Jacques Kallis: a class act in Tests and ODIs, with bat and ball © AFP

This is the third article to round off the series I had undertaken to analyse the players who played ODIs and Tests. The first looked at the top batsmen and the second looked at the top bowlers. This one looks at the top players over these forty years, combining batting, bowling and fielding. The base for this analysis are the two earlier analysis. So detailed explanations will not be given.

The key points are mentioned below.

1. Tests and ODIs carry equal weight of 50 points. I do not subscribe to the view that ODIs should carry lower weight. Over the years the best players have demonstrated equal commitment and performed at the top level in both formats. It would be unfair to treat these two formats differently. Let me confess that I would never accord any form of T20 this equal status.

2. Batting and Bowling carry equal weight, (viz) 45 points each, i-e, 22.5 each for Tests and ODIs. There is a very important adjustment made on these to take care of the specialist players. This is explained below.

3. Fielding carries a weight of 10 points, split equally between Tests and ODIs. 5 points will be given for 500 dismissals in both formats. I know this will benefit the wicket-keepers. Let me say that that is the main purpose, to reward the most difficult of cricketing tasks.

4. In summary, the following adjustments are built in the batting and bowling analysis. This has been given to preempt questions on these.
- Period based adjustment for batting average and strike rate (for ODIs).
- Period based adjustment for bowling average and runs per over.
- Weighted bowler quality for batting and batsmen quality for bowling.
- Quality of wickets captured for bowling.
- Peer comparisons for batting average and strike rate (for ODIs).
- Peer comparisons for bowling average and runs per over.
- Team strengths incorporated in batting and bowling valuations.

6. For the Batting and Bowling analyses, I had set 1000 runs and 100 wickets as the cut-off levels. However I have to do it differently here as otherwise, great specialist players such as Lara and McGrath will miss out. Hence I have kept the cut-off at 20 Tests and 40 ODI matches respectively. The cut-off for ODIs is kept at a slightly lower level of 40 to take care of the early years when a player could play for 5 years and play only 40 matches.

5. Finally the very significant and major adjustment I have done to benefit the specialist players. This is essential since the all-rounders start with a built-in advantage, securing points on both. In fact before this adjustment, 17 of the top-20 were all-rounders. The adjustment methodology is explained below.

- First the total of unadjusted batting and bowling points are determined.
- The proportion of batting points out of this total of batting+bowling points is determined. If this proportion is less than 0.33, the player is deemed to be a specialist batsman (who might or might not bowl) and his batting points are adjusted by upto 12.5%. The 12.5% will be applicable for pure batsmen such as Hayden, Gilchrist, Dravid et al.
- The proportion of bowling points out of this total of batting+bowling points is determined. If this proportion is less than 0.33, the player is a specialist bowler (who could hold a bat almost always) and his bowling points are adjusted by upto 12.5%. There is a slight difference to batting in that the bowlers always bat and will never have zero batting points. The highest adjustment of around 9% is for bowlers who are very average batsmen such as Alderman, McGrath et al.
- This adjustment is done separately for Test matches and ODIs to take care of varying player performances. Tendulkar is only a "batsman who bowls" in Tests, with 44 wickets, but is almost an all-rounder in ODIs, with 154 wickets. Similarly there are bowlers who have performed as a batsman more effectively in ODIs than Tests.

Since the Australia-New Zealand Test finished early on the fifth day I was able to include that Test and make these the end-of-season analysis. The impact of the Test is that Ponting slipped down a place while Johnson and Ross Taylor moved up.

Let us look at the tables. There is so much data that it is impossible to present everything. Since most of the data has been presented and discussed in the previous two articles, only the player analysis related tables are presented here. The first table shows the total points and Test/ODI split.

SNo TotPts Player name        Cty    Test    ODIs

  1. 60.80 Kallis J.H         Saf   31.06   29.74
  2. 57.42 Pollock S.M        Saf   27.16   30.26
  3. 56.96 Tendulkar S.R      Ind   26.57   30.39
  4. 55.30 Wasim Akram        Pak   23.97   31.33
  5. 55.17 Imran Khan         Pak   28.10   27.07
  6. 54.38 Kapil Dev N        Ind   25.24   29.14
  7. 53.48 Hadlee R.J         Nzl   27.14   26.34
  8. 52.83 Waugh S.R          Aus   26.92   25.91
  9. 52.12 Jayasuriya S.T     Slk   21.50   30.62
 10. 51.83 Richards I.V.A     Win   23.17   28.66
 11. 51.75 Botham I.T         Eng   27.47   24.28
 12. 50.65 Muralitharan M     Slk   25.58   25.07
 13. 49.59 Warne S.K          Aus   26.67   22.92
 14. 49.52 Cairns C.L         Nzl   23.05   26.47
 15. 49.09 Flintoff A         Eng   21.66   27.43
 16. 49.03 Border A.R         Aus   25.86   23.17
 17. 47.16 Hooper C.L         Win   20.99   26.17
 18. 47.09 Waugh M.E          Aus   21.97   25.12
 19. 46.68 Vettori D.L        Nzl   21.68   24.99
 20. 46.52 Chappell G.S       Aus   23.94   22.58
 21. 46.15 Vaas WPUJC         Slk   20.46   25.69
 22. 45.35 Sehwag V           Ind   20.49   24.86
 23. 45.28 Gayle C.H          Win   18.79   26.49
 24. 45.27 Ponting R.T        Aus   24.11   21.16
 25. 44.97 Gilchrist A.C      Aus   20.92   24.05
 26. 44.27 Lara B.C           Win   24.54   19.73
 27. 44.10 Waqar Younis       Pak   20.38   23.72
 28. 43.82 Marshall M.D       Win   24.10   19.72
 29. 43.40 Ganguly S.C        Ind   18.12   25.28
 30. 43.15 Shahid Afridi      Pak   14.74   28.40

Kallis sits at the top of this collection of outstanding players on merit. His status as an all-rounder par excellence is fully justified. A self-effacing performer, it is difficult to think of a single match in which he has not performed in one area or other. In international matches his tally of 21456 runs, 512 wickets and 255 catches is unlikely to be surpassed ever. As far as runs/wkts against average opposition teams, let me remind the readers of two things. One is that an adjustment has been made for the team quality. Sceond is that almost every top player, at one time or other would have got some relatively easy runs/wkts.

If there is a surprise at the second-placed player, it will only be an indication of the quiet manner in which the unheralded Shaun Pollock has performed in the international scene. And if there is a criticism of this high placing it will only be in the minds of the biased and partisan. In international matches his tally of 7300 runs, 814 wickets and 168 catches is an indication of his outstanding skills. His bowling average is either side of 24 in the two forms of the game. He Test batting average of 32.32 is higher than that of many an established Test batsman.

Tendulkar is next. What does one say of this great player, inarguably amongst the three greatest players of all time in anyone's book. How can a guy be so good in whatever he does. The best in many batting milestones, no mean bowler in ODIs and helped in Tests by the specialist player adjustment. That his still-increasing tally of international 31045 runs will remain forever the Everest to be scaled, like the 19-wickets capture of Laker, is undisputed. To boot, 188 wickets and 226 catches. Finally how can such a great player be so unaffected by success and adulation. A fairly dubious ball-tampering charge remains the single grey-mark in 21 years of playing at the top level.

Now come two Pakistani great players. First Wasim Akram, among the greatest left-handed bowlers of all time and a fearless attacking batsman. He overcame personal health problems with such a level of performance that he should be a role model for any aspiring sportsman. His international tally stands at 6615 runs, 916 wickets and 119 catches. Undoubtedly a candidate for the best ever left-handed all-rounder.

