India’s best tailenders

Ishant Sharma’s heroics and his maiden Test fifty reminded us of the importance of having tailenders who can score some runs. Or, failing that, at least stay around long enough for other batsmen to score some more runs. Ishant was perhaps more of the second type.

We have a quick look at the best performers at 8-11 in the three formats.

For Tests and ODIs  a cutoff of 20 innings is used. For T20Is it is 10 innings.

Test batting averages at 8-11:

Indian tailenders

RA Jadeja’s average is now above Kapil Dev’s. Remember that both of them and a few others like Nadkarni scored centuries up to No 7 as well.

Kapil, Ashwin and Harbhajan have two centuries here. Others with centuries are Kirmani, IK Pathan, Kumble and Agarkar.

Here Agarkar has the lowest average by a century-maker and Ishant the lowest by a fifty-maker.

The lowest average here is by Maninder Singh, followed by Chandrashekhar and Doshi which most would have guessed.

In ODIs, we have:

Indian Tailenders (ODI)

The highest averages are by Pathan and Chetan Sharma. Sharma has scored a century batting lower.

Pathan and Agarkar are the only ones here with 2 fifties. The lowest average by a fifty-scorer is by Praveen Kumar.

The lowest average is by Sreesanth, followed by Ishant Sharma and Nehra.

For T20Is, no one has 20 innings so we take the cutoff of 10 innings instead.

Indian tailenders - T20I

Ashwin and Harbhajan are the only ones who qualify here. Neither has scored a fifty.

 

Making sense of the Women’s T20 World Championship of 2020

This is one area where Wikipedia is more informative than Cricinfo.

With the conclusion of the qualifying rounds, Bangladesh and Thailand join the “big 8” to make up the 10 teams.

Whatever you need to know is here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_ICC_Women%27s_T20_World_Cup

Also see the results of the 2018 championship, when India lost in the semi-finals to England, who in turn lost to Australia in the final:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_ICC_Women%27s_World_Twenty20

T20Is between India and the West Indies

Hope that you read this before the caravan moves on to the ODI series.

India won the 3-match series 3-0, repeating the margin of the series played in late 2018. Thus India had won 6 T20Is in a row.

Here is a list of T20Is between these teams:

T20I I v WI list of results

And the summary of wins and losses:

T20I I v WI results

We now look at individual performances:

Batting: most runs (100 and above):

I v WI T20 runs.JPG

RG Sharma and Kohli are far ahead of the others. E Lewis is the only one with 2 centuries, and Sharma the only one with 4 50+ scores.

Highest innings scores (75 and above):

I v WI T20 innings

Lewis did well in 2016-17 but has slipped since then. The just-concluded series was low scoring as no one scored 75 or more.

Bowling-most wickets (5 and above):

I v WI T20 wkts

As you will see, the best performance is a 4-for. Bumrah has the most wickets (8) while 3 others have 7.

Best innings bowling (3wi and above):

I v WI T20 inngs bowling

Sammy and Bravo have the only 4-for here. DL Chahar had the freakish figures of 3-4 in 3 overs during this series.

Fielding-Most dismissals (4 and above):

I v WI T20 dismissals

RG Sharma has the most dismissals (7), ahead of keeper MS Dhoni and 2 others with 5.

Most innings dismissals (3):

I v WI T20 innings dis

KD Karthik has the most for a keeper, while Lendl Simmons and RG Sharma also have 3.

All-round performance (Minimum 20 runs and 2 wickets):

I v WI T20 AR

Krunal Pandya is the only one who comes close to Dwayne Bravo, whose figures during the 2009 World Championship were then the best in all T20Is.

 

 

The Worst Defeats in T20Is-2

The Malian women’s T20I team has been making headlines all over the cricket world (not only in Bamako and famed Timbuktu) for their abject defeats.

Earlier we have looked at the worst defeats of men’s T20I teams.

The worst defeat in a limited overs match is measured by either 1) runs or 2) balls remaining when the target is reached.

One can also look at 3) lowest scores by runs 4) highest scores by runs conceded

And as a stretch: 5) least balls in an innings.

We now look at the records of women’s T20Is as on 28-06-2019:

Losses by runs (100 and above):

WT20I defeats-runs

We see that the top three defeats were sustained by Mali, with China and Lesotho a little behind. We will see much more of Mali in the remaining part of this post.

