Showing posts with label Graeme Smith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Graeme Smith. Show all posts

Tuesday, 1 January 2013

Test team of the year 2012

For the test team of the year, I’ve given extra weight to performances away from home. Often the mark of great players is that they can master foreign conditions. For each player I’ve generated a weighted average, and I’ve used that to pick the team.

I’ve also looked at openers as a separate skill to batting in numbers 3-5. I also feel that numbers 6 and 7 need to be multi-skilled players: who can contribute with the bat and either the ball or the gloves. As a result I’ve picked the best batsman among the keepers. It is very difficult to quantify the ability of keepers, and while I feel that Prasanna Jayawardene is currently without peer as a keeper, his batting (while improving) is significantly weaker than some of the other keepers.

With the bowlers I decided on at least 2 quick bowlers and at least one spinner. After that I picked the next best bowler. There were a few times that a team went in with either 3 spinners or 4 pace bowlers, but every time the results were not good enough to demand it being replicated in this team.

There were a couple of bowlers who had a good year without playing any away matches. For these players I looked at the average difference between home matches and away matches, and adjusted their weighted averages accordingly.

Openers: Alastair Cook and Graeme Smith.

While these two may not have the crowd in raptures with scintillating stroke-play, they have scored a lot of runs this year, both home and away.

NameOverall AverageAway AverageWeighted average
AN Cook (Eng) 48.0371.954.67
GC Smith (SA) 48.5250.5649.52
Mohammad Hafeez (Pak) 45.952.548.24
AN Petersen (SA) 4743.0645.09
TM Dilshan (SL) 40.134240.67
DA Warner (Aus) 43.7728.539.96

Numbers 3-5: Marlon Samuels, Michael Clarke and Shivnarine Chanderpaul

Michael Clarke has been amazing in Australia, but his away form was so poor that he was almost pipped for the spot by Amla.

NameOverall AverageAway AverageWeighted average
S Chanderpaul (WI) 109.55196131.17
MN Samuels (WI) 86.694.7189.94
MJ Clarke (Aus) 106.3331.3384.9
HM Amla (SA) 70.9374.8572.83
JH Kallis (SA) 705663.3
Azhar Ali (Pak) 55.16056.73
MEK Hussey (Aus) 61.6136.553.68
AB de Villiers (SA) 58.2146.7852.5
Asad Shafiq (Pak) 47.1164.2552.38

All Rounder: Jacques Kallis.

While Samuels came out as the best all-rounder for the year, he is already in the team for his batting (and there’s also a chance he won’t be allowed to bowl). Kallis has had a much improved year with the ball, his averages were similar to Dale Steyn for the year.

NameBattingBowlingDifference
MN Samuels (WI) 89.9442.847.14
JH Kallis (SA) 63.330.8932.41
Mohammad Hafeez (Pak) 48.2428.3619.88
KS Williamson (NZ) 30.5241.67-11.15
MEK Hussey (Aus) 56.7373-16.27
SR Watson (Aus) 31.748-16.3

Keeper: AB de Villiers

De Villiers almost made the team as a batsman alone. Ramdin recovered well from having calls for his head at the start of the year.

NameOverall AverageAway AverageWeighted average
AB de Villiers (SA) 48.5548.5548.56
D Ramdin (WI) 42.8754.1647.71
MJ Prior (Eng) 38.8539.6239.07
MS Wade (Aus) 36.2739.637.31
MS Dhoni (India) 40.6324.3337.14
Adnan Akmal (Pak) 25.2537.6628.64

Bowlers: Tino Best, Tim Southee, Narsingh Deonarine and Vernon Philander

This was the big surprise for me. Where is Dale Steyn? Where is James Anderson? Probably the best two bowlers in the world and they don’t even feature. Likewise Saeed Ajmal just gets pipped. These are not the bowlers that I would pick if I were selecting a team other than on stats.

