Standardised ODI Batting Performances

Cricket is almost unique in the way individual statistics are so widely accepted as a measure of performance despite its results being so team-reliant. This is a mere extension of the nature of a game which is so individual yet so collective at the same time. Results are often decided by more than the just the sum of all the parts with team balance, cohesion and variety all playing big roles, but each delivery itself is an intense individual battle between batsman and bowler before the other ten men on the field can do a thing. This individual component makes player statistics much easier to track and indeed much more representative of value than in other team sports.

In Test cricket, averages have long been accepted as the best measure of performance. Two fairly simple equations – runs scored per wicket lost and runs conceded per wicket taken – have ruled the cricket world for decades. Other statistics are commonly kept but these two averages have made and broken many selection debates and sparked many arguments. In one day cricket, the rate at which runs are scored are vital and hence strike rates and economy rates are carefully examined when evaluating a player’s value these days as well. It has even started to become more common to multiply a batsman’s average by his strike rate when looking at his one day contributions although this has yet to take over as the standard measure. Averages have been our main reference point in cricket since statistics started being kept seriously and while the comparison of scoring rates is starting to make them slightly less important, these basic formulas are still what cricket nerds across the world turn to immediately.

Whilst these measures are fine for comparing players to their contemporaries, it has long been the holy grail of cricket statisticians to compare players across eras. This has been attempted many times in Test cricket with adjustments to discount everything from helmets to uncovered pitches, but due to one day cricket’s short history, no-one has bothered delve in to possible variables across time. However, research shows that one day cricket has changed greatly in its short history with batting averages and particularly scoring rights going through the roof. Arguably, one day cricket has changed more since its inception than Test cricket has changed in the last fifty years. The following data shows the upward trend:

Only matches involving two of the top eight nations have been considered. This has been implemented to remove the anomalies caused by associate teams, Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Unfortunately, this eliminates the likes of Andy Flower and Heath Streak from the research completely, however the damage Zimbabwe across time could cause to the consistency of this data far outweighs the benefits of including such players in overall rankings. More significantly, though, is the fact that the data only considers performances in the top seven of the batting order – tailend scoring is not relevant when comparing batsmen across time and could only corrupt the data. All matches before 1979 have been grouped together due to the small number of ODIs played in the embryonic stages.

This data was used to “standardise” one day batting across time. The standardisation method involves finding the par values for different time periods (see above) and then weighting performances in those different periods to find the overall value of one’s performances. For example, averaging 20 in a period where 30 was par would be the equivalent to averaging 40 in a period where 60 was par, while averaging 30 in a period where 30 was par would be the equivalent to averaging 20 in a period where 20 was par. The same of course can be applied to the changes in strike rates across time. It could be argued that this method favours batsmen who were ahead of their time in terms of scoring rates, however these batsmen should be recognised for not only revolutionising the game to a degree but added such value to their respective teams at the time. After the standardisation had been calculated, the method involving the multiplication of strike rate and average mentioned above was used to rank every One Day International batsman in history (a qualification of 30 innings in the top seven against top eight teams was used). The following data shows the top 20; a full list can be seen at the bottom of this page.

Unsurprisingly, Viv Richards – a One Day Internation batsman before his time – leads the pack. More surprisingly is Zaheer Abbas, recognised as merely a good one day batsman in many circles, coming in second, indicating that he perhaps deserves more acclaim than he receives. Hussey sits in third having out-Bevaned Bevan with the man himself close behind. The achievements of Ponting have been put into better perspective with his modern-day feats seeing him slide behind the forgotten Neil Farbrother. Most interesting is the large difference between actual and standardised strike rates for the likes of Lamb, Turner and Chappell, really putting their strange-looking records by modern standards into much better perspective. Dhoni is probably the biggest surprise in the top twenty, finding himself ahead of recognised greats of one day batting such as Tendulkar and Lara.

This data, of course, is not the be all and end all. Standardising performances across time removes one variable, but player roles within teams, longevity, the ability the withstand pressure situations and many other factors will still live on to fuel discussions and even arguments between fans. Statisiticans will try, but you there will always be something you can’t accurately standardise and this is what makes cricket not only the great game it is, but the great debate it is as well.

Full list: