A quick look at the DRS rule with hawkeye and lbw

There is a significant issue with the way that hawkeye is used for DRS.

There is some doubt as to the exact position of the ball when captured on camera. It's only accurate to the nearest 2mm or so. While that's very accurate, once it's used to create a model, it can be dangerous. As a result there is a margin for error. Then there can be difficulty determining exactly where the ball hits the pad, especially where it brushes the front pad on the way to the second. This means that there is some doubt as to what the actual position of the ball is.

To overcome this, the ICC have ruled that more than half of the ball needs to hit the centre of the wicket. This is a user friendly option at first glance. The boundary is really clear, and the batsman needs to be clearly out in order to be given out. But near the boundaries there are occasionally situations where the ball is clearly going to hit, but instead the hawkeye system calls the ball "umpires call."

This is particularly ridiculous when the ball has hit the batsman on the back foot. In a situation where the ball has only an extra 40cm to travel, if the middle of the ball is just outside the middle of the stump then for the ball to miss the stumps, then the model would have to be out by 5.5 cm. On a distance of travel of 40cm that's allowing way too much margin for error (realistically there would be a significantly less than 1% chance of the ball missing the stumps).

A solution would be to look at a cone that was using a realistic model for the uncertainty. That would be more sensible for the commentators, fans and players to understand, and would actually provide a more sensible answer to the question "would the ball hit the stumps?"

I've put together a short video to demonstrate what I mean as well.

South Africa vs Zimbabwe - things to watch for

Here are 5 things I'm going to be watching for in this match.

1. I really enjoy watching Elton Chigumbura. He's the sort of player who plays to win the match, rather than playing to have a good average. He gives himself the difficult jobs, and then puts everything into them.

2. Will Zimbabwe get Amla early. The Zimbabwean attack is quite suited to most New Zealand grounds, but if they don't get Amla early, then they will struggle to get him at all.

3. Quinton de Kock - can he rein his game in against the slower paced (but subtle and tricky) opening attack of Zimbabwe.

4. Brendan Taylor - Has he regained his touch that made him one of the best batsmen in the world in 2011.

5. South Africa's movement off the ball in the field. De Villiers has made it clear that he wants to see his team moving around more off the ball, like the New Zealand players do. This will be a chance to see if his talk has worked.

Martin Guptill and the form myth

Every season there seems to be a cause célèbre among NZ cricket fans. In 2013 the call was that Brendon McCullum wasn't scoring enough runs, and needed to be dropped. In 2013-14 it was that Peter Fulton wasn't scoring enough runs and needed to be dropped. This season the overwhelming majority of cricket talk in New Zealand has been about one man: Martin Guptill. Apparently he isn't scoring enough runs and needs to be dropped.

In either calls to Radio Sport or comments on the Vietchy On Sport facebook page there have been at least 21 players suggested as being a better option as an opener than Martin Guptill. People have suggested different ways that he might get injured in order to get him replaced in the squad.

But the opinion that Guptill's significantly out if form is not just confined to the uninformed public (I consider anyone that suggest Michael Pollard, Peter Ingram or Kyle Mills as replacements for Guptill uninformed). There have been a number of the country's sports journalists join in. In a quite well written and balanced piece, Andrew Alderson noted that Guptill "struggled for form." Charlie Bristow talked of Mike Hesson needing "to handle Martin Guptill's stuttering form." Mark Geenty commented that the top order was carrying "significance and concern." Guy Heveldt said that Guptill is "under immense pressure to find some form before the World Cup begins." Daniel Richardson said that Guptill is "out of touch", "has done little to inspire confidence" and that his "form is a concern."

David Warner vs Rohit Sharma

Over the past couple of days I've been called a troll, a Jonathan Agnew fan and even an Australia on twitter, because I have a position that is somewhat different from others on the David Warner vs Rohit Sharma incident. The problem is that a nuanced view doesn't fit neatly inside a 140 character window, and so my views have been missinterpreted. Part of that is because people seem to have very absolute views on the matter, when I don't think what happened is really very black and white.

First of all I'll talk about my system of ethics with sledging and other play, and what I consider acceptable, then I'll look at the Warner-Sharma confrontation specifically.

Sledging is an attempt to get a psychological advantage over another player. For me this is part of the game. However, there are limits to what is acceptable. Some examples of forms that are acceptable (in my opinion) are fielders encouraging the bowler in a way that the batsman can hear and that might get into a batsman's head. For example "That's 4 dot balls in a row now" "He's got no idea about the short one" "Look at how he's holding the bat with his bottom hand, I reckon his coach will have words with him about that afterwards. It's causing him to push the bottom of the bat in. I reckon a half volley outside off will see him nick out here." These comments make the batsman doubt either their technique or their form, and can cause them to play false shots.

