Jump to content

Reworked Top 100 Test Innings list- STILL NO SACHIN...


Robelinda

Recommended Posts

Posted
Top 10 Tendulkar Test Innings: 169 vs. South Africa at Cape Town 1997 (15.91) (Lost) 136 vs. Pakistan at Chennai 1999 (15.48) (Lost) 214 vs. Australia at Bangalore 2010 (15.03) (Won) 122 vs. England at Birmingham 1996 (14.48) (Lost) 248 vs. Bangladesh at Dhaka 2004 (14.20) (Won) 111 vs. South Africa at Johannesburg 1992 (13.63) (Draw) 116 vs. Australia at Melbourne 1999 (13.15) (Lost) 155 vs. Australia at Chennai 1998 (12.09) (Won) 146 vs. South Africa at Cape Town 2011 (11.60) (Draw) 177 vs. Australia at Bangalore 1998 (11.42) (Lost)
You can add 119* at Manchester in 1990 to save the Test...his first cent Of course his third one at Perth was a beauty too
Posted
Apparently a Laxman innings has been added at #94' date=' after a recalculation, the guy is answering questions over at cricketweb, pretty interesting task and good on him for attempting it in the first place. Its one thing to moan and whinge on the internet, another thing to actually sit down for months and create it from scratch yourself.[/quote']This I totally agree...and I totally respect him for that. In fact I have shared my own Virtuoso Analysis with him. He is definitely a good analyst in my view and while we share the like for Kapil we probably do not share the same for Sachin...lol
Posted
SRT's 100 against SA last year at Newlands is as good an innings you would see ever against Steyn and Morkel.
One of the greatest duels between batsman and bowler you will ever see.
Posted
Lol' date=' everyone is talkin abt sachin, and u got ur own issues.:haha:[/quote'] I am talking about the randomness of this list. I just used Laxman's 167 as an example. Nothing to do with my nick. His innings should not be at 8 at all. Infact not even in the list.
Posted

Any work of this kind won't get any attention if it has everything regular and in place. Sachin not being there is the only way it can catch some eyes. and Its complete bs.

Posted
I am talking about the randomness of this list. I just used Laxman's 167 as an example. Nothing to do with my nick. His innings should not be at 8 at all. Infact not even in the list.
kay.
Posted
Any work of this kind won't get any attention if it has everything regular and in place. Sachin not being there is the only way it can catch some eyes. and Its complete bs.
This! The so called 'expert' didn't even mention a thing about a certain Richards missing from that list.
Posted
No place for Sachin or Viv, couldn't care less. I didn't get this part :hmmmm2:
enough said about this dude's formula. sometimes for greatness, in order to gain recognition, must all too often consent to ape greatness.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...