Australia's stability factor over the last 30 years (Click here for a bigger image) © Ric Finlay

Australia’s hectic ODI programme this year, involving 32 different players playing in 39 matches, set me wondering if there had ever been a higher “churn” of players for the team. It was easy to establish that the 39 matches was a record high for Australia in a calendar year, beating the 37 matches played in 1999, and never before had Australia fielded as many as 32 players in the same time span; the previous highest was 26 in 1997.

But the high number of matches played creates an expectation of a high number of players; it well may be that the team was more stable in 2009 than in 2008, when only 18 matches were played, but as many as 20 different players were used.

Attempting to quantify team stability from these statistics is not as straightforward as it may initially seem. One could perform a division and come up with 0.82 players per match for 2009, against 1.11 for 2008 but this is meaningless for those who understand that each team contains 11 players!

Even multiplying the number of matches by 11, and dividing by the number of players (13.4 for 2009, 9.9 for 2008), giving an average number of matches per player in the calendar year, is not really useful since it doesn’t allow comparison between different years when different numbers of matches were played.

In the end, I decided to start with the premise that each calendar year commences with a match in which eleven players take part, and to then measure the changes that occurred subsequent to that first match.

So, for 2009, after the first match, we had another 21 players representing Australia in the next 38 matches, giving a stability index of 0.55 extra players per match. In 2008, it was another nine players in 17 matches, for an index of 0.53.

Doing this for Australian teams in each calendar year since 1979, when ODIs became an integral part of the cricket scene, gives the following results:

Year-wise stability index for Australia since 1979

Year	Matches	Players	Stability Index
1979	13	30	1.58
1980	9	23	1.50
1981	17	24	0.81
1982	15	20	0.64
1983	23	22	0.50
1984	22	21	0.48
1985	21	24	0.65
1986	23	18	0.32
1987	24	22	0.48
1988	15	18	0.50
1989	18	21	0.59
1990	23	18	0.32
1991	14	17	0.46
1992	21	19	0.40
1993	17	20	0.56
1994	30	23	0.41
1995	13	22	0.92
1996	26	20	0.36
1997	19	26	0.83
1998	25	23	0.50
1999	37	21	0.28
2000	23	17	0.27
2001	21	19	0.40
2002	29	21	0.36
2003	35	21	0.29
2004	26	20	0.36
2005	29	23	0.43
2006	29	23	0.43
2007	34	21	0.30
2008	18	20	0.53
2009	39	32	0.55

The table indicates that the Australian team has been less stable over the past couple of years than in the previous nine years, an era of great success for the team. There are significant spikes in the years preceding World Cups (eg, 1995, 1997-98), presumably as selectors experimented with players in an effort to strike the right combination, while the World Cup years themselves seem to be more stable.

The two years just after the cessation of Kerry Packer’s World Series can be seen as being the most tumultuous in terms of team selection, with an average of over 1.5 new players per match. After that, the benefits of having a stable team became to be recognised, and the ratios dropped quickly, although not initially to the levels reached in the 2000s, Australia’s ODI golden age.

There is much more that can be investigated here, including looking at other teams, and correlating team stability with team success.

	Allan Border missed only one Test during a period in which Australia played 157 © Getty Images

A chance remark by Shankar Narayanan of New Delhi provided the spark for this article. He wanted me to look at the fact that Dravid was rarely injured and almost never missed a Test. I started thinking about and it struck me that I could not even tell when Dravid missed a Test, if ever he did. I knew that Kapil Dev missed a single Test, courtesy Gavaskar, and I started work. Thanks to Shankar for providing the spark.

I decided that I would do this analysis for both Tests and ODIs. And as I started the work, the idea of doing a combined Test+ODIs analysis also seemed feasible especially as I have already done done a lot of work regarding the forthcoming combined batting/bowling analyses.

First let us see why players miss matches.

1. They are injured. This is the most common reason.

2. They opt out. Dhoni did that during the tour of Sri Lanka and a host of English and Australian players have done so for subcontinent tours during the early days. Not now, though, with so much money being available here.

