Statistics never lie, according to cricket statisticians, but they are certainly capable of speaking different languages to different people according to their biases.
The popular narrative in the build-up to the World Test Championship final at Lord’s on June 11 is that South Africa’s overwhelming strength is their bowling attack.
The inference is clear; if bowling is their strength then batting must be their weakness.
The first point to make about the Proteas 12-test journey to the final is that it involved over 30 players including, lest we forget, former captain Dean Elgar whose brilliant 185 was instrumental in winning the very first of those dozen tests in December 2023 against India at SuperSport Park in Centurion.
A third-string squad was, by necessity, sent to New Zealand in February last year where the Proteas lost for the first ever to the Black Caps, leaving them with a 1-3 record from their first four tests.
Even at that stage the mathematicians had worked out that seven victories from the remaining eight tests would most likely be needed to reach the final.
Which is exactly what Temba Bavuma’s team achieved – seven in succession followed a rain-affected draw in Guyana with South Africa in obvious ascendancy.
It is easy to select a dozen individual performances which were crucial to the team reaching Lord’s but equally simple to choose one – ‘Rabaraj.’
Kagiso Rabada claimed 47 wickets in 10 matches at an average of 19.97, with a best bowling performance of 6-46. Keshav Maharaj claimed 40 wickets in just eight matches at an average of 20.57, with a best of 5-59. Those are staggering numbers which don’t lie, no matter what language you speak. But wait – there’s more.
Marco Jansen’s 29 wickets in only six matches came at a cost of just 20.82 apiece with his best of 7-13 basically winning the first test against Sri Lanka at Kingsmead/St George’s Park. That’s 116 wickets in 24 tests at comfortably under 21 runs each. To those still asking ‘how’ South Africa reached the final, that should be ample information.
In fourth and fifth place, incidentally, are veteran Dane Paterson with 21 wickets at 23.33 (best of 5-61) and Nandre Burger (another reminder of how many players have contributed) with 5-40.
David Bedingham is the leading run-scorer in the WTC cycle with 645 at a modest average of 33.92 considering a first-class average of 50+ compiled over a decade. But his contribution is over-shadowed in significance by captain Temba Bavuma’s 609 runs in seven matches averaging 60.90, including two centuries and four fifties.
Aiden Markram’s 572 WTC runs from 18 innings averaged 33.64 but the stability the 30-year-old provides at the top of the order is crucial to the balance of the team. Sometimes an opener’s innings is more important measured in balls faced than runs scored.
Tristan Stubbs was the fourth batsman to reach 500 runs having been parachuted into the No 3 spot for the second test against India at Newlands – the shortest ever! His 500 runs from 16 innings also came at an average of 33.33 but two centuries and a 50 in a player’s first 10 test appearances says far more than ‘total’ or ‘average.’
Kyle Verreynne has been cast into the ‘traditional’ wicketkeeper’s role batting at No 6 or seven and it is to his great credit that he has embraced it. He is, after all, a ‘proper’ middle-order player at domestic level with a first-class average of over 50 in almost 100 games. His 488 runs at an average of 37.53 during the WTC cycle make him the best test No 7 in the world. Don’t they?
Tony de Zorzi’s brilliant innings of 177 against Bangladesh in Chittagong helped lay the platform for a critical victory by an innings and 273 runs. Although he seems unlikely to make the final XI at Lord’s, his 486 runs played an important role on the road to Lord’s – as did Ryan Rickelton’s 451 at an average of 56.37 on the back of his career-best 259 in his final innings against Pakistan at Newlands.
Can bat, can bowl, can field. No amount of statistics-massaging will make South Africa favourites but the numbers also suggest they may not be as much under the big dog as many people think.