Then the charismatic Imran Khan. His batting only suffers in comparison to his bowling. His bowling performance against India in the series is among the best ever in the sub-continent. He missed over 15 Tests as a bowler, otherwise he would be placed higher. And let us not forget that his captaincy record is outside the scope of this analysis. His numbers stand at 7516 runs, 544 wickets and 63 catches.

The top-10 list is completed by Kapil Dev, Richard Hadlee, Steve Waugh, Jayasuriya and Viv Richards. One could argue on the relative placements. However these ten are among the best players of all time.

Two each from South Africa, Pakistan, India and one each from Australia, Sri Lanka, New Zealand and West Indies comprise the top-10.

Just outside the top-10 are Muralitharan and Warne. Many a specialist great player like Lara, McGrath, Dravid, Gilchrist, Kumble et al are outside the top-10, but in the top-30. This is understandable and should be accepted by all. After all we are talking about players, not batsmen or bowlers.

To view/download the complete table list, please click/right-click here and save the file.

Now for three more support tables. First the table showing the total points, split into batting, bowling and fielding.

SNo TotPts Player name        Cty    Bat     Bow    Fld

  1. 60.80 Kallis J.H         Saf   35.54   22.71   2.55
  2. 57.42 Pollock S.M        Saf   23.22   32.53   1.68
  3. 56.96 Tendulkar S.R      Ind   43.74   10.96   2.26
  4. 55.30 Wasim Akram        Pak   20.42   33.69   1.19
  5. 55.17 Imran Khan         Pak   25.33   29.21   0.63
  6. 54.38 Kapil Dev N        Ind   25.52   27.59   1.27
  7. 53.48 Hadlee R.J         Nzl   21.08   31.77   0.63
  8. 52.83 Waugh S.R          Aus   34.36   16.29   2.18
  9. 52.12 Jayasuriya S.T     Slk   31.08   19.21   1.83
 10. 51.83 Richards I.V.A     Win   38.07   11.66   2.10
 11. 51.75 Botham I.T         Eng   24.55   25.70   1.50
 12. 50.65 Muralitharan M     Slk    7.88   41.11   1.66
 13. 49.59 Warne S.K          Aus   13.48   34.21   1.90
 14. 49.52 Cairns C.L         Nzl   25.06   23.69   0.77
 15. 49.09 Flintoff A         Eng   24.21   23.94   0.94
 16. 49.03 Border A.R         Aus   35.34   11.01   2.68
 17. 47.16 Hooper C.L         Win   27.63   17.35   2.17
 18. 47.09 Waugh M.E          Aus   32.18   12.08   2.83
 19. 46.68 Vettori D.L        Nzl   20.90   24.61   1.17
 20. 46.52 Chappell G.S       Aus   33.52   11.57   1.43
 21. 46.15 Vaas WPUJC         Slk   17.24   28.12   0.78
 22. 45.35 Sehwag V           Ind   34.76    9.23   1.36
 23. 45.28 Gayle C.H          Win   28.97   14.66   1.66
 24. 45.27 Ponting R.T        Aus   41.82    0.28   3.17
 25. 44.97 Gilchrist A.C      Aus   36.07    0.00   8.90
 26. 44.27 Lara B.C           Win   41.43    0.00   2.84
 27. 44.10 Waqar Younis       Pak   10.20   33.41   0.49
 28. 43.82 Marshall M.D       Win   13.36   30.10   0.36
 29. 43.40 Ganguly S.C        Ind   31.53   10.18   1.69
 30. 43.15 Shahid Afridi      Pak   26.69   15.53   0.93

To view/download the complete table, please click/right-click here and save the file.

Now for the second support table. This shows the base numbers in terms of Test matches, runs, wickets, catches and averages.

SNo  Player name        Cty Mat  Runs   Avge Wkts   Avge Ct/S

  1. Kallis J.H         Saf 137 10843 (54.76) 261 (31.56) 156
  2. Pollock S.M        Saf 108  3781 (32.32) 421 (23.12)  72
  3. Tendulkar S.R      Ind 166 13447 (55.57)  44 (52.27) 104
  4. Wasim Akram        Pak 104  2898 (22.64) 414 (23.62)  43
  5. Imran Khan         Pak  88  3807 (37.69) 362 (22.81)  28
  6. Kapil Dev N        Ind 131  5248 (31.05) 434 (29.65)  64
  7. Hadlee R.J         Nzl  86  3124 (27.17) 431 (22.30)  39
  8. Waugh S.R          Aus 168 10927 (51.06)  92 (37.45) 112
  9. Jayasuriya S.T     Slk 110  6973 (40.07)  98 (34.35)  78
 10. Richards I.V.A     Win 121  8540 (50.24)  32 (61.38) 122
 11. Botham I.T         Eng 102  5200 (33.55) 383 (28.40) 120
 12. Muralitharan M     Slk 132  1256 (11.63) 792 (22.71)  72
 13. Warne S.K          Aus 145  3154 (17.33) 708 (25.42) 125
 14. Cairns C.L         Nzl  62  3320 (33.54) 218 (29.40)  14
 15. Flintoff A         Eng  79  3845 (31.78) 226 (32.79)  52

To view/download the complete table, please click/right-click here and save the file.

And the third support table. This shows the base numbers in terms of ODI matches, runs, wickets, catches, averages and strike rates.

SNo  Player name      Cty Mat  Runs   Avge- StRt Wkts   Avge-RpO Ct/S

  1. Kallis J.H       Saf 298 10613 (45.75- 72.4) 251 (32.01-4.8)  99
  2. Pollock S.M      Saf 303  3519 (26.46- 86.7) 393 (24.51-3.7)  96
  3. Tendulkar S.R    Ind 442 17598 (45.12- 86.3) 154 (44.30-5.1) 122
  4. Wasim Akram      Pak 356  3717 (16.52- 88.3) 502 (23.53-3.9)  76
  5. Imran Khan       Pak 175  3709 (33.41- 72.7) 182 (26.62-3.9)  35
  6. Kapil Dev N      Ind 225  3783 (23.79- 95.1) 253 (27.45-3.7)  63
  7. Hadlee R.J       Nzl 115  1751 (21.62- 75.5) 158 (21.56-3.3)  24
  8. Waugh S.R        Aus 325  7569 (32.91- 75.9) 195 (34.51-4.6) 106
  9. Jayasuriya S.T   Slk 443 13428 (32.43- 91.2) 322 (36.71-4.8) 105
 10. Richards I.V.A   Win 187  6721 (47.00- 90.2) 118 (35.83-4.5)  88
 11. Botham I.T       Eng 116  2113 (23.22- 79.1) 145 (28.54-4.0)  30
 12. Muralitharan M   Slk 327   660 ( 6.80- 76.7) 505 (22.74-3.9)  94
 13. Warne S.K        Aus 194  1018 (13.05- 72.0) 293 (25.73-4.3)  65
 14. Cairns C.L       Nzl 215  4950 (29.46- 84.3) 201 (32.81-4.8)  63
 15. Flintoff A       Eng 141  3394 (32.02- 88.8) 169 (24.38-4.4)  42

To view/download the complete table, please click/right-click here and save the file.

A few requests to the readers.

1. Pl check the complete table by viewing/downloading the link before rushing off with questions like "Where is Zaheer Khan" or "I don't see Javed Miandad".
2. Look at this as a list of great players. Apply the "Best amongst equals" philosophy. The best batsman/bowler need not be the best player and vice versa. Here all facets of the game are considered.
3. In your anxiety to push up your favourite player, do not pull down other players or countries. There are blogs and websites for that sort of diatribe. Not in this site or blog, though.
4. The usual request. Do not insult me, a fellow contributor, a fellow reader, any player or another country. Disagree with anything, but in a nice and cultured manner.
5. And finally, without clearly reading and understanding the article, please do not make statements like "Abc greater than Xyz. How can it be". It can be because of the numbers.

Adam Gilchrist: quicker than the rest in all formats © AFP

Man cannot have deliberately designed three forms of the game of cricket with more symmetry in their relative run rates than he has done so.

With the first international Twenty20 match being played in February, 2005, the three forms of the game have co-existed together since then, challenging batsmen to adapt to the vastly different conditions that each brings to the contest.

Since that time, Test cricket, with no limit on the length of an innings, has produced runs at the rate of 3.34 runs per over, (compared with a run rate of 2.74 runs per over in all Tests to that point).

One-day internationals, played for the most part over 50 overs per innings, have an overall scoring rate of 5.01 runs per over since 2005, (compared to a rate of 4.57 runs per over in the first 34 years of their existence).

Twenty20 cricket, played over 20 overs per innings, has offered runs at the furious rate of 7.53 runs per over in the first 140 matches.

What is remarkably symmetrical about these run rates since 2005 is this: the run rate in ODIs has been almost exactly 50 per cent higher than the run rate in Tests. Not 49 percent, not 51 percent, but 50 percent.

As if this is not remarkable enough, when we do a similar calculation between the run rates of ODI and T20 matches, we find again that the run rate in T20 matches is almost exactly 50 percent higher than that for ODIs. 50.3 percent, to be precise.

This symmetry in the run rates between the three forms of the game is so perfect that is appears to have been deliberately engineered. We know, of course, that it wasn’t.

These 50 percent increments can be used as a benchmark to track the adaptability of individual batsmen who have played the three forms of the game.

I then became interested in finding ways to measure how individual batsmen fared against these benchmarks. I looked at six Australians who played extensively in all three since 2005, Ricky Ponting, Mike Hussey, Adam Gilchrist, Andrew Symonds, Michael Clarke and Matthew Hayden.

The most adaptable of this group appears to be Mike Hussey, whose respective scoring rates in Tests, ODIs and T20s since 2005 have been 2.90, 5.30 and 8.32 runs per over. That gives him an overall increase from Tests to T20s of 287 percent, well above the 225 percent that would be achieved if he had just managed 50 percent increases up the line.

The lowest overall gain, 171 percent, was achieved by Adam Gilchrist (4.96, 6.16, 8.50), although he is somewhat penalised by his high Test run rate, where he tended to bat as though it was a limited overs match. The other player who has clearly had problems forcing the run rate is Michael Clarke (3.14, 4.55, 6.28). His figures show that he has only managed to double his Test run rate when playing T20 cricket, well below par.

Player	Test run rate	ODI run rate	T20 run rate	Overall increase (%)
Ricky Ponting	3.69	5.05	7.97	216
Michael Clarke	3.14	4.55	6.28	200
Michael Hussey	2.90	5.30	8.32	287
Adam Gilchrist	4.96	6.16	8.50	171
Andrew Symonds	3.96	5.67	10.16	257
Matthew Hayden	3.36	4.96	8.64	257

As an alternative, and to overcome the penalty suffered by Gilchrist in particular for scoring so quickly at Test level, I then calculated three ratios for each player, and then multiplied those ratios together. The three ratios were the degree each player exceeded, or failed to exceed, the overall scoring rate for each class of cricket.

Ponting, for example, had a ratio of 1.10 for Test cricket, 1.11 for ODIs and 1.06 for T20s. The product of those three ratios is 1.29.

Doing this for the six batsmen provides the following:

Ricky Ponting	1.29
Michael Clarke	0.78
Michael Hussey	1.11
Adam Gilchrist	2.26
Andrew Symonds	1.98
Matthew Hayden	1.25

This method confirms Gilchrist’s position as a premier run-scoring batsman, and consigns Michael Clarke to where he should be.

I hope this initial foray into analysing scoring rates over different classes of cricket might lead to some more sophisticated and extensive work by others!

Ricky Ponting is only the second batsman to score 10,000 ODI runs in wins © Getty Images

Ricky Ponting might have had a slight dip in form last year, but the milestones still keep rolling for him. During the course of his 69 off 71 balls in the third ODI against New Zealand in Hamilton, Ponting became the first player to complete 8000 runs as captain in ODIs.

In the very next game, at Eden Park, Auckland, Ponting played an exhilarating knock of 50 off 35 balls to become the first batsman to post 50 fifties as captain.

Ponting's aggregate of 8095 at an average of 44.23 in 214 games in charge includes 21 hundreds and 50 fifties - both are records as captain. His average is also the best among the captains with 3000 runs or more in ODIs. South Africa's Graeme Smith is the only other captain to have averaged 40-plus - 4749 (ave.40.58) in 127 ODIs.

Captains with 5000 or more runs in ODIs

Batsman	ODIs	Runs	Average	100s/ 50s	Strike rate
Ricky Ponting	214	8095	44.23	21/ 50	84.17
Stephen Fleming	218	6295	32.78	7/ 38	70.84
Arjuna Ranatunga	193	5608	37.63	4/ 37	77.98
Mohammad Azharuddin	174	5239	39.39	4/ 37	78.46
Sourav Ganguly	147	5104	38.66	11/ 30	76.20

Ponting is one of only two batsmen in the history of ODIs to have amassed 10,000 runs in winning causes, accomplishing the feat during his innings of 61 off 55 balls against West Indies in the fifth ODI at the MCG on February 19. He has scored 10,158 at an average of 50.28, including 25 hundreds and 65 fifties, in 244 matches. Only Sachin Tendulkar has aggregated more runs than Ponting for winning causes - 10,737 (ave.58.03), including 33 hundreds and 56 fifties, in 222 matches.

Ponting has been lucky to have played in exceptional teams almost throughout, which explains why almost 79% of his runs have come in wins, compared with just 61% for Tendulkar. But among those with at least 7000 runs in wins, one batsman has a higher percentage than Ponting: Adam Gilchrist has scored 79.60% of runs in wins. Ponting is followed by Kallis (68.52), Jayasuriya (66.07), Inzamam-ul-Haq (63.32) and Tendulkar (61.01).

Highest percentage of runs in wins (Qual: 7000 runs in wins)

Batsman	Wins - ODIs	Runs	Average	Strike rate	Total runs	% runs in wins
Adam Gilchrist	202	7657	41.16	99.33	9619	79.60
Ricky Ponting	244	10,158	50.28	82.86	12,895	78.77
Jacques Kallis	188	7273	53.47	75.06	10,613	68.52
Sanath Jayasuriya	233	8873	41.26	96.58	13,428	66.07
Inzamam-ul-Haq	215	7434	51.26	79.04	11,739	63.32
Sachin Tendulkar	222	10,737	58.03	90.66	17,598	61.01

With a 3-2 series win over New Zealand, Ponting now enjoys a success % of 77.83 (Played: 214, Won: 157, Lost: 44, NR: 11 & Tied: 2) - the best amongst captains with 75 or more ODIs as captain, eclipsing West Indian, Clive Lloyd's success % of 77.71 (Played: 84, Won: 64, Lost: 18, NR: 1 & Tied 1).

MS Dhoni has an excellent ODI batting index, which is next only to that of Viv Richards © AP

This is a follow-up to the article published a few days back. Alex had suggested that I do this based on the strike rates as the defining measure. I was not very comfortable with that since I think the batting average is a very important measure. Then Mareeswaran made the excellent suggestion that I use the combination of batting average and strike rate.

The ODI Batting Index (OBI), which is a product of batting average and strike rate, was used by me as part of television analysis during 2002/3. Afterwards it has undergone many transformations, Strike rate remaining common but multiplied by batting average, runs per innings and even extended batting average. However the original idea is still the best. The batting average is the most accepted of all measures.

First I am going to present the top-10 batsmen, based on OBI, based on their career figures. This has been given to let the readers have a perspective. An OBI of 50.00 has not been reached so far !!!

  1   Hussey M.E.K         Aus  115   38   4136   53.71   88.4   47.46
  2   Dhoni M.S            Ind  143   37   5420   51.13   89.9   45.95
  3   Richards I.V.A       Win  167   24   6721   47.00   90.2   42.40
  4   Zaheer Abbas         Pak   60    6   2572   47.63   84.8   40.39
  5 ~ Bevan M.G            Aus  196   67   6912   53.58   74.2   39.74
  6   Tendulkar S.R        Ind  431   41  17598   45.12   86.3   38.92
  7   Pietersen K.P        Eng   88   15   3220   44.11   86.7   38.24
  8   de Villiers A.B      Saf   92   13   3333   42.19   88.9   37.52
  9 ~ Klusener L           Saf  137   50   3576   41.10   89.9   36.96
 10   Symonds A            Aus  161   33   5088   39.75   92.4   36.75

As per request of some readers I have given also the OBIdx based on the eminently acceptable Runs per innings measure. This removes the anamolies of excessive not outs. However the main tables are still based on batting average since the not outs impact there is minimal. Position no.3 will always have lower number of not outs than no.7 and is applicable to all.

  1   Zaheer Abbas         Pak   60   2572   42.87   84.8   36.35
  2   Richards I.V.A       Win  167   6721   40.25   90.2   36.30
  3   Tendulkar S.R        Ind  431  17598   40.83   86.3   35.22
  4   Sehwag V             Ind  215   7091   32.98  103.5   34.14
  5   Dhoni M.S            Ind  143   5420   37.90   89.9   34.06
  6 ~ Gilchrist A.C        Aus  279   9619   34.48   96.9   33.42
  7   de Villiers A.B      Saf   92   3333   36.23   88.9   32.22
  8   Hussey M.E.K         Aus  115   4136   35.97   88.4   31.78
  9   Pietersen K.P        Eng   88   3220   36.59   86.7   31.72
 10 ~ Smith G.C            Saf  147   5613   38.18   83.1   31.73

First I worked out the all-match ODI Index for each batting position. In this case the OBI will be appropriate since the same methodology is used to determine the individual batsmen figures. Since the comparisons are across all batsmen at the same position the impact of not outs is minimised. The Strike rates are for that position. In order to ensure that flashes in the pan do not spoil the comparisons, a minimum limit of 1000 runs is set for Opening, no.3, no.4, no.5 and no.6 positions. For the position 7, the bar is set at 700 runs.

The OBI of the batsman in the relevant position is divided by the all-match OBI for that position and the ratio is arrived at. The tables are ordered on this ratio and the top-10 shown. Let us now look at the tables.

Analysis of Opening position

ODI Index for all matches: 22.50

No Batsman             Cty Inns No  Runs   Avge Balls  S/R   OBI  AllIdx-%

 1.Dilshan T.M         Slk   25  2  1263  54.91  1238 1.020 56.02  249.0%
 2.Tendulkar S.R       Ind  319 23 14482  48.93 16431 0.881 43.12  191.7%
 3.Watson S.R          Aus   48  5  1986  46.19  2264 0.877 40.51  180.1%
 4.Sehwag V            Ind  182  5  6336  35.80  6100 1.039 37.18  165.3%
 5.Gilchrist A.C       Aus  259  7  9200  36.51  9386 0.980 35.78  159.0%
 6.Gayle C.H           Win  193 14  7510  41.96  8901 0.844 35.40  157.3%
 7.Turner G.M          Nzl   29  5  1197  49.88  1688 0.709 35.37  157.2%
 8.Hayden M.L          Aus  147 14  5891  44.29  7486 0.787 34.86  154.9%
 9.Lara B.C            Win   52  5  2166  46.09  2871 0.754 34.77  154.5%
10.Smith G.C           Saf  146  9  5598  40.86  6724 0.833 34.02  151.2%

Dilshan retains his position at the top. However, Tendulkar, with his excellent Strike rate has moved into the second position. The mountain of runs at an outstanding OBI of 43.12 is testament to the greatness of Tendulkar in this position. Any comment will be an understatement.

The pleasant surprise is the presence of two great attacking players, Sehwag and Gilchrist in the top 5. They had missed out in the earlier analysis.

Analysis of no. 3 position

ODI Index for all matches: 23.04

No Batsman             Cty Inns No  Runs   Avge Balls  S/R   OBI  AllIdx-%

 1.Richards I.V.A      Win   51  9  2418  57.57  2891 0.836 48.15  209.0%
 2.Mohammad Yousuf     Pak   43  7  1988  55.22  2521 0.789 43.55  189.0%
 3.Ganguly S.C         Ind   32  4  1476  52.71  1952 0.756 39.86  173.0%
 4.Lara B.C            Win  106  9  4447  45.85  5167 0.861 39.46  171.3%
 5.Zaheer Abbas        Pak   47  3  2009  45.66  2485 0.808 36.91  160.2%
 6.Gambhir G           Ind   31  4  1161  43.00  1403 0.828 35.58  154.4%
 7.Ponting R.T         Aus  305 30 11978  43.56 14779 0.810 35.30  153.2%
 8.Kallis J.H          Saf  176 29  6898  46.93  9455 0.730 34.23  148.6%
 9.Chanderpaul S       Win   25  2  1125  48.91  1635 0.688 33.66  146.1%
10.Hick G.A            Eng   58  9  2182  44.53  2891 0.755 33.61  145.9%

In the pivotal position of no.3, there is no one to beat the great Viv Richards. His OBI is an amazing 48.15. The well-known no.3 batsmen, Md Yousuf, Ganguly and Lara follow. It is interesting to note that Ponting has scored nearly 12000 runs at an OBI of 35.30.

It may be of interest to note that Dhoni has scored 993 runs at an OBI of over 75.00.

Analysis of no. 4 position

ODI Index for all matches: 25.40

No Batsman             Cty Inns No  Runs   Avge Balls  S/R   OBI  AllIdx-%

 1.Richards I.V.A      Win   81 12  3373  48.88  3593 0.939 45.89  180.7%
 2.de Villiers A.B     Saf   42  8  1740  51.18  1967 0.885 45.27  178.2%
 3.Sarwan R.R          Win   43 12  1707  55.06  2172 0.786 43.28  170.4%
 4.Bevan M.G           Aus   53 15  2265  59.61  3232 0.701 41.77  164.5%
 5.Jadeja A            Ind   29 10  1008  53.05  1391 0.725 38.45  151.4%
 6.Crowe M.D           Nzl   53 14  1899  48.69  2436 0.780 37.96  149.4%
 7.Boon D.C            Aus   35 12  1255  54.57  1811 0.693 37.81  148.9%
 8.Twose R.G           Nzl   44  5  1829  46.90  2410 0.759 35.59  140.1%
 9.Ranatunga A         Slk   36  6  1272  42.40  1540 0.826 35.02  137.9%
10.Kallis J.H          Saf   73 17  2635  47.05  3636 0.725 34.10  134.3%

The change has meant that Richards moves to the top position in this position instead of Bevan whose scoring rate is a pedestrian 0.7. Richards is the only batsman to have finished on top in two batting positions. de Villiers has shown his potential greatness by getting into the second position with a 45+ OBI. A surprise in this position is the high placement of Ajay Jadeja.

