For the 2007 World Cup, the significant top performers are listed below.

1. The maximum runs were scored by Hayden with 265.
2. The best Runs per Innings figure was Hayden's 44.17 in 6 innings, including 4 x 50s. 3. The best strike rate was Yuvraj Singh's 1.947 (148 runs in 76 balls).
4. Umar Gul captured the maximum wickets, having accounted for 13 dismissals.
5. The best bowling average was achieved by Chigumbura of Zimbabwe who captured 7 wickets at 7.29.
6. Vettori bowled most economically with a RPO figure of 5.33 in 24 overs.

2. A re-look at the Par Score

Sometime back I had a look at the Par Score for T20s in which I had suggested a Par Score as 165. I had increased this to 170+ for the sub-continent. I have looked at this again, only for the 25 matches of the World Cup. Looking at the 12 teams which scored 160 and above, 8 teams won defending such totals while 4 totals were chased successfully. This gives a very reasonable 66.7% winning chance and 160 can very well be taken as a Par Score for this World Cup, which will be played in England. On the other hand, increasing the Par Score to 165 gives the teams a chance to win in 7 out of 8 (87.5%). So I would say that the Par Score should be between 160-165. 160 should be sufficient, the few extra runs increase the chances of winning significantly.

3. T20-Intls: Analysis of 20-over runs conceded and wickets captured

Ov  Num    Runs Max   Avge    SD   SEM   Wkts   Avge    SD   SEM
 # Overs

 1 174.0   1004  19   5.77   3.47  0.26    40   0.23   0.46  0.03
 2 174.0   1199  25   6.89   4.69  0.36    42   0.24   0.49  0.04
 3 174.0   1333  18   7.66   4.52  0.34    57   0.33   0.56  0.04
 4 174.0   1319  20   7.58   4.82  0.37    54   0.31   0.51  0.04
 5 174.0   1466  22   8.43   4.86  0.37    37   0.21   0.46  0.04
 6 173.5   1376  21   7.92   4.83  0.37    67   0.39   0.58  0.04
 7 173.0   1137  22   6.57   3.94  0.30    47   0.27   0.48  0.04
 8 172.4   1163  24   6.74   3.95  0.30    49   0.28   0.50  0.04
 9 172.0   1077  19   6.26   3.61  0.28    49   0.28   0.52  0.04
10 169.0   1157  20   6.85   3.92  0.30    45   0.27   0.52  0.04
11 166.5   1090  19   6.53   3.65  0.28    60   0.36   0.54  0.04
12 163.5   1191  18   7.27   4.28  0.33    48   0.29   0.49  0.04
13 163.0   1234  25   7.57   4.64  0.36    52   0.32   0.53  0.04
14 161.5   1099  21   6.79   4.07  0.32    63   0.39   0.57  0.04
15 157.2   1181  24   7.51   4.45  0.35    63   0.40   0.53  0.04
16 155.5   1253  26   8.04   5.32  0.43    58   0.37   0.59  0.05
17 152.1   1280  21   8.41   5.04  0.41    71   0.47   0.66  0.05
18 147.0   1145  24   7.79   4.92  0.40    70   0.48   0.57  0.05
19 132.0   1184  36   8.97   6.08  0.52    76   0.58   0.71  0.06
20 109.3   1052  21   9.61   4.96  0.45   105   0.96   0.84  0.08

A new statistical measure, suggested by Aneesh Kulkarni, the Standard Error of the Mean (SEM) has been taken. This measure is a function of the Standard Deviation and the number of samples, in this case the number of overs. The SD and SEM are related measures. The SD refers to the actual values (could range from 0 to 36) while the SEM refers to the expected variation of the mean values. Readers can contribute, if they want, on this measure.

a. There is a spurt in the second over, indicating that the first over was used to get the bearings. There is marked spurt in the 5th over, possibly because the batsmen take couple of overs to familiarize themselves and cut loose in anticipation of the removal of the fielding restrictions.

b. There seems to be no significant change between the 10th and 11th over since there is no artificial commercial break after the 10th over.

c. There seems to be a steady move in the later overs. However the 14th over shows an unexpected dip. Why, I cannot tell.

d. There is a major move in wickets lost between 5th and 6th overs, a clear case of batsmen chancing their arms. The significant increase in the 20th over is again understandable.

