A definition of minnows

[Migara]

All countries has been minnows except Aussies and Poms. But no one defines who is a minnow. It's loosely defined as new entrant to test / ODI cricket. But when sides like Pakistan considered they had large number of players with test experience in their 1st test, so may not be minnows. So it needed an objective assessment to judge on minnows.

Batting and bowling averages of each country by decade was compared to that of rest of the world (batting ability and bowling ability). Two indices were created Pessimistic index (PI), where it was assumed that deficincies of bowling or batting could not compensate each other. PI was calculated with sqaure root of the product of batting and bowling abilities. Optimistic Index (OI) was average of the two, where it was assumed that batting and bowling can cover up each ones deficiencies.

Here are the results:

[SIZE="5"]Bangladesh[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]2000s 	 	18.95	53.19	33.13	33.22	0.57	0.62	0.6	0.6[/COLOR]
								
[SIZE="5"]India	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1930s 	 	22.04	38.4	31.61	31.94	0.7	0.83	0.76	0.76
1940s 	 	24.66	46.67	36.25	34	0.68	0.73	0.7	0.7[/COLOR]
1950s 	 	26.45	35.09	27.53	27.68	0.96	0.79	0.87	0.87
1960s 	 	28.06	34.14	31.3	31.8	0.9	0.93	0.91	0.91
1970s 	 	30.05	33.4	30.9	31.64	0.97	0.95	0.96	0.96
1980s 	 	32.13	36.39	30.17	31.42	1.06	0.86	0.96	0.96
1990s 	 	33.1	33.46	29.09	31.3	1.14	0.94	1.03	1.04
2000s 	 	35.34	34.78	31.53	33.94	1.12	0.98	1.05	1.05
								
[SIZE="5"]New Zealand[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1930s 	 	23.78	46.03	31.73	31.38	0.75	0.68	0.71	0.72[/COLOR]
1940s 	 	30.11	42.11	34.56	35.01	0.87	0.83	0.85	0.85
1[COLOR="Red"]950s 	 	18.73	38	28.45	27.86	0.66	0.73	0.69	0.7[/COLOR]
1960s 	 	22.66	31.79	32.06	32.14	0.71	1.01	0.85	0.86
1970s 	 	26.05	38.95	31.34	31.22	0.83	0.8	0.82	0.82
1980s 	 	27.82	30.38	30.8	32.31	0.9	1.06	0.98	0.98
1990s 	 	27.44	36	29.73	30.98	0.92	0.86	0.89	0.89
2000s 	 	29.76	33.76	32.14	34.06	0.93	1.01	0.97	0.97
								
[SIZE="5"]Pakistan	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
1950s 	 	24.42	30.1	27.68	28.41	0.88	0.94	0.91	0.91
1960s 	 	27.41	35.72	31.13	31.86	0.88	0.89	0.89	0.89
1970s 	 	33.13	33.52	30.46	31.71	1.09	0.95	1.01	1.02
1980s 	 	33.69	30.68	29.98	32.36	1.12	1.05	1.09	1.09
1990s 	 	29.03	28.52	29.51	31.9	0.98	1.12	1.05	1.05
2000s 	 	33.3	34.79	31.81	33.96	1.05	0.98	1.01	1.01
								
[SIZE="5"]South Africa[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1880s 	 	7	22.95	18.91	19.17	0.37	0.84	0.56	0.6
1890s 	 	10.85	25.65	25.85	25.15	0.42	0.98	0.64	0.7[/COLOR]
1900s 	 	22.24	21.65	24.11	25.39	0.92	1.17	1.04	1.05
[COLOR="Red"]1910s 	 	21.16	33.14	29.43	24.02	0.72	0.72	0.72	0.72[/COLOR]
1920s 	 	26.2	34.15	33.69	33.03	0.78	0.97	0.87	0.87
1930s 	 	26.7	38.12	32.02	31.24	0.83	0.82	0.83	0.83
1940s 	 	30.64	42.97	34.92	34.3	0.88	0.8	0.84	0.84
1950s 	 	24.81	28.78	27.73	28.51	0.89	0.99	0.94	0.94
1960s 	 	31.65	30.26	30.74	32.28	1.03	1.07	1.05	1.05
1970s 	 	38.67	21.12	30.68	32.05	1.26	1.52	1.38	1.39
1980s 								
1990s 	 	31.64	27.05	29.24	32.02	1.08	1.18	1.13	1.13
2000s 	 	35.87	30.97	31.45	34.5	1.14	1.11	1.13	1.13
								
[SIZE="5"]Sri Lanka[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1980s 	 	24.22	39.53	30.89	31.75	0.78	0.8	0.79	0.79[/COLOR]
1990s 	 	28.9	35.67	29.51	31.12	0.98	0.87	0.92	0.93
2000s 	 	34.58	29.57	31.67	34.57	1.09	1.17	1.13	1.13
								
[SIZE="5"]West Indies[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1920s 	 	16.1	40.32	32.53	33.12	0.49	0.82	0.64	0.66[/COLOR]
1930s 	 	24.6	35.34	32.04	31.82	0.77	0.9	0.83	0.83
1940s 	 	42.89	31.2	33.41	35.88	1.28	1.15	1.21	1.22
1950s 	 	33.74	31.2	26.31	28.06	1.28	0.9	1.07	1.09
1960s 	 	33.66	31.81	30.37	32.16	1.11	1.01	1.06	1.06
1970s 	 	34.54	33.49	30.09	31.61	1.15	0.94	1.04	1.05
1980s 	 	33.05	25.02	30.03	33.69	1.1	1.35	1.22	1.22
1990s 	 	27.89	29.23	29.66	31.83	0.94	1.09	1.01	1.01
2000s 	 	28	38.49	32.51	33.5	0.86	0.87	0.87	0.87
								
[SIZE="5"]Zimbabwe	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
1990s 	 	24.4	36.05	29.78	33.96	0.82	0.94	0.88	0.88
[COLOR="Red"]2000s 	 	24.94	43.46	32.36	33.66	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77[/COLOR]

Looking at these values few glaring points are evident.

1. BAN, NZ (1950s) and SAF (1880-1890) have been apalling
2. Pakistan never had been a minnow side
3. ZIM and NZ are the only sides to regress with time at some point of their cricket history
4. If 0.8 is taken as the cut off (to force SL of 1980s to become a minnow) the highligted ones can be considered as minnows
5. In 1990s ZIM were NOT minnows.

Discuss

 

[andruid]

All countries has been minnows except Aussies and Poms. But no one defines who is a minnow. It's loosely defined as new entrant to test / ODI cricket. But when sides like Pakistan considered they had large number of players with test experience in their 1st test, so may not be minnows. So it needed an objective assessment to judge on minnows.

Batting and bowling averages of each country by decade was compared to that of rest of the world (batting ability and bowling ability). Two indices were created Pessimistic index (PI), where it was assumed that deficincies of bowling or batting could not compensate each other. PI was calculated with sqaure root of the product of batting and bowling abilities. Optimistic Index (OI) was average of the two, where it was assumed that batting and bowling can cover up each ones deficiencies.

Here are the results:

[SIZE="5"]Bangladesh[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]2000s 	 	18.95	53.19	33.13	33.22	0.57	0.62	0.6	0.6[/COLOR]
								
[SIZE="5"]India	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1930s 	 	22.04	38.4	31.61	31.94	0.7	0.83	0.76	0.76
1940s 	 	24.66	46.67	36.25	34	0.68	0.73	0.7	0.7[/COLOR]
1950s 	 	26.45	35.09	27.53	27.68	0.96	0.79	0.87	0.87
1960s 	 	28.06	34.14	31.3	31.8	0.9	0.93	0.91	0.91
1970s 	 	30.05	33.4	30.9	31.64	0.97	0.95	0.96	0.96
1980s 	 	32.13	36.39	30.17	31.42	1.06	0.86	0.96	0.96
1990s 	 	33.1	33.46	29.09	31.3	1.14	0.94	1.03	1.04
2000s 	 	35.34	34.78	31.53	33.94	1.12	0.98	1.05	1.05
								
[SIZE="5"]New Zealand[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1930s 	 	23.78	46.03	31.73	31.38	0.75	0.68	0.71	0.72[/COLOR]
1940s 	 	30.11	42.11	34.56	35.01	0.87	0.83	0.85	0.85
1[COLOR="Red"]950s 	 	18.73	38	28.45	27.86	0.66	0.73	0.69	0.7[/COLOR]
1960s 	 	22.66	31.79	32.06	32.14	0.71	1.01	0.85	0.86
1970s 	 	26.05	38.95	31.34	31.22	0.83	0.8	0.82	0.82
1980s 	 	27.82	30.38	30.8	32.31	0.9	1.06	0.98	0.98
1990s 	 	27.44	36	29.73	30.98	0.92	0.86	0.89	0.89
2000s 	 	29.76	33.76	32.14	34.06	0.93	1.01	0.97	0.97
								
[SIZE="5"]Pakistan	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
1950s 	 	24.42	30.1	27.68	28.41	0.88	0.94	0.91	0.91
1960s 	 	27.41	35.72	31.13	31.86	0.88	0.89	0.89	0.89
1970s 	 	33.13	33.52	30.46	31.71	1.09	0.95	1.01	1.02
1980s 	 	33.69	30.68	29.98	32.36	1.12	1.05	1.09	1.09
1990s 	 	29.03	28.52	29.51	31.9	0.98	1.12	1.05	1.05
2000s 	 	33.3	34.79	31.81	33.96	1.05	0.98	1.01	1.01
								
[SIZE="5"]South Africa[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1880s 	 	7	22.95	18.91	19.17	0.37	0.84	0.56	0.6
1890s 	 	10.85	25.65	25.85	25.15	0.42	0.98	0.64	0.7[/COLOR]
1900s 	 	22.24	21.65	24.11	25.39	0.92	1.17	1.04	1.05
[COLOR="Red"]1910s 	 	21.16	33.14	29.43	24.02	0.72	0.72	0.72	0.72[/COLOR]
1920s 	 	26.2	34.15	33.69	33.03	0.78	0.97	0.87	0.87
1930s 	 	26.7	38.12	32.02	31.24	0.83	0.82	0.83	0.83
1940s 	 	30.64	42.97	34.92	34.3	0.88	0.8	0.84	0.84
1950s 	 	24.81	28.78	27.73	28.51	0.89	0.99	0.94	0.94
1960s 	 	31.65	30.26	30.74	32.28	1.03	1.07	1.05	1.05
1970s 	 	38.67	21.12	30.68	32.05	1.26	1.52	1.38	1.39
1980s 								
1990s 	 	31.64	27.05	29.24	32.02	1.08	1.18	1.13	1.13
2000s 	 	35.87	30.97	31.45	34.5	1.14	1.11	1.13	1.13
								
[SIZE="5"]Sri Lanka[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1980s 	 	24.22	39.53	30.89	31.75	0.78	0.8	0.79	0.79[/COLOR]
1990s 	 	28.9	35.67	29.51	31.12	0.98	0.87	0.92	0.93
2000s 	 	34.58	29.57	31.67	34.57	1.09	1.17	1.13	1.13
								
[SIZE="5"]West Indies[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1920s 	 	16.1	40.32	32.53	33.12	0.49	0.82	0.64	0.66[/COLOR]
1930s 	 	24.6	35.34	32.04	31.82	0.77	0.9	0.83	0.83
1940s 	 	42.89	31.2	33.41	35.88	1.28	1.15	1.21	1.22
1950s 	 	33.74	31.2	26.31	28.06	1.28	0.9	1.07	1.09
1960s 	 	33.66	31.81	30.37	32.16	1.11	1.01	1.06	1.06
1970s 	 	34.54	33.49	30.09	31.61	1.15	0.94	1.04	1.05
1980s 	 	33.05	25.02	30.03	33.69	1.1	1.35	1.22	1.22
1990s 	 	27.89	29.23	29.66	31.83	0.94	1.09	1.01	1.01
2000s 	 	28	38.49	32.51	33.5	0.86	0.87	0.87	0.87
								
[SIZE="5"]Zimbabwe	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
1990s 	 	24.4	36.05	29.78	33.96	0.82	0.94	0.88	0.88
[COLOR="Red"]2000s 	 	24.94	43.46	32.36	33.66	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77[/COLOR]

Looking at these values few glaring points are evident.

1. BAN, NZ (1950s) and SAF (1880-1890) have been apalling
2. Pakistan never had been a minnow side
3. ZIM and NZ are the only sides to regress with time at some point of their cricket history
4. If 0.8 is taken as the cut off (to force SL of 1980s to become a minnow) the highligted ones can be considered as minnows
5. In 1990s ZIM were NOT minnows.

Discuss

Disclaimer: Zimbabwe and Bangladesh did did not have an active Fisrst Class standard Domestic Structure upon being granted Test status. (though most of Zimbabwe's initial test squads wouyld probably have played inn SA for a few year and maybe even got tests caps were it not for apartheid)

 

[subshakerz]

Pakistan, thanks to Hanif and Fazal, were extremely competitive upon entering test cricket, winning games in their first series against all opposition.

 

[The Sean]

Two things I found particularly interesting:

1. Zimbabwe's batting average in the 2000s is higher than it was in the 1990s, despite them being a lesser team.
2. Bradman only played one series against a minnow.

 

[Ikki]

You have to be more accurate when putting together batting and bowling stats. For example, minnows tend to play more games against each other. While that may reflect decent figures, in reality most of the runs/wickets were still taken against sub-standard teams.

For those reasons, I'd consider the Pakistani, Indian and New Zealand teams of the 50-60s minnows. They largely played each other IIRC and won very few against the top nations: WIndies, Australia and England. The Zimbabwe team of the 90s was certainly a minnow, but towards the end of the 90s they were doing much better and it's arguable they weren't. They won, IIRC 3 matches in the whole of the 90s and those were towards the end against Pakistan and India in 1-2 match series.

As for a definition, I think a minnow is a team that is less than the others, in part and whole, when competing, and are a step below the standard.

 

[chasingthedon]

Here is an historical picture of the ICC rating system from the first Test onwards.

Interesting points:-

- South Africa, while undoubtedly poor in the 19th century, sky-rocketed in the early 1900s thanks to good performances against England. However, these England teams were way under full-strength and South Africa's rating quickly dropped again after 1910.

- If we take the "minnow" cut-off as 60, this mainly agrees with Migara's findings and most of the other points he makes.

- All teams are bunched up during the Packer years, when the top teams lost their best players and the weaker teams were thus not as far behind.

- India were top in 1973!

- Australia have been the most successful over the Test cricket era.

 

[Richard]

I've never been a fan of the use of the term "minnow" TBH. Clearly there will always be certain teams that are stronger than others, but some new teams could easily have been, relatively speaking, stronger than some established ones at other times, but the established team won't be called a "minnow" because it's... well, established.

For me there is one barometer - a team is Test-standard, or it is not. The overwhelming majority of teams granted Test status have been Test-standard; the only exceptions are Bangladesh (who have yet to reach it), New Zealand up to 1960/61, and South Africa up to 1905/06 (and many of their games were classified Test only retrospectively anyway). Zimbabwe, due to the deteriorating political situation, went from being Test (and ODI) standard to not being, in early-2003 - to date a unique occurrance.

But there is no way India of the 1930s or Sri Lanka of the early-1980s or Zimbabwe of the 1990s were as weak, relatively speaking, as England were 1986-1989; or Australia 1984-1988/89; or West Indies in 2007.

The strength of a team is what is important, not how long it's been playing for. Once a team is Test standard, no-one has any business in my book to be saying "well if you remove ... team from the equation then..." Only with substandard teams is it sensible to do that.

 

[Goughy]

But there is no way India of the 1930s or Sri Lanka of the early-1980s or Zimbabwe of the 1990s were as weak, relatively speaking, as England were 1986-1989; or Australia 1984-1988/89; or West Indies in 2007.

Are you saying Zim in the 90s were better than England in 87?

 

[Golaxi]

why aren't england on the list? there was a time when we were happy (ecstatic) to beat ANYONE.

 

[SJS]

All countries has been minnows except Aussies and Poms. But no one defines who is a minnow. It's loosely defined as new entrant to test / ODI cricket. But when sides like Pakistan considered they had large number of players with test experience in their 1st test, so may not be minnows. So it needed an objective assessment to judge on minnows.

Batting and bowling averages of each country by decade was compared to that of rest of the world (batting ability and bowling ability). Two indices were created Pessimistic index (PI), where it was assumed that deficincies of bowling or batting could not compensate each other. PI was calculated with sqaure root of the product of batting and bowling abilities. Optimistic Index (OI) was average of the two, where it was assumed that batting and bowling can cover up each ones deficiencies.

Here are the results:

[SIZE="5"]Bangladesh[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]2000s 	 	18.95	53.19	33.13	33.22	0.57	0.62	0.6	0.6[/COLOR]
								
[SIZE="5"]India	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1930s 	 	22.04	38.4	31.61	31.94	0.7	0.83	0.76	0.76
1940s 	 	24.66	46.67	36.25	34	0.68	0.73	0.7	0.7[/COLOR]
1950s 	 	26.45	35.09	27.53	27.68	0.96	0.79	0.87	0.87
1960s 	 	28.06	34.14	31.3	31.8	0.9	0.93	0.91	0.91
1970s 	 	30.05	33.4	30.9	31.64	0.97	0.95	0.96	0.96
1980s 	 	32.13	36.39	30.17	31.42	1.06	0.86	0.96	0.96
1990s 	 	33.1	33.46	29.09	31.3	1.14	0.94	1.03	1.04
2000s 	 	35.34	34.78	31.53	33.94	1.12	0.98	1.05	1.05
								
[SIZE="5"]New Zealand[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1930s 	 	23.78	46.03	31.73	31.38	0.75	0.68	0.71	0.72[/COLOR]
1940s 	 	30.11	42.11	34.56	35.01	0.87	0.83	0.85	0.85
1[COLOR="Red"]950s 	 	18.73	38	28.45	27.86	0.66	0.73	0.69	0.7[/COLOR]
1960s 	 	22.66	31.79	32.06	32.14	0.71	1.01	0.85	0.86
1970s 	 	26.05	38.95	31.34	31.22	0.83	0.8	0.82	0.82
1980s 	 	27.82	30.38	30.8	32.31	0.9	1.06	0.98	0.98
1990s 	 	27.44	36	29.73	30.98	0.92	0.86	0.89	0.89
2000s 	 	29.76	33.76	32.14	34.06	0.93	1.01	0.97	0.97
								
[SIZE="5"]Pakistan	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
1950s 	 	24.42	30.1	27.68	28.41	0.88	0.94	0.91	0.91
1960s 	 	27.41	35.72	31.13	31.86	0.88	0.89	0.89	0.89
1970s 	 	33.13	33.52	30.46	31.71	1.09	0.95	1.01	1.02
1980s 	 	33.69	30.68	29.98	32.36	1.12	1.05	1.09	1.09
1990s 	 	29.03	28.52	29.51	31.9	0.98	1.12	1.05	1.05
2000s 	 	33.3	34.79	31.81	33.96	1.05	0.98	1.01	1.01
								
[SIZE="5"]South Africa[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1880s 	 	7	22.95	18.91	19.17	0.37	0.84	0.56	0.6
1890s 	 	10.85	25.65	25.85	25.15	0.42	0.98	0.64	0.7[/COLOR]
1900s 	 	22.24	21.65	24.11	25.39	0.92	1.17	1.04	1.05
[COLOR="Red"]1910s 	 	21.16	33.14	29.43	24.02	0.72	0.72	0.72	0.72[/COLOR]
1920s 	 	26.2	34.15	33.69	33.03	0.78	0.97	0.87	0.87
1930s 	 	26.7	38.12	32.02	31.24	0.83	0.82	0.83	0.83
1940s 	 	30.64	42.97	34.92	34.3	0.88	0.8	0.84	0.84
1950s 	 	24.81	28.78	27.73	28.51	0.89	0.99	0.94	0.94
1960s 	 	31.65	30.26	30.74	32.28	1.03	1.07	1.05	1.05
1970s 	 	38.67	21.12	30.68	32.05	1.26	1.52	1.38	1.39
1980s 								
1990s 	 	31.64	27.05	29.24	32.02	1.08	1.18	1.13	1.13
2000s 	 	35.87	30.97	31.45	34.5	1.14	1.11	1.13	1.13
								
[SIZE="5"]Sri Lanka[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1980s 	 	24.22	39.53	30.89	31.75	0.78	0.8	0.79	0.79[/COLOR]
1990s 	 	28.9	35.67	29.51	31.12	0.98	0.87	0.92	0.93
2000s 	 	34.58	29.57	31.67	34.57	1.09	1.17	1.13	1.13
								
[SIZE="5"]West Indies[/SIZE]								
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
[COLOR="Red"]1920s 	 	16.1	40.32	32.53	33.12	0.49	0.82	0.64	0.66[/COLOR]
1930s 	 	24.6	35.34	32.04	31.82	0.77	0.9	0.83	0.83
1940s 	 	42.89	31.2	33.41	35.88	1.28	1.15	1.21	1.22
1950s 	 	33.74	31.2	26.31	28.06	1.28	0.9	1.07	1.09
1960s 	 	33.66	31.81	30.37	32.16	1.11	1.01	1.06	1.06
1970s 	 	34.54	33.49	30.09	31.61	1.15	0.94	1.04	1.05
1980s 	 	33.05	25.02	30.03	33.69	1.1	1.35	1.22	1.22
1990s 	 	27.89	29.23	29.66	31.83	0.94	1.09	1.01	1.01
2000s 	 	28	38.49	32.51	33.5	0.86	0.87	0.87	0.87
								
[SIZE="5"]Zimbabwe	[/SIZE]							
Decade  	Bat Av	Bowl Av	Gbat	Gbowl	Bat Ab	Bowl Ab	PI	OI
1990s 	 	24.4	36.05	29.78	33.96	0.82	0.94	0.88	0.88
[COLOR="Red"]2000s 	 	24.94	43.46	32.36	33.66	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77[/COLOR]

Looking at these values few glaring points are evident.

1. BAN, NZ (1950s) and SAF (1880-1890) have been apalling
2. Pakistan never had been a minnow side
3. ZIM and NZ are the only sides to regress with time at some point of their cricket history
4. If 0.8 is taken as the cut off (to force SL of 1980s to become a minnow) the highligted ones can be considered as minnows
5. In 1990s ZIM were NOT minnows.

Discuss

I see no difference (as good as know of you want to nit-pick ) between PI and OI. Am I missing something here

PI	OI	Diff
0.6	0.6	0
0.76	0.76	0
0.7	0.7	0
0.87	0.87	0
0.91	0.91	0
0.96	0.96	0
0.96	0.96	0
1.03	1.04	-0.01
1.05	1.05	0
0.71	0.72	-0.01
0.85	0.85	0
0.69	0.7	-0.01
0.85	0.86	-0.01
0.82	0.82	0
0.98	0.98	0
0.89	0.89	0
0.97	0.97	0
0.91	0.91	0
0.89	0.89	0
1.01	1.02	-0.01
1.09	1.09	0
1.05	1.05	0
1.01	1.01	0
0.56	0.6	-0.04
0.64	0.7	-0.06
1.04	1.05	-0.01
0.72	0.72	0
0.87	0.87	0
0.83	0.83	0
0.84	0.84	0
0.94	0.94	0
1.05	1.05	0
1.38	1.39	-0.01
1.13	1.13	0
1.13	1.13	0
0.79	0.79	0
0.92	0.93	-0.01
1.13	1.13	0
0.64	0.66	-0.02
0.83	0.83	0
1.21	1.22	-0.01
1.07	1.09	-0.02
1.06	1.06	0
1.04	1.05	-0.01
1.22	1.22	0
1.01	1.01	0
0.87	0.87	0
0.88	0.88	0
0.77	0.77	0

 

[Migara]

I see no difference (as good as know of you want to nit-pick ) between PI and OI. Am I missing something here

PI	OI	Diff
0.6	0.6	0
0.76	0.76	0
0.7	0.7	0
0.87	0.87	0
0.91	0.91	0
0.96	0.96	0
0.96	0.96	0
1.03	1.04	-0.01
1.05	1.05	0
0.71	0.72	-0.01
0.85	0.85	0
0.69	0.7	-0.01
0.85	0.86	-0.01
0.82	0.82	0
0.98	0.98	0
0.89	0.89	0
0.97	0.97	0
0.91	0.91	0
0.89	0.89	0
1.01	1.02	-0.01
1.09	1.09	0
1.05	1.05	0
1.01	1.01	0
0.56	0.6	-0.04
0.64	0.7	-0.06
1.04	1.05	-0.01
0.72	0.72	0
0.87	0.87	0
0.83	0.83	0
0.84	0.84	0
0.94	0.94	0
1.05	1.05	0
1.38	1.39	-0.01
1.13	1.13	0
1.13	1.13	0
0.79	0.79	0
0.92	0.93	-0.01
1.13	1.13	0
0.64	0.66	-0.02
0.83	0.83	0
1.21	1.22	-0.01
1.07	1.09	-0.02
1.06	1.06	0
1.04	1.05	-0.01
1.22	1.22	0
1.01	1.01	0
0.87	0.87	0
0.88	0.88	0
0.77	0.77	0

Actually it was used to counter differences between relative strengths of batting an bowling. If batting and bowling are both 0.7, PI and OI both are 0.7.
But, instead if batting was 1.2 and bowling was 0.4, then OI will be 0.8, which will even out deficiencies. and PI will be 0.70, which caused addition of deficiencies.

(X + Y) / 2 >= sqrt(XY), when X > 0 and Y > 0

 

[Migara]

why aren't england on the list? there was a time when we were happy (ecstatic) to beat ANYONE.

classically they are not regarded as minnows. But you can run the query and see whether they have degraded down to that level at some point of time

 

[Richard]

Are you saying Zim in the 90s were better than England in 87?

I honestly don't have a clue. But if the Zimbabwe side in 1999 were inferior to that of England in 1989 I'll eat my computer.

 

[Migara]

Two things I found particularly interesting:
Zimbabwe's batting average in the 2000s is higher than it was in the 1990s, despite them being a lesser team.

But the relative ability has declined from 0.82 to 0.77

 

[Migara]

The Zimbabwe team of the 90s was certainly a minnow, but towards the end of the 90s they were doing much better and it's arguable they weren't.

I am struggling to pick which were the minnows that ZIM played in 1990s. All sides in world cricket perhaps except SL in early 90s were not minnows by any stretch of imagination.

 

[Ikki]

I am struggling to pick which were the minnows that ZIM played in 1990s. All sides in world cricket perhaps except SL in early 90s were not minnows by any stretch of imagination.

I didn't say the Zimbabwean team played minnows. They were, IMO, the only minnows during the 90s. My post, which you've chopped, was referring to Pakistan, India and New Zealand of the 50s-60s. The point was, you have to be a bit more careful comparing minnows in their batting/bowling stats, for example, because they also usually play weaker sides like themselves.

For Zimbabwe, I wouldn't consider them minnows towards the late 90s when, for example the likes of Goodwin came.

 

[Migara]

For Zimbabwe, I'd consider them minnows in all their time in Test cricket bar the late 90s until 2003 where they were clearly pretty good and no longer a rung below.

You consider them to be the best of the minnows during their minnowhood?

 

[Ikki]

You consider them to be the best of the minnows during their minnowhood?

I'd consider them the only minnows during their history until the arrival of Bangladesh. I guess Sri Lanka were pretty weak early on in the 90s too.

 

[Migara]

The problwm was how weak were SL / ZIM / PAKcompared to NZ / BAN or SAF. The above analysis shows that SL / ZIM / PAK were much stronger as minnows than NZ / BAN or SAF. And the former were quite competitive compared to latter

 

[Migara]

bump!