An evening with Statsguru

After the spectacular display this morning I have spent some quite a bit of time today on Statsguru to see where this it fits in. (If you don’t like stats you should stop reading straight away, but if you’re reading this in the first place you probably like stats.)

– Australia’s first innings lead in this match was 188, but they may still lose. There have been six previous instances of team losing after posting a first innings lead greater than 188 (throwing out Pakistan’s forfeiture at The Oval in 2006 and the bookmaker affected Test in Centurion twelve years ago). Interestingly, Australia have been involved in all six. They’ve been on the losing end three times though; in addition to Headingley 1981 and Calcutta 2001 the also lost at the SCG in 1894 after scoring 586 in the first innings. One of their victories was in South Africa though. At Kingsmead in 1950 they were bowled out for their previous lowest score in South Africa, 75, and conceded a first innings lead of 236. They bowled South Africa out for 99 in the second innings, however and successfully chased 336 to win.

– A draw seems unlikely, so one of South Africa or Australia will win with a completed innings score under 100. South Africa look the more likely victors; if so their 96 all out will be the twelfth lowest all time in a win and the third lowest since the war. The smallest ever is England’s 45 all out at the SCG in 1887 and each of the lowest four are from before 1900. The lowest post-war total in a winning cause is the same 75 all out from above, which may give Australia some hope. The second lowest is New Zealand’s 94 all out against India in 2002. Should Australia come back, their 47 all out will be the second lowest all time.

– Whilst taking five wickets on debut is not too unusual (it’s happened 89 times since the war) Vernon Philander did so with the fewest total deliveries. He bowled seven overs for his 5-15. The only other bowler to take a five-fer on debut in under ten overs is Graham Onions, who took 5-38 in 9.3 overs at Lord’s in 2009.

– Shane Watson’s 5-17 in five overs is the fourth fastest five-fer of all time. The fastest is Ernie Toshack’s 5-2 in just 19 deliveries (2.3 eight ball overs) against India at Brisbane in 1947.

– If Watson’s performance is on the losing side in this Test, he will at least have an understanding captain. Clarke took 6-9 in 6.2 overs in Mumbai in 2004, a Test that Australia lost by 13 runs. That currently stands as the shortest losing five-fer and is level with compatriot Tim May’s 5-9 as the fewest runs conceded in a losing five-fer.

Two is not enough

Today we saw another example of how incredible Test cricket is. There has been a bit of hand-wringing in recent times about bat starting to dominate ball to an unreasonable extent. It isn’t all founded, but it is true that there has been an increasing sentiment that a ‘good’ pitch is a road on which both sides can score 500 in the first innings. Today blew that out of the water. Today we saw the ball finally make a comeback. Twenty-three wickets fell, nineteen of them in the space of about three hours after lunch. It was, as I mentioned earlier, the most incredible day of cricket I have seen.

We have already seen some spectacular tests this year when the bowlers were on top of the batsmen. Sri Lanka collapsed so spectacularly in Cardiff, England collapsed at Lord’s to set up a close finish, India collapsed to Stuart Broad at Trent Bridge to set up an English victory that had looked impossible, India collapsed to the West Indies earlier this week before the West Indies returned the favour and set up a thrilling finish to the test. This one will trump them all. Hopefully groundsmen and administrators are finally learning that a good pitch has something in it for batsmen and bowlers.

Today was also yet another reason why Test cricket is the greatest form of the sport. In what other sport could you have the match so utterly transform not once but twice? In what other sport could a side have a historically bad performance and still have a good chance to win? South Africa are in a good position on 81-1 needing 236, but at the start of their innings 236 looked like a very daunting target. The ‘ebb and flow’ of Test matches has always been considered a benefit, today it was a tsunami. How frustrating then that what should have been a third Test was scrapped in favour of more unremarkable limited overs matches? There were a pair of good contents in that leg, but most were one sided and dull. By contrast, when have these two sides not put on a thrilling exhibition of test cricket? Already England have played five meaningless ODIs in India. Next year they will have five more against Australia instead of a fourth Test against South Africa. This after the ECB and CSA agreed that the Test series ought to be a five match ‘marquee’ series. It is maddening, and there is a petition for the ECB and CSA to see sense. (I know I’ve plugged it before, but it is all the more obvious now why it is needed.) A three match series last winter would have seen the Ashes drawn 1-1 and a two match series here will certainly not be enough to determine a proper winner. We’re finally getting decent pitches, now we’re losing the matches to play on them.