Likewise batting advice to the batsman is acceptable, even if it's not always genuine. The below example (about 1:20 in) where Hadlee gives Botham some advice on how to play his bowling is a classic. Botham may well have been late on the shot because he was thinking about what Hadlee had said and had anticipated a different delivery.



I f the fielding side feel that the batsmen are doing something underhanded, such at taking a run when the ball was dead, they are entitled to express their displeasure to them.

The more interesting questions are what is unacceptable. Here is my list:

Threats of violence that don't involve the playing of the game. For example "I'm going to break your ribs with the next ball" is acceptable. Likewise "If those close fielders stay there, I'm going to still play my shots and they will get hurt." Both of these, however, need to be in context. A bowler/batsman shouldn't be randomly threatening violence willy-nilly, but in the heat of an exchange they are fine. "I'll see you in the car park afterwards and smash your face in," however is not acceptable.

Racial slurs are not acceptable. They are not acceptable directed at a player or spoken about a player. There's a story about some things that Shane Thompson said to Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis to try and goad them into bowling short at him (rather than yorkers) that are totally unacceptable things to have been said on a cricket pitch.

Abuse for the sake of it is unacceptable. This includes most (but not all) send-offs. There can be time for a witty send off, provided it is brief and concludes an ongoing conversation. Prolonged send-offs, especially abusive ones, are completely unacceptable.

Likewise abusing someone to get under their skin, without there being any relation to the game or without it being in the context of an ongoing conversation is not on. The way that Fleming subjected Smith to a torrent of nastiness when he arrived at the crease may have helped New Zealand tie the series, but it was not something that New Zealand fans should be proud of.

There are other difficult situations, but generally it is fine to sledge, provided it is done in a way that has a purpose, and doesn't cross the line into pure abuse.

Now lets look at the Warner-Sharma situation. Here's my summary of what happened, as far as I understood it.

1. Rohit Sharma was slightly outside his ground, as he's entitled to be.
2. David Warner threw the ball towards the stumps.
3. The ball was very wide of the mark, and (only just) missed Sharma, and then evaded Haddin.
4. Sharma and Raina then proceeded to run an overthrow.
5. Warner thought that the ball had deflected off Sharma and got angry that they ran an overthrow contrary to established protocol.
6. Warner told Sharma that he was unimpressed
7. Sharma said something to Warner in Hindi. Warner speaks a few words of Hindi and didn't understand the full message but was upset by what he did understand.
8. Warner shouted at Sharma to speak English.
9. Sharma repeated his message in English as the umpires separated the players.

The one key point here is number 2. David Warner is a fantastic fielder. He has produced a few blinding run outs from direct hits. One of the impressive things about his fielding is just how often he hits the stumps. Given his ability, the fact that he missed the stumps by about 3m from close range is peculiar. The fact that he almost hit Sharma was concerning. How off target it was can be seen by the fact that Haddin stepped twice, then dived full length, and still didn't get to the ball.

He thought that he had hit Sharma with the throw, and that, therefore, Sharma shouldn't take a run. He didn't appologise for hitting Sharma, which would normally happen. It makes me wonder if he was aiming to hit Sharma with the throw. For me that is the key thing that was wrong with that incident.

What Warner said after that was in keeping with his understanding that Sharma had taken a run he would not normally be entitled to take. Sharma speaking Hindi successfully got in the head of Warner, and I don't have a particular problem with that. Warner's reaction, likewise, was totally understandable in context. The only issue, and it's a big one, was if Warner deliberately tried to hit Sharma with the ball.

If (in the opinion of the match referee) he did, then it would be a level 2 offence and he should be banned for a couple of games. Instead Warner was charged with a level 1 offence for "using language or a gesture that is obscene, offensive or insulting." As he had been found guilty of a similar offense within the past 12 months it was automatically raised to a level 2 offense, but he received the minimum fine for that offence, of 50% of his match fee.

The thing that I don't understand is how he was found guilty of that at all. As far as I can see he didn't abuse Sharma, and he didn't use any offensive gestures that I could see. If Sharma had spoken to him in English, then asking him to "speak English" would have been offensive, but given that Sharma didn't actually speak English, it was a perfectly reasonable request (despite not being delivered in a particularly reasonable manner). In the verbal altercation, Warner and Sharma acted equally badly, but not nearly badly enough for a charge.

If the ICC Code of Conduct was applied correctly here, either Warner would have been charged with deliberately throwing the ball at Rohit Sharma or he wouldn't have been charged at all.

Comparing between eras part 2. The survey results

In the previous post I looked at some New Zealand batsmen throughout the years and compared them, by trying to take into account some of the factors that might have batting either easier or harder for them.

I did this by looking at the runs that each player scored at a particular ground, and then looking at how easy/difficult that ground was to score at during that player's career. After that I allocated each ground a modifier value, and multiplied the runs scored at each ground by that ground's modifier. As a result (for example) the 188 runs that Martin Crowe scored at the Bourda in Georgetown were worth 164.5, because (during Crowe's era) it was a batting friendly pitch. However, his 120 runs that he scored at Karachi were worth 135.1 because that ground favoured bowlers.

I wanted to try the technique across a wider range of batsmen, so I put a simple request on twitter, for people to send me their top 5 batsmen. The tweets started pouring in.

I need some crowd-sourcing help. I want a lot of top of head lists of the 5 best batsmen ever. Please reply with your 5 and then RT. Thanks!

— Michael Wagener (@Mykuhl) January 7, 2015

I received a few humerous replies such as 5 votes for Rohit Sharma, 5 votes for Graham Thorpe and my personal favourite:

@Mykuhl @TheCricketGeek Adam West Michael Keaton Del Boy Val Kilmer George Clooney

— Adrian Toomey (@adriantoomey) January 7, 2015

But eventually I had 159 serious lists of 5.

From the top 20 (plus ties) I then worked out their Normalised Averages. I left out two players, Barry Richards and WG Grace, as neither of their test careers were really the reason that people put them in the list. For both, test matches made up less than 5% of their first class career. I'll deal with them (and Charles Bannerman) in a future post.

Here's the list:

Rank	Name	Votes	Average	Norm Average
1	Don Bradman	119	99.94	101.03
2	Sachin Tendulkar	112	53.79	54.10
3	Brian Lara	108	52.89	54.41
4	Viv Richards	84	50.24	54.96
5	Ricky Ponting	55	51.85	52.50
6	Kumar Sangakkara	52	58.45	58.27
7	Gary Sobers	31	57.78	57.71
8	Rahul Dravid	28	52.31	52.73
9	Jacques Kallis	27	55.37	59.55
10	Jack Hobbs	24	56.95	63.01
11	Barry Richards	12	72.57	*
11	Wally Hammond	12	58.46	58.44
13	AB de Villiers	11	52.10	52.99
13	Steve Waugh	11	51.06	53.56
15	WG Grace	10	32.29	*
16	Graeme Pollock	9	60.97	59.91
16	Sunil Gavaskar	9	51.12	54.76
18	Herbert Sutcliffe	4	60.73	62.00
18	Dennis Compton	4	50.06	53.44
18	Martin Crowe	4	45.37	47.91
18	Adam Gilchrist	4	47.61	49.24
18	Allan Border	4	49.54	54.30

There are a couple of interesting things here. Less than 3/4 of people picked Bradman. Often they said that it was because they had never watched him bat, and that's understandable, but I would have thought his extraordinary average alone was sufficient to put him in the mix. You don't need to know much about batting averages to know that Bradman's numbers are almost unbelievable.

The tendency to only vote for batsmen that people had seen meant that players who had played since 2000 had to score at a lower average than players who had played before that. Here's a graph comparing the number of votes that a batsmen got with their normalised average:

There was also a tendency for people to nominate players who had done well against their sides. Most votes out of England included Brian Lara who hit both of hit triple centuries against England, while votes from India often included Ricky Ponting who averaged mid fifties against the Indians.

Here's the list ordered by their Normalised Average. I've added in two other older players who only got one vote each, Ken Barrington and Everton Weekes but who both had exceptional records.

