one more sequel. But, Pawan, a great idea.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 28, 2014, 9:48 GMT

    My observation is that the low batting scores are in single digits. I would recommend fixing a cut off of say 15 runs for the lower innings cut off. in this case, the HSI would way beyond the 36 that tops the list. Moreover, my reckoning is that a slow 10-15 plus score (SR <30)has the same (or even greater impact) than a25 ball 2. The Shastri innigs mentioned in the comments is a case in point. 2) taking cue from one of the comments regarding over the match duel innings comparison, I looked at possibly the slowest ODI innigs ever- Gavaskar's 36 of 174 balls. For England Chris Old scored 51 of 30 balls . The HSI is around 8.22 with score difference of 15 runs. In the article, the innings score difference rarely touches below 30. 3) at other end of spectrum, I looked into the three fastest hundreds scorecard (SRS of 278, 255, and 216 respectively). in all three cases, one of the opposition batsmen has scored 50 plus runs at a strike rate of over 100. (contd)

  • SLSup on April 27, 2014, 16:32 GMT

    Anantha, you've done justice to the gist of what I was saying even with your editing. I guess the point can be made the kind of drastic pitch/grounds scenario I've exampled are in the minority. In both instances the changes in conditions during the innings was quite drastic - more than the 10% identified in the preamble.
    [[
    Yes, many of these changes are much more than 10%. Win the toss, win the game. The proliferation of day-night games in locations north of Nagpur, during winter, has made these games lotteries.
    Ananth
    ]]
    How true it is of Greenidge/Haynes rates and high strikes rates of today! I am also surprised that NZs Ewen Chatfield doesn't feature in bowlers column that doesn't take strike rate into consideration. He played 114 ODIs at 3.57 an over. He does appear in your link to HT_Index in a peer comparison on 0.4 balls bowled by Martin Crowe! I feel that's a peer comparison that's a "bit" off balance.
    [[
    Chatfield appears twice in the full table which has to be downloaded and viewed. His HTIndex was 5.25 times against Coney (10 overs) and 5.19 times against the occasional bowling of Martin Crowe (4 overs). A very accurate bowler indeed.
    Ananth
    ]]
    Looking him up for this post, I was shocked to read Chatfield actually DIED on the pitch - on his debut Test! Had no idea! Thought that amuzing in the context of your article on peer comparisons!

  • drinks.break on April 26, 2014, 12:59 GMT

    Another reason why the bowling indexes are lower & with a narrower range is because of the relative achievability or otherwise of the "perfect" innings/innspell.

    Getting extremely close to the perfect bowling accuracy of 0 runs conceded is much more than just a theoretical possibility - as the Walsh and Simmons spells demonstrate. However, who has ever got anywhere near a batting SR of 600 for an innings of 20+ balls faced?
    [[
    Yes, a very good point. Narins has the highest strike rate with a minimum of 6 balls faced. He scored 24 in 6 (400). At 20 balls, the highest is McCullum's once-in-lifetime innings of 80 in 28: still less than 300. Possibly more relevant is the innings I have referred to in the article. Afridi's 55 in 18: a s/r of 305.
    Your bowling comments seem to be valid in T20s also: remember the spells of Mendis and Herath.
    Ananth
    ]]

    In other words, the close proximity of the "perfection ceiling" to the best bowling analyses squeezes all the innspells closer to each other. However, with batsmen, the opposite picture has the effect of spreading the data out.
    [[
    David, thanks for a very nice comment.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • ThinkingCricket on April 26, 2014, 7:52 GMT

    One interesting fact is that almost all the innings on your list are from long ago. This is possibly indication of the fact that such selfish batting is no longer considered acceptable in this day and age, and that batsmen who play like this will nowadays find themselves being dropped.
    [[
    Also an indication of the changing game and the overall lowering of scoring rates. Attacking batsmen like Greenidge and Haynes had scoring rates of 65. Today Amla has a scoring rate of 90, higher than all but 10 batsman .
    Ananth
    ]]

  • drummoni on May 8, 2014, 13:43 GMT

    Hi Ananth,

    Would it be possible to analyse the batting criteria if some sort of run criteria was placed upon it - for example both batsmen reached 5 or 10 runs. It struck me that a lot of the list contained innings of 0 or 1 off 20 - 30 balls.

