***Official*** India in New Zealand 2013/14

[Dan]

Unquestionably, but his average has been helped out by a fair few tail end wickets, if my hotel room broadband wasn't so inconsistent I'd do the calculation again, but from memory, Boult has 38 out of 72 wickets from lower order players.

48/72 are top 7 wickets.

 

[Blocky]

48/72 are top 7 wickets.

Was I wrong in thinking he had a tonne of dismissals against Finn, Anderson and Broad during the English series?

Extrapolate that out, he takes 66% of his wickets in the top 7, Wagner takes 79% of his wickets in the Top 7.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Unquestionably, but his average has been helped out by a fair few tail end wickets, if my hotel room broadband wasn't so inconsistent I'd do the calculation again, but from memory, Boult has 38 out of 72 wickets from lower order players.

You were close. It was 24 out of 72. Good memory!

And most of those tail end wickets were when he just mopped up the tail with the second new ball because, you know, he's good and entrusted to do so.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Was I wrong in thinking he had a tonne of dismissals against Finn, Anderson and Broad during the English series?

Extrapolate that out, he takes 66% of his wickets in the top 7, Wagner takes 79% of his wickets in the Top 7.

If you take out Boult's "tail end" wickets he takes 100% of his wickets in the top 7.


Anyway, in this world where tail end wickets don't count.

Boult minus 24 "tail end" wickets. 48 wickets @ 39.81

Wagner minus 7 "tail end" wickets. 31 wickets @ 47.74

 

[Bahnz]

The vault actually has all 18 Tests since Wagner debuted, atm.

vs. top five bats

Wagner

27/1052
Ave: 39.0
ER: 3.1

Boult

35/1175
Ave. 33.6
ER: 2.8

Southee

32/881
Ave: 27.5
ER: 2.6

Bracewell

13/845
Ave: 65.0
ER: 3.7

Anderson

9/137
Ave: 15.2
ER: 2.0

Williamson

10/544
Ave. 54.4
ER: 3.3

Sodhi

3/404
Ave: 134.7
ER: 3.8

There, it's against top 5 rather than top 7 bats, but it's still relavent to the current debate.

 

[Blocky]

You were close. It was 24 out of 72. Good memory!

And most of those tail end wickets were when he just mopped up the tail with the second new ball because, you know, he's good and entrusted to do so.

Give any opening bowler a new ball and a tail end and he should be able to clean them up. The argument also isn't Boult vs Wagner. The argument is Wagner vs anyone not named Southee or Boult, so realistically, stop taking the discussion off track otherwise the only redeeming feature of your post is Malkovich yelling check in Rounders and nothing more.

 

[Dan]

Was I wrong in thinking he had a tonne of dismissals against Finn, Anderson and Broad during the English series?

Extrapolate that out, he takes 66% of his wickets in the top 7, Wagner takes 79% of his wickets in the Top 7.

I don't really care whether he got Finn, Anderson or Broad a lot during that series. You're talking career top order numbers. Stop shifting goalposts.

 

[Dan]

Also, when has anyone here advocated getting rid of Wagner in this discussion?

If people want to bring in another seamer, they've been advocating it at the expense of Sodhi.

 

[Blocky]

Also, when has anyone here advocated getting rid of Wagner in this discussion?

If people want to bring in another seamer, they've been advocating it at the expense of Sodhi.

Yes, we're discussing Wagner solely because everyone believes he's worth his place in the side and not because people mentioned Henry, Bennett, Gillespie as players they'd rather see in the side.

 

[Blocky]

If you take out Boult's "tail end" wickets he takes 100% of his wickets in the top 7.


Anyway, in this world where tail end wickets don't count.

Boult minus 24 "tail end" wickets. 48 wickets @ 39.81

Wagner minus 7 "tail end" wickets. 31 wickets @ 47.74

Your division skills are horrible - you've removed the wickets but not the runs scored by those players, meaning anyone from 8 to 11 can be dismissed as many times as they want but not counter balance the runs that were scored. But having seen you discuss other subject areas, I'm not surprised you horribly butchered this.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

He was dropped after the West Indies side, he only played one of the games against South Africa and if I recall correctly, also missed a game or two against England as Bracewell was favoured

Nah, he played all the tests against England after winning a 'bowl-off' against Gillespie (for NZ A vs England) after Bracewell stood on broken glass. He was dropped after WI and didn't play against SL. He only played one test against South Africa - replacing Martin and took 1 for plenty (after Martin had taken 3-63 in the 1st test)

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Of course I just removed the wickets. If their wickets aren't worthy of bowlers, why should we care what little runs they score?

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

But having seen you discuss other subject areas, I'm not surprised you horribly butchered this.

Yeah, what evs.

Ignore list time.

 

[Flem274*]

Narine took, what, 6/90-odd in 40ish overs in the 3rd Test at Hamilton as NZ racked up 350. He hardly tore through them to bowl them out for under 200. And Hamilton's the best pitch in the country for spin, right?

Was the most spin friendly pitch I've ever seen in NZ too.

 

[Blocky]

Of course I just removed the wickets. If their wickets aren't worthy of bowlers, why should we care what little runs they score?

Ask Dan Vettori, Stuart Broad, Mitchell Johnson and other #8s that.

 

[Blocky]

Nah, he played all the tests against England after winning a 'bowl-off' against Gillespie (for NZ A vs England) after Bracewell stood on broken glass. He was dropped after WI and didn't play against SL. He only played one test against South Africa - replacing Martin and took 1 for plenty (after Martin had taken 3-63 in the 1st test)

I knew he'd missed a series somewhere in there.

 

[Bahnz]

He was also ridiculously dropped for the first test against Bangladesh. One of the worst selection decisions since Martin was dropped for the tests against the West Indies in 2008.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

Yawn. Stats don't lie, unlike your opinions.

Having got home from work exhausted, i'm not going to take the bait, but i will say one thing; Lies, damned lies and statistics

 

[Dan]

Yes, we're discussing Wagner solely because everyone believes he's worth his place in the side and not because people mentioned Henry, Bennett, Gillespie as players they'd rather see in the side.

No, that's not what the discussion was at all. Maybe earlier in the thread, but definitely not now.

Hendrix said that Wagner's performance as third seamer would be crucial, because without a performing third seamer additional pressure is put on the weak link of the attack, Sodhi, and he can't really deal with that; and that Sodhi's role in the attack is less crucial because he can be covered for by Corey J and the man with the tumblr fans, whereas Wagner cannot be.

Which somehow or other transitioned into you rambling on for two pages about how good Wagner is, as if we'd all said he shouldn't be playing.

I do want Henry in there ahead of Wagner, ftr, but not for any statistically-justifiable reason. I just (selfishly) want to watch him bowl when I'm at the Basin. On potential he'd be worth the punt IMO, but unseating an incumbent who has been serviceable in his role would be pretty harsh. In fact I actually quite like Wagner as a bowler.

 

[smash84]

so which team is favorite to win the test series?