bowleroverall averageaway averageweighted average
TL Best (WI) 16.2714.9215.69
TG Southee (NZ) 22.6417.320.08
N Deonarine (WI) 19-20.27
VD Philander (SA) 21.1121.8321.45
BW Hilfenhaus (Aus) 21.6720.821.49
Junaid Khan (Pak) 24.1421.7822.96
Saeed Ajmal (Pak) 20.5629.9323.17
PM Siddle (Aus) 23.0938.3324.14
KAJ Roach (WI) 22.2534.2524.3
MA Starc (Aus) 25.0527.525.27
Abdur Rehman (Pak) 22.6441.3326.26
HMRKB Herath (SL) 23.6162.1627.12
MS Panesar (Eng) 26.0329.3127.23
GP Swann (Eng) 29.9323.6127.54
PP Ojha (India) 25.96-27.7
JM Anderson (Eng) 29.526.6128.62
TA Boult (NZ) 30.7727.0529.1
DW Steyn (SA) 29.7129.0829.41

Sunday, 30 September 2012

Law 23 and Steven Finn

Here is a snippet from Law 23, Part 4:

"vi) the striker is distracted by any noise or movement or in any other way while he is preparing to receive, or receiving a delivery. This shall apply whether the source of the distraction is within the game or outside it."

The conditions for a dead ball are quite clear. The batsman has to be distracted. If the batsman is not distracted, then the ball should not be declared dead.

The test is not "does the umpire think that the batsman should have been distracted." The test is "was the batsman distracted."

The timing is also interesting. When is the ball dead? A possible argument is that the ball should be declared dead immediately once an umpire feels that the batsman is likely to be distracted. However that's not the test. The test is if the batsman was distracted. The ball also does not have to be declared dead immediately once an incident has happened. See for example Tom Smith's description of how to rule on an injury:

"Example 4
The ball has been hit into the outfield and the fielder, in attempting to stop it, falls and is in obvious pain through a serious injury.
Before calling Dead ball, the umpire should look to see if the ball is continuing towards the boundary. If it is and it will reach the boundary almost immediately, he would not call Dead ball as once the ball crosses the boundary it is going to be dead anyway. By delaying the call he will neither be depriving the batting side of a boundary nor unnecessarily delaying getting attention to the stricken fielder"
(Smith, 2003, p.167)

It is completely within the consistent ruling of Law 23 to see what happens, and then call the ball as dead if necessary.

Which brings us to the Steven Finn breaking the wickets with his leg. The correct ruling here is that the umpire should see if the batsman was distracted or not before calling the ball dead.

If the batsman hits the ball for 4, or 2, then it should not be a dead ball, as the batsman was clearly not distracted. If the ball goes down the leg side for what would have normally been called a wide, then it should be called wide, not dead ball, as even if the batsman was distracted there was no opportunity for him to play a shot to it.

In the South Africa test where the precedent was set the first three were not called. It was only once Graeme Smith approached the umpire saying that he found it distracting that the umpire started to call it dead.

In the Super 8 match James Franklin did not make any such complaint, as as a result the law was applied incorrectly.

Incorrect interpretation of this rule cost New Zealand significantly in the last game. It would be crazy if it continued to be ruled incorrectly throughout the rest of the tournament. This is not something that the MCC Laws sub-committee needs to look at. The law is clear, and just needs to be applied correctly.

Friday, 20 July 2012

Mini-session analysis - 1st test Eng SA The Oval 2012

Here is the final mini-session analysis for the first test between England and South Africa at The Oval, London, England.

A mini-session is (normally) half a session, either between the start of the session and the drinks break or the drinks break and the end of the session. Occasionally a long session will have 3 mini-sessions where it will be broken up with 2 drinks breaks.

1-1aEngland 36/1 off 11England
1-1bEngland 34/0 off 12England
1-2aEngland 48/0 off 15England
1-2bEngland 40/0 off 15England
1-3aEngland 27/1 off 10South Africa
1-3bEngland 61/0 off 13England
1-3cEngland 21/1 off 14South Africa
2-1aEngland 19/3 off 13South Africa
2-1bEngland 40/1 off 12England
2-2aEngland 57/2 off 10.1England
2-2bEngland 2/1 off 0.4England
South Africa 25/1 off 11
2-3South Africa 61/0 off 26South Africa
3-1aSouth Africa 40/0 off 16South Africa
3-1bSouth Africa 61/0 off 12South Africa
3-2aSouth Africa 36/0 off 15South Africa
3-2bSouth Africa 54/1 off 12South Africa
3-3aSouth Africa 53/0 off 16South Africa
3-3bSouth Africa 73/0 off 27South Africa
4-1aSouth Africa 36/0 off 15South Africa
4-1bSouth Africa 75/0 off 14South Africa
4-2aSouth Africa 60/0 off 13South Africa
4-2bSouth Africa 63/0 off 12South Africa
4-3aEngland 36/2 off 12South Africa
4-3bEngland 66/2 off 26South Africa
5-1aEngland 33/1 off 13South Africa
5-1bEngland 42/0 off 15England
5-2aEngland 31/1 off 15draw
5-2bEngland 32/4 off 16South Africa

Latest update here.

