For sportstats home page, and info in Test Cricket in Australia 1877-2002, click here
|
|
Z-score’s
Cricket Stats Blog The longest-running cricket stats blog on the Web
|
|
Charles Davis: Statistician
of the Year (Association of Cricket Statisticians and Historians)
|
Who are the Fastest-Scoring (and Most Tenacious) Batsmen in Test
Cricket? Click Here. |
Longer articles
by Charles Davis Click Here |
A list of
“Unusual Dismissals” in Test matches |
Unusual Records. For Cricket Records you
will not see anywhere else, Click Here |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FOUND:
a full score of the Madras Tied Test ! some
remarkable first-class innings, re-scored. |
The Davis Test Match Database Online. Detailed scores for all Tests from 1877 to the 2010s have now been
posted. Almost three-quarters of Tests include ball-by-ball coverage;
virtually all others offer some degree of extended detail, beyond anything
previously made available online. The starting page
is here. An information page outlining
this database is here. Major Test
Partnerships (200+) 1877 to 1970. Major Test
Partnerships (200+) 1971 to 1999. |
|||
|
I have mentioned players with the most run out
credits in the past (still led by Jack Hobbs with 19). But what of the
players with fewest credits? The only players with more than 100 Tests and no
run out credits at all are Ross Taylor (112 Tests) and Matthew Hayden (103) Mark Waugh (128), VVS Laxman (134) and
Inzamam-ul-Haq (120) had only one run out credit each. Joe Root in 150 Tests has 3 run out credits.
However, two of them are ‘secondary’ in that he is the second fielder listed.
Shane Warne in his 145 Tests had the same run out stats as Root (1 primary 2
secondary) It is apparent that run outs by slip fielders are
rare. ******** Something a little different. After some
controversy over Mohammad Siraj’s penchant for the ‘celebrappeal’ (wildly
celebrating an lbw or caught behind without actually consulting the umpire) I
searched some Cricinfo ball-by-ball texts for that word. This was a very quick search not using any other
terms, so it probably misses some. Results... In 170 recent Tests, there were 38 references to
"celebrappeal". 17 of the 38 went to review. Stuart Broad was the bowler 11 times, Siraj 5. No
one else more than 2. One by Bangladesh was described as
"Broad-esque", another "a Broad-level celebrappeal" Of Siraj's five, none were out. Two were reviewed
but not out, one would have been out but India decided not to review. Of Broad's 11, only two were given out by the
umpire, one of which was overturned on review. One other was given not out, but overturned on a bowling
review. In another of Broad's celebrappeals a run out occurred while Broad
was doing his dance. I should add that 18 of the 38 were actually out,
so Broad's and Siraj's success rates with their celebrappeals were
particularly low. Later: when I extended the search to look at some
earlier Tests and found another 12 references to Broad's celebrappeals (6 of
them were OUT). The first occurrence of the word seems to be 2015 - Broad
again (Durban 2015). That reference says "Broad's celebrappeal was
justified this time" suggesting that it was well-known behaviour before
that. The word may well have been invented in Broad’s honour. ******** Another rarity: In the Adelaide Test against
India, Scott Boland took a wicket with his first ball in the second innings,
after having a catch taken off a no ball with his first delivery of the first
innings. I can only find two cases of a bowler taking a
wicket with his first ball in both innings - Akshar Patel at Ahmedababd 2021
and Zaheer Khan at Mirpur 2007. Suggestions welcome. In Zaheer’s case, it was
the very first ball of both innings. ******** |
21 December 2024 The online database is now complete up to and
including the 2010-11 season. I don’t know how much further I will take it:
certainly up to 2012, but beyond that, sources independent of
Cricinfo/Cricket Archive become progressively harder to find, and so for many
Tests I am not adding much to sources already available. I would like to stress that I am happy to supply
ball-by-ball Test data to amateur researchers (in line-per-ball Excel
format), within reason but free of charge. ‘Reason’ being single series or
season, usually, but ask if you would like more. I am also happy to share series from my ODI
ball-by-ball data, which is not online. I don’t know if or when any of this
will make it to the web. I currently have bbb records for about 800 ODIs from
the 20th Century. These data are not evenly distributed;
Australian coverage is extensive, matches from the subcontinent far less so.
I am hopeful of obtaining more in the future. ******* Stuck in the 90s Following up an enquiry, I dipped into the data to
find out which individual innings involved the most balls faced in the 90s.
The data that I have features the following Most Balls Faced in the 90s
Note Washbrook turning up 1st and 3rd,
and from consecutive Tests! Washbrook’s 114 off 455 balls is one of the
strangest centuries; he also spent 67 balls stuck on his final score of 114,
before being dismissed by Ramadhin in his 10th consecutive maiden
over. Batting like that seems simply weird today. There seems to have been be
a ‘culture’ among many batsmen in the 1950s and 60s that accurate finger-spin
bowling could not be hit. Note also that for Washbrook (and for a number of
the other innings in the table) the number of balls is plus or minus 2 or 3
due to unmarked leg byes in the scores. Most Balls Faced on 99
Most balls faced on 99 by a batsman who was out for
99 is 17 balls by JG Wright v Eng Christchurch 1991-92. In actual time in the 90s, the most may be ~98
minutes by Saqlain Mushtaq (above). Michael Vaughan’s effort took 87 minutes. There are probably some cases to be found in Tests
that haven’t made it into the ball-by-ball database. ‘Slow-scoring’ records
like this tend to be more common in the past, when more Tests are missing. At the other end of the scale, I had thought for a
long time that no centurion had ever spent only one ball in the 90s. However,
last year Ben Stokes managed it at Lord’s against Australia, going from 88 to
100 with sixes off consecutive balls. He went from 78 to 100 off four legal
balls plus a wide. If anyone can think of other possibilities not
covered, let me know. I checked Jaisimha’s 99 in 504 minutes but I don’t
think it would feature. When Nazar Mohammad took almost nine hours to reach
100 in 1952, he actually sped up a bit in the 90s. ******** There is no precedent for a #10 and #11 (Jasprit and
Akash at the ’Gabba) batsmen needing 33 or more runs to save the follow-on,
and actually getting them. The most by any team needing to save the follow-on
with the 10th wicket is 40 by Bangladesh v Sri Lanka in 2009. The batsmen
were #9 and #11. (I only looked at Tests with 200-run follow-on.) ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the Test Match Database, quite a few
discrepancies have been found in secondary stats (such as minutes batted)
between the main scorecards on the one hand and the table of half-centuries
on the other. Most of these problems have come from revisions to the main
scorecards that I have neglected to transfer through to the 50+ files. For
early Tests especially, these problems often derive from uncertainties and
conflicts in the reports that match scorecards are based on. I have now been through all the anomalies and I
have corrected as many of the conflicts as possible. For example, in the very
first Test, I have settled on 210 minutes for an innings of 63 by H Jupp, as
per the main scorecard, previously given as 191 minutes in the 50+ file. Most
corrections are smaller than this. ******** My blog has now passed the 20-year mark. The
first entry was on 6 November 2004. The early entries
are mostly copies of the short columns I wrote for The Age newspaper at the
time. I haven't changed the format of the blog much in 20 years, due to lack
of computer skills. Now very old-fashioned. So be it. ******** In the India A match in Melbourne the other day,
the first four balls of Australia A second innings were faced by four
different batsmen. It went 1,W,W,0 ******** |
29 November 2024 Nathan McSweeney, making his Test debut against
India in the Perth Test, took a catch after just 13 balls were bowled in the
match. Sounds rare, but it turns out to be a bit more common than I thought.
Here are some other names for catches on Test debut in the first over of the
match… HJ Tayfield 0.2 RG Hart 0.3 IM Chappell 0.3 PJP Burge 0.4 MRJ Veletta 0.4 IG Butler 0.5 While ball-by-ball data is incomplete for many
Tests, I have reason to believe that the above list is complete. I had a memory of Chris Sabburg, who never played
first-class cricket, taking a catch (off Kevin Pietersen) on his first ball
as fielding substitute at the ’Gabba in 2013. However, according to an
interview with Sabburg on YouTube, he had been a sub for a couple of overs
earlier in the day, so that disqualifies him; he came on a second time and
took the catch second ball. In innings two of a Test, Allen Lissette in 1955 and
Pragyan Ojha in 2009 took a catch off their first ball when fielding on
debut. Both had batted earlier in the match. ******** Here is an example of the pitfalls of producing a
table of records based on very incomplete information. When Marnus
Labuschagne was out for 2 off 52 balls in Perth, the Fox Sports website (but
not the TV coverage) put up a supposed list of slowest Test innings by
Australian batsmen…
Unfortunately this list is based on dodgy
information. When I generated a list from my own database, using the same
qualification of 50 balls minimum, I got the following…
So there are significant additions. There is also an
error in the TV list – Peter Taylor never scored 4 off 66 balls. The online
scorecards do show this for St John’s in 1991, but Taylor actually
scored 4 off 41 balls, not 66. One reason for this error is that slow-scoring
records were often set long ago, and Cricinfo/Cricket Archive lack the needed
detail for early Tests. By contrast, fast-scoring records are often quite
recent so they do better with that category. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It was a long wait, but the 100th score
of 250 or more in Tests has finally arrived thanks to Joe Root. Root’s 262
came 106 Tests after the previous score of 250 (252 by Tom Latham at
Christchurch in 2022). This was equal to the longest pause, in terms of Tests
played, between 250s in history: there was also a gap of 106 Tests in the
1980s. Root clocked up the 100th in Multan
just half an hour in playing time – 9
overs – ahead of Harry Brook, who went on to 317, which I supposed was
the shortest gap between 250s except that the case of Jayawardene and
Sangakkara reaching 250 against South Africa in 2006 was extremely similar. Prior to the 106-Test gap, there had been a
53-Test gap going back to Kane Williamson’s 251 in 2020. This represents
quite a dearth of giant scores in this decade, maybe an effect of ‘Bazball’.
