« September 2009 |
| November 2009 »
October 26, 2009
Analysing bowlers in Test wins
Posted by Ananth501 at
in Tests - bowling
|
|
|
Muttiah Muralitharan has taken more than 40% of Sri Lanka's wickets in the Tests they've won
© AFP
|
| A few days back I posted an article on the runs scored by batsmen in winning cause. A number of comments were received which indicated that the batting averages in winning Tests is a very important indicator. I have done the work but will post the tables in a later article since I want to do justice to the bowlers. In fact the bowlers' analysis is as different from the batsmen analysis as chalk and cheese.
The reason is very simple and fundamental. Look at the following two Tests.
In 1932, Australia scored 153 runs in the match and WON.
South Africa:36 & 45.
Australia: 153.
In 1921, England scored 817 runs in the match and LOST.
Australia: 354 & 582.
England: 447 & 370.
The common thread running through these two extreme matches is that the winning team captured 20 wickets. This is the mandatory requirement of all wins, barring a few matches in which there might have been declarations or retired-hurt situations.
So I am going to take a somewhat different look at the bowlers' analysis. I have also been influenced by Unnikrishnan's excellent suggestion that the % runs should be calculated for each match, summed and averaged. I applied that to the bowler analysis. However let me inform Unni that there is almost no difference at all in the two ways of calculations since the team wickets is 20 for over 99% of the matches. There would obviously be a difference in batting because the total team runs in won matches vary a lot. I have also compared the bowling averages of bowlers, in winning causes, to the bowling averages of the other bowlers.
This time I have done a table of the top 25 for each of these analysis and a single team-based table, listing only the top-10 for each team. The full table is available through a link.
The criteria is simple. The bowler should have been involved in a minimum of 10 wins and captured over 100 wickets in their career.
1. Top 25 bowlers based on % of team wickets in wins
No Cty Bowler Mat Wins Wkts Wkts %-of-Wkts
Own Team
1.Eng Barnes S.F 27 13 115 260 44.23
2.Slk Muralitharan M 129 53 430 1060 40.57
3.Nzl Hadlee R.J 86 22 173 440 39.32
4.Aus Grimmett C.V 37 20 143 400 35.75
5.Ind Chandrasekhar B.S 58 14 98 276 35.71
6.Saf Steyn D.W 33 18 124 360 34.44
7.Saf Tayfield H.J 37 11 74 220 33.64
8.Ind Kumble A 132 43 284 860 33.02
9.Aus Lillee D.K 70 31 203 618 32.80
10.Aus O'Reilly W.J 27 14 91 279 32.61
11.Eng Fraser A.R.C 46 12 78 240 32.50
12.Eng Peel R 20 12 78 240 32.50
13.Eng Lohmann G.A 18 15 94 300 31.33
14.Aus McKenzie G.D 60 18 112 360 31.11
15.Eng Gough D 58 18 105 342 30.83
16.Pak Imran Khan 88 26 155 520 29.81
17.Win Marshall M.D 81 43 254 857 29.62
18.Win Ramadhin S 43 13 76 260 29.23
19.Ind Bedi B.S 67 17 97 336 28.90
20.Win Croft C.E.H 27 10 57 200 28.50
21.Pak Waqar Younis 87 39 222 780 28.46
22.Saf Donald A.A 72 33 187 660 28.33
23.Eng Caddick A.R 62 21 114 402 28.27
24.Aus Davidson A.K 44 16 89 320 27.81
25.Aus Trumble H 32 14 77 280 27.50
Let us give Barnes his place at the top. That is to be expected, considering that he captured 7 wickets per Test which became nearly 9 per Test in won matches. Muralitharan and Hadlee's high +-40% is to be expected considering that they were the leading bowlers for their respectiove teams, by a wide margin. Grimmett is also to be expected. This single position is also enough to show the contribution that Chandrasekhar has made for Indian cricket. Steyn is fast emerging as one of the great bowlers. Then come the two great spinners, Tayfield and Kumble. Lillee's 6.5 wickets per Test for a strong Australia is a revelation. The top-10 is rounded off by O'Reilly, the other great leg spinner of the 1920s.
The top-10 has 6 spinners. Also 6 modern bowlers appear in these positions.
To view the complete list, please click here.
