A deep dive into Mark Waugh's final heroic Test performance

By Once Upon a Time on the Roar / Roar Guru

Robbed of certain victory by ongoing inclement weather throughout both of the first two tests of the 2001-02 home series against New Zealand, Australia were staring down the barrel of a very embarrassing series defeat when the lowly ranked visitors piled on 534 after getting first use of a very good batting surface in the Perth decider.

Australia struggled to avoid the follow on and only managed to finally do so off the back of a very famous 99 from lower order batsman, Shane Warne.

Despite making all of the running over the first four days, it would have been the New Zealand players and fans, rather than the Australians, sweating (profusely) throughout the final day.

Going into the final day, Australia were 2 for 69 in theoretical pursuit of an extremely unlikely 440, and the assumption would have no doubt been that they would struggle to even survive out the day for a draw. However, the Australians clearly did not see it that way. Hayden left for 57 at 130, and Mark Waugh lasted until 195, 4th out for 86 off 158 balls.

When Damien Martyn was out for 30, Adam Gilchrist joined skipper Steve Waugh, and the victory chase was still on.

With the captain playing the anchor role, and Gilly racing past 50 at nearly a run a ball, Australia got to 101 more needed with 79 balls to do it in, and 5 wickets still standing. Then came that fluky run out … but still the chase continued, only eventually being forced to put up the shutters and shut up shop when first innings top scorer, Shane Warne, was also run out, with 85 to get, 65 balls remaining, but now only three tailenders remaining to support Gilchrist.

In a Test that finished with one side only 59 runs from victory, the other a mere three wickets, every single run scored by Australia in both innings retained top value. Given that Australia were in crisis from early in their first inning until their final day counterattack, every delivery that any of the batsmen received that didn’t result in a wicket was also priceless.

Let’s see how deciding Test maestro Mark Waugh performed across both innings combined in comparison to his six batting colleagues, as well as, on this occasion, first innings saviour Shane Warne.

The most important innings for Australia in this match were Warne’s 99, Mark’s 86 and Gilchrist’s 83 not out, so this was certainly a genuine team effort, rather than a lone hand.

However, across both innings, Mark top scored with 128 runs, making a par 40 plus 2 in Australia’s first innings rear guard action, and then top scoring in the second innings as well as launching the initial assault on the final day in the quest for what would have been one of the all-time great come from behind victories.

In scoring 18.5% of Australia’s runs off the bat, he faced 17% of the deliveries bowled to the Australian batsmen across both their innings in this particular Test match. He outscored the other Australian batsmen in the match, including Warne, by an average quotient of 1.72 and absorbed more potential wicket taking deliveries than those same team mates by an average quotient of 1.76.

The full tables of Mark’s decimal fractional quotient above peers is shown in Tables A and B below.

Table A – runs across both innings

Shane Warne 1.17
Damien Martyn 1.42
Adam Gilchrist 1.54
Steve Waugh 1.71
Justin Langer 1.71
Matthew Hayden 2.25
Ricky Ponting 2.25

Table B – balls faced across both innings

Damien Martyn 1.11
Steve Waugh 1.28
Shane Warne 1.29
Justin Langer 1.32
Matthew Hayden 1.88
Adam Gilchrist 1.95
Ricky Ponting 3.46

Tables C and D below show that Mark was the only Australian batsman to score more than 30 in both innings.

Table C – Individual Highest Score in Match

Shane Warne 99
Mark Waugh 86
Adam Gilchrist 83
Justin Langer 75
Steve Waugh 67
Damien Martyn 60
Matthew Hayden 57
Ricky Ponting 31

Table D – Individual Lowest Score in Match

Mark Waugh 42
Damien Martyn 30
Ricky Ponting 26
Shane Warne 10
Steve Waugh 8
Adam Gilchrist, Matthew Hayden, Justin Langer 0

Mark Waugh’s strike rate across both innings of 59 was superior to the 55.6 that represents the flattened average strike rate of the other seven Australian batsman combined.

The three among the other seven with higher match strike rates i.e., Ponting (90.5), Gilchrist (74.1) and Warne (64.5) occupy positions 8, 8, 8 and 2; 3, 7, 3, and equal 8; and 2, 4, 1 and 4 respectively on the tables in comparison to Mark’s 1, 1, 2 and 1.

Finally, the fusing together of run scoring and scoring speed previously championed on The Roar by both Renato Carini and myself: as this is one solitary Test in isolation, it will be based on aggregate rather than average, with 50 remaining as the par strike rate for test cricket. Match fusions are shown in Table E below.

