The response to the previous off-the-beaten-track article on West Indian pace bowlers was so good and the comments were so interesting that I decided to continue on a similar theme rather than move into the ODI domain. This time I have taken the Australian teams for analysis. I have read the readers' comments and have realized that I must include both batsmen and bowlers in the analysis. So this article is quite a different one to the previous one which was almost totally graphic. This one has only a single graph and many other tables.

What are the cut-off Tests? After a lot of deliberation, inspection and perusal of the readers' comments, I have decided that the golden period will start with Test no 1121, the first Ashes 1989 Test and end with Test no 1957, the second Test between New Zealand and Australia which was played during March 2010. There could be a variation of a few Tests at either end but most of the readers would agree that this really represented the golden period of Australian supremacy. Before the 1989 cut-off, Australia lost to West Indies and Pakistan. Since the 2010 cut-off, Australia have drawn the Pakistan series and lost against India and England and one can clearly see the fall.

I have selected the following 24 players who were the top Australian performers during these 22 years. Most of these players select themselves. There are 15 batsmen and 9 bowlers in this elite collection. Readers might want to add one or two to this list but I am sure none of these players will be taken out. I considered and discarded Alderman (only 70+ wickets after the cut-off), Border (since added), Reiffel (since added), Kasprowicz (quite average), Symonds (not enough batting impact), Watson (impact probably in future), Clark & Siddle (less than 100 wkts) et al.

Batsmen:

Border, Boon, Steve Waugh, Healy, Taylor, Mark Waugh, Martyn, 
Langer, Slater, Hayden, Ponting, Katich, Gilchrist, Clarke, Hussey. 

Bowlers:

McDermott, Hughes, Reiffel, Warne, McGrath, Gillespie, MacGill, B Lee, Johnson.

First, a graphic time-line of the careers of the 14 batsmen and 7 bowlers.

The timeline started with the continuation of the careers of Boon, Steve Waugh, Healy and Taylor. After a couple of years, Mark Waugh made his debut. Then came Martyn and Slater. Hayden and Ponting came in within the next couple of years. All the while the first four stalwarts continue to play. Boon retired, followed by Taylor and Healy who handed over his gloves to Gilchrist. No new batsmen came in for some time. Then Katich, Clarke and Mike Hussey took their deserved places.

McDermott started the timeline period and bowled on his own, with support from Alderman for some time. Then Warne made his, fairly ordinary, debut. Within a year McGrath made his debut, again nothing great. No one could have foreseen such wonderful careers, for both. Gillespie came after a few years. Afterwards MacGill started his interrupted, but great-in-numbers, career. Lee started with a bang, only to fade away in the second half of his career. Warne and McGrath retired on the same day, along with Langer. Johnson made his bow 4 years back and, despite some off-colour series, has performed very creditably.

Next the results summary of these 236 Tests.

Period      T   W   D   L    %

1989-2010 236 142  51  43  71.0%

1989-1994  59  27  22  10  64.4%
1995-1999  58  32  11  15  64.7%
2000-2004  59  44   7   8  80.5%
2005-2010  60  39  11  10  74.2%

Overall the Australian teams have achieved 71.0% success during these 22 years. Across three generations of players, this is outstanding and represents, arguably, the longest domination of the world scene. This has been split further into four approximately equal periods. I have not gone on players or series but rather calendar years split to get four similar sub-groups.

The 1990s have been more or less uniform with an average success % of around 64%. Half the matches have been won and a fair number drawn. There was a propensity to draw more matches during the early 1990s than later on. Defeats are fewer as are wins. Border captained during most of the first period and passed the captaincy to Mark Taylor during mid-1994. Taylor captained most of the Tests during the second period and handed over the captain's cap to Steve Waugh. Taylor was, by nature, a more aggressive captain than Border and has also acquired world-beaters as players.

Now we come to the real golden period of all. During the next 5 years, Steve Waugh captained Australia and amassed an incredible 80% success rate, despite the blip in India during 2001. Nearly three-quarter of the matches were won. Draws, as a playing option, were not offered to the opposing teams. Similar to the pattern already established, Steve Waugh passed the baton to Ponting during early 2004. There was a noticeable drop in success rate during the last period. However the 74% figure still represents strong domination of world cricket. Now that the responsibility has been passed on to Michael Clarke, the world will watch with interest how the next 5/6 years will shape up for Australia.

