Analysing wides and no-balls in Twenty20 internationals
A look at the bowlers who bowl the most and least wides and no-balls in Twenty20 internationals
![]() |
... © Getty Images |
No Bowler Ctry Mat Overs Wides NBs Total W+Nb
It is not a surprise that all the bowlers in the table are the quicker bowlers. They are all attacking wicket-taking bowlers. The spinner who has conceded the most wides and no-balls is Shoaib Malik with 21.
Now a look at the best performing bowlers in this classification.
2. Bowlers who have conceded the least number of wides and no-balls
No Bowler Ctry Mat Overs Wides NBs Total W+Nb 1 Mudassar Bukhari Hol 7 25.4 0 0 0 2 Haq R.M Sco 7 25.0 0 0 0 3 Seelaar P.M Hol 9 35.0 1 0 1 4 Borren P.W Hol 9 35.0 1 0 1 5 Dhaniram S Can 11 33.4 1 0 1 6 Patel J.S Nzl 11 33.1 0 1 1 7 Vaas WPUJC Slk 6 22.0 0 1 1 8 McCallan W.K Ire 8 21.5 1 0 1 9 Collingwood P.D Eng 30 32.0 2 0 2Quite a few bowlers from the unfancied teams have conceded one noball or wide. Vaas and Jeetan Patel have also bowled a single wide.
Now for some qualitative assessments. First a table based on the number of wides and no-balls conceded per match.
3. Bowlers who have conceded most numbers of wides & no-balls per match
No Bowler Ctry Mat Overs Total WNb/M W+Nb
Sohail Tanvir also clocks in at 2.4 wides and no-balls per match. However he is a great match-winner, at least in IPL matches. Rampaul follows next.
Ray Price is the leading (maybe the wrong term) spinner. He has conceded 1.43 wides and no-balls per match.
4. Bowlers who have conceded least numbers of wides & no-balls per match
No Bowler Ctry Mat Overs Total WNb/M W+Nb
Now for the frequency of no-balls and wides.
5. Bowlers who have been most frequent with no-balls and wides
No Bowler Ctry Mat Overs Total Balls/WNb W+Nb
Ray Price leads the spinners with a wide or no-ball every 16.8 balls, quite frequent for a spinner.
6. Bowlers who have been least frequent with no-balls and wides
No Bowler Ctry Mat Overs Total Balls/WNb W+Nb
Conclusion:
This started as a simple article. However the results are extremely fascinating. So much so the conclusions are quite speculative and I invite the enlightened readers to come in with their comments.
The tables 1,3,5 are the "negative" tables in this analysis in that these show the bowlers who have bowled more wides/no-balls, more wides/no-balls per match and more frequent wide/no-balls. However these tables are dominated by the genuinely good fast bowlers from top teams who have won more matches for their teams than the other bowlers.
The tables 2,4,6 are the "positive" tables in this analysis in that these show the bowlers who have bowled less wides/no-balls, less wides/no-balls per match and less frequent wide/no-balls. However these tables are dominated by the bowlers from lesser teams and some ordinary spinners. These are not necessarily match-winners. The top spinners, Muralitharan, Mendis, Harbhajan, Vettori, Botha, Swann et al are conspicous by their absence.
What does one conclude.
- That the top fast bowlers go for broke at the cost of control.
- That the top spinners do similarly but exercise more control.
- That the lesser bowlers, especially from the weaker teams, handicapped by their own lack of skills and team strength, show greater discipline and exercise lower levels of variety.
- That the wides/no-balls, especially the wides, because of the unknown free-hit component of the no-balls, are not that negative a trait that a bowler can have.
Note: For some perceptive comments on the conclusion, I must thank Sriram (Ananthanarayanan) who has brought in welcome independent editing skills.
The bottom line is that the really attacking bowlers, especially the fast bowlers, necessarily go for pace and variation and this might lead to more wides and no-balls. Maybe such a measure should be looked into in conjunction with strike rates of bowlers. My gut feel is that it is not possible to derive any conclusion from looking only at wides and no-balls.
To view/down-load the complete table, please click/right-click here.
Anantha Narayanan has written for ESPNcricinfo and CastrolCricket and worked with a number of companies on their cricket performance ratings-related systems