Modern batsmen are so prone to hitting the ball in the air nowadays that it
is perhaps not surprising that giant scores have become so rare. Having said
that, it is interesting that Root and Brook hit only 3 sixes in their
combined 579 runs. There were six 250s in the space of 25 Tests in
1957-58. ********* At Chittagong in March, Prabath Jayasuriya was
dropped by three Bangladeshi slips fielders off the same ball. Jayauriya was
on 6 when he edged a ball off Khaled Ahmed; Shanto at 1st slip
missed the chance but it then deflected to Dipu at 2nd and on to Zakir at 3rd,
but none of them could hang on. ******** |
4 November 2024 Why Eleven? There was an interesting question on a ACS chat site
a little while back: what is the origin of having eleven players in a cricket
team? In truth the answer is lost in the mists of time.
The earliest surviving scorecards, from 1744, have teams of eleven, but
earlier descriptions of the game generally lack the detail to help with the
question of origins. The 1727 ‘Goodwood’ rules for a cricket match in Sussex
describes teams of twelve, which complicates things, but it is understood
(not sure how) that eleven was the standard. Someone asked the much-vaunted AI, which came up
with a completely useless answer. The most satisfying answer offered was from Eric
Parker’s History of Cricket, published around 1950. He pointed out how
the numbers 11 and 22 crop up (so to speak) regularly in traditional farming
practices in England. There are 22 yards in one chain, a common farm
measurement; farms possessed a literal chain created for the purpose. Easy to
measure out a cricket pitch. There were 10 chains to a furlong (a “long
furrow” = 220 yards) and eight furlongs to a mile. An area one chain by one
furlong was an acre, being the area that one worker could plough in one day
with a team of oxen. The original stumps (two of them in underarm days)
were 22 inches high placed five and a half inches apart; the ball was five
and a half ounces. I like the connection with the number 22. Beyond
that we don’t have a terribly clear idea when the idea of applying it to
cricket matches arose. ******** It appears that the protocol for measuring minutes
batted has changed, at least as far as online scores go. Drinks breaks are no
longer included in batting times. This represents a break with traditional
practice. While the change has some logic, that break makes historical
comparisons a little harder. Here is a comparison of a recent innings from
Pakistan. The CA/CI (Cricket Archive/Cricinfo) times are on the left and
exclude drinks breaks. Source BB is a score that includes drinks breaks, and
Source C is similar.
There is potential for confusion if the protocols
get mixed, such as when one protocol is used for the whole innings but
another for milestones (50s, 100s etc) from different source. The differences
in the above data, while sometimes small,
appear to go beyond exclusion of drinks breaks. ******** The Draw Drought One effect of the escalation of big hitting and high
strike rates in Tests has been the near-disappearance of drawn Tests. The
trend has been particularly strong in the last year. In the last 50-odd
Tests, there has been only one Test that was drawn after play on Day 5 (and
one other where Day 5 was rained out). That Test, West Indies v South Africa
at Port-of Spain in August, had four full sessions lost to bad weather, and
other sessions shortened. This was brought home when draws seemed to be a
foregone conclusion in two recent Tests; there seemed to be no chance of results
after Day 3 at Kanpur (India v Bangladesh, where almost 3 days were lost to
weather) and Multan (Pakistan v England, with first innings of 566 and 823),
yet both Tests were completed with time to spare. The lack of dull draws is surely welcome, yet with
that comes the disappearance of exciting draws. In the last 100 Tests, there
has been only one that I would class as a draw with a close finish: at
Karachi in 2023 Pakistan (449 & 277/5) v New Zealand (408 & 304/9).
Close Tests haven’t disappeared entirely – there was New Zealand winning off
the last ball at Christchurch in 2023 against Sri Lanka – but hopes for
forcing a draw against the odds are rare now. Nevertheless the preponderance
of result Tests means that such Tests that have close finishes still occur
fairly regularly. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Lawrie Colliver has provided a re-score of an ODI
that Australia played in Pakistan in 1988, scored from a newly-discovered
video. It was the only ODI that Australia played on that tour, the others
being cancelled due to floods and rioting in the aftermath of the
assassination of President Zia. apiece – but
Pakistan was declared the winner on account of losing fewer wickets (7
to 8). As far as I know, it is one of only two tied ODIs decided by this
method. It appeared especially odd because, with the scores tied, Pakistan
made no attempt to score from the last five balls, bowled by Dodemaide .
Presumably they knew that they were ‘ahead’, but it almost came unstuck when
a wicket fell off the second last ball. Abdul Qadir faced the last ball and
padded it away. A wicket here would have tied the game in wickets as well as
runs. Lawrie’s notes describe it as “plumb” but it was given not out, and so
Pakistan won. ******** India had a remarkable win in the recent Kanpur
Test, coming after more than two days were washed out. It was the first time
that a team has started its first innings on the fourth day and won, with the
peculiar exception of the Cronje 'Leather Jacket' Test. The fourth day also featured the most wickets on
a day with over 400 runs. 437 runs, 18 wickets (85 overs), previously 447/17
(91.4 overs) at The Oval 2013, and 414/17 at Lord's 1931. ******** |
October 2024 A Brief History of Rest Days A recent Test in Sri Lanka had a ‘Rest’ day – actually
a pause for a national election. Like the handful of Tests in this Century
that had such pauses, there were special circumstance involved. The ToSh group had a little discussion about this,
and it got me looking into the history of Rest Days. I was surprised by some
of the observations. The insertion of days off into Test matches,
specifically as rest days, dates only from the 1950s. Prior to that all ‘rest
days’ were literal days of rest, i.e., Sundays, with the occasional pause
also on Christmas Day. For a long time, playing cricket on a Sunday was
severely frowned upon, or even illegal, in Christian countries. Some of the
earliest written records of cricket in the 17th Century are court
records of people fined for playing cricket on the Sabbath. In England, there were no rest days of any kind
prior to 1920. All Tests were three days, commencing early- or mid-week,
aligned with County matches. In Australia, Tests were longer and often
encompassed the weekend, but days off were always on a Sunday, even if the
match started on a Saturday. There is one Test that shows that the idea of
simply granting players a day off did not apply in those days: the first Test
of 1897-98 at the SCG started on a Monday and went for five days without a
break. In 1921, some Tests in England started to straddle
the weekend and the Sunday prohibition applied. It was similar in South
Africa, where a Test in 1922-23 actually had two consecutive days off, a
Sunday and Christmas Day on the Monday. The epic Durban Test of 1939 had two
Sundays in addition to the ten scheduled days. The first Tests with Sunday play occurred during
England’s first tour of India in 1933-34. When West Indies toured India in
1948-49, there was play on Sundays and the five-day Tests had no rest days.
The idea of regular rest days seems to have emerged in the 1951-52 England
tour of India, where there was play on Sundays but a day off after Day 3 of
each Test. Rest days soon became the norm in the five-day and
six-day Tests in Australia and England, but invariably these remained on a
Sunday for many years. The West Indies had the same approach; there were also
a couple of Tests which had two rest days because they occurred over Easter,
pausing for Good Friday and Easter Sunday. The last of these was in 1965
(Georgetown). One of the oddest cases was Karachi 1956. There was
a rest after Day 3 (Sunday); then on Monday (Day 4) Pakistan dominated and
were set 69 to win. Incredibly they scored only 63 for 1 in 46 overs before
stumps, and so had to come back. The next day was another rest day (a day of
mourning for a political figure) and so they waited till Wednesday to score
the needed six runs. Sunday play in Australia was finally introduced in
1968-69 (although not in all Tests). Those Tests with Sunday play had rest
days after Day 2 or 3. England did not have Sunday play until 1981, and even
then it was irregular with most rest days coinciding with Sunday. After 1986-87, rest days in Australia fade from
view, only occurring under special circumstances. New Zealand followed suit.