Even some “respectable” teams such as South Africa, WI and Sri Lanka can be found here.

Losses by balls remaining (72 or more):

WT20I defeats-balls

These are all the cases where a target was chased down in 8 overs or less. In two cases only 4 balls were enough.

As you may guess, the Mali team holds the top three positions. Mozambique and Fiji are next in line. The only “respectable” team here is Ireland.

Lowest scores (30 or less):

WT20I defeats-lowest scores

The three lowest scores are by Mali in the span of three days in June 2019. Note that they did improve to 30/9 in 20 overs. China is also here with its record of 14 set earlier in 2019. Even Bangladesh has a score of 30.

Least balls in an innings (72 or less):

WT201 defeats-least balls batted.

Mali again, though they took less balls to score 14 than their 6. Mexico, China and Kuwait give them company.

And finally

Highest opposing totals (190 and above):

WT20I defeats-highest totals conceded

Note that almost all of these are in the first innings.

Mali yet again in 1st, 2nd and 4th place although South Africa is in 3rd and 5th place. Many other “respectable” teams have been at the receiving end, including India against England in 2018.

You can guess why those who follow statistics may be planning to visit Timbuktu. While this is supposes to be in an area affected by terrorism, you can at least get to Mali’s capital Bamako with a single stop at Paris or Addis Ababa. With luck, you can reach there within 18 hours from Delhi.

The Worst Defeats in T20Is-1

The Malian women’s T20I team has been making headlines all over the cricket world (not only in Bamako and famed Timbuktu) for their abject defeats.

It is a good time to examine the worst T20I defeats. For a change, gentlemen before ladies.

The worst defeat in a limited overs match is measured by either 1) runs or 2) balls remaining when the target is reached.

One can also look at 3) lowest scores by runs 4) highest scores by runs conceded

And as a stretch: 5) least balls in an innings.

We now look at the records of men’s T20Is as on 27-06-2019:

Losses by runs (100 and above):

T20I defeats-runs

We can see that the worst defeat was sustained by Kenya in the 2007 World Championship, and that they made 88 when facing a Sri Lankan total of 260.

Losses by balls remaining (60 or more):

T20I defeats-balls remain

These are all the cases where a target was chased down in 10 overs or less.

The “winner” here was Botswana who were dismissed for 46, and then let Namibia hit off these runs in 3.5 overs or 16.1 overs/97 balls remaining. Next comes Netherlands in the course of the 2014 World Championship. Other whipping boys such as Kenya, Nepal and Germany follow.

Lowest scores (60 or less):

T20I defeats-lowest totals by runs

The biggest fail here is Netherlands with 39 against Sri Lanka in the 2014 World Championship (mentioned above).

And next is one of the big boys, West Indies with 45 against England earlier this year.

Other whipping boys such as Botswana, Germany and Nepal follow.

Least balls in an innings (90 or less):

T20I defeats-lowest totals by balls

The lowest tally here is 10.3 overs, just over the halfway mark.

Most of these are in the second innings.

Our old friends Netherlands again, followed by West Indies as mentioned above.

A few teams such as South Africa have crossed 100 here in less than 15 overs.

And finally,

Highest opposing totals (240 and above):

T20I defeats-most runs conceded

Note that almost all of these are in the first innings.

Ireland has conceded the most (278) to Afghanistan earlier this year. But even Australia had a similar experience against Sri Lanka in 2016. Kenya conceded 260 to Sri Lanka in 2007 as mentioned earlier.

Next we will take up women’s T20Is, which includes single-digit totals.

 

 

 

A mockery of cricket (2)

As earlier mentioned, all T20 matches between ICC members now have T20I status. This has led to highly one-sided results, though there have also been surprises such as the Thai women’s team winning against Sri Lanka.

We now come to the case of non-local players in a national team. Some teams such as the UAE have been doing this for years, But one should remember that more than 50% of UAE’s population are expatriates, many of whom are from cricket majors such as India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

Oman and Hong Kong have followed a similar policy, as have other potential “major market” teams such as the USA and Canada. Some African teams such as Kenya have  Asian players whose families have lived there for generations, similar to the Kallicharans and Chanderpauls of the West Indies.