Table E – Fusion across both innings

Mark Waugh 151
Shane Warne 140.6
Adam Gilchrist 123
Ricky Ponting 103.2
Damien Martyn 82.2
Justin Langer 68.2
Steve Waugh 66.2
Matthew Hayden 56

Table F demonstrates two different hypothetical effects:

1. How Australia’s victory aspirations would have dramatically improved had any one of Steve, Martyn, Hayden or Langer faced the same number of deliveries that they did across both innings, but rather scored at the same overall match strike rate as Mark i.e., 59 and…

2. How Australia’s victory aspirations would also have genuinely improved had either of Warne or Ponting faced a mere 32 extra deliveries scoring at the same strike rate that each did across both innings combined.
Table F

Match Runs facing 32 more balls at same strike rate Victory target deficit at call of time (59 in real events) Match run scoring at Mark’s strike rate To win at Steve Waugh’s exit in runs/balls (101 off 79 in real events) To win at Warne’s exit in runs/balls (85 off 65 in real events) New Fusion (Mark 151)
Shane Warne 130 34 n/a n/a n/a 157.7
Ricky Ponting 86 n/a n/a 49 off 25 n/a 155.7
Adam Gilchrist n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 149.8
Damien Martyn n/a n/a 116 75 off 79 59 off 65 136.9
Steve Waugh n/a n/a 100 76 off 79 60 off 65 118
Justin Langer n/a n/a 97 79 off 79 63 off 65 114.5
Matthew Hayden n/a n/a 68 90 off 79 74 off 65 80

The reason another 32 deliveries are factored into either Ponting or Warne’s respective innings is because when Australia finally called off the run chase upon Warne being the 7th wicket of the innings to fall (and final one of the match as it turned out), Gilchrist protected tailender Jason Gillespie by taking 41 of the remaining 65 deliveries of the match.

Had either Ponting or Warne faced an extra 32 deliveries, then Gillespie would not have been needed to bat, and the strike with Gilchrist could have been more evenly shared along the lines of 32-33.

This being the case, Gilchrist would have been able to keep going along at the same strike rate as when Warne got run out, at which point he (Gilchrist) had scored around 60 off around 70 balls. This adjustment leaves Gilchrist with a base individual score of 87 not out off 101 balls if and when time is called with Australia still (only slightly) shy of the target.

Mark Waugh (Sean Garnsworthy/Getty Images)

Finally, if Ponting, Gilchrist and Warne had all scored exactly as they did, but Hayden, Langer, Martyn and Steve had faced the same number of deliveries they each did in Australia’s second innings, and all four had scored at the same 54.4 strike rate as Mark in his 86, Australia would have finished, mathematically, a mere eight runs short of victory. This factors in Australia having the luxury of sending in Brett Lee instead of Jason Gillespie upon Warne’s dismissal, and Lee facing the same number of deliveries that Gillespie did (24), but also scoring at that same aforementioned strike rate of 54.4. It does not factor in the very real potential for Gilchrist to sufficiently increase his strike rate with the victory finish line well and truly in sight.

If, however, those same four batsman (Hayden, Langer, Steve and Martyn) had managed Mark’s overall strike rate across both innings of 59, with all other batsman including Mark and the tailenders scoring exactly as they did, then Australia would have already won the match in a canter at pretty much precisely the point in time when Warne was run out late on that final day i.e., with approximately 11 overs to spare.

The various different scenarios centred around the previous Table F do not represent fantasy alternate histories, but are rather mathematically driven to demonstrate just how much Mark Waugh outperformed the rest of his batting peers in a vital Test match in which Australia almost made massive history. The only one in his team to come significantly close to matching him was a tailender who played the innings of his life.

While his best performances were mostly in Ashes cricket as well as against the top tiered teams from among the test match cricketing community of his time, occasionally Mark was required to produce something special against the minnows and weaker teams of his era, such as New Zealand. Here in Perth, already over the hill at 36 and a half, he massively outperformed, when it mattered most, the then current generation recently arrived at or coming to their peaks of Langer 31, Hayden 30, Martyn 30, Gilchrist 30 and Ponting 27, not to mention his equally over the hill twin (obviously of the same age as him).

In line with the previous, penultimate paragraph, against the same opposition some 20 months earlier there had been the little remembered effort of 72 not out in a team total of 214 (next best scores 46 and 17) to start the series down in the land of the long white cloud, one of four times in his test career when Mark was the batsman left stranded upon the team being properly bowled out.

In that match, the victory margin had been a mere 62 runs.

The Crowd Says:

2022-05-30T15:22:37+00:00

Micko

Guest


Thanks Bernie. Great stuff. :thumbup: :cricket:

2022-05-28T21:20:38+00:00

Choppy Zezers

Roar Rookie


Yeah well Ricky goes okay, I guess, but you'd need to do better analysis how his record stacks up against at least two Steve Smith's, one Lee, a McCluskey and, well not Dirk Wellham, how about Murray Bennett?

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T14:44:17+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Actually 3 of top 6 for odi bats cause I mistakenly thought gilly was from wa, even though in the top 10 test reckoning I didn't miss that fact.

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T14:40:02+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


No, I'm talking Greg Chappell and Ricky Ponting in both for starters.

2022-05-28T14:38:59+00:00

Choppy Zezers

Roar Rookie


He was probably a better ODI opener than test batsman for the Kiwis. Marty Guptill knows all about that

2022-05-28T14:38:07+00:00

Choppy Zezers

Roar Rookie


Hmm not sure why 2 of 10 and 4 of 6 test and odi best ever batter people arent from NSW. Did you miscalculate? Must have. Check it again.