Analysis of no. 5 position

ODI Index for all matches: 22.77

No Batsman             Cty Inns No  Runs   Avge Balls  S/R   OBI  AllIdx-%

 1.Dhoni M.S           Ind   38  9  1560  53.79  1832 0.852 45.81  201.2%
 2.Flintoff A          Eng   48 10  1749  46.03  1854 0.943 43.42  190.7%
 3.Hussey M.E.K        Aus   25  6  1003  52.79  1221 0.821 43.36  190.4%
 4.Symonds A           Aus   96 18  3473  44.53  3780 0.919 40.91  179.7%
 5.Yuvraj Singh        Ind   81 13  2878  42.32  3268 0.881 37.27  163.7%
 6.Collingwood P.D     Eng   74 16  2621  45.19  3213 0.816 36.86  161.9%
 7.Rhodes J.N          Saf   90 23  2734  40.81  3302 0.828 33.79  148.4%
 8.Cronje W.J          Saf   43  7  1451  40.31  1745 0.832 33.51  147.2%
 9.Dravid R            Ind   69 13  2459  43.91  3341 0.736 32.32  141.9%
10.Inzamam-ul-Haq      Pak  105 22  3473  41.84  4559 0.762 31.88  140.0%

This is Dhoni's position. He is now batting more and more at no.5. He again has a very high OBI of 45+. Flintoff jumps over Hussey into the second position. What a loss Flintoff's is to the game. Hussey just about gets in at a 43+ OBI. It is a surprise that Symonds, while scoring the same runs as Inzamam, has an OBI value of 40.91, which is about 8 more than Inzamam. Dravid retains his top-10 position with a respectable ODI of 32.32.

Analysis of no. 6 position

ODI Index for all matches: 19.91

No Batsman             Cty Inns No  Runs   Avge Balls  S/R   OBI  AllIdx-%

 1.Raina S.K           Ind   32 10  1087  49.41  1171 0.928 45.86  230.4%
 2.Bevan M.G           Aus   87 34  3006  56.72  3871 0.777 44.04  221.2%
 3.Younis Khan         Pak   28  5  1012  44.00  1108 0.913 40.19  201.8%
 4.Hussey M.E.K        Aus   51 14  1607  43.43  1811 0.887 38.54  193.6%
 5.Arnold R.P          Slk   59 21  1703  44.82  2273 0.749 33.58  168.6%
 6.Cronje W.J          Saf   45 16  1235  42.59  1567 0.788 33.56  168.6%
 7.Dhoni M.S           Ind   47 11  1395  38.75  1718 0.812 31.46  158.0%
 8.Yuvraj Singh        Ind   57  8  1727  35.24  2032 0.850 29.95  150.5%
 9.Jadeja A            Ind   43  8  1324  37.83  1743 0.760 28.73  144.3%
10.McMillan C.D        Nzl   39  5  1058  31.12  1244 0.850 26.47  132.9%

The change in measure has allowed Suresh Raina, a faster scoring batsman, to jump over Michael Bevan, the finisher extraordinary. Both have very high OBI values of around 45.

Analysis of no. 7 position

ODI Index for all matches: 15.86

No Batsman             Cty Inns No  Runs   Avge Balls  S/R   OBI  AllIdx-%

 1.Hussey M.E.K        Aus   20 14   706 117.67   706 1.000 117.67  741.9%
 2.Shahid Afridi       Pak   40  9   718  23.16   527 1.362  31.56  199.0%
 3.Abdul Razzaq        Pak   79 21  1848  31.86  2076 0.890  28.36  178.8%
 4.Hopes J.R           Aus   38  6   896  28.00   911 0.984  27.54  173.6%
 5.Pollock S.M         Saf   81 26  1633  29.69  1836 0.889  26.41  166.5%
 6.Boucher M.V         Saf   44 16   846  30.21   991 0.854  25.79  162.6%
 7.Chigumbura E        Zim   38  6   995  31.09  1222 0.814  25.32  159.6%
 8.Streak H.H          Zim   40 12   864  30.86  1175 0.735  22.69  143.1%
 9.Arnold R.P          Slk   36 12   707  29.46   984 0.718  21.17  133.5%
10.O'Donnell S.P       Aus   38 12   717  27.58   950 0.755  20.81  131.2%

Hussey has numbers which are beyond imagination. Granted he has scored only 700+ runs but what a finishing job he does. The next best is Shahid Afridi with 31.56. I am happy that Afridi is in this list because he is an outstanding talent. Before any negative comments are made on the high number of not outs, please do not forget that each not out instance indicates that the batsman has stayed on and finished his job, maybe not always successfully.

The candidates for the top-7 positions in an all-time ODI team, again my choice, are given below. Since this analysis incorporates the Strike rates it is possible to select a team. I have not just gone on the numbers.

Op Tendulkar S.R       Ind  319 23 14482  48.93 16431 0.881 43.12  191.7%
Op Gilchrist A.C       Aus  259  7  9200  36.51  9386 0.980 35.78  159.0%
 3 Lara B.C            Win  106  9  4447  45.85  5167 0.861 39.46  171.3%
 4 Richards I.V.A      Win   81 12  3373  48.88  3593 0.939 45.89  180.7%
 5 Symonds A           Aus   96 18  3473  44.53  3780 0.919 40.91  179.7%
 6 Hussey M.E.K        Aus   51 14  1607  43.43  1811 0.887 38.54  193.6%
 7 Shahid Afridi       Pak   40  9   718  23.16   527 1.362 31.56  199.0%

Now add 4 top bowlers and we have a team the Gods would stop and watch. It is unfortunate Dhoni misses out but Gilchrist wins for many reasons, his numbers and the balance he brings by taking the opening positions. Hussey or Bevan is a tough call and a personal one.

Arjun Hemnany has done some additional work on the Not outs % by position. This is quite relevant to the discussions on Batting average vs Runs per innings. I have presented this table below.

% of Not outs out of all innings

Openers - 4.74 %
no.3 -    7.84 %
no.4 -   13.14 %
no.5 -   16.09 %
no.6 -   19.83 %
no.7 -   23.69 %
no.8 -   27.39 %
no.9 -   33.56 %
no.10 -  41.98 %
no.11 -  59.74 %

At a later date I will come out with the Batting position analysis incorporating the figures above so that we would see a "normalized" Batting average figure. Many thanks to Arjun.

Michael Hussey averages 117.67 at the No.7 slot © Getty Images

This is an analysis suggested by reader(s) whose names elude me. It is an excellent suggestion in that it will enable us to get a very good handle on the best performers at each batting position.

