The term 'top order' refers to

[Daemon]

Use of the word "top" suggests high quality. Accordingly, most of the teams from the subcontinent have no top order.

You have Hales opening fo- ah, you got me good sledger, wac

 

[kiwiviktor81]

I like the idea of 3-6 being the middle order

The reason why it's silly to do this is because then you make the term "top order" redundant. If it's just the openers you can say openers and middle order.

 

[Gob]

top order 1-3
middle order 4-7

the end

Spot on

 

[Dawood Ahmad]

Top order is the top 4 in my book.

The middle order is 5 through 7

But wait news flash some people call 3-6 the middle order even though they also call the top 4 the top order. They use either middle order or top order for positions 3-4 interchangeably without thought.

Ea cricket 07 does this

 

[TheJediBrah]

how would that clear things up when you have different terms for the same position :s

How could that possibly be a problem

There's no definitive description or definition and of course there will be multiple terms for the same position

How is this even a discussion

 

[Athlai]

how would that clear things up when you have different terms for the same position :s

Egypt is both in Africa and the Middle East. Deal with it.

 

[Gnske]

Arbitrary and useless term really, some teams like the current Black Caps don't even have a top order.

 

[FBU]

HowSTAT! Test Cricket - Glenn McGrath - Wickets by Batting Order Graph

 

[Athlai]

Arbitrary and useless term really, some teams like the current Black Caps don't even have a top order.

Our top order starts and ends at 3.

 

[Daemon]

Our batting order starts and ends at 3.

fixed

 

[NZTailender]

Arbitrary and useless term really, some teams like the current Black Caps don't even have a top order.

nice adaptation of sledger's joke

 

[Jono]

Use of the word "top" suggests high quality. Accordingly, most of the teams from the subcontinent have no top order.

Gone from just bagging India to the whole subcontinent.

So racist. Don't take out the bad curry you had one night on billions of people ya weak colon ****

 

[Shady Slim]

The quality of the persons in situ is irrelevant. Whether you have Adam Gilchrist or Derek Pringle at 7 doesn't matter. It's still the same spot in the order.

so then is the tail a separate entity to the orders?

because you often hear teams without an allrounder but an extra bowler being accused of having a "long tail"

 

[cnerd123]

Okay so a more serious answer for this.

The "Top" order is called so because it's the part of the lineup that bats at the 'Top' of the innings. So this basically covers the batsmen who come in early to establish things. I think this can vary from team to team, match to match. The Top 3 are obviously always going to be the Top Order. The number 4 will be considered a part of the Top Order depending on whether or not the side believes that he will be needed to bat in the early part of the innings. So if you are on a grassy, seam friendly wicket with some rookie openers against a strong pace attack, it's quite conceivable that number 4 will be in early, and thus he is likely to be considered as part of the ' Top Order' for team planning purposes. But when you're on a flat hard pitch against a couple of popgun medium pacer with two ATG openers, you're likely to consider the number 4 as part of your Middle Order instead. This makes sense when you consider that the idea is to have your Top Order see off the new ball and lay a platform. If conditions and opposition are such that you're happy losing 2-3 wickets against the newish ball (say about 30 overs old), then that means your number 4 is in the Top Order.

The Number 5 batsman can't even be a part of the Top Order tho. Simply because having the Top Order extend to the half the playing XI would just be ridiculous. It's either the first 3 or the first 4 batsmen.

The Middle Order begins when the Top Order ends. This will be 4 or 5. The length of the Middle Order almost entirely depends on how many players you have whom can be considered reasonable, 'proper' batsmen. Most lineups end off around 7, but some play the extra batting allrounder or two and can conceivably possess a Middle Order that extends down to 8 or 9. Sometimes a side just doesn't have enough proper batting, and so their Middle Order ends at 6. This is all subjective, and whether or not a player can be classified as a 'Proper' batsman can depend on conditions, opposition and other factors. The Middle Order is usually expected to do the bulk of the run scoring, and to cash in after the Top Order have done their job setting a platform.

The 'Lower Order' begins at that point in the lineup after the Middle Order where you start seeing players who can bat, but not to the extent that you'd recognize them as 'proper' batsmen. They're not inept like the Tailenders are, but you do not think they're worthy of being classified as part of your Middle Order, and consequently do not rely on them to score a bulk of your runs. Lumping them in as the Lower Order is to basically recognizing that they possess batting ability, and may contribute occasionally, but they aren't your main source of runs.

The Tail is where the Rabbits bat. Guys who you expect absolutely no runs from whatsoever.

So based on your playing XI, the opposition you are playing, and the conditions you are playing in, you're definition of Top/Middle/Lower Orders and the Tail can vary. You can have no Lower Order and go straight from Middle Order to Tail. You can maybe have no Middle Order. You can have both a Lower Order and a Middle Order but no Tail. You could have all three. Your Middle Order and Lower Order may be just one guy each. But you cannot have no Top Order. You must have Top Order. You may have a weak one, but it's just impossible to not have one. It just goes against the definition.

That's how I see it anyways.

 

[Gnske]

nice adaptation of sledger's joke

Do you really expect me to read the whole thread before I post feces

 

[Smudge]

Do you ever have thoughts that don't include KW

Yes. He calls them nightmares.

 

[Gob]

Do you really expect me to read the whole thread before I post feces

Shane Watson would have

 

[Red]

Okay so a more serious answer for this.