2. Top 5 bowlers for each country based on % of team wickets in wins
Cty Bowler Mat Wins Wkts Wkts %-of-Wkts
Own Team
Aus Grimmett C.V 37 20 143 400 35.75
Aus Lillee D.K 70 31 203 618 32.80
Aus O'Reilly W.J 27 14 91 279 32.61
Aus McKenzie G.D 60 18 112 360 31.11
Aus Davidson A.K 44 16 89 320 27.81
...
Eng Barnes S.F 27 13 115 260 44.23
Eng Fraser A.R.C 46 12 78 240 32.50
Eng Peel R 20 12 78 240 32.50
Eng Lohmann G.A 18 15 94 300 31.33
Eng Gough D 58 18 105 342 30.83
...
Ind Chandrasekhar B.S 58 14 98 276 35.71
Ind Kumble A 132 43 284 860 33.02
Ind Bedi B.S 67 17 97 336 28.90
Ind Harbhajan Singh 77 31 168 619 27.13
Ind Prasanna E.A.S 49 15 81 300 27.00
...
Nzl Hadlee R.J 86 22 173 440 39.32
Nzl Martin C.S 50 12 59 240 24.58
Nzl Cairns C.L 62 16 76 320 23.75
Nzl Chatfield E.J 43 12 52 240 21.67
Nzl Cairns B.L 43 12 48 240 20.00
...
Pak Imran Khan 88 26 155 520 29.81
Pak Waqar Younis 87 39 222 780 28.46
Pak Wasim Akram 104 41 211 820 25.73
Pak Danish Kaneria 54 21 108 420 25.71
Pak Shoaib Akhtar 46 20 99 400 24.75
...
Saf Steyn D.W 33 18 124 360 34.44
Saf Tayfield H.J 37 11 74 220 33.64
Saf Donald A.A 72 33 187 660 28.33
Saf Ntini M 99 50 233 1000 23.30
Saf Pollock P.M 28 10 46 200 23.00
...
Slk Muralitharan M 129 53 430 1060 40.57
Slk Vaas WPUJC 111 43 166 860 19.30
...
Win Marshall M.D 81 43 254 857 29.62
Win Ramadhin S 43 13 76 260 29.23
Win Croft C.E.H 27 10 57 200 28.50
Win Roberts A.M.E 47 21 110 420 26.19
Win Ambrose C.E.L 98 44 229 878 26.12
The list is elf-explanatory. The Indian top-5 are all spinners. Quite surprising is the presence of Ramadhin amongst great West Indian fast bowlers and the very high placing of Fraser, McKenzie and Kaneria.
To view the complete list, please click here.
3. Top 25 bowlers based on Ratio of bowling average in wins
No Cty Bowler Wkts <-Wins Bow Avge-> Ratio
Team Own Others
1.Eng Fraser A.R.C 78 24.20 16.53 27.90 1.69
2.Nzl Hadlee R.J 173 18.38 13.07 21.82 1.67
3.Pak Imran Khan 155 20.16 14.50 22.56 1.56
4.Eng Barnes S.F 115 17.71 13.58 20.98 1.54
5.Slk Muralitharan M 430 20.57 16.04 23.66 1.47
6.Saf Steyn D.W 124 21.33 16.68 23.77 1.43
7.Pak Shoaib Akhtar 99 21.78 17.52 23.19 1.32
8.Eng Briggs J 84 16.01 13.01 16.86 1.30
9.Aus Davidson A.K 89 19.52 16.04 20.86 1.30
10.Aus McKenzie G.D 112 23.47 19.49 25.27 1.30
11.Eng Underwood D.L 123 18.65 15.19 19.67 1.30
12.Aus O'Reilly W.J 91 17.84 14.96 19.23 1.29
13.Aus Lillee D.K 203 21.56 18.27 23.18 1.27
14.Win Gibbs L.R 154 22.93 19.17 24.23 1.26
15.Saf Goddard T.L 47 23.03 19.09 24.10 1.26
16.Eng Verity H 71 20.01 16.65 20.97 1.26
17.Eng Lohmann G.A 94 11.21 9.67 11.91 1.23
18.Ind Pathan I.K 66 23.70 20.26 24.88 1.23
19.Eng Peel R 78 16.97 14.67 18.07 1.23
20.Aus Grimmett C.V 143 19.99 17.60 21.32 1.21
21.Aus Trumble H 77 20.79 18.00 21.85 1.21
22.Eng Bedser A.V 74 20.09 17.54 21.04 1.20
23.Ind Kumble A 284 21.18 18.71 22.40 1.20
24.Saf Pollock P.M 46 22.86 19.83 23.77 1.20
25.Win Croft C.E.H 57 19.39 17.12 20.29 1.18
I have ordered this table on the ratio of own wickets average to other bowlers wicket average in won matches. Fraser is on top having outr=performed his peers in won matches by 69%. I am not able to expplain this other than possibly the relatively weaker English attacks. Hadlee is next. However note the stunning contributions made by Imran Khan in their wins, over 55% better. Muralitharan, is next. Shoaib Akhtar comes into the top-10 as also the great left arm fast bowler, davidson.
