Anantha Narayanan

I had scheduled the Test HSI (High Score Index) article for this fortnight. However the response to the last article, on the "forgotten Test innings" was very good and the readers had come up with their suggestions, many of which were absolute gems and matched the evocative and wistful tone of my article. Consequently, I decided to do the follow-up article, based on reader responses now and publish the Test HSI article next week. So, to the delight of many readers, another anecdotal article gets the nod.

My sincere thanks to all the readers who came up with their suggestions, especially Kamran Wasti and Harsh, whose suggestions could have filled up an entire article, Arjun, Pawan, David, Gerry et al. When I say that I had a problem selecting 12 out of 32, had to increase this to 13, 14 and 15, readers will appreciate the quality of their contributions. I would venture to say that this is a more exciting set of innings than my selection.

In these matters I know that whatever I say is not followed. The theme of the article is to not to highlight great innings, match-winning innings, match-saving innings or high-HSI innings. What I have highlighted are the innings that are not talked about and have gone off cricket followers' radars.

I suggest that readers understand this important point before asking questions like, "Where is the 337?", "Why is the 221 not included?", "How can you miss the 213?" and even "You are biased because you have not considered the 136", and so on. The 337, 221, 213, 136, the double-50s of Rahul Dravid et al will not be discussed since every cricket follower knows about these. But I bet there will be quite a few comments on some of these numbers.

Let us now move on to the readers' selections: this time presented in chronological order.

Test # 599. Australia v England

Played on 7,8,10,11 January 1966
  at Sydney Cricket Ground.
England won by an innings and 93 runs

England     : 488 all out
   RW Barber          185  (0.70)
Australia   : 221 all out
Australia   : 174 all out

These were the John Arlott-TMS and Alan McGilvray-ABC days. Wonderful to hear the commentary in those mellifluous tones! The short-wave radio was a permanent companion, even in classrooms. Bob Barber was an oddity in those Boycott-Lawry days. A score of 185 in 255 balls was Sehwagesque. A strong middle order contributed a sum total of 8 runs. But this stupendous innings, supported by John Edrich's sedate hundred, and late-order support, paved the way for a big innings win for England. It is poignant that towards the end of a very ordinary career, Barber essayed one of the finest away Ashes innings ever, the only time he crossed 100 in Tests.

Test # 613. South Africa v Australia

Played on 31 December 1966, 2,3,4,5 January 1967
  at Newlands, Cape Town.
Australia won by 6 wickets

Australia   : 542 all out
South Africa: 353 all out
   RG Pollock         209  (2.50)
South Africa: 367 all out
Australia   : 180 for 4 wkt(s)

Graeme Pollock's 274 is remembered far more than his more valuable innings of 209. Although this was the only Test lost by South Africa in an otherwise dominant series, Pollock was magnificent. Facing a huge total of 542, South Africa slumped to 12 for 2, when Pollock walked in, and then to 85 for 5. He scored 209 wonderful runs out of fewer than 350 runs added while at crease. Pollock got good support from Peter van der Merwe and Peter Pollock. His 209 was not enough to avert the follow-on and a loss. Graeme's HSI was a phenomenal 2.50.

Test # 665. Pakistan v New Zealand

Played on 8,9,10,11 November 1969
  at Dacca Stadium.
Match drawn

New Zealand : 273 all out
Pakistan    : 290 for 7 wkt(s)
New Zealand : 200 all out
   MG Burgess         119* (2.90)
Pakistan    : 51 for 4 wkt(s)

This was an evergreen classic, unearthed by Kamran. After two middling innings, Pakistan secured a lead of 17 runs. New Zealand slumped to 25 for 4 and faced certain defeat when Mark Burgess walked in. On the fourth (and last?) day, Glenn Turner departed early and New Zealand faced disaster at 101 for 8. Burgess rescued them, in company of Bob Cunis, with a stand of 96 for the ninth wicket. Pakistan did not have enough time to secure a win. A match-saving innings nonpareil. Look at the very high HSI of 2.90.

Test # 779. England v West Indies

Played on 8,9,10,12,13 July 1976
  at Old Trafford, Manchester.
West Indies won by 425 runs

West Indies : 211 all out
   CG Greenidge       134  (2.81)
England     : 71 all out
West Indies : 411 for 5 wkt(s)
England     : 126 all out

This is a peculiar selection in that West Indies finally won the Test by a massive 425 runs. But their first innings was a one-man effort and but for that we would not know how the match would have gone. Gordon Greenidge opened and saw four wickets fall for 26. He controlled the innings beautifully and scored 134 runs out of a score of 193 for 8. The first-innings score of 211 proved a huge mountain to climb and England folded for 71 and 126. Greenidge helped himself to a second-innings hundred, but nowhere near the first-innings gem. Look at the very high HSI. 63.5% of the completed innings, to boot.

Test # 797. West Indies v Pakistan

Played on 18,19,20,22,23 February 1977
  at Kensington Oval, Bridgetown, Barbados.
Match drawn

Pakistan    : 435 all out
   Wasim Raja         117* (0.39)
West Indies : 421 all out
Pakistan    : 291 all out
West Indies : 251 for 9 wkt(s)

This innings assumes importance because of what happened at the end of this exciting Test. Wasim Raja came in at 207 for 5 and against this hostile pace attack, Pakistan could easily have folded for 250. Wasim Raja controlled the second half of the Pakistani innings beautifully, adding valuable runs for each of the later partnerships. He remained not out on 117 and carried Pakistan to a potentially match-winning score of 435. Note the low HSI of this innings, which belies the value of this wonderful effort. Incidentally in the second innings, Wasim Raja and Wasim Bari added 133 for the last wicket to prevent a certain West Indian win.

Test # 841. India v West Indies

Played on 12,13,14,16 January 1979
  at M.A.Chidambaram Stadium, Chepauk, Chennai.
India won by 3 wickets

West Indies : 228 all out
India       : 255 all out
   GR Viswanath       124  (2.20)
West Indies : 151 all out
India       : 125 for 7 wkt(s)

The two all-time classic 90s by the two stalwarts of Indian batting, Sunil Gavaskar's 96 and Gundappa Viswanath's 97*, tend to get talked about a lot more than many other top innings essayed by these two "giants". As such the top-class match-winning century of Viswanath in Chennai deserves a special look. West Indies finished with an average first-innings score of 228, thanks to a memorable 98 by Alvin Kallicharran, an innings worthy of being included in this list. Even though they had lost the big names to the Packer series, the trio of Sylvester Clarke, Norbert Philip and Vanburn Holder were not easy to face.

Viswanath, coming in at 11 for 2, anchored the Indian innings with a classical innings of 124, including an invaluable 70-run partnership with Syed Kirmani for the eighth wicket. The lead of 27 proved invaluable in the last innings, in which India chased a low target with difficulty. Viswanath's 124, with very little support, was the driving force behind the tough win.

