Movement patterns in cricket vary by both position and game…
★★★★☆ 4.0 — Peer reviewed, Journal of Sports Sciences
★★★★☆ 4.0 / 5 — Peer reviewed, Journal of Sports Sciences
Movement patterns in cricket vary by both position and game format
Carl James Petersen et al. · 2009 · Journal of Sports Sciences · article
Why this rating
- Evidence class: article (3.00)
- Cited 6.4x the average for its field and age (+0.50)
- Top 10% most-cited in its field (+0.50)
The rubric starts from what kind of study this is and lets citation data adjust it, never the other way round. Five stars is reachable by a well-regarded evidence synthesis and not by a single paper, however famous. Scores round down.
How the field treats it
182 citations recorded.
Field-weighted citation impact: 6.40. This is the count normalised against papers of the same age in the same field, where 1.00 is exactly average — it is the number worth reading, because a raw count means something different in oncology than in topology.
In the top 10% most-cited work in its field.
What stands against it
No retraction, correction or expression of concern on record.
No published comment, reply or rebuttal naming it was found among the works that cite it.
Data-integrity concerns often surface first on PubPeer, which cannot be read automatically: see its discussion there.
Notices from Crossref, which carries the Retraction Watch database; replies from OpenAlex.
What it actually says
We compared the movement patterns of cricketers in different playing positions across three formats of cricket (Twenty20, One Day, multi-day matches). Cricket Australia Centre of Excellence cricketers (n = 42) from five positions (batting, fast bowling, spin bowling, wicketkeeping, and fielding) had their movement patterns (walk, jog, run, stride, and sprint) quantified by global positioning system (GPS) technology over two seasons. Marked differences in movement patterns were evident between positions and game formats, with fast bowlers undertaking the greatest workload of any position in cricket. Fast bowlers sprinted twice as often, covered over three times the distance sprinting, with much smaller work-to-recovery ratios than other positions. Fast bowlers during multi-day matches covered 22.6 +/- 4.0 km (mean +/- s) total distance in a day (1.4 +/- 0.9 km in sprinting). In comparison, wicketkeepers rarely sprinted, despite still covering a daily total distance of 16.6 +/- 2.1 km. Overall, One Day and Twenty20 cricket required approximately 50 to 100% more sprinting per hour than multi-day matches. However, multi-day cricket's longer duration resulted in 16-130% more sprinting per day. In summary, the shorter formats (Twenty20 and One Day) are more intensive per unit of time, but multi-day cricket has a greater overall physical load.
Read it
- Publisher record
- doi.org/10.1080/02640410903348665
- OpenAlex record — the data this rating was computed from
This rates the paper, not the claim. A strong paper can still be irrelevant to, or misquoted by, the post that cited it. The stars say how much weight the study can bear — not whether it says what someone claimed it says.
Rubric v1.0 · data from OpenAlex, retrieved 18 Oct 2026