    Ian
    [[
    Yes, Ian, there is already a comment or two on these lines. If you see Pawan's comments he has suggested a way of using the ball difference as a comparison measure. Pl read my reply also.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • Kunal.thedevil on May 5, 2014, 19:35 GMT

    Sir, I have been reading and enjoying your articles for quite some time now. Thanks a lot! I particularly remember watching the ODI 1524 on DD. It was a real struggle for Sachin Tendulkar that day. Just a few days earlier, in ODI 1523 he had hit 186 not out and Rahul Dravid had hit 153 and it was an incredible partnership. I was quite young at that time and remember getting very frustrated seeing Sachin struggling, especially since the 186 was realy fresh in my mind. Thanks a lot for reviving the memories. This could even be 1 more idea for a small article (maybe).

  • on April 29, 2014, 4:11 GMT

    The match mentioned here was not in World Cup but in World Series Cup, the triangular in Australia organised each year. "The next entry is, arguably, the most incredible one. During the 1992 World Cup, Phil Simmons bowled, what I consider one of the most devastating spells ever, against Pakistan. He finished with the unbelievable figures of 10-8-3-4. All four were top-order dismissals. This is the only instance of eight maiden overs in a ten-over spell."
    [[
    Navin, already commented and corrected.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • piyush144 on April 28, 2014, 9:14 GMT

    A simple and good article. Hence the request for adding complexity ..... ;) The batting list is pretty much dominated by the worse partner scoring 0 or 1 run after facing more than 20 balls. To me this is not a very interesting list. However in this list i would like to see this match http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66029.html Jayasurya scores fastest 50 and none of his team mates come close. I know Ananth that you will agree with me that this is a perfect example of chalk and cheese! Perhaps you have done this kind of article before but i have not read it?
    [[
    The match you are referring to is there even in the downloadable table. Match # 1093. Jayasuriya scored 14.6 times faster than Dharmasena.
    However I do not understand what exactly you want. "none of his team mates come close" is quite vague and in a sense that is what I have done. If you are specific, it will help.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 28, 2014, 5:07 GMT

    Sir, I remember a famous match in Perth Australia where Ravi Shastri made 68 ball 10. And the match was famous because India still won. Srikanth made a run a ball 60 and hence the index is only 6.8 and not good enough for this list :)
    [[
    Vivek, that was match # 693. Shastri, as you have mentioned, scored 10 in 68. Shrikanth scored 60 in 60. So the ratio is 6.8. However even the downloadable file has 10.0 as the cut-off. Maybe I would lower the cut-off for Batting to 5.0 and Bowling to 4.0 and upload the file. You could then download the file which will have many more entries.
    Ananth
    ]]
    ALso did you think of this scenario where the highest scorer of the match being the slowest scorer as well ? For eg , Ganguly s innings in 2007 WC against Bangladesh and his 160 ball 130 against Sri Lanka?
    [[
    But this could happen often. In olden days it was not uncommon for an opener to anchor an innings of 250 with a 150 ball 100.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • ilovetests on April 27, 2014, 3:55 GMT

    I don't know if this will make your list when/if you do a similar analysis for test matches, but when (the same innings) Nathan Astle got the fastest ever 200, Matt Horne scored 4 off 53.

    Astle 222 off 153 SR 132.14 Horne 4 off 53 SR 7.54

    http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63981.html
    [[
    Nothing wrong in attempting that route. Yours could be the starting point. Problem is that only around 1350 Tests have the required data.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • Anand_S on April 27, 2014, 3:30 GMT

    Ananth: Is it possible to extend this for the entire match including both innings? I mean there will be several more innings. I know this may be a little unfair in that the batsmen had to face different bowling attacks, but still given that it is the same day on the same pitch it shows a contrast in the kind of days two different people in the same match on the same day !!
    [[
    Anand, it is possible but probably not fair. But I will do some test runs. After I finish the T20 work I will look it up.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • Anand_S on April 27, 2014, 3:20 GMT

    Ananth:.

    To the best of my knowledge, Simmons magical 10-8-3-4 came in a triangular series iinvolving Aus, Pak and WI (not in the 1992 world cup). The series was played in 1992-93 though. This was a tournament when Pak were bowled out below 100 twice by WIN and a few months later in a triangular invlving South Africa they were blow out for 43 !!!