Now the details, viz., the batting averages and scoring rates for Australia and the opposition teams during these period.

          |--------Australia----------| |-------Other Teams---------|
Period    Wkts   Runs  Avge  Balls  RpO Wkts   Runs  Avge  Balls  RpO

1989-2010 3927 134071 34.14 243382 3.31 4187 119118 28.45 240984 2.97

1989-1994  972  32138 33.06  65699 2.94  989  29117 29.44  64656 2.70
1995-1999 1009  30332 30.06  60124 3.03  992  26464 26.68  55122 2.88
2000-2004  933  34853 37.36  55419 3.77 1104  29923 27.10  58786 3.05
2005-2010 1013  36748 36.28  62140 3.55 1102  33614 30.50  62420 3.23

Across these 22 years, Australian batsmen have scored at an average of 34.14 and at an overall rate of 3.31. The opposition have scored at an average of 28.45 and a scoring rate of 2.97. This represents a differential of 20% and 15% and explains the overall success of the Australian teams.

Now the period numbers. The first period has lower numbers for both but shows a differential of 12% and 9%, just enough for the edge which has been achieved. The second period has still lower numbers all around and show differentials of 12% and only 5%. These indicate only marginal superiority.

Now comes the wonderful period when Australian batting averages moved upwards and the other team averages moved downwards. The third period showed a differential of 37% and 23%. That has translated into the phenomenal 80% success rate.

During the last period, there has been 19% and 10% differential. Looks like there is a strong correlation between these differential values and overall success rates.

Now for the special analysis on player groups. First the Bowlers groups analysis which is probably more interesting. I have identified the Bowler groups which played in all these 236 Tests and ordered these on the number of matches played. Then each of these groups has been analyzed for all relevant measures. I have excluded the one-bowler groups since these do not convey much (only one selected bowler played). I have also not shown bowler groups which played in only one Test (e-g, Warne/MacGill or McGrath/MacGill/Lee et al). The players are given in order of their debut.

The presentation itself is quite complex. It was impossible to show the bowler groups and the numbers in one line. The display would have gone past the screen. Also if the player group line and the numbers line are shown together the numbers are not clear. Hence I have separated the player line and numbers line. The group number is the common link. Readers should not forget that these are unique player groups.

 1. Warne; McGrath; Gillespie; 
 2. Warne; McGrath; Gillespie; Lee; 
 3. Warne; McGrath; Lee; 
 4. Lee; Johnson; 
 5. Warne; McGrath; Reiffel; 
 6. McDermott; Hughes; 
 7. Warne; McGrath; 
 8. McDermott; Warne; Hughes; 
 9. McDermott; Warne; McGrath; Reiffel; 
10. McGrath; MacGill; 
11. McDermott; Warne; McGrath; 
12. Warne; McGrath; MacGill; Lee; 
13. McDermott; Warne; 
14. McGrath; Gillespie; MacGill; Lee; 
15. Gillespie; MacGill; Lee; 
16. Warne; Lee; 
17. MacGill; Lee; Johnson; 
18. Warne; McGrath; Gillespie; MacGill; 
19. Warne; McGrath; Gillespie; Reiffel; 

                   |--- Bowler Group--| |--- Other team --|Comparisons
No.  T  W D L    % Wkts Runs  Avge  RpO Wkts Runs  Avge RpO  Avge  RpO

