Blogs kartikeya date how effective are left-right batting pairs_ _ cricket blogs _ espn cricinfo
-
Upload
nakul-surana -
Category
Documents
-
view
54 -
download
0
Transcript of Blogs kartikeya date how effective are left-right batting pairs_ _ cricket blogs _ espn cricinfo
2/11/2015 Blogs: Kartikeya Date: How effective are left-right batting pairs? | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo
http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/826753.html 1/5
Feeds for all blogs
THE CORDON HOME
KAMRAN ABBASI
BYC
SAMIR CHOPRA
HASSAN CHEEMA
KARTIKEYA DATE
GUEST SPOT
NICHOLAS HOGG
JON HOTTEN
RUSSELL JACKSON
MICHAEL JEH
AHMER NAQVI
ANANTHA NARAYANAN
RAF NICHOLSON
V RAMNARAYAN
STUART WARK
JONATHAN WILSON
FEBRUARY 9, 2015
Kartikeya Date
Tweet 38 | | 6 COMMENTS
In cricket, being left-handed comes with some peculiar advantages (and
disadvantages). Bowlers, on the whole, tend to be right-arm bowlers and find
it difficult to get lbws against left-handers if the ball isn't swinging. On the
other hand, this same predominance of right-arm bowlers means that lefties
invariably face a massive rough outside their off stump as a Test match
progresses.
The desire for a left-right batting combination has produced many a change in
batting orders. Commentators often argue that in ODI cricket, left-right
combinations might find it easier to score quickly, as the bowler has to keep
adjusting his line and length and bowl to different fields if the strike is rotated
regularly. This increases the chance that the bowler may bowl a bad ball. To
take a hypothetical case, should this extend to promoting JP Duminy ahead of
Faf du Plessis to join Hashim Amla at the wicket? Is there any evidence to
suggest that left-right stands are more prolific than others?
How effective are left-right battingpairs?
No Calum Chambers in the 18 for Arsenal. Just
three appearances in 2015 for him - Wenger
protecting him after a difficult spell.
Retweeted by Jonathan Wilson
Jack Pitt-Brooke
@JackPittBrooke
Expand
This has got Kranjcar 76th-minute free-kick
winner written all over it.
Jonathan Wilson
@jonawils
Expand
23m
37m
The Cordon on Twitter
Tweets from a list by ESPNcricinfo
RECENT POSTS
How effective are left-right batting pairs?
Giving the batsman the benefit of the doubt?It's in the law
In defence of the bouncer
Bowling to blame for India's poor overseasrecord
Ganguly or Dravid: who was a better ODIcaptain?
All Posts »
MOST READ MOST COMMENTED
Top bowling and batting performances in the WorldCup
Pakistanis should stop crying fixing
Amir's ban a blessing in disguise
Amir only allowed to bowl offspin
The World Cup all-star commentary line-up
How the teams stack up
2.1kLike
Australia have been the only side in the last 15 years to have had consistently dominant
left-handers in their batting order © Getty Images
Enlarge
Series Countries Live Scores Fixtures Results News Features Photos Video & Audio Blogs Statistics Archive Shop Mobile
2/11/2015 Blogs: Kartikeya Date: How effective are left-right batting pairs? | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo
http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/826753.html 2/5
I looked at all ODI partnerships since 1979 in ODI games featuring only Test
teams (excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe). I have considered the top seven
batting positions only. For most of the 1980s and early '90s, one out of four
batsmen in the top seven was a left-hander. Starting in the late '90s, this has
increased to one in three.
Except for a short period in the late '90s, there has been no significant
difference in the run-scoring abilities of left- and right-handers in ODI cricket.
From the start of 1995 to the end of 2000, 70 left-handers batted in the top
seven of an ODI innings in matches featuring only the top eight Test teams,
and averaged 33.6. In these games, 199 right-handers averaged 29.3 batting
in the top seven. You can imagine the names - Ganguly, Bevan, Kirsten,
Jayasuriya, Lara, Gilchrist, Thorpe, Knight, Twose, Fleming - every team had a
top left-hander, if not two, in those years.