(The special circumstances were sometimes very odd: the Brisbane Test of
1995-96 was paused for a day so that the broadcaster could show the
Australian Grand Prix.) Rest days in England remained, when scheduled, on
Sundays, before disappearing in the early 1990s. Rest days were dispensed
with in South Africa when that country returned to Test cricket in 1992, but
they continued to be regularly used in the hotter climes of the subcontinent
and West Indies. In a unique occurrence, a Zimbabwe/New Zealand Test in
November 1992 was paused for a day so that an ODI could be played. Not
exactly a rest day! The pressure of tighter schedules was making its
mark, and the last series with normal rest days appears to be New Zealand in
West Indies in 1996. There was a rest day in India’s first Test there the
following year (on Good Friday), but the other two Tests of the series were
so heavily rain-affected that the idea of rest days did not apply. As said earlier, scheduled pauses in Tests since
then have only occurred under special circumstances. A day was taken in a
Test at Sharjah in 2014 following the shocking death of Philip Hughes, but
extra play was added at the scheduled end of the match. Frequency of rest days (Day Prior,
Number of Tests) 1 138 2 269 3 510 4 34 5 3 For the record, here are what can be described as
Rest or Pause Days in Tests from the last 30 years.
******** Most Runs added after the fall of each
wicket (Test innings)
******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most runs added after a top-scorer was out… At Kingston in 1955 top scorer Neil Harvey (204)
was out at 373 and Australia made 758, so that is 385 runs added. ******** Half of all Test series have been played in the
21st Century, even if one-off Tests are not considered. The proliferation of
two- and three-Test series at the expense of fours- and fives- is part of the
reason. ******** The England v Australia T20 at Southampton, won
by Australia 179 to 151, was the equal highest scoring T20 international
where both teams were bowled out in less than their allotted 20 overs.( There
was a match between Bangladesh and West Indies in 2018 that also produced 330
runs.) In a 348-run match between Australia and Pakistan
on 2 May 2010, both teams were bowled out, but they both played the full 20
overs. ******** At Dhaka in 2004, Irfan Pathan bowled two
hat-trick balls to Mohammad Ashraful in the same innings. The first came
after Pathan had dismissed Rajin Saleh first ball and Ashraful came to the
wicket. The second came when Pathan dismissed Mushfiqur Rahman first ball at
the end of an over. Ashraful was still batting and faced Pathan when he
started his next over, hitting him for 3. Late in the innings there was another hat-trick
ball, bowled by Kumble while Ashraful was still batting, but this time he was
at the non-strikers end. ******** |
15 September 2024 The Slowest Starters In his sixth innings extending over almost 2 years,
Mohammad Ali of Pakistan finally scored his first run in Test matches. The
stroke for two came off his 52nd ball faced. I decided to make a
list to see who had made a slower start… Most balls faced before scoring first
career run in Tests.
Giffen’s number is uncertain because the analysis is
based on (very detailed) newspaper reports. It should be reasonably accurate
because most of it comprised maiden overs. Zahir Khan of Afghanistan did not score until his
eighth innings, but faced only 29 balls in doing so. Most of the above is extracted from the ball-by-ball
database, covering 80 per cent of Tests. Some of the figures are surprising,
and probably could not be guessed from the whole innings data; Hamish
Marshall is an example – his first Test innings was 40 off 121 balls, from
which one would not expect 38 balls to get off the mark. So it is likely that
there would be other cases not identified. One would be Sajeewa de Silva (KSC
de Silva) in the 1990s, whose possible range is 38 to 52 balls, probably at the
lower end of that range. Terry Jarvis of New Zealand scored 9 in 123 minutes
in his first Test innings in 1964-65, but no other detail is available. ******** The Great LBW Drought The 1970-71 series was a watershed in Ashes history,
ending Australia’s hold over the urn in the 1960s and ushering in a more
evenly contested decade. England won that six-Test series 2–0; apart from
Bodyline (1932-33), it is the only time in the past century that England has
regained the Ashes in Australia. There were some statistical oddities. Chief among
them: not one Australian batsman was given out lbw in the entire series. This
remains a sore point among England fans with long memories, although there
was also a low count of English victims, just five. There were mitigating
factors. Most important was an odd change in the lbw Law (as
an “experimental rule”) that was tested out from the Australian domestic
season in 1969-70, to 1971. The intent was to discourage pad play by making
it easier to be given out doing playing “no genuine stroke”, but the specific
wording of the rule had a strange side effect. It reverted ‘standard’ lbws
(where a stroke was played) to the pre-1935 Law, making it mandatory for a
ball to pitch in line with the stumps, so excluding balls pitching outside
off stump. (By 1972, the wording had been modified to restore the pre-1969
criteria for standard lbws, while retaining the new no stroke provisions.
This was permanently written into the Laws in 1980.) There had been a dramatic effect, with the incidence
of lbw in Australian domestic cricket dropping from 8-9 per cent of
dismissals (1967 to 1969) to 4-5 per cent after the rule change, returning to
9 per cent in 1972-73. In the 70-71 Tests, it was only 2.7 per cent. Umpire
Tom Brooks may have amplified the effect; he umpired five Tests (plus the
abandoned Melbourne Test) but gave only two batsmen out lbw, both English.
Incidentally, my father was a 1st Grade umpire in Sydney in those
years and knew Brooks, and I remember Dad remarking that Brooks’ instructions
were that lbw conditions were always extremely difficult to satisfy. In that climactic final Test of 70-71 at the SCG,
Rowan gave Ray Illingworth out lbw to Dennis Lillee. Surviving video
highlights show Illingworth playing no stroke – probably the first batsmen
given out under the experimental rule. (Batsmen had been out lbw playing no
stroke before often enough, but under standard rules.) The other lbw in the series was given at the MCG, by
Max O’Connell, who officiated in two Tests. The table shows the fluctuations in lbws in Test
matches brought on by the changes. Incidence of LBWs in Test matches.
All Test matches, calendar years. “1970”
includes some matches before the experimental rule. The experimental rule was followed in England in 1971,
in Tests versus Pakistan and India. In six Tests, there were only five lbws,
a similar tally to the 70-71 Ashes. Just two of them were against England
batsmen. Only one of the five was a ‘no stroke’ lbw (Snow to Gavaskar). The
only lbw in the three Pakistan Tests was very last wicket of the series. When normality was restored in 1972, there were 27
lbws in five Ashes Tests in England. Curiously, none of them were of the ‘no
stroke’ variety. Today about five per cent of lbws involve the batsman
playing no stroke. Incidence of LBW in Australian
First-Class Cricket 1966-74
******** Understanding the Law Change The 1971 L.B.W. Law is illustrated from Wisden
of that year. It took me a while to understand it. The Section 39 in bold
type is the Law as it had stood for over 35 years. It includes a provision
for lbw to balls “pitched on the off-side of the striker’s wicket”. However,
in 1971 this paragraph was no longer in force and had been completely
superseded by the “experimental rule” in italics. Part (a) of the rule
requires the ball to have pitched in line with the stumps, contrary to the
provision of Law 39. Though not stated explicitly, it applies to standard
lbws. Part (b) – and only Part (b) – allows for balls pitching outside off
stump, but applies only to batsmen making no genuine effort to play the ball.
I cannot be certain that this reversion to the pre-1935
Law was the intention of the new wording, but it certainly was the effect. It
is hard to understand how making standard lbws more restrictive could reduce
the amount of pad play, if that was the goal. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have endeavoured to update my list of unusual dismissals in Test matches. If anyone
can think of cases that I have missed that should be considered, particularly
in recent years, let me know. Test matches only. The list now includes the Bairstow brain fade at
Lord’s last year. ******** |
31 August 2024 Stroke or no stroke? As a follow-up to my last post, here is some data on
batsmen dismissed (bowled or lbw) without playing a stroke. Data is since
Cricinfo began archiving text description in 1999. The data for 1999 to 2001
is probably rather patchy. I have noted 247 cases of no stroke bowled
dismissals since 1999 (4.2 % of all bowled dismissals) and 301 LBW (5.1 %)
*Innings after April 1999 TWM Latham has four no stroke BWDs but no LBW, and Brian
Lara has four no stroke LBWs but no BWDs. Interesting that neither Lara nor
Tendulkar are known to have been bowled this way, but they have 12 LBWs (note
Chanderpaul also). However, there is no data for them before 1999.
Tendulkar’s lbws include the controversial incident when he was hit on the
arm/shoulder trying to duck a McGrath delivery that did not get up. Most innings played without a ‘no stroke’ bowled or
LBW: Angelo Mathews of Sri Lanka on 195 and Mark Boucher of South Africa on
183. ******** No shot lbw in both innings: KD Mackay, Kanpur 1959-60 (pair of ducks) BC Lara, Leeds 2000. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the Wellington Test of 2023 (New Zealand v Sri
Lanka) not a single batsman was out bowled or lbw. New Zealand won by an innings.