Name	Average	Norm Average
Don Bradman	99.94	101.03
Ken Barrington	58.67	64.00
Jack Hobbs	56.95	63.01
Herbert Sutcliffe	60.73	62.00
Graeme Pollock	60.97	59.91
Jacques Kallis	55.37	59.55
Everton Weekes	59.46	59.39
Wally Hammond	58.46	58.44
Kumar Sangakkara	58.45	58.27
Gary Sobers	57.78	57.71
Viv Richards	50.24	54.96
Sunil Gavaskar	51.12	54.76
Brian Lara	52.89	54.41
Allan Border	49.54	54.30
Sachin Tendulkar	53.79	54.10
Steve Waugh	51.06	53.56
Dennis Compton	50.06	53.44
AB de Villiers	52.10	52.99
Rahul Dravid	52.31	52.73
Ricky Ponting	51.85	52.50
Adam Gilchrist	47.61	49.24
Martin Crowe	45.37	47.91

A couple of interesting things here are the way that players are rewarded for scoring on the harder pitches. Sutcliffe and Hobbs played together through a large part of their careers. But Hobbs was the one that scored the most runs when the conditions were the hardest for batting. As a result Hobbs' average increased by 6.06 while Sutcliffe's only increased by 1.27.

Jacques Kallis likewise scored a lot of runs at Newlands, which has been a graveyard for batsmen, and he has been rewarded for that. Kumar Sangakkara however, has scored a lot of his at the SSC, which is a place that batsmen have prospered, and so that saw his normalised average end up lower than his actual average.

I still have a number of players that I'd like to look at such as Victor Trumper, Bruce Mitchell, Zaheer Abbas and Andy Flower. But there's plenty of time for that in the next installment.

Comparing between Eras, Part 1, Crowe, Sutcliffe, Turner and Williamson.

When you write a stats piece, it's not uncommon to get criticism. It's also not unwelcome. I think my statistics have become better, and my writing has improved through interaction that I've had with readers.

Some criticism is not so welcome or useful. The person that said that he was going to "come to England and burn my house down for being a bias English" for example. This gentleman was upset that I said that Matt Prior had a better batting average than MS Dhoni.

Then there's the type that makes me think. Just after the declaration in the second test in Wellington, I tweeted a comparison of a bunch of New Zealand batsmen after 71 test innings. I received an interesting reply from someone that knows a bit about batting.

Barry Richards, the great South African batsman tweeted me back saying that Williamson was a nice kid, but couldn't be compared with Crowe.

Over the next couple of days we sent tweets back and forth discussing the concept of comparing different players from different eras.

One of the points that he made is that statistics don't take into account the context of an innings. There are times that an innings of 30 can be a match winner, while other times an innings of 70 can be meaningless. This is true, and in part there is not a lot that can be done about this. The hope is that these sort of innings end up cancelling themselves out.

Another point that he made was that the pitches, outfields and bowling were all different. How do you compare a player who has played against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe to one that hasn't? Sabina Park in the 80's was a minefield. Sabina Park now is a featherbed. How can you compare someone who played on those different pitches. To hit a six used to require the ball to be hit over the fence. Now it just needs to hit the rope, that's placed 2 m inside the speakers that are 1 m inside the advertising hoardings that are 1 m inside the boundary.

Likewise it's easier to bat against some bowlers than others. You would expect a batsman playing against Garner, Holding, Marshall and Roberts to find things more difficult than one playing against Powell, Rampaul, Sammy and Bravo.

It's impossible to account for these factors perfectly. However, there are some ways that we can deal with these differences. In order to be able to answer some of Richards' issues I decided to look at the results for some of the New Zealand batsmen at each ground. Then I looked at the results of every top order batsman at that ground throughout each player's career. I decided to normalise to having an average of 40. So a ground where the batsman averaged 32, I would multiply any run scored at that ground by 1.25.

For example during Martin Crowe's career batsmen averaged 53.86 at Bulawayo Athletic Club. This means that any runs scored at that ground would only count for 0.743 of a run. Accordingly, Crowe's 48 runs there would count as 35.6 runs. There is an advantage here for any player who played for a team with a really good bowling attack, but it's hard to account for that completely.

I decided to look at Crowe, Turner, Sutcliffe and Williamson to see how Williamson compares to some of the greats. In the last post I showed that Williamson now has a higher test average than any of the greats of NZ cricket had, and had also scored more runs, at a higher average than they had after the same number of innings.