4. T20-Intls: Comparison of 20-over figures between First and Second inns

Ovr First Innings    Second Innings    First Inns  Second Inns
 #     Runs               Runs            Wkts         Wkts

 1 (87.0  525) 6.03  5.51 (87.0  479)   20  0.23    20  0.23
 2 (87.0  545) 6.26  7.52 (87.0  654)   26  0.30    16  0.18
 3 (87.0  688) 7.91  7.41 (87.0  645)   24  0.28    33  0.38
 4 (87.0  675) 7.76  7.40 (87.0  644)   29  0.33    25  0.29
 5 (87.0  685) 7.87  8.98 (87.0  781)   19  0.22    18  0.21
 6 (87.0  673) 7.74  8.10 (86.5  703)   31  0.36    36  0.41
 7 (87.0  542) 6.23  6.92 (86.0  595)   26  0.30    21  0.24
 8 (87.0  608) 6.99  6.48 (85.4  555)   28  0.32    21  0.25
 9 (87.0  568) 6.53  5.99 (85.0  509)   24  0.28    25  0.29
10 (86.0  606) 7.05  6.64 (83.0  551)   29  0.34    16  0.19
11 (86.0  608) 7.07  5.96 (80.5  482)   32  0.37    28  0.35
12 (85.0  644) 7.58  6.94 (78.5  547)   23  0.27    25  0.32
13 (85.0  647) 7.61  7.53 (78.0  587)   24  0.28    28  0.36
14 (84.0  578) 6.88  6.69 (77.5  521)   36  0.43    27  0.35
15 (83.0  597) 7.19  7.86 (74.2  584)   36  0.43    27  0.36
16 (83.0  729) 8.78  7.19 (72.5  524)   31  0.37    27  0.37
17 (82.5  673) 8.12  8.75 (69.2  607)   45  0.54    26  0.38
18 (79.5  625) 7.83  7.74 (67.1  520)   42  0.53    28  0.42
19 (78.0  736) 9.44  8.30 (54.0  448)   53  0.68    23  0.43
20 (73.2  706) 9.63  9.57 (36.1  346)   71  0.97    34  0.94

    Total      7.50  7.29                   0.38        0.33

The first innings average for both runs per over and wickets per over are slightly higher for obvious reasons, the absence of a specific target. In the second innings the target is known and only the required runs are scored and unnecessary risks not taken.

a. The first real difference comes in the 2nd over. For some strange reason the chasing teams have averaged 25% more than the first batting teams. Why, I cannot put my fingers on one reason.

b. Similar in the 5th over where contrary to what I would have expected, the chasing teams have outscored the first batting teams. Possibly the uncertainty of the first innings caused this. For the first 6 overs, the chasing team has an additional 2 runs (45+ against 43+). No great difference.

c. The rest of the stats show usual fluctuations other than the 19th over where the first batting team is over a run ahead of the chasing team. Yuvraj Singh's 36-run over has contributed 0.3 of this run.

d. There is no great difference in average wickets other than the over 3 (chasing team 30% more), over 10 (first batting team nearly double of chasing team) and over 19 (first batting team 35% more). The later is explainable what with the batsmen throwing their bats around in the first innings and slowing down nearing the target in the second. In addition, it is also possible that the matches are won or lost by the 19th over.

5. T20-Intls: Comparison of 20-over figures between T20s and IPL

Ov T20-Interntionals IPL-2009 matches    T20-Intls  IPL-2009
 #     Runs               Runs              Wkts       Wkts

