I was just talking to one of my colleagues at IDBI Capital about the huge number of one-sided games in this world cup. However, being more empirically inclined was wondering to look at some statistics to prove the same.
Here is an excellent analysis by S.Rajesh of Cricinfo where he says:
- Firstly he defines one sided rather conservatively as "a margin of at least 50 runs, or five wickets with 30 balls to spare".
- In the 2003 and 2007 WC astounding 72% of the matches were one sided
- Removing non test playing nations the figure for 2003 is 56% but that of 2007 is still 68% ( this statistic is clearly a better one as it excludes non-test playing nations). In 1987 the % was just 28% which looks like the most hard-fought world cup.
His analysis doesn't just end with world cup though....He has done an analysis of all the matches so far and well the concerns are there for ICC:
- In 1980's the one sided % was 35, in 1990's 38 and in 200s it has moved to astonishing 49%. Almost 50% of the matches are simply a waste of time in 200s. This is an irony by itself. With so much involvement of professionalism ( batting coaches,bowling coaches, fielding coaches, trainers, etc) in the game we would expect more closely fought matches...
- He has also given a break up from 2000 onwards and in most of the years the one sided % is hovering around 50. It touches a low of 39% in 2004 and a high of 53% in 2007.
I am waiting for the country wise results analysis. Which country would be involved in most one sided wins and defeats....No guesses for the former ( should by all means by Australia) and for latter there should be a tough fight between India, WI and B'Desh.