With the COVID-19 enforced break nearly over, the return of test cricket is imminent and as such, it seemed like the perfect like to look back on the previous year of test cricket and refresh our memories of how it all went. We'll be doing this through the lens of our regression-based team and player ranking systems in order to identify the key players, and perhaps spot any under-the-radar trends that might have gone unnoticed by the wider cricketing community.
For this analysis, we're looking at all test matches played between 1st April 2019 and 31st March 2020 - which matches the time period the ICC use to award the Test Championship mace. This comprises a total of 36 tests, the first of which was England's somewhat nervy victory over Ireland at Lord's, with the most recent being New Zealand's defeat of India at Christchurch.
We hope you find this an interesting read and that, at the very least, it serves as a timely reminder of the state of test cricket before it was so rudely interrupted.
TEAM PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS OVERVIEW
The following table shows the Heavy Bail rankings for 31st March 2020, including a comparison to the same date in 2019. Also included are the ICC rankings as of 31st March 2020 - for more information on Heavy Bail's ranking system as well as how it differs from the ICC's method, please click here.
India hold on to top spot after a very strong year. They played 9 tests in all, winning their first 7 in a row, sealing whitewash series victories over West Indies, South Africa and Bangladesh in the process. Their dominance was checked somewhat towards the end of the season, losing 2-0 away to New Zealand, but their strong performances over the rest of the season, and indeed the last few years, mean they hold onto the number 1 rank.
The most improved side were Australia, jumping from 4th to 2nd in the rankings. Buoyed by the return of their disgraced batsmen, Steve Smith and David Warner, they followed up a successful retention of the Ashes with five straight test match wins, including a 3-0 series whitewash of a strong New Zealand side.
England's post-Ashes winter was a little less convincing. Their two-test tour of New Zealand ended in a 1-0 defeat, and a four-match series in South Africa started with a 107 run loss. They did, however, manage to turn that around into a 3-1 series win, and leapfrog South Africa in the rankings in the process.
That series defeat was the final blow in a disappointing year for South Africa. They mustered just that one victory from seven tests in total, dropping them from 2nd to 5th in our rankings.
In terms of other results, we saw Pakistan overcome Sri Lanka 1-0 in December, after a crushing 2nd test victory which saw all of Pakistan's top 4 hitting centuries in the 2nd innings. Zimbabwe managed to draw a test against Sri Lanka, albeit in a 1-0 series defeat, and Afghanistan lost a couple of one-off tests against Bangladesh and West Indies. None of these results were enough to cause any shift in the bottom half of the rankings.
It's worth briefly noting that the Heavy Bail ranking system excludes any team that has played fewer than 10 games in the qualification period, which is why neither Ireland or Afghanistan appear in our rankings (yet). No such criteria is used for the ICC ranking system.
INDIVIDUAL PLAYER PERFORMANCE
Now let's take a look at the individual player performances over the past year. Our player ranking system looks at every single ball bowled in the qualifying period and generates a ranking for all the players, which takes into account their overall performance and is weighted against the strength of opposition.
More information is in the link above, but, in short, it means that taking the wicket of Steve Smith is worth more than that of Jasprit Bumrah, and runs scored off Josh Hazlewood are valued more than runs scored off Joe Root. The system also allows for greater emphasis to be placed on run-scoring/prevention or wicket-taking/preservation.
Batsmen
The following table shows the top 10 batsmen according to our model, with different versions based on alternate weightings between wickets and runs. To qualify, a batsman must have either played at least 10 innings or scored at least 400 runs in the qualifying period.
Babar Azam is the clear standout here, topping the rankings no matter how we weight the model. He only played 8 innings in the qualifying period, but still managed to pile on 615 runs at an average of over 100, with a healthy strike rate to boot. Four centuries in this period underline Babar's sensational form this year, especially considering he only had one test century to his name previously. Time will tell whether this was a genuine breakout year for the Pakistani, but the signs are certainly promising.
In second place is yet another breakout star in Marnus Labuschagne. Initially coming into the Australia side as a concussion substitute for Steve Smith, Labuschagne's performance's were impressive enough that he retained his position for the rest of the Ashes, even after Smith returned to the side. He remained solid throughout the Ashes, but it was his performances in the Australian summer that catapulted him towards the top of our rankings.
He started it off with 3 consecutive centuries - 2 against Pakistan and one against New Zealand - helping his side to dominant victories. He didn't let up though, with a magnificent 215 in his latest test capping off an incredible year.
Another standout performer worth highlighting is Rohit Sharma. He only managed 6 innings in this time but the numbers speak for themselves - 556 runs, an average of 93, a strike rate of 76. The vast majority of these came in a series against South Africa, as he inspired his side to a crushing 3-0 win, and it's a shame for his side that injury prevented him from playing in New Zealand - a series that India went on to lose.
As an opening batsman, Sharma is something of an anomaly amongst the top performers in this year's analysis. The only other openers to have any significant impact on the standings are Rory Burns and Mayank Agarwal, and they feature much further down the list. Interestingly, Burns is generally rated higher by our model than Agarwal, despite having a much lower average (39.9 vs 55.6). A closer look at their respective years explains this, however. Burns largely scored his runs against New Zealand and Australia who, as we'll see below, had some of the strongest bowling to be seen last year. Agarwal, on the other hand, plundered most of his runs against the relatively weak bowling of South Africa and Bangladesh, and struggled to perform in the West Indies.
Elsewhere on the list are more of the names you'd expect to see. Steve Smith's ridiculous Ashes campaign was enough to get him in the top 5, even with a more modest return in his home summer. Virat Kohli had a good year, albeit an inconsistent one - more failures than he would have liked, but a career best 254* at home to South Africa. Ben Stokes scored three centuries, including one of the greatest innings of all time, and scored solidly throughout the year. Similarly, Rahane picked up a couple of centuries and was generally a reliable middle order contributor for India throughout the year.