 1 (174.0 1004) 5.77  5.55 (114.0  633)   40   0.23  38  0.33
 2 (174.0 1199) 6.89  6.73 (114.0  767)   42   0.24  33  0.29
 3 (174.0 1333) 7.66  7.20 (114.0  821)   57   0.33  26  0.23
 4 (174.0 1319) 7.58  7.73 (114.0  881)   54   0.31  26  0.23
 5 (174.0 1466) 8.43  8.10 (113.5  922)   37   0.21  31  0.27
 6 (173.5 1376) 7.92  7.98 (113.0  902)   67   0.39  33  0.29
 7 (173.0 1137) 6.57  5.66 (113.0  640)   47   0.27  30  0.27
 8 (172.4 1163) 6.74  6.65 (113.0  752)   49   0.28  17  0.15
 9 (172.0 1077) 6.26  6.88 (113.0  778)   49   0.28  27  0.24
10 (169.0 1157) 6.85  6.10 (112.2  685)   45   0.27  33  0.29
11 (166.5 1090) 6.53  6.51 (112.0  729)   60   0.36  30  0.27
12 (163.5 1191) 7.27  7.31 (112.0  819)   48   0.29  26  0.23
13 (163.0 1234) 7.57  7.23 (111.0  802)   52   0.32  27  0.24
14 (161.5 1099) 6.79  7.46 (110.1  822)   63   0.39  30  0.27
15 (157.2 1181) 7.51  7.94 (109.4  871)   63   0.40  36  0.33
16 (155.5 1253) 8.04  8.17 (105.5  865)   58   0.37  45  0.43
17 (152.1 1280) 8.41  9.15 (104.2  955)   71   0.47  43  0.41
18 (147.0 1145) 7.79  9.60 (102.2  982)   70   0.48  47  0.46
19 (132.0 1184) 8.97  8.98 ( 96.2  865)   76   0.58  44  0.46
20 (109.3 1052) 9.61 10.01 ( 82.5  829)  105   0.96  77  0.93

   Total        7.39  7.49                     0.36      0.32

It must be remembered that the T20s have had matches played across the world, between many different levels of teams and do not have the 10th over long commercial break.

a. The IPL matches have a slightly higher run-rate as well as slightly lower wickets per over also. Possibly the better quality of players?

b. Not so surprisingly the T20 and IPL have almost similar values barring one over, the 18th. IPL rate is ahead by 20%. Over 10, which had a greater significance for IPL than T20s, there is no variance at all.

c. The two opening overs have shown a much higher quantum of wickets being captured. Understandable since IPL was played in South Africa while the T20s have been played in batsmen-friendly pitches across the world. There seems to be a greater number of wickets in the 6th over in T20s than IPL indicating that in the T20s teams have opted for steadier starts but have tried to speed up just before the fielding restrictions end.

6. T20-Intls: 10 over scores - runs scored

SNo. I MtId Year Team 10Overs Final score   vs  %adv Rns Rslt

  1. 1 0013 2007 Aus 117/2 to 221/ 5 (20.0) Eng 1.89 104 Won
  2. 1 0020 2007 Win 109/0 to 205/ 6 (20.0) Saf 1.88  96 Lost
  3. 2 0014 2007 Saf 107/0 to 132/ 0 (11.3) Pak 1.23  25 Won
  4. 2 0020 2007 Saf 106/2 to 208/ 2 (17.4) Win 1.96 102 Won
  5. 1 0079 2008 Nzl 106/0 to 191/ 9 (20.0) Win 1.80  85 Won
  6. 2 0057 2008 Win 102/3 to 102/ 3 ( 9.1) Aus 1.00   0 Won
  7. 1 0027 2007 Slk 101/2 to 260/ 6 (20.0) Ken 2.57 159 Won
  8. 1 0080 2009 Aus 101/2 to 182/ 9 (20.0) Saf 1.80  81 Won
  9. 1 0011 2006 Nzl 101/2 to 162/ 8 (20.0) Slk 1.60  61 Lost
 10. 2 0047 2007 Ind 101/1 to 167/ 3 (18.1) Aus 1.65  66 Won
 11. 2 0024 2007 Bng 100/2 to 165/ 4 (18.0) Win 1.65  65 Won
...
...
...
168. 1 0021 2007 Ken  38/5 to  73/10 (16.5) Nzl 1.92  35 Lost
169. 2 0064 2008 Ire  34/2 to  72/ 6 (19.1) Ken 2.12  38 Won
170. 1 0067 2008 Ber  33/5 to  70/10 (20.0) Can 2.12  37 Lost
171. 1 0050 2007 Saf  28/7 to  58/ 8 (13.0) Win 2.07  30 Lost
172. 2 0075 2008 Can  27/4 to  75/10 (19.2) Zim 2.78  48 Lost

