ICC World Twenty20 2010

Perfect balance was the key for England

A statistical review of the ICC World Twenty20 2010

Madhusudhan Ramakrishnan

May 17, 2010

Comments: 11 | Text size: A | A

After the first couple of matches in their campaign, it didn't look like England would go much further in the World Cup. They were unlucky to lose to West Indies, and then struggled a bit in getting past Ireland. Once into the Super Eights, though, all aspects of their game clicked superbly, especially in the final where they overwhelmed Australia, who had until then looked like the best team in the tournament. England's openers and Pietersen were fantastic in the big games and the bowling attack didn't have a weak link. The table below shows how England's performance improved from the early stages to the second half of the tournament.

England's batting and bowling performance during Group stage and after Group stages
  Matches played Runs Scored Run rate Batting Average Wickets taken Economy rate Bowling Average
During Group stage 2 311 7.77 23.92 3 7.92 24.66
After Group stage 5 752 8.20 31.33 37 7.07 18.91

The two most impressive aspects of their game were their top-order batting and the varied bowling attack. England's opening batsman Craig Kieswetter and their No.3 Kevin Pietersen were prolific throughout. England's superiority in this regard was a major factor in their victory. Australia had a patchy tournament with some good starts, but the openers missed out in the big games. The absence of Indian and South African batsmen in the list shows how poor the top orders of these two teams were in the big games.

Batting performance of openers and number 3 batsmen in the tournament after Group stages
Batsman Innings Runs scored Balls faced Scoring rate Average
Kevin Pietersen 4 215 142 9.08 107.50
Craig Kieswetter 5 183 159 6.90 36.60
Salman Butt 4 135 114 7.10 45.00
Kumar Sangakkara 4 132 104 7.61 33.00
Mahela Jayawardene 4 121 74 9.81 40.33
David Warner 5 108 72 9.00 27.00
Chris Gayle 3 107 72 8.91 35.66

Unlike most teams, England did not have any weak link in the bowling attack. The fifth bowler of most teams went for plenty, and more often than not, this proved to be crucial in the overall context of the match. Shane Watson and Mohammad Hafeez proved to be a major liabilities in their team's otherwise strong bowling attack. Ravindra Jadeja had a forgettable tournament and his bowling figures were ruined in the game against Australia. Michael Yardy, on the other hand, had a very good tournament even though he went for plenty in the final.

Performance of the fifth bowler for various teams in the tournament (minimum qualification 36 balls bowled)
Bowler Team Runs conceded Balls bowled Economy rate Wickets taken Average
Michael Yardy England 136 120 6.80 4 34.00
Mohammad Hafeez Pakistan 123 84 8.78 2 61.50
Ravindra Jadeja India 117 72 9.75 2 58.50
Shane Watson Australia 163 96 10.18 2 81.50
Kieron Pollard West Indies 77 42 11.00 1 77.00

Apart from England's strong performances, another pleasant surprise was the display of the fast bowlers throughout these two weeks. Before the tournament began, it was anticipated that they would struggle on the slower tracks, but the pitch, especially in Barbados, offered plenty of pace and bounce, and the fast men did pretty well in other venues as well.

Compared to the last two editions this tournament was a better one for fast bowlers. Spinners enjoyed a successful time, but not as much as in the previous tournament. Saeed Ajmal and Steven Smith did well, while Graeme Swann bowled with excellent control and had an economy rate of less than seven runs per over.

Performance of fast bowlers and spinners in ICC World T20 2010
Bowler type Runs Conceded Balls Bowled Wickets taken Average Economy rate
Pace 4251 3390 202 21.04 7.52
Spin 2841 2368 110 25.82 7.19

Performance of fast bowlers and spinners in ICC World T20 2009
Bowler type Runs Conceded Balls Bowled Wickets taken Average Economy rate
Pace 4683 3528 184 25.45 7.96
Spin 2541 2302 125 20.32 6.62

Performance of fast bowlers and spinners in ICC World T20 2007
Bowler type Runs Conceded Balls Bowled Wickets taken Average Economy rate
Pace 5533 4261 221 25.03 7.79
Spin 1877 1442 79 23.75 7.80

The table below summarises the overall batting performance of teams across the three World Cups. The batting average has gone down a touch and the scoring rate also has fallen slightly over the three tournaments. More helpful bowling tracks and bigger grounds have contributed to better bowling figures in the 2010 edition.

Overall batting performance in the three T20 World Cup tournaments
Tournament year Runs scored Balls faced Run rate Wickets lost Average
2007 7881 6170 7.66 348 22.64
2009 7625 6208 7.36 337 22.62
2010 7413 6152 7.22 346 21.42

The batting performances during the Powerplay overs in the three editions of the T20 World Cup is summarised below. The 2010 edition has seen a drastic fall in scoring rate and the number of wickets falling in the first six overs has also increased.

