Welcome

Hello.

Welcome to the Bat and Ball Brimborion.
This is a blog about numbers (mostly).
Cricket statistics (mostly).
But they could be any numbers.
Or anything else that I may feel like rambling on about.
Whatever may interest me at the time.
Enjoy.
And, in case you are wondering:
Brimborion – n. Something useless or nonsensical. From ‘The Superior Person’s Second Book of Words’ by Peter Bowler (not the first-class cricketer).

Andrew

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Is Mark Boucher the new Jack Blackham?

As we know, Mark Boucher recently broke the world record for wicket-keeping dismissals and became the first keeper to take 400 dismissals. This invariably starts people wondering about the question of who the best wicket-keeper ever is.

I don’t plan on answering that question here, but I am going to make a suggestion as to how we can create measurements that allows us to more accurately compare keepers over time.

We do not have any reliable data on dropped catches and missed stumpings, so we cannot create a ‘fielding percentage’ similar to baseball. There are two measurements that we do have of wicket-keepers: dismissals and byes conceded. For the purposes of measurement, I am going to look at dismissals as a percentage of team dismissals and byes conceded per 100 balls kept. And, although wicket-keeping purists may not like it, we can also consider batting ability. So, with apologies to the Keith Andrews and Richie Ryalls of the world, I am going to include batting average.

Now, the role of the keeper, and with it the measurements have changed over time. A lot of this is to do with the fact that keepers used to stand up to the stumps a lot more in the past than they do today. In modern cricket keepers have a higher percentage of dismissals, lower rates of conceding byes, and are expected to score more runs than in the past. The table below shows how these numbers have changed over time:


PeriodBat Avg%Dis%Byes
1877-191416.4311.761.28
1919-193923.5614.230.93
1946-197022.4517.390.70
1971-199025.1019.380.63
1990-200729.7520.430.62


So, let us consider Mark Boucher and Jack Blackham. Blackham played in the first ever Test in 1877 and represented Australia in 35 Tests between then and 1894. Boucher has a dismissal percentage of 23.09, byes conceded rate of 0.65 and a batting average of 30.21. Blackham’s figures are 11.36, 1.38 and 15.63, respectively. Boucher’s figures are basically twice as good as Blackham in all departments.

My suggestion is that we create an era adjusted measure by dividing the keepers stat by the overall average of all other keepers who played in the years that they played and multiplying it by the current average (i.e.20.43 for dismissals, 0.62 for byes and 29.75 for batting from the table above).

This produces a very interesting result if we compare Boucher to Blackham. Boucher’s adjusted figures are 23.80 for dismissals, 0.61 for byes and 29.40 for batting. No great change as there, as he is currently playing. Blackham has 23.59 for dismissals, 0.79 for byes and 29.46. Which are remarkably similar, especially in dismissals and byes.

So, here are the tables for the leading 5 keepers in each of the adjusted measures (with a minimum of 20 Tests as wicket-keeper):

Percentage dismissals

NameAdjustedActual
GRA Langley (Aus)29.0221.92
AFA Lilley (Eng)28.5315.54
CO Browne (WI)28.1327.36
H Strudwick (Eng)27.0116.47
ATW Grout (Aus)25.0121.61



Byes conceded per 100 balls


NameAdjustedActual
H Carter (Aus)0.270.74
PR Downton (Eng)0.270.28
DJ Richardson (SA)0.340.33
WAS Oldfield (Aus)0.360.64
Khaled Mashud (Ban)0.360.40



Batting average


NameAdjustedActual
LEG Ames (Eng)63.4643.40
A Flower (Zim)56.8053.70
AC Gilchrist (Aus)49.4448.66
Imtiaz Ahmed (Pak)44.5630.45
H Carter (Aus)44.3722.97


Note that only matches where the player was the designated keeper are included. If they played as a specialist batsman this is excluded. We do not have full details for when keepers were replaced during a match, so it is assumed that the keeper kept for the whole game. This could affect the byes calculation marginally.

Note also that this does not suggest that Les Ames, for example, would average 63.46 if he were playing today. It is simply a measure compared to contemporaries, i.e. if Ames were playing today and was as far ahead of current keepers in terms of batting average as he was in his day then he would average 63.46.

Of course, we still do not have a measure for that other great skill required from modern wicket-keepers: Encouraging the bowlers. You know, the incessant “Great bowling … “ comments after each ball. Sometimes emitted mere nanoseconds before the half-volley is eased to the mid-wicket boundary. But, the TV technology whizzes may be working on this as we speak. Soon ‘Keeper-o-Meter’ will give us measurements of decibel levels, volume and quality of encouragements. And then statisticians will be able to correlate this to wickets falling.

1 comment:

Rodney Ulyate said...

Great post, Andrew. Many thanks. It's wonderful to see you spreading your statistical wings without the constrictive red tape which doubtless usually ties them down. Do keep it up.

Although I'm of the proud opinion that Bouchie has long been firmly established in the uppermost echelons of wicketkeeping greatness, I don't feel that the comparison with the unequivocal [b]Prince[/b] of Wicketkeepers is (or could ever be) a valid one.

Your attempt at adjusting 'keepers' stats according to the trends, vagaries and idiosyncrasies of their times is highly commendable, but it does Blackham, at least, very little justice. He was differently exceptional and exceptionally different even within his own time-frame. Its laws and averages only vaguely apply to him.

Was this not the man who stood up to the stumps with Spofforth hurling 'em down at the speed of a yellow bullet, the man whose all-but-byeless performance in the 1882 Ashes-kindler was described by W.G. as "perfection", the man who became the first after Pinder to dispense with the then-neigh-mandatory long-stop, the man who once made the most ludicrous of legside stumpings, only to have his adamant "H'zat?" met by the bewildered square-leg adjudicator with "Wonderful"...

Not even Boucher, in all his record-breaking splendour, is this unique in his enterprising brilliance and sheer inimitability.