Even though the 10-over mark is not significant in T20 International matches, there being no Commercial(-cum-strategic) break, I have determined the 10-over scores to do a similar analysis as IPL. After all 10 overs represents the mid point and is an ideal point for taking stock.

a. There have been quite a few instances of teams having reached 100 runs during the first 10 overs, 11 to be precise. This has been distributed over a number of teams, Pakistan and England excepted.

b. Not all teams have taken advantage of this great start. Australia and Sri Lanka have capitalized on the start very well. Couple of teams who crossed 100 in 10 overs have also lost.

c. A few teams have scored fewer than 40 runs in the first 10 overs and have lost. The only exception is the Ireland which, however, was chasing only a paltry total of 67 by Kenya.

7. T20-Intls: 10 over scores - % of runs advanced in second 10 overs

SNo. I MtId Year Team 10Overs Final score   vs  %adv Rns Rslt

  1. 1 0045 2007 Ind  60/2 to 188/ 5 (20.0) Aus 3.13 128 Won
  2. 2 0081 2009 Aus  56/2 to 161/ 4 (18.5) Saf 2.88 105 Won
  3. 2 0075 2008 Can  27/4 to  75/10 (19.2) Zim 2.78  48 Lost
  4. 1 0036 2007 Nzl  60/4 to 164/ 9 (20.0) Eng 2.73 104 Won
  5. 1 0035 2007 Pak  69/3 to 189/ 6 (20.0) Slk 2.74 120 Won
  6. 1 0051 2008 Win  48/3 to 131/ 7 (20.0) Saf 2.73  83 Lost
  7. 1 0023 2007 Aus  51/4 to 138/ 9 (20.0) Zim 2.71  87 Lost
  8. 2 0049 2007 Nzl  49/6 to 132/10 (18.3) Aus 2.69  83 Lost
  9. 1 0043 2007 Ind  57/3 to 153/ 5 (20.0) Saf 2.68  96 Won
 10. 2 0029 2007 Pak  53/4 to 141/ 7 (20.0) Ind 2.66  88 Lost
 11. 1 0081 2009 Saf  59/3 to 157/ 5 (20.0) Aus 2.66  98 Lost
 12. 1 0027 2007 Slk 101/2 to 260/ 6 (20.0) Ken 2.57 159 Won
 13. 1 0038 2007 Slk  57/3 to 147/ 5 (20.0) Bng 2.58  90 Won
 14. 1 0022 2007 Pak  67/3 to 171/ 9 (20.0) Sco 2.55 104 Won
 15. 1 0049 2007 Aus  73/3 to 186/ 6 (20.0) Nzl 2.55 113 Won
 16. 2 0059 2008 Ire  47/2 to 118/ 6 (19.5) Sco 2.51  71 Won
 17. 2 0039 2007 Saf  63/3 to 158/ 4 (19.1) Nzl 2.51  95 Won
 18. 1 0032 2007 Nzl  77/2 to 190/10 (20.0) Ind 2.47 113 Won
 19. 2 0071 2008 Zim  55/4 to 135/ 9 (20.0) Can 2.45  80 Lost
 20. 1 0008 2006 Eng  59/4 to 144/ 7 (20.0) Pak 2.44  85 Lost

a. India tripled their score at the 10-over mark, and won. They also added 128 runs against the quality Australian attack. Sri Lanka have scored the maximum number of runs during the second 10 overs, battering the hapless Kenyans to the tune of 159 runs (yes, a rate of 15.9 rpo).

8. T20-Intls: T20 Batting Index (Min 5 batting innings)

No Batsman          Ctry  Inns  Runs  R/Inns   StRt  BatIdx

 1 Gayle C.H         Win    7    261   37.29  161.1   60.07
 2 Warner D.A        Aus    5    177   35.40  155.3   54.96
 3 Symonds A         Aus   11    337   30.64  169.3   51.88
 4 Masakadza H       Zim    7    258   36.86  135.8   50.05
 5 Hayden M.L        Aus    9    308   34.22  143.9   49.25
 6 Yuvraj Singh      Ind    9    262   29.11  164.8   47.97
 7 Jayasuriya S.T    Slk   11    341   31.00  154.3   47.83
 8 McMillan C.D      Nzl    7    187   26.71  159.8   42.70
 9 Smith D.S         Win    5    166   33.20  123.9   41.13
10 Samuels M.N       Win    6    131   21.83  177.0   38.65
11 Smith G.C         Saf   12    364   30.33  127.3   38.61
12 Oram J.D.P        Nzl   12    293   24.42  156.7   38.26
13 Gambhir G         Ind   11    328   29.82  126.6   37.76
14 Duminy J.P        Saf   10    279   27.90  133.5   37.24
15 Misbah-ul-Haq     Pak   14    422   30.14  122.7   36.98
16 Kemp J.M          Saf    7    203   29.00  126.9   36.79
17 Hussey D.J        Aus    7    181   25.86  141.4   36.56
18 Pietersen K.P     Eng   15    375   25.00  144.2   36.06
19 Ponting R.T       Aus   14    376   26.86  131.5   35.31
20 McCullum B.B      Nzl   21    582   27.71  125.4   34.76

This is a measure which encompasses in a single number the two significant characteristics of T20 batting, (viz), the runs scored and the strike rate. In order to take away the effects of not outs, in any case Batting average in T20 is a non-starter, only Runs per Innings is used. A minimum of 5 batting innings are used to select batsmen.

The measure is a product of the Runs/Innings figure by Strike Rate. This is an excellent measure to determine the batsman's contribution. Longevity does not come into the picture at all.

Gayle, with a Runs/Inns figure of 37.29 and strike rate of 1.611 has an excellent Bat index value of 60.07 and leads by a good margin against the new sensation from Australia, David warner, who has figures of 35.4 and 1.553 leading to 54.96. Third is the incomparable Andrew Symonds, with figures of 34.10 and 1.543, getting a Bat index of 52.62.

The unheralded Masakadza, playing for an unfancied team is the surprising presence at no.4, with an excellent Bat index value of over 50. Yuvraj Singh is the leading Indian and Misbah-ul-Haq, the leading Pakistani batsmen.

9. T20-Intls: % of boundaries in an innings (innings minimum - 50 runs)

No MtId Year Player Name          For  Runs Balls S/R  4-6s  %    vs

 1.0040 2007 Yuvraj Singh         Ind   58   16  362.5   54 93.1% Eng
 2.0011 2006 Jayasuriya S.T       Slk   51   23  221.7   46 90.2% Nzl
 3.0049 2007 Oram J.D.P           Nzl   66   31  212.9   56 84.8% Aus
 4.0014 2007 Smith G.C            Saf   71   40  177.5   60 84.5% Pak
 5.0079 2008 McCullum B.B         Nzl   59   34  173.5   48 81.4% Win
 6.0043 2007 Sharma R.G           Ind   50   40  125.0   40 80.0% Saf
 7.0027 2007 Jayasuriya S.T       Slk   88   44  200.0   68 77.3% Ken
 8.0018 2007 Nazimuddin           Bng   81   50  162.0   62 76.5% Pak
 9.0074 2008 Rizwan Cheema        Can   68   43  158.1   52 76.5% Slk
10.0020 2007 Gibbs H.H            Saf   90   55  163.6   68 75.6% Win
...
14.0020 2007 Gayle C.H            Win  117   57  205.3   88 75.2% Saf

Yuvraj Singh is on top, because of his 6-sixes over off Broad. An astounding 93% of his runs were scored in 4s and 6s. Jayasuriya's 90% follows next and then comes Oram's 85%.

The maximum runs in boundaries in an innings is by Gayle who scored 88 runs off his score of 117 in boundaries. Unfortunately West Indies lost the match.