Only one lbw decision was reviewed, the umpire’s not out decision being
upheld. ******** In the Nottingham Test England reached 50 faster
than any team before them, on the second ball of the fifth over. Even more
notable was the fact that it was done on the first morning of the Test; most
previous record-breaking 50s have happened in teams’ second innings when
quick runs were required. The relevant section of the Unusual Records has been updated. ******** |
5 August 2024 Clean Bowled or Played On? For the last twenty years or more, I have
periodically been going through descriptions of ‘BOWLED’ dismissals in Tests
to distinguish between ‘clean bowled’ and ‘played on’ dismissals, with ‘no
stroke’ dismissals thrown in for good measure. Here is a little statistical
study of some of the data for recent years. This does rely on the Cricinfo
commentators noticing edges – and this sometimes requires extensive replays –
but the descriptions are now so detailed that I would expect that a great
majority of cases are noticed. I looked at 668 batsmen out bowled, in 115 Tests. [Bowled
dismissals in total account for 18 per cent of all dismissals (more like 25
per cent for tailenders)]. Of the 668, I noted 155 cases of the ball hitting
bat first, and a further 35 coming off the pad or other body part. That is 23
per cent off the bat and 5.2 per cent off the pad, giving a total of 28.4 per
cent, In another 34 cases (5.1 per cent), the batsmen was
recorded as playing no stroke; nearly all of these were clean bowled. There
were also a (very) few cases where no stroke was offered, but the ball hit
the bat anyway and went onto the stumps. Left-handed batsmen are more likely than
right-handed to play on: 34 per cent to 26 percent (total edge or pad). It
might be that the line required for a right-handed bowler to bowl a
left-hander is more difficult than with a right-handed batsman. There is less difference between left- and
right-handed bowlers: 25 per cent (left) and 30 per cent (right). Pace bowlers get 32 per cent of their bowled wickets
via edge or pad, whereas spin bowlers get only 19 per cent. The incidence of
‘playing on’ varies between countries, and appears to be associated with the
dominance of pace or spin bowling across various countries.
Perhaps of more interest is a strong relationship
between batting position and a propensity to play on. There is a major
difference between top-order and bottom-order bats, presumably linked to much
tighter techniques among better batsmen. It is quite hard to get a ball on
the stumps through a top batsman’s defence without hitting something on the
way.
One interesting question that is hard to answer is:
How many bowled dismissals occur to balls that are not directed at the
stumps? The available descriptions often don’t distinguish between playing on
with a fine edge (when the ball would probably have hit the stumps anyway)
and playing on to a ball that would have missed the stumps. My impression is
that the latter is in the majority, but beyond that I wouldn’t hazard a
guess. Perhaps the massive CricViz database could offer some clues. ******* |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
11 July 2024 A Revised List The “Hot 100”, the lists of fastest- and slowest-scoring
Test batsmen has been updated, rather belatedly. I have made a few
modifications. For the fast scorers, the bar has been raised to a 2,500
career run minimum (and averages over 20), to try to weed out secondary
players, in a batting sense, with limited careers. But those guys have not
been ignored; there is now a second table for
those in the 500 to 2,500 run category, and this
allows Gilbert Jessop to step into pride of place, after all these years. https://www.sportstats.com.au/hotscore2024.html I noticed that in the “Balls Between Dismissals”
category (longest average innings length), Herbert Sutcliffe has edged ahead
of Don Bradman in the latest calculation. I think this due to some improved
calculations for the 1926 and other series. Sutcliffe is now on 163.9 balls
per dismissal to Bradman’s 163.7. However, neither player’s data is complete,
and various estimates have been used to fill the gaps. There is no way to
distinguish these figures statistically; they are effectively tied. ******** Tit for Tat. Players who have
dismissed each other for golden ducks in the same Test.
******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Another data point for historical dropped
chances. Barry Valentine has very kindly provided me with
another monumental ball-by-ball analysis of an Ashes series, this time the
1962-63 series in Australia. I have been through it looking for mention of
dropped or missed chances and found about 48 (depending on definitions) to go
with the 111 catches and stumpings. This implies a miss rate of just over 30
per cent. It is hard to say whether the instances represent
everything that could ever be found. However, I would say that Valentine’s
analysis, which runs to 236 pages and is drawn from a wide variety of
sources, is about as exhaustive as we will ever see. ******** When Maninder Singh was caught by Graham Gooch
off Dilley at Lord’s in 1986, Gooch initially dropped the catch. It deflected
to wicketkeeper French, who dropped it in turn, but managed to deflect the
ball back toward Gooch. Gooch flicked the ball up with his boot and finally
caught the ball. ******** A Nepal cricket anecdote, after their near
miracle victory. I spent almost a month in Nepal in 1984 including
a 26-day trek in the Himalayas. Can't say I encountered much evidence of
cricket. When we had a rest day in the trek in Muktinath the Australians and
Poms in the group thought we would teach the Sherpas how to play cricket. Not
a great success; at 3800 metres up, even the Sherpas were reluctant to run
between wickets. However, later I did encounter a guy in a remote
village who came up to me and asked if I knew the score in the Test match. He
must have been asking about a West Indies/Australia match. It was quite
unusual to meet someone who spoke English; turned out he was from India. I could not help him. We had no contact with the
outside world for the whole 26 days, and none of the villages we went to had
electricity. Nowadays I would suffer if I had to go without internet for 2
days. An account of trekking 40 years ago is in my
travel memoirs. https://sportstats.com.au/Travel/1984TrekkinginNepal.pdf |
16 June 2024 The Best Umpire, by DRS Data A couple of curiosities that I noticed after
updating my DRS (Decision Review System) file: ·
Most regular Test umpires have a DRS overturn rate between 24 and 27
per cent when reviews are called, but there is one current umpire who is way
ahead of anyone. Michael Gough’s overturn rate is just 16.8 per cent; nearest
to that is the retired Asad Rauf on 22.8 per cent (only part of Rauf’s career
was during the DRS era), followed by still-active Kumar Dharmasena on 23.4.
Gough has now umpired 34 Tests where DRS was used, and has been subject to
208 reviews, a fair number for assessment. ·
Joe Root has been the batsman in far more reviews than any other, 111
reviews in all. Jonny Bairstow and Steve Smith are next on 69 reviews each.
74 of Root’s reviews were from bowlers, with only 14 per cent successful. For
all batsmen, 19 per cent of bowlers’ reviews are successful (umpire’s
decision overturned). This suggests that Root is such a prized wicket that
bowlers tend to waste speculative reviews in the hope of getting lucky. An historical note: prior to the general adoption of
DRS, there were at least two series where the system was trialled. I had been
aware that it was tested in a Sri Lanka/India series in 2008, but I hadn’t
known until recently that it was also used in a New Zealand/West Indies
series a few months later. ******** Some stats concerning my Test match
score collection. My Test match score collection has been accumulating
for more than 20 years now. Of the first 2500 Tests, about 1650 are now
represented. Most are (copies of) handwritten scores as recorded by scorers
at the matches. Some 79 of them are digital records from sources other than
online sources. Ball by ball records from Cricinfo or other online sources
are not included in these figures, but number an additional 472. Cricinfo began archiving Test match ball-by-ball
texts in April 1999. Of 1441 Tests prior to this, I have ball-by-ball records
for about 1100, thanks to the score collection. About 30 of these are
incomplete, and 30 more (all early matches) were reconstructed from detailed
press reports. ******** Ideas I like for improving T20 cricket
(but we will probably never see) Alas I find myself unmoved by these 400- and even
500-run slogfests in 40 overs. Most of the
sixes I saw in the IPL were off three-quarter-strength strokes or mishits.
Too easy. In spite of hundreds and hundreds of sixes, no hit went more than
110m in the IPL. Ten or fifteen years ago hits longer than 110m were regular
occurrences. Some suggestions to give bowlers a fighting chance… ·
Forget about Power Plays. Allow five men on the boundary throughout. ·
To score six, a shot must land in the crowd, not just over the rope. A
proper hit should be required. ·
To score four, the ball must cross the boundary – the only criterion.
The position of the fielder is irrelevant. ·
A catch should count even if taken outside the boundary rope, as long
as the fielder first touches the ball before setting foot outside the
boundary. None of these silly juggling tricks. ·
Forget these pointless Impact Players. Why do teams need 12 players in
a 40-over match? ·
If a batter ‘reverses’ his stance, the wide law should not apply, at
all. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Back from holiday. I will add more series to my
online scores soon. ******** Hitting a seven and a five in the same Test
innings: Andy Sandham hit a 7 and a 5 in his 325 at
Kingston in 1930. WA Young did the same at Christchurch in 2021-22 (v
Bangladesh), with the shots coming only a few balls apart. Young's 7 was
signalled as an 8 by the umpires, but the scorers appear to have (correctly)
decided that it was a 7. The poor bowler Ebadot; a catch was dropped, they
ran 3, and the bowler had to chase the overthrow himself, unsuccessfully, to
the boundary. ******** |
30 May 2024 ‘Diverse’ Overs in Internationals. Apparently in scoring there is a thing called a
‘smudger’, where every ball in an over has a different outcome in terms of
runs scored. Ask Steven talks about this in a recent column: it has
something to do with Mike J Smith (not MJK Smith), who did some scoring after
his playing career and was known as “Smudger”. (According to the internet,
“smudge” is a nickname sometimes attached to people named Smith – Steve Smith
being one such.) In an ODI on 1 Apr 1999 (India v Pakistan, Mohali),
an over by Sehwag included a dot ball, three singles, a single off a no ball
(=2), a '3 wides' delivery, a four, a four off a no ball (=5), and a six. Not
in that order. At Guwahati on 10 Jan 2023, the last over of the
match went 2, 0, 1, 5, 4, 6. Sri Lanka batting against India (Mohammad
Shami). I haven't found any 6-delivery overs in Tests or
ODIs that contained 012345 or 123456, but there are a few with 012346 (not in
order). The following 6-ball overs had shots off the bat for
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 (in any order) West Indies (535) v England Kingston 1935, 117th
over. 046123 West Indies v England Antigua 1986, 37th over,
during Viv Richards record century. 136240 England (400) v West Indies, Chester-le-Street 2007,
75th over. 263410 Australia (401) v England Brisbane 2013/14, 53rd
over. 263401 Australia (369) v England Perth 2013/14, 83rd
over. 6, 2, 0, 4, 5 wides, 1, 0. Australia (370) v NZ, Christchurch 2016, 53rd
over: 6, 3, 1, 2, 0, 4. There are a couple of cases with 12346 (out of
order) but no 0s (two singles). Most remarkable was Mumbai 1951/52, when India hit
4, 0, 1, 2, 3, 8 in the 44th over, 1st innings. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
10 April 2024 Dropped Catches in Tests: 2023 Compiling of
dropped catch reports has continued into 2023. This dataset stretches back to
2001 for all Tests, and much further back for some selected Tests,
particularly in England. The percentage of chances missed has been decreasing
– i.e., catching is improving – gradually but slowly in this century. Does
the 2023 data add anything new? Overall, 22.3
per cent of chances (catches and stumpings) were missed in 2023, down from
24.4 per cent in 2022. This is the lowest annual miss rate recorded so far,
the previous low being 22.8 per cent in 2018. The most
surprising thing to me is seeing Australia with the worst drop rate of any
country. It’s the first year that this has happened. It seems strange, yet
the impression during the 2023 Ashes was that Australia was dropping a lot of
catches and England doing not much better. Missed Chances (catches and
stumpings) since 2010, by fielding team
Among
individuals, Alastair Cook retains his position as both the leading
beneficiary of dropped catches (78) in the 21st Century and, as a
fielder, the leading perpetrator (81). It must be noted that Cook spent a lot
of time in his early career fielding at short leg, the position with the
highest general drop rate. There has been
some movement in the stats of bowlers. Stuart Broad finished his career with
more dropped catches than anyone else (144). He moved ahead of Jimmy
Anderson, who had 135 at the cutoff date, and has probably registered a few
more so far in 2024. Also still in full stride is Nathan Lyon, also on 135,
and likely to pass Broad at some point. Lyon has seen 28 per cent of chances
missed off his bowling, as against 26
per cent for Broad and 23 per cent for Anderson. For other countries, Ravi
Ashwin on 102 (27%) is the only bowler with more than 100 chances missed. The usual
caveats apply, regarding what and what does not constitute a dropped catch.
On the other hand, the method for searching for instances has been consistent
for more than 20 years. A reminder of
the paper I wrote on the longer history of dropped catches… https://www.sportstats.com.au/articles/droppedcatcharticleACS.pdf Garry Morgan assisted
with the collection of recent data. “2023” Tests include New Year’s Tests in
2024, but exclude New Years Tests from 2023. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
At Adelaide
in 1968-69, Charlie Griffith (reportedly) had to run in to bowl 19 times to
complete a single over, on the first day. In addition to the eight-ball over,
there were seven calls of no ball, and four other run-ups where Griffith
baulked and did not deliver the ball. This was reported in the
Miller/Whitington tour book; however there is a problem with this report in
that only three no balls were recorded in the day’s scorecard. ******** Australian
players in the 1968-69 series were paid $190 per Test, equivalent to about
$1,500 in 2024 dollars. Current (2024) payments for Australian male players
are more like $20,000 per match; modern players also enjoy substantial
contract retainers and other sources of income (sponsorships etc). ******** |
21 March 2024 Following an enquiry
by a friend, I decided to dive into the Adelaide Test of 1968-69. This was
one of the most remarkable Tests of its time, with Australia falling 21 runs
short in a big run chase but holding on for a draw with 9 wickets down. At
1764 Runs, it is the second-highest-scoring time-limited Test in history,
edged out only by the Rawalpindi Test in 2022 (1768 runs). Australia managed
to score 872 runs in the match with only one century and no century stands.
There were no fewer than 17 scores of more than 50 in the match. That final run
chase was marked by an extraordinary set of run outs, four in all. Three of
them came in two overs, and this followed the “Mankad” of Ian Redpath by
Charlie Griffith earlier in the innings. I can remember
this one, listening to it on the radio as a child. I could hardly stand the
tension: I would walk away for a bit before rushing back to the radio. It
should have been on TV but there had been a cut in transmission to Sydney
after tea. I remember how it odd it was that the match continued so late
(must have been 6:54 in Sydney) because of the new ‘15 overs in the last
hour’ rule. I also remember Dad talking about the Mackay/Kline stand in 1961
but I had been too young to remember it. Adelaide
1968-69: Final Hour Timeline West indies 1st innings 276 Australia 1st innings 533 West indies 2nd innings 616. Australia was set a target of 360 in
a minimum of 344 minutes on the final day. The match was one of the first to
enforce a fixed minimum number of overs in the last hour (15 eight-ball
overs). As such, the final session extended to 6:24 pm local. Lunch score : Australia 106/1 (Lawry
37, Chappell 19) Tea score 217/3 (Chappell 56, Walters
0) (3:40-4:00) At 4:30, Australia was 250/3
(Chappell 75, Walters 14) Timeline of the Last Hour (from 5:00) The new ball had been available at 65
overs but not taken.
Australia still needed 21 runs with
one wicket remaining. The
Timeline is drawn from a variety of reports. It is a ‘best available’
rendering: some reports are not completely consistent. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the
current Test between England and India at Dharamsala, England managed to lose
three wickets AND burn through three reviews, all on the same score (175). In
particular, Brad Stokes' effort, utterly plumb lbw for a duck, will go into
highlight reels for the most blatantly ill-advised reviews. It was the third
time in his career that Stokes has been out for a duck after calling for a
review and failing. The only other recognised batsman with so many failures
of this type is…Jonny Bairstow! ******** |
8 March 2024 In posting
scores from the New Zealand/England series of 2007-08, I noticed how fast and
furious the innings of 77 not out by Tim Southee was. Played at Napier, it
was Southee’s first Test match. The 77, coming in 40 balls,
included a sequence of 15 balls faced where Southee advanced his score from 6
to 57. I had a look for extremes of this type (most runs off 15 balls faced)
and found it was rather dominated by New Zealanders playing at home… Most Runs in the
space of 15 balls faced in Tests
This list is
from the ball-by-ball database, so it may not be complete, but I doubt if
there would be many cases missed. It is a little surprising in the age of
Bazball that all bar one of these instances are 10 or more years old. Southee is now
playing his 100th Test, but has never played another innings
remotely like that debut. ******** More on Chelmsford 1983 Recently (13
Feb) I wrote of the wildly wrong published Balls Faced figures for some early
ODIs in the 70s and 80s. Perhaps the worst was the pivotal ODI between
Australia and India at Chelmsford in the 1983 World Cup, where the total
balls faced did not remotely resemble the total balls bowled. I thought that
there could be little additional information to be found, but Lawrie Colliver
has come up with a partial score for the Indian innings that he recorded off
the radio broadcast. (Lawrie was a teenager at the time, but his score looks
well-recorded.) I have appended
the figures from this score, which covers the first session only, to the
figures found elsewhere. There are columns for 1) the ‘official’ BF
originally published in Frindall 1997, 2) my own estimates based on the Over
numbers of the dismissals, and 3) the exact figures from the newly found
score.
Sharma scored 21 off 45 balls before
lunch in Colliver’s score. * Kapil 29 balls is an exact number,
from newspaper reports The new figures
suggest that my estimates, while not particularly accurate, were reasonably indicative
of the real figures. While there is no precise figure for the whole innings
of Yashpal Sharma, the pre-lunch record shows that the official figure must
be way off. Sharma did not bat rapidly after lunch and was out after Kapil,
contrary to the published record. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
24 February 2024 On Historical Trends in Missed Chances in Tests As a matter of interest,
I have posted an article of mine recently published in The Statistician, on
the subject of historical trends in dropped catches in Tests. The conclusion
seems to be that catching standards have improved over generations, but
probably not as much as many modern commentators frequently claim. There has
been evolution not revolution. https://www.sportstats.com.au/articles/droppedcatcharticleACS.pdf I would like to
think that this study breaks new ground. ********
This lists the earliest in an innings that a batsman
reached 100, not the balls faced by the batsman. Warner at Perth reached his
century off the fourth ball of the 20th over. The list is
dominated by modern Tests with ‘soft’ six-hitting. Data is missing for many
early Tests, but there are no likely candidates among these. Joe Darling took
about 32 overs to reach 100 at the SCG in 1897-98. Gavaskar took 35 overs at
Delhi in 1983-84. Wides and no
balls are not included. Thanks to Shahzad for the data on Majid Khan. I have added
this list to the Unusual Records section. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thanks to
reader Ben who alerted me to a problem with umpire names in my Test
scorecards. Most Tests from mid-2006 to mid-2007 reported the wrong umpires,
due to a compiling error. I believe that they have all been corrected now.
Umpires’ names in the ball-by-ball files were correct. ******** |
13 February 2024 More questions on old ODI stats A contact (Michael)
has pointed out the poor state of the scorecard of the important India v
Australia ODI at Chelmsford on 20 June 1983 (ODI# 217 or 219). The 'official'
balls faced could only be described as nonsense, to the extent that Cricket
Archive has deleted this data from the scorecard and appended a note
explaining why (total balls faced in either innings fall way short of the
number of balls bowled). The data is still up on Cricinfo, however. https://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/43/43649.html The match is
especially important because if India had lost, there would have been no 1983
World Cup victory and subsequent Indian cricket history would have rather
different! I have uploaded
a few notes on this match, and others, including my estimates of balls faced. https://www.sportstats.com.au/articles/Unfortunately.pdf (UPDATE: see 8 March) ******** Jasprit Bumrah
has now taken more than 150 Test wickets at an average of 20.28. He joins a
select bunch who have recorded such a
combination. Bowlers whose Test
averages dropped below 20.30 mid-career (minimum 150 wickets)
The table shows
bowlers who, at least one point of their career, had more than 150 wickets
and a bowling average better than 20.30. None of these bowlers except Barnes
finished their career with such an average. Waqar Younis held on to this
average the longest: 11 matches and 45 wickets. Shaun Pollock averaged better
than 20.3 at three points of his 150+ career. But perhaps the most impressive
is Malcolm Marshall, who at one point had 286 wickets at 20.29. ******** When one partnership
outscored the entire opposition (in a completed Test)
(Another
qualification: everyone in the losing team batted.) ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There was quite
the controversy at The Oval in the final Ashes Test in 2023 when a ball was
changed after 36 overs, and the replacement ball had completely different
bounce and swing properties to the old one. In fact, this ball was so helpful
to bowlers that no new ball was taken after 80 overs. The innings lasted 94.4
overs without the fielding side requesting a new ball, the longest such
innings in the last 200 Test matches (since Afghanistan took no new ball in
104.5 overs at Bangalore in 2018). Nowadays
almost all teams take a new ball within a couple of overs of it becoming
available. There were only three cases of a second new ball taken later than
95 overs in 2023. ******** The
record-rich stats of the South Africa v India Test at Cape Town have been
reported in detail at various websites. I was pleased to see, though, that
Charles Bannerman’s 1877 records still hold, although given a good shake by
Aiden Markram’s 106 out of 176 in South Africa’s second innings. Next highest score was Dean
Elgar’s 12. Markram's ratio of 8.83 (106/12) between top score and second-top
score is second all-time to Bannerman's ratio of 9.17 (165/18). I would add
that the six wicket in eleven balls collapse by India was by far the fastest
such collapse in Tests, as reported elsewhere. It was also reported that the
previous record was six wickets in 27 balls, but this overlooked the six
wickets in 23 balls way back in the original 1882 Ashes Test (England’s
second innings). ******** Shamar
Joseph’s dismissal of Steve Smith with his first ball in Test cricket got me
looking at the batsmen who have been dismissed in such circumstances. Nearly
all such batsmen have made low scores – this because a bowler’s first ball
will likely be early in an innings – with the highest being 26 by Marvan
Atapattu when he was dismissed by Nilesh Kulkarni in 1997 (Sri Lanka went on
to make 952 with Kulkarni finishing with 1 for 175.) The batsman
with the highest average on the list is Eddie Paynter on 59.2. He was
dismissed by HD Smith’s first ball in 1933 in New Zealand. However, Paynter’s
average was only 43 at the time. Steve Smith’s average of 58 at Adelaide is
the highest ‘active’ average of batsmen falling in this way. Note that
Kumar Sangakkara is on the list; he was memorably dismissed by Nathan Lyon’s
first ball. Sangakkara finished with an average of 57.5 and was averaging
over 55 at the time. Steve Smith’s average is at some risk of dropping below
Sangakkara’s 57.5 before long. ******** |
22 January 2024 Warner bows out David Warner it
seems had two parallel careers in Tests, a brilliant career at home and a
much inferior career elsewhere. His great home record, it seems, repeatedly
came to the aid of Warner being selected for tour after tour where he
underperformed. I don't know of any non-captain who was so coddled and
protected by selectors for so long. His supporters in Australia are probably
little aware of how bad his stats away from home have been. In his last 12
Test tours from 2015, Warner scored exactly two centuries, and both of those
were in Bangladesh more than six years ago. On those 12 tours he batted 74
times and averaged 28. After the Bangladesh centuries he averaged 22.7 with a
highest score of 68 in 41 innings. In the 2019 Ashes he scored 95 runs in ten
innings, but it was Usman Khawaja who was dropped. Warner’s 2019 stats are
the worst ever by an opener in a five-Test series. By contrast,
Khawaja since his return in 2022 has scored four centuries and a couple of
90s on tour, and averaged 59, with nine scores higher than Warner's 68. Here are the
most extreme contrasts between home and away performance for batsmen with
more than 5000 Test runs.
The bar of 5000 runs
is quite high, but there are now more than 100 batsmen who qualify. Among
other current batsmen, Rohit Sharma (3737 runs) has a ratio of 2.00, but he
will have future opportunities to correct that imbalance. ********** Where Chances
are Missed; Comparing Formats Here is some
data comparing the distribution of dropped catches between formats. The raw
data for this chart was supplied by a third party; I don’t record missed
chances in ODIs or T20 myself. The chart
compares dropped chances by fielding position; not surprisingly, there are
significant difference between Test and the shorter formats.
The percentages
are relative to the total dropped catches in that format, so the bars in each
colour will add up to 100 per cent. Attacking
fielding position like slips and short leg see a lot more misses in Test than
limited overs, as one would expect. By contrast, the ‘permanent’ positions of
bowler and keeper are quite similar across the formats. It is curious to
see far more chances going to third man and fine leg in T20 than in ODI; I
suppose that ramp shots must be used much more in the former. The difference
between misses at mid-on and midwicket in T20 is a bit of a mystery; it
should be remembered that this data depends on the accuracy of ball-by-ball
descriptions. If I have
calculated correctly, the percentage of chances dropped are similar in Tests
and ODIs, about 23 per cent and 22 per cent respectively. The T20 data used
in the above chart is rather patchy and I haven’t attempted to calculate an
overall percentage for that format. Shortly, I will
be preparing a report of missed catches in Tests in 2023, from my own data. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sreeram reports that telecasts of three of the
Tests of the India/Australia series in 1979-80 were prevented, fully or in
part, by order of the Government. The rationale was that too many people
watching the cricket would be bad for the economy. The Janata Party, “a bunch
of bores”, were in power at the time. ******** An unusual pseudo-double-hat-trick, in the Big
Bash at Albury. Melbourne were six down with four balls to play, which went
W, W, run out, W. The run out means there was no official
hat-trick, but the bowler Sams actually received a credit for the run out and
so was responsible for all four wickets. The #11 batsman, Haris Rauf, was, not
surprisingly, caught unprepared, and went to the wicket for the last ball
without pads on. Possibly fearful of being timed out! Thanks to the run out,
he was at the non-strikers end. ******** |
23 December 2023 ODI Score Curiosities Online scores for ODIs (Cricinfo, Cricket Archive)
contain a complete set of balls faced for all batsmen, going back to the
beginning. I have often wondered how this was done, given that so many
original scoresheets for early matches have been lost, and balls faced
figures for many such matches were never published in any form (that I am
aware of) when they were played. Some of the scoresheets that do survive do
not list the balls faced anyway. How were the figures obtained? Recently I was sent a set of ten ODI scoresheets
from 1983 to 1986, that I had not previously seen, played in the subcontinent
and West Indies. I endeavoured to re-score these into ball-by-ball form but
there were problems. Some scores had missing pages and other pages were
almost unreadable. Even so, I found scoring anomalies in the majority of the
innings that I was able to study. Here is a quick review… WI v Aus 19 Apr 1984, Match 3. In the WI innings, only two bats had BF recorded in
the scoresheet, Greenidge and Richardson. Their figures were reproduced
exactly on re-scoring ball-by-ball. However, the online BF figures for the
other batsmen (which were absent from the score) could not be reproduced even
though the scores and the scoring stroke sequences for those batsmen were
reproduced exactly. I got 121 balls faced for Haynes, quite different from
the 142 balls online, and Logie faced 34 not 21 balls in his 52 minute
innings. If they were not on the surviving score, where did those online
figures come from? WI v Aus 26 Apr 1984, Match 4. Parts of this score were nearly unreadable. However,
it is clear that online figures in the WI innings are problematic, because
the total Balls Faced by the batsmen fall well short of the balls bowled (272
v 289). The problem appears to lie once again with Haynes’ innings. I get 119
balls faced as against 102 balls faced in online scores. Ind v Aus, 9 Sep 1986, Match 2 Innings 1. Bowling figures in the scoresheet
disagree with ‘official’ figures. Innings 2 bowling page not available. Ind v Aus, 24 Sep 1986, Match 3 Innings 1. Balls faced figures are not given in the
scoresheet, but the re-score produces significant BF differences with online
figures, even though runs and scoring strokes are reproduced. Innings 2 not
available. Ind v Aus, 2 Oct 1986, Match 4 Innings 2: India total given as 241 and SP Davis
runs conceded 26 – differing from online scores (242 and 28). Ind v Aus, 7 Oct 1986, Match 6 Innings 1: bowling figures in score disagree with
official figures. Innings 2 not available. All this is from a set of just ten ODI scores
received, four of which were incomplete. The ten also included two scores by
Geoffrey Saulez (Sri Lanka v Australia in 1983). These two presented no
problems at all when re-scoring. Saulez had a bit of a reputation for lack of
neatness, but in general the quality of his scores is much superior to the
scores from India and West Indies in this period. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
For many years, batsmen running the winnings
run(s) have been limited to the minimum ruins required. If one is needed and
two are run, only the first run counts. An exception applies to boundaries:
all runs are counted unless the target is first reached by running. However, in the past, there have been cases of
batsmen running more than the runs needed to win the match, but it is rare: · In the second Test of
1876-77, two leg byes were run when only one was needed. · 1878-79 Test,
Bannerman hit a three when two runs were needed · Adelaide 1884-85,
Shrewsbury hit two when one was needed. Strangely, the surviving score
records the last over as " 2.. " · Lord's Test of 1890, a
hit for two by JM Read when one was needed. · SCG 1928-29, JC White
hit two when one was needed. There are several other possible cases, but there
is no scorebook and the information may not be certain. There are three in
the 1800s, and three in Pakistan in the 1950s. There are no known cases
anywhere since 1960. There are a few Tests where I don't know what the
winning hit was worth. ******** Best first bowling by players who did not bowl on
debut… Ian Johnson did not bowl in his first two Tests
but then took 6/42 and 2/92 at SCG in 1946-47. Simon Katich took 0/25 and 6/56 in his second
Test, having not bowled in his first.