3. In rare cases for top players, they are dropped.

An extended absence from cricket through an outside happening like war is not a reason since both the team(s) and player(s) miss matches.

The cut-off is simple. For Tests it is 50 matches, for ODIs, 100 matches and for the combined analysis, these two numbers form the minimum requirement. The question of determining the number of matches played by the team presented a nice tough challenge since the career span for each player is unique.

1. Test matches: Ordered by the number of matches played

SNo.Player               Cty  Career   <-Mats->    % Missed
                               Span    Own Team       Mats

  1.Waugh S.R            Aus 1985-2004 168  189  88.9%  21
  2.Tendulkar S.R        Ind 1989-2009 159  173  91.9%  14
  3.Border A.R           Aus 1979-1994 156  157  99.4%   1
  4.Warne S.K            Aus 1992-2007 145  177  81.9%  32
  5.Ponting R.T          Aus 1995-2009 136  159  85.5%  23
  6.Dravid R             Ind 1996-2009 134  135  99.3%   1
  7.Stewart A.J          Eng 1990-2003 133  154  86.4%  21
  8.Kumble A             Ind 1990-2008 132  159  83.0%  27
  9.Walsh C.A            Win 1984-2001 132  142  93.0%  10
 10.Lara B.C             Win 1990-2006 131  158  82.9%  27

The most amazing players in this group are Border and Dravid who missed a single Test each in careers lasting 15 years. Dravid missed the Motera Test during 2005. The others missed quite a few Tests, none more so than Warne. Surprisingly Kumble also missed 27 Tests, as did Lara. Tendulkar missed 14 Tests, no doubt due to his injuries.

To view the complete list, please click here.

2. Test matches: Ordered by the % of team matches played

SNo.Player               Cty  Career   <-Mats->    % Missed
                               Span    Own Team       Mats

  1.Gilchrist A.C        Aus 1999-2008  96   96 100.0%   0
  2.Reid J.R             Nzl 1949-1965  58   58 100.0%   0
  3.Greig A.W            Eng 1972-1977  58   58 100.0%   0
  4.de Villiers A.B      Saf 2004-2009  52   52 100.0%   0
  5.Border A.R           Aus 1979-1994 156  157  99.4%   1
  6.Dravid R             Ind 1996-2009 134  135  99.3%   1
  7.Kapil Dev N          Ind 1978-1994 131  132  99.2%   1
  8.Healy I.A            Aus 1988-1999 119  120  99.2%   1
  9.Dujon P.J.L          Win 1981-1991  81   82  98.8%   1
 10.Waugh M.E            Aus 1991-2002 128  130  98.5%   2
 11.Lawry W.M            Aus 1961-1971  67   68  98.5%   1
 12.Fredericks R.C       Win 1968-1977  59   60  98.3%   1
 ...
 221.Martyn D.R          Aus 1992-2006  67  167  40.1% 100
 ...
 224.Titmus F.J          Eng 1955-1975  53  185  28.6% 132

What does one say of Gilchrist. 96 straight Tests and if he had not missed that catch off Laxman would have gone on past 100. This is some level of fitness. Reid and Greig played 58 straight Tests each. Greig broke this sequence since he was involved with Packer. Let us see how long is de Villiers' run. Kapil Dev missed one Test, not because he was injured, but Gavaskar's making him the scapegoat for playing a poor shot. Quite a few others have missed only one Test.

Incidentally Pietersen had a run of 54 consecutive Tests which was broken by his recent injury. Note also the very low % of matches of Martyn indicating his in-out playing career. He also had a long break between 1994 and 2000. What he achieved despite this treatment is amazing. Titmus had a six-year hiatus between 1968 and 1974.

To view the complete list, please click here.

