IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v167y2004i4p657-667.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rating teams and analysing outcomes in one‐day and test cricket

Author

Listed:
  • P. E. Allsopp
  • Stephen R. Clarke

Abstract

Summary. Multiple linear regression techniques are applied to determine the relative batting and bowling strengths and a common home advantage for teams playing both innings of international one‐day cricket and the first innings of a test‐match. It is established that in both forms of the game Australia and South Africa were rated substantially above the other teams. It is also shown that home teams generally enjoyed a significant advantage. Using the relative batting and bowling strengths of teams, together with parameters that are associated with common home advantage, winning the toss and the establishment of a first‐innings lead, multinomial logistic regression techniques are applied to explore further how these factors critically affect outcomes of test‐matches. It is established that in test cricket a team's first‐innings batting and bowling strength, first‐innings lead, batting order and home advantage are strong predictors of a winning match outcome. Contrary to popular opinion, it is found that the team batting second in a test enjoys a significant advantage. Notably, the relative superiority of teams during the fourth innings of a test‐match, but not the third innings, is a strong predictor of a winning outcome. There is no evidence to suggest that teams generally gained a winning advantage as a result of winning the toss.

Suggested Citation

  • P. E. Allsopp & Stephen R. Clarke, 2004. "Rating teams and analysing outcomes in one‐day and test cricket," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 167(4), pages 657-667, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:167:y:2004:i:4:p:657-667
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2004.00505.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2004.00505.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2004.00505.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. S R Clarke & P Allsopp, 2001. "Fair measures of performance: the World Cup of cricket," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 52(4), pages 471-479, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. McGinn Eamon, 2013. "The effect of batting during the evening in cricket," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 141-150, June.
    2. Liam J.A. Lenten & Wayne Geerling & László Kónya, 2012. "A hedonic model of player wage determination from the Indian Premier League auction: Further evidence," Sport Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 60-71, January.
    3. Gaurav Deval & Faiz Hamid & Mayank Goel, 2021. "When to declare the third innings of a test cricket match?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 303(1), pages 81-99, August.
    4. Abhinav Sacheti & Ian Gregory-Smith & David Paton, 2016. "Managerial Decision Making Under Uncertainty," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 17(1), pages 44-63, January.
    5. P Dawson & B Morley & D Paton & D Thomas, 2009. "To bat or not to bat: An examination of match outcomes in day-night limited overs cricket," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1786-1793, December.
    6. Moffatt Joanne & Scarf Phil & Passfield Louis & McHale Ian G. & Zhang Kui, 2014. "To lead or not to lead: analysis of the sprint in track cycling," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 161-172, June.
    7. Hemanta Saikia, 2020. "Quantifying the Current Form of Cricket Teams and Predicting the Match Winner," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 45(2), pages 151-158, May.
    8. Akhtar, Sohail & Scarf, Philip, 2012. "Forecasting test cricket match outcomes in play," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 632-643.
    9. Silva, Rajitha M. & Manage, Ananda B.W. & Swartz, Tim B., 2015. "A study of the powerplay in one-day cricket," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 931-938.
    10. Stephen Easton & Sean Pinder & Steven Stern, 2018. "Documenting the functional form of dynamic risk‐taking behaviour in a real options context using sporting contests," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 58(S1), pages 159-178, November.
    11. Colin Cannonier & Bibhudutta Panda & Sudipta Sarangi, 2015. "20-Over Versus 50-Over Cricket," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 16(7), pages 760-783, October.
    12. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Jewell, Sarah & Singleton, Carl, 2024. "Can awareness reduce (and reverse) identity-driven bias in judgement? Evidence from international cricket," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    13. Asif, M. & McHale, I.G., 2019. "A generalized non-linear forecasting model for limited overs international cricket," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 634-640.
    14. Sarah Jewell & J. James Reade & Carl Singleton, 2020. "It's Just Not Cricket: The Uncontested Toss and the Gentleman's Game," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2020-10, Department of Economics, University of Reading.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. S Lessmann & M-C Sung & J E V Johnson, 2011. "Towards a methodology for measuring the true degree of efficiency in a speculative market," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(12), pages 2120-2132, December.
    2. Abhinav Sacheti & Ian Gregory-Smith & David Paton, 2016. "Managerial Decision Making Under Uncertainty," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 17(1), pages 44-63, January.
    3. Anthony J. Vine, 2016. "Using Pythagorean Expectation to Determine Luck in the KFC Big Bash League," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(3), pages 269-281, September.
    4. Sarah Jewell & J. James Reade & Carl Singleton, 2020. "It's Just Not Cricket: The Uncontested Toss and the Gentleman's Game," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2020-10, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    5. Hemanta Saikia, 2020. "Quantifying the Current Form of Cricket Teams and Predicting the Match Winner," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 45(2), pages 151-158, May.
    6. P Dawson & B Morley & D Paton & D Thomas, 2009. "To bat or not to bat: An examination of match outcomes in day-night limited overs cricket," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1786-1793, December.
    7. Asif, M. & McHale, I.G., 2019. "A generalized non-linear forecasting model for limited overs international cricket," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 634-640.
    8. F C Duckworth & A J Lewis, 2004. "A successful operational research intervention in one-day cricket," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(7), pages 749-759, July.
    9. Chris Goumas, 2013. "Modelling home advantage in sport: A new approach," International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 428-439, August.
    10. Colin Cannonier & Bibhudutta Panda & Sudipta Sarangi, 2015. "20-Over Versus 50-Over Cricket," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 16(7), pages 760-783, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:167:y:2004:i:4:p:657-667. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.