Now that we have some idea of how left- and right-handers have performed
over the years, let's see if the partnership record is a variance. In other
words, if, despite the overall quality of left- and right-handers being more or
© Kartikeya Date
Enlarge
© Kartikeya Date
Enlarge
2/11/2015 Blogs: Kartikeya Date: How effective are left-right batting pairs? | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo
http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/826753.html 3/5
less equal, left-right stands are more prolific, perhaps there is something to
the idea that teams should try and play left-right combinations whenever
possible, even if it means shuffling the batting order at short notice.
First, let's look at how frequently the three types of partnerships occur - two
right-handers, two left-handers, and left-right pairs. In the 21st century, two
right-handers have been as likely to bat together in an ODI as a left-right pair.
This change from the 1980s, when right-hand pairs predominated, is
understandable given the overall increase in number of left-handers in
international teams.
Next, let's look at partnership averages. The evidence suggests that left-right
partnerships have done better than right-right partnerships only during periods
when left-handers have been better than right-handers overall (prominently so
in the late 1990s). In the 21st century, two right-handers have batted together
5984 times in for the top six wickets in an ODI and produced 35.3 runs per
stand. Two left-handers have batted together 1317 times and averaged 34.4
runs per stand. Left-right pairs have batted 6767 times and averaged 36.3. So
left-right pairs have done two runs better than two left-handers, and one run
better than two right-handers. During this time, 154 left-handers have
averaged 32.8 in ODIs, the same as the 341 right-handers have. So perhaps
there is some minor benefit to left-right pairs. If you look at median stands,
the median left-right stand in the 21st century has been worth 23 runs. The
median left-left and right-right stands have been worth 22 runs each.
© Kartikeya Date
Enlarge
2/11/2015 Blogs: Kartikeya Date: How effective are left-right batting pairs? | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo
http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/826753.html 4/5
BATTING AVERAGE AGAINST EACH BOWLING OPPONENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY
OPPONENT LEFT-LEFT LEFT-RIGHT RIGHT-RIGHT
Australia 34.47 30.09 39.26
England 38.8 38.5 36.75
India 36.66 39.61 35.77
New Zealand 33.62 37.24 36.53
Pakistan 27.82 36.7 36.8
South Africa 35.47 34.89 32.14
Sri Lanka 34.39 34.93 35.74
West Indies 36.18 40.5 39.84
Let's look at how teams have done against different opponents in the 21st
century. The record in the table below does not, in my view, provide any clear
evidence to suggest that left-right pairs have done better than right-right or
left-left pairs. If anything, it suggests that weak bowling attacks have struggled
against left-right pairs. New Zealand have not had a strong attack for much of
the decade. Their current attack is perhaps their best since the days of Shane
Bond. India have fared best when they haven't been faced with a left-hander.
Pakistan on the other hand have dominated left-left pairs.
Finally, let's look at batting teams in the 21st century. In general, teams with
strong left-handers have done well with at least one left-hander at the wicket.
Australia have been the only side to have consistently dominant left-handers in
their batting order in the last 15 years. India have had Yuvraj Singh, Gautam
Gambhir, Shikhar Dhawan, Suresh Raina, and to a lesser extent, Sourav
Ganguly.
BATTING AVERAGE BY COMBINATION
TEAM LEFT-LEFT LEFT-RIGHT RIGHT-RIGHT
Australia 41.58 40.15 41.64
England 33.19 33.3 34.36
India 31.76 40.05 39.14
New Zealand 24.96 32 31.68
Pakistan 31.64 32.73 32.55
South Africa 31.08 38.41 40.32
Sri Lanka 33.46 36.58 34.67
West Indies 35.4 32.48 28.37
The record does not suggest that there is any advantage to sending a left-
hander in to join a right-hander (or vice versa), compared to sending a right-
hander in to join a right-hander, or a left-hander to join a left-hander. Further,
it shows that bowlers should be used to bowling against left-right pairs since
such pairs are as common as right-hand pairs in contemporary international
cricket. This raises an interesting point when one is comparing bowlers from
the 1970s and early 1980s with bowlers from more recent times. The latter
have had to be just as effective against good-quality left-handers as they have
against good-quality right-handers.
