Clarke, S. R. 1998. “Test Statistics.” in Statistics in Sport, edited by J. Bennett. London: Arnold Applications of Statistics Series.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. M. 2003. Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.Google Scholar
Scarf, P. and X. Shi. 2005. “Modelling Match Outcomes and Decision Support for Setting a Final Innings Target in Test Cricket.” IMA Journal of Management Mathematics 16:161–178.Google Scholar
Scarf, P. and S. Akhtar. 2011. “An Analysis of Strategy in the First Three Innings in Test Cricket: Declaration and the Follow-On.” Journal of the Operational Research Society 62:1931–1940.Google Scholar
Scarf, P., X. Shi, and S. Akhtar. 2011. “On the Distribution of Runs Scored and Batting Strategy in Test Cricket.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 174:471–497.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar
About the article
Published Online: 2014-01-20
Published in Print: 2014-01-01
At the completion of the second innings of a scheduled 5-day match, if the team batting first leads by at least 200 runs, then it has the option of forcing the second innings batting team to bat again in the third innings. The sequence of batting innings according to Team A, Team B, Team B, and Team A (if required) is the result of team A enforcing the follow-on.
If a team has accumulated an adequate amount of runs during its first innings (Team A) or second innings (Team B), then the team may decide to declare at that time, but these less common scenarios are not the focus of this study.