Note the low averages by the concerned bowlers in wins. No doubt these figures would be influenced, partly, by the outstanding analysis against weaker teams. But neither Fraser nor Hadlee had one easy match in their careers.
To view the complete list, please click here.
4. Top 5 bowlers for each country based on Ratio of bowling average in wins
Cty Bowler Wkts <-Wins Bow Avge-> Ratio
Wins Team Own Others
Aus Davidson A.K 89 19.52 16.04 20.86 1.30
Aus McKenzie G.D 112 23.47 19.49 25.27 1.30
Aus O'Reilly W.J 91 17.84 14.96 19.23 1.29
Aus Lillee D.K 203 21.56 18.27 23.18 1.27
Aus Grimmett C.V 143 19.99 17.60 21.32 1.21
...
Eng Fraser A.R.C 78 24.20 16.53 27.90 1.69
Eng Barnes S.F 115 17.71 13.58 20.98 1.54
Eng Briggs J 84 16.01 13.01 16.86 1.30
Eng Underwood D.L 123 18.65 15.19 19.67 1.30
Eng Verity H 71 20.01 16.65 20.97 1.26
...
Ind Pathan I.K 66 23.70 20.26 24.88 1.23
Ind Kumble A 284 21.18 18.71 22.40 1.20
Ind Bedi B.S 97 19.43 17.66 20.14 1.14
Ind Chandrasekhar B.S 98 20.83 19.28 21.69 1.13
Ind Prasanna E.A.S 81 19.04 17.62 19.57 1.11
...
Nzl Hadlee R.J 173 18.38 13.07 21.82 1.67
Nzl Cairns C.L 76 21.35 20.20 21.70 1.07
Nzl Bracewell J.G 35 19.54 19.29 19.59 1.02
Nzl Chatfield E.J 52 18.39 19.00 18.22 0.96
Nzl Vettori D.L 109 19.07 21.40 18.52 0.87
...
Pak Imran Khan 155 20.16 14.50 22.56 1.56
Pak Shoaib Akhtar 99 21.78 17.52 23.19 1.32
Pak Waqar Younis 222 19.84 18.21 20.49 1.13
Pak Sarfraz Nawaz 75 21.47 20.52 21.76 1.06
Pak Wasim Akram 211 18.63 18.49 18.68 1.01
...
Saf Steyn D.W 124 21.33 16.68 23.77 1.43
Saf Goddard T.L 47 23.03 19.09 24.10 1.26
Saf Pollock P.M 46 22.86 19.83 23.77 1.20
Saf Tayfield H.J 74 20.98 18.85 22.05 1.17
Saf Donald A.A 187 18.77 16.80 19.56 1.16
...
Slk Muralitharan M 430 20.57 16.04 23.66 1.47
Slk Vaas WPUJC 166 20.20 22.64 19.62 0.87
...
Win Gibbs L.R 154 22.93 19.17 24.23 1.26
Win Croft C.E.H 57 19.39 17.12 20.29 1.18
Win Marshall M.D 254 18.70 16.79 19.50 1.16
Win Ambrose C.E.L 229 18.66 16.86 19.29 1.14
Win Ramadhin S 76 19.08 17.80 19.61 1.10
The table is self-explanatory. Note the vast difference between Muralitharan, Hadlee and their support bowlers. Also Gibbs leads the West Indian list.
To view the complete list, please click here.
Comments (17)
October 12, 2009
How far ahead is the top one - part II
Posted by Ananth501 at
in Tests - bowling
|
|
|
Dale Steyn has the second-best strike rate among bowlers with at least 100 Test wickets
© AFP
|
| How far ahead is the top player in any list is a key point to answering the question of whether a high mark set by a player will be reached. I had earlier done a similar analysis for batting. Now I have taken a few Test bowling measures and created a table of the Top-100, subject to qualifying criteria, and assigned each position a percentage relative to the top position. A perusal of these tables will give an idea of the degree of permanence of the top places.
