MARCH 4, 2013

Statistics

The vexed question of 'not outs' in Test cricket

Anantha Narayanan

Among batsmen with 4000-plus runs, Saeed Anwar is the only one to have an Extended Batting average greater than
his Test average ESPNcricinfo Ltd
Enlarge

Due to technical issues, Ananth has not been able to view and respond to the comments.
We are working on the issue and hope to have it resolved as soon as possible.
This article addresses the often-debated question of 'not outs' in Test cricket. 'Batting average' is an
archaic statistical measure with a glaring weakness. While other statistical measures have seen many
changes over 130 years of Test cricket, this measure with a fundamental flaw has survived unaltered.
Let's begin by understanding the flaw and then look at the methods to address it.
So what exactly is the problem? Well, it lies in the manner of handling not outs. Lara played an epic,
scoring 400 runs over 13 hours but this innings, as far as determining the batting average is
concerned, does not exist. On the other hand, his three first-ball ducks against Australia, England and
New Zealand are considered as three innings. While it is true that he was dismissed in the later three
innings, it is also a fact that he played long enough to have played four complete innings. Basically
'batting average' should not exclude such innings.
As Milind puts it quite effectively, the batting average computation violates a basic mathematical
dictum. Runs are added to the numerator and nothing to the denominator. Absolutely perfect
description of the anomaly that exists.
Let us compare the figures of two modern great batsmen.
Batsman
Team
T
I No SNo No % Runs Avge RpI
Kallis J.H
Saf 162 274 40
5 14.6 13128 56.10 47.91
Lara B.C
Win 131 232
6
2 2.6 11953 52.89 51.52
Kallis has played 31 more Tests to score additional 1150 runs but averages just over three runs more.
That is because Kallis has 40 not outs compared with Lara's four. It might be due to the way Lara
played, his batting positions or more declarations for Kallis who is a part of a stronger team and so
on. Let us see how we can address the anomaly which is somewhat unfair to the top-order batsmen.

It should be noted that this problem is more pronounced in ODI matches because of the limited
number of overs available and absence of declarations. It is also a fact that two batsmen remain not
out in most ODI innings. However ODI batting is measured by the batting average and strike-rate,
thus lowering the singular importance of batting averages.
I have selected 34 batsmen, who have scored over 2000 Test runs and averaged over 50, for this
analysis. Virender Sehwag is just hanging on by the skin of his teeth and a failure in Chennai may
very well plunge him below 50. And a reasonable Test at Centurion would push de Villiers past the 50
mark. However the data for all batsmen who have crossed 2000 runs is available for downloading and
the link is provided later. The data is current up to match 2073, the Cape Town Test which finished
just now.
Batsman

