Bowling spells with more wickets taken than runs conceded
These rare spells have etched their place in cricketing history.
The one-day international format has seen plenty of ‘containing’ spells that have contributed to some great victories, more so in the twentieth century. It is not easy to dry up the runs in the limited-overs format where the batsmen will always be on the lookout for runs.
This is more visible in the modern game which clearly favours the batsmen. Economies and strike rates have risen dramatically over the years, especially since the advent of Twenty20 cricket. Previously unimaginable scores of 400 in ODIs have been breached an ample number of times now.
There have been some outstanding spells over history, which have been so incredible that the bowler has managed to take more wickets than the number of runs he conceded. With the modern era favouring batting, it is tough to imagine any additions to this list in the foreseeable future.
#4 Stuart Binny (4.4-2-4-6)
In June 2014, India toured Bangladesh for a three-match ODI series and won the rain-curtailed first ODI, thanks to the Duckworth-Lewis method.
In the second ODI at Dhaka, Indians strode in to bat first but a five-wicket haul from Taskin Ahmed, coupled with fine support from the other Bangladeshi bowlers, saw the visitors bundle out for just 105. They might not have breached the three-digit figure had it not been for Umesh Yadav's quickfire 17 at the end.
It looked like Bangladesh had the game in their pocket but it was not to be, much to the dismay of the passionate Bangladesh fans. After Mohit Sharma dismissed both openers cheaply, Mohammed Mithun and Mushfiqur Rahman stabilized the innings with a 31-run partnership.
Enters Stuart Binny. From 44/2, the Bangladeshis bundled out for a mere 58. Binny gave away 4 runs in his 4.4 overs and bagged 6 wickets!
The 28 deliveries that he bowled had 26 dot balls, which included the 6 wickets of course. This astonishing spell saw Binny not only win the man of the match award but also etch his name in the history books.