S RajeshRSS FeedFeeds

World Twenty20 1012, stats review

When dot balls didn't matter

West Indies had a higher dot-ball percentage than any of the other sides who reached the Super Eights. But they had the power-hitters to compensate for that

S Rajesh

October 9, 2012

Comments: 9 | Text size: A | A

Marlon Samuels smashed 78 off 56 balls, Sri Lanka v West Indies, final, World Twenty20, Colombo, October 7, 2012
The victory margin in the final was 36 runs, which is exactly the number of extra runs West Indies scored in sixes compared to Sri Lanka © Associated Press
Enlarge

West Indies weren't the most consistent team in the tournament, but they won the 2012 World Twenty20 because they raised their game when it mattered the most, and played the knockout stages better than anyone else. However, not many will grudge them their success because of the way they played their cricket. As Sambit Bal wrote, they're the second-favourite team for most non-West Indians - and the way they played the tournament, and celebrated their victory, was nothing if not hugely entertaining.

The presence of so many power-hitters in West Indies' batting line-up gave them a distinct advantage, and they played to that strength throughout. Their run rate of 8.20 per over was the best among all teams, with Australia and New Zealand being the only other sides to score at more than eight per over. However, while New Zealand and Australia achieved those run rates by reducing their dot-ball percentages - New Zealand's percentage of 35.33 was the lowest of all sides - West Indies went completely the other way: their dot-ball percentage of 43.24 was highest among the teams which made it to the Super Eights, and yet their run rate was also the highest. That's because of the ability of several of their batsmen to hit the ball long and hard so often that they didn't to bother about such trivialities as taking singles and twos.

That attitude was reflected in the final as well, as West Indies played out 51 dot balls to Sri Lanka's 50. Yet West Indies won the match handily, and the winning margin of 36 runs was exactly the number of extra runs West Indies scored in sixes: they struck 7, to Sri Lanka's 1.

Overall, West Indies averaged 5.81 balls per boundary (a four or a six), which was marginally better than the next best, but in terms of sixes the difference was much more. West Indies' 49 sixes for the tournament was 18 better than the second-best - Australia's 31. In terms of balls per six, West Indies averaged 14.69, while Australia were next at 18.16. Among the teams that struggled to hit sixes were Sri Lanka and India: Sri Lanka averaged 40.61 balls per six, while India's average was 48.67 (12 sixes in 584 balls).

As a bowling unit, Sri Lanka and South Africa were the best, with economy rates of 7.15. South Africa were the most frugal in conceding boundaries, giving away a four or a six every 8.19 balls. Their average for conceding a six was 39.08 balls, while Pakistan's was 44.06.

For a team which was bounced out before the semi-finals, India's numbers were pretty impressive too: their batting average was the second-best, their bowling average the best, and their dot-ball percentage with the ball the highest.

Boundaries and dot balls for each team
Team 4s/ 6s scored Balls per boundary 4s/ 6s conceded Balls per boundary Dot-ball %-bat Dot-ball %-bowl
West Indies 75/ 49 5.81 74/ 26 7.18 43.24 39.55
Sri Lanka 89/ 18 6.83 66/ 28 7.96 38.02 44.04
Australia 63/ 31 5.99 82/ 34 6.22 39.04 40.14
Pakistan 81/ 24 6.76 87/ 16 6.84 41.81 38.60
India 74/ 12 6.79 50/ 24 7.22 35.40 46.14
South Africa 48/ 14 7.73 49/ 13 8.19 35.85 44.47
England 61/ 28 6.35 68/ 23 6.43 40.46 44.86
New Zealand 65/ 26 6.62 64/ 27 6.51 35.33 37.29

How each team fared in World Twenty20 2012
Team Matches Won/lost Bat ave/ Run rate Bowl ave/ Econ rate Ave diff Run rate diff
West Indies 7 4/ 2 25.78/ 8.20 22.92/ 7.52 2.86 0.68
Sri Lanka 7 5/ 2 26.13/ 7.77 18.56/ 7.15 7.57 0.62
Australia 6 4/ 2 31.70/ 8.13 25.78/ 7.95 5.92 0.18
Pakistan 6 4/ 2 22.84/ 7.55 25.20/ 7.32 -2.36 0.23
India 5 4/ 1 31.25/ 7.73 15.51/ 7.18 15.74 0.55
South Africa 5 2/ 3 24.08/ 7.57 19.79/ 7.15 4.29 0.42
England 5 2/ 3 23.09/ 7.90 24.06/ 7.66 -0.97 0.24
New Zealand 5 1/ 4 25.50/ 8.16 22.67/ 7.84 2.83 0.32

The batting stars
The two batsmen who shone consistently for West Indies were Chris Gayle and Marlon Samuels. Both finished among the top four run-getters, at strike rates of more than 130, and were also among the top three six hitters.