******** |
7 December 2023 Some curious new scores A contact in Pakistan, Shahzad, has kindly provided
copies of a few more Test scores along with a number of ODI scores that I did
not have. One of the scores, Zimbabwe v Sri Lanka 1st Test in
1994-95, is interesting, albeit in a statistical sense only. It was left
drawn after four days without completing the teams’ first innings, but it
featured a mind-numbing partnership of 217 between Asanka Gurushinghe and
Sanjeeva Ranatunga. On re-scoring, this stand amounted to 691 balls in 467
minutes. Among partnerships of 200 or more, the scoring rate is the fourth
slowest all-time. In runs per hour, it is the second slowest, by a narrow
margin, after a notorious stand by McGlew and Waite in 1957-58. Slowest Double-Century Stands
The fastest 200 stand, as it happens, is the most
recent (at the time of writing). Zac Crawley and Joe Root put on 206 off 186
deliveries at Old Trafford this year. At 115.7 runs/100 balls, it is faster
than the 233 off 203 balls by Hayden and Gilchrist against Zimbabwe in
2003-04. Crawley and Root faced 183 deliveries for the first 200, but Hayden
and Gilchrist reached 200 off 170. No balls and wides are included in the
delivery counts. ******** The other two scores that Shahzad sent had curious
endings... Karachi 1978-79: Pakistan target 164 against India. The next day
multiple published reports had them
scoring 165-2. However it was realised that the winning shot had been for 2
runs, so only the first run counted. The corrected score of 164-2 is in Wisden
and later reports. Karachi 1985-86: Pakistan target was 98 v Sri Lanka. The surviving
score has Pakistan reaching 98 on the first ball of the 17th over but then
continue batting for three balls ending in a single. These three balls are
circled and apparently crossed out. Note that this is not an 'official' score, but was
made by a scorer for Pakistan TV and other journalists. But it is complicated. Mudassar scored 56* in the
score but is given 57* in published scores and Wijesuriya concedes 8 runs in
the score but 9 in published scorecards. Did someone delete the superfluous
single from the team but not delete the run from batsman and bowler? The published scorecard has been balanced by having
one, not two, no balls. I think that the simplest resolution would involve
this issue. If there really were two no balls but one was missed by the
official scorers, then Mudassar’s score would be 56 and the last three balls
would be deleted. If one of the no balls did not occur, but was mistakenly
recorded in the surviving score, then the extra three balls would stand and
Mudassar has 57. I would tend to favour the former, since it is easier to
miss a no ball call than to insert a false one, and there are seven
deliveries recorded in both the overs with the no balls. I have attached a screenshot of this innings. If
anyone can suggest a resolution let me know.
******** Sreeram has found reports of ‘singular’ Man of the
Match Awards being made in the 1974-75 India v West Indies series. A very
good find. I am disappointed that I overlooked this, as it is mentioned in
places in my collection of reports. I consulted my collection and came up
with a full list from that series… Bangalore CH Lloyd Delhi (FSK) IVA Richards Kolkata GR Viswanath Chennai (Chepauk) GR Viswanath Mumbai (Wankhede) CH Lloyd The awards were decided by a panel of three judges.
There is mention of Lloyd being "player of the series" after Mumbai
but it is unclear whether this was the just the journalist's opinion or an
actual award. This predates the regular MoM awards made in the
1975-76 Australia v West Indies series, previously thought to be earliest. I do have a note in my MoM file that there were
awards in India of some kind from 1969-72. In 1966-67 there were separate
awards for batsmen and bowlers; at Kolkata, Sobers won both, so technically
he was a singular MoM. All the match awards that I have seen in England in
the 1960s were separated (batsmen/bowler, teams), although John Edrich won a
single Player of the Series in 1968. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the two-Test series between Sri Lanka and
South Africa in 2006, famous for its 624-run partnership between Kumar
Sangakkara and Mahela Jayawardene at the Colombo SSC, Jayawardene won the
Player of the Match awards in both Tests. It seems very strange, then, that
the Player of the Series went to Muttiah Muralitharan. ******** |
27 November 2023 Disrupted Careers of the 1970s In the 1970s, there were a couple of major
disruptions to international cricket. The first was the exclusion of South
Africa from Test cricket from 1970; the second was the World Series Cricket
tournaments from 1977 to 1979, which took a large number of players out of
Test cricket until late 1979. This curtailed the careers of quite a number of
important players. But as it happens, some substitute matches were played;
there were two five-match series involving a ‘World XI’, in 1970 and 1971-72,
and of course the Packer World Series matches. There were 16 five-day Packer
‘Supertests’ played, eleven in Australia and five in the West Indies. I have gathered the scores of these matches,
combined them with players’ Test records and produced the following combined
averages… Some Careers Incorporating ‘World XI’
and WSC Matches (batting)
There are some whose batting averages improved when
these matches are incorporated, including Sobers, Ian Chappell and Viv
Richards. The most striking is Greg Chappell, who made seven centuries in his
17 ‘other’ Internationals, lifting his average to 55.6 in 104 matches. Among
players who have played more than 100 Tests, only Kumar Sangakkara and Steve
Smith have higher averages. In terms of average, Chappell has a clear
advantage over any of his contemporaries with the exception of Sobers. Another point of interest is the performances of
Barry Richards and Graeme Pollock. Pollock’s performances in the additional
matches were somewhat moderate, and this takes his average from 61 in 23
Tests down to 54 in 31 matches. This is a case of ‘regression to the mean’,
experienced by nearly every batsman who had an average over 60 after 20
Tests. Richards performed very well in the additional matches, keeping his
average above 60, but his total of 14 matches is still too small for
reasonable statistical interpretation. I haven’t prepared a table of bowlers, but two cases
are particularly interesting. Dennis Lillee took no fewer than 91 wickets in
18 additional matches, including a famed spell of 6 for 0 at the WACA. This
takes him to 446 wickets at 24.2 at this level, which would vault him above
Kapil Dev and Richard Hadlee in the wickets list. Lillee’s average of 5.07
wickets per match surpasses any other pace bowler with more than 200 Test
wickets. There is also the case of Mike Procter, who played
in seven additional matches and took 41 wickets at 15. This is even better
than his 29 wickets at 20 in his 9 Tests. The total comes to 70 wickets at
17.1 in 16 matches; this is still not enough for statistical rigour, but it
certainly highlights what a loss to international cricket he was. Procter
took 1417 wickets at 19.5 in first-class cricket. ******** I might add a little table concerning regression to
the mean. Among those who played 50 Tests of more, there are ten batsmen
whose batting averages exceeded 60 after 20 Tests. Every one experienced a
fall in average by the time they played 50 Tests…
Although they lost a little of their early pace,
Bradman and Sutcliffe held onto their very high averages quite well, while
others lost a lot of ground. Jack Hobbs had a 20-Test average of 57.1, the
highest by anyone who increased his average in his next 30 Tests (to 61.3
after 50 Tests). Viv Richards also increased his average, from 55.6 after 20
Tests to 57.7 after 50. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
During the World Series (Packer) season in 1977-78,
Dennis Amiss became the first batsman to don a helmet in a senior cricket
match. I had thought that this had happened in the aftermath of a serious
injury to David Hookes in a match against the West Indies XI on 16 Dec 1977.