Left-right pairs have no systematic advantage over other types of batting pairs
in the ODI game. If the choice is between a left-hander and right-hander, the
© Kartikeya Date
Enlarge
2/11/2015 Blogs: Kartikeya Date: How effective are left-right batting pairs? | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo
http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/826753.html 5/5
batsman in better form ought to be selected, regardless of how many other
batsmen of that type are already present in the line-up. In Test matches, the
story may perhaps be different.
Kartikeya Date writes at A Cricketing View and tweets here
Feeds: Kartikeya Date
Keywords: Selection, Stats
© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.
Latest
Login - Register to post comments -
Posted by Sigismund on (February 10, 2015, 14:00 GMT)
Another excellent set of statistics, and an analysis that was long overdue: thank you. I thinkthere is a genuine difference at lower levels of the game: bowlers are not good at adjusting, itis annoying for the captain and fielders, and it slows the game down - these things do seem toimpair the concentration and performance of the amateur player; perhaps even once insideprofessional cricket it is a hard feeling to shake. RE the first paragraph, I am firmly of the viewthat left-handed batting is cheating, because it is so much easier to score square of the wicket.Within top-flight cricket, there are many examples of left-handers who have made it withconsiderably less talent than right-handed peers who haven't, e.g. Strauss, Cook. They areusually actually right-handed people. Cook only has two attacking shots! Lara was a rareexample of a left-hander with a full range of natural strokes. I admire Michael Clarke a a rareexample of a left-handed person who bats right-handed.
Posted by contrast_swing on (February 10, 2015, 13:40 GMT)
Average is not the right descriptor for this analysis. Matches are not won by an averageperformances. What would be more interesting is the variance of the partnerships -- if L-Rpartnerships have a higher variance that would confirm the myth of L-R effectiveness --- sincewe tend to remember the success stories more than other way round.
So please provide the variance of the partnership data.
Posted by prewebhost_cheaphosting on (February 10, 2015, 10:46 GMT)
yes, its the best way to get control on bowling attack as bowler can not settle down himselfquickly
Posted by ThinkingCricket on (February 10, 2015, 9:34 GMT)
I am inclined to agree with the conclusion of this piece., but this argument is fundamentallyincomplete without SR data, given how vitally important scoring rates are in any limited oversgame. I don't think they would alter the result, but the conclusion can't be valid until that datais examined.
Posted by perl57 on (February 9, 2015, 22:40 GMT)
Generally bowlers are mostly adept at bowling to one side as they prepare themselves. This iswhere we have three greatest bowlers of all time. Akram, McGrath, and Steyn. They are likeRip Wan Winkles who can sleep thirty years and when woke up to bowl to Dave Warner or aSourav Ganguly they will channelize that line to get them out the first ball. But how many of thebowlers these days do we have who can do that? Jimmy Anderson is termed world class but heis so poor he ends up giving 90 runs in his quota of 10 sometimes. That's why right and leftbatsmen are always a profit.
Posted by ygkd on (February 9, 2015, 21:16 GMT)
My belief has always been that batting left-handed confers a massive advantage to kidsentering the system, but the further one gets the less of an advantage it becomes as thebowlers get better at counteracting it. That the same might apply for left-right partnershipswould not really surprise.
Login - Register to post comments -
SITEMAP | FEEDBACK | RSS | ABOUT US | CAREERS | PRIVACY POLICY | TERMS OF USE
© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.
2,108 people recommend this. Be the f irst of your friends.Recommend
Login
Login