Test # 873. New Zealand v West Indies

Played on 8,9,10,12,13 February 1980
  at Carisbrook, Dunedin.
New Zealand won by 1 wicket

West Indies : 140 all out
New Zealand : 249 all out
West Indies : 212 all out
   DL Haynes          105  (1.32)
New Zealand : 104 for 9 wkt(s)

If ever a batsman nearly won a Test single-handedly, this was the one. In a match of low scores, Desmond Haynes was last out in both innings, participating in 20 partnerships for the match, as Arjun has pointed out. He scored 160 out of the team total of 352. In the second innings, he saw the score at a disastrous 29 for 4 and helped by two late-order partnerships, steered West Indies to 212 and a low target of 104. New Zealand almost did not make the target, thanks to excellent spells by Michael Holding, Joel Garner and Colin Croft. Haynes faced over 530 balls in the two innings, over 50% of the team balls.

Test # 901. West Indies v England

Played on 27,28,29,31 March, 1 April 1981
  at Antigua Recreation Ground, St John's, Antigua.
Match drawn

England     : 271 all out
   P Willey           102* (1.08)
West Indies : 468 for 9 wkt(s)
England     : 234 for 3 wkt(s)

This is a really forgotten innings by a journeyman cricketer. This might have been Antigua, but the bowlers were Andy Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft, who could get the ball to talk on a concrete pitch. Peter Willey walked in at 138 for 5 and added 102 out of the 133 while at crease: one of the highest percentage of run contributions at 76.7%. This brave effort helped England reach a respectable total of 271 and safety in the match. Because he came in at 138 for 5, the HSI is relatively lower.

Test # 902. West Indies v England

Played on 10,11,12,14,15 April 1981
  at Sabina Park, Kingston, Jamaica.
Match drawn

England     : 285 all out
   GA Gooch           153  (2.18)
West Indies : 442 all out
England     : 302 for 6 wkt(s)
   DI Gower           154  (1.27)

The 154* at Headingley is one of the most talked about innings. Graham Gooch achieved immortality with that effort, against the might of the West Indies attack, to craft an unlikely win in a low-scoring match. A few years back, Gooch played an equally important innings, a run less. The bowling quartet of Holding, Malcolm Marshall, Croft and Garner were waiting for him at Sabina Park.

This innings of 153 suffers only in comparison to the Headingly innings. It was an equally great innings. Surprisingly Gooch was fifth out, having made his runs out of 249. Ninety-six of the runs were in boundaries. Geoff Boycott was the next highest scorer, at 40, giving Gooch's innings a very good HSI of 2.18. West Indies took a lead of 157 and then...

As I was writing up this effort of Gooch, I saw that an equally wonderful innings, matching Gooch's own 154, was played by David Gower. He essayed a 403-ball marathon effort that saved England. Two wonderful 150-plus scores in the same Test. No hundred from West Indies' batsmen to boot.

Test # 1096. West Indies v Pakistan

Played on 14,15,16,17,19 April 1988
  at Queen's Park Oval, Port of Spain, Trinidad.
Match drawn

West Indies : 174 all out
Pakistan    : 194 all out
West Indies : 391 all out
Pakistan    : 341 for 9 wkt(s)
   Javed Miandad      102  (0.84)

Javed Miandad, purveyor of that most famous six of all time, in Sharjah, and the scorer of unbeaten 280. But I agree with Kamran that his most famous innings is his Port-of-Spain effort in 1988. Two average first innings were followed by an excellent West Indies score of 391, setting a daunting target of 372 for Pakistan with well over four sessions of play left.

The bowlers, a different foursome, no less fearsome: Marshall, Curtly Ambrose, Courtney Walsh and Winston Benjamin. Miandad came in at 62 for 2 and played a patient innings of 102, departing at 288 for 7.

Test # 1360. South Africa v Australia

Played on 14,15,16,17 March 1997
  at Crusaders Ground, Port Elizabeth.
Australia won by 2 wickets

South Africa: 209 all out
Australia   : 108 all out
South Africa: 168 all out
Australia   : 271 for 8 wkt(s)
   ME Waugh           116  (1.23)

While I agree that this match-winning effort of Mark Waugh is not entirely forgotten, there is no doubt that it does not strike the same chords as the 153* in Bangalore or the 138 on debut do. So I have taken the liberty of including a tough-as-nails classic from the seemingly softer brother.

After three rather listless innings, Australia was set a very difficult winning target of 270 on a pitch in which the average RpW (Runs per Wicket) for the first three innings was 16.

Mark Waugh entered at a difficult score of 30 for 2. Each of the next three batsmen participated in useful partnerships. However Australia were never sure of a win, even at 145 for 3 at close of fourth day's play. Allan Donald, Shaun Pollock, Jacques Kallis, Brian McMillan and Paul Adams formed a really difficult attack. Mark Waugh was out sixth at 258 when 12 runs were needed. Luckily for him, and Australia, Ian Healy took them to an improbable win.

Comparisons cannot be avoided. In many ways this innings was similar to Sachin Tendulkar's 136 in Chennai, where he was dismissed leaving India 17 runs to win. While the Australian late order obliged, the Indian late order did not. One can conclude that both batsmen did not complete the task.

Test # 1363. West Indies v India

Played on 27,29,30,31 March 1997
  at Kensington Oval, Bridgetown, Barbados.
West Indies won by 38 runs

West Indies : 298 all out
   S Chanderpaul      137* (1.77)
India       : 319 all out
West Indies : 140 all out
India       : 81 all out

This was a pulsating Test match won by West Indies by 38 runs when India were set the low target of 120 to win. Ian Bishop, Ambrose and Franklyn Rose were unplayable. They did not even need Mervyn Dillon to bowl.

But the real outstanding innings of the match was played a few days earlier. West Indies scored 298 in the first innings and any lower score would have meant India would have won. The West Indian innings was anchored by Shivnarine Chanderpaul, who scored 137 runs, worth more than many a double-hundred. He received only sporadic support from the top order.

Chanderpaul entered at 10 for 1 and steadied the innings, which, at 193 for 7, looked doomed. In partnership with Ambrose, Chanderpaul added 65 for the eighth wicket. The value of the 298 was felt three days later.

Test # 1439. Australia v England

Played on 2,3,4,5 January 1999
  at Sydney Cricket Ground.
Australia won by 98 runs

Australia   : 322 all out
England     : 220 all out
Australia   : 184 all out
   MJ Slater          123  (3.50)
England     : 188 all out

Michael Slater's career-best innings was essayed during the 1998-99 Ashes series. It is one of the best Ashes hundreds ever. Australia had a first-innings lead of around 100.

But this lead would have been worthless if Australia did not have Slater. Opening the innings, he scored 123 out of the team total of 184. The innings percentage of 66.8 has only been bettered by Charles Bannerman's 165. One other batsman reached double figures: Mark Waugh, with 24. It was not a slap-dash innings. Slater faced 189 balls in a dominating display of four and a half hours.

The HSI was a stupendous 3.50: one of the highest in Test history. More on that in the next article.

Test # 1797. Bangladesh v Australia

Played on 9,10,11,12,13 April 2006
  at Narayanganj Osmani Stadium, Fatullah.
Australia won by 3 wickets

Bangladesh  : 427 all out
Australia   : 269 all out
   AC Gilchrist       144  (3.02)
Bangladesh  : 148 all out
Australia   : 307 for 7 wkt(s)
   RT Ponting         118* (0.66)

If anyone is asked to talk of Ricky Ponting's career, he would mention the 140, 257, 156, 120 and 143* et al. No one would remember the 118 against Bangladesh. But that, in my opinion, is one of the most important innings Ponting played in his career.

Bangladesh took a first-innings lead of 158 runs and set Australia an imposing 307 to win. After a good start Australia were wobbling at 231 for 6. Ponting steered them home with a top-quality, unbeaten innings of 118. This innings is important because it saved Australia from the greatest of upsets.

Tendulkar played a similar match-winning innings of 105 against Bangladesh. But I did not include it here since who has ever "forgotten" any innings Tendulkar played.

As I was going through this scorecard I realised that Adam Gilchrist, in the first innings, played an equally important innings. In response to 423, Australia were on the edge of the abyss at 61 for 4 when Gilchrist walked in. Soon they slumped to 93 for 6 and follow-on (?) looked imminent. Gilchrist scored 144, his innings studded with six sixes and reduced the lead to a manageable 158. And manage, they did.

Test # 1812. Sri Lanka v South Africa

Played on 4,5,6,7,8 August 2006
  at P.Saravanamuttu Stadium, Colombo.
Sri Lanka won by 1 wicket

South Africa: 361 all out
Sri Lanka   : 321 all out
South Africa: 311 all out
Sri Lanka   : 352 for 9 wkt(s)
   DPMD Jayawardene   123  (0.62)

This time I have included a single innings from the modern era. Mahela Jayawardene's 374 is a much-remembered innings. The world record created, the world record missed, the two days spent by the vaunted South Africa attack on the field and so on. Very few people remember what happened a week later.

Seven days and probably 7km (Sri Lankans could correct me) separated the Tests. What a pair of Tests these turned to be. One a batting marathon and a win by an innings and over 150 runs and another which had four scores either side of 350.

South Africa, after taking a lead of 40, set Sri Lanka, an imposing 352 to win. Although Sri Lanka were sitting pretty at 120 for 2, soon wickets fell at regular intervals and they were never in complete control of the chase. Jayawardene held the innings together with an excellent innings of 123. Like Waugh did, Tendulkar did and Brian Lara did not, Jayawardene fell ten runs off the target and a few anxious moments later, Sri Lanka won by one wicket. An excellent innings under pressure, throughout.

This has been a whimsical and nostalgic journey through 13 decades of Test cricket. It is like a whiff of fresh air for me and, I hope, for many readers. It really does not matter which innings has been included or excluded. I could easily have substituted five of these innings with others and not lost the impact of the article. My sincere thanks to all the readers for their enthusiastic participation. It is a reminder to me that I should go anecdotal more often.

A brief note on the Newlands tour de force. Sriram, our son, who was in India recently made a fairly serious statement that Test cricket, due to changing times and the enormous revenue-generation of initiatives like the IPL (and, sadly, minus sentiment/history), was in danger of dying out in ten to 15 years time. My heart protested at this but my mind was endorsing the tough statement, especially since he is a serious student of the game and the people who run the game. It is my considered belief that the BCCI wants Test cricket to take a distant third place, to be tolerated and humoured rather than encouraged. So Sriram is probably close to the mark.

But let me say this. As of today (March 5, 2014) Test cricket is alive and kicking, and how. The last three hours at Newlands produced more genuine cricketing excitement than the entire IPL can produce. An average bowler who can bowl four overs of innocuous left-arm spin and keeps the runs conceded to 30, or one who can hit across the midwicket fence a few times will pocket a million dollars.

At Newlands, it was guts all the way. The whole match was symbolised by the limping Ryan Harris, who is going under the surgeon's scalpel next week, producing two magical deliveries to snatch a win from an equally exciting draw. Harris wouldn't get an IPL contract: he would go "unsold" at a minimum price of 100,000 dollars. He would not get a million dollars for selling male fairness creams. His four overs would go for 40 runs and he would warm the benches if at all he was picked. In all probability he may never play in a Test match again. But his name will be there, talked about when people talk of courage and guts. The knowledgeable cricket followers salute you, Ryan, the other ten Australians and the 11 South Africans. You guys have shown the courage and fortitude on the field that your administrators have not shown off the field. Michael Clarke, Ryan Harris, Vernon Philander, AB de Villiers, Faf du Plessis, Dale Steyn, Kyle Abbott et al shine in this regard.

Incidentally, with a cut-off of 100 wickets, Ryan Harris has a better bowling average than Imran Khan, Keith Miller, Dale Steyn, Ray Lindwall, Croft, Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Holding and Dennis Lillee.

South Africa deserved to come out with a draw. Australia deserved to secure a win. Both teams fought like tigers. It is possible that the way Australia bowled on a perfect batting strip on the last day and never gave up trying gave them the edge. Nothing was easy, not even the ninth wicket. If Test cricket could produce five classics in the past 80 days in Wellington, Auckland, Johannesburg, Newlands and Sharjah, maybe Sriram is wrong. Test cricket might very live well beyond me.

I started doing the preliminary work on Test Innings Ratings. My first cut of the tables showed some surprises: innings that were outside the top areas of the Wisden 100 list. I started looking into these and found that some of them were real classics. Some of these, the innings by Clem Hill, Azhar Mahmood and Kim Hughes were in the top ten of the original list. But I felt it was necessary to bring these forgotten and not-so-well-known innings to the spotlight. We tend to talk so much about 270/213/136/155/241/153/281/149/154 et al that we seem to miss out on other equally great efforts. Hence this list of 12 innings. As usual I will offer brief comments on each innings as I go along. These innings are presented in reverse chronological order.

1. Test # 1734.South Africa v England*

Played on 13,14,15,16,17 January 2005
  at  New Wanderers Stadium, Johannesburg.
England won by 77 runs

England     : 411 for 8 wkt(s)
South Africa: 419 all out
England     : 332 for 9 wkt(s)
   ME Trescothick 180 (1.95)
South Africa: 247 all out

After two sizable first innings, there was nothing in the match for either team. Hence there was a need for England to put up a sizable 300-plus total so that their top-quality bowling attack could defend the total. Andrew Strauss was dismissed within minutes and Robert Key (who?) followed half an hour later.