First I worked out the all-match average for each batting position. In this case the average will be appropriate since the same methodology is used to determine the individual batsmen figures. Since the comparisons are across all batsmen at the same position the impact of not outs is minimised. In order to ensure that flashes in the pan do not spoil the comparisons, a minimum limit of 1000 runs is set for Opening, no.3, no.4, no.5 and no.6 positions. For the positions 7 and 8, the bar is set at 500 runs.

The batting average of the batsman in the relevant position is divided by the all-match batting average for that position and the ratio is arrived at. The tables are ordered on this ratio and the top-10 shown along with the last player in that position. Let us now look at the tables.

Analysis of opening position. All matches average: 32.21

No  Batsman            Cty  Inns No  Runs   Avge % of all
                                                   avge

 1. Dilshan T.M         Slk   25  2  1263  54.91  170.5%
 2. Turner G.M          Nzl   29  5  1197  49.88  154.8%
 3. Tendulkar S.R       Ind  319 23 14482  48.93  151.9%
 4. Dippenaar H.H       Saf   43  6  1752  47.35  147.0%
 5. Watson S.R          Aus   43  5  1794  47.21  146.6%
 6. Lara B.C            Win   52  5  2166  46.09  143.1%
 7. Greenidge C.G       Win  120 10  4993  45.39  140.9%
 8. Hayden M.L          Aus  147 14  5891  44.29  137.5%
 9. Waugh M.E           Aus  141 11  5729  44.07  136.8%
10. Chanderpaul S       Win   74  9  2814  43.29  134.4%
...
...
83. Obuya D.O           Ken   45  1  1012  23.00   71.4%

We are in for a minor surprise. Two opening batsmen have moved ahead of the greatest ODI batsman ever, Tendulkar. This proves without any doubt that Dilshan is among the most explosive of ODI openers now playing. Not to forget his strike rate. Turner averaged nearing 50 when batting was not that easy.

Now comes the master. An average of nearly 50 maintained over 300 matches while scoring nearly 15,000 runs tells the tale. There has been no better ODI player and probably never will be. Note how high Watson is placed, higher than masters such as Lara, Greenidge, Hayden and Mark Waugh.

Analysis of no. 3 position. All matches average: 32.90

No  Batsman            Cty  Inns No  Runs   Avge % of all
                                                   avge

 1. Richards I.V.A      Win   51  9  2418  57.57  175.0%
 2. Mohammad Yousuf     Pak   43  7  1988  55.22  167.8%
 3. Ganguly S.C         Ind   32  4  1476  52.71  160.2%
 4. Kallis J.H          Saf  176 29  6898  46.93  142.6%
 5. Lara B.C            Win  106  9  4447  45.85  139.3%
 6. Zaheer Abbas        Pak   47  3  2009  45.66  138.8%
 7. Hick G.A            Eng   58  9  2182  44.53  135.4%
 8. Ponting R.T         Aus  300 30 11814  43.76  133.0%
 9. Jones D.M           Aus  131 14  5100  43.59  132.5%
10. Gambhir G           Ind   31  4  1161  43.00  130.7%
...
...
45. Aftab Ahmed         Bng   52  4  1253  26.10   79.3%

In the pivotal position of no.3, there is no one to beat the great Viv Richards. He averages over 57 while scoring nearly 2500 runs. The well-known no.3 batsmen, Md Yousuf, Ganguly, Kallis and Lara follow. It is interesting to note that Ponting has scored nearly 12000 runs at an average of 43.76.

It may be of interest to note that Dhoni has scored 993 runs at 83.75.

Analysis of no. 4 position. All matches average: 34.77

No  Batsman            Cty  Inns No  Runs   Avge % of all
                                                   avge

 1. Bevan M.G           Aus   53 15  2265  59.61  171.4%
 2. Sarwan R.R          Win   43 12  1707  55.06  158.4%
 3. Boon D.C            Aus   35 12  1255  54.57  156.9%
 4. Jadeja A            Ind   29 10  1008  53.05  152.6%
 5. de Villiers A.B     Saf   42  8  1740  51.18  147.2%
 6. Richards I.V.A      Win   81 12  3373  48.88  140.6%
 7. Crowe M.D           Nzl   53 14  1899  48.69  140.0%
 8. Kallis J.H          Saf   73 17  2635  47.05  135.3%
 9. Twose R.G           Nzl   44  5  1829  46.90  134.9%
10. Clarke M.J          Aus   64 11  2420  45.66  131.3%
...
...
49. McMillan C.D        Nzl   43  0  1092  25.40   73.0%

The great finisher, Mike Bevan has a near-60 average in no.4. A surprise in this position is the high placement of Ajay Jadeja. Note the high average of de Villiers. Richards averages nearly 50 at this position.

Analysis of no. 5 position. All matches average: 30.69

No  Batsman            Cty  Inns No  Runs   Avge % of all
                                                   avge

 1. Dhoni M.S           Ind   38  9  1560  53.79  175.3%
 2. Hussey M.E.K        Aus   25  6  1003  52.79  172.0%
 3. Flintoff A          Eng   48 10  1749  46.03  150.0%
 4. Collingwood P.D     Eng   74 16  2621  45.19  147.2%
 5. Symonds A           Aus   96 18  3473  44.53  145.1%
 6. Dravid R            Ind   69 13  2459  43.91  143.1%
 7. Chanderpaul S       Win   61 15  1996  43.39  141.4%
 8. Yuvraj Singh        Ind   81 13  2878  42.32  137.9%
 9. Fairbrother N.H     Eng   45 14  1302  42.00  136.9%
10. Inzamam-ul-Haq      Pak  105 22  3473  41.84  136.3%
...
...
34. Jayawardene D.P.M.D Slk   63  6  1458  25.58   83.3%

This is Dhoni's position. He is now batting more and more at no.5. Hussey just about gets in at 50+ average. It is a surprise that Symonds, while scoring the same runs as Inzamam, has an average nearly 3 more. Dravid has a fair average at no.5.

Analysis of no. 6 position. All matches average: 26.49

No  Batsman            Cty  Inns No  Runs   Avge % of all
                                                   avge

 1. Bevan M.G           Aus   87 34  3006  56.72  214.1%
 2. Raina S.K           Ind   32 10  1087  49.41  186.5%
 3. Arnold R.P          Slk   59 21  1703  44.82  169.2%
 4. Younis Khan         Pak   28  5  1012  44.00  166.1%
 5. Cronje W.J          Saf   45 16  1235  42.59  160.8%
 6. Hussey M.E.K        Aus   47 13  1418  41.71  157.4%
 7. Dhoni M.S           Ind   47 11  1395  38.75  146.3%
 8. Jadeja A            Ind   43  8  1324  37.83  142.8%
 9. Yuvraj Singh        Ind   57  8  1727  35.24  133.0%
10. Tillakaratne H.P    Slk   60 19  1393  33.98  128.3%
...
...
26. Border A.R          Aus   61 11  1174  23.48   88.6%

Mike Bevan is the finisher extraordinary and stays on top at no.6 by a wide margin. He is the only batsman to have finished on top in two batting positions. Raina is proving his value to India in this finishing position. It is surprising that Border is the last in this position.

