Skip to main content

Spinners in County Cricket Part 3

A continuation of a series of posts on spinners in county cricket, parts 1&2 can be found here and here

The statistics for this post don't include the last round of county matches, so in most cases will cover the first 12 games of the 14 game 2023 county season.  I've only looked at front line spinners, which I've defined as bowlers who have bowled at least 150 overs.  13 bowlers have have met the front rank criteria. (Dawson, De Caires, Harmer, Leach, Parkinson, Quadri, Thompson, Swepson, Hartley, Carson, Bess Gohar and Keogh).  The best average amongst the 13 is Liam Dawson at 21.81 and Simon Harmer's 54 wickets is the most taken by any spinner.  Josh De Caires (AKA Mike Atherson) is a new name with a distinctly good 26.5 average (second best amongst front line spinners.)

As a group the spinners have taken 320 wickets at an average of just over 36 runs a wicket.  That compares with an average for all bowlers of 31.7.  Wickets taken by front line spinners make up 10% of total wickets and are taken at 4.5 runs higher than the average for all wickets. 

Accordingly compared with the June post front line spinners have taken 2% more of total wickets to fall (10% compared to 8%) and have reduced the average runs per wicket by 1.7 runs a wicket. And if we look just at the data since the last post spinners have been taking wickets at an average of 34 runs a wicket.  I think this suggests (but doesn't prove) that spinners fare better in late July to early September than they do earlier in the year, that is what I would expect as pitches get drier.

The problem for spinners is that we don't play much CC cricket in July and August.  Surrey who will (almost certainly) be repeat county championship champions only play part time spinners and that might have started a trend.   

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

County Championship Salary Cap

This is post about salaries in county cricket. The first class counties are subject to a cap and a collar on amounts paid in wages to cricketers.  They must pay above a collar, currently £0.75m, and below a cap, currently £2m. There is an agreement for both the collar and the cap to increase over the next funding round to 2024. In 2024 the collar will be £1.5m and the cap £2.5m What is less clear is what payments count towards the cap and collar.  I assume employers' national insurance (a 13% tax on wages) isn't included.  Similarly I assume payments to coaching staff don't count towards the cap as if they did, Somerset, Lancashire and Yorkshire would all be over the current £2m cap.  I've gone through the accounts of the first class counties to see what, if any, disclosure, they include on players' wages.  What gets disclosed varies enormously, quite a lot for some counties, nothing for others.  Additionally there is a possibility the information include

Mo Bobat and County Cricket

Cricinfo has this  interview with ECB "Performance Director" Mo Bobat.  Bobat makes an interesting claim about county cricket, "Take something like county batting average. We know that a county batting average does not significantly predict an international batting average, so a lot of the conventional things that are looked at as being indicators of success - they don't really stand true in a predictive sense."  And later in the article there is a graph, showing county averages plotted against test averages for 13 English test batsmen.  This is reproduced below. better than random? raw data suggests no meaningful link between championship and test averages 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Test County Championship Sam Curran England players' batting averages

English County Cricket Finance: 2018 Bentley Forbes Rankings

I have gone through the most recent financial statements for the English first class counties,  made an estimate of the financial strength of each and given them a Bentley Forbes Consulting ( TM ) financial sustainability ranking.  The overall table looks like this. County      Profit Assets Ranking Position Essex   4   4   4   1 Surrey   1   7   4   1 Nottinghamshire   5   5   5   3 Somerset   2   8   5   3 Derbyshire   8   3   5   5 Leicestshire    6   6  6   6 Sussex  15   1  8   7 Middlesex  14   2  8   7 Kent     9   9  9   9 Worcestshire    3  15  9 10 Gloucestshire   7  12  9.5 11 Northamptonshire   11  13  12 12 Glamorgan   16  10  13 13 Durham     12  14  13 13 Yorkshire    10  17  13 15 Warwickshire   17  11  14 16 Lancashire   13  16  14 17        The approach is to rank the counties for profitability and balance sheet strength and combine the two measures in a sustainability ranking. The balance sheet strength is itself a combination of thre