Marcus Trescothick then played the innings of his life on a good bowling track against a very good South Africa attack. Michael Vaughan supported him in a third-wicket stand of 120-plus but soon England was tottering at 222 for 6. In the company of Ashley Giles, Trescothick counterattacked and took their total to 332. He faced only 248 balls and scored two-thirds of his runs in boundaries. Trescothick's HSI (High Score Index) was a creditable 1.95.

The fact that England won by 77 runs was a just reward for Trescothick's wonderful effort.

2. Test # 1716. Pakistan v Sri Lanka

Played on 20,21,22,23,24 October 2004
  at Iqbal Stadium, Faisalabad.
Sri Lanka won by 201 runs

Sri Lanka   : 243 all out
Pakistan    : 264 all out
Sri Lanka   : 438 all out
   ST Jayasuriya 253 (2.71)
Pakistan    : 216 all out

Faisalabad: a batting paradise. Not really, during the autumn of 2004. The first two innings terminated either side of 250, Pakistan having a useful first-innings lead of 21. Marvan Atapattu was dismissed by a snorter from Shoaib Akhtar in the first over. Sanath Jayasuriya then played, what I feel, is one of the greatest innings ever played. I don't say this lightly. This innings deserves to be considered alongside many well-known classics.

Kumar Sangakkara and Mahela Jayawardene, with two fifties, supported Jayasuriya, but after Jayawardene departed at 216, Jayasuriya cut loose. He scored three-fourths of a near-century stand with Thilan Samaraweera. Then wickets fell steadily and Sri Lanka slumped to 337 for 8. Jayasuriya added 101 for the ninth wicket in the company of Dilhara Fernando, who contributed a solitary run. Jayasuriya was out after a superlative innings of 253 in 348 balls. The HSI for this innings is an excellent 2.71.

This match is similar to the previous one in many ways. Pakistan were deflated when they were set to score 417 and were dismissed for 216. Unfortunately in my previous Ratings work, this innings lost some of its sheen because of Faisalabad's numbers. I have corrected that now and am using the match level BQI/PQI (Bowling Quality Index/Pitch Quality Index).

3. Test # 1594. New Zealand v England

Played on 13,14,15,16 March 2002
  at Jade Stadium, Christchurch.
England won by 98 runs

England     : 228 all out
New Zealand : 147 all out
England     : 468 for 6 wkt(s)
New Zealand : 451 all out
   NJ Astle 222 (1.57)

This is an innings straight from the fantasy land. New Zealand was dead and buried and the fat lady had started to practise her notes. As they were on the third day of the recent Wellington Test a few minutes after lunch, until Brendon McCullum and BJ Watling happened. On that summer's day in March 2002, New Zealand had reached 119 for 3, chasing 550 runs when Nathan Astle walked in.

I think I can insist that that this masterpiece should be in everyone's top 20 innings. Astle scored 222 in 168 balls, crossing the boundary 39 times, 11 of them aerially. Stephen Fleming gave him some support to start with and then Craig McMillan. But New Zealand moved to 333 for 9 when an injured Chris Cairns walked in. Then followed a period of 15 overs in which 118 runs were scored. I can tell you, the England team was shaken. Less than 100 runs were needed when Astle was caught behind. His single-handed effort overshadowed other excellent efforts from Graham Thorpe, Andrew Caddick and Matthew Hoggard. This was not just an innings of a lifetime. This was an innings which is talked of as one of the best sporting moments in their history, in a country in which cricket takes a back seat to rugby.

Trust New Zealand to produce such from-the-edge-of-precipice efforts. As I write this, I do not know how the Wellington Test will end. But if New Zealand win, McCullum's innings would be right at the top, challenging for a top-five position. The similarities between the Kolkata Test and the Wellington Test are many. Will India be at the receiving end tomorrow? PS: Not really. The pitch is still almost perfect, unlike the Kolkata one. McCullum's innings will not get the additional credit for match win. Note that he does not lose anything just because the match is drawn.

4. Test # 1403. South Africa v Pakistan

Played on 26,27,28 February, 1,2 March 1998
  at Kingsmead, Durban.
Pakistan won by 29 runs

Pakistan    : 259 all out
   Azhar Mahmood 132 (1.62)
South Africa: 231 all out
Pakistan    : 226 all out
South Africa: 225 all out

This was a Wisden top-ten innings. However, I can never tire of elevating this gem to a pedestal. Azhar Mahmood walked in at 89 for 5. Saw the innings plummeting to 127 for 6, 142 for 7 and 153 for 8. He scored 132 of the 170 runs scored after he entered and added 117 runs with the late-order batsmen, their total contribution being 14. His innings was studded with 24 fours. All against Allan Donald, Fanie de Villiers and Shaun Pollock.

That Pakistan won a rare away victory, that too against the formidable South Africa, was again a tribute to Mahmood's wonderful innings. Mention must be made of a nearly equal effort from Saeed Anwar in the second innings, when he scored 118 out of 226.

5. Test # 1444. India v Pakistan

Played on 16,17,18,19,20 February 1999
  at the Eden Gardens, Calcutta.
Pakistan won by 46 runs

Pakistan    : 185 all out
India       : 223 all out
Pakistan    : 316 all out
   Saeed Anwar 188* (2.08)
India       : 232 all out

Now Saeed Anwar is on his own. From 26 for 6, Pakistan recovered to 185 through Moin Khan and Wasim Akram, and still conceded a lead of 38. I am amazed at how similar this innings of Saeed Anwar is to those of Trescothick and Jayasuriya. One fifty as support. Nothing otherwise, and Saeed Anwar carried his bat through the innings, scoring 188 out of 316. The HSI was a creditable 2.06.

The strong Pakistani bowling line-up ran through India for 232 runs, winning narrowly by 46 runs. There is no denying the contributions of Akram, Akhtar and Saqlain Mushtaq. But the target would have been a nominal one but for Saeed Anwar's magnificent effort.

6. Test # 1129. Australia v New Zealand

Played on 24,25,26,27,28 November 1989
  at W.A.C.A. Ground, Perth.
Match drawn

Australia   : 521 for 9 wkt(s)
New Zealand : 231 all out
New Zealand : 322 for 7 wkt(s)
   MJ Greatbatch 146* (1.43)

Mark Greatbatch, who later became famous for his attacking scoring as an ODI opener, played one of the greatest defensive innings of all time at the WACA in 1989. The first two innings followed the script and New Zealand started the third innings, 290 behind. Soon they were 11 for 2 and the writing of an innings victory was on the wall.

Greatbatch played a defensive classic, scoring 146 in 485 balls in nearly 11 hours of concentration and took New Zealand to safety at 322 for 7. Even at 234 for 7, New Zealand looked likely to lose. Then Greatbatch added 88 runs for the eighth wicket in 50 overs, in company of Martin Snedden, who faced over 140 balls. Let us not forget that this was against Terry Alderman, Geoff Lawson, Carl Rackemann and Merv Hughes. I would probably put Dennis Amiss, Michael Atherton and Faf du Plessis' efforts ahead of this in terms of match-saving innings.

7. Test # 1065. Australia v England

Played on 10,11,12,14,15 January 1987
  at the Sydney Cricket Ground.
Australia won by 55 runs

Australia   : 343 all out
   DM Jones 184* (3.14)
England     : 275 all out
Australia   : 251 all out
England     : 264 all out

A Test match of medium scores was won by Australia because of their above-par first-innings effort. On the opening day and continuing, Australia were struggling and could never come to terms with the pitch and the English bowling attack. Only one batsman, Dean Jones, mastered the conditions. He came in at 8 for 1, saw through steady fall of wickets and remained unbeaten on a final score of 343, which proved to be a match-winning score. There was very little support. This is shown by the very high HSI of 3.14.

The value of the 184* (and 343) can be gauged by the fact that three 250-plus innings followed and the final margin was only 55 runs.

Is this better than the energy-sapping 200-plus innings of Jones in Madras, four months previously, in that tie? I find it difficult to put one above the other. To carve two masterpieces in one season is something very few can boast about.

8. Test # 915. Australia v West Indies

Played on 26,27,28,29,30 December 1981
  at the Melbourne Cricket Ground.
Australia won by 58 runs

Australia   : 198 all out
   KJ Hughes 100* (2.60)
West Indies : 201 all out
Australia   : 222 all out
West Indies : 161 all out

This, like Mahmood's innings, was in the top ten of the Wisden 100. One of the best innings ever played against the West Indian quartet (it does not matter who were the four) of pace bowlers. In this case it was Michael Holding, Andy Roberts, Joel Garner and Colin Croft. This was the defining innings of the match. Without Kim Hughes' unbeaten 100, Australia might not have crossed 100 and West Indies would have rolled them over. Coming in at 8 for 3, Hughes scored 100 out of the 190 runs that were added. He faced 200 balls, each one from an express fast bowler. The HSI of 2.6 indicates the lack of support, the next best score being 21.

West Indies secured a lead of only 3 runs and were dismissed for 161 while chasing 219, against Dennis Lillee - who achieved multiple milestones in this Test - Alderman, Lawson and Bruce Yardley. The fact that 40 wickets fell for 782 runs indicates the immense value of Hughes' innings.

9. Test # 788. India v England

Played on 17,18,19,21,22 December 1976
  at Feroz Shah Kotla, Delhi.
England won by an innings and 25 runs

England     : 381 all out
   DL Amiss 179 (1.15)
India       : 122 all out
India       : 234 all out

Touring India was a very difficult task during 1970s, with any three out of the four spinners ready to weave their magic on tailor-made wickets. Amiss may not be considered in the top-five group of England openers but he has played a few away classics and is the only one to appear in this collection twice. England slumped to 65 for 4 and 125 for 5 but recovered due solely to Amiss' epochal innings of 179 and the stands he essayed with Alan Knott and John Lever. He mastered the conditions and the bowlers beautifully.

A first-innings score of 381 was always going to be a huge score and proved enough. Lever destroyed India for 122, capturing 7 for 46. Was this the Vaseline match? Who cares? There was no nonsense of not enforcing the follow-on and England won comfortably by an innings.

10. Test # 732. West Indies v England

Played on 16,17,19,20,21 February 1974
  at Sabina Park, Kingston, Jamaica.
Match drawn

England     : 353 all out
West Indies : 583 for 9 wkt(s)
England     : 432 for 9 wkt(s)
   DL Amiss 262* (4.62)

If I am asked what the best match-winning innings ever was, I might hesitate and take some time. But if I am asked what the best match-saving innings ever was, I will reply in five seconds: Dennis Amiss' 262 in Kingston in 1974. If anyone did not know about this innings, it is time they familiarised themselves with this classic.

England scored a very useful 353, with no big contribution from anyone. Then West Indies declared with a lead of 230. It must be admitted that this was not one of West Indies' vintage attacks, but still, Keith Boyce, Bernard Julien, Garry Sobers and Lance Gibbs do not constitute a weak line-up. England lost Geoff Boycott at 32 and John Jameson and Frank Hayes before 107. Amiss held the innings together and was unbeaten on 123 at an England score of 218 for 5 at close of the fourth day, still in arrears.

On the fifth day, with no real support, Amiss added 139 to his score out of the 214 added to England's score. At 343 for 8, England looked like losing. Then Pat Pocock scored an invaluable 4 in 88 balls and helped Amiss add 49 runs for the ninth wicket in nearly 30 overs. The last-wicket partnership added a further 40 runs. Amiss faced 563 balls in his near-ten-hour epic.

His HSI is a huge 4.62, the next highest score being 38 and he scoring well over 60% of his team score. Amongst hundreds, Amiss' HSI is bettered only by Charles Bannerman, VVS Laxman, Graham Yallop and Kapil Dev. His HSI is the highest amongst the double-centurions.

11. Test # 320. South Africa v Australia

Played on 20,21,23,24 January 1950
  at Kingsmead, Durban.
Australia won by 5 wickets

South Africa: 311 all out
Australia   : 75 all out
South Africa: 99 all out
Australia   : 336 for 5 wkt(s)
   RN Harvey 151* (1.32)

This is one of my favourite Test innings. Australia went 236 runs behind. The follow-on was not enforced. Promptly South Africa were dismissed for 99: shades of Auckland 2014. Australia had the impossible target of 336 to achieve in the last innings against Hugh Tayfield and company, Tayfield having captured seven wickets for 23 in the first innings.

Neil Harvey essayed his career-best innings of 151 and took Australia to an unlikely five-wicket win. It was a tough task when they were 95 for 4 but Harvey added 135 and 106 runs for the next two wickets in the company of Sam Loxton and Colin McCool. Harvey mastered the difficult offspin of Tayfield completely. Because of the good support and the below 50% share of team score Harvey's HSI is 1.32.