Analysis of no. 7 position. All matches average: 21.18

No  Batsman            Cty  Inns No  Runs   Avge % of all
                                                   avge

 1. Hussey M.E.K        Aus   20 14   706 117.67  555.6%
 2. Dhoni M.S           Ind   24  9   589  39.27  185.4%
 3. Kemp J.M            Saf   24  8   579  36.19  170.9%
 4. Kaif M              Ind   30 10   667  33.35  157.5%
 5. Mahmudullah         Bng   27  8   621  32.68  154.3%
 6. Abdul Razzaq        Pak   79 21  1848  31.86  150.4%
 7. Chigumbura E        Zim   35  6   916  31.59  149.1%
 8. Oram J.D.P          Nzl   22  3   590  31.05  146.6%
 9. Harris C.Z          Nzl  105 36  2136  30.96  146.2%
10. Streak H.H          Zim   40 12   864  30.86  145.7%
...
...
36. Wasim Akram         Pak   87 12  1227  16.36   77.2%

What is the number we are seeing here. Hussey, granted he has scored only 700 runs has remained not out on 14 occasions and has an average of over 100. The next best is Dhoni with 39.27. Before any negative comments are made on the high number of not outs, please do not forget that each not out instance indicates that the batsman has stayed on and finished his job, maybe not always successfully.

Analysis of no. 8 position. All matches average: 16.84

No  Batsman            Cty  Inns No  Runs   Avge % of all
                                                   avge

 1. Klusener L          Saf   36 18  1056  58.67  348.4%
 2. Harris C.Z          Nzl   23 10   519  39.92  237.1%
 3. Dharmasena H.D.P.K  Slk   42 18   719  29.96  177.9%
 4. Streak H.H          Zim   58 19  1147  29.41  174.6%
 5. Abdul Razzaq        Pak   35  9   751  28.88  171.5%
 6. Moin Khan           Pak   38 13   608  24.32  144.4%
 7. Pollock S.M         Saf   74 23  1145  22.45  133.3%
 8. Shahid Afridi       Pak   25  2   504  21.91  130.1%
 9. Hogg G.B            Aus   47 20   590  21.85  129.8%
10. Rashid Latif        Pak   49 15   688  20.24  120.2%
...
...
15. Agarkar A.B         Ind   59 13   678  14.74   87.5%

Kluesener is the leader here with a very high average of over 58 while scoring over 10900 runs. He is leading by a big margin over Chris Harris. This is the place for the all-rounders and the bowlers who can bat.

Taking into account the runs scored and averages attained, the 6 outlier batting position performances are given below.

OP. Tendulkar S.R       Ind  319 23 14482  48.93  151.9%
 3. Kallis J.H          Saf  176 29  6898  46.93  142.6%
 3. Ponting R.T         Aus  300 30 11814  43.76  133.0%
 4. Richards I.V.A      Win   81 12  3373  48.88  140.6%
 5. Symonds A           Aus   96 18  3473  44.53  145.1%
 6. Bevan M.G           Aus   87 34  3006  56.72  214.1%

Since I felt that nos 9-10-11 analysis would not lead to anything significant I have not done the analysis for these positions.

Muttiah Muralitharan has taken ten or more wickets in a Test in four consecutive matches © AFPs

First I wanted to do an analysis of the ODI high innings in view of the momentous tryst with destiny of one colossus at Gwalior. Then I decided not to do so since the results may not be exactly what is wanted by the myriad of Tendulkar fans and I am not ready to read and answer hundreds of comments.

The innings, one of the greatest ever, need not be and is not the best ODI innings ever. The numbers 189/189/194/175/183/149/140/158 et al are floating around. By Tendulkar's own high standards, the 175/138/143/134/98 innings lay claim to being his best. But not to take away from the greatness and perfection of the innings. There might be greater innings but certainly no greater batsman during the past six decades. The gap is widening and soon would be insurmountable.

This is similar to the 400 which, despite being the highest Test innings, is nowhere near innings associated with the numbers 270/153/154/281/149/213/293 et al.

Instead I have come out with an analysis based on the excellent suggestion made by Alex Tierno. This is to determine the successful bowler sequences from a minimum of 3 wkts per Test to 10 wickets per Test. The more I did the work the more I felt that this is an excellent method of determining bowler consistency.

I needed to create a completely new Database of Player-Match records. However this will be very useful since I can do many new analysis without resorting to individual programs. That will be a great bonus.

Let us see the tables starting with 3 or more wickets. I have shown the first three in each classification. Where there are multiple bowlers with same number of Tests, the one with the highest WpT figure is shown.

Wkts/test Bowler            # of  First  # of  Avge
                           tests  MtNo   Wkts   WpT

>= 3 wkts Warne S.K          39   1576   244    6.3     
>= 3 wkts Muralitharan M     34   1555   251    7.4     
>= 3 wkts McGrath G.D        17   1718    88    5.2

There is a nice surprise in the bread-and-butter classification of 3+ wickets. Shane Warne has taken 3 or more wickets in 39 consecutive Tests, averaging 6.3 WpT (wickets per Test). Muralitharan has achieved this in 34 consecutive Tests averaging 7.4 WpT. This is a true measure of the consistency which these two great spinners employed throughout their careers.

At this point it is worth explaining that there could be 3+ wkts streaks of more than 17 Tests from either Warne or Murali. I have deliberately shown the top three bowlers, rather than the top three bowling streaks, to broaden the scope of the anaysis.

As expected Muralitharan dominates the other classifications, leading in the 10+, 9+, 8+(shared), 7+, 6+, 5+ and 4+ wickets categories.

Wkts/test Bowler            # of  First  # of  Avge
                           tests  MtNo   Wkts   WpT

>= 4 wkts Muralitharan M     19   1626   135    7.1     
>= 4 wkts Bedi B.S           13    785    78    6.0     
>= 4 wkts Waqar Younis       12   1192    86    7.2

Muralitharan has captured 4 or more wickets in 19 consecutive Tests, averaging 7.1 WpT. The Indian classicist, Bedi is next with 13 consecutive Tests at an average WpT of 6.0.

Wkts/test Bowler            # of  First  # of  Avge
                           tests  MtNo   Wkts   WpT

>= 5 wkts Muralitharan M     14   1670   109    7.8     
>= 5 wkts Lee B              11   1824    70    6.4     
>= 5 wkts Donald A.A          9   1403    61    6.8

Muralitharan has captured 5 or more wickets in 14 consecutive Tests, averaging 7.8 WpT. The unlucky Brett Lee, is next with 11 consecutive Tests at an average WpT of 6.5.

Wkts/test Bowler            # of  First  # of  Avge
                           tests  MtNo   Wkts   WpT

>= 6 wkts Muralitharan M      8   1670    68    8.5     
>= 6 wkts Warne S.K           7   1582    53    7.6     
>= 6 wkts Lee B               7   1824    47    6.7

Muralitharan has captured 6 or more wickets in 8 consecutive Tests, averaging 8.5 WpT. Shane Warne is next with 7 consecutive Tests at an average WpT of 7.6.

Wkts/test Bowler            # of  First  # of  Avge
                           tests  MtNo   Wkts   WpT

>= 7 wkts Muralitharan M      7   1670    62    8.9     
>= 7 wkts Barnes S.F          5    117    41    8.2     
>= 7 wkts Turner C.T.B        4     25    39    9.8

Muralitharan has captured 7 or more wickets in 7 consecutive Tests, averaging 9.9 WpT. The great Sydney Barnes, is next with 5 consecutive Tests at an average WpT of 82.

Wkts/test Bowler            # of  First  # of  Avge
                           tests  MtNo   Wkts   WpT

>= 8 wkts Barnes S.F          4    130    49   12.2     
>= 8 wkts Muralitharan M      4   1559    42   10.5     
>= 8 wkts Turner C.T.B        4     25    39    9.8     

Sydney Barnes has captured 8 or more wickets in 4 consecutive Tests, averaging an amazing 12.2 WpT. CTB Turner ties this with 4 consecutive Tests at an average WpT of 9.8. Muralitharan's streak completes the table.