  • SLSup on April 26, 2014, 18:21 GMT

    Interesting, especially in light of the relativity applied to the analysis as it relates to outcome of the game. The only spoler perhaps are situations where CONDITIONS can determine the outcome of a game DRASTICALLY. Example: IND vs SL WC semi-final in 1996 and AUS vs SL WC final in 1996. SL won both due to pitch (semi's) and ground/dew (final).

    1996 WC was known for AUS ability to apply pressure after batting first and SL ability to chase ANY total. Yet, the finals proved bit much for AUS due to dew at Gaddaffi's in its first ever D/N ODI. Subsequent tri-nation contest showed you cannot win batting first in a D/N at Gaddaffi Staduim. As for Calcutta semi's, the ptich was designed to favour the second bowling team, assumed to be India. Only, Azharuddin won the toss and put SL in. I will find it hard to accept even a great chalk to cheese analysis as this applied to player value to games where the outcome is a forgone conclusion based on ptich/ground factors.
    [[
    Minor editing done. I have mentioned in the article all these varying pitch conditions.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 26, 2014, 13:44 GMT

    Nice, simple analysis. I noticed one error though - the West Indies Pakistan game involving Phil Simmons was not at the world cup, but later in the year. I thought to check only because I remember Pakistan's weird score in the world cup (220/2) - Simmons could not possibly have taken 4 wickets!
    [[
    Lynx-eyed Ganesh! many thanks. We live and learn. I have always been under the impression that this spell was in the WC. As you say, Pakistan scored 220 for 2 and still lost. Rameez crawled to 103 in 158 and Lara retired hurt for a quick 88 and West Indies won by 10 wickets. Once again, many thanks.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • its.rachit on April 26, 2014, 10:33 GMT

    oops ... sorry ... i did not look at the table but opened the match scorecard and noticed .... apologies ....
    [[
    No need to apologize at all. Happens to all of us.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • its.rachit on April 26, 2014, 9:56 GMT

    Niec analysis Ananth ... however you missed a very interesting point ... in the batting analysis, the India BD match where Sachin outscored Dravid by 20+ factor, same thing happened for the BD team as well ...Athar ali khan made 0 of 22 and Hasibul Hussain made 21 of 20 ... 105 strike rate versus 5 strike rate ... infact 5 batsmen from BD played more than 20 balls but no one had a strike rate of ore than 50 ...
    [[
    No, Rachit. I have not missed it. Tendulkar-Dravid entry is 11th and Athar-Hasibul entry is 9th, two places above. It is there in the featured table. The point is that I did not elaborate on many B-team contrasts.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • its.rachit on April 26, 2014, 9:56 GMT

    Niec analysis Ananth ... however you missed a very interesting point ... in the batting analysis, the India BD match where Sachin outscored Dravid by 20+ factor, same thing happened for the BD team as well ...Athar ali khan made 0 of 22 and Hasibul Hussain made 21 of 20 ... 105 strike rate versus 5 strike rate ... infact 5 batsmen from BD played more than 20 balls but no one had a strike rate of ore than 50 ...
    [[
    No, Rachit. I have not missed it. Tendulkar-Dravid entry is 11th and Athar-Hasibul entry is 9th, two places above. It is there in the featured table. The point is that I did not elaborate on many B-team contrasts.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • its.rachit on April 26, 2014, 10:33 GMT

    oops ... sorry ... i did not look at the table but opened the match scorecard and noticed .... apologies ....
    [[
    No need to apologize at all. Happens to all of us.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 26, 2014, 13:44 GMT

    Nice, simple analysis. I noticed one error though - the West Indies Pakistan game involving Phil Simmons was not at the world cup, but later in the year. I thought to check only because I remember Pakistan's weird score in the world cup (220/2) - Simmons could not possibly have taken 4 wickets!
    [[
    Lynx-eyed Ganesh! many thanks. We live and learn. I have always been under the impression that this spell was in the WC. As you say, Pakistan scored 220 for 2 and still lost. Rameez crawled to 103 in 158 and Lara retired hurt for a quick 88 and West Indies won by 10 wickets. Once again, many thanks.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • SLSup on April 26, 2014, 18:21 GMT

    Interesting, especially in light of the relativity applied to the analysis as it relates to outcome of the game. The only spoler perhaps are situations where CONDITIONS can determine the outcome of a game DRASTICALLY. Example: IND vs SL WC semi-final in 1996 and AUS vs SL WC final in 1996. SL won both due to pitch (semi's) and ground/dew (final).