3. ODI matches: Ordered by the number of matches played

SNo.Player               Cty  Career   <-Mats->    % Missed
                               Span    Own Team       Mats

  1.Jayasuriya S.T       Slk 1989-2009 440  494  89.1%  54
  2.Tendulkar S.R        Ind 1989-2009 436  562  77.6% 126
  3.Inzamam-ul-Haq       Pak 1991-2007 378  450  84.0%  72
  4.Wasim Akram          Pak 1984-2003 356  478  74.5% 122
  5.Dravid R             Ind 1996-2009 339  447  75.8% 108
  6.Azharuddin M         Ind 1985-2000 334  379  88.1%  45
  7.Muralitharan M       Slk 1993-2009 333  445  74.8% 112
  8.Ponting R.T          Aus 1995-2009 330  404  81.7%  74
  9.Waugh S.R            Aus 1986-2002 325  357  91.0%  32
 10.Vaas WPUJC           Slk 1994-2008 324  399  81.2%  75

At the top it is not easy to even get to 90% which has been achieved only by Steve Waugh. Note the very high number of matches missed by Tendulkar which has pushed his playing % to below 80.

To view the complete list, please click here.

4. ODI matches: Ordered by the % of team matches played

SNo.Player               Cty  Career   <-Mats->    % Missed
                               Span    Own Team       Mats

  1.Cronje W.J           Saf 1992-2000 188  191  98.4%   3
  2.Tikolo S.O           Ken 1996-2009 126  128  98.4%   2
  3.Flower A             Zim 1992-2003 213  218  97.7%   5
  4.Dhoni M.S            Ind 2004-2009 151  155  97.4%   4
  5.Khaled Mashud        Bng 1995-2006 126  130  96.9%   4
  6.Dujon P.J.L          Win 1981-1991 169  177  95.5%   8
  7.Sangakkara K.C       Slk 2000-2009 256  270  94.8%  14
  8.Boucher M.V          Saf 1998-2009 285  303  94.1%  18
  9.Border A.R           Aus 1979-1994 273  290  94.1%  17
 10.Odoyo T.M            Ken 1996-2009 120  128  93.8%   8
 ...
174.Hayden M.L           Aus 1993-2008 161  392  41.1% 231
 ...
178.Kambli V.G           Ind 1991-2000 104  272  38.2% 168
179.Mushtaq Ahmed        Pak 1989-2003 144  402  35.8% 258

The African players rule the roost here, picking up the top 3 places. Tikolo and Andy Flower come from the lesser nations. Dhoni's run of 150+ matches, missing only four, that too a voluntary decision, is commendable.

Note Hayden's extraordinarily low % of matches. After making his ODI debut in 1993, he had a 6-year break until 2000, after which he was devastating. Kambli was in and out. Mushtaq played a single disastrous match three years after his retirement.

To view the complete list, please click here.

5. Test+ODI matches: Ordered by the number of matches played

SNo.Player               Cty  Career   <-Mats->    %
                               Span    Own Team

  1.Tendulkar S.R        Ind 1989-2009 595  735  81.0%
  2.Jayasuriya S.T       Slk 1989-2009 550  636  86.5%
  3.Inzamam-ul-Haq       Pak 1991-2007 498  586  85.0%
  4.Waugh S.R            Aus 1985-2004 493  546  90.3%
  5.Dravid R             Ind 1996-2009 473  582  81.3%
  6.Ponting R.T          Aus 1995-2009 466  563  82.8%
  7.Muralitharan M       Slk 1992-2009 462  597  77.4%
  8.Wasim Akram          Pak 1984-2003 460  609  75.5%
  9.Vaas WPUJC           Slk 1994-2009 435  532  81.8%
 10.Azharuddin M         Ind 1985-2000 433  489  88.5%
 11.Lara B.C             Win 1990-2007 429  532  80.6%
 12.Border A.R           Aus 1979-1994 429  447  96.0%

The only two players who have 90+% in this top-12 table are Steve Waugh and Border. It is a tribute to their fitness. Tendulkar just about gets past 80%. Note how high Azharuddin's playing %, a tribute to his fitness.

To view the complete list, please click here.

6. Test+ODI matches: Ordered by the % of team matches played

SNo.Player               Cty  Career   <-Mats->    %
                               Span    Own Team

  1.Cronje W.J           Saf 1992-2000 256  261  98.1%
  2.Flower A             Zim 1992-2003 276  283  97.5%
  3.Dujon P.J.L          Win 1981-1991 250  259  96.5%
  4.Border A.R           Aus 1979-1994 429  447  96.0%
  5.Sangakkara K.C       Slk 2000-2009 341  357  95.5%
  6.Healy I.A            Aus 1988-1999 287  301  95.3%
  7.Kapil Dev N          Ind 1978-1994 356  375  94.9%
  8.Boucher M.V          Saf 1997-2009 411  438  93.8%
  9.Jayawardene D.P.M.D  Slk 1997-2009 416  446  93.3%
 10.Marsh G.R            Aus 1985-1992 167  180  92.8%
 ...
106.Abdul Qadir          Pak 1977-1993 171  323  52.9%
107.Sidhu N.S            Ind 1983-1999 187  357  52.4%
108.Martyn D.R           Aus 1992-2006 275  530  51.9%
109.Hayden M.L           Aus 1993-2009 264  561  47.1%
110.Mushtaq Ahmed        Pak 1989-2003 196  513  38.2%

Again here Cronje is on top, followed by Andy Flower. Australia has three players in the top-10. At the end of the table we have players, barring Hayden, already discussed, who have had chequered careers. Qadir, in Tests, had a poor start, playing 10 matches in 5 years. In case of Mushtaq, his unsuccessful comeback efforts in 2003 have extended his overall career by three years. Sidhu had a 5-year gap after his debut in 1983.

Kepler Wessels has been deliberately excluded since his two-country career spanning 12 years does not lend itself to this type of analysis.

To view the complete list, please click here.

Finally one can see that the batsmen dominate the top portions of the lists. As Goel mentioned, bowlers find it difficult to maintain their playing status because of multitude of reasons.

As Sesha requested I have completed the work on longest treaks and given below is the top-10 streaks. This was one tough job.

Border after missing the fourth test had a long streak, unlikely ever to be broken. Similarly Mark Waugh finished with over 100 consecutive tests once he came back. Gavaskar had a 100+ test run just before the end of his career. Gilchrist's run covered his entire career. Dravid's streak was at the start of his career.

To view the complete list, please click here.

Test streaks: Minimum 50 consecutive tests

Player              Team Mats CareerSpan  <--Streak--> Tests

Border A.R           Aus  156   838-1256   849 to 1256  153
Waugh M.E            Aus  128  1161-1620  1223 to 1620  107
Gavaskar S.M         Ind  125   683-1073   753 to 1066  106
Gilchrist A.C        Aus   96  1467-1863  1467 to 1863   96
Dravid R             Ind  134  1328-1918  1328 to 1776   94
Viswanath G.R        Ind   91   666- 948   684 to  948   87
Hayden M.L           Aus  103  1252-1904  1493 to 1857   86
Sobers G.St.A        Win   93   386- 738   404 to  697   85
Tendulkar S.R        Ind  159  1127-1918  1127 to 1549   84
Boucher M.V          Saf  126  1381-1916  1400 to 1710   75

	Sachin Tendulkar's outstanding 175 against Australia in Hyderabad meant another huge total was almost chased down © Getty Images

I did an analysis on a winning target score in T20s and many subsequent matches showed how close the results of my analysis were. So I have embarked on doing a similar analysis for ODI matches. For ODIs there are a lot more matches available for analysis.

First some exclusions. For obvious reasons, I am going to exclude "Abandoned" matches, "No-result" matches (100 in all), matches which were decided on previous "revised score" rules (56 matches ), the more recent "Duckworth-Lewis" rules (101 matches) and a few incomplete innings. The reason is that the D/L and similar situations distort the scores quite a bit. If a team scores 300 and loses to another team which scores 150 in 20 overs, nothing can be inferred from the match. That leaves us 2659 matches for analysis.

