India versus Pakistan and the power of a six: an analysis of cricket results

To paraphrase CLR James, “What do they know of
South Asia who do not cricket know?” George Orwell
described sport as war minus the shooting. South Asian
cricket has been dubbed war minus the nuclear missiles.
The result of a sports match can trigger cardiac deaths,1
and contests between India and Pakistan have prompted
shootings, riots, killings, and sudden death. Cricket has
been used as an extension of foreign policy—to instigate
peace or prolong hostilities. However, regional cooperation
will probably increase prosperity, with some
commentators arguing that cricket is an important component
of public health strategies.2
Facing up to the future requires a dispassionate
appraisal of the past. How have India and Pakistan fared
against each other in cricket? To answer this question—
uppermost in the minds of over a billion people in
South Asia and many millions outside—we compared 50
years of test matches and one day matches between
India and Pakistan. One incident galvanised the
emotions of these two nations. In 1986 Pakistan batsman
Javed Miandad scored a dramatic match-winning six off
the last ball in a one day match that his side had looked
like losing until that delivery—a shot heard throughout
South Asia and much of the world. The burning
question since has been what effect Miandad’s six—a reference
point in South Asia to rival John F Kennedy’s
shooting and the winning baseball strike in Don
DeLillo’s Underworld—had on the subsequent performance
of the teams? Could analysis of results before and
after this reference point answer the question, end conjecture,
and allow peace to blossom?
Methods and results
We analysed all 133 matches between 1952 and 2003.
There were 47 test matches and 86 one day matches.
India won five (11%) test matches and 30 (35%) one
day internationals, and Pakistan won nine (19%) and
52 (60%) respectively. The rest were drawn, or
abandoned because of bad weather, crowd trouble,
or assassination. We grouped matches into time
periods 1952-86 (35 test and 17 one day matches) and
1986-2003 (12 test and 69 one day matches) according
to our specified time point—Miandad’s six. We
examined the relation between match results and time
periods by cross tabulation and assessed the strength
of association (Kendall’s rank correlation).
Overall, Pakistan was more likely to win after the hit
(correlation coefficient
= 0.17, P = 0.03). Venue
(home, away, or neutral) was not associated with
outcome (
= 0.01, P = 0.82), and neither was winning
the toss (
= 0.06, P = 0.44) or batting first (
= 0.04,
P = 0.55). In the cumulative win chart, the steep upward
slope for one day matches after 1986 highlights the
change in fortunes in Pakistan’s favour (figure).
Comment
Overall, Pakistan has achieved greater success in both
forms of the game. These data suggest that in one day
matches Miandad’s six inspired an improvement in
Pakistan’s performance or a decline in India’s, or both,
but this effect was small in test cricket. Venue, winning
the toss, and batting first were not associated with
outcome. We believe there are no other important
explanations for the observed findings. Both teams have
won oneWorld Cup final and lost one. No other factors
were at play around our reference point that might have
favoured one team over the other, certainly not in terms
of retirements or rule or format changes. Weather
conditions, ground conditions, selection policies, and
match fixes are too innumerable to measure or adjust
for.We believe these data support our hypothesis that a
single shot had an enduring influence. Now India must
have a landmark victory of its own—it may have already.