    1996 WC was known for AUS ability to apply pressure after batting first and SL ability to chase ANY total. Yet, the finals proved bit much for AUS due to dew at Gaddaffi's in its first ever D/N ODI. Subsequent tri-nation contest showed you cannot win batting first in a D/N at Gaddaffi Staduim. As for Calcutta semi's, the ptich was designed to favour the second bowling team, assumed to be India. Only, Azharuddin won the toss and put SL in. I will find it hard to accept even a great chalk to cheese analysis as this applied to player value to games where the outcome is a forgone conclusion based on ptich/ground factors.
    [[
    Minor editing done. I have mentioned in the article all these varying pitch conditions.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • Anand_S on April 27, 2014, 3:20 GMT

    Ananth:.

    To the best of my knowledge, Simmons magical 10-8-3-4 came in a triangular series iinvolving Aus, Pak and WI (not in the 1992 world cup). The series was played in 1992-93 though. This was a tournament when Pak were bowled out below 100 twice by WIN and a few months later in a triangular invlving South Africa they were blow out for 43 !!!

  • Anand_S on April 27, 2014, 3:30 GMT

    Ananth: Is it possible to extend this for the entire match including both innings? I mean there will be several more innings. I know this may be a little unfair in that the batsmen had to face different bowling attacks, but still given that it is the same day on the same pitch it shows a contrast in the kind of days two different people in the same match on the same day !!
    [[
    Anand, it is possible but probably not fair. But I will do some test runs. After I finish the T20 work I will look it up.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • ilovetests on April 27, 2014, 3:55 GMT

    I don't know if this will make your list when/if you do a similar analysis for test matches, but when (the same innings) Nathan Astle got the fastest ever 200, Matt Horne scored 4 off 53.

    Astle 222 off 153 SR 132.14 Horne 4 off 53 SR 7.54

    http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63981.html
    [[
    Nothing wrong in attempting that route. Yours could be the starting point. Problem is that only around 1350 Tests have the required data.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 28, 2014, 5:07 GMT

    Sir, I remember a famous match in Perth Australia where Ravi Shastri made 68 ball 10. And the match was famous because India still won. Srikanth made a run a ball 60 and hence the index is only 6.8 and not good enough for this list :)
    [[
    Vivek, that was match # 693. Shastri, as you have mentioned, scored 10 in 68. Shrikanth scored 60 in 60. So the ratio is 6.8. However even the downloadable file has 10.0 as the cut-off. Maybe I would lower the cut-off for Batting to 5.0 and Bowling to 4.0 and upload the file. You could then download the file which will have many more entries.
    Ananth
    ]]
    ALso did you think of this scenario where the highest scorer of the match being the slowest scorer as well ? For eg , Ganguly s innings in 2007 WC against Bangladesh and his 160 ball 130 against Sri Lanka?
    [[
    But this could happen often. In olden days it was not uncommon for an opener to anchor an innings of 250 with a 150 ball 100.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • piyush144 on April 28, 2014, 9:14 GMT

    A simple and good article. Hence the request for adding complexity ..... ;) The batting list is pretty much dominated by the worse partner scoring 0 or 1 run after facing more than 20 balls. To me this is not a very interesting list. However in this list i would like to see this match http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/66029.html Jayasurya scores fastest 50 and none of his team mates come close. I know Ananth that you will agree with me that this is a perfect example of chalk and cheese! Perhaps you have done this kind of article before but i have not read it?
    [[
    The match you are referring to is there even in the downloadable table. Match # 1093. Jayasuriya scored 14.6 times faster than Dharmasena.
    However I do not understand what exactly you want. "none of his team mates come close" is quite vague and in a sense that is what I have done. If you are specific, it will help.
    Ananth
    ]]

  • on April 29, 2014, 4:11 GMT

    The match mentioned here was not in World Cup but in World Series Cup, the triangular in Australia organised each year. "The next entry is, arguably, the most incredible one. During the 1992 World Cup, Phil Simmons bowled, what I consider one of the most devastating spells ever, against Pakistan. He finished with the unbelievable figures of 10-8-3-4. All four were top-order dismissals. This is the only instance of eight maiden overs in a ten-over spell."
    [[
    Navin, already commented and corrected.
    Ananth
    ]]