Agree that Satyanash's reasoning was better, all I was wanting to say was that there could still be skewed results. If someone takes 200 wickets and just 10 of them are as a result of a changed batting order it skewed the percentages enough.Just a couple of points raised in the thread. First up I don't think the circumstances that Nufan highlighted occur often enough to question the graphs. Besides its a bowler's job to remove nightwatchmen asap. And nighwatchmen succeed often enough for them to be a legit top order wicket.
Satyanash is right. If you clean up the tail after removing the openers you're penalised by the perception you are a tail order basher. Its the job of fast bowlers to get the openers and come back and quash the tail. Akram did that expertly so I think his high no of tail ender wkts proves he did his job.
cheers. they played in an era of no outstanding spin options, so the even spread is probably a result of that. merv maybe a higher percentage of tailenders by scaring the **** out of them more than alderman
I am not going there Read the thread title. Good bowlers onlyAt the risk of causing **** in this thread,
Kallis and Sobers please.
That was out of a shared faith that his figures would be s***Yet you made one for Lyon