You can click on a players name to see their stats, or skip the individual grounds by clicking on table:
Crowe
Sutcliffe
Turner
Williamson
Table

Martin Crowe:

Ground	Actual Runs	Factor	Mod. Runs
Adelaide Oval - Australia	145	0.951	137.9
AMI Stadium, Christchurch - New Zealand	389	1.352	526
Asgiriya Stadium, Kandy - Sri Lanka	34	1.433	48.7
Barabati Stadium, Cuttack - India	15	1.506	22.6
Basin Reserve, Wellington - New Zealand	1123	0.908	1019.3
Bourda, Georgetown, Guyana - West Indies	188	0.875	164.5
Brisbane Cricket Ground, Brisbane - Australia	278	1.088	302.4
Bulawayo Athletic Club - Zimbabwe	48	0.743	35.6
Carisbrook, Dunedin - New Zealand	141	1.114	157
Colombo Cricket Club Ground - Sri Lanka	72	1.202	86.5
Eden Park, Auckland - New Zealand	712	1.1	783.5
Edgbaston, Birmingham - England	36	1.126	40.5
Gaddafi Stadium, Lahore - Pakistan	216	1.065	230.1
Harare Sports Club - Zimbabwe	201	1.076	216.2
Headingley, Leeds - England	38	1.14	43.3
Iqbal Stadium, Faisalabad - Pakistan	41	1.061	43.5
Kennington Oval, London - England	46	0.948	43.6
Kensington Oval, Bridgetown, Barbados - West Indies	16	1.113	17.8
Kingsmead, Durban - South Africa	28	1.139	31.9
Lord's, London - England	327	1.006	329.1
M.Chinnaswamy Stadium, Bangalore - India	35	1.311	45.9
Melbourne Cricket Ground - Australia	161	1.139	183.4
National Stadium, Karachi - Pakistan	120	1.126	135.1
Newlands, Cape Town - South Africa	23	1.236	28.4
Niaz Stadium, Hyderabad - Pakistan	40	0.873	34.9
Old Trafford, Manchester - England	185	0.996	184.2
Queen's Park Oval, Trinidad - West Indies	5	1.411	7.1
Sabina Park, Jamaica - West Indies	7	1.138	8
Seddon Park, Hamilton - New Zealand	36	1.164	41.9
Sinhalese Sports Club Ground, Colombo - Sri Lanka	126	1.094	137.8
Sydney Cricket Ground - Australia	8	0.95	7.6
The Wanderers Stadium, Johannesburg - South Africa	83	1.319	109.5
Trent Bridge, Nottingham - England	213	1.003	213.6
Tyronne Fernando Stadium, Moratuwa - Sri Lanka	30	1.211	36.3
W.A.C.A. Ground, Perth - Australia	278	1.064	295.7

Crowe's actual average was 45.37. His modified average is 47.91

Bert Sutcliffe:

Ground	Runs	Factor	Mod. Runs
AMI Stadium, Christchurch - New Zealand	303	1.25	378.6
Bagh-e-Jinnah, Lahore - Pakistan	29	1.194	34.6
Bangabandhu National Stadium, Dhaka - Pakistan	20	1.532	30.6
Basin Reserve, Wellington - New Zealand	126	1.508	190
Brabourne Stadium, Mumbai - India	115	0.972	111.8
Carisbrook, Dunedin - New Zealand	166	2.014	334.3
Eden Gardens, Kolkata - India	187	1.119	209.2
Eden Park, Auckland - New Zealand	198	1.329	263.1
Edgbaston, Birmingham - England	57	1.085	61.9
Ellis Park, Johannesburg - South Africa	113	1.074	121.3
Feroz Shah Kotla, Delhi - India	286	0.805	230.1
Gaddafi Stadium, Lahore - Pakistan	23	0.965	22.2
Headingley, Leeds - England	120	1.09	130.8
Kennington Oval, London - England	171	1.177	201.3
Kingsmead, Durban - South Africa	36	1.279	46
Lal Bahadur Shastri Stadium, Hyderabad - India	154	0.533	82
Lord's, London - England	75	1.217	91.2
National Stadium, Karachi - Pakistan	63	1.186	74.7
Nehru Stadium, Madras - India	143	1.058	151.3
Newlands, Cape Town - South Africa	66	0.931	61.5
Old Trafford, Manchester - England	179	1.097	196.4
Pindi Club Ground, Rawalpindi - Pakistan	7	2.519	17.6
St George's Park, Port Elizabeth - South Africa	90	1.316	118.5

Sutcliffe's actual average was 40.10. His modified average is 46.46

Glenn Turner:

Ground	Runs	Factor	Mod. Runs
Adelaide Oval - Australia	54	1.03	55.6
AMI Stadium, Christchurch - New Zealand	664	1.094	726.3
Bangabandhu National Stadium, Dhaka - Pakistan	136	1.197	162.7
Basin Reserve, Wellington - New Zealand	349	1.241	433.1
Bourda, Georgetown, Guyana - West Indies	259	0.768	198.9
Brabourne Stadium, Mumbai - India	29	1.106	32.1
Carisbrook, Dunedin - New Zealand	61	1.414	86.2
Eden Park, Auckland - New Zealand	381	1.137	433.1
Gaddafi Stadium, Lahore - Pakistan	9	0.939	8.5
Green Park, Kanpur - India	148	0.91	134.7
Headingley, Leeds - England	92	1.403	129.1
Kennington Oval, London - England	78	0.996	77.7
Kensington Oval, Barbados - West Indies	21	1.03	21.6
Lal Bahadur Shastri Stadium, Hyderabad - India	17	2.928	49.8
Lord's, London - England	52	1.11	57.7
MA Chidambaram Stadium, Chennai - India	42	1.309	55
Melbourne Cricket Ground - Australia	6	1.083	6.5
Niaz Stadium, Hyderabad - Pakistan	51	0.832	42.4
Queen's Park Oval, Trinidad - West Indies	148	1.116	165.2
Sabina Park, Jamaica - West Indies	244	0.864	210.8
Trent Bridge, Nottingham - England	20	1.115	22.3
Vidarbha C.A. Ground, Nagpur - India	59	1.579	93.2
Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai - India	71	1.161	82.5

Turner's actual average was 44.64. His modified average is 49.03

Kane Williamson:

Ground	runs	modifier	modified runs
Basin Reserve, Wellington - New Zealand	684	0.973	665.5
Bellerive Oval, Hobart - Australia	53	1.179	62.5
Brisbane Cricket Ground, Brisbane - Australia	19	0.907	17.2
Dubai International Cricket Stadium - U.A.E.	43	0.999	42.9
Eden Park, Auckland - New Zealand	208	1.085	225.7
Galle International Stadium - Sri Lanka	10	0.968	9.7
Hagley Oval, Christchurch - New Zealand	85	0.941	80
Headingley, Leeds - England	16	1.064	17
Kensington Oval, Barbados - West Indies	204	1.353	276
Lord's, London - England	66	1.092	72.1
M.Chinnaswamy Stadium, Bangalore - India	30	1.149	34.5
McLean Park, Napier - New Zealand	4	1.859	7.4
Newlands, Cape Town - South Africa	28	0.984	27.6
P Sara Oval, Colombo - Sri Lanka	153	1.024	156.7
Queen's Park Oval, Trinidad - West Indies	94	0.997	93.7
Queens Sports Club, Bulawayo - Zimbabwe	117	0.885	103.6
Rajiv Gandhi International Stadium, Uppal, Hyderabad - India	157	0.892	140.1
Sabina Park, Jamaica - West Indies	145	1.503	217.9
Sardar Patel (Gujarat) Stadium, Motera, Ahmedabad - India	131	0.852	111.6
Seddon Park, Hamilton - New Zealand	242	1.362	329.6
Sharjah Cricket Stadium - U.A.E.	192	0.859	165
Sheikh Zayed Stadium, Abu Dhabi - U.A.E.	26	0.818	21.3
Shere Bangla National Stadium, Mirpur, Dhaka - Bangladesh	62	0.933	57.8
Sir Vivian Richards Stadium, Antigua - West Indies	19	0.77	14.6
St George's Park, Port Elizabeth - South Africa	15	1.051	15.8
University Oval, Dunedin - New Zealand	35	0.821	28.7
Vidarbha Cricket Association Stadium, Jamtha, Nagpur - India	8	0.974	7.8
Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury Stadium, Chittagong - Bangladesh	188	0.788	148.2

Williamson's average is currently 45.97. His modified average is 47.73.

Final table

Name	Average	Modified average
Sutcliffe	40.10	46.46
Turner	44.64	49.03
Crowe	45.37	47.91
Williamson	45.97	47.73

After doing this analysis it seems that Crowe and Turner are still ahead of Williamson. However, he's catching them quickly.

Once I started doing this for these batsmen, I started to wonder what would happen if we did this for all the greats. To help with that I did a quick crowd-source on twitter by asking people who they thought the 5 greatest batsmen ever were. In my next post on this topic, I'll look at how the likes of Sachin Tendulkar, Sir Donald Bradman, WG Grace, Bruce Mitchell and Sir Vivian Richards stack up, once this modification is made. Check back here to see the results of the survey and also the batsmen's numbers.

Mini-session Analysis, 2nd test, New Zealand vs Sri Lanka, Basin Reserve 2014/15

Here is the mini-session analysis for the second test between New Zealand and Sri Lanka at Basin Reserve, Wellington

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.