Finally, it's worth mentioning BJ Watling, whose double century against England was enough to ensure he was the only wicket-keeper to make it onto our list, despite some relatively underwhelming performances in subsequent fixtures.
Bowlers
And now, we have our equivalent table for the bowlers. To qualify, a bowler must have bowled at least 110 overs in the qualifying period.
Immediately we notice more variation across the table than we saw for the batsmen. Whilst Starc and Yadav have been outstanding for their raw wicket taking ability, they have been relatively expensive, meaning that they move aside for more economical bowlers such as Neil Wagner, Jasprit Bumrah and Josh Hazelwood when we adjust the weighting parameter.
Mitchell Starc's performance is in keeping with his overall career. Similar results were found back in 2014, when our player ranking system was initially devised, and he also ranked 1st amongst bowlers in the 2019 World Cup when we weighted towards wicket taking. As such, Starc seems to have fully established himself as the world's foremost strike bowler across both multiple formats.
Just behind Starc in the raw wicket-taking column is Yadav of India. Yadav actually has a better average (15.0 vs 19.2) and strike rate (26.8 vs 37.0) than Starc in the qualifying period but Australia's tougher opposition in this time sees Starc rated higher by our model. Yadav's poor economy rate (3.36) also see him drop off further than Starc as we go across the table. This is similarly true for South Africa star Rabada, whose wicket taking brilliance is somewhat tarnished by his tendency to concede quick runs.
Whist they have both been in terrific form when it comes to taking wickets, both Yadav and Starc's all round performances have arguably been overshadowed by those of their teammates. For Australia, Pat Cummins and Josh Hazlewood feature across the table - both taking plenty of wickets, with a good economy, and against high quality opposition. For India, we have Jasprit Bumrah rating highly across the board, which is very similar to how he rated in the World Cup, and Ishant Sharma also features in the top 10.
Arguably the number one standout performer here, however, is New Zealand's Neil Wagner. His raw figures - an average of 21.6 and an economy of 2.63 - are good, but it's especially impressive considering the strength of batsman he found himself bowling to. With tests against the "big three" of England, Australia and India, the average Wagner delivery was to a batsman averaging 45. Compare this to Pat Cummins, who had a near identical average and economy as Wagner, but from deliveries to comparatively weaker batsmen - averaging just 35, and Wagner's year looks all the more impressive.
Wagner wasn't the only New Zealand bowler to impress - Tim Southee put in impressive performances against the same high quality of opposition and we even see Colin de Grandhomme come out as the top rated bowler when we place more emphasis on economy. De Grandhomme has come out very well over the course of this analysis, even appearing on the batting rankings as well. There is definitely room for further analysis on the all-rounder, especially given he also performed very well in our bowling rankings last World Cup.
Conspicuous in their absence are the England bowlers. Only Dom Bess appears anywhere in the table, and that was largely driven by his economy rather than any particular wicket taking prowess. There is no great mystery as to why England's bowlers aren't rated very highly - they simply haven't been that good. In terms of raw figures, Stuart Broad has the best average amongst the England bowlers, but only ranks 11th overall. His economy, particularly during the Ashes series, was poor, and his best performances came against a poor South Africa side, meaning he was always unlikely to find himself in our top ten.
Perhaps most concerning for England is the form of Jofra Archer. In general, our model has not been especially kind to him - see both our World Cup and Ashes reviews last year. In particular, we noted the following in our Ashes review last year:
Whilst [Archer] has no doubt been exhilarating to watch, [the model] indicates that his current averages - 25 in ODIs and 20 in Tests - may be unsustainable given the true quality of his bowling. To date he has perhaps had his figures boosted by spending more time than his colleagues bowling at weaker batsmen, and has not been especially successful (at least in raw statistical terms) at bowling at the stronger batsmen.
Since this, Archer's performances seem to have proved this theory correct. He averaged a dismal 47 over the winter, bringing his overall average up to a more modest 27, which is perhaps a regression to the mean. He has, however, suffered from a couple of injuries in this period, which potentially stem from an excessive workload, so he may have benefited more than most from the long break. We'll be watching keenly to see whether a fully fit Archer can fulfill the potential he demonstrated last summer.
Finally, the observant amongst you may have noticed a distinct lack of spin-bowling options in the bowlers table. England's Dominic Bess was the only spinner to appear anywhere at all in the top 10 and, as we've already noted, that was largely due to some very economical bowling he did in a couple of tests against South Africa. Whether this was simply a quiet year for spinners, or that it speaks to a wider decline is certainly a question that merits further discussion.
In any case, the full table actually shows that, as might be expected, Australia's Nathan Lyon was the standout spin-bowler of the 2019-20 season. In all the three columns he hovered between 11th and 13th, and as such was unlucky to miss out on a top 10 spot.
Heavy Bail's 2019-20 World XI
It's time to declare our 2019-20 World XI. These are the top performers according to the model, with additional discretion applied to ensure a balance between wicket-taking/preservation and run rate/economy. There were a few tough calls to make and as such we have included a fairly long reserves list, making up a squad of 18:
RJ Burns
RG Sharma
M Labuschagne
SPD Smith
Babar Azam
BA Stokes
BJ Watling (wk)
MA Starc
JR Hazlewood
N Wagner
JJ Bumrah
Reserves: MA Agarwal, AM Rahane, V Kohli, C de Grandhomme, UT Yadav, PJ Cummins, NM Lyon
Please stay tuned for an upcoming review of the 2019-20 ODI season, as well as a range of other cricket related analysis. Follow us on Twitter for all the latest.
Thanks for reading!