Team

Tests

Inns

No

No%

Runs

Avge

BradmanD.G

Aus

52

80

10

12.5

6996

99.94

PollockR.G

Saf

23

41

9.8

2256

60.97

HeadleyG.A

Win

22

40

10.0

2190

60.83

SutcliffeH

Eng

54

84

10.7

4555

60.73

Barrington

Eng

82

131

15

11.5

6806

58.67

EdeCWeekes

Win

48

81

6.2

4455

58.62

HammondW.R

Eng

85

140

16

11.4

7249

58.46

Sobers

Win

93

160

21

13.1

8032

57.78

HobbsJ.B

Eng

61

102

6.9

5410

56.95

WalcottC.L

Win

44

74

9.5

3798

56.69

HuttonL

Eng

79

138

15

10.9

6971

56.67

KallisJ.H

Saf

162

274

40

14.6

13128

56.10

Sangakkara

Slk

115

196

16

8.2

10045

55.81

Tendulkar

Ind

194

320

32

10.0

15645

54.32

Chappell

Aus

87

151

19

12.6

7110

53.86

NourseA.D

Saf

34

62

11.3

2960

53.82

LaraB.C

Win

131

232

2.6

11953

52.89

Miandad

Pak

124

189

21

11.1

8832

52.57

ClarkeM.J

Aus

89

148

15

10.1

6989

52.55

DravidR

Ind

164

286

32

11.2

13288

52.31

MohdYousuf

Pak

90

156

12

7.7

7530

52.29

AmlaH.M

Saf

68

118

10

8.5

5610

51.94

PontingR.T

Aus

168

287

29

10.1

13378

51.85

Chanderpaul

Win

146

249

42

16.9

10696

51.67

FlowerA

Zim

63

112

19

17.0

4794

51.55

Hussey

Aus

79

137

16

11.7

6235

51.53

Gavaskar

Ind

125

214

16

7.5

10122

51.12

WaughS.R

Aus

168

260

46

17.7

10927

51.06

YounisKhan

Pak

80

140

11

7.9

6580

51.01

HaydenM.L

Aus

103

184

14

7.6

8626

50.74

BorderA.R

Aus

156

265

44

16.6

11174

50.56

Richards

Win

121

182

12

6.6

8540

50.24

Compton

Eng

78

131

15

11.5

5807

50.06

SehwagV

Ind

102

177

3.4

8559

50.05

Most cricket followers are au fait with the above table. The one data element not shown normally is
the "Not out %". This shows the % of not outs out of the total innings played. Among this elite
collection of 34 batsmen, who account for 13% of runs scored in Test cricket, the highest % of not
outs has been achieved by Steve Waugh, the middle-order giant from Australia. He has been
unbeaten one in six innings. Andy Flower, Shivnarine Chanderpaul and Allan Border have similar
numbers. In Flower's case, it has been more a question of a top drawer batsman in a weak team
remaining unbeaten as his compatriots were dismissed.
The lowest figure has been achieved by Lara with 2.6%: that means once in 40 innings. Sehwag, with
his attacking instincts is the only other batsman who clocks in fewer than 5%.
Out of interest, let me share with the readers some facts related to not outs across the 135 years of
Test cricket. Of the 72865 innings played, there have been 9502 not outs, accounting for about 13%.
Out of these 9502, 4253 not outs - nearly half - have been at scores below 10 runs.
A simple alternative is to use the Runs per Innings (RpI) instead of the batting average. Unfortunately
it is a drastic step taking the other extreme. It affects the middle-order batsmen considerably. Many
of their low-score not outs would be considered as completed innings and players like Kallis would be
penalised. The graph below illustrates the two extreme situations - batting averages and RpI.

 Anantha Narayanan
Enlarge

We need something between Batting average and RpI. I am proposing two alternatives to fill this
space.
The first method seeks to redefine the not out innings. A dismissal is a dismissal and nothing needs to
be done about those. But let us accept that even an Icelander with scant knowledge of cricket would
accept that a 13-hour innings should not suddenly cease to exist just because of a declaration. Let us
classify not out innings as "real not out" innings and the "Completed (or fulfilled) not out" innings.
The key is to determine a cut-off point beyond which the innings is considered as completed or
fulfilled. I considered various values. A fixed figure, say, 25 or 50, would be unfair to weaker batsmen
with low averages which means the figure has to be dynamically determined. The batting average
itself is a good cut-off but a little stiff. Also we are questioning the very methodology of batting
average. So I have zeroed in on a sensible dynamic value - a cut-off point at 50% of the "Average for
dismissed innings". Here are couple of examples. Don Bradman's average for dismissed innings is
83.83 and any not out innings below 42 will be considered as a "real not out". Ken Barrington's
average for dismissed innings is 50.37 and any not out innings below 25 will be considered as a "real
not out". Any other not out innings would be considered as a fulfilled innings.
Let us examine the impact of this method. The table below lists the same 34 batsmen with their RpI
and RpFI values, ordered by RpFI.
Batsman