Madness

Today was easily the most incredible day’s cricket I have ever seen. I actually missed the first session (I have to sleep sometime) and woke up to find that South Africa were in a reasonable position, 49-1 in response to Australia’s 284 all out. I didn’t think that Australia would get so many, but Clarke apparently batted very well with the tail. Still, South Africa looked in a good position. Shane Watson opened the bowling after lunch and I thought the Proteas would have an easy time of it. Ten overs later, of course, it was all but over. Watson took 5-17 in just five overs. It was good bowling, pitched up and moving off the surface, but South Africa didn’t play it very well. They went after the ball and were exposed when it nipped back at the stumps. There is bounce in the wicket, but Watson was pitching it on the right length to keep it hitting the stumps. Australia’s use of the DRS was also very good, precisely as it was meant. A dire run out for the ninth wicket summed up South Africa’s failings. After being one down at lunch they were all out for 96 halfway through the session.

Australia came out to bat leading by 188 and to the everyone’s amazement were all out leading by 235. It was without question the most dramatic collapse I have ever seen. I remember the West Indies being 21-5 at Sabina Park in 2004. I remember England being 21-5 at Lord’s the next year, though I’ve tried to block that out. Never before had I seen a side 21-7, however and never before in the history of Test cricket have a side been 21-9 and the Australians at one point were. They were in real danger of breaking the record for the lowest Test score of all time, New Zealand’s 26 all out against England. They got past that mark with a streaky boundary, however, and even managed to go past their lowest ever score of 36 all out. The actually added 26 for the tenth wicket to finish 47 all out. Vernon Philander picked up a five-fer on his debut, and it was certainly deserved. He bowled very tight, much like Watson did; pitching the ball up and threatening the stumps. If it went away from the batsmen he got an edge, if it went in he got an LBW.

It’s a spicy pitch in Cape Town, but that is not solely responsible for the two collapses. Nineteen wickets fell for 94 runs between lunch and the end of the Australian innings, but in the other half of the day 200 runs were added for the loss of just four wickets. The Australians especially could not be said to have batted well. Ponting shuffled across the stumps yet again and was LBW for a duck. Hussey played a needless waft outside off immediately after tea and was caught at slip and Brad Haddin played one of the worst shots I have ever seen. He tried to cut a ball that was too close to him and was caught behind with his team on 18-5! Although Australia avoided their lowest ever Test score, it was still their lowest since the war and their fourth lowest of all time.

More than anything else the Australians were culpable for their own demise and this was demonstrated quite clearly in the final passage of play. South Africa knew they had to bat sensibly to get the 236 they had been set and went about doing so. Australia were probably still in a state of some shock about their collapse and bowled a lot more loose deliveries and South Africa put them away gladly. They finished the day on 81-1 showing that the pitch was not a minefield. They may be favourites to win now, but who’d make a prediction about this match?

Clarke and Ponting

The current and previous Aussie captains have had very contrasting days today. Michael Clarke played an incredible innings. He began the day slightly inauspiciously by losing the toss. It looked a bowl first pitch and Smith duly inserted the Aussies. (Though Clarke said that he would have liked to bat anyway.) He was into the crease much sooner than he would have liked, however, as Australia slipped to 40-3 against the bowling of Steyn and the debutant Vernon Philander. Clarke had a torrid time starting against Steyn, but he stayed in and it was only a few overs before Steyn had to come out of the attack. From there Clarke found it much easier. Morkel, Tahir and Kallis took just 1-121 between them and went at nearly five an over. By the time Steyn returned to the attack the Aussie skipper was already past 70 and well set. A further five wickets fell before bad light stopped play early with Australia struggling on 214-8 with Clarke not out and having made exactly half of those runs.

Ponting, on the other hand, made only eight. He did not play poorly, but was undone by a brilliant inswinger from Steyn. It does mean that he has not passed fifty since the meaningless second innings at Brisbane last November. Over the last twelve months he averages just 20 in seven Tests. There was a lot of speculation over his future in the side after the dismal Ashes series. He stepped down from the captaincy, but hung on to his place. He compared himself to Tendulkar at the time as he hoped to have a similar Indian summer. Before the limited overs leg of the tour Clarke suggested that Ponting was due for a renaissance and Ponting himself said two days ago that he had no plans to retire. Events may conspire against him though. There is a series against New Zealand coming up which is a good one in which to blood youngsters. If Ponting can’t put up a good score at some point in this series he may have to jump before he is pushed.

