Third Slip: Scored the majority of runs: and then ???

THIRD SLIP

thirdslip.com
Cricket, by the numbers

Scored the majority of runs: and then ???

When Shakib Al Hassan scored more than 50% of his team's total, and lost, my thoughts went back to a similar rear-guard masterpiece by Laxman at Sydney. I wondered whether it was possible that a number of such innings are in vain. Hence this article. A rare one, it covers both Tests and ODIs.

Test matches

Since I was not interested in a batsman scoring 100 out of an unfinished innings, say, of 180 for 3, I had to set some strict qualification criteria. The first was that the innings had to be complete, in other words, 10 wickets had to fall. The only exception was that innings in which the number of wickets captured + any retired hurt situations totalled 10 would be included since these are normally considered as "all out" innings. For that matter the very first innings ever played, in which Charles Bannerman retired hurt at 165, falls into this category.

The other condition was that we necessarily had to exclude matches in which a very low total was scored. For instance in Bradman's fairwell test in 1948, England scored 52 in the first innings, Len Hutton contributing an all-time-great defensive innings of 30. It is very likely that when a team is all out for a low total, one batsman scores over 50%. Despite Hutton's great innings, this innings does not qualify because of our additional qualification that the innnings has to be greater than 100 runs, consequently making the individual batsman innings greater than 50.

A total of 143 innings qualify under these strict bar levels. Let us look at the top 10 and view the potted scorecards of these 10 tests.


No MtId Year Player Name      L For (Vs) Runs    Score     Share

 1.0001 1877 Bannerman C        Aus (Eng) 165  245 for 10   67.3  Won   Debut
 2.1439 1999 Slater M.J         Aus (Eng) 123  184 for 10   66.8  Won
 3.1481 2000 Laxman V.V.S       Ind (Aus) 167  261 for 10   64.0  Lost
 4.0779 1976 Greenidge C.G      Win (Eng) 134  211 for 10   63.5  Won
 5.1156 1990 Gurusinha A.P    ~ Slk (Ind)  52   82 for 10   63.4  Lost
 6.0542 1963 Reid J.R           Nzl (Eng) 100  159 for 10   62.9  Lost
 7.0652 1969 Nurse S.M          Win (Nzl) 258  417 for 10   61.9  Drawn
 8.0776 1976 Amarnath M         Ind (Win)  60   97 for 10   61.9  Lost
 9.0846 1979 Yallop G.N       ~ Aus (Eng) 121  198 for 10   61.1  Lost
10.1171 1991 Gooch G.A          Eng (Win) 154  252 for 10   61.1  Won

As I had anticipated, 5 of these great innings have been played for losing teams. Led by Laxman's on-the-burning-deck Sydney classic of 167, Gurusinha's single-handed defiance of 52 at Chandigarh and John Reid's wonderful 100 at Christchurch.

Four of these innings have been played for winning teams and a lone draw. It is amazing that the first such inngs was played in the first test. It was played by the first test player who faced the first ball. Charles Bannerman's 67.3% is still the highest % of runs by a single batsman in an innings, although it has been run close by Slater and Laxman.

Just for information. The last innings in the above table, played by Gooch against the most fearsome bowling attack that ever bowled is the third in the list of all-time-great innings, developed by Hallmark-Thirdslip (earlier known as Wisden 100). This modern classic follows Bradman's 270 during 1936 and Lara's all-time-great chasing innings of 153* against Australia.

For a view of the potted scorecards of the above 10 Test matches, please click here.

Again just for information, I have reproduced below the 3 highest % innings, albiet in innings in which fewer than 10 wickets were lost. These are the only innings which stand above Bannerman's century.


 1.0941 1982 Mohsin Khan        Pak (Ind) 101  135 for  1   74.8  Drawn
 2.0248 1935 McCabe S.J         Aus (Saf) 189  274 for  2   69.0  Drawn
 3.0164 1926 Macartney C.G      Aus (Eng) 133  194 for  5   68.6  Drawn

For a view of the complete table, please click here.

ODI matches

Here the qualifivation criteria have to be modified. In addition to being "all out", we will include the innings in which the full complement of 40, 50 or 60 overs (whatever the maximum might be) are completed with a proviso that we will consider only 30 overs and above. Otherwise some of these 20-20 type matches would creep in.

A total of 82 innings qualify under these strict bar levels. Let us look at the top 10 and view potted scorecards of these 10 ODI matches.


No  MtId Year For  (Vs)     Score     (Max) Player Name     Score Share Result

 1. 0264 1984 Win (Eng) 272/9  in 55.0 (55) Richards I.V.A   189  69.5% Won
 2. 0216 1983 Ind (Zim) 266/8  in 60.0 (60) Kapil Dev N      175  65.8% Won
 3. 0629 1990 Nzl (Pak)  74 ao in 31.1 (50) Jones A.H         47  63.5% Lost
 4. 1652 2000 Slk (Ind) 299/5  in 50.0 (50) Jayasuriya S.T   189  63.2% Won
 5. 1944 2003 Nzl (Slk) 225 ao in 45.3 (50) Styris S.B       141  62.7% Lost
 6. 1571 2000 Aus (Nzl) 191 ao in 46.2 (50) Martyn D.R       116  60.7% Lost
 7. 0831 1993 Eng (Aus) 277/5  in 55.0 (55) Smith R.A        167  60.3% Lost
 8. 0454 1987 Zim (Nzl) 239 ao in 49.4 (50) Houghton D.L     142  59.4% Lost
 9. 1209 1997 Pak (Ind) 327/5  in 50.0 (50) Saeed Anwar      194  59.3% Won
10. 0169 1983 Eng (Nzl) 267/6  in 50.0 (50) Gower D.I        158  59.2% Won

The list is headed by Richards' wonderful Manchester masterpiece which was the best ever ODI innings in the Hallmark-Thirdslip list of greatest ODI innings (formerly known as Wisden 100) until it was pipped last year by the Gilchrist blitzkreig during the 2007 World Cup Final. Kapil Dev's monumental 175 against Zimbabwe, after coming in at 9 for 4, stands next. Spare a thought for Smith's 167 in a losing cause against Australia.

It is again surprising that even in ODI matches, these 10 matches are split equally between wins and losses. Three of these losses have come despite big centuries. The grand-daddy of such losing centuries is not even in this list. That is, of course, Hayden's 181, finished on the losing side in that unbeleivable 696 shoot-out at Hamilton.

For a view of the potted scorecards of the above 10 ODI matches, please click here.

There is only a single sub-100 score in this list, indicating that the small scores dismissals are not that common in ODI matches.

Since the qualifying bar was lowered slightly, one would have expected more batsman to achieve the 50% levels. The substantial lowering of numbers in this list as compared to Tests (granted 1870 x 4 innings as against 2700 x 2 innings) is possibly caused by two reasons. One is that very few batsmen bat through an innings. Towards the end of the innings, there is a need to score quickly and these batsmen tend to hit out and get dismissed. The other potential reason is that, if a batsman decides to anchor an innings, he necessarily might score at a slower rate than the others, especially the late order batsmen, and he might fall below the 50% criteria. Also one should not forget that almost all successful chasing innings get excuded.

For a view of the complete table, please click here.

Y. Anantha Narayanan
April 2008