Team

Tests

Inns

No

FulfilNO

Runs

Avge

RpI

RpFI

Chg%

BradmanD.G

Aus

52

80

10

6996

99.94

87.45

89.69

10.3%

HeadleyG.A

Win

22

40

2190

60.83

54.75

56.15

7.7%

EdeCWeekes

Win

48

81

4455

58.62

55.00

55.69

5.0%

SutcliffeH

Eng

54

84

4555

60.73

54.23

55.55

8.5%

HobbsJ.B

Eng

61

102

5410

56.95

53.04

55.20

3.1%

PollockR.G

Saf

23

41

2256

60.97

55.02

55.02

9.8%

Barrington

Eng

82

131

15

6806

58.67

51.95

53.59

8.7%

WalcottC.L

Win

44

74

3798

56.69

51.32

53.49

5.6%

HammondW.R

Eng

85

140

16

7249

58.46

51.78

52.91

9.5%

Sangakkara

Slk

115

196

16

10045

55.81

51.25

52.05

6.7%

HuttonL

Eng

79

138

15

6971

56.67

50.51

52.02

8.2%

LaraB.C

Win

131

232

11953

52.89

51.52

51.97

1.7%

Sobers

Win

93

160

21

8032

57.78

50.20

51.49

10.9%

Tendulkar

Ind

194

320

32

15645

54.32

48.89

50.14

7.7%

Chappell

Aus

87

151

19

7110

53.86

47.09

49.72

7.7%

NourseA.D

Saf

34

62

2960

53.82

47.74

49.33

8.3%

MohdYousuf

Pak

90

156

12

7530

52.29

48.27

49.22

5.9%

SehwagV

Ind

102

177

8559

50.05

48.36

49.19

1.7%

KallisJ.H

Saf

162

274

40

13128

56.10

47.91

48.80

13.0%

HaydenM.L

Aus

103

184

14

8626

50.74

46.88

49.01

3.4%

Gavaskar

Ind

125

214

16

10122

51.12

47.30

48.20

5.7%

YounisKhan

Pak

80

140

11

6580

51.01

47.00

48.03

5.8%

ClarkeM.J

Aus

89

148

15

6989

52.55

47.22

47.87

8.9%

DravidR

Ind

164

286

32

13288

52.31

46.46

47.80

8.6%

Miandad

Pak

124

189

21

8832

52.57

46.73

47.74

9.2%

Richards

Win

121

182

12

8540

50.24

46.92

47.71

5.0%

PontingR.T

Aus

168

287

29

13378

51.85

46.61

47.61

8.2%

AmlaH.M

Saf

68

118

10

5610

51.94

47.54

47.54

8.5%

Hussey

Aus

79

137

16

6235

51.53

45.51

46.19

10.4%

Compton

Eng

78

131

15

5807

50.06

44.33

46.09

7.9%

FlowerA

Zim

63

112

19

4794

51.55

42.80

44.80

13.1%

Chanderpaul

Win

146

249

42

10696

51.67

42.96

43.66

15.5%

WaughS.R

Aus

168

260

46

10927

51.06

42.03

43.53

14.7%

BorderA.R

Aus

156

265

44

11174

50.56

42.17

42.98

15.0%

It is obvious that the RpFI figures for batsmen with a high % of not outs would be much below the
Batting average than those with low % of not outs. Bradman drops 10.3% & Kallis drops by 13.1%.
Readers can note that the four middle-order batsmen who have already been discussed earlier

