Statistics can be misleading and mind-numbing

Cricket is a sport that is subservient to statistics. No other sport is dissected in such a compulsive and addictive way. Every miniscule detail is captured in some form, chewed over and spat out to accentuate some comparison. Not a moment of action escapes the attention of those who revel in data as they busy themselves structuring detail to prove the worthiness of one versus another. Be it team, individual, venue or country, there is always an abundance to report, digest and evaluate.

In my opinion players should not always be slaves to such statistical scrutiny. There is a time and a place to roll out significant records but often a default model is presented that screams blandness.

For example, the advent of T20 cricket has awakened our logic in this department. In that format a brief but brilliant cameo at a critical juncture is often a game changer and worthy of accolades far greater than a player who maxed out. That concise winning performance is therefore noteworthy and warrants singular praise.

Statistics can also be misleading. Tales are often regaled of a five-wicket haul that influenced an outcome, but closer inspection may reveal that the majority of the individual successes came at the wrong end of the batting order. Runs scored against weak opposition, which in some countries may equate to nothing more than a club attack, is another case in point. These types of performances skew statistics.

We are too eager to slap some ink on paper and lay out the bare facts without telling the complete story. The simplest and starkest example of this is when commentators discuss a bowler's career wickets as an indicator of his class and ability. Forget the number of wickets achieved in total and focus on the strike rate. That is where the authentic picture is painted.

The next time a statistical graphic fills your television screen don’t just accept it as a reflection of brilliance. Analyse it, dig deeper, and decide if it is worthy.

Commentators are often bombarded with details that are intended to complement the broadcast. Some are blatantly basic whilst others are intriguing and thought provoking. Unfortunately, the latter tends to be a rarity and therefore mediocrity is sadly the standard. The quality statistics are the ones that make an impact. They are the meaningful morsels that get chins wagging. They surprise and educate all at the same time.

Such was the case post-test at Lord’s. This is when the best in the business scurry and squirrel around to inform and enlighten. One of the most educational statisticians is S Rajesh from Bangalore. He provides a treasure trove of cricketing information that never states the obvious. He indulges in exhaustive research that rewards and fulfills. Here’s a sample of his nuggets regarding the recent encounter at Lord’s:

• India at Lord’s have played 16, won 1 and lost 11. They have not lost as many matches at any other ground.
• England at Lord’s between 1984 and 1999 – played 23, won 4 and lost 11. England at Lord’s since 2000 – played 24, won 13 and lost 3.
• Of Dravid’s 33 test centuries, only two have been scored in a losing cause – against England at Lord’s in 2011 and against Zimbabwe in 1998.
• Kevin Pietersen and Matt Prior have four century stands. Each time they have gone past 16 they have added a hundred.
• Strauss versus left-arm pace in tests since December 2009: 132 runs, 12 dismissals, average 11.
• India’s record in the first tests of a series outside the subcontinent: 51 matches, 8 wins, 30 defeats and 13 draws.
• In his last four away first tests, Harbhajan has taken 6 for 614 in 159.1 overs – average per wicket is 102.3, strike rate is 159.1 and his economy is 3.9 runs per over.
• In the first test of an away series, Harbhajan has taken 30 wickets in 14 tests at an average of 60.4 and a strike rate of 108.1.
• Until 2002, no test had had four lefties as openers. Since then, it has happened a whopping 56 times.

Catch ya later…