3 or more 100s in a test series for Ind

[zen]

3 or more 100s in a test series for Ind excl BD and ZIM 

 

• 3 times = Gavaskar 
• 2 times = Dravid and Kohli 

 

Kohli, Pujara, etc. are current players. Will they or one of them go past Gavaskar? 

 

 

 

Edited August 14, 2020 by zen

[zen]

Among non Indian current players, Smith has gone past Gavaskar. He has 4 series with 3 or more hundreds. 

[Gollum]

1 hour ago, zen said:

Among non Indian current players, Smith has gone past Gavaskar. He has 4 series with 3 or more hundreds. 

Incredible, in just 73 tests and he was picked for bowling initially!!!! Imagine his tally after 200 tests. Modern day Bradman. 

Edited August 14, 2020 by Gollum

[zen]

3 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Incredible, in just 73 tests and he was picked for bowling initially!!!! Imagine his tally after 200 tests. Modern day Bradman. 

I do not think he will play 200 tests for the sake of playing those. I was impressed by Mark Taylor when he was on 334 v Pak and refused to go past that as a) it was not needed as his team was in a good position, and b) respect element for Bradman. 

 

Even Lara hanged up his boots after that great series in Pak. These guys do not go on playing for the sake of it  

[coffee_rules]

Hayden 380 didn’t care for Bradman

Lara the captain kept playing to get to 400 and the test turned into a dull draw

[zen]

37 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Hayden 380 didn’t care for Bradman

Lara the captain kept playing to get to 400 and the test turned into a dull draw

We are talking about players/captains like Taylor, who always go for win. As for Lara, if the game is expected to end in a draw better try to bat once and keep the other team on the field to drain it. Though WI did well to have Eng follow on. Ind did that v Aus too where it went for 700 runs. 
 

When it comes to key decisions, these guys will not hurt the team in general. 
 

We saw in Pak in 2004 what happened when the captain of one team had to declare as a batsman when into a shell to get to his 200 (boring stuff!)

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by zen

[coffee_rules]

23 minutes ago, zen said:

We are talking about players/captains like Taylor, who always go for win. As for Lara, if the game is expected to end in a draw better try to bat once and keep the other team on the field to drain it. Though WI did well to have Eng follow on. Ind did that v Aus too where it went for 700 runs. 
 

When it comes to key decisions, these guys will not hurt the team in general. 
 

We saw in Pak in 2004 what happened when the captain of one team had to declare as a batsman when into a shell to get to his 200 (boring stuff!)

 

You are so biased. You are cherry picking out stats to criticize Tendulkar. Lara played till almost tea on Day3. If he had declared earlier WI could have won the test. He clearly wanted to beat Hayden 380. Everybody has some eye on records, just Tendulkar is not an exception

[zen]

42 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Everybody has some eye on records, just Tendulkar is not an exception

1 or 2 tests is ok (as they say exceptions do not make a rule) .... not for majority of your career  

 

 

Quote

Lara played till almost tea on Day3. If he had declared earlier WI could have won the test. He clearly wanted to beat Hayden 380.

WI only played 202 overs, which is acceptable if you do not plan to bat again. Because Eng was on the field for long, it got bundled out for 99, which created a window for WI in the first place .... As a bonus, a record like that is nice to have as it brings it back to the WI from Aus .... Eng had already won the series

 

But feel free to think otherwise 

 

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by zen

[Jimmy Cliff]

1 hour ago, zen said:

We are talking about players/captains like Taylor, who always go for win. As for Lara, if the game is expected to end in a draw better try to bat once and keep the other team on the field to drain it. Though WI did well to have Eng follow on. Ind did that v Aus too where it went for 700 runs. 
 

When it comes to key decisions, these guys will not hurt the team in general. 
 

We saw in Pak in 2004 what happened when the captain of one team had to declare as a batsman when into a shell to get to his 200 (boring stuff!)

 

That batsman was scoring at a SR of 80+ in the post tea session. I know that is not as entertaining and hard hitting as Gavaskar's 8(54) against Australia in the 4th innings while chasing 120-odd in Australia but I wouldn't refer to that as an instance of a batsman going into a shell .

[nevada]

5 hours ago, zen said:

I do not think he will play 200 tests for the sake of playing those. I was impressed by Mark Taylor when he was on 334 v Pak and refused to go past that as a) it was not needed as his team was in a good position, and b) respect element for Bradman. 

 

Even Lara hanged up his boots after that great series in Pak. These guys do not go on playing for the sake of it  

Lara was keen to play in the England test series that followed the world cup. His idea was to quit LOIs and continue in test cricket, at one point talking about playing till 40. The 2007 ODI WC was held in WI. They had a dismal tournament and as they kept losing game after game, the pressure mounted. Fed up with constant criticism and bickerings, Lara then announced that he would quit from all formats at the end of the world cup. 

[zen]

7 minutes ago, nevada said:

Lara was keen to play in the England test series that followed the world cup. His idea was to quit LOIs and continue in test cricket, at one point talking about playing till 40. The 2007 ODI WC was held in WI. They had a dismal tournament and as they kept losing game after game, the pressure mounted. Fed up with constant criticism and bickerings, Lara then announced that he would quit from all formats at the end of the world cup. 

After a series like in Pak, people like him can continue to play. At 11,953 runs, many could be like let me get to 12k or even 15k, 150 tests, etc. 

[nevada]

23 minutes ago, zen said:

After a series like in Pak, people like him can continue to play. At 11,953 runs, many could be like let me get to 12k or even 15k, 150 tests, etc. 

Yes, he could have stayed put despite the world cup debacle. An Indian player in a similar situation most likely wouldn't have quit. 

[zen]

5 minutes ago, nevada said:

Yes, he could have stayed put despite the world cup debacle. An Indian player in a similar situation most likely wouldn't have quit. 

Yes, the point. And Ind did go through a debacle as well when it was knocked out in the first round. 

[rkt.india]

On 8/15/2020 at 3:29 AM, Gollum said:

Incredible, in just 73 tests and he was picked for bowling initially!!!! Imagine his tally after 200 tests. Modern day Bradman. 

No. For him, bowling was always a secondary skill and just a way to get into the team. He was always a batsman first. Bowling got him into the team earlier than others. That's a big misconception that he was a bowler. (Due to Aussie obsession with leg spinners)

Edited August 16, 2020 by rkt.india

[raki05]

On 8/15/2020 at 3:35 AM, zen said:

I do not think he will play 200 tests for the sake of playing those. I was impressed by Mark Taylor when he was on 334 v Pak and refused to go past that as a) it was not needed as his team was in a good position, and b) respect element for Bradman. 

 

Even Lara hanged up his boots after that great series in Pak. These guys do not go on playing for the sake of it  

Lara played alone for 4 days to rach milestone 400. Talk about hypocrisy.

[maniac]

3 hours ago, raki05 said:

Lara played alone for 4 days to rach milestone 400. Talk about hypocrisy.

The match ended up in a draw, WI could have won that match had they more time.