As a batting unit, West Indies' strength was clearly in the middle and final overs. In the Powerplay, they only averaged 6.66 runs per overs. In the middle overs (6 to 15), they averaged 8.20 runs per over - next only to Australia's 8.75 - and averaged 44.30 runs per wicket. The high average meant they didn't lose too many wickets during these overs, which meant they had wickets in hand during the last five. Their run rate during this stage was 10.06 runs per over. Both Gayle and Samuels had relatively high dot-ball percentages, but they made up for that by getting plenty of runs in boundaries - for Gayle, the percentage of runs scored in fours and sixes was 77.48.

Shane Watson was the leading run-scorer of the tournament, and apart from his boundary-hitting prowess, his low dot-ball percentage was also impressive.

How the top 8 run-scorers made their runs
Batsman Runs Balls Average Strike rate 4s/ 6s Boundary% Dot-ball%
Shane Watson 249 166 49.80 150.00 19/ 15 66.67 35.54
Mahela Jayawardene 243 209 40.50 116.26 29/ 5 60.08 45.45
Marlon Samuels 230 173 38.33 132.94 14/ 15 63.48 40.46
Chris Gayle 222 148 44.40 150.00 19/ 16 77.48 44.59
Brendon McCullum 212 133 42.40 159.39 20/ 10 66.04 32.33
Luke Wright 193 114 48.25 169.29 14/ 13 69.43 30.70
Virat Kohli 185 151 46.25 122.51 20/ 4 57.14 34.21
Tillakaratne Dilshan 179 148 25.57 120.94 17/ 4 51.40 33.78

Spin on top
With pitches generally getting slower as the tournament went on, and the last three games held at the spin-friendly Premadasa Stadium in Colombo, the overall stats in the tournament finished in favour of the spinners. The averages were almost the same, but the economy rates were much better for spinners - there was a difference of more than one run per over between the economy rates of pace and spin.

Pace v spin in the 2012 World Twenty20
Bowling type Wickets Balls Average Econ rate 4s/ 6s conceded
Pace 166 3158 25.07 7.90 435/ 114
Spin 125 2652 24.35 6.88 208/ 106

The three leading spinners in the tournament were Sunil Narine, Ajantha Mendis and Saeed Ajmal. All three of them had economy rates of less than seven, with Narine excelling in that department. In terms of wickets, Mendis was outstanding - his haul of 15 is the highest in any World Twenty20, going past Dirk Nannes' 14 in the 2010 tournament.

Comparing the three top spinners in the 2012 World Twenty20
Bowler Balls Wickets Average Econ rate 4s/ 6s conceded
Sunil Narine 148 9 15.44 5.63 8/ 3
Ajantha Mendis 144 15 9.80 6.12 11/ 5
Saeed Ajmal 144 9 18.11 6.79 19/ 2

Among the fast bowlers, Watson and Mitchell Starc were the two best in terms of wickets. Watson's 11 wickets came at an average of 16 and an economy rate of 7.33, while Starc was superb with his economy rate too (6.83), while his ten wickets cost him 16.40 each.

L Balaji was the most successful bowler for India with nine wickets, and while West Indies' Ravi Rampaul took as many wickets too - mostly with outstanding new-ball bowling - his length deliveries at the death cost West Indies a few runs. Steven Finn and Tim Southee were the other fast bowlers who impressed, but Lasith Malinga had a surprisingly poor tournament - though he managed eight wickets, his economy rate was a poor 8.44. (Click here for the leading wicket-takers in the 2012 World Twenty20.)

The overall numbers
Comparing the overall stats for the four World Twenty20 tournaments, it's surprising to see how similar they are. The first edition, in South Africa, had the highest run rate, but since then the scoring rates have stayed within the narrow band between 7.53 and 7.63. The one significant difference between the first edition and the others is also the number of 200-plus scores: in 2007 there were five scores of 200 or more - including two matches when both teams scored more than 200. Since then, there've been only two more 200-plus totals in three tournaments. (Click here for the high totals in World Twenty20 tournaments.)

The overall stats for each World Twenty20
Year Runs Wickets Average Run rate 4s/ 6s 200+ scores
2007 7881 348 22.64 7.99 659/ 265 5
2009 7625 337 22.62 7.62 667/ 166 1
2010 7413 346 21.42 7.53 504/ 278 0
2012 7448 315 23.64 7.63 645/ 223 1

S Rajesh is stats editor of ESPNcricinfo. Follow him on Twitter

RSS Feeds: S Rajesh

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by Fast_Track_Bully on (October 12, 2012, 10:28 GMT)

Well done India!. Look at the bowling which was termed as 'below average' is the best based on true facts!. On the other hand so called 'specialist' fast bowler from home side went for 40s every time!

Posted by ayush75 on (October 10, 2012, 7:17 GMT)

India's tournament afterall wasn't disastrous. True the captain left a lot to luck and didn't try giving that extra push! The dot ball percentage and bowling average shows clearly the bowlers weren't that bad. India seriously were let down by the opening pair. If you look at the other successful teams, like Sri lanka, Aussies, Windies, theri best batsman play in top4. India were marred by having the slow sehwag, edgy gambhir, and out of practice yuvraj, and the bowler pathan(seriously why!) in the top 4. Look at the no of sixes hit! Their best batsman in the format, Raina, the in form dhoni, and infact sharma, all batted down. Thank god there was kohli! I guess dhoni could have gambled like sending sharma to open and sending raina at 4. Infact he himself could have chosen to open had he been brave! I seriously dun think gambhir and sehwag deserve a place in atleast T20 XI, younger guys need a chance there.

Posted by Ramansilva on (October 10, 2012, 5:02 GMT)

Among the semi-finalists Windies are best for sixers. Now wonder they have immense body strength. Small made Sri Lankans have hit the highest number of boundaries. They have the artistry and flare. Among the S8 dropouts, Indian has hit the lowest number of sixers. So much for the so called strong batting line up. Thanks to Cricinfo for providing interesting stats.

Posted by TRAM on (October 9, 2012, 19:00 GMT)

6-hitting capacity is really a grossly under-studied skill. I always argued what is the difference between Badrinath and MSDhoni in CSK, both with similar batting avg and similar strike rate in IPL (believe it or not). But we all know the match-turning and match-winning capacity of MSD even though Badri is also a sought-after batsman. The difference is the power-hitting - which makes field placements immaterial. That is the key. Future of T20 cricket is in the hands of consistent power-hitters. India (BCCI), you better groom well built big-hitters, if you want to survive.

Posted by sk12 on (October 9, 2012, 14:17 GMT)

Looks like Ind has the best W/L ratio among all teams.. Lesson to MSD - when you look like losing, do anythign to prolong it (we lost with about 5 overs to spare).. when you are sure of winning make sure you really go for it towards the end (we won scoring about 3 in 6 balls againt pak)....

Posted by   on (October 9, 2012, 13:50 GMT)

Stats are good to have .. but they never tell the complete story.

Wish their was a gauge for on-field energy, commitment to task and the likes.

Posted by i_witnessed_2011 on (October 9, 2012, 12:01 GMT)

Surprised to Indian bowling average... They bowled well... (MSD : yeah except for the rain hit match ;-))

Posted by tusharkardile on (October 9, 2012, 10:34 GMT)

if MSD reads this article, he will have a new excuse for not winning the cup - "we bowled more dot balls than any other team!!!"

Posted by guptahitesh4u on (October 9, 2012, 10:10 GMT)

Is this analysis useful?? In the final SL had 50 dot balls but they also got all out in 18.4 overs, thus they played 8 balls less compared to WI..so In actual, their dot ball count should be 58.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
Feedback
Print
S RajeshClose
S Rajesh Stats editor Every week the Numbers Game takes a look at the story behind the stats, with an original slant on facts and figures. The column is edited by S Rajesh, ESPNcricinfo's stats editor in Bangalore. He did an MBA in marketing, and then worked for a year in advertising, before deciding to chuck it in favour of a job which would combine the pleasures of watching cricket and writing about it. The intense office cricket matches were an added bonus.

    Trading places

All Out Cricket: In a world where £50m can be staked on a single IPL game, armies of professional cricket traders work the betting markets. But who are these people?

The set-up

The Cricket Monthly: When Tony Greig was outwitted by Ashley Mallett
Download the app: for iPad | for Android tablet

    Automaton, man, inspiration

Twenty years on, Shivnarine Chanderpaul continues to be understated. And that doesn't bother him. What's not to like? By Brydon Coverdale

    85 Tests, 70 defeats

Numbers Game: Bangladesh's stats are easily the worst among all teams when they'd played as many Tests

Johnson v McLaren: a tale of two blows

Russell Jackson: The South African allrounder had the misfortune of being in the line of fire twice this year

News | Features Last 7 days

Champions League T20 still battling for meaning

The thrills are rather low-octane, the skills are a bit lightweight, and the tournament overly India-centric

From Constantine to Chanderpaul

As West Indies play their 500th Test, here's an interactive journey through their Test history

Busy keepers, and Waqar's bowleds

Also, high scores and low averages, most ducks in international cricket, and the 12-year-old Test player

'My kind of bowling style is gone now'

Former New Zealand seamer Gavin Larsen talks about wobbly seam-up bowling, the 1992 World Cup, and his role in the next tournament

Automaton, man, inspiration

Twenty years on, Shivnarine Chanderpaul continues to be understated, underestimated. And that doesn't bother him. What's not to like?

News | Features Last 7 days