Analysis of Indian Cricket Team: 2003 v 2011

2003 XI V/S 2011 XI of the Indian Cricket Team

Cricket is more than a sport in our nation and few sports moments in the Indian history have been as iconic as Kapil Dev lifting the 1983 Cricket World Cup at the Lord’s. It led India into a cricket revolution, both in terms of talent and fan following.

The country had to wait for 28 years to win the title back. It was another iconic moment when MS Dhoni, the Captain Cool of Indian Cricket team then, hit the iconic six on April 2nd, 2011, as India beat Sri Lanka by 6-wickets.

Many consider MS Dhoni & Co. as the best Indian team of modern era. After all, they won the World Cup. However, there are another set of fans who believe that the Sourav Ganguly-led Indian squad from 2003 World Cup was much better in comparison. It had one the most legendary batting lineups ever in the blue colours. One cannot label if a team is better or not simply because it won a World Cup or not, the pro-Ganguly-XI fans say, After all, you need to take into account the numerous aspects leading upto and during the World Cup.

The Runners up of 2003 ICC ODI World Cup

Points kept in mind while comparing both the teams

Undoubtedly one of the most loved playing 11’s in the history of Indian cricket- the 2003 Indian world cup squad and the 2011 squad. Though both the teams played in different years under different circumstances in this report, I will try to compare both the teams completely based on the statistics and the sports analytics, like how many matches the squads played, how many matches were against associates nation ( though they could be though to beat sometimes), how strong the opponent was in both the cases, how experienced was our team in different years, how many players were in their prime during their respective world cups?

World Champions of 2011 ICC ODI World Cup

2003 XI- The world cup squad led by Sourav Ganguly and the 2011 XI led by MS Dhoni

The 2003 world cup was played in South Africa, Kenya and Zimbabwe which was played away from home, despite of this fact the 2003 squad reached the Finals which give them an edge over the 2011 squad as it was played in Indian Subcontinent where the track record of the Indian team has always been phenomenal (marginally over 55%).

The Indian team had a meagre winning percentage of 44% till 2003 at away grounds
The Indian team had a meagre winning percentage of 44% till 2003 at away grounds
With over 55% Indian team in 2011 always had an upper hand

Pro-Ganguly XI 1–0 Pro-Dhoni XI.

In 2003 India played against 3 associate nations which include 4 matches and a very crucial match of Semi Final. Though associates could be a though a nut to break sometimes but when it comes to the numbers the 10 members always have an upper hand over associates in terms of experience, the number of runs scored or wickets taken in that matter. Whereas the 2011 world cup squad played against 2 associate nations in the group league. When considered the factor of associate teams, the Dhoni led team had lesser easy games. (Though not a single game is easy, this factor is totally based upon the number of games played by the associate and their experience)

Pro-Ganguly XI 1–1 Pro-Dhoni XI.

When it comes to the quality of players the opponent had in these scenarios the ICC ODI rankings of batting and bowling has been taken into consideration just a day before the world cups commenced. (9th February 2003 & 19th February 2011). The Ganguly led team faced top 7 batsman from the top 10 ICC ODI rankings with just 1 Indian bowler featuring in the list of top 10 giving it a 1:7 ratio of the Indian bowlers to the opposition batsman, and the Indian batsman faces top 7 bowlers among top 10 in ICC ODI bowlers list with just 1 Indian batsman facing the quality bowlers again giving it a ratio of 1:7 between the Indian batsman to the opponent bowlers.

Coming to the 2011 World Cup there were 6 opponent batsman placed in top 10 which India faced with none of the bowlers listing in top 10 from India .Coming to the batting 4 Indian players were placed in top 10 of the ranking comparing to 8 bowlers around the world bowling to them giving a 1:2 ratio. So when it comes to batting the Dhoni battalion were stronger than the Sourav’s 11 and the opposite applies when it comes to bowling, based upon the ratio of the top 10 ICC ODI rankings.

Pro-Ganguly XI 2–2 Pro-Dhoni XI.

In terms of the experience of each squad, as it is a crucial factor when it comes in handling the pressure and unbalanced situations, the 2003 Indian squad had an average of 110 matches making it the third most experienced team in the world cup followed by Pakistan and Sri Lanka respectively.

Whereas the 2011 Indian squad was the most experienced squad with an average of 139 matches with Sri Lanka the runners up with 124 matches. In terms of experience the Dhoni led team was far more experienced than 2003 squad giving the latter a benefit in comparisons.

The 2003 team was comparatively less experienced in the whole lot
The Indian team was the most experienced team of the WC-2011, where the two most experienced team made it to the Finals.

Pro-Ganguly XI 3–2 Pro-Dhoni XI.

An important consideration comes under the fact of captaincy, both much celebrated cricketers of Indian history both leading their team from front but when it comes to numbers while Ganguly, has a win-loss ratio of 1.16 in ODI’s, MS Dhoni has a better win-loss ratio in ODI’s compared to Ganguly. When it comes to captaincy the 2011 team edges over 2003.

Pro-Ganguly XI 3–3Pro-Dhoni XI.

There are other factors as well which can be taken into consideration such as three matches were forfeited in 2003 world cup giving Zimbabwe a place in super 6 over England and Kenya over New Zealand for the semi final, if these matches weren’t cancelled the scenario would have been different but wouldn’t be counted in this report as it is completely based on statistics. Hope the Indian cricket team keep making us proud and we keep winning trophies at the ICC events as Cricket is more than a sport in our nation and cricketers more than human.

--

--