 1. 23 15 3 5  71.7 304 7344 24.16 2.68 412 10701 25.97 2.90 1.08 1.08
 2. 16 10 4 2  75.0 265 7402 27.93 3.15 284  8086 28.47 3.30 1.02 1.05
 3. 16 14 2 0  93.8 224 5413 24.17 2.81 311  7470 24.02 2.91 0.99 1.04
 4. 13  5 3 5  50.0 111 3359 30.26 3.19 221  8141 36.84 3.31 1.22 1.04
 5. 10  5 3 2  65.0 126 2775 22.02 2.50 164  4133 25.20 2.71 1.14 1.08
 6. 10  4 4 2  60.0 100 2370 23.70 2.96 165  4986 30.22 3.07 1.28 1.04
 7. 10  6 2 2  70.0  86 1959 22.78 2.50 173  4174 24.13 2.87 1.06 1.15
 8.  9  4 2 3  55.6 105 3062 29.16 2.87 149  4632 31.09 2.90 1.07 1.01
 9.  7  4 2 1  71.4 103 2867 27.83 2.57 123  3374 27.43 2.57 0.99 1.00
10.  7  3 3 1  64.3  71 1706 24.03 2.73 120  3473 28.94 2.84 1.20 1.04
11.  6  4 1 1  75.0 104 2282 21.94 2.70 120  3185 26.54 2.78 1.21 1.03
12.  6  6 0 0 100.0 106 2797 26.39 2.88 115  3169 27.56 2.97 1.04 1.03
13.  6  2 3 1  58.3  50 1512 30.24 2.79  99  3331 33.65 3.02 1.11 1.08
14.  6  5 0 1  83.3 106 2584 24.38 2.79 117  3029 25.89 2.97 1.06 1.06
15.  5  3 1 1  70.0  60 2247 37.45 3.27  88  3621 41.15 3.40 1.10 1.04
16.  4  3 0 1  75.0  44 1070 24.32 3.24  77  2133 27.70 3.33 1.14 1.03
17.  4  3 1 0  87.5  52 1661 31.94 3.19  75  2288 30.51 3.09 0.96 0.97
18.  4  2 0 2  50.0  62 1677 27.05 2.97  69  1921 27.84 3.15 1.03 1.06
19.  4  3 0 1  75.0  72 1443 20.04 2.67  74  1643 22.20 2.81 1.11 1.05

It would not surprise many that Warne, McGrath and Gillespie have played together in the maximum number of Tests as a unique group. Their 27 Tests have yielded an excellent success rate of 72%. They have been 10% and 8% better than the the entire team values. I have shown the % difference to the entire team than the other bowlers since in cases where the group has three bowlers, the rest of the team would have captured very few wickets.

However the best group with significant number of Tests is Warne, McGrath and Lee. When they played as a group, they played 16, won 14 and drew 2. However the fourth bowler also seems to have pulled his weight since the differentials are quite low.

McDermott and Warne, when they played together, have not been very successful.

Note the success rate of Warne, McGrath, MacGill and Lee. They played 6 and won all and captured 105 of the 112 wickets.

As a super-group, Warne and McGrath, played together, along with other bowlers, in no fewer than 104 Tests, won 71, drew 17 and lost 16 for an overall success rate of 76.4. Undoubtedly the most potent bowling combination in history of Test cricket.

I have since added Hughes and Reiffel. Because of this the cut-off has been increased to 4 Tests. A few new groups involving Reiffel and Hughes have been created. Readers can peruse these themselves.

The batsmen groups are less interesting since upto 7 batsmen are involved and it is not easy to visualize the groups immediately. Let us see the tables. In the bowler groups there were 1-bowler groups. Here the minimum number of batsmen in a group is 4. There are a lot more groups than for the bowlers. Hence only batsmen groups which have played in 4 test or more are selected. It should be also noted that only Batting average comparisons are done since Balls faced information is not available for about 30 of the early matches.

 1. Ponting; Katich; Clarke; Hussey; 
 2. Boon; S Waugh; Healy; Taylor; Border; 
 3. Boon; S Waugh; Healy; Taylor; M Waugh; Slater; 
 4. S Waugh; M Waugh; Martyn; Langer; Hayden; Ponting; Gilchrist; 
 5. Boon; S Waugh; Healy; Taylor; M Waugh; Slater; Border; 
 6. Boon; Healy; Taylor; M Waugh; Border; 
 7. S Waugh; Healy; Taylor; M Waugh; Ponting; 
 8. Martyn; Langer; Hayden; Ponting; Gilchrist; Katich; Clarke; 
 9. Hayden; Ponting; Katich; Clarke; Hussey; 
10. S Waugh; M Waugh; Langer; Slater; Hayden; Ponting; Gilchrist; 
11. Hayden; Ponting; Gilchrist; Clarke; Hussey; 
12. S Waugh; M Waugh; Langer; Slater; Ponting; Gilchrist; 
13. S Waugh; Martyn; Langer; Hayden; Ponting; Gilchrist; 
14. S Waugh; Healy; M Waugh; Langer; Slater; Ponting; 
15. S Waugh; Martyn; Langer; Hayden; Ponting; Gilchrist; Katich; 
16. S Waugh; Langer; Hayden; Ponting; Gilchrist; 
17. Martyn; Langer; Hayden; Ponting; Gilchrist; Clarke; 
18. S Waugh; Healy; Taylor; M Waugh; Hayden; 
19. S Waugh; Healy; Taylor; M Waugh; Langer; Slater; 
20. S Waugh; Healy; Taylor; M Waugh; Langer; Slater; Ponting; 

                    |Batsmen Group| |---Entire team ---|  Comp
No.  T  W D L    %  Ins  Runs  Avge Ins  Runs  Avge  RpO  Avge

 1. 17 10 4 3  70.6 119  5415 45.50 283 10811 38.20 3.51  1.19
 2. 15  8 6 1  73.3 123  5092 41.40 244  8900 36.48 3.03  1.13
 3. 14  7 3 4  60.7 149  5620 37.72 258  7289 28.25 3.08  1.34
 4. 13  9 3 1  80.8 135  6446 47.75 190  7571 39.85 3.87  1.20
 5. 12  8 3 1  79.2 125  6208 49.66 164  7199 43.90 3.10  1.13
 6. 12  6 5 1  70.8 105  3706 35.30 220  6597 29.99 2.87  1.18
 7. 10  6 3 1  75.0  82  3271 39.89 171  5514 32.25 3.03  1.24
 8.  9  3 3 3  50.0 106  3682 34.74 161  4792 29.76 3.71  1.17
 9.  9  3 2 4  44.4  82  3279 39.99 169  5347 31.64 3.19  1.26
10.  7  5 0 2  71.4  77  2992 38.86 113  3688 32.64 3.39  1.19
11.  7  6 1 0  92.9  49  2600 53.06  88  4489 51.01 3.72  1.04
12.  6  6 0 0 100.0  55  2701 49.11  88  3560 40.45 3.59  1.21
13.  6  5 0 1  83.3  54  2981 55.20  82  3778 46.07 4.24  1.20
14.  6  2 2 2  50.0  54  1831 33.91  99  2570 25.96 2.74  1.31
15.  5  2 2 1  60.0  60  3014 50.23  85  3420 40.24 4.06  1.25
16.  5  5 0 0 100.0  31  1925 62.10  52  3026 58.19 3.93  1.07
17.  5  5 0 0 100.0  46  2523 54.85  70  3177 45.39 3.91  1.21
18.  4  2 0 2  50.0  35   898 25.66  74  1856 25.08 2.86  1.02
19.  4  2 1 1  62.5  42  1669 39.74  77  2191 28.45 2.96  1.40
20.  4  2 2 0  75.0  51  2304 45.18  63  2583 41.00 3.16  1.10

Border has since been added. The group which played in most Tests together is during the early years, viz., Taylor, Slater, Boon, M Waugh, S Waugh and Healy, which played together in 26 tests and had a respectable success value of 69.2%. The more recent foursome of Ponting, Katich, Clarke and Hussey has played in 17 Tests with a success rate of 70%. This number is likely to increase further. A four-some sub-set of the first group has played in 15 Tests with a higher success rate of 73.3%.

The most successful group with significant number of matches is the powerful one consisting of Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Mike Waugh, Martyn, Steve Waugh and Gilchrist which played in 13 tests and won 9 leading to a success % of 80+.

Like the bowlers, here also there is a group which achieved a 100% success rate in 6 Test matches. this group consists of Slater, Langer, Ponting, Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh and Gilchrist. Couple of other groups have achieved 100% in the 5 Tests they played together.

Finally we stand in admiration, awe and wonder at the team of great players who dominated the world scene for over 22 years. No current team can ever hope to match this record. India does not have the bowlers and their batting is going to get decimated soon. South Africa lacks the spin strength, unless otherwise Imran Tahir just blazes through, to do well everywhere. Australia themselves have to find quality replacements soon. They are also unable to finish off won matches nowadays. Sri Lanka are going through a transitory phase and the future does not look that great, for most of the teams. There is going to be periodic domination by teams for periods of 2/3 years. That is all.

The Test-player matrix could not be drawn in a graphical mode in view of the huge number of players. The graph would have become very unwieldy and impossible to view. Hence I have created a viewable text file for the readers.

To view/down-load the file containing the matrix between all 24 players and the 236 Tests, to indicate which player played in which test, please click/right-click here. You could export this into an Excel sheet or view as a text file.

To view/down-load the file containing the matrix between 9 bowlers and the 236 Tests, to indicate which player played in which test, please click/right-click here. You could export this into an Excel sheet or view as a text file.

To view/down-load the file containing the matrix between 15 batsmen and the 236 Tests, to indicate which player played in which test, please click/right-click here. You could export this into an Excel sheet or view as a text file.

I am glad to resume my articles after a break of a month during which I was immersed in World Cup related work. I had done so much of WC related work that I decided that I would go back to Tests. My next article will be the comprehensive analysis of World Cup performances that I had promised before the beginning of the World Cup.

I have also selected a very unusual area for this article. Pure analysis can be done by anyone with access to a Database, a set of tools and an analytical flair. What I have selected is a programming specialty. This is a graphical look at the 8 West Indian pace bowling giants who played across 28 years and 226 Tests. This required a lot of specialized programming work and the results have come out very nicely and pleasing to the eye. The layouts and formatting work itself took a few days. The readers can download the graphs, study these at leisure and come out with their conclusions.

First, a graphic time-line of the careers of the 8 bowlers.

The following facts are clear through a perusal of the time-line graph above. This is only for the purpose of gathering overall intelligence. The detailed by-Test graphs come later.

1. West Indian pace bowling saga of 28 years is comprised of two clear periods. The first one between 1974 and 1987 during which Roberts, Holding, Garner and Croft held sway. Then the second period between 1988 and 2001 during which Walsh, Ambrose and Bishop held forte.
2. Ha!!! I can hear knives being sharpened. I can clearly see a mail saying that I have gone senile and missed, arguably, the greatest of all these bowlers, Marshall. No I have not forgotten the genial "giant". He is the connecting player across the two eras. Note the following.
- He is the only one to have straddled both periods almost completely.
- He has played with all the other 7 bowlers, at their peak. That is truly amazing. 14 years at the top, 376 wickets at 20.95, arguably, Marshall is the greatest amongst this collection of greats.
- He is the one bowler who defines clearly the West Indian pace supremacy. No wonder he is held in such high esteem.
3. Croft's career was a sub-set of Garner's career. Marshall's arrival hastened Croft's departure.
4. Roberts handed over the baton to Walsh.
5. Holding and Garner retired almost simultaneously and Ambrose took over from them.
6. Bishop had to retire quite early. Severe back injuries meant he had long breaks in his career twice. Just extend his career by another 5 years, at least until 2001, when Walsh retired. Think of the impact this would have had on West Indian cricket.

The detailed graphs have been split into three individual ones since it would be impossible to show all 226 tests in one graph. While these graphs have been split in such a manner that these cover approximately the same number of tests, some career date-lines have been followed.

The first graph covers the career of Andy Roberts and incorporates 74 tests. Roberts made his debut in Test# 734 (1974) and made his last appearance in Test# 972 (1983), 74 tests later. During this period, Holding, Garner and Marshall made their debuts and Croft completed his career.

Roberts was alone for over 10 tests before Holding made his debut. Lance Gibbs and Holder were the two bowlers with whom he shared these 10 tests. Holding and Roberts, along with Gibbs and Holder, played for another 15 tests before Garner and Croft made their debut in the same Test. For some reason, Holding went off when these two made their debuts. It is possible that he was even dropped ??? The huge gap between Test$ 822 and 845 was the Packer period during which none of these four played. Marshall made his debut during the middle of these Packer tests.

In the post-WSC era, West Indies started by playing four top pace bowlers for the first time. This was the golden period for these four greats, although it meant that Marshall lost his place. Despite losing their hold over the World Cup, they were lethal and very potent as a Test team. They played in different combinations in a number of tests. Marshall took over from Croft. What is surprising is that even Holding has missed quite a number of tests during these years, even before the WSC absence. The level of competition for 3/4 places amongst these 5 top-quality bowlers must have been intense.

I have made another analysis of this period in terms of bowler combinations, results etc. These are shown at the end.

Now the second period during which six bowlers are present. This comprises of the later part of the Holding/Garner careers, the bulk of the Marshall career and the start of the Ambrose/Bishop careers. This was the most successful period for West Indies as the summary of results is shown at the end. Barring one series in the middle, they had an embarrassment of riches, the problem being who to leave out. Ambrose took over from Holding/Garner seamlessly and Bishop was potent. Marshall had retired well before the end of this period.

The third period had the three bowlers, Walsh, Ambrose and Bishop. Walsh played in all but two of the tests during this period. Ambrose played in most of these tests. Unfortunately Bishop had to retire because of injuries. That was a blow to the West Indies from which they never recovered. Walsh and Ambrose struggled for a few Tests together, then Walsh alone for a few more and he also retired. The results, as expected, were quite mixed. Mervyn Dillon was the major support player to Ambrose and Walsh during these last few Tests.

After Test# 1544, came the fall, and what a fall it was. It was left to the unfortunate Brian Lara to preside, more unsuccessfully than successfully, over this crumbling edifice. 10 years have passed and there is no light at the end of the tunnel, barring a lone completely unexpected success in the Champions' Trophy during 2004.

An analysis of the results is given below.

Period                  Matches Wins Draws Losses %-success

1974 (0734)-1984 (0983)   76    26   36    14     57.8% (No real dominating run)
1983 (0986)-1994 (1257)   79    47   20    12     72.1% (11/7/7 consecutive wins)
1994 (1258)-2001 (1544)   71    20   19    32     41.5% (7/6 consecutive losses)

Total                    226    93   75    58     57.7%

As already indicated the golden period were the 10 years between 1984 and 1994, with a %-success of 72.1. Only 12 losses during a decade. The earlier decade was also quite good with a %-success of 57.8. The last 8 years were quite average with a success % of only 41.5. However let us not forget that unlike today, these were not the results-seeking years. A draw, especially by the opposing team was considered very good.

Out of the 226 Tests, there were a maximum of 100 tests in which 4 of the pace bowlers could have been played. This number could be lower since information on injuries is not known. Details on various combinations are given below. Incidentally such instances are identified on the graphs with the sign '!'.

Bowler combination                Matches  Wins

Roberts/Holding/Garner/Croft      11       5
Roberts/Holding/Garner/Marshall    6       3
Holding/Garner/Croft/Marshall      3       0
Holding/Garner/Marshall/Walsh      4       2
Marshall/Walsh/Ambrose/Bishop      6       4

Total                             30      14

There are two surprises. The first is that West Indies played 4 pace bowlers, out of these 8, in only 30 of these during these 27 years. Of course they played other pace bowlers to come to four. The second surprise is that in tests in which West Indies had fielded 4 pace bowlers, out of the selected 8, their win percentage is below 50. This indicates that the best combination was three top pace bowlers and one bowler of different type, a spinner or even a medium pace swing bowler, to maintain balance. One would have again expected the win % to be higher. Maybe 3 pace bowlers + Gibbs/Holder/Richards/Gomes/Harper/Patterson was the more effective combination. Amongst this lot, Gibbs was a world-class spinner on his own rights. Patterson and Holder were good support bowlers.

The career summaries of the 8 bowlers is given below.

Bowler     Wkts  Mats Career details

Roberts:    202   47 ( 74) : 0734 (1974) - 0972 (1983)
Holding:    249   60 ( 92) : 0764 (1975) - 1068 (1987)
Garner:     259   58 ( 79) : 0797 (1977) - 1072 (1987)
Croft:      125   27 ( 38) : 0797 (1977) - 0919 (1982)

Marshall:   376   81 (106) : 0837 (1978) - 1175 (1991)

Walsh :     519  132 (142) : 0997 (1984) - 1544 (2001)
Ambrose:    405   98 (108) : 1095 (1988) - 1509 (2000)
Bishop:     161   43 ( 73) : 1117 (1989) - 1407 (1998)

Walsh and Ambrose have missed only 10 tests each in their long careers. Walsh, mainly at the beginning because of non-selection. The others have missed quite a few tests, because of various reasons, WSC Tests, non-selection, injuries et al.

Finally a tribute to these 8 great bowlers. I cannot remember any instance of their engaging in any verbal duel with any batsman. One penetrating glare was all what was on view. They let the ball do all the talking and what conversation the 121282 deliveries engaged in. Capturing their haul of 2296 wickets at a rate of 52.8 balls and at an average of 22.8 runs per wicket. Did they bowl like millionaires. No, they conceded only 2.59 runs per over. Any of these 8 could have found a place in 90% of Test teams across the years. They graced the Test scene for nearly 3 decades. We can only stand back and admire them at this point in time.

Coming to the other dominating team over the past 10 years, I would like to hear from the readers whether such an analysis would be possible or worthwhile at all. There were only two great bowlers, McGrath and Warne and a host of good supporting bowlers. Such a graph as done above may not make sense.

To view/down-load the .zip file containing the graphs, please click/right-click here.
This will let you view the graphs at leisure and draw your own conclusions.

As the 2011 World Cup tournament proceeded through its 49 matches, it became clear to me that bowlers, particularly spin bowlers, were winning many favourable lbw decisions that they would not have won in previous tournaments. I presume it is unnecessary for me to describe the process whereby a bowler, having unsuccessfully appealed for lbw, was able to have the decision re-visited, and through the microscopic examination of video footage, the initial decision was often reversed.

Using our CSW database software, I have tracked back through all World Cup tournaments since they started in 1975, and from my research, have come up with the following table:

LBW decisions in World Cups

Year	Venue	%lbw	%lbw (quicks)	%lbw (spinners)
1975	England	14.90	18.01	6.06
1979	England	12.38	14.45	0.00
1983	England	11.52	14.61	3.23
1987	Subcontinent	7.01	9.35	6.54
1992	Australasia	6.42	7.08	8.51
1996	Subcontinent	7.59	10.17	6.86
1999	England	14.24	15.15	17.44
2003	South Africa	12.40	13.33	12.89
2007	Caribbean	11.31	11.38	14.76
2011	Subcontinent	16.28	15.34	21.03
Total		11.57	12.79	12.92

The third column (%lbw) gives the number of lbw decisions as a percentage of all dismissals. Until this year, those tournaments held in England clearly gave the greatest incidence of lbw decisions as a proportion. I initially thought this might be as a result of the higher propensity of English umpires to give batsmen out lbw compared with their counterparts in other countries, but unlike the 1975, 1979 and 1983 tournaments, the 1999 event included only two English umpires of the dozen who officiated that year. One can only therefore conclude that English conditions provide a higher likelihood of players being dismissed lbw than in other countries.

The last two columns (%Qlbw and %Slbw) give the number of lbw dismissals as a percentage of all dismissals engineered by “quick” and “spin” bowlers respectively. (The category “quick” includes all bowlers from medium-pace upwards.) One can see that in early years, spin bowlers found it very difficult indeed to win an lbw decision from umpires. In fact, in the first three World Cups, there were only four lbw decisions given to spin bowlers in total, with none at all in 1979! The removal of the tournament to the sub-continent in 1987 doubled the chance of spin bowlers winning lbw decisions, and there was a significant jump again in the 1999 event. This year, there has been an almost 50% rise in the proportion of dismissals won by lbw decisions for spin bowlers compared with the 2007 World Cup, and for the first time, more than one in five dismissals have been earned this way for these bowlers.

The DRS has clearly shown that umpires have been too conservative in considering lbw appeals in the past, and that batsmen have been getting away with murder for years! The higher incidence of lbw dismissals for both spin and quick bowlers is a result not only of the direct intervention of video replays, but also, in all probability, of a realisation by umpires that they are safer in giving out what they originally would have considered to be marginal decisions only a year or two ago. I recall many referrals in this last World Cup by batsmen given out lbw in the hope they would be reprieved– but weren’t.

With batsmen now being at greater risk in being given out lbw at the top level, it will be interesting to see what batsmen will do to counter this danger. Presumably playing straighter, and less “across the line” will be a first strategy, but also coming down the wicket more might be an effective counter. We may expect more stumpings as a result! It is fascinating to watch the game continually evolving.