possessing high % of not outs, viz., Andy Flower, Chanderpaul, Steve Waugh and Border have had
the highest drops and occupy the bottom four positions in this table. The lowest drop has been for
Lara and Sehwag, with 1.7%. In fact Sehwag, who was 34th in the batting average table moves up
to 18th here. Even the high batting average of Kallis drops to below 50.
This is a simple and easy-to-understand method. Anyone can incorporate these figures by inspecting
the not out innings of a batsman. I also have to accept that while this addresses the "not out"
problem somewhat, the fundamental weakness of having an innings represented in the numerator in
the form of runs and being ignored in the denominator exists. Albeit small innings only. At least the
400s and 365s have been taken care of.
However a more intuitive and stronger method is the one that tackles the "Runs" side of the formula
to equate every batsman on a fair basis. In this method I will "extend" the not out innings to its
natural conclusion or in other words - get the batsmen "out". Clearly this is a case of an extrapolation
combining actual runs scored with virtual ones. Does it matter? Let us venture outside the normal
realm of things and scrutinise what is in store.
The key question is "by how many runs" to extend these not out innings. When I started working on
this idea a few years back, along with Dr.Ashwin Mahesh, we picked out the Batting average. In view
of our own fundamental objection to this value we moved on to the RpI and subsequently to the
"Average for dismissed innings". This is relatively easy to handle. Just multiply the number of not out
innings by the "Average for dismissed innings", get the new total runs and divide by the total innings
to derive the Extended Batting average (EBA). This can be added on to any existing table in a jiffy.
A few years back I noticed a flaw in this approach. Sehwag is batting these days like a village team
slogger who has forgotten the basics. If, by any chance, he remains not out, however much it is
unlikely, should we add nearly 50 runs to his innings? With all due respects to the great Tendulkar, a
similar situation exists in his case too. That brings us to Michael Clarke and his purple patch. In the
last 10 innings he has averaged over 80. It would be unfair to add only 45 runs or thereabouts.
Hence I decided that, despite the risk of adding complexity, I would add the Runs per innings for the
last 10 innings played by the batsman. This is complex since this value has to be determined
dynamically for each and every not out innings played by the batsman during his career. It requires
tricky computer algorithms. Also note that I have used Runs per innings because we are considering
only 10 innings and a couple of not out innings would distort the entire process. Why 10 innings
instead of 10 Test matches? Well there have been times when a player played 3-5 Tests a year and it
would have taken a few years to play 10 Tests. That is too long a period for a recent form
connotation. In general, 10 innings is one long or two short series and would reflect the recent form
quite accurately.
Let us peruse the revised figures. The table below lists the same 34 batsmen ordered by EBAvge.
Batsman