12. Test # 56. Australia v England

Played on 29, 31 January, 1,2 February 1898
  at Melbourne Cricket Ground.
Australia won by 8 wickets

Australia   : 323 all out
   C Hill 188 (2.41)
England     : 174 all out
England     : 263 all out
Australia   : 115 for 2 wkt(s)

I never tire of talking about Clem Hill's magnificent innings, especially since most people, me included, did not know of this until the Wisden 100 appeared on the horizon. New Year Test at the MCG in 1898, a mere 115 years back. Jack Hearne runs through the Australian top order and they faced utter catastrophe at 58 for 6. Hill played one of the most significant pre-WW1 innings. He scored 188 and was dismissed at 303 for 9. In between he added 165 for the seventh wicket, 60 for the eighth wicket and took Australia to a match-winning 323.

The HSI of Hill's innings was 2.41 since he scored 60% of his team's score and the next highest innings was 46. English bowling was very good: Tom Richardson, Hearne and Johnny Briggs.

Finally a revisit of my own top ten. The core seven innings will always be there. Don Bradman's 270, Brain Lara's 153*, Graham Gooch's 154, Ian Botham's 149, Laxman's 281, Mahmood's 132 and Hill's 188. To which I will now add Jayasuriya's 253, Amiss' 262* and Saeed Anwar's 188*. Okay, let me make it a nice XI by adding Astle's 222. Do I hear "one more"? I will add Harvey's 151* and get to a round dozen.

A request to the readers. This is not a list of the best Test innings. I have only highlighted the innings which have gone off the radar. So please do not come out with comments like "Where is the 153?", "Why is the 136 not included?", "The 188 does not deserve to be included" and the likes.

To download/view the nine complete tables, please CLICK HERE. My take is that many of the questions can be answered if you download this file, extract the component files and view the contents. Instead of asking me obvious questions for which the answers are already in the tables, you could download the file and view the tables.

As promised, I have presented here the career summary of some of the top batsmen who missed the cut-offs: all with batting averages exceeding 50.

The Ashes series has extensive coverage on ESPNcricinfo and S Rajesh has a concise but very well-compiled summary of the series. Here, I am going to provide my own take on the cleansweep. All the Australian players contributed. George Bailey did not do much but took some fine catches. For England, only Stuart Broad and Ben Stokes, and to a lesser extent, Michael Carberry did something of note. George Dobell, in his piece on rating of England players' performance in the Ashes, has placed Graeme Swann, capturer of seven wickets at 80.0 and one who quit before the end of the tour, at 5.5 and Carberry, who played with grit and courage for well over 17 hours, at 4.0. I disagree with the Swann rating - it seems almost as if Swann is being given a few points for what he did earlier. But that is not the purpose of rating players for the series.

The following table provides the comparisons of the key measures that led to the 5-0 win for Australia.

Ashes Session analysis details

The Tendulkar brace (article 1 and article 2) was a tough pair for me. Not only did I have to put in a lot of effort, but had to face a barrage of (often unjustified) criticism from fans of the great cricketer, who did not want to see any analyses that did not sing unrestrained praise. However, one good metric came out through these two articles as a very valuable one for measuring player contributions. I had presented a raw version of the HSI (High Score Index). This metric found support from many readers and I had promised that I would develop HSI as an independent measure after incorporating tweaks from many readers. This is the first attempt at that. In this article I have covered the ODI game: an easier one to start with because of the single-innings format.

The tweaks suggested can be summarised as below.

- Extend the concept to all innings, not just the top two scores.
- Incorporate the team score into the computations.
- Avoid the very high range of numbers in the early version: the HSI for an innings went as high as 11.4.
- Look at how the players have performed in various classifications, with HSI as the key measure.
- Look at the possibility of using a GM (geometric mean) rather than AM (arithmetic mean) because of the significant variations.

I have given below a few typical cases to bring out the nature of the problems.

Score Hs1 Hs2  Expectations

A 100 as the top score does not provide enough information by itself. It could be out of a team score of 200 or 300. It could be supported by an innings close to 100, by a 50 or by a 25. It could be part of 200 for 1 or 200 all out. Most of the alternatives have been given above and the expectations have been given on the right. Everything is self-explanatory. I have explained the final methodology below.

The HSI is a measure of two components for the innings top score. The batsman stands alone at the top and his contribution gets enhanced depending on the support received. On the other hand the second-placed scorer has had the support of a higher-scoring batsman. So it is sufficient to take his and other lower scoring batsmen's contributions based on the team score. With this background let me show the working.

Top batsman HSI = Hs1/Team score x HSI/Hs2. This incorporates both components.
Other batsmen HSI = Batsman score/Team score.

I worked out that there is no need to multiply the lower scores by Score/Hs1. That would lower the values too much. An Hs1 of 100 and Hs2 of 90 (out of 200) would end up with Hs1 well over 25% higher than Hs2, which is incorrect.

Now let us see all the values and check whether the expectations are met.

Case 1: 200-100-30. Work: 100/200=0.5, 100/30=3.33
        HSI for Hs1: 0.5*3.33=1.667
        HSI for Hs2: 30/200=0.15
Case 2: 200-100-50. Work: 100/200=0.5, 100/50=2.0
        HSI for Hs1: 0.5*2.0=1.0
        HSI for Hs2: 50/200=0.25
Case 3: 200-100-90. Work: 100/200=0.5, 100/90=1.11
        HSI for Hs1: 0.5*1.11=0.55
        HSI for Hs2: 90/200=0.45
Case 4: 200-50-50.  Work:  50/200=0.25, 50/50=1.0
        HSI for Hs1: 0.25*1.0=0.25
        HSI for Hs2: 50/200=0.25
Case 5: 300-100-50. Work: 100/300=0.333, 100/50=2.0
        HSI for Hs1: 0.333*2.00=0.667
        HSI for Hs2: 50/300=0.1667
Case 6: 300-100-90. Work: 100/300=0.333, 100/90=1.11
        HSI for Hs1: 0.333*1.11=0.367
        HSI for Hs2: 90/300=0.300
Case 7: 300-50-40.  Work:  50/300=0.167, 50/40=1.25
        HSI for Hs1: 0.167*1.25=0.208
        HSI for Hs2: 40/300=0.1667

I have checked each HSI value and confirmed that it meets the expectations. Hence I will not go any further in depth. Readers can verify these numbers themselves. I also do a minor tweak for result matches where lower than 100 runs were chased down. Of course any unfinished innings below 100, in a no result match, is not considered.

Now that the HSI for every innings has been determined, let us move into the many tables I have created. The first is the basic table of the HSI value itself. I have shown the top 25 HSI values. There is a downloadable Excel file that contains the 24,000 innings which have HSI values greater than or equal to 0.1. Please download and peruse it before asking about specific innings or player.

Readers should remember that these calculations are scorecard-based, non-contextual and within a team. MS Dhoni's 65 out of 188, with Hs2 being 31, fetches an HSI of 0.724. Quinton de Kock's 135 out of 351, with Hs2 being 77, gets an HSI of 0.674. It does not mean that Dhoni's innings was better or match-winning. It only means that Dhoni contributed more to his team's cause. The result is immaterial. The key word is "contribution". All comparisons, within a match, should only be within a specific team innings. What is important is that Dhoni gets 0.724 and Kohli, 0.164. de Kock gets 0.674 and AB de Villiers, 0.218. Please make sure that this point is clearly understood.

An unambiguous note on the cut-off. I have selected 3000 ODI runs as the cut-off for the main table. There are 127 batsmen that qualify. Only one of these batsmen, Wasim Akram, has an average below 20.0 and I have decided not to exclude him. This cut-off has been determined on the assumption that a very good batsman would need around 100 matches to cross 3000 runs. In fact only 60 batsmen have reached this landmark in 100 matches. David Gower, Mahela Jayawardene, Kumar Sangakkara, Stephen Fleming, Richie Richardson et al needed more. Once this stiff cut-off is set, all players are considered equal. Afterwards I am not going to say one batsman played in only so many matches and another played in many more matches and so on. The players have met the criterion set and that is it.

For the other 12 tables, there are varying cut-off points. In general, 50 innings has been used as the minimum for qualification. However, readers should note that to qualify for the later tables only the appropriate cut-off is needed. In other words, Sunil Gavaskar would qualify for the "BatPos 1-2-3" table even though he has scored only 2651 career runs. Brad Haddin would qualify for the "Wins" table even though he has scored only 2692 career runs. Clive Lloyd would qualify for "BatPos 4-5-6-7" table even though he has scored only 1977 career runs. And so on.

After getting the HSI values I evaluated on the need to do an alternate mean-evaluation. I decided that it is not necessary to use GM and used AM itself since the distribution pattern revealed a few important facts. The top entry is at 9.9, the next one at 6.7, the third one at 5.2, the fourth one at 5.02 and the fifth one is at 4.2. See how steeply the values drop: less that 50% value for the fifth entry. So there is really a single outlier: Brendon McCullum's innings, which is from the Twilight Zone. I did not want to be influenced by this single performance. Andrew Jones could also be considered as an outlier. After this, normalcy returns. Also the values, 5.24 to 0.0, are already in some form of logarithmic representation, representing 400 to 1.

A few important facts on HSI.

1. The highest HSI value is 9.983 for McCullum's 80 out of 87(+8) for 0, with the next highest score being How's 7.
2. Two great 100s: Viv Richards' 189* and Kapil Dev's 175* are in third and fourth position in the HSI table. The key numbers for Richards are 189 out of 262, followed by 26. For Kapil, 175 out of 254, followed by 24. Two almost identical innings. And Shane Watson's 185 is placed sixth. Great credentials for this table indeed.
3. The lowest HSI value for an Hs1 innings is in match #257. New Zealand scored 116. Richard Hadlee and Derek Stirling were joint top scorers with 13 runs each. Their HSI value was a mere 0.126.
4. The highest HSI value for an Hs2 innings is for Jesse Ryder. In match #2677, New Zealand were chasing 158 and finished at 165 for 0. Ryder scored 79 and McCullum, 80. Ryder's HSI was 0.496 and McCullum's, 0.509.
5. The lowest HSI value for an Hs2 innings is for Martin Crowe's 5 runs in match #629. Crowe's HSI value is 0.075.
6. The highest HSI value for a non-Hs1-Hs2 innings was for Herschelle Gibbs in match 1760. This was a funny innings. South Africa was chasing 229 and scored 230 for 1. Lance Klusener top-scored with 75 (HSI 0.347), Boeta Dippenaar followed with 74 (0.337) and Gibbs' scored 70. His HSI was 0.319.
7. 969 HSI values are 1.0 and above. This represents 1.6% of the total.
8. 3329 HSI values are 0.5 and above. This represents 5.6% of the total.
9. 35548 HSI values are below 0.10. This represents 59.6% of the total.
10.The average Hs1 for 6736 team innings is 71.3. The average Hs2 for these innings is 46.3. The ratio is 1.57. However, the average of ratios taken at innings level is 1.65 which is the more relevant figure.
11.The average HSI value for the 59655 innings is 0.144. This average will also let us take a stand on career averages of HSI. Maybe 0.22 would an excellent career average.

Now for the multiple HSI tables based on various selection criteria. This was one of the main objectives of this exercise. For most tables I have shown the top 30/25 players. Needless to say (or more appropriately, needs to be said) that the complete set of entries is available in the downloadable file with 13 tables. Please make an attempt to answer your question by downloading that file before asking me. Since this is one of the longest articles I have ever penned, I will only provide minimal comments.

It is safe to say that McCullum's innings is a true outlier. Chasing 95, scoring 80 (in 28 balls) out of 95, reaching the target in about six overs, allowing Jamie How to score 7: well, it does happen, but once every 40 years. Only the 100-run tweak kept this to below 10.0. Jones' innings was a more acceptable instance of domination. He scored 47 out of 74 with Crowe's 5 being the next highest score. Not as much of an outlier as McCullum's, but out of the ordinary.

Now we get to two all-time classics: in my opinion, seconded by many, the two greatest ODI innings ever played. No comparisons can ever be made of the higher scores on flat-belters with these classics in bowler-friendly conditions. I place the 189* higher only because of the quality of England bowling attack: Bob Willis, Ian Botham, Neil Foster and Derek Pringle. Richards came in at 5 for 1, saw the score slump to 102 for 7, scored 189 out of 272. The next highest score was Eldine Baptiste's 26, and Richards added 106 for the last wicket with Michael Holding, who scored 12. This was not in front of a super-charged crowd nor was it a television spectacle. It was total domination by an undisputed colossus. If there is an innings better than this, I am waiting to hear of the same, and will probably wait forever. This carries an HSI value of 5.243. I think HSI values of 5.0 are for once-in-a-lifetime performances.

Kapil's 175* (HSI 5.023) stands second only because there is a slightly better 5.xx innings ahead. Kapil came in at 9 for 4, saw the score at 17 for 5, scored 175 out of 266, including an unbroken stand of 126 with Syed Kirmani, who had the next best score of 24, Kapil played the innings of his life and those of million other lives. The similarities between the two innings are startling. That these two innings are third and fourth confirms to me the validity of HSI. If either of these innings had gone out of the top five, I might have had frowns on my forehead.

This table of 30 hosts a number of all-time classics: Richards' 189, Kapil's 175, Watson's explosive 185 (out of 232), the lesser-known masterpieces of Charles Coventry and Paul Stirling, Saeed Anwar's 194, David Gower's majestic 158, Scott Styris' all-time-classic 141 and so on. Barring minor personal preferences this is a table of many ODI classics.

This is the most important table since it measures the HSI across the career. It can be seen that the numbers are at a different magnitude from the article on Sachin Tendulkar's ODI career, since I now measure all innings and have incorporated the team scores. Richards is comfortably ahead with a career HSI average of 0.311. This is confirmed by an average of 47+ and a win percentage around 70. Gordon Greenidge follows with 0.302, the only other batsman with an HSI value exceeding 0.3. Hashim Amla follows next close behind with 0.297. Even if Amla maintains 80% of his 80-match form in the next 80 matches, he may be in a similar position. Now comes Tendulkar: 446 innings, just over 50% wins, an average of 44.83 and an HSI of 0.293. Numbers depicting a magnificent career, embellished by the huge number of matches played and spread over 23 years. This top quintet is rounded off by Desmond Haynes. Look at the top 11 players in this table. The other six are Virat Kohli, Chris Gayle, Crowe, Dean Jones, Brian Lara and Javed Miandad. These, plus Ricky Ponting, are arguably the best 12 ODI batsmen ever, the Dazzling Dozen. Thus the importance of this measure is established once and for all. The relative positioning is immaterial.

Richards batted at the No. 3 spot just enough to qualify: 51 innings, an amazing 80+% wins, an RpI value of 47+ and an HSI value of 0.356. Lara is next having spent well over 50% of his career in these pivotal positions. Tendulkar follows just behind, but with a lot more matches. Then Greenidge and, surprisingly, Shivnarine Chanderpaul. Four of the top five players are West Indians of two different generations. In the next two positions are the two current giants.

Crowe has stolen the thunder from Richards in the Nos. 4 to 7 positions table. The generally lower HSI values, all barring one below 0.3, indicate the difficulty of making significant contributions when batting in the middle order. Richards maintains his win percentage value which is around two-thirds. That master of the middle order batting, Miandad appears next. Steve Tikolo, the only world-class batsman Kenya produced, is a well-deserved presence in this table. Ross Taylor rounds off the top five.

Richards excelled in the first innings: most of his top innings - 189*, 181, 138, 153, 149, were in the first innings. Look at the wonderful win ratio of 70% when West Indies batted first. And Richards outstanding RpI figure of 46. Haynes is placed second, with marginally lower figures. In fourth position is Marsh, the quintessential opening batsmen, with impressive figures under all columns. Knight rounds off the table, but with less that 50% wins. Tendulkar's figures are very impressive but the win percentage remains just below 50%, matching his career numbers.

A smattering of modern batsmen fills up this table. Four of the top five, Gayle, Kohli, Watson and Graeme Smith are still active. If we say that this indicates a better chasing scenario currently, then it may be the correct conclusion for the wrong reason since all these HSI numbers are measures within a team. But it is possible that there more chasing wins now than ever. Kohli's outstanding RpI in chasing wins stands out. Gayle's is slightly low but I expect that he makes up for this with a higher scoring rate. Tendulkar is fine, not outstanding, with a RpI of 38. However, he has a higher win percentage batting second, than batting first.

A very unlikely player at the top: Marcus Trescothick, who was very good at home, but memory tells me that many of these good innings were in lost matches. A tally of 25 wins in 57 matches confirms this. Nathan Astle follows next. Then it is Tendulkar, with a very good RpI value of nearly 44 and an HSI value of just below 0.3. It is surprising that there are not many Indian batsmen in the top-20. Maybe they all took HSI points off each other. It is also surprising that the HSI values are at a lower level: most values are below 0.3.

Richards was the best traveller. I am almost certain that the very high HSI of 0.424 was caused by his stupendous performances in England and Australia. The 138, 153*, 189*, 149 were enough to give him this extraordinary HSI. Look at the very high RpI: nearly 48. Look at the away-win percentage of West Indies teams: 55 out of 82. Then Greenidge. The West Indians seem to have very good away figures, possibly because they do not play many home matches: Lara and Chanderpaul are there in the top ten. Virender Sehwag seems to have liked the pitches away from India too. Mathew Hayden has an above-average RpI value of nearly 41. But Richards stands supreme.

Tendulkar was king in the neutral locations. He also played in as many as 145 matches. Many of these were played at Sharjah and the VB Series-type triangular tournaments. An excellent RpI value of around 44 shows the extent of his contributions in these away matches. The win percentage is around his career level of 50%. Gayle is the only other batsman to have an HSI of above 0.3, with a decent RpI value. Gary Kirsten and Miandad, the king of Sharjah, complete the top five positions. Let me hasten to add that matches in UAE are neutral matches for Pakistan.

In this and the next table, the "Wins" column is superfluous. However common programs generate the tables and I have left it at that. Chris Gayle is at the top of the Wins table. When West Indies won, he was right there outperforming his team-mates. That is what the value of 0.408 indicates. Gayle's RpI is well above average. Amla has won only 52 matches, but chips in very well. And look at his RpI which is an extraordinary 62+. Astle is a surprise entry. Let us not forget that he would have contributed with the ball too. Then comes Richards, winning 114 matches and having an excellent HSI of 0.352 and very good RpI value of 45. Lara is very close behind Richards. It is no surprise that the top-20 batsmen in this table have RpI values exceeding 40. Kohli is the only batsman other than Amla to have a 50-plus RpI value.

Javed Miandad figures at the top of the "Losses" table. Tendulkar is in fifth position. How do we explain this? The only sane explanation seems to be that they did what was expected of them and the others failed. However, let me add that the RpI of Tendulkar and Miandad in these matches is around 32. This indicates that they were not at their best but still out-performed their team mates. Let us not forget that the highest value of HSI in this table is only 0.294. It is not a table which can be easily explained. AS Milind says, A typical loss is normally due to fall of early wickets. So the top-three batsmen might not get too many HSI points.

These are the matches from the World Cups and Champions Trophies, the true world-level tournaments. The matches from quarter-finals onwards and Super-xxx matches are included. A note on the qualification: There were only two important matches, as defined here, in the first few World Cups: the semi-final and final. As such there would be batsmen who have played in these World Cups who would barely reach six matches, leave alone ten. Hence, I have lowered the cut-off for inclusion in this table to six matches.

The table has very surprising entries at the top. The evergreen Saeed Anwar leads the table with 0.422. His RpI is an outstanding 60. Sourav Ganguly is another surprise. It shows the value of his partnership with Tendulkar and confirms the fact that he contributed more than his share in key matches. A magnificent RpI of 62 corroborates this. In third place is the unfancied New Zealand all-rounder, Styris. He has performed very effectively, almost always under the radar. Then we have de Silva, no doubt helped by those three top class performances during 1996, in which he scored over 200 runs. The top five segment is rounded off by the star allrounder from Bangladesh, Shakib. What he has done with limited support is wonderful. Richards is down in 11th position and Tendulkar is further down in 19th position. Look at the win percentage values of Mark Waugh, Hayden and Adam Gilchrist.