What is tougher in Cricket ?

[Vijay.Sharma]

In 80s and 90s reaching 160 -170 was difficult .The way quality of bowling is going down and teams are putting bigger and bigger total ' date='I don't think it was unexpected that 200s will not be possible.Just look at the scorecard of 2nd ODI of Australia vs Bangladesh ,Watson made 185 in 26 overs, because the total of BD was 229 Watson was unable to to get more.If it would have been 1st innings then Don't know how many Watson could had put on board[/quote']I actually dont think that the argument that the quality of bowling has gone down is really very factual. Of course the 90s was the decade when it came to maximum number of ATG bowlers operating. But overall I dont think that the new millenium's average bowler is worse than at any other time. Secondly, the argument that pitches are all flat is also not factually correct. If someone throws up numbers related to increase in averages and argues that it proves pitches are flatter than before or bowlers are worse than before I think it would be a mistake. There is correlation not causation. I think the biggest cause is in style of play. The ODI game has been well and truly cracked from a batsman's perspective right now. And with the advent of T20 the style of play has become even more aggressive. I will attribute the high scores to style of play and willingness to take more risks by batsmen than bowling standards or pitches. In fact I would actually argue that the current ODI bowlers, if they bowled in ODIs in the 70s, 80s, or 90s would probably restrict teams to less than 200 in 60 overs or less than 180 in 50 overs very often.

[vvvslaxman]

caging sreesanth?

[Magneto]

^^ :haha: He is apparently a poet and a pianist. Should not be very difficult to cage him.

[Sachin=GOD]

caging sreesanth?

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[Bumper]

Actually, i dont reckon a 200 in a 50-over ODI is that difficult anymore. In this era of 20 overs of powerplay and Twenty20 hitters, 200 is more like the 150 of the yesteryears. Sooner or later, some body will break Sehwag's record, prolly Sehwag himself (he still had 4 overs to go when he got out yesterday, on a perfect day, that's another 30-40 runs) When SRT scored his 200, i mentioned that his record will be broken shortly & it happened just as i had predicted. To Outsider's Everest analogy, the equivalent of Tensing Norgay and Edmund Hillary is really Viv's 180+ (not SRT's 200). Viv's 180 was lightyears ahead of anything his peers could conjure up. 300 in test cricket is going to become more and more a rarity. Modern batsmen simpy don't have the patience to last that long. To me, the qunitessential batting record (and perhaps one that will never be broken) is Lara's 400. That will take some getting!

[Sehwag1830]

Actually, i dont reckon a 200 in a 50-over ODI is that difficult anymore. In this era of 20 overs of powerplay and Twenty20 hitters, 200 is more like the 150 of the yesteryears. Sooner or later, some body will break Sehwag's record, prolly Sehwag himself (he still had 4 overs to go when he got out yesterday, on a perfect day, that's another 30-40 runs) When SRT scored his 200, i mentioned that his record will be broken shortly & it happened just as i had predicted. To Outsider's Everest analogy, the equivalent of Tensing Norgay and Edmund Hillary is really Viv's 180+ (not SRT's 200). Viv's 180 was lightyears ahead of anything his peers could conjure up. 300 in test cricket is going to become more and more a rarity. Modern batsmen simpy don't have the patience to last that long. To me, the qunitessential batting record (and perhaps one that will never be broken) is Lara's 400. That will take some getting!

Kapil Dev had scored 175. How is 189 light years ahead of 175 ?

[bulbul]

caging sreesanth?

:haha: even tougher is to Cage is Avatar Dravid_The Wall :giggle:

[Tiger80]

I actually dont think that the argument that the quality of bowling has gone down is really very factual. Of course the 90s was the decade when it came to maximum number of ATG bowlers operating. But overall I dont think that the new millenium's average bowler is worse than at any other time. Secondly, the argument that pitches are all flat is also not factually correct. If someone throws up numbers related to increase in averages and argues that it proves pitches are flatter than before or bowlers are worse than before I think it would be a mistake. There is correlation not causation. I think the biggest cause is in style of play. The ODI game has been well and truly cracked from a batsman's perspective right now. And with the advent of T20 the style of play has become even more aggressive. I will attribute the high scores to style of play and willingness to take more risks by batsmen than bowling standards or pitches. In fact I would actually argue that the current ODI bowlers, if they bowled in ODIs in the 70s, 80s, or 90s would probably restrict teams to less than 200 in 60 overs or less than 180 in 50 overs very often.

At present Pakistan is only sub continent team that has decent bowling attack and they are the one which are actually winning low scoring matches.In Sl vs Pak series no team was able to pass 300 and almost all matches were low/average scoring ,so we are still seeing bowlers dominating.If your argument that game is cracked is true then SL with decent batsmen should had beaten Pakistan convincingly but that did not happen

[Vijay.Sharma]

Actually, i dont reckon a 200 in a 50-over ODI is that difficult anymore. In this era of 20 overs of powerplay and Twenty20 hitters, 200 is more like the 150 of the yesteryears. Sooner or later, some body will break Sehwag's record, prolly Sehwag himself (he still had 4 overs to go when he got out yesterday, on a perfect day, that's another 30-40 runs) When SRT scored his 200, i mentioned that his record will be broken shortly & it happened just as i had predicted. To Outsider's Everest analogy, the equivalent of Tensing Norgay and Edmund Hillary is really Viv's 180+ (not SRT's 200). Viv's