Miller and Marsh, the best of the first weekend

This analysis will be done at suitable points during the World Cup 2015 so that the readers can see the way the Performance tables evolve. As more matches get played the top performance mosaic changes and readers can identify with what happened in the past few days. The qualifying bar for inclusion moves higher as more matches get played.

Four almost identical matches were played so far in the first two days of the World Cup. Four strong batting teams scored above 300, bowled very purposefully and won very handsomely. So there were more good batting performances and this is shown by the tables.

Top Batting performances in WC 2015: in 4 matches played so far

SNo	Rating Pts	Year	ODI#	Batsman	For	Vs	Runs	Balls
1	397	2015	3601	DA Miller	South Africa	Zim	138*	92
2	386	2015	3600	JWA Taylor	England	Aus	98*	90
3	370	2015	3600	AJ Finch	Australia	Eng	135	128
4	314	2015	3601	JP Duminy	South Africa	Zim	115*	100
5	280	2015	3602	V Kohli	India	Pak	107	126
6	221	2015	3599	CJ Anderson	New Zealand	Slk	75	46
7	220	2015	3601	H Masakadza	Zimbabwe	Saf	80	74
8	214	2015	3602	Misbah-ul-Haq	Pakistan	Ind	76	84
9	210	2015	3602	SK Raina	India	Pak	74	56

David Miller's explosive innings has just about managed to get the top spot with 397 rating points. That James Taylor's innings is ahead of the other hundreds is a surprise so much so I checked the constituent measures. I was pleasantly surprised and gratified to see that this gem really deserved its high place. A poor position at entry and afterwards, facing a huge target, facing an excellent attack (remember the numbers of the two 'Mitch's), the number of runs added with the late order batsmen, including Anderson and so on. So Taylor made up for not getting the win bonus points. Aaron Finch's beautifully paced hundred is very close behind and then comes JP Duminy's hundred, which edges out Kohli's hundred because Duminy came at a poor situation and had to do a rescue act while Virat Kohli had great support. All the fifties follow next in a logical order. But I can assure the readers that these entries would disappear as more matches get played.

Top Bowling performances in WC 2015: in 4 matches played so far

SNo	Rating Pts	Year	ODI#	Bowler	For	Vs	Analysis
1	458	2015	3600	MR Marsh	Australia	Eng	9.0 - 0 - 33 - 5
2	427	2015	3602	Sohail Khan	Pakistan	Ind	10.0 - 0 - 55 - 5
3	311	2015	3600	ST Finn	England	Aus	10.0 - 0 - 71 - 5
4	287	2015	3602	Mohammed Shami	India	Pak	9.0 - 1 - 35 - 4

All of Mitchell Marsh's five wickets were those of top order batsmen and he is comfortably ahead of Sohail Khan's similar collection. Finn is way behind since his wickets were a mixed lot. Shami's quality bowling effort is in fourth place. Tahir's good collection fell just short of the cut-off.

Top Player performances in WC 2015: in 4 matches played so far

SNo	Rating Pts	Year	ODI#	Player	For	Vs	Runs	Balls	Analysis
1	510	2015	3600	MR Marsh	Australia	Eng	23	20	9.0-0-33-5
2	281	2015	3599	CJ Anderson	New Zealand	Slk	75	46	3.1-0-18-2

Marsh's all-round performance and the bowling effort are not going to be beaten in a hurry in the matches to come. Marsh secured over 500 rating points which is very creditable considering that these are only the first few matches. Corey Anderson is a few miles behind. He just about met the bowling criterion. As more matches get played there would be more entries in this sparsely populated table.

Top Team performances in WC 2015: in 4 matches played so far

SNo	Rating Pts	Year	ODI#	Team	Own score	Vs	Other score
1	596	2015	3599	New Zealand	331 for 6 in 50.0	Slk	233 for 10 in 46.1
2	596	2015	3600	Australia	342 for 9 in 50.0	Eng	231 for 10 in 41.5
3	592	2015	3602	India	300 for 7 in 50.0	Pak	224 for 10 in 47.0
4	574	2015	3601	South Africa	339 for 4 in 50.0	Zim	277 for 10 in 48.2
5	410	2015	3600	England	231 for 10 in 41.5	Aus	342 for 9 in 50.0
6	399	2015	3601	Zimbabwe	277 for 10 in 48.2	Saf	339 for 4 in 50.0
7	394	2015	3599	Sri Lanka	233 for 10 in 46.1	Nzl	331 for 6 in 50.0
8	394	2015	3602	Pakistan	224 for 10 in 47.0	Ind	300 for 7 in 50.0

As already mentioned, four almost identical matches. The four winning teams have rating points between 574 and 596. The wins by New Zealand and Australia are bracketed at 596 rating points since their wins were more comprehensive. New Zealand is ahead by 0.2 rating points. The losing teams are within 16 rating points. I do not think that any World Cup has ever started in similar manner. Four scores of 3xx vs 2xx.

A brief introduction into the methodology of Performance Analysis.

The Batting Performance Ratings analysis takes into account the Runs scored, Balls faced, Next highest score (if this is the highest score), % of Team score, Innings status at entry, Bowling quality, Pitch information, Team strengths, Target score in front, Match location, Result and Match importance. These parameters are given appropriate weights. The calculations are done in such a way that Rating points of 1000 would be allotted to a mind-blowing and match-winning score of 200 in 150 balls in a WC final.

The Bowling Performance Ratings analysis takes into account the Wickets captured, Quality of batsmen dismissed, Scores at which batsmen were dismissed, Bowling accuracy, Batting quality, Pitch information, Team strengths, Target being defended, Match location, Result and Match importance. The calculations are done in such a way that Rating points of 1000 would be allotted to a magnificent and match-winning analysis of 10-2-15-6 in a WC final.

The Player Performance Ratings analysis takes into account the Batting Rating points, Bowling Rating points and the Fielding Rating points, which is a combination of catches and stumpings. There are minimum criteria for batting and bowling stints to ensure that these are genuinely all-round performances.

The Team Performance Ratings analysis takes into account the Result, Margin of win, Resources utilized, Team strengths, Match location and Match importance. The calculations are done in such a way that Rating points of 1000 would be allotted to an overwhelming win by 150 runs or 8 wickets in a WC final.