Before I totally forgot, I just wanted to look at two of the most interesting sporting statistical stories of the last few months. Both were different but excellent examples of what stats should be used for – exploding sporting myths.<br />
<br />
The first was in <a href=”http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=8227″>Prospect magazine of February, and looked back at the career of Shane Warne</a>. Aside from the widely publicised stat about him being the highest run scorer in test cricket without a century, it made an interesting case for both Glenn McGrath and Muttiah Muralitharan being considered better bowlers. True, Warne got more test wickets (with 708, still the record), but the other two both have over 500 and are near the top in terms of strike rate and runs per wicket, which Warne is not.<br />
<br />
Does Warne have a defence? Hard to say. Against Murali, a Warne advocate could point to the fact that he travels much better, with more wickets (43), a better average, economy and strike rate, and more 5-fors in only 4 more tests away from home. Murali, in contrast, has a much better record at home in all areas of his bowling, benefiting from pitches that are prepared for him.<br />
<br />
More damningly, Murali has 137 wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, the two weakest teams in test cricket, and an average below 16. Warne has played these two only 3 times, with 17 wickets at around 25. This in effect inflates Murali’s record by about 20%, and shows that his record is not all it seems.<br />
<br />
Glenn McGrath is a harder comparison to Warne. He enjoyed opening for Australia pretty much through out his career, using the new ball for a side that generally trampled on the opposition, and had an outstanding career. Having been in the same side for most of their tests, it’s hard to see who has had the bigger impact. For what it is worth, both bowlers have suffered when the other has not been in the team, suggesting they bowled best in tandem. In the 104 tests they played together, their stats are:<br />
<pre> Warne McGrath<br />
Tests 104 104<br />
Wickets 513 488<br />
Average 24.9 21.3<br />
Win% 68% 68%</pre><br />
<br />
In the tests played without the other, the stats are less good for both:<br />
<pre> Warne McGrath<br />
Tests 41 20<br />
Wickets 195 75<br />
Average 26.8 23.3<br />
Win% 51% 65%</pre><br />
Overall, Warne is a higher wicket taker but with a poorer average. But without McGrath and with Warne, Australia’s win percentage goes from just under 70 to just over 50. Perhaps McGrath is more important after all. <br />
<br />
<b>Rugby myths</b><br />
<br />
The second was a Sunday Times piece from January 28 on Rugby that analysed data from the 2005 and 2006 Six Nations, and found some facts that completely go against the current wisdom of how to play. The most interesting were:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Possession is everything No, it isn’t. In the 2006 Six Nations, England dominated the battle for possession – indeed, in two of their five games they won 80% more than their opponents – but they ended a lowly fourth <br />
<br />
Ball retention is crucial No, wrong too. In 2005 and 2006, 83% of tries took three phases of play or fewer. The longer you kept the ball, the less likely you were to score <br />
<br />
Goalkicking wins matches It can, but no Six Nations match in 2004 or 2005 was lost by the team scoring most tries. Tries are still vital.<br />
<br />
Yellow cards spell disaster Nope. Most teams reduced to 14 hold up well. Scores made during sin-bin periods rarely turn a match from the course it was already on <br />
<br />
Some Six Nations teams are outstanding at forcing turnovers Not really. Last season every team retained between 90% and 94% of the ball they took into contact <br />
<br />
The drop goal is a means of easy points No. In recent years, fewer than one attempt in three has succeeded <br />
<br />
<i>Source: IRB Game Analysis Centre</i> </blockquote><br />
<br />
What this should mean is that coaches should teach a fundamentally different approach to playing the game. Firstly, it’s not about winning the ball, just doing the best with it when it comes your way. Secondly, if you hit the fourth phase, kick for territory – you have little chance of scoring. Thirdly, infringe all you like – the sin bin doesn’t hurt you that much. Fourthly, only drop for goal when you are in range and it’s the fourth or higher phase.<br />
<br />
Unlikely, but there you go.