10. T20-Intls: Overs in which 20 or more runs were conceded

No MtId Year I Bowler Name       For Vs  O        % of Tot Max

 1.0040 2007 1 Broad S.C.J       Eng Ind 19 36 runs 16.5%   20
 2.0001 2005 1 Tuffey D.R        Nzl Aus 19 30 runs 14.0%   20
 3.0027 2007 1 Onyango L.N       Ken Slk 19 29 runs 11.2%   20
 4.0053 2008 1 Patel J.S         Nzl Eng 16 26 runs 14.1%   20
 5.0027 2007 1 Tikolo S.O        Ken Slk 13 25 runs  9.6%   20
 6.0032 2007 1 Yuvraj Singh      Ind Nzl 16 25 runs 13.2%   20
 7.0057 2008 2 Johnson M.G       Aus Win  2 25 runs 24.5%    9
 8.0049 2007 2 Symonds A         Aus Nzl 18 24 runs 18.2%   19
 9.0039 2007 1 Morkel J.A        Saf Nzl 15 24 runs 15.7%   20
10.0024 2007 1 Mohammad Ashraful Bng Win 19 24 runs 14.6%   20
11.0079 2008 1 Edwards F.H       Win Nzl  8 24 runs 12.6%   20
12.0006 2006 1 Hogg G.B          Aus Saf 16 23 runs 11.4%   20
13.0022 2007 1 Haq R.M           Sco Pak 13 23 runs 13.5%   20
14.0088 2009 1 Bracken N.W       Aus Saf 16 23 runs 14.7%   20
15.0025 2007 1 Dabengwa K.M      Zim Eng 13 22 runs 11.7%   20
16.0054 2008 1 Hitchcock P.A     Nzl Eng  5 22 runs 11.4%   20
17.0008 2006 2 Mahmood S.I       Eng Pak  5 22 runs 14.9%   17
18.0047 2007 1 Sreesanth S       Ind Aus 18 22 runs 13.3%   20
19.0035 2007 2 Mohammad Asif     Pak Slk  7 22 runs 14.1%   20
& 12 others who have conceded 21 runs in an over,
& 18 others who have conceded 20 runs in an over.

a. There are 30 instances in the first innings and only 19 in the second innings. Clearly a case of the uncertainty prevailing in the first innings when the target is unclear while in the second innings the target is clear and there is no need to go for risky run-scoring efforts.

b. New Zealand batsmen have done this 9 times, followed by South Africa 7 times and Australia, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and India 6 times each.

c. Australia and New Zealand bowlers have conceded 20 or more runs 8 times while England bowlers 6 times.

d. The Indian batting and England bowling stints converged in the 36-run over essayed by Yuvraj Singh against Broad during the T20 World Cup 2007. The irony is that Yuvraj himself was hit for 25 runs by Oram/McMillan.

e. Hopes, Ashraful, Shahadat Hossain and Sreesanth have conceded 20 or more runs twice in T20 matches.

f. Johnson's 25 run constituted 24.5% of the opposing team total. However this was while a low Australian total was being chased by West Indies, in less than 10 overs. In a complete 19-20 over match, the highest % of runs conceded was in the Symonds over to New Zealand (24 out of 132, but Australia won) and the amazing 36 over bowled by Broad (36 out of 218).

11. T20-Intls: Analysis of maidens bowled

No Bowler             Ctry  Mat  Overs  Mdns  % Mdns   M/M

 1 Price R.W           Zim    4   16.0    3   18.75   0.75
 2 Nel J.D             Sco    6   19.0    3   15.79   0.50
 3 Gillespie M.R       Nzl   11   35.0    3    8.57   0.27
 4 Fernando C.R.D      Slk   13   46.0    3    6.52   0.23
 5 Shahid Afridi       Pak   16   61.3    3    4.88   0.19
 6 Syed Rasel          Bng    8   29.0    2    6.90   0.25
 7 Sreesanth S         Ind    9   34.0    2    5.88   0.22
 8 Bracken N.W         Aus   17   56.5    2    3.52   0.12
 & 29 others who have bowled a single maiden in their career.

a. There are 8 instances of bowlers exceeding or reaching 3 maidens. Three bowlers have bowled 2 maidens each.

b. Ray Price of Zimbabwe has the best record of maiden frequency with 18.75%, followed by J.D.Nel of Scotland (15.8%) and Gillespie of New Zealand with 8.5%. c. The highest number of runs conceded in the 20th over is 21 while the highest number of runs conceded in the first over is 19.

c. In T20s a total of 50 maidens were bowled out of 3238 overs making the frequency at one every 65 matches. Contrast this with the IPL figures of 21 maidens out of 2179 overs, working out to a much lower frequency of a maiden every 104 matches. Possibly due to the higher quality of batsmen present.