However, Amiss had already been using his helmet (a modified motorcycle
helmet) in warm-up games, starting with a match against West Indies on 24 Nov
1977. On the first day of that 4-day match, Amiss scored 81.
The first use of a helmet in a Test match was by
Graham Yallop at Bridgetown on 17 Mar
1978. Yallop scored 47. That first use by Amiss had been in a match at
Football Park, Adelaide; apparently the match was not televised. There is a
video online of Amiss, wearing an early helmet, facing Andy Roberts; perhaps
that was in a later game. ******** |
24 October 2023 A Brief History of the New Ball More than a decade ago I wrote a review of new ball
use in Tests. I am repeating it here, but with a few updates/corrections… The very early Tests seem to have used a single ball
for each innings regardless of length. New balls could be called for if the
condition of the ball deteriorated severely: this happened after 207 overs in
the England followed in 1907. The 200-run trigger
appears to have been kept in use until 1945. It wasn’t entirely satisfactory. Sometimes, to avoid
a new ball, teams reduced scoring before 200 runs were up. In 1946 the MCC
introduced an over limit. Strangely, they settled on 55 overs, an extremely
low number that favoured pace bowlers. In Australia, the 200-run limit
remained in place in 1946/47, but was switched to 40 (eight-ball) overs in
1947/48. This was of no help to the touring Indian side facing Lindwall and
Miller. In 1949 some common sense returned and the trigger
was lifted to 65 six-ball overs or 50 eight-ball overs for the next few
years. By 1954/55 this had been abandoned in Australia and the 200-run
trigger returned. All the recorded new balls of the 1954 and 1955 series in
England were taken over 200 runs, but an over limit seems to have been
reintroduced soon after; 75 in combination with 200 runs, whichever came
first. By 1962 new balls in England were being taken at 200 runs or 85 overs.
There is also some uncertainty about this period in
other countries. In the West Indies, 75 overs seems to have been used when
the MCC toured in 1960, but 200 runs when India toured in 1962. The known
record for use of an old ball is 185 overs at Bridgetown in 1962, but since
India scored only 187 runs in that innings, the use of the old ball was not a
matter of choice. Some other Tests may have used a combination of runs or
overs, whichever came first. In the Australian tour of West Indies in 1965,
some new balls came at 200 runs and others at 75 overs, but when England
toured in 1968 no new balls were taken before 75 overs, even when the score
was over 200. In India, new balls up to 1965 were generally after
200 runs. There were some exceptions in India and Pakistan when matting
wickets were used, with mention of new balls at 150 or 165 runs. The switch
to 75 overs was probably in 1965. In 1965, the runs scored standard in England and
Australia fades away and the MCC established a standard in England of 85
overs, or 65 eight-ball overs in Australia (and other countries). This
remained in use for many years in these countries, but again other countries
had local variations. New Zealand and South Africa followed the MCC standard,
but 75 overs seems to have been the norm in the West Indies and the
subcontinent. Finally in 1995, all countries lined up with the
same standard, with the new ball available after 80 overs; this remains in
place. ******** Bowlers taking 2 wickets in an over most
times (Tests).
There is some uncertain data before 1999, but I
think I have covered just about all cases for bowlers like Wasim Akram. The
prominence of spin bowlers reflects the fact that spinners are more likely to
harvest tailend wickets than pace bowlers. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Best
bowling average of career coming in their last Test… Perhaps surprising, but there are more than 150
such bowlers who have played multiple Tests, including RGCE Wijesuriya, who
finished with a bowling average of 294.0 (he took his only wicket in his last
Test). Among those who played 20 or more Tests and took
10 or more wickets there is only FS Jackson (24 wickets @ 33.3) RF Surti (42 wickets @ 46.7) EJ Barlow (40 wickets @34.1) Bhuvneshwar Kumar (63 wickets at 26.1) Not including players whose careers are
continuing. ******* |
Finally, a Complete Picture of the
Madras Tied Test Gulu Ezekiel in India has now sent to me
high-quality scans of a complete score of the Tied Test in Madras/Chennai in
1986: a score previously missing, as I have mentioned often enough over the
years. Gulu obtained the scans through S. Giridhar and V.J. Raghunath, the
authors of From Mumbai to Durban (2016). The original score resides in
the office of the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association. I have completed the re-scoring of the score into
ball-by-ball form. (Previously this was available only for the final innings,
and much of that was based on an inferior copy.) The re-score mostly went
well – but only mostly. A summary of the findings follow. Note, this is an
analysis of the score, not a match review. [The short version – the re-score
agrees with the final result, but not with absolute certainty.] The score format is one innings per page, containing
conventional recording of batting strokes, bowling analyses and Falls of
Wicket. There is also a table giving the score at the end of each over (this
is very useful but, frustratingly, sometimes inaccurate). In the bowling
section, ends of bowling spells are marked (again, not 100% accurately) and
byes and leg byes are not marked, so their location has to be inferred. Overs
are not numbered, so when a bowling spell ends, identifying the next bowler
often requires trial and error, guided by the over-by-over score and upcoming
strokes in the batting section. The handwriting changes between the pages; there
appear to be two different hands. The scorers are named as G. Ganesh and
Chittibabu. The latter is named only for the teams’ second innings. K.S. Mani
is also believed to have scored the Test, but his name is absent; perhaps he
was making another score. The pages list the batsmen’s Balls Faced (mostly but
not always accurately, and they vary from the Australian published data). BF
data cannot be easily gleaned from a conventional score. A linear score is
needed; this suggests that the score may be based on additional material of
this type. The implication is that the score may be a re-copy from a linear
original, or maybe the scorer was writing both types of score, or maybe one
scorer was using a linear method while the other made a traditional score. The score also allows full identification of session
scores (lunch and tea). Some of this data was previously unknown; the
reporting style at the time, even when quite detailed, tended to dispense
with such niceties. Some comments on the re-scoring each innings… Innings 1, Australia 574-7 decl. A long innings that eventually yielded a sensible
re-score. The only final sticking point was just before tea on the first day,
when Boon and Jones were batting. A single by Boon off Yadav does not fit
unless moved slightly, and is preceded and followed by leg byes. This
preserves the batsmen’s scoring strokes; either that, or the single was
credited to the wrong batsman, and Boon actually scored 121 and Jones 211.
Some small areas of the page were obscured or indistinct. UPDATE: Sreeram has suggested a better resolution of
this problem that avoids moving strokes around. It does presume errors for a
few overs in the over-by-over score section of the scoresheet, but it also
produces balls faced figures in the re-score that are more consistent with
the scoresheet. Innings 2, India 397. The score of 397 was preserved, but there were
problems. After tea on the third day, two overs by Bright, his 13th
and 14th, are marked as ending a spell. As written, these overs do
not fit with the batsmen’s scoring strokes and throw the innings ‘out of
kilter’. Eventually, I found that if the next over by Bright, his 15th
and ostensibly from his next spell, was inserted before his 13th over, then the innings clicked back
together neatly (it felt like suddenly solving a Rubik’s Cube). Here is a
screenshot of the overs in question. Bright is the fourth bowler.
To make the re-score work, Bright’s Over 15, it
appears, should be placed before Over 13. Curiously, Over 15 is written using
a different pen to all of Bright’s other overs. A second problem is seen in Kapil Dev’s innings of
119. While the score does indeed say 119, Kapil’s scoring strokes actually
add up to 121 !
The re-score of the bowling also produces 119 runs
for Kapil; there are two extra singles in the batting scoring strokes that
cannot be found in the bowling, including the last single. In the above
screen shot, Kapil’s intermediate scores of
50, 67 and 93 are correct; the problem occurs toward the end of the
innings, which should read 2111221 not 211112211. There are no missing singles from the other batsmen.
Re-scoring preserves both Kapil’s 119 and the total of 397, which is
important in such a supremely close Test match. However, the existence of
errors like this is unsettling. Innings 3, Australia 170/4 decl. This innings is written less neatly than the
others. While the given score can be reproduced, a few overs suffer from
readability problems and require a certain amount of ‘interpretation’ to
preserve this. In the score, Greg Matthews is given 49 balls faced. This is
impossible: the actual number from the re-score is 25. Once again, an
unsettling error. (The Australian report gives Matthews 25 BF.) Innings 4, India 347. With the improved-quality scan now available, a
couple of minor problems with the earlier re-score can be resolved. These
occurred in the first few overs, and the innings now hangs together pretty
well. The final session is based on Lawrie Colliver’s analysis of the
surviving video. A couple of minor observations with this innings: The scoresheet gives the fall of the 2nd
wicket as 159, not 158. The re-score agrees with the ‘official’ 158. The
scoresheet has balls faced figures that differ from the Australian version
(this is true of all four innings). Contrary to what I wrote last year, Greg
Matthews did not bowl his 39.5 overs unchanged. His marathon spell was
interrupted by one over, the last before lunch, bowled by Steve Waugh.
Strangely, the score gives a total innings time of 342 minutes, but this is
not possible. A time of 409 minutes, in published reports, is much closer to
the mark. Finally, a comparison of balls faced figures from
the final innings: the Australian source, the score and the re-score. Only
the re-score adds up correctly to the number of balls bowled (523). Madras Tied Test: Final innings balls
faced, by source
A link to the revised series
page in the Database is here. ******** |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
