The war of the vital statistics

Perdo Collins takes it on the chin © Getty Images

In studies across England the battle of the Old Trafford scorecard rages. On one side stands the ICC. On the other are most of Britain's proud battalion of cricket statisticians, led firmly from the front by Test Match Special's `Bearded Wonder', Bill Frindall. At stake is the scorecard, which for cricket statisticians is a sacred document, a kind of Dead Sea Scroll with numbers.

The uproar surrounds a curious incident involving a split chin and a toilet break. Shortly before noon on the third day of the Old Trafford Test in August, the West Indian fast bowler Pedro Collins was hit on the chin by a nasty Andrew Flintoff bouncer. Collins retired hurt immediately. Later, in the last over before lunch, West Indies' ninth wicket fell. Lunch was taken. During the break the match referee was told the stitched-up Collins would resume afterwards.

He never did, leaving England and the bemused umpires standing expectantly on the field. Lara claimed to have gone to the toilet and returned to find Collins still in the pavilion, his head too sore to continue. So Lara declared the innings at the lunch score of 395 for 9.

Or did he? There begins the battle. The ICC match referee Ranjan Madugalle says yes. The statisticians chorus no and hurl Law 12.3 (b) at their adversaries: "A side's innings is considered complete if no further batsman is available to come in." Collins was not available to bat: so West Indies' innings was closed at that point. As such the scorecard should read 395 all out.

The disagreement seems to revolve around whether Collins ever resumed his innings or not. The ICC-camp claim his statement of intent to bat is enough. The Frindall camp say that is rubbish: he had to cross the boundary rope, which never happened. The Laws are ambiguous.

The divide has split cricket's organs of record. The Cricinfo website (and this magazine) have fallen in with the ICC - so far. So have a small rebel group of statisticians. Wisden Cricketers' Almanack has reserved judgement. Might is on the side of the ICC; right, the statisticians are convinced, is with them.