How well will Afghanistan's spinners go?

It's a fascinating question - at least two out of 4 spinners who have been very successful in limited over cricket are likely to make their test debut tomorrow. They will be playing in India, a country known for spinning tracks.

The Afghan captain, Ashgar Stanikzai is certainly bullish about their ability: "In my opinion, we have good spinners, better spinners than India."

That's a big call. India have some very high quality spinners in test cricket. But does he have a point?

There is no doubt that Afghanistan's spinners have been good in limited overs cricket, but does that mean anything?

Some spinners have excelled in test cricket and limited overs. Warne, Murali, Shakib, Swann all have excellent stats in all forms of the game.  But others haven't seen such correlation. Amit Mishra, Ish Sodhi, Abdur Razzak and Sunil Narine all have very strong limited overs stats, but have not converted that to test matches.

The comparison of Sodhi and Rashid is an interesting one. When they've played against similar opponents, they have had very similar stats. See for example this graph of combined IPL and Big Bash statistics. (This is the 8 players who played a reasonable number of matches in both tournaments over the past 2 years)

They have clearly been two of the stand out bowlers in the two major domestic T20 tournaments, and yet, Sodhi averages over 40 in test cricket with the ball.

Part of that will be that Sodhi has to play half his cricket in New Zealand, but part of it is also that it is not always possible to predict absolutely test success based on limited over success. They are sometimes linked, but not always.

I wondered if there was a general relationship in the numbers. Were Narine and Sodhi the outliers, or were Warne and Muralitheran the odd ones.

So I tried to construct a model, to see what happened. It turns out, to my surprise, that it is possible to predict, vaguely, the average and strike rate of a bowler in test cricket based on their ODI and T20 performances. I looked at the 37 players who had played as spinners in all 3 formats, had played at least 40 combined limited overs matches and had taken at least one test wicket.

The model is not very reliable, but it was better at predicting the bowling statistics of the players than just taking the average for the group. So it did provide some interesting numbers.

The equations that it came out with were as follows:

Only 4 of the 6 Afghani spinners had played enough limited overs cricket to have meaningful numbers, and here are their predicted results:

That would relate to the following results based on overs bowled:

Those wouldn't be particularly bad returns for a first ever test against India, but they also aren't really the results that Stanikzai is hoping for.

But the question comes up, how reliable is this anyway?

There is a degree of randomness in cricket results that means that any predictions are always quite unreliable. Looking at the graphs of the predicted vs actual for the career stats, it shows that there is quite a bit of variation about the trend.

I've added in the red lines manually, They show where roughly 95% of the data fits. Within 17 of the average and within 20 of the strike rate. Those are huge variations, which shows that it's very difficult to predict test performances based on limited overs performances.

I have added in the best realistic and worst realistic expected figures, based on these confidence bands:

It will be interesting to see which one of these the Afghani spinners actually get closest to.

Flight, guile and Santner

Mitchell Santner ran in to bowl in his typically graceful manner. He bowled slightly short of a good length, and the ball skidded off the pitch. Hamilton Masakadza diffused it comfortably, playing it out into the off side.

-

In his reply to David Hume’s argument about miracles, CS Lewis added in a chapter titled “A Chapter Not Strictly Necessary.” The idea was that it was a chapter that wasn’t really needed for his argument, but it gave him pleasure to write it, and so he added it into his book. His chapter was about the aesthetic beauty of nature.

Mitchell Santner is a very good bower. The fact that he makes what he does look good is a bonus, it’s not really necessary. If he took ugly wickets, it would look the same in the scorebook.

The Miraculous Metamorphisis of Mark Craig

Mark Craig in action

In the first two tests in this series, Mark Craig looked like one of the worst spin bowlers to ever wear the black cap. And that is saying something, given that there have been some very ordinary spin bowlers produced by New Zealand in the past.

It looked like he really had no options for taking a wicket or containing the batsmen. His RPO being over 4 seemed to show that the batsmen had taken a cautious approach, rather than anything else. It could have quite easily been over 6, if they'd really gone after him.

Then, come day 2 of the third test, he picked up 5 wickets in a morning, to post the best ever bowling figures in Sharjah, and be described by one of the Pakistani commentators as Craig the Destroyer.

It's interesting to look at how this happened. How did the teddy bear turn into a grizzly bear?

I noticed two things in common with almost all the wickets: drift and bounce. Lets go though them individually.

Is Daniel Vettori a good selection?

I've been asked by a few people what I think about picking Daniel Vettori for the 3rd test in Sharjah. So I've pulled some numbers from overseas tests (as performances in New Zealand conditions are fairly close to being irrelevant in Sharjah).