SA v Aus preview

The ridiculously short two Test series between South Africa and Australia gets underway on Saturday. Two matches is not enough to decide between two such heavyweights. Even three really isn’t enough (and there is a lovely petition to add an extra match to the England v South Africa series next summer). But it is what it is, and should be good viewing anyway. The ODI and T20 series made for a good primer, both were quite close in the end. South Africa and Australia have produced some incredibly compelling cricket over the last few years, and they are as evenly matched this year as they have ever been.

I gave an early preview a month ago, but everything is a bit clearer now that the limited overs leg is over. Australia may be rebuilding after their 1-3 Ashes defeat, but they’re going about it quite well. They played well in Sri Lanka and reasonably well in the limited overs matches. It will be only the second time that Clarke has lead the side against a major opponent, however, and the first was the innings defeat at Sydney at the start of the year. He didn’t look very creative in that match, in particular he did not look like he had any answers when England’s batsmen were well set. (He now has the ignominy of allowing England’s highest ever score in Australia.) Australia have also brought two spinners on the tour, neither of whom have played in South Africa before. (Ten points to anyone who can name Australia’s spinner last time they toured South Africa without looking it up on Cricinfo.) They may not be a lot of use, however. Cape Town, the venue for the first test, usually takes the most spin of any ground in South Africa, but the Test is being played so early in the summer that it looks like it will seam more. (Though no one is quite sure. It’s been ninety years since the last time Cape Town hosted a November Test.)

South Africa have not made very many changes to their Test side in the last several years and they’ve always played very good cricket in that time. (Though never quite good enough to top the rankings.) Nine of the XI who won by an innings and 20 runs in Jo’burg two and a half years ago are in South Africa’s squad for the first test, though there is a good chance that Paul Harris will miss out in favour of Imran Tahir. Dale Steyn is still the best bowler in the world, especially when the pitches have a bit of pace in them. The Australians (Hussey apart) had a very difficult time against England’s pacemen in the Ashes, and I think they will continue to struggle against Steyn and co. The biggest problem for South africa may be the length of time since they last played a Test match. They have not played a Test since they hosted India in January and it might take them a bit to get back into the rhythm of the longest form. They will need to adjust quickly however; they cannot afford to fall behind in a two match series. I do think that they are marginally the better side, however.

It is very difficult to accurately predict the outcome of a series between two such evenly matched teams, especially over such a short series. It wouldn’t be a proper preview if I didn’t at least try though. So my prediction: The first Test will be drawn and South Africa will win the second.

Disgrace

It was a common theme of discussion during the India v England ODI series that the grounds were uncommonly empty. (Common during the rare passages of play in which England were not collapsing, anyway.) Various reasons were mooted, such as too much exposure to cricket and the big names not playing for India. (And apparently a number of Indian ‘supporters’ only like to watch India bat.) I wasn’t too surprised then, to hear that the crowds for the first test against the West Indies were also small. The West Indies are a smaller draw than England now, and the Indian public prefer limited overs matches anyway. Still, the big guns are back for India and it’s a chance for them to recover some face after their humiliation in England so shouldn’t a lot of people show up?

Apparently not, and this account goes a long way to explaining why. No country is immune to jobsworths and bureaucracy of course, least of all England, but compare that attitude to the one displayed by those in charge of last day ticket sales at Lord’s over the summer. We saw this same sort of farce at the World Cup last year; England’s match against India was moved at the last minute without regard to the accommodations already booked by the travelling supporters, the ticket sales mayhem for the same match and the rather amusing story of Geoffrey Boycott summoning a general to prevent his sandwiches from being confiscated. (In fact, Adam Mountford’s blog from the World Cup is basically a day by day tale of incompetence.) The fact that any international ground can treat its fans in such a manner is a disgrace and must be considered as part of the reason for poor attendances.

India are almost there

The West Indies did not collapse as badly as they might have. They got to 180 and have thus set India 276 to win. It’s a fairly daunting total, but India have gone about it well so far. Sehwag hit his usual run-a-ball fifty before departing to a daft shot and Dravid and Tendulkar are both in the runs. At close they are 152-2 and things look pretty dire for the West Indies.

