With the BBL about to start (I refuse to call it WBBL until that other
tournament is known as the MBBL) then the stats wallers have been sharpening
their pencils - or more like clicking their keyboards to give us some
background before the party kicks off. I found the exchange below quite
At first you might expect that the number of 50+ scores any one nation's
players had contributed previously could perhaps be in proportion to the
number of representatives they had in the tournament. However that can't be
right, obviously, for Australia. All the other nations represented have
provided the cream of their batting crop whereas Australia have to play a
large number of non-internationals, in the same manner that England must do
in the KSL.
So is the fact the home team have provided over 60% of the total mean they
have a higher number than you might expect? I've no
idea frankly but I find the numbers intriguing. Also have the Sri Lankans
punched above their weight? You judge...