A 360-degree look at the 2016 World T20

This was indeed an odd World T20. The first 12 matches were out of place in such a tournament. An elimination tournament within a world event was virtually unheard of. It was as if the football World Cup had started with an eight-nation elimination tournament. On top of that a bilateral South Africa-England match also sneaked in in between.

So what was the World T20 really? With all apologies to the qualifiers, I decided that my analysis of the tournament would only start with the Super 10 matches. It makes sense. It is difficult to evaluate Mohammad Nabi's performance against Hong Kong in the same light as his performance against England. However, recognising that these 12 matches also contained some sterling performances, I have added a section on the best performances during the qualifying phase at the end.

This article is more data mining, extraction and presentation than analysis. Only the three best-performance tables are pure analysis. Also, there are not many conclusions or opinions. The facts have been presented with matter-of-fact descriptions. Normally I take one area and go quite deep. This is different. Since I have to cover a wide area, it has more breadth and width and less depth. However, where required, I have gone deep.

Dot ball redefined
First, a clarification. I have made a very significant and common-sense-based redefinition of one of the pillars of bowling analysis. Henceforth I will treat a dot ball as one in which no run was added to the opposing team. Thus a maiden over comprises six such tougher-defined dot balls. I am sure most readers will agree with me. The current definition of dot ball and maiden over date back to 1877, and so are outdated and archaic for the fast-paced T20 game.

A bowler should earn his maidens. Already we have amendments to the law that do not allow wides and no-balls to be exempt while looking at dot balls and maiden overs. I have simply extended this concept to byes and leg-byes. When Dale Steyn bowled six balls to Virender Sehwag and Gautam Gambhir in 2012 in Colombo and conceded five leg-byes, he, wonderful bowler though he is, did not deserve a maiden. There was no denying that five runs accrued to India's total, which is all that matters. Interesting sidebar is that India won by a single run. Similarly, Shaun Tait bowled a wonderful first over to Imrul Kayes in 2010. It is classified as a maiden. But he conceded four byes, and so that ball was not a dot ball.

The bottom line as far as I am concerned is that it is the runs conceded to the other team that matter, not the runs conceded to the batsman. This is to emphasise the team game concept, not to apportion blame.

I have talked about this in depth since I know that the point will be raised by readers. I will accept and post all such comments but will not change my interpretation. I know that it is more difficult to earn a maiden as per my interpretation, and that is enough for me. I also feel that it is the correct interpretation and would not mind starting a campaign to implement this change, at least for limited-overs matches.

Fortunately in this World T20, only two overs were declared maidens when in actual fact, they weren't. In the first match against New Zealand, Ashish Nehra bowled his first over very well and dismissed Colin Munro. However the New Zealanders took a leg-bye, so the over was not a true maiden. A few days later, Mohammad Amir's second over to India was declared a maiden. However two leg-byes were scored off Shikhar Dhawan's hips. Amir, you are most welcome back to the cricket scene since you are an exciting bowler, but sorry, you should not get this maiden.

The first part of my analysis is based on Rating Points which was covered in my February article. Briefly, the Rating points are on a scale of up to 100 and have been determined incorporating the nuances of T20. I do not want to repeat the basis of calculation here. Please refer to the article. Some minor changes have been done since that analysis, especially on match weights.

19.4
This is a number that will forever be imprinted on the minds of all West Indian cricketers, supporters and followers. In two consecutive knockout matches, this ball was hit for a six: first by Andre Russell against India and then Carlos Brathwaite against England. West Indies won both matches with two balls to spare. There is no doubt that if the respective targets were 12 runs away, the following two balls would also have been put over the ropes.

Brearley and Sammy: An unlikely pair
Darren Sammy scored eight runs in 13 balls, had a bowling summary of 3.0-0-31-1 and took two catches. That was probably the smallest contribution any player made in the World T20. However, he led his side with imagination, verve, commitment, and a never-say-die attitude. There was a shade of Mike Brearley in his captaincy. Like the scholarly Brearley, Sammy brought the best out of a set of exceptionally gifted individuals. He bonded 15 cricketers into a single unified team. Two cricketers who are totally unlike but have something special in common.

Winning/par score in the World Cup
When I analysed the 23 matches that were completed, I tried averaging the first- and second-innings scores and got some middling numbers. But I am wary of presenting the same in view of some significant facts. The first is that there were only 23 matches. There were 11 wins defending varying scores and 12 wins chasing targets between 119 and 230. That is fine. But a set of 11/12 innings seems to be a low population set. The other important factor was that a team could defend a score of 170 score in a 3pm match but not a score of 200 in a 7.30pm match, on the same pitch. Toss and dew made a mockery of calculations.

Finally the ranges of numbers were such that averaging these was like averaging student marks of 10 and 100 or batsman scores of 0 and 100. Three matches were played in Nagpur and the average RpO was 5.8. Twice, scores below 125 were defended successfully. Four matches were played at Wankhede Stadium and the average RpO was 10.1. Three times, scores above 180 were chased successfully. With this sort of range present in a third of the matches, if I say that the average RpO was 7.8, it means nothing. As Jarrod Kimber very eloquently explained, there was no par score in the World Cup.

Maybe it was a clear case of converting wickets in hand to runs on the board, come what may. Maybe India would have been better off scoring 210 for 6 rather than 192 for 2. How? I cannot say how, that is not my call: it was MS Dhoni's and Virat Kohli's. Maybe you do not decide that 190-200 was a par score on that pitch. You push for beyond what your gut feel tells you.

Bangladesh vs India: Two fours had been hit and Bangladesh needed two runs in three balls to win and (virtually) knock the favourites - the hosts - out of the tournament. Two experienced batsmen were at the crease. It was a cakewalk. The suggested scenario would have been: take a single to tie the match and then take another single to win the match. Very conveniently, Hardik Pandya bowled two full tosses. Either could have been put away for one, two or four runs.

What happened was a brain fade, a compulsion to showboat and the need to hit a six and perform a victory dance took precedence. A by-now well-known sequence of WWW meant that Bangladesh's recently discovered tough exterior was found to be cracked. Did India deserve to win? Of course, a resounding "Yes", if only for their captain's calm demeanour and unflappable temperament. If one person deserved a bit of luck, it was Dhoni. Did Bangladesh deserve to win? Of course, yes, for 117 balls. But a resounding "No" for the last three. Everyone cannot be a Kohli or a Root or a Smith or a Williamson. But they could learn something by studying innings by these young masters.

West Indies v South Africa: A six was hit and the equation was two in four balls. First difference was that Brathwaite and Denesh Ramdin communicated. "Let us first get a single and then see" must have been the gist of this powwow. Brathwaite calmly places the ball for a single, to secure the tie. Then Ramdin does an easy upper cut to secure the win. Maybe they had watched what happened couple of days ago and remembered the sequence, just in time. Maybe they are more cricket-savvy. Maybe they are less skilled but possess more common sense.

Four sixes in an over: an additional look
If anyone follows cricket, they would have known by now how the final finished: with a quartet of sixes. Has this ever happened before? The answer is no. But there are nice variations of this theme to be culled from the database. Let me give these below.

1. There are 19 instances of four sixes being hit in an over. This list is, of course, led by Yuvraj Singh, with a round half-dozen sixes. Out of these 19, six bowlers conceded a four in the over as well. Three of these overs finished on the wrong side of 30 runs.

2. Out of these 19, four were the last overs of the respective innings. Furthermore, three of these four were in the first innings, and Ben Stokes' over was the only instance of the last chasing over going for four sixes. Let me look at these four instances below.

2.1. In match No. 291, Rubel Hossain bowled the last over in the first innings. The first ball, to Lendl Simmons, went for a single. Then Marlon Samuels took over and it was carnage. The sequence was 1, 6, 6, 6, 4, 6. West Indies moved from 168 for 4 to 197 for 4 and won comfortably.

2.2. In match No. 364, Dwayne Bravo bowled the last over of the first innings to Chris Jordan. The sequence was 2, 6, 6, 6, 0, 6. England moved from 139 for 6 to 165 for 6. The importance of this over was revealed later, when West Indies lost by just five runs.

2.3. In match No. 288, Xavier Doherty bowled the last over of the first innings to Chris Gayle and Kieron Pollard. The sequence was 6, 1, 6, 6, 6, w. West Indies moved from 180 for 3 to 205 for 4. They won the match comfortably.
2.4. In match No. 557, Ben Stokes bowled to Brathwaite, the last over of the second innings. The sequence was 6, 6, 6, 6. The score moved from 137 for 6 to 161 for 6. This time there were no comebacks.

Nineteen runs in an over?
Let us imagine for a moment that two very correct batsmen are at the crease. A perfect square drive fetches four runs off the first ball. The batsmen run like hares off the second and get two. But they have not kept pace with the required rate. The equation is 13 off four. Despite two excellent balls, we are almost in a boundary-needed-every-ball territory. What happens if a batsman gets out in the first three deliveries? We are in 6, 6, 4 or 6, 4, 4 scenarios. This has been discussed just to show how difficult the equation was. All pressure was taken away with the six-whatever-ball approach adopted by Brathwaite. In a similar situation next time, Brathwaite might hole out. That is fine, since this approach is one that might work once in three attempts.

Now for the three serious analytical derivations of the World Cup. The best performances in the World Cup, grouped by the appropriate facet of the game.

It would indeed have been a big surprise if the magnificent match-winning effort of Samuels did not appear at the top of the best-innings table. Samuels scored more than half his team score and anchored the innings from the second over to the last. In the 2012 final, Samuels played a similar innings in the first innings of the match. Here in Kolkata, it was a tough chase, especially with the score at 11 for 3. Brathwaite was the enforcer but Samuels was the backbone. This innings fetches 65.4 rating points and deservedly finishes on top. I only wish he had not taken the opportunity, after playing a memorable innings, to score off others, off the pitch.

Gayle's blistering hundred comes in next. Even though more runs were scored in fewer balls, it was only a preliminary group match and both teams were playing on neutral ground. But the value of the innings was immense. The number of runs, the 200-plus strike rate, and the fact that West Indies were chasing a huge score were enough to push this innings into second place.

There is no doubt that Simmons was thrice-blessed against India. But the value of the innings cannot be over-emphasised. He was primarily responsible for taking West Indies to the final. The importance of the match, the quality of Indian bowling, the loss of the two early wickets and the away location all propelled Simmons' innings into the top three. The innings might not have been very pretty but it was very, very effective. Johnson Charles and Andre Russell only played supporting roles. It was Simmons who was there at the end.

Jason Roy's powerful chasing effort of 78 in the semi-final appears next. Then comes Joe Root's classic effort in the final. It is possible that if Root had not got out in the 15th over, England could very well have won the match. Both of Kohli's masterpieces appear in the top-10. That Brathwaite's ten-ball blitz is not just a cameo is proved by its high placing: at no. 7. The list is rounded off by Root's earlier effort and Martin Guptill's match-winning innings.

Despite the fact that Australia scored 193, their win against Pakistan was not assured until the last couple of overs. James Faulkner's spell was primarily responsible for this win. In a match in which the average scoring rate was nine, he went at below seven. His last two overs were superb: 12 balls, 13 runs, four wickets and a single four. It is possible that the batsmen were going for the runs. But that is part of the game.

The opening match of the World Cup, in Nagpur. In the matches in the qualifying rounds, scoring was not as free as expected, but scores of 158, 170 and 186 were posted. New Zealand would have expected a middling score but were restricted to 126. An easy victory was on the cards. After all, the same Indian line-up had outbatted Australia recently, and this was home. Until Nathan McCullum took out Dhawan. Then Mitchell Santner dismissed Rohit Sharma and Suresh Raina: 12 for 3 in three overs. There was no recovery afterwards. Santner gave away nothing and finished with 4 for 11. All his wickets were those of top-order batsmen or allrounders. He bowled 16 dot balls and conceded a single four. His outstanding spell is deservedly in second place, with 56.5 points.

Brathwaite is now known all over the world as the guy who finished off the final with a quartet of sixes. His bowling effort in England's innings has gone into the background. However, it must be said that that bowling effort was as important, or even the more important contribution. Four excellent overs of medium pace, at an RpO of below six, and including the important wickets of Root, Jos Buttler and a rampant David Willey were the features. He bowled his overs in single-over spells.

Stokes' excellent spell in the semi-final, which included very tight two overs at the end follows next. Two Samuel Badree special spells controlling the initial part of the innings are in the top ten. Most of these overs were bowled in the tough Powerplay overs. Willey bowled his heart out in the final. That England fell short should not take anything away from his mesmerising spell. Mustafizur Rahman, Jordan and Chirs Morris complete the top ten.