The "Top" order is called so because it's the part of the lineup that bats at the 'Top' of the innings. So this basically covers the batsmen who come in early to establish things. I think this can vary from team to team, match to match. The Top 3 are obviously always going to be the Top Order. The number 4 will be considered a part of the Top Order depending on whether or not the side believes that he will be needed to bat in the early part of the innings. So if you are on a grassy, seam friendly wicket with some rookie openers against a strong pace attack, it's quite conceivable that number 4 will be in early, and thus he is likely to be considered as part of the ' Top Order' for team planning purposes. But when you're on a flat hard pitch against a couple of popgun medium pacer with two ATG openers, you're likely to consider the number 4 as part of your Middle Order instead. This makes sense when you consider that the idea is to have your Top Order see off the new ball and lay a platform. If conditions and opposition are such that you're happy losing 2-3 wickets against the newish ball (say about 30 overs old), then that means your number 4 is in the Top Order.

The Number 5 batsman can't even be a part of the Top Order tho. Simply because having the Top Order extend to the half the playing XI would just be ridiculous. It's either the first 3 or the first 4 batsmen.

The Middle Order begins when the Top Order ends. This will be 4 or 5. The length of the Middle Order almost entirely depends on how many players you have whom can be considered reasonable, 'proper' batsmen. Most lineups end off around 7, but some play the extra batting allrounder or two and can conceivably possess a Middle Order that extends down to 8 or 9. Sometimes a side just doesn't have enough proper batting, and so their Middle Order ends at 6. This is all subjective, and whether or not a player can be classified as a 'Proper' batsman can depend on conditions, opposition and other factors. The Middle Order is usually expected to do the bulk of the run scoring, and to cash in after the Top Order have done their job setting a platform.

The 'Lower Order' begins at that point in the lineup after the Middle Order where you start seeing players who can bat, but not to the extent that you'd recognize them as 'proper' batsmen. They're not inept like the Tailenders are, but you do not think they're worthy of being classified as part of your Middle Order, and consequently do not rely on them to score a bulk of your runs. Lumping them in as the Lower Order is to basically recognizing that they possess batting ability, and may contribute occasionally, but they aren't your main source of runs.

The Tail is where the Rabbits bat. Guys who you expect absolutely no runs from whatsoever.

So based on your playing XI, the opposition you are playing, and the conditions you are playing in, you're definition of Top/Middle/Lower Orders and the Tail can vary. You can have no Lower Order and go straight from Middle Order to Tail. You can maybe have no Middle Order. You can have both a Lower Order and a Middle Order but no Tail. You could have all three. Your Middle Order and Lower Order may be just one guy each. But you cannot have no Top Order. You must have Top Order. You may have a weak one, but it's just impossible to not have one. It just goes against the definition.

That's how I see it anyways.

That's one way to see it, but the correct way to see it is:

Top order: 1-3

Middle order: 4-7

Lower order: 8-11

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Top order – faces the first ball
Lower top order – number 2 and 3
Top middle order – number 4
Middle middle order – number 5
Lower middle order – number 6
Upper lower order – number 7 and 8
Middle lower order – number 9
Lower lower order – number 10 and 11
Tail – anyone equivalent or worse than Derek Pringle.

 

[Daemon]

Okay so a more serious answer for this.

The "Top" order is called so because it's the part of the lineup that bats at the 'Top' of the innings. So this basically covers the batsmen who come in early to establish things. I think this can vary from team to team, match to match. The Top 3 are obviously always going to be the Top Order. The number 4 will be considered a part of the Top Order depending on whether or not the side believes that he will be needed to bat in the early part of the innings. So if you are on a grassy, seam friendly wicket with some rookie openers against a strong pace attack, it's quite conceivable that number 4 will be in early, and thus he is likely to be considered as part of the ' Top Order' for team planning purposes. But when you're on a flat hard pitch against a couple of popgun medium pacer with two ATG openers, you're likely to consider the number 4 as part of your Middle Order instead. This makes sense when you consider that the idea is to have your Top Order see off the new ball and lay a platform. If conditions and opposition are such that you're happy losing 2-3 wickets against the newish ball (say about 30 overs old), then that means your number 4 is in the Top Order.

The Number 5 batsman can't even be a part of the Top Order tho. Simply because having the Top Order extend to the half the playing XI would just be ridiculous. It's either the first 3 or the first 4 batsmen.

The Middle Order begins when the Top Order ends. This will be 4 or 5. The length of the Middle Order almost entirely depends on how many players you have whom can be considered reasonable, 'proper' batsmen. Most lineups end off around 7, but some play the extra batting allrounder or two and can conceivably possess a Middle Order that extends down to 8 or 9. Sometimes a side just doesn't have enough proper batting, and so their Middle Order ends at 6. This is all subjective, and whether or not a player can be classified as a 'Proper' batsman can depend on conditions, opposition and other factors. The Middle Order is usually expected to do the bulk of the run scoring, and to cash in after the Top Order have done their job setting a platform.

The 'Lower Order' begins at that point in the lineup after the Middle Order where you start seeing players who can bat, but not to the extent that you'd recognize them as 'proper' batsmen. They're not inept like the Tailenders are, but you do not think they're worthy of being classified as part of your Middle Order, and consequently do not rely on them to score a bulk of your runs. Lumping them in as the Lower Order is to basically recognizing that they possess batting ability, and may contribute occasionally, but they aren't your main source of runs.

The Tail is where the Rabbits bat. Guys who you expect absolutely no runs from whatsoever.

So based on your playing XI, the opposition you are playing, and the conditions you are playing in, you're definition of Top/Middle/Lower Orders and the Tail can vary. You can have no Lower Order and go straight from Middle Order to Tail. You can maybe have no Middle Order. You can have both a Lower Order and a Middle Order but no Tail. You could have all three. Your Middle Order and Lower Order may be just one guy each. But you cannot have no Top Order. You must have Top Order. You may have a weak one, but it's just impossible to not have one. It just goes against the definition.

That's how I see it anyways.