Team

Tests

Inns

Runs

BradmanD.G

Aus

52

80

6996

SutcliffeH

Eng

54

84

PollockR.G

Saf

23

41

Avge

OutAvge

ExtRuns

EBAvge

Chg%

99.94

83.83

7759

96.99

3.0%

4555

60.73

54.64

5024

59.81

1.5%

2256

60.97

54.43

2394

58.39

4.2%

EdeCWeekes

Win

48

81

4455

58.62

54.88

4654

57.46

2.0%

HammondW.R

Eng

85

140

7249

58.46

46.19

8018

57.27

2.0%

HeadleyG.A

Win

22

40

2190

60.83

45.61

2275

56.88

6.5%

Barrington

Eng

82

131

6806

58.67

50.37

7410

56.56

3.6%

HobbsJ.B

Eng

61

102

5410

56.95

53.34

5645

55.34

2.8%

HuttonL

Eng

79

138

6971

56.67

47.89

7629

55.28

2.5%

Sangakkara

Slk

115

196

10045

55.81

47.56

10792

55.06

2.3%

Sobers

Win

93

160

8032

57.78

44.06

8768

54.80

5.2%

KallisJ.H

Saf

162

274

13128

56.10

42.23

14905

54.40

3.0%

WalcottC.L

Win

44

74

3798

56.69

51.03

4001

54.07

4.6%

Tendulkar

Ind

194

320

15645

54.32

44.56

16888

52.77

2.8%

LaraB.C

Win

131

232

11953

52.89

49.76

12220

52.67

0.4%

MohdYousuf

Pak

90

156

7530

52.29

46.19

8009

51.34

1.8%

AmlaH.M

Saf

68

118

5610

51.94

39.92

6042

51.20

1.4%

NourseA.D

Saf

34

62

2960

53.82

47.49

3167

51.08

5.1%

ClarkeM.J

Aus

89

148

6989

52.55

42.23

7559

51.07

2.8%

Chappell

Aus

87

151

7110

53.86

44.57

7706

51.03

5.3%

PontingR.T

Aus

168

287

13378

51.85

45.15

14646

51.03

1.6%

DravidR

Ind

164

286

13288

52.31

44.71

14505

50.72

3.1%

HaydenM.L

Aus

103

184

8626

50.74

47.68

9244

50.24

1.0%

SehwagV

Ind

102

177

8559

50.05

47.96

8854

50.02

0.1%

YounisKhan

Pak

80

140

6580

51.01

44.24

6966

49.76

2.5%

Miandad

Pak

124

189

8832

52.57

41.97

9310

49.26

6.3%

Chanderpaul

Win

146

249

10696

51.67

34.49

12259

49.23

4.7%

Hussey

Aus

79

137

6235

51.53

42.50

6742

49.21

4.5%

Gavaskar

Ind

125

214

10122

51.12

44.14

10523

49.17

3.8%

Compton

Eng

78

131

5807

50.06

44.40

6302

48.11

3.9%

Richards

Win

121

182

8540

50.24

44.49

8753

48.09

4.3%

WaughS.R

Aus

168

260

10927

51.06

35.47

12480

48.00

6.0%

FlowerA

Zim

63

112

4794

51.55

35.43

5337

47.65

7.6%

BorderA.R

Aus

156

265

11174

50.56

37.04

12397

46.78

7.5%

Bradman's EBA is 97% of his Batting average, a drop of 3%. Headley drops 6.5%. Sobers drops by
5%. All the middle order stalwarts have drops exceeding 6%. Sehwag has the lowest drop: only
0.1%, virtually no change. Similarly Lara drops by only 0.4%. Amongst these top batsmen not even a
single batsman has his EBA higher than his Batting average. This happens lower down the table.
Mohsin Khan has the highest increase: 1.4%. The much-maligned Graeme Hick's EBA is 1.3% higher
than his Batting average. Darren Ganga follows next with a 0.9% increase. A total of 11 batsmen
have higher EBA values. Interested readers can study the Excel sheet for details. Saeed Anwar is the
only batsman with more than 4000 runs under his belt and an EBA higher than Batting average.
This method is more elegant and intuitive with complexity of calculations being the sole deterrent.
However the concept is very good and any cricket follower can implement the fixed value concept
easily. The fixed value can be anything from a slew of values. And we can say with certainty
that every innings is represented in the numerator and denominator. We have addressed that
problem effectively.
Let us revisit the figures of Kallis and Lara.
Batsman
Team
T
I No SNo No % Runs Avge RpI RpAI ExtRuns EBA
%Avge
Kallis J.H Saf 162 274 40
5 14.6 13128 56.10 47.91 48.80 14905 54.40
97.0%
Lara B.C
Win 131 232 6
2 2.6 11953 52.89 51.52 51.97 12220 52.67
99.6%
Readers can see that Lara's average was nearly 4 fewer than Kallis. However his RpI and RpAI are
nearly 3 runs higher. Significantly, the EBA, which is more accurate and a valid measure, is only less
than 2 runs below Kallis. EBA probably reflects the central tendency most accurately.
Now for a revised graph. The two alternatives are pictorially represented occupying the space in the
middle.

Anantha Narayanan
Enlarge

This is not a theoretical exercise - Two alternatives are presented to address a genuine problem. The
Spl Not outs method is simple and easy to implement. The Extended Batting average method is more
complex and would require a computer to incorporate recent form. However using the Out Bat
average or Batting average or RpI or RpFI as the extension basis would be easier to implement. What

is needed? Well, an influential organization such as ESPNcricinfo should study the suggestions and
start implementing the revised averages: Of course along with the current measures.
To download/view the comprehensive Excel sheet containing the values for all the 264 batsmen who
have crossed 2000 Test runs, please CLICK HERE.