Brathwaite's magnificent effort with the bat and ball in the final occupies the top place. It is way ahead of the next-placed performanec. The 3 for 23 fetches 55.4 points, and the explosive 34 in ten balls fetches 54.5 points. The total of 110 is reflective of the quality of the effort. It is the best ever all-round effort in T20 World Cup history.

Shahid Afridi might not have had a very good World Cup, both as a player and as captain. But in Kolkata against Bangladesh, he could not do anything wrong. His blitz of 49 in 16 balls, with 40 of those runs coming in boundaries, took Pakistan to a match-winning 201. Then when Bangladesh batted, he bowled a beautifully controlled spell of 2 for 27. The economy rate of 6.75 tied Bangladesh up. He dismissed two dangerous attacking batsmen, Tamim Iqbal and Sabbir Rahman, as they were ready to accelerate. Truly a world-class all-round performance and one that is deservedly in second place.

There is no doubting the quality of Root's classically compiled 56 in the final. Who could have imagined that he would bowl the second over and dismiss the two openers, including Gayle? This was a match-winning effort, but snatched away by the blistering blade of Brathwaite. I normally do not consider a single over as a complete bowling spell for an allrounder-effort analysis. However, the exception is when two wickets are captured.

The second part of my analysis is a tabular look at the key aspects of the game: namely, dot balls, boundaries and wides/no-balls.

South Africa were very good in handling dot balls. While batting, their dot-ball percentage was 32.2, and while bowling, 36.8%. This gave them a net of 4.6%. While this difference in percentages does not mean anything specific, it allows the follower to get a handle on how the dot-ball scenario worked for the team concerned. India and England were nearly equally good. Both had net percentage values of around 4.5%. Pakistan and New Zealand were fine, on the positive side.

On the distaff side, West Indies were an amazing team. Their net dot-ball percentage was a whopping -5.8%. That means they played 5.8% more dot balls than they bowled. On another day, on another continent, South Africa would have won the World T20 and West Indies would not have qualified. But in India in 2016, how they handled the balls off which they scored was important. That comes in the next section.

South Africa and England led on average number of boundaries per match. Both averaged more than 21 boundaries per match. Pakistan followed next, with 20.5. Australia and West Indies followed, with averages just below 20.

Where West Indies did very well was in that 37% of their boundaries were sixes. This was reflected in many measures. They scored 64.2% of their runs in boundaries, way ahead of the other teams. Their average number of sixes per match was in excess of seven: only South Africa matched them. Their weighted average of the boundary hit was 4.74, indicating the high proportion of sixes, with only Afghanistan matching them. Afghanistan, incidentally, were a revelation in this regard. Note how low India's numbers are: 23.7%, 50.8%, 3.6 and 4.47. Only Bangladesh lags behind.

Australia and Bangladesh were simply outstanding. They each bowled a total of eight wides and no-balls. That makes it a miserly two such deliveries per match. Australia were the only team not to have bowled a no-ball. New Zealand and West Indies were also quite disciplined. South Africa were the least disciplined of all the teams, bowling 36 wides and two no-balls. Twenty of these wides were bowled in their disaster of a match against England, who too were equally lax, with 35 wides and two no-balls in all.

India were the worst offenders on the no-ball front. Two of their spinners overstepped and the R Ashwin transgression might have cost them the semi-final. Although it must be said that the loss of Simmons would not have deterred West Indies from attacking, as evidenced in the final. West Indies conceded three no-balls. One of these went for the maximum: 13 runs in all, to be exact. Overall, in 23 matches, only 17 no-balls were bowled.

The third part of my analysis is a 360-degree look at the World Cup. I have covered all facets of the game in this loosely strung single topic coverage.

Dot balls-Individual: Remember that these are the tougher dot balls, as defined by me. In the match against West Indies, his first World T20 match, Jeffrey Vandersay was absolutely terrific. Of the 24 balls he bowled, 19 were dot balls. This constitutes 79.2% of the balls bowled, the best such figure in the World Cup. I remember watching this entire spell and was amazed at the quality of bowling by a newcomer. I am certain that we will see and hear more about Vandersay in the years to come, in the longer formats of the game. Afghanistan's Hamza Hotak bowled 18 dot balls in his spell against West Indies. This constitutes 75% of the balls he bowled.