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T14:06:14+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


You're right about Astle btw: he was not an all time great, even by New Zealand's low standards. But he was definitely more than a mere also ran. But his 222 off 153 balls was just about as meaningless as a test innings could be.

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T13:52:47+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Yeah, all four results were possible (including a tie) up until 11 overs before the end, then two of the remaining ones until 2 balls from the end. Does it make you proud that 8 of Australia’s 10 greatest test batsmen, and 2 of our 6 greatest (proper) ODI batsmen are from NSW? :stoked:

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T13:49:49+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Your first sentence may well be right.

2022-05-28T13:39:10+00:00

Choppy Zezers

Roar Rookie


It was well exciting the last day. One of those tests where all three results are in play coming into the final session. I wasn't a huge Astle fan. He was a bit too inconsistent for me. Craig McMillan too. But not Luke Ronchi who was a superstar. I'm surprised Pigeon bowled 13 overs less than Dizzy in the first innings.

2022-05-28T13:34:45+00:00

Choppy Zezers

Roar Rookie


I think Parore's century was also instrumental in getting them beyond the 500. Always a good batter person but didn't always show it. But then again, when a team makes half a thousand any hundred must be instrumental. Nah I'm giving Lou the man of the match. First test opening against that attack is well impressive. Stand you up? Nah I would never do that no matter how little I understand eekwashuns and stuff

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T10:53:52+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


I only viewed the match results in an internet cafe in Makassar, South Sulawesi, after getting back from a two week trek to the island's interior - my feelings were mixed. On the one hand, I was shocked that the kiwis had made a game of it, having been extremely lucky to be saved by rain in the first two tests, but on the other hand, completely relieved that we had comfortably drawn the game, and somewhat proud that they had obviously come damn close to winning it.

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T10:50:34+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


I haven't scrutinised the kiwi efforts, although I must say, as someone who didn't see a single ball of the test, Nathan Astle appears to have played outstandingly. Yeah, Bond was alright, Cairns solid without being brilliant (talking overall ability and career for both rather than necessarily this particular test), and my inner jury is still out as to whether Vettori or Mark should have been player of the match - in Danielsen's case, he took 6 wickets, most of them key ones, in Australia's key first innings in a match where batting was easier than bowling. I am appalled that from 7 for 281 just before stumps on Day 1, Australia allowed the kiwis to climb back off the canvas, even allowing for Astle's seemingly brilliant innings, many times more meaningful than his totally overrated fastest double ton in test history. Thanks for calling in Zesers, I thought you were going to stand me up. :crying:

2022-05-28T10:43:54+00:00

Choppy Zezers

Roar Rookie


How does Juniors innings compare to the Kiwis efforts? An attack with Bond, Cairns and Vettori ain't too shabby. Does Junior lose points for his woeful bowling effort?

2022-05-28T10:40:37+00:00

Choppy Zezers

Roar Rookie


I have and I concur with AMD. Although dad moaned incessantly about how this much vaunted team couldn't even beat NZ and they were bowling rubbish and deserved to lose. Lousy pessimistic father. I argued every team is allowed a bad test and it's only NZ and we could run down any score they set. Well I guess he was right, just don't tell Zezers Snr that. I recall it more as Lou Vincent's first test. He was a middle order bat and apparently a gun field and goes out and scores 100 and 50. NZ must have thought he would be the fix for their opening issue with Sinclair, Fleming and Astle and Cairns to follow. But he didn't cash in during his career and couldn't get the results he wanted.

2022-05-28T08:02:43+00:00

Redcap

Roar Guru


Yeah, I'd have been wary of that Australian team too.

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T07:48:05+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Another thing to realise from that match, not the theme of my article, is that New Zealand were clearly too cowardly to set Australia an even 400 in four sessions – and with good reason. All else being equal, that would have seen us require a mere 45 off the last 21 overs with Warne not needing to be run out desperately going for another run.

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T07:21:13+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


No, you've understood 99.94% of everything. Thanks for making contact.

2022-05-28T07:09:09+00:00

Redcap

Roar Guru


Evening Bernie, I read this yesterday, but my brain seized up and I went back to doing work stuff (reading and trying to make sense of correspondence to my employer from residents of retirement villages). I've now got the general gist and have located my memories of this match - they're mostly Gilchrist's innings, and sitting around with Dad speculating about whether Australia would go for it. It appeared for a few overs that Gilchrist was going for it, before circumstances conspired against him. From what I understand, your thesis is that Mark essentially laid a platform and established a sort of baseline level of performance that had others matched or come close to matching, Australia would/could have snuck home for a historically significant run chase. Or I've missed the point entirely. Anyway, good stuff.

AUTHOR

2022-05-28T03:49:28+00:00

Once Upon a Time on the Roar

Roar Guru


Have you reread like you promised Zesers? :stoked:

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar