January 20, 2017

The curious case of Shakib Al Hasan

His Test stats as batsman and bowler compare favourably with some of the best allrounders, which is why his second-innings dismissal in Wellington is all the more puzzling
102

Only five players have a higher difference between batting and bowling averages than Shakib Al Hasan (among allrounders with 2000 runs and 100 wickets) © ESPNcricinfo Ltd

Shakib Al Hasan. Bangladesh's second-highest run-getter in Tests. And in ODIs and T20Is. Also Bangladesh's leading wicket-taker in Tests. And in ODIs and T20Is. Also owner of Bangladesh's top-score in a Test innings, and the second-best figures in Tests. Also, arguably, the chief culprit in Bangladesh's dire fifth-day collapse in Wellington which led to a stunning defeat after they had posted 595 in their first innings, the highest total ever in a Test defeat.

Shakib is easily the best cricketer Bangladesh have produced; he is also one of their most experienced, having played nearly ten years of international cricket, which makes his acts of rashness - as was seen in Wellington - even more difficult to comprehend. His unconventional approach is sometimes reminiscent to that of Habibul Bashar, who was Bangladesh's best batsman in the early and mid 2000s despite an extremely unorthodox technique. While there have been instances when Shakib's approach has confounded critics and puzzled fans, there is no doubting his class and the overall numbers he has racked up in Tests.

For a start, he is one of only five players to score a double-century and take a ten-wicket haul in Tests. The others are Vinoo Mankad, Allan Border, Wasim Akram, and Ian Botham.

Players who have scored a double-hundred and taken a ten-for in Tests
Player Top score Best match fig 200s 10WM
 Vinoo Mankad  231  13/131  2  2
 Ian Botham  208  13/106  1  4
 Allan Border  205  11/96  2  1
 Wasim Akram  257*  11/110  1  5
 Shakib Al Hasan  217  10/124  1  1

His all-round numbers in Tests stand up to the toughest scrutiny. With the bat, he averages 40.85, which is better than averages of the four great allrounders of the 1980s, and also better than Tony Greig (40.43), Keith Miller (36.97), Shaun Pollock (32.31), Chris Cairns (33.53), and Andrew Flintoff (31.77). His bowling average of 32.45 is better than those of Garry Sobers (34.03), Flintoff (32.78) and Jacques Kallis (32.65).

The difference between Shakib's batting and bowling averages is 8.39. Among allrounders who have scored 2000-plus runs and taken 100-plus wickets in Tests, only five players - Sobers, Kallis, Imran Khan, Miller and Pollock have a higher difference. Botham, Kapil, Hadlee, Greig and Chris Cairns all have a smaller difference between their batting and bowling averages.

Highest diff between batting and bowling averages (Min 2000 runs and 100 wkts)
Player Mat Runs Bat Av Wkts Bowl Av Ave diff
 Garry Sobers  93  8032  57.78  235  34.03  23.74
 Jacques Kallis  166  13289  55.37  292  32.65  22.71
 Imran Khan  88  3807  37.69  362  22.81  14.88
 Keith Miller  55  2958  36.97  170  22.97  13.99
 Shaun Pollock  108  3781  32.31  421  23.11  9.19
 Shakib Al Hasan  45  3146  40.85  161  32.45  8.39
 Trevor Goddard  41  2516  34.46  123  26.22  8.23
 Tony Greig  58  3599  40.43  141  32.20  8.23
 Ian Botham  102  5200  33.54  383  28.40  5.14
 Richard Hadlee  86  3124  27.16  431  22.29  4.86

Shakib's numbers perhaps also mean more because he plays for a relatively weak team, and has usually been the key player with both bat and ball for Bangladesh. Also, playing for Bangladesh means limited opportunities to play Test cricket: in nearly a decade, Shakib has played only 45 Tests, which is about half the number he would have played had he belonged to one of the bigger teams. In nearly ten years of international cricket, Shakib hasn't yet played a Test against Australia, which is telling commentary on international scheduling over the last decade.

The limited opportunities, though, haven't prevented him from making an impact with both bat and ball. With the bat, he averages more than 40 against New Zealand, Pakistan, West Indies and Sri Lanka, including averages of more than 65 against the first two teams mentioned; with the ball, he averages less than 32 against England, New Zealand, South Africa, West Indies and Zimbabwe.

Shakib's value to Bangladesh can be gauged by his percentage contribution with both bat and ball to the team's runs and wickets in the Tests he has played. As a batsman, he contributes almost 14% of the total runs for Bangladesh (including extras); with the ball, he takes 28% of Bangladesh's wickets in the matches he has played. Add those percentages up, and his total of 41.99 is next only to Richard Hadlee's 42.51, among allrounders with 2000-plus runs and 100-plus wickets. Hadlee's batting contribution was relatively meagre, but he was the main weapon for New Zealand's bowling attack, taking 34% of their wickets.

Shakib Al Hasan has contributed almost 14% of Bangladesh's runs and 28% of their wickets in the Tests he has played in © ESPNcricinfo Ltd

This statistic will admittedly favour the bowling allrounders more than the batting ones, as a bowler's share of the total wickets is higher than a batsman share of total runs (as only four or five bowlers do the bowling compared to six or seven specialist batsmen in a team). However, this number does indicate Shakib's value to Bangladesh, compared to those of other allrounders to their teams.

Shakib is also one of only four players to have held the record for best bowling figures and highest Test score for a team: till Taijul Islam's 8 for 39 against Zimbabwe in October 2014, Shakib's 7 for 36 against New Zealand in 2008 stood as Bangladesh's best for six years. And his 217 against New Zealand in the Wellington Test is now Bangladesh's top score in Tests. The only others to hold this record are Roger Blunt of New Zealand, Amar Singh and Vinoo Mankad. Blunt's 45 and 3 for 17 came in New Zealand's first ever Test, so there was very limited sample size to choose from. Similarly, Amar Singh's 51 came in India's first Test, while his 7 for 86 came in their fourth. Mankad's records were more meaningful: his 231 came in India's 49th Test, and his 8 for 52 in their 30th match. Shakib's records have come much later in Bangladesh's Test journey: his best figures of 7 for 36 came in their 54th Test, and his 217 in their 96th.

Players who have held the record for top score and best bowling figures for a country in Tests
Player Top score Country's Test No. Top figures Country's Test No.
 Roger Blunt (NZ)  45  1st  3/ 17  1st
 Amar Singh (Ind)  51  1st  7/ 86  4th
 Vinoo Mankad (Ind)  231  49th  8/ 52  30th
 Shakib Al Hasan (B'desh)  217  96th  7/ 36  54th

Shakib's Test numbers, and a comparison with other allrounders, clearly illustrate just how well his numbers match up with some of the best in the world. At the same time, those numbers also make his act on the fifth morning in Wellington all the more inexplicable.

With inputs from Shiva Jayaraman.

S Rajesh is stats editor of ESPNcricinfo. Follow him on Twitter.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • dhanpr1781857 on February 20, 2017, 1:58 GMT

    wait for Ashwin to topple his records

  • Khair ul on January 27, 2017, 23:09 GMT

    Shakib is not a good test player PERIOD. He does not have the mindset. I don't doubt that he merits selection in the team as Bangladesh really don't have many options but he will remain an ordinary test batsman when he had the potential to become a really good one. He is more suited to ODI but there too he often bats irresponsibly but in ODI one can forgive more easily but not in tests.

  • jahid on January 27, 2017, 17:14 GMT

    if you leave Zimbabwe from the equation, his away performance is better as an allrounder. as a bowler, his test stats are better than ashwin's bowling in away condition.

  • sharir5619170 on January 27, 2017, 15:06 GMT

    Whatever the haters say...But Shakib is the best all-round all rounder ever. He reached No.1 ranking in test, ODI AND T20. No other all-rounders even thought of that. If someone is No.1 in test, he is No.40 in ODI. If someone is No. 5 in T20, He is No.36 in tests. So, he did the thing only he could have done. He deserves some respect. If he was from any big countries like Australia, England, India...He would have been a legend but people not even call him great because he is from Bangladesh. It's always nice to see a Bangladeshi in a list of greats. Good luck.

  • cric_person on January 25, 2017, 3:18 GMT

    @HAMZASALMAN If Kallis was born in India or Australia (and to a lesser extend, England) he would be regarded as one of the best since Bradman. As he's South African he gets a lot less attention and fandom. Similar problem applies to Sangakarra.

  • nicktu3022703 on January 24, 2017, 5:20 GMT

    Wondered why Jason Gillespie wasn't on the double centuries and 10 for list. Amazingly (or not so amazingly with McGrath and Warne in your team), his match best is just 9/80

  • yadavk1291972 on January 23, 2017, 10:05 GMT

    @ANWARUZZ please use statsguru and check for yourself the performance of Sakib if you take out matches against zim,afg,holland,japan korea etc . Truth hurts bro

  • Hamza Salman on January 23, 2017, 8:31 GMT

    Looking at the stats, it's clear to me that Jacque Kallis is the most under-rated player in cricket history. He averaged more than Tendulkar and was a frontline bowler too with 300 Test wickets at very good average. I've seen him bowl at 90 mph earlier on in his career. His returns overall make a case for him to be placed in the Top 5 Test cricketers of all-time.

  • Anwar uz on January 23, 2017, 5:06 GMT

    @cricfan34515918. You are from the land whose fingers never tires tapping statsitics and making your players greatest in the world. Only when it comes that others have a better stats you guys don't believe in stats anymore. LOL

  • yadavk5152547 on January 22, 2017, 18:17 GMT

    The only reason this player sakib ever played Intl cricket was that, he was born in that country . If it was any other country I do not believe he would have moved above state team level .please do not insult the greats sobers, akram by using his name on the same list

  • No featured comments at the moment.