Maidens: Remember that these are the tougher maidens as defined by me. Five maidens were bowled. Mohammad Nabi of Afghanistan bowled the first maiden of the main World T20, to Sri Lanka. This was followed by a magnificent over from Vandersay of Sri Lanka, in his T20I debut match. He bowled the over to Johnson Charles and dismissed him off the last ball. Liam Plunkett bowled a maiden over to Rashid Khan of Afghanistan. Then Rangana Herath bowled a maiden to England batsmen Alex Hales, who he dismissed off the fourth ball, and Root. This was the second over of the innings. In the final, Badree's second over to Eoin Morgan was a maiden. Since this was within the Powerplay and in the final, the maiden was worth its weight in platinum.

Twenty-four-plus run overs: Two such overs were bowled in the World Cup. The first one was AB de Villiers' counter-attack against the young 17-year-old Afghanistan spinner Rashid Khan, who had started well. This over was necessary to take South Africa past the 200 mark. De Villiers' scoring sequence was 6, 6, 4, 6, 6, 1. Amir Hamza conceded 25 runs in the match against England in the 19th over. England were recovering from 85 for 7 and nowhere near a comfort level when the over started at 107 for 7. They finally reached 142 and won by only 15 runs. Finally, the most discussed over of the tournament. Four balls, 24 runs, the World Cup violently taken away. What more can one say, except admiring Brathwaite and sympathising with England in general and Stokes in particular.

It is necessary to bring out one two-over sequence. South Africa scored 229 and looked to be heading to a comfortable win. Then Roy and Hales went berserk. The first over, bowled by Kagiso Rabada, went for 21 runs, and the next over, by Steyn, for 23. The first 12 balls realised 44 runs, England never looked back, and South Africa never recovered. Steyn was indeed disappointing. Are we seeing the decline of one of the greatest bowlers of all time?

High dot-ball percentage: In the first match of the World Cup, India did not score off 56 balls, which works out to 51.4% of the balls bowled. Without any doubt, this was one of the greatest surprises of the World Cup, considering how strong the Indian batting line-up was, and the lack of familiarity of the New Zealand bowling line-up with the Indian conditions. However, the highest number of dot balls came when West Indies batted against Afghanistan. They did not score off 57 balls, or 47.5% of the balls bowled in the match. The World Cup average of dot balls works out to 37.0%.

Low dot-ball percentage: In the innings in which England mounted their historic chase of 230 against South Africa, they did not just score boundaries. They faced the fewest dot balls. They did not score off only 21 balls, 17.8% of the balls bowled. That is only around one per over. And the amazing feature of this number is that three of these dot balls occurred in the last over, when just a single was needed. And South Africa were only slightly worse. They had only 25 dot balls, working to 20.8%.

High boundary-ball percentage: Again we come to the same match. South Africa, in their innings of 229, managed to reach or go past the ropes no fewer than 33 times. That works out to 27.5% and one every 3.6 balls. It is difficult to even imagine the carnage. Let me also add that 13 of these were over the ropes. South Africa nearly achieved this against Afghanistan, reaching the boundary 32 times.

Low boundary-ball percentage: Back again to that India-New Zealand match. The top-quality Indian batting line-up could only strike five balls past the boundary ropes. This works to an unbelievable 4.6%: a boundary every 22 balls. Bangladesh were only slightly better against New Zealand. The same five boundaries, this time out of 94 balls: a boundary every 19 balls. Kohli and Shuvagata Hom hit two boundaries each.

High boundary-runs percentage: When West Indies completed their historic win against India, what many followers did not realise was that their boundary percentage was an extraordinarily high 76.8% of the runs scored. They scored 146 of their 196 runs in boundaries. This also indicated a clear method of playing the ball bowled on merit, accumulating dot balls, and when the opportunity presented itself, going for the big hit - a strategy quite different to what the other teams do. It must be said that the strategy worked. South Africa scored more runs in boundaries against Afghanistan: 148 runs out of 203, working out to 72.9%, in boundaries.

High number of wides: Surprisingly, the most undisciplined bowling performance was by South Africa against England. South Africa bowled 20 wides, including two "big-daddy" wides. This was an important factor in why they could not defend a huge total of 229. Even Imran Tahir was guilty of bowling four wides. India bowled 11 wides against Australia. However, this did not matter and they won the (virtual) quarter-final with ease in the end.