China, to its credit, has stuck to indigenous players in spite of suffering heavy losses.

Countries of the British Isles have (in recent years) been dependent on “imports” from various sources such as Australia, South Africa, the West Indies and South Asia. Admittedly, many of those from the “white Commonwealth” (such as Trott, Strauss, Pietersen and Caddick) are those whose families had migrated FROM Britain one or two generations ago.

And there are weird cases such as Andrew Symonds (born in Britain to West Indian parents, grew up in Britain, played for Australia). Another is Dimitri Mascarenhas (born in Britain to Sri Lankan parents, grew up in Australia and finally played for England).

And there are those of Asian origin such as current players Moeen Ali and Adil Rashid and others from the recent past such as Ravi Bopara and Monty Panesar who have lived in Britain all their lives.

Dependence on foreign players (even if they are from former colonies) seems to be important in some major soccer teams, a good example being France. But there have been critics of this from within France, particularly when they won the World Cup in 1998 (when Zidane scored the first two goals in the final). Politicians such as Le Pen had nasty things to say then.

Now we come to the western European countries. Apart from the Netherlands, there is little tradition of cricket and most teams have to depend on imports (especially from South Asia, predominantly from Pakistan and now Afghanistan).

To prove this point, we look at the recent 3-match T20I series between Belgium and Germany. Belgium met its Waterloo, losing 3-0 in the matches played at (where else?) Waterloo.

You can see details of this series here:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/scores/series/19254/germany-in-belgium-t20is-2019

Let us take the scorecard of any of the matches, say the second one:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/19254/scorecard/1183921/belgium-vs-germany-2nd-t20i-germany-tour-of-belgium-2019

We can see that the German team has 10 of the 11 members clearly from South Asia, certainly from India and Pakistan and perhaps Sri Lanka and Afghanistan. There is one with an Anglo-Saxon name called Daniel Weston who was born and brought up in Australia (Perth) but NOT Germany. Presumably all are citizens or permanent residents of Germany, but what is it doing to popularize cricket among the average sports followers in Germany? Not much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Weston

Now look at the Belgian team.

All 11 in the team appear to be of Pakistani or Afghan origin. (Possibly some are from India, but I doubt it). And both Germany and Belgium do NOT have a tradition of immigration from South Asia as Britain has.

What good is this doing to develop European cricket if the match between Germany and Belgium includes 21 South Asians and one Aussie? Particularly when practically all of these players would be unlikely to make any decent team in their own country?

And the German and Belgian sports fans would stick to watching their soccer, hockey or tennis players rather than cricket.

Tail piece: In the 3rd T20I Weston did not play so  the match could well be described as German South Asians vs Belgian South Asians.

 

A mockery of cricket (1)

Over the last year, the ICC has decided to give T20I status to ANY match between men’s sides (as well as women’s sides) from countries whose cricket boards are part of ICC. This is regardless of cricketing ability.

This also means that all T20Is starting from 2018-2019 (for women’s matches) and 2019 for men’ s matches are included in official statistics as well as official rankings.

You can see statistics on http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html or similar sites.

And ICC rankings can be seen here: http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/test/date-specific.php  for player rankings

and http://www.espncricinfo.com/rankings/content/page/211271.html  for team rankings.

One expected outcome was very one-sided matches, such as this:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/25749943/all-14-china-slump-lowest-women-t20i-total

in which China was all out for 14 in 10 overs, in reply to UAE’s 203/3 in 20 overs. China’s efforts included 6 ducks and an unbeaten 0.

From the scorecard http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/19111/scorecard/1171353/china-women-vs-united-arab-emirates-women-group-a-thailand-womens-t20-smash-2018-19

we see that China at least has all or most of the players from their own country, while UAE’s team seems to include players from India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka with a token local player (much like the UAE’s men’s teams of the past).

Knowing the Chinese, they will gradually get better and will probably be challenging established teams after a few years. At the time of writing in May 2019, you can see that UAE is ranked 16th and China 75th (out of 79). China is one of the 6 teams with zero points.

If this is a mockery of international cricket, there is a still bigger mockery when the national team of a Western European country entirely consists of South Asians. And that is true of men’s cricket as well. This will be covered next.