Player of the Match in Cricket: How It's Awarded and What It Means
The Player of the Match award recognises the individual who contributed most decisively to the match outcome. This article explains who decides the award, what criteria are used across batting, bowling, and fielding contributions, and whether the award always goes to the winning team's player.
How Player of the Match Is Decided
In international cricket, the Player of the Match award is typically decided by a nominated adjudicator — often a former international cricketer who has specific cricket expertise. In ICC events, the adjudicator is appointed by the ICC. In bilateral series, the adjudicating panel varies by series. The adjudicator watches the complete match (or reviews data and highlights) and makes a judgment based on which player's contribution was most decisive in determining the match's outcome. There is no fixed formula — the adjudicator uses cricket judgment to assess whether a batting performance, bowling spell, or fielding contribution was most influential. In close matches, the decision is often straightforward (the player who scored the winning runs or took the match-winning wicket); in one-sided matches, the award may recognise a performance that was exceptionally good even if the match was won comfortably.
Does Player of the Match Always Go to the Winning Team?
No — Player of the Match can go to a player from the losing team if their individual performance was exceptional, even if their team lost. A batsman who scores 150 while their team loses by 30 runs may win the award because their innings was outstanding even if unsuccessful. A bowler who takes 5 wickets in an ODI that their team loses may still receive the award for bowling excellence. However, performances from the winning team tend to receive the award in most cases because the judgment of 'most decisive' inherently favours contributions that produced a win. A match-winning 80 from the successful chase is typically valued above a losing 150 that wasn't enough.
What Statistics Are Considered
The adjudicator considers: runs scored and batting strike rate (for batting-based awards); wickets taken, economy rate, and the specific wickets taken (top-order vs. tail wickets) for bowling awards; catches, run-outs, and fielding moments that directly changed the match for fielding awards; and crucially, the match situation context — 40 runs in a crisis is more valuable than 80 in a winning position. There is no public scoring formula — the process is human judgment informed by data. Occasionally, the award goes to a cricketer whose contribution was less statistically impressive but demonstrably match-deciding (a 5-over spell that broke a critical partnership, or a catch that ended a dangerous partnership in the final over).
Frequently asked questions
Can all-rounders win Player of the Match for combined contributions?
Yes — all-rounders who contribute significantly in both batting and bowling can win Player of the Match for combined performances that no single-discipline player matched. A player who scores 60 and takes 3 wickets in the same ODI may deserve the award over a batsman who scored 85 or a bowler who took 4 wickets, because the dual contribution was more decisive in the context of the match. Some of cricket's most celebrated Player of the Match awards have gone to genuine all-round performances: Imran Khan, Ian Botham, and Andrew Flintoff all received awards for combined performances that included meaningful contributions in both disciplines. The adjudicator makes the call — there is no formal threshold for combined contributions.
Is there a Player of the Match award in Test cricket?
Yes — the Player of the Match award exists in Test cricket, though it is less prominently commercialised than in limited-overs formats. In Tests, the award often recognises a batsman who scored a century (or centuries) that were decisive in the result, or a bowler who took 5 or 10 wickets across the match. The ICC and broadcaster-sponsored award presentations occur at the end of the Test and are part of the post-match ceremony. The Test Player of the Match award is generally considered harder to identify than the limited-overs equivalent because Test cricket's longer timeline means more contributions influence the result — one match-turning partnership can be as decisive as an individual century.
Has a wicketkeeper ever won Player of the Match primarily for their keeping?
Yes — though primarily keeping contributions are rarer Player of the Match justifications than batting or bowling contributions. Wicketkeepers who combine good keeping (no byes, several dismissals) with a valuable batting contribution (particularly from a lower batting position that alters the match's run total) are strong Player of the Match candidates. Adam Gilchrist (Australia) frequently won awards for combined batting-and-keeping contributions — his ability to add 80-100 runs from number 7 in ODIs while keeping well gave him one of the best Player of the Match percentages among Test/ODI players of his era. A pure-keeping Player of the Match award (no significant batting contribution) is possible but very uncommon.