If an active player is at the top of an all-time list, he keeps on widening the gap on the second placed player, unless otherwise the top two or three are also active. This true of the aggregate type of measures. On the other hand in performance related measures, it does not matter since it is possible for later players to catch up with the particular measure.
The tables are shown in a standardised format. The first five entries are shown to get an idea, not just of the top entry, but also the ones immediately following the top. When required, more entries are shown. Then the 50th entry, exactly at mid-point, is shown to get an idea of the % drop. Finally the 100th entry is shown to get a further idea of the table's distribution of the key measure.
1. Table of Bowling averages (minimum 100 wkts)
SNo.Bowler Type Cty Runs Wkts Avge %
1.Lohmann G.A RFM Eng 1205 112 10.76 100.0
2.Barnes S.F RFM Eng 3106 189 16.43 65.5
3.Turner C.T.B RFM Aus 1670 101 16.53 65.1
4.Peel R lsp Eng 1715 102 16.81 64.0
5.Briggs J lsp Eng 2095 118 17.75 60.6
6.Blythe C lsp Eng 1863 100 18.63 57.8
7.Wardle J.H lsp Eng 2080 102 20.39 52.8
8.Davidson A.K LFM Aus 3819 186 20.53 52.4
9.Marshall M.D RF Win 7876 376 20.95 51.4
10.Garner J RF Win 5433 259 20.98 51.3
...
50.Tate M.W RFM Eng 4055 155 26.16 41.1
...
100.Doshi D.R lsp Ind 3502 114 30.72 35.0
Lohmann is nearly as far ahead in Bowling average as Bradman is so far as Batting average is concerned. Notwithstanding all the underlying factors (uncovered pitches, 3-day tests, average amateur batsmen etc), this is a huge difference since we are looking only at the raw numbers here. In fact the top 6 bowlers are all pre-WW1 bowlers.
Then come Wardle, a 50s bowler, Davidson, a 60s bowler and two modern West Indian giants, Marshall and Garner. I would say that the best any modern bowler can hope for is an entry into the top-10, as Muralitharan and Steyn are trying for.
Note how far off the 50th placed bowler, Tate and Doshi, at no.100, are.
To view the complete list, please click here.
2. Table of Wickets per Test (minimum 100 wkts)
SNo.Bowler Type Cty Mat Wkts WpT %
1.Barnes S.F RFM Eng 27 189 7.00 100.0
2.Lohmann G.A RFM Eng 18 112 6.22 88.9
3.Muralitharan M rob Slk 129 783 6.07 86.7
4.Turner C.T.B RFM Aus 17 101 5.94 84.9
5.Grimmett C.V rlb Aus 37 216 5.84 83.4
...
50.Wasim Akram LFM Pak 104 414 3.98 56.9
...
100.Giffen G rob Aus 31 103 3.32 47.5
The wonderful thing in this table is not the presence of Barnes and Lohmann at the top, that is taken for granted, but how close Muralitharan is to Lohmann. In modern times, to have a wickets per Test of greater than 6 is simply amazing. Let us forget about wickets captured against weaker teams and appreciate the true greatness of this genial giant.
The 50th placed bowler is well above 50% indicating a clustering on top.
To view the complete list, please click here.
3. Table of Career wickets captured
SNo.Bowler Type Cty Mat Wkts %
1.Muralitharan M rob Slk 129 783 100.0
2.Warne S.K rlb Aus 145 708 90.4
3.Kumble A rlb Ind 132 619 79.1
4.McGrath G.D RFM Aus 124 563 71.9
5.Walsh C.A RF Win 132 519 66.3
...
11.Ntini M RF Saf 99 388 49.6
...
50.Hughes M.G RF Aus 53 212 27.1
...
100.Cork D.G RFM Eng 37 131 16.7
This is a pure longevity based table. Muralitharan is ahead by 10% and counting. Since the next active bowler is Ntini and he is 50% off, it is safe to say that Muralitharan is going to add more wickets to his name and keep this achievement a never-to-be-beaten one.
The career wickets tally drops off so drastically that the 50th placed bowler is only at 27%. Also the 100th placed bowler is 83% away.
To view the complete list, please click here.
4. Table of Bowling economy (minimum 1000 overs)
SNo.Bowler Type Cty Overs Mdns Runs RpO %
1.Goddard T.L LFM Saf 1956.0 706 3226 1.65 100.0
2.Nadkarni R.G lsp Ind 1527.3 665 2559 1.68 98.4
3.Verity H lsp Eng 1862.1 604 3510 1.88 87.5
4.Wardle J.H lsp Eng 1099.3 403 2080 1.89 87.2
5.Illingworth R rob Eng 1989.0 715 3807 1.91 86.2
...
22.Edmonds P.H lsp Eng 2004.4 613 4273 2.13 77.4
...
50.Statham J.B RFM Eng 2676.0 595 6261 2.34 70.5
...
100.Reid B.A LFM Aus 1040.4 244 2784 2.68 61.7
Bowling accuracy was probably more valued in Tests during 50s and 60s. Goddard and Nadkarni are 50s/60s bowlers and have unimaginable accuracy rates. Can we even imagine an analysis of 32-27-5-0 which Nadkarni essayed in 1964. The best modern bowler in this regard is Edmonds, who is 23% away.
The clustering at the top is so pronounced that Statham, at no.50, is only 30% away. And the 100th placed bowler is less than 40% away.
To view the complete list, please click here.
5. Table of Bowling strike rate (Min 100 wkts)
SNo.Bowler Type Cty Balls Wkts St Rt %
1 Lohmann G.A RFM Eng 3821 112 34.12 100.0
2 Steyn D.W RF Saf 6676 170 39.27 86.9
3 Barnes S.F RFM Eng 7873 189 41.66 81.9
4 Waqar Younis RFM Pak 16223 373 43.49 78.4
5 Briggs J lsp Eng 5332 118 45.19 75.5
...
50 Harmison S.J RFM Eng 13375 226 59.18 57.6
...
100 DeFreitas P.A.J RFM Eng 9838 140 70.27 48.5
Lohmann, as expected is on top. But what is surprising is the second place of Steyn and fourth place of Waqar Younis. Steyn is only 14% away but is likely to slip back as he plays more Tests. But one must give credit to Steyn who is second in an all-time list where the pre-WW1 bowlers are expected to reign supreme. No less is Waqar Younis' achievement.
To view the complete list, please click here.
A table of the best bowling performances in a Test or innings does not belong to this analysis since that is a specific single innings/match event and does not warrant such a comparison. For 10 years, no one might reach 10 or 19 wicket mark, and in one week, two bowlers might go past it.
Comments (24)
October 1, 2009
In a winning cause
Posted by Ananth501 at
in Batting
|
|
|
Len Hutton scored more than 22% of England's runs in the games they won
© Getty Images
|
| I was influenced by a recent comment by a reader on runs scored in winning causes. Everyone and their neighbour's Labrador talk about centuries scored during the wins of teams completely forgetting that more than "centuries", the emphasis should be on "runs" scored. Why ignore a winning 98 or for that matter a winning 48.
Let me take two players not often discussed. The first is Ganguly. He, and most of the knowledgeable Indian supporters, would agree that his majestic unbeaten 98 while orchestrating a great chasing win over Sri Lanka during 2001 was a far greater innings, arguably his best, than many a big 100. Ganguly might have missed a personal landmark but he did not miss the bigger objective. Would anyone, including Ganguly, have been satisfied if Ganguly had scored 5 more runs but India 5 less.
Now for Jimmy Adams. Would anyone rate his 208 against New Zealand higher than his outstanding unbeaten 48 against Wasim/Waqar/Razzak/Saqlain taking his team to an improbable one-wicket win leading to a rare series win. Even though Adams' innings was less than half of Mark Waugh's match-winning of 116 against South Africa, it was no less important.
Hence I have done an analysis of the runs scored by a batsman during his team's wins. It does not matter whether the batsman scored 12(Ambrose), 49(Paranavitana), 96(Shakib Al Hasan) or 309(Sehwag). The runs are considered and added. Not the 400, nor the 241.
Also I have not done an average of these scores. It will be certain that this average would be higher than his career batting average. I have rather looked at the % of share of the runs scored by his team. This will give a clear indication of his contributions. There is no comparison done across eras, across teams, across bowlers et al. It is almost like the peer comparison. In truth it is a peer comparison, but the comparison is only within the team, that too only in selected subset of matches. I have also not prepared tables across teams. Each table is for the concerned team.
The criteria is simple. The batsman should have been involved in 10 wins and scored over 2000 Test runs (exception for Bangladesh and Zimbabwe). The team runs are computed, sans extras.
Cty Batsman L Mat Runs Wins Runs TmRuns RpT % TS
Eng Hutton L 79 6971 27 2678 11891 99.2 22.52
Eng Hobbs J.B 61 5410 28 2720 13715 97.1 19.83
Eng Gooch G.A 118 8900 32 2950 15504 92.2 19.03
Eng Boycott G 108 8114 35 2950 16366 84.3 18.03
Eng Hammond W.R 85 7249 29 2584 14614 89.1 17.68
Eng Pietersen K.P 54 4647 18 1608 9370 89.3 17.16
Eng Cowdrey M.C 114 7624 43 3087 18416 71.8 16.76
Eng Sutcliffe H 54 4555 25 2141 12840 85.6 16.67
Eng Edrich J.H ~ 77 5138 22 1771 10730 80.5 16.51
Eng Barrington K.F 82 6806 31 2319 14188 74.8 16.34
Eng Thorpe G.P ~ 100 6744 38 3006 18917 79.1 15.89
Eng Strauss A.J ~ 67 5266 30 2596 16344 86.5 15.88
Eng Compton D.C.S 78 5807 25 1801 11420 72.0 15.77
Eng Richardson P.E ~ 34 2061 13 808 5195 62.2 15.55
Eng Trescothick M.E ~ 76 5820 37 2847 18757 76.9 15.18
Hutton is amongst the best across teams, averaging nearly 100 runs per Test and scoring over 22% of the team runs in winning matches. Hobbs is also quite high. Then comes the unheralded Gooch who scored above 19% of his team's winning runs.
Ind Viswanath G.R 91 6080 20 1637 9029 81.8 18.13
Ind Sidhu N.S 51 3202 13 1179 6680 90.7 17.65
Ind Dravid R 134 10823 44 4005 23227 91.0 17.24
Ind Tendulkar S.R 159 12773 51 4416 26993 86.6 16.36
Ind Gavaskar S.M 125 10122 23 1671 10417 72.7 16.04
Ind Vengsarkar D.B 116 6868 18 1187 7823 65.9 15.17
Ind Azharuddin M 99 6215 22 1609 10693 73.1 15.05
Ind Mansur Ali Khan 46 2793 12 846 5712 70.5 14.81
Ind Sehwag V 69 5757 25 1958 13228 78.3 14.80
Ind Amarnath M 69 4378 12 771 5772 64.2 13.36
Ind Engineer F.M 46 2611 13 774 5930 59.5 13.05
Ind Gambhir G ~ 25 2271 13 924 7203 71.1 12.83
Ind Laxman V.V.S 105 6741 36 2428 19479 67.4 12.46
Ind Chauhan C.P.S 40 2084 10 511 4425 51.1 11.55
Ind Shastri R.J 80 3830 10 492 4274 49.2 11.51
The stylish Viswanath leads the Indian table, followed surprisingly by the irrepressible sardar, Sidhu. Then come the three greatest Indian batsmen ever, not necessarily in that order, Dravid, Tendulkar and Gavaskar. Note the somewhat low share of Ganguly (11.23%), possibly because of batting at no.6 position many a time.
Nzl Crowe M.D 77 5444 16 1219 7085 76.2 17.21
Nzl Richardson M.H ~ 38 2776 12 763 5019 63.6 15.20
Nzl McMillan C.D 55 3116 18 1186 7838 65.9 15.13
Nzl Wright J.G ~ 82 5334 21 1253 8430 59.7 14.86
Nzl Fleming S.P ~ 111 7172 33 2145 14637 65.0 14.65
Nzl Cairns C.L 62 3320 16 936 7393 58.5 12.66
Nzl Howarth G.P 47 2531 12 558 4655 46.5 11.99
Nzl Coney J.V 52 2668 17 814 6900 47.9 11.80
Nzl Astle N.J 81 4702 27 1239 11747 45.9 10.55
Nzl McCullum B.B 46 2283 13 563 5885 43.3 9.57
Nzl Hadlee R.J ~ 86 3124 22 790 8792 35.9 8.99
Nzl Vettori D.L ~ 94 3492 29 1101 12696 38.0 8.67
Nzl Parore A.C 78 2865 19 497 8744 26.2 5.68
The number of wins are somewhat lower indicating New Zealand's rough ride over the years. However out of these, the greatest New Zealand batsman ever, Martin Crowe lives up to his reputation and is on top with a high value of 17+%.