Wkts/test Bowler            # of  First  # of  Avge
                           tests  MtNo   Wkts   WpT

>= 9 wkts Muralitharan M      4   1559    42   10.5     
>= 9 wkts Turner C.T.B        3     26    31   10.3     
>= 9 wkts Richardson T        3     46    33   11.0
>= 9 wkts Grimmett C.V        3    249    33   11.0

Muralitharan has captured 9 or more wickets in 4 consecutive Tests, averaging 10.5 WpT. CTB Turner is next with 3 consecutive Tests at an average WpT of 10.3.

Wkts/test Bowler            # of  First  # of  Avge
                           tests  MtNo   Wkts   WpT

>=10 wkts Muralitharan M      4   1559    42   10.5     
>=10 wkts Grimmett C.V        3    249    33   11.0     
>=10 wkts Lohmann G.A         2     47    27   13.5

Finally the grand-daddy of all sequences. Muralitharan has captured 10 or more wickets in 4 consecutive Tests, averaging 10.5 WpT. The great Australian leg-spinner, Grimmett, is next with 3 consecutive Tests at an average WpT of 11.0.

Murali's four consecutive 10-wkt hauls are shown below. The concerned year was 2001. This is one record which might, like Laker's 19 wickets in a single test, never be bettered.

1559 vs India       34.1  9  87 8   46.5 17 109 3  
1561 vs Bangladesh   9.4  4  13 5   35.3  6  98 5  
1567 vs West Indies 53.4 11 126 6   31.3 10  44 5  
1570 vs West Indies 23.4  5  54 4   35.5 16  81 6  

A final note. Only comments on the subject covered in the article will be published.

An interesting exchange of mails

Posted by: Alex at March 11, 2010 10:06 AM
Ananth - Pl see if you can do analysis to answer the following question: Suppose we restrict ourselves to test matches that have produced a result (including the "tie" tests). What fraction of these featured a winning team bowler taking X wkts/match (where X=7,8,9, ...)? If we split this data into decades (or venue countries), is there any pattern? You could do similar analysis for SR and averages. I feel most result-oriented matches feature a winning team with a bowler who takes at least 7 wkts in that match ... very rare to win with a bunch of bowlers contributing 2-5 wkts each.

[[ Alex That is a lovely idea. It will clearly show whether there is a discernible change in the winning methods of Test teams. Will have to do a special program but will be worth it. Thanks Ananth: ]]

Posted by: Jeff at March 12, 2010 9:37 AM
@ Alex
These are the figures that I have:
1269 tests have produced a winning result
On winning teams, the number of times players took & or more wickets are:

7 = 390 times (0.31 per match)
8 = 311 (0.25)
9 = 187 (0.15)
10+=269 (0.21)

For players on losing teams, the numbers are:

7 = 156 (0.12)
8 = 137 (0.11)
9 =  46 (0.04)
10+= 65 (0.05)

Not surprisingly, it's more twice as likely for a player on a winning team to 7 or 8 wkts in a match and up to 4 times more likely for them to take 9+ wkts
There have been 682 draws (therefore 1364 drawing teams), and the numbers are:

7 = 197 (0.14)
8 =  81 (0.06)
9 =  49 (0.04)
10+= 65 (0.05)

These are very similar to the figures for the losing teams, particularly for 9+ wickets.
Obviously this is only the overall figures but I found it interesting that the results for drawn matches were so low. This is the decade by decade split for winning/tied teams.
Note that I have the number of times 7,8,9,10+ wkts have been taken. Some of these will have happened in the same match, so the following figures will slightly over estimate the % of matches they occur in, but the figures should give a good picture of the fact that the % of winning teams with players taking 7 wkts has been increasing over time but the % of winning teams with players taking 10+ wkts has been decreasing.

Era      %7wkts %8wkts %9wkts %10+wkts

PreWW1    25%     31%    15%     26%
Inter War 31%     24%    11%     32%
40s/50s   26%     28%    18%     23%
60s       20%     20%    19%     15%
70s       31%     17%    18%     18%
80s       31%     22%    15%     26%
90s       33%     32%    15%     19%
2000s     36%     21%    12%     16%

Jeff
[[That is wonderful. I am tied up with so many things that I could have done justice to Alex's excellent suggestion only after a few days. I will immediately publish your response. Within an hour I will extract the table and put it up on the blog itself. Many thanks and the non-existent hat is off in admiration.
Ananth:]]

Sreesanth is one short of playing 50 ODIs, but he still hasn't figured out a way to concede fewer runs © Associated Press

To start with, I must admit that I’ve always enjoyed watching Sreesanth bowl. He has a smooth, rhythmical action, has a classical side-on delivery motion, and, when he gets it right, the outswinger is wicked and a thing of sheer beauty. None of these things matter, though, when the format is limited-overs cricket, because then the rule is that Sreesanth will get clobbered no matter what he tries.

When Sreesanth returned to the ODI team with much fanfare at the beginning of the year, I had my doubts. Sure, he’d taken five in an innings against Sri Lanka in a matchwinning performance in the Kanpur Test, but this was a different format. Consistency has never been his forte, and on these benign subcontinent pitches, I feared he would be ruthlessly exposed.

And so it happened. Sri Lanka milked him for 47 off seven overs, while even Bangladesh too 54 and 53 off eight overs in the triangular tournament in Dhaka. More punishment from Sri Lanka in the final – none for 72 in 9.3. If anything, it got worse in the three-match home series against South Africa, with 74 and 83 runs – the fifth-highest for an Indian in ODIs – going off his nine overs in two of those matches.

Which brings us to a pertinent question: should Sreesanth be considered at all for one-day cricket? Let’s look a little more closely at his ODI stats: he has bowled in 48 matches so far, and 15 times – very nearly one third of all innings – he has gone at seven runs an over or more. Another eight times he has conceded more than a run a ball. That means 23 out of 48 times – almost 50% - he has leaked in excess of a run a ball. In contrast only 11 times has he gone at less than five an over.

Admittedly, his strike rate is reasonably impressive – a wicket every 34 balls – but his profligacy completely undoes his wicket-taking ability. Compare him with Irfan Pathan, who has the same strike rate but has an economy rate of 5.25, which is way better than Sreesanth’s 6.03. And we’re not even starting on the relative batting capabilities of the two.

And did you know that Sreesanth belongs to a highly exclusive club of which he is the only member? Of those who’ve bowled at 1500 balls in ODIs, he is the only one with an economy rate of more than six. Which means Sreesanth in the team is excellent news for the opposition, but if I were MS Dhoni, I would much rather have him in my Test line-up than in the ODIs.

Worst economy rate among ODI bowlers (Qual: 1500 balls)

Bowler	ODIs	Wickets	Average	Strike rate	Econ rate
Sreesanth	49	68	34.20	34.0	6.03
M Nkala	50	22	71.36	71.9	5.95
Elton Chigumbura	103	73	36.94	37.7	5.87
Ishant Sharma	41	56	32.48	33.5	5.81
Henry Olonga	50	58	34.08	35.5	5.76
Sean Ervine	42	41	38.07	40.2	5.67
N Odhiambo	45	46	35.95	38.0	5.67
Shahadat Hossain	46	42	43.42	45.9	5.67
Tapash Baisya	56	59	41.55	44.2	5.64
Naved-ul-Hasan	74	110	29.28	31.5	5.57