Stumps, Day 1: England lead the mini-session count 5-2.

The day started sensationally with Morne Morkel hitting Strauss in the pads with his 4th ball. His LBW appeal was turned down, but Smith decided to review it and the decision was overturned: Strauss lbw Morkel 0 in the first over.

From that point South Africa had next to nothing to celebrate for 4 hours. Cook and Trott attempted to bat South Africa into the ground. 170 runs in just over 56 overs. Hardly break neck pace, but very effective.

The fall of the wicket hardly did anything to speed up the scoring rate at first either. Pietersen only scored 3 off his first 20 balls. However he exploded from there (in the context of the match) scoring 39 off his next 51 balls before gloving a short ball from Kallis through to de Villiers.

The pitch seemed quite slow, but occasionally one carried through quite well. It could be a pitch where bowlers get good results from bowling cutters and cross seam deliveries in order to exaggerate the inconsistent nature.

It was very much England's day, but the average first innings score at the Oval is about 410, so they are not far ahead of par for this day. The match is quite well set up, and will be even if South Africa manage a couple of early wickets tomorrow. The English tail is formidable, with Broad scheduled to come in at 10. (Broad averages 27 - there have been 92 players who have played more than 20 innings in the top 5 with a lower average than that)

One of the beautiful things about test cricket is that it often leaves you with as much anticipation after the first day as it had before it. This is one of those tests. When Cook resumes on 114 tomorrow morning there will still be everything to play for.

First drinks, Day 2: England lead the mini-session count 5-3.

3 wickets for 19 runs in 13 overs. That is a very comprehensive hour. The match is actually quite even, despite England leading the mini-session count.

Lunch drinks, Day 2: England lead the mini-session count 6-3.

England managed to take this mini-session, and are back in the lead in the match. I think about 400 is about par for this pitch. England are on track to get close to 400, but there is a lot of cricket left in this match.

Stumps, Day 2: England lead the mini-session count 8-4

Despite England leading the count, I feel South Africa are probably slightly ahead. The bookies, however, have the draw as favourite, followed by England. It will be interesting to see if the pitch does start to play tricks. Apparently the groundsmen have made an effort to keep water off the block due to the rain in England this year. This might mean that it does break up more than would be expected after such a wet summer.

Interestingly it was a day without anyone really starring. A few bowlers picked up 1 or 2 wickets. Amla looked good for 47, and Prior batted well for his 60, but there were no really stand out performances. If England manage to bowl out South Africa near the end of the day tomorrow for about 350, we could have an epic finish on our hands here.

Stumps, Day 3: South Africa lead the mini-session count 10-8.

A day of disciplined bowling, and disciplined batting. England managed to keep South Africa to about 3 an over, but only managed to remove Graeme Smith. Smith is now just 223 runs away from taking Bruce Mitchell's record for the most runs in England for South Africa that has stood since 1947.

I heard a commentator say that it was difficult to take wickets as the pitch was too good. I'm not actually sure that a pitch where 12 wickets fall in 261 overs is actually a good pitch. I think a good pitch should have a wicket fall every 12 overs or so, not every 22 overs. However if it breaks up early tomorrow and is a minefield by the end of day 5, I might have to review my assessment.

South Africa will want 4 sessions to bowl England out, but it is unlikely they will get sufficient runs for Smith to declare in 2 sessions tomorrow, so the draw should certainly be favourite now.

David Trist once said that to win a test match you should bowl one third of your overs as maidens. That way you are creating pressure on the batsmen. Both teams have bowled about one sixth. The batsmen have found this pitch too easy. To the credit of Amla and Smith however, they cashed in on the conditions more than the English batsmen (except Cook) did. The South African batsmen were fantastic. George Dobell summed it up well when he said "There may be some doubts about the South Africa tail, but when the head and the body are as strong as this, it is not the most pressing of concerns."

First drinks, Day 4: South Africa lead the mini-session count 11-8

The grind continues. Kallis has done his best impression of a snail. He's scored 8 runs off 56 balls. That is less than one an over. Amla was more positive, with 24 off 34. England have bowled with discipline, but no imagination. Their approach works normally, but 439/2 should suggest to the English bowlers that they need to change things up.

Stumps, Day 4: South Africa lead the mini-session count 16-8

This game no longer looks either evenly poised or headed for a draw. South Africa have taken the game by the scruff of the neck.

The Kallis and Amla partnership is the 3rd largest partnership for South Africa. It's the 3rd largest partnership for South Africa. The 6th largest 3rd wicket partnership. The 5 largest partnership against England. The 2nd largest unbeaten partnership. It's also the 23rd largest partnership of all time.

Amla's innings is the largest by a South African. The 4th largest against England. The 4th largest in England. The 5th longest innings in terms of minutes, and the longest unbeaten innings in terms of minutes. It was the twentieth largest innings of all time.

This was also only the 4th time that a South African team had had 3 players score over 130 in the same innings.

All of this is to say simply that the South African innings was very good. And the English bowling got worn down. If England go on to lose by an innings, which looks quite likely at this point, then it will be the 4th largest first innings total to result in an innings loss.

This is all so unexpected after day one. It is really quite a remarkable turn around. Strauss dropping Amla on 40 may be the most expensive dropped catch in the history of test cricket.

The question now is if this game has another twist. Can Bopara, Bell, Prior and/or the bowlers bat England to safety. It would be remarkable if they do, but there has been a steel about this English team recently that means that it is not inconceivable.

First drinks, Day 5: South Africa lead the mini-session count 17-8

England have lost another wickets, with Ravi Bopara going for a slash outside off and seeing a wide ball crash into the middle stump. Bell has looked solid, despite one nervous moment against Tahir. He and Prior could put together a large partnership, but if they get broken up too soon, it's hard to England making it to the end.

End of match, Tea, Day 5: South Africa win the match and the mini-session count 18-9

Andrew Strauss put down a difficult chance off Amla when he was on 40. At that point England were on top in this match. The South Africans did not relinquish the momentum. They are a very hard team to stop once they are on a roll.

The game was very comprehensive, and South Africa deserve all the accolades they are inevitably receiving, however I don't think that this match is a fair reflection of the relative strengths of the two sides.

England had to bat and bowl in the most difficult conditions for both. Days 2 and 5 were the only days where the ball really misbehaved. South Africa had the best of the conditions, but they made them count well.

The remarkable thing was how long it took before the South African batsmen were able to start punishing the bowling. It was roughly 10 hours before the English bowlers started to lose their menace, and even then they still mostly kept to the plan in the last 3 hours when they were getting belted. It was just that the plan did not work.

It will be interesting to see what Flower, Strauss and co. come up with for the next test. I hope that they don't do what English teams of the '90s did in this situations and make wholesale changes. Flower has so far shown that that is not his style.

The next test will be an entirely different prospect. The ball will probably swing at Headingly and so Steyn, Philander, Anderson and Bresnan will be a much more interesting prospect. We could have a totally different style of match.

I, for one, can hardly wait the 10 days until the next game.

Wednesday, 7 March 2012

Preview NZ SA 1st Test Dunedin 11/12

It feels like a long time since the last test match between Pakistan and England. There has been a lot of cricket between tests.

The South African tour of New Zealand got off to a positive start for the home nation, but 5 matches in a row to South Africa have changed the momentum somewhat.

Both teams are adding some big names, South Africa bring in Tahir, Philander and Smith. New Zealand bring in Taylor, Vettori and Martin.

Things to look for:

1. Chris Martin vs Smith & Kallis. Martin has a good record against both of South Africa's best batsmen, and the way that umpires are calling LBW's now really plays to his advantage. It will be interesting to see how he goes.

2. Is Ross Taylor fit? He had one warm up match, where he fielded for a day then watched the rain fall before being replaced. He has not faced a delivery in a real match for a couple of months.

3. Tahir vs NZ's bowlers. NZ has often relied on a lot of runs from the tail. Regularly they score more for the last 5 wickets than the first. However traditionally this had not happened when there has been a good spin bowler operating. Lyon ripped through them in Brisbane, and so Tahir should be eagerly awaiting a bowl.

4. Philander playing away from home. Philander has looked amazing in South Africa, and probably the best place for his type of bowling is New Zealand, but how well will he actually go in unfamiliar conditions?