Win Lara B.C ~ 131 11953 32 2929 14611 91.5 20.05
Win Sarwan R.R 81 5671 13 1210 6505 93.1 18.60
Win Sobers G.St.A ~ 93 8032 31 3097 16926 99.9 18.30
Win Adams J.C ~ 54 3010 21 1534 9045 73.0 16.96
Win EdeC Weekes 48 4455 16 1403 8324 87.7 16.85
Win Greenidge C.G 108 7558 57 4653 27970 81.6 16.64
Win Campbell S.L 52 2882 16 1068 6645 66.8 16.07
Win Walcott C.L 44 3798 12 1113 6955 92.8 16.00
Win Richardson R.B 86 5949 43 3059 19251 71.1 15.89
Win Worrell F.M.M 51 3860 18 1483 9359 82.4 15.85
Win Kanhai R.B 79 6227 27 2404 15248 89.0 15.77
Win Nurse S.M 29 2523 10 873 5569 87.3 15.68
Win Chanderpaul S ~ 121 8576 27 1933 12839 71.6 15.06
Win Lloyd C.H ~ 110 7515 43 3337 22217 77.6 15.02
Win Haynes D.L 116 7487 60 4041 27824 67.3 14.52
Lara has contributed quite significantly, above 20%, to the (somewhat lower) proportion of wins during his career. From the strong West Indian teams of the 1980s, only Greenidge is present in the top-10. In fact Richards has a somewhat lower % of runs value of 13.9 although one must admit that he had a win ratio of greater than 50%.
What does this indicate. Possibly that the other batsmen were quite strong. However this is negated by the presence of all the top West Indian batsmen of the 1950s in the top-10. I am happy to see Jimmy Adams in the top-10.
Slk Sangakkara K.C ~ 85 7308 41 4179 22486 101.9 18.58
Slk de Silva P.A 93 6361 19 1467 8736 77.2 16.79
Slk Jayawardene D.P.M.D 107 8750 48 4155 25575 86.6 16.25
Slk Atapattu M.S 90 5502 31 2138 15653 69.0 13.66
Slk Jayasuriya S.T ~ 110 6973 40 2801 20634 70.0 13.57
Slk Samaraweera T.T 54 3787 30 2222 16748 74.1 13.27
Slk Ranatunga A ~ 93 5105 17 985 7801 57.9 12.63
Slk Tillakaratne H.P ~ 83 4545 24 1534 12221 63.9 12.55
Slk Dilshan T.M 57 3443 28 1843 15126 65.8 12.18
Slk Vaas WPUJC ~ 111 3087 43 1388 22578 32.3 6.15
Not much to choose amongst the top Sri Lankan batsmen, Sangakkara leading the others quite comfortably. He has also averaged over 100 wickets per won Test.
Saf McGlew D.J 34 2440 11 1156 5285 105.1 21.87
Saf Smith G.C ~ 77 6343 40 3783 20252 94.6 18.68
Saf Wessels K.C ~ 40 2788 12 1044 5800 87.0 18.00
Saf Kallis J.H 131 10277 64 5099 31306 79.7 16.29
Saf Kirsten G ~ 101 7289 48 3800 23961 79.2 15.86
Saf Barlow E.J 30 2516 11 941 6324 85.5 14.88
Saf Cullinan D.J 70 4554 34 2325 16048 68.4 14.49
Saf Cronje W.J 68 3714 32 2156 15214 67.4 14.17
Saf de Villiers A.B 52 3558 26 1793 13056 69.0 13.73
Saf Hudson A.C 35 2007 13 876 6544 67.4 13.39
Saf McLean R.A 40 2120 12 768 5749 64.0 13.36
Saf Amla H.M 37 2460 21 1389 10713 66.1 12.97
Saf Gibbs H.H 90 6167 44 2877 22607 65.4 12.73
Saf Prince A.G ~ 48 3074 28 1719 13546 61.4 12.69
Saf Rudolph J.A ~ 35 2028 12 721 6371 60.1 11.32
McGlew, the great South African batsmen of the 1960s has an excellent 21+% of run share in won matches and has scored over 100 runs per Test. Then come Smith, Wessels and Kallis. Note also Smith's high win %.
Aus Bradman D.G 52 6996 30 4813 17036 160.4 28.25
Aus Chappell G.S 87 7110 38 3595 19209 94.6 18.72
Aus Simpson R.B 62 4869 22 2015 11264 91.6 17.89
Aus Lawry W.M ~ 67 5234 20 1853 10714 92.7 17.30
Aus Harvey R.N ~ 79 6149 41 3253 19174 79.3 16.97
Aus Hill C ~ 49 3412 25 2223 13200 88.9 16.84
Aus Walters K.D 74 5357 28 2303 14211 82.2 16.21
Aus McDonald C.C 47 3107 23 1557 9994 67.7 15.58
Aus Ponting R.T 136 11341 90 7754 50453 86.2 15.37
Aus Slater M.J 74 5312 44 3508 22833 79.7 15.36
Aus Ponsford W.H 29 2122 16 1508 9884 94.2 15.26
Aus Hayden M.L ~ 103 8626 71 6038 39634 85.0 15.23
Aus Trumper V.T 48 3163 22 1717 11427 78.0 15.03
Aus Hassett A.L 43 3073 26 1947 13123 74.9 14.84
Aus Hussey M.E.K ~ 42 3317 27 2359 15899 87.4 14.84
Bradman has scored over 28% of the team runs in won games. One more insurmountable number for the other batsmen to contend with. Then come a number of middle era Australians, led by Chappell. Ponting barely makes to the top-10. Hayden and Hussey find their places in the top-15. I am happy to see Victor Trumper in the top-15.
Pak Shoaib Mohammad 45 2705 12 1055 4927 87.9 21.41
Pak Saeed Anwar ~ 55 4052 23 2254 11079 98.0 20.34
Pak Inzamam-ul-Haq 120 8830 49 4690 25012 95.7 18.75
Pak Younis Khan 63 5260 22 2241 12570 101.9 17.83
Pak Javed Miandad 124 8832 39 2923 17298 74.9 16.90
Pak Asif Iqbal 58 3575 10 759 4934 75.9 15.38
Pak Mohammad Yousuf 82 7023 32 2617 17627 81.8 14.85
Pak Mudassar Nazar 76 4114 23 1511 10311 65.7 14.65
Pak Zaheer Abbas 78 5062 22 1530 10483 69.5 14.60
Pak Ijaz Ahmed 60 3315 23 1487 10385 64.7 14.32
Pak Mohsin Khan 48 2709 18 1134 8060 63.0 14.07
Pak Aamer Sohail ~ 47 2823 22 1365 9970 62.0 13.69
Pak Majid Khan 63 3931 13 849 6230 65.3 13.63
Pak Saleem Malik 103 5768 39 1880 17010 48.2 11.05
Pak Kamran Akmal 43 2226 13 776 7443 59.7 10.43
Shoaib Mohammad leads with a 21+%. Saeed Anwar is also high up there. Then come the three modern greats, led by Inzamam. Note Younis Khan's 100+ runs per test in won games.
Cty Batsman Mat Runs Wins Runs TmRuns RpT % TS
Bng Habibul Bashar 50 3026 1 149 692 149.0 21.53
Bng Mohammad Ashraful 50 2149 3 65 1724 21.7 3.77
Bangladesh has won only 3 Tests. Ashraful was part of all the three tests although he contributed next to nothing. Habibul Basher contributed a lot in their win over Zimbabwe. Shakib Al Hasan, that mercurial world class cricketer, contributed a lot during their brace of wins over West Indies.
Cty Batsman Mat Runs Wins Runs TmRuns RpT % TS
Zim Whittall G.J 46 2207 4 361 1994 90.2 18.10
Zim Flower A ~ 63 4794 7 507 3461 72.4 14.65
Zim Flower G.W 67 3457 7 529 3630 75.6 14.57
Zim Campbell A.D.R ~ 60 2857 6 167 2908 27.8 5.74
Not many wins here. However note the somewhat higher contribution of Gary Whittall to the Zimbabwe wins ahead of the more fancied Flower brothers.
To view the complete list, please click here.
I will come out with the second part of the "How far ahead is the top one ..." article next week. Later I will do a "In a winning cause" article on bowlers.
Comments (32)
|
RSS Feed