Batting performance in Powerplay overs across the three World Cups
Tournament year Runs scored Balls faced Run rate Wickets lost Average
2007 2326 1985 7.03 86 27.04
2009 2514 2027 7.44 83 30.28
2010 2167 2029 6.40 96 22.57

In the last six overs the run rates and batting averages were pretty similar to the last two editions. Australia were the exceptional team during this period, scoring at the rate of 11.13 per over in the final six overs.

Batting performance in the last six overs across the three World Cups
Tournament year Runs scored Balls faced Run rate Wickets lost Average
2007 2425 1666 8.73 152 15.95
2009 2329 1651 8.46 143 16.28
2010 2394 1636 8.77 145 16.51

Of the three grounds in which the tournament was played, St Lucia produced the highest run rate, of 9.03 runs per over. The Kensington Oval in Barbados provided excellent support to fast bowlers, but also assisted batsmen who were willing to play the horizontal-bat shots. The matches in Guyana were mostly rain affected and the pitch there was not quite conducive for run scoring.

Statistics for individual grounds
Ground Runs Balls Run rate Wickets Average
Kensington Oval, Barbados 1064 734 8.69 58 18.34
Beausejour Cricket Ground, St Lucia 989 657 9.03 63 15.69
Providence Stadium, Guyana 341 245 8.35 24 14.20

Despite both the semi-finals and the final being won by the team chasing, batting first was more productive overall in the 2010 tournament. Most of the games in the group stages and the Super Eights were won by the team batting first. Both India and South Africa lost the two games when they chased in the Super Eight stages and were eliminated from the tournament.

Batting first and chasing in the ICC T20 World Cup 2010
Innings Runs Balls Run rate Wickets Average
1st 4150 3322 7.49 177 23.44
2nd 3263 2830 6.91 169 19.30

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by kingkarthik on (May 19, 2010, 1:13 GMT)

Sri Lankan fans, i think the point of the entire discussion was to show how the cream of the crop performed once the straglers and non test playing nations were out of the tournament. If the numbers relating to Zim, Bang, Ireland and Afghan were included, the statistics will be skewed. So please don't go with your usual conspiracy theory of people wanting to discredit Sri Lanka. Mahela did not do much against Australia and England because they had superior bowling attacks.

Posted by   on (May 18, 2010, 15:20 GMT)

Stats has been manipulated in the way the writer wanted to hide the fact of Mahelas Superior batting display.

Posted by   on (May 18, 2010, 10:39 GMT)

This stats lacks objectivity. This does not include the 181 scored by Mahela Jayawardena, at a far superior rate.

Posted by indianzen on (May 18, 2010, 9:06 GMT)

It was sad to see PAK loosing it, becoz after India, I support our brother pakistanees. but i am sure that both india and pak will bounce back. but soddozai, is another Ramiz Raza. Accpet criticm only they can bring you up mate...

Posted by Navin84 on (May 18, 2010, 7:10 GMT)

Sanjeewa Alphonsus: You are mis-understanding the statement, it says "AFTER GROUP STATE" it means not including the 2 group state matches where Mahela scored 181 runs. However, the amount of innings by each bastmen which is mentioned above is more than one. Mr. Madhusudhan Ramakrishnan please re-check the stats properly. How could Kieswetter & Warner played six innings after the group state, where the 2nd state is only 3 games with the semi and final make a total of 5. Pietersen missed a game, Gayle (WI) did not play in the semis, Salman Butt did not play in the final so is Sanga so how could they played 5 innings. Please re-check your stats properly.

Posted by AshesMonkey on (May 18, 2010, 6:15 GMT)

@Sanjeewa - think the stats are wrong too. MJ total does not include the first 2 games of the group stage so his total excludes his 100 v Zimbabwe & 81 v New Zealand. Total runs scored in tournament is 302 less 181 = 121

Posted by   on (May 18, 2010, 4:46 GMT)

These stats alone are evidence of Hafeez being a liability both in bowling and batting.

Posted by   on (May 18, 2010, 3:34 GMT)

Batting performance of openers and number 3 batsmen in the tournament after the Group stage is completely wrong. mahela's first two innings were a 80 odd and 100. how could the total be 135 if he scored 180 odd in the first two games

Posted by _NEUTRAL_Fan_ on (May 18, 2010, 3:00 GMT)

"More helpful bowling tracks and bigger grounds have contributed to better bowling figures in the 2010 edition"...and isn't the game so much better off for this. Well done curators, more of the same please.

Posted by patlola on (May 18, 2010, 0:19 GMT)

Surprised to see Jadeja here , among the 5th bowlers stats.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
ESPNcricinfo staffClose
Related Links
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days