High number of no-balls: Although there were other innings in which two no-balls were bowled, I have highlighted the West Indies-India semi-final because the four no-balls had a profound impact on the match result. First, Russell's no-ball was hit for six and the free hit was also dispatched for six, making it a 13-run ball. Then the two no-balls by Ashwin and Pandya cost India plenty: to be precise, two wickets.

Now we come to the over groups. From a logical and planning point of view I have split the innings into three over groups: overs 1-6, overs 7-15 and overs 16-20.

Most boundaries in overs 1-6: South Africa scored 17 boundaries (13 fours and 4 sixes) in the first six overs against England. That is 76 out of 83 runs in boundaries. Imagine a boundary every other ball! The England bowlers deserved our pity, at least for the duration of the South Africa innings. South Africa also scored 14 boundaries against Afghanistan.

Most boundaries in overs 7-15: This is the middle period and is normally the consolidation period. However, there are matches in which the middle periods have produced plenty of boundaries. The best performance was by West Indies against India in their semi-final win. In the nine overs, Simmons, Johnson and Russell plundered 14 fours. That means one every four balls. West Indies' strategy was simple. Defend for three balls and hit the fourth for a four or six. Earlier in the tournament, West Indies scored 12 boundaries in their win over England. It looks like this was their strategy through the tournament.

Most boundaries in overs 16-20: This is the last stage. As such, I have only considered the innings in which the entire five overs were played. South Africa scored 11 boundaries in their last five overs against Afghanistan.

Fewest boundaries in overs 1-6: Bangladesh could only manage two boundaries against New Zealand and India could only manage three against New Zealand in the Powerplay overs.

No boundaries in overs 7-15: What is presented now are two most extraordinary batting disasters. In the nine middle overs, India did not score a single boundary. I am speechless (or wordless).

No boundaries in overs 16-20: Pakistan were reasonably well placed at 123 for 3 in 15 overs, chasing 181. Fifty-eight runs in five overs seemed quite achievable. Then came a five-over stretch where Ish Sodhi, Adam Milne and Mitchell McClenaghan conceded no boundary in 30 balls and gave away only 35 runs. New Zealand won by a comfortable margin of 22 runs.

High strike rate in over groups: England scored the most runs in overs 1-6: 89 runs against South Africa. West Indies scored 96 runs in the middle group of nine overs against England. They followed this with 94 runs against India in the semi-final. England's tally in the middle period against South Africa was also 94 runs. In the last five overs against Afghanistan, South Africa scored 78 runs. This also included the 29-run de Villiers over against Rashid Khan.

Low strike rate in over groups: In the match between Pakistan and India, both teams scored only 28 runs in the first six overs. The only difference was that Pakistan had not lost a wicket while India lost three. Still, India won, thanks to Kohli's brilliance. India scored only 32 runs in the middle overs. Bangladesh scored 35 runs against New Zealand. South Africa scored only 31 runs in the last five overs against West Indies.

The qualifying phase
Below are the standout performances during the qualifying phase.

1. Mohammad Nabi's lovely spell of 4 for 20, for Afghanistan, against Hong Kong fetched 52.2 points and was the best one during the preliminary phase.

2. Paul van Meekeren of Netherlands produced a magnificent match-winning spell of 4 for 11, which led to a successful defence of a low target of 60 against Ireland. This fetched 50.6 points.

3. Shakib Al Hasan's identical spell of 4 for 11 against Oman fetched 49.3 points.

4. Nabi also led the innings ratings with 48.2 points for his innings of 52 in 32 balls against Zimbabwe.

5. Tamim Iqbal secured 46.9 points for his match-defining innings of 103 in 63 balls against Oman.

6. The irrepressible Ahmed Shahzad got 43.9 points for his attacking 61 off 39 balls against Scotland.

7. Mohammad Nabi's 52 in 32 balls, coupled with his controlled spell of 3.0-0-14-1 was the best all-round performance, with 76.8 points.

8. Ajay Lalcheta of Oman opened the innings with a maiden against Ireland.

9. In Bangladesh's match against Oman, Shakib Al Hasan captured two wickets each in two of the overs he bowled.

10. Finally, Bilal Khan bowled 17 dot balls out of the 24 he bowled against Bangladesh. This represents nearly 71% of the balls bowled.