India need another 124 with eight wickets in hand, but if the Windies can get either Dravid or Tendulkar early on (a big ‘if’ especially for Dravid) they are still in with a shout. The only Indian batsman after Dravid who is in any kind of form is Dhoni, who made a duck in the first innings. It would take an epic collapse by India to lose this test, but it is not beyond the realm of possibility.

Minimum score?

It’s just gone lunchtime in Delhi and the West Indies are struggling with the score on 109-7 in their second innings. It’s a lead of 204, but even that is mostly down to some brilliant counterattacking from Chanderpaul. Still, they need more. At the start of the day I thought they would want about 250 to be favourites. Obviously that is well out of the question now, but they could theoretically defend a lower total than that. The pitch is slow and will take a lot of turn, and the Indian batsmen haven’t posted a good score in a Test match since scoring 364 in the first innings at Cape Town in January. Dravid is in the sort of form that he could almost chase down 200 by himself though. Obviously the Indian batsman play spin well, but they will have to keep their heads; something only Dravid did in the first innings.

All things considered, I can’t see the West Indies defending less than about 250. Certainly anything under 225 is very gettable for India. The West Indies need Chanderpaul to stay in as long as possible. For me, the magic number is 154. Once they get to that, India will have to chase 250 to win and that is never straightforward. On paper they have the batsmen to do it, but those batsmen have misfired all year. The West Indies bowlers have already performed very well to give them a vital first innings lead, but they’ll have to do so again to turn that into a victory.

Game on!

The West Indies managed to scrape past 300 this morning before sensationally bowling out India for just 209. Forget what I said about the Windies needing runs on the board to cope with India’s powerful middle order; the Indians look like they’re still in England! They were fortunate to start well. The openers put on 89, but the opening stand could have been broken long before it was; two edges fell short of the slips, one was dropped and Sehwag was bowled off a no-ball. This was evened out somewhat, as the first wicket was actually a bit unfortunate; Gambhir was run out backing up. After that wicket fell, however, the rest fell in a rush. Only Dravid (of course) resisted with the entire middle and lower order falling away cheaply.

India probably scored about what they deserved to score. Their strokeplay was as bad as it was in England four months ago. Sehwag played with his usual rashness and was fortunate to get to fifty, whilst Tendulkar, Laxman and Yuvraj Singh all flashed at wide deliveries and made just 31 between them. The Windies bowled decently and they maintained an attacking line, but India must now have some serious concerns about their batting. To fail in bowling conditions against the best attack in the world is one thing; to fail on a subcontinent pitch against a second rate attack is quite another.

As mentioned yesterday, India’s bowling looks a bit short as well. Today they opened the bowling with their two spinners! To be fair to Dhoni, it worked as they each picked up an early wicket, but what does it say about (and to) one’s seamers when neither of them can be trusted to open the bowling at a crucial period? India may yet win this match; it is doubtful that they will play so poorly when they come to bat again and they may not have too many to chase. Some in India must hope that they lose though. This is now a side with serious deficiencies and an overhaul looks increasingly needed. Very often the Indian board have used minor results to paper over the cracks in their side. If they lose to the West Indies, however, they may not be able to pretend all is well. A loss may be the best thing for India.

Last day of the series

The Pakistan v Sri Lanka series is shaping up for an exciting finish. Sri Lanka are 164-5 at stumps on the fourth day. (They ought to be six down, but a run out in the 52nd over was not given by the Third Umpire in odd circumstances.) Sri Lanka’s lead is 237 and they don’t have a lot of batting left. Sri Lanka will need at least fifty more runs to set up a declaration, but they won’t be able to score them very quickly with the tail. If Sri Lanka can set Pakistan 300 to win there should be about two sessions left and a draw would be the most likely result. Sri Lanka would probably want more than that, but they have to win the match to salvage a draw in the series. It makes for an interesting decision for Dilshan. I doubt that he will want to give Pakistan much less than 300 to chase, but anything more makes it very, very hard to force a victory. Sri Lanka may be able to get away with a more aggressive declaration since Pakistan have little to gain by chasing victory. An overnight declaration would be a statement of intent and make probably ensure some sort of positive result, albeit most likely a Pakistan victory. I would like to see Dilshan take that risk, since Sri Lanka have little to gain from a draw, but I don’t think that’s likely. Unfortunately I think Dilshan will probably bat deep and take the 0-1 defeat.