Firstly Vettori is quite different from most spinners. He takes more wickets in the first innings than he does in the second innings. This is partially because he relies more on bounce than turn, so he gets more assistance in the first innings than he does later on.

Also, his numbers away from home are better than I realised recently, but also he's not played many tests. In the past 5 years, he's only played 6 away tests, and 3 of them were in 2010. However in all 6 tests he's taken more wickets in the first innings than in the second.

During that time, however, despite only playing in 6 matches, he's taken more wickets at a better average than any other New Zealand spinner (not counting Ross Taylor's 2 wickets for 34 runs). Ish Sodhi, Mark Craig and Kane Williamson all have better strike rates, but because Vettori bowls so economically, he ends up with a better average.

This is also a big advantage when New Zealand are needing to get to the new ball (which they definitely need to do in UAE, the old ball is useless for both quicks and spinners). He can get through those overs without costing too many runs. This was the role that McCullum took on for himself in the first two tests.

This was also useful when the team is under pressure. In the game that he played at Antigua, Chris Gayle was in a destructive mood. West Indies were already on 96 when Vettori came to the crease in the 21st over. Vettori bowled the next 16 overs from that end for only 26 runs. While he didn't pick up Gayle, he did get him to inside edge just past his stumps twice.

Another interesting thing has happened as a result of Vettori's bowling: when he's played New Zealand won about as often overseas (20% vs 22%) but have lost a lot less often. As a result with Vettori NZ averages 0.46 wins / loss overseas, as opposed to 0.38 without him overseas.

It's certainly an interesting selection, and one that could work quite well.

Another first innings spinner

A couple of years ago I wrote a post about Daniel Vettori, showing that he was much more effective in the first innings than in the second innings.

Among spin bowlers who have taken more than 250 wickets, Vettori is alone in this, but among bowlers who have taken less wickets there are a few others. Here's the list of regular spin bowlers who started their careers post 1978 and who have a second innings average higher than their first innings average.

Name	First innings wickets	First innings average	Second innings wickets	Second innings average	difference
Shakib Al Hasan (Ban)	78	30.74	28	38.50	-7.76
SLV Raju (India)	57	28.50	36	34.22	-5.72
DL Vettori (ICC/NZ)	226	33.07	134	36.70	-3.63
Abdul Qadir (Pak)	151	32.19	85	33.88	-1.69
NM Lyon (Aus)	52	32.23	32	32.69	-0.46

It's a fairly short list, but the interesting thing is the last three names on it. Vettori and Qadir are two outstanding bowlers. But they both have quite similar records to Nathan Lyon.

I thought it would be interesting to look at the three bowlers together, after they had all played the same number of matches as Nathan Lyon has:

1st innings (24 matches)	Deliveries	Runs	Wickets	Avg	S/R	E/R
DL Vettori	3039	1317	35	37.63	86.8	2.6
Abdul Qadir	3895	1853	50	37.06	77.9	2.85
NM Lyon	3239	1676	52	32.23	62.3	3.1

2nd innings (24 matches)	Deliveries	Runs	Wickets	Avg	S/R	E/R
DL Vettori	3592	1452	47	30.89	76.4	2.43
Abdul Qadir	3338	1506	42	35.86	79.5	2.71
NM Lyon	2082	1046	32	32.69	65.1	3.01

We can see that Vettori started off his career more conventionally, being more effective in the second innings. But the thing that stands out to me is how much more effective Lyon is at taking wickets than either of the other two. His strike rate is remarkable. (To put his strike rate in context: at the same stage of his career Warne had a strike rate of 67.4) Lyon's overall average and strike rate is also better than Vettori's or Abdul Qadir's was after 24 matches.

It seems that the Australian selectors and public are still somewhat unconvinced by Lyon, but I think that if he can hold his own in a comparison with Vettori and Abdul Qadir, then he is probably a bowler worth persevering with.

CricketGeek Player Profile: Elias Sunny

In July this year, Elias Sunny became the first person to be named man of the match on debut in two different formats when he took 5/13 against Ireland at Stormont. It was another notch in what has become a stellar start to his cricketing career. He also took 6/94 on test debut.

Sunny is a slow left arm bowler, but he bowls with quite an open action, so the ball comes from a slightly different angle than an orthodox left-arm spin bowler. This has given him an ability to get left handed batsmen out with more regularity than most left-arm spinners. He also turns the ball quite sharply, and tends to bowl a slightly different length than most orthodox spinners. These combine to make him a real danger man for teams playing against Bangladesh.

His different angles mean that he's likely to be a particular threat to batsmen who have not faced him before, although he has shown the ability to get out some batsmen repeatedly, notably compatriot Mahmudullah, who he has dismissed a number of times in domestic cricket.

His international T20 record is remarkable, averaging 12.22 with an economy rate of 5.50, but that is somewhat artificial, given that he has only played against Ireland, the Netherlands and Scotland. However his overall T20 record is still very good, and includes being the local player of the Bangladesh Premier League. Here is a graph of his career averages.

We can see he is settling in to an average of under 20, and an economy rate close to 6. If he can translate that to international cricket he will be a massive asset to Bangladesh, and could be part of the catalyst that they need to go to the next level.

This tournament is likely to be a good litmus test for him. We may get the chance to see if he has just had a good start, or if he really is as good as his figures would indicate.

Penny-pinching Misers

I've recently watched the movie Moneyball. The idea of a killer stat is interesting, and it is interesting if such a thing exists in cricket.

In baseball getting on base is the primary objective when batting. There are times that other things are ideal, but getting on base is always a good thing. Compare this with batting in limited overs cricket. If the team needs 8 of the last 2 balls, and you hit a single, you are making it extremely unlikely for your team to win the game. (Unless you have Andre Adams at the other end, and Graeme Aldridge is bowling). However if you need 2 runs off 7 balls, and Bruce Reid at the other end, a single is a great thing.

Likewise if you are chasing 324, scoring 110 off 155 deliveries is really making it difficult for your team to win. But scoring 101 off 143 when your team is chasing 197 on a tricky pitch is an outstanding effort.

However it is rarely true in recent times that a bowler can bowl 9 or more overs and concede less than 50 runs and it be a bad effort. If a bowler stops batsmen from scoring runs, they are doing their job. Over the past 5 years when teams restrict their opponents to 250 or less they win roughly 2/3 of the matches. To put that in perspective South Africa has the 2nd best winning record in that time, winning about 2/3 of their matches. To put it another way, If Bangladesh managed to keep their opponents to 250 or less every match they would be likely to have the best winning record in Asia.

As a result, bowlers who can regularly keep their runs conceded under 50 are very valuable for a team. Which leads to the question: who are the best at doing it?

Player	Bowled 9 or more overs	Conceded 50 or less	Percentage
Mohammad Hafeez (Pak)	24	22	91.7%
GP Swann (Eng)	38	33	86.8%
DL Vettori (NZ)	53	45	84.9%
J Botha (Afr/SA)	41	34	82.9%
RW Price (Zim)	54	44	81.5%
Shakib Al Hasan (Ban)	68	52	76.5%
KMDN Kulasekara (SL)	37	28	75.7%
M Muralitharan (SL)	41	31	75.6%
B Lee (Aus)	28	21	75.0%
BAW Mendis (SL)	31	23	74.2%
Saeed Ajmal (Pak)	37	27	73.0%
NW Bracken (Aus)	33	24	72.7%
P Utseya (Zim)	54	39	72.2%
DJG Sammy (WI)	28	20	71.4%
Shahid Afridi (Pak)	78	54	69.2%

In that list of 14, there are 10 finger spinners. Some of them don't often bowl that many overs, and only get to bowl that many if things are going well for them, such as Mohammed Hafeez, Nuwan Kulasekera or Darren Sammy, however the other 9 finger spinners are in the 13 most likely bowlers to bowl 9 or more overs.

If we give in to conventional wisdom that we need pace bowlers in a team to give the bowling line up balance, we need to know who are the most reliable pace bowlers. Here are the equivalent numbers for the quick(er) bowlers.

Player	Bowled 9 or more overs	Conceded 50 or less	Percentage
KMDN Kulasekara (SL)	37	28	75.7%
B Lee (Aus)	28	21	75.0%
NW Bracken (Aus)	33	24	72.7%
DJG Sammy (WI)	28	20	71.4%
Z Khan (India)	52	34	65.4%
MG Johnson (Aus)	54	34	63.0%
Mashrafe Mortaza (Ban)	37	23	62.2%
KD Mills (NZ)	35	21	60.0%
SL Malinga (SL)	44	24	54.5%
JM Anderson (Eng)	56	30	53.6%
SCJ Broad (Eng)	53	27	50.9%

An equivalent table for wrist-spin bowlers is rather redundant, as it would only contain Shahid Afridi, as the only wrist spinner to have 20 or more innings where he has bowled 9 or more and conceded 50 or less in the past 5 years.

Perhaps this would suggest that if we were going to pick a stats-based world team for an ODI, our bowlers might be best to have Kulasekara and Lee opening the bowling, Hafeez and Sammy as our all-rounders and Vettori and Swann as our pure spinners. It would be a very difficult line-up to score off indeed.