I have taken the first innings scores, grouped these into run ranges and tabulated the results. Then I have derived some conclusions on winning target scores by inspecting and interpreting the results.

Let me say that this is a macro analysis. I would appreciate readers understanding this and avoid making comments such as target winning score depending on bowler quality, toss, day-night, team strength et al. All these have been considered in the past and will be considered in future. Let us give a break to these in this article.

The analysis has been done for the following sets of matches.

1. All matches.
2. Starting period matches.
3. Middle period matches.
4. Modern period matches.
5. Matches in Asian sub-continent.
6. Matches outside Asian sub-continent.

I tried analysing this for the countries, but did not get far since the number of matches played comes down and the number of matches in each run group becomes so small that it is impossible to derive any conclusions. In fact for a country such as New Zealand the % of wins for 240-249 is 81.2% and for 250-259 is 60.0%. Such inconsistencies make a country-level analysis a non-starter. Only for Australia, with 472 matches, could this be done with some level of confidence.

How does one define what is a winning score? I have worked on the basis that a score which gives the team a winning possibility of around 60% can be considered a winning target score. Anything lower will not give the team any edge in the long run and aiming for much higher than 60% might backfire on the team in that they might aim for 300 and end up with 220.

1. All matches

FBatScore  Matches   Wins  % wins AvgeWinMargin

Below 125     108      4     3.7     12.8
125 - 149     140     13     9.3     25.9
150 - 174     221     36    16.3     29.6
175 - 199     334     82    24.6     34.0
200 - 219     339    134    39.5     46.0
220 - 229     198     94    47.5     42.4
230 - 239     196    104    53.1     45.8
240 - 249     191    110    57.6     55.4
250 - 259     166    100    60.2     59.3
260 - 279     294    217    73.8     62.3
280 - 299     204    157    77.0     80.2
Above 300     268    243    90.7    101.5

Total        2659   1294    48.7     63.3

From a perusal of the above, it is a reasonable conclusion that a winning target score, based on the criteria already set, is around 250.

2. First period matches (1971-1989)

FBatScore  Matches   Wins  % wins AvgeWinMargin

Below 125      26      2     7.7      7.0
125 - 149      32      4    12.5     15.5
150 - 174      65     11    16.9     25.1
175 - 199      98     29    29.6     36.2
200 - 219      91     39    42.9     45.7
220 - 229      42     23    54.8     30.9
230 - 239      56     35    62.5     48.5
240 - 249      41     25    61.0     60.4
250 - 259      23     16    69.6     57.6
260 - 279      53     40    75.5     60.1
280 - 299      21     19    90.5     82.1
Above 300      16     16   100.0    122.7

Total         564    259    45.9     53.9

Things were tough for the batsmen during these early bowler-friendly times. Lower totals were defended more often than not. Hence the winning target score for this period was 235. Even this has been reached with the higher scores during late 1980s.

No team which scored 300+ runs finished on the losing side. The highest score successfully chased during this period was by New Zealand who overhauled England's score of 296 during 1983. India defended a total of 125 against Pakistan quite comfortably while Pakistan defended a total of 87 in 16 overs against India.

3. Middle period matches (1990-1999)

FBatScore  Matches   Wins  % wins AvgeWinMargin

Below 125      21      1     4.8     14.0
125 - 149      42      5    11.9     18.4
150 - 174      73     15    20.5     35.8
175 - 199     115     30    26.1     32.1
200 - 219     131     56    42.7     38.5
220 - 229      77     42    54.5     44.4
230 - 239      66     36    54.5     40.2
240 - 249      66     43    65.2     45.8
250 - 259      59     34    57.6     44.6
260 - 279      91     70    76.9     67.4
280 - 299      54     41    75.9     73.6
Above 300      61     57    93.4     91.6

Total         856    430    50.2     54.7

Things improved for batsmen during this period. Consequently the winning target score increased to around 240.

4 300+ totals were chased successfully. Australia defended a total of 101 in 30 overs against West Indies.

4. Modern period matches (2000-2009)

FBatScore  Matches   Wins  % wins AvgeWinMargin

Below 125      61      1     1.6     23.0
125 - 149      66      4     6.1     45.8
150 - 174      83     10    12.0     25.2
175 - 199     121     23    19.0     33.8
200 - 219     117     39    33.3     57.1
220 - 229      79     29    36.7     48.6
230 - 239      74     33    44.6     49.1
240 - 249      84     42    50.0     62.1
250 - 259      84     50    59.5     69.9
260 - 279     150    107    71.3     59.8
280 - 299     129     97    75.2     82.6
Above 300     191    170    89.0    102.8

Total        1239    605    48.8     73.5

In the modern times, many more high totals were chased successfully. This effect percolated down and the winning target score could be pegged at 260.

300+ chases were commonplace with South Africa's overtaking Australian score of 434 being the highlight. West Indies defended a total of 124 in 30 overs against Bangladesh.

5. Asian sub-continent matches

FBatScore  Matches   Wins  % wins AvgeWinMargin

Below 125      31      2     6.5      7.0
125 - 149      52      1     1.9     38.0
150 - 174      81     17    21.0     26.9
175 - 199     121     31    25.6     41.5
200 - 219     123     54    43.9     41.8
220 - 229      74     31    41.9     47.7
230 - 239      80     43    53.8     48.3
240 - 249      72     38    52.8     52.8
250 - 259      58     39    67.2     39.5
260 - 279     118     90    76.3     61.5
280 - 299      91     67    73.6     80.6
Above 300     104     95    91.3     94.1

Total        1005    508    50.5     61.1

The winning target score for the Asian sub-continent is around 255. It is not easy to defend low totals on these batting-friendly pitches.

6. Outside Asian sub-continent matches

FBatScore  Matches   Wins  % wins AvgeWinMargin

Below 125      77      2     2.6     18.5
125 - 149      88     12    13.6     24.9
150 - 174     140     19    13.6     31.9
175 - 199     213     51    23.9     29.5
200 - 219     216     80    37.0     48.9
220 - 229     124     63    50.8     39.8
230 - 239     116     61    52.6     44.1
240 - 249     119     72    60.5     56.7
250 - 259     108     61    56.5     72.0
260 - 279     176    127    72.2     62.9
280 - 299     113     90    79.6     79.9
Above 300     164    148    90.2    106.2

Total        1654    786    47.5     64.8

Surprisingly the winning target score is the same as for Asian sub-continent. This has been caused by the way the New Zealand and English pitches have eased in recent times. The winning target score is around 250. Quite a few sub-150 totals have been defended.

Finally it can be seen that, barring the first period, the winning target score is either side of 250.

I started this article before the Hyderabad ODI between India and Australia, and fibnished it after the match. One more 300+ total (oh! a 350+ total) almost bit the dust. No score is safe, it looks like. However this match does not change this article a bit.

As requested by Khalil, I have done an analysis of the period 2005-09 and presenbted the table here.

7. Recent matches (2005-2009)

FBatScore  Matches   Wins  % wins AvgeWinMargin

Below 125      27      0     0.0      0.0
125 - 149      33      2     6.1     49.0
150 - 174      39      6    15.4     27.3
175 - 199      52     10    19.2     33.8
200 - 219      62     20    32.3     62.3
220 - 229      34      9    26.5     49.9
230 - 239      48     22    45.8     47.9
240 - 249      40     17    42.5     69.1
250 - 259      42     24    57.1     67.0
260 - 279      67     45    67.2     54.2
280 - 299      62     46    74.2     84.2
ABove 300     125    111    88.8    103.2

Total         631    312    49.4     76.6

The winning par score could be pegged at 265, 5 runs above the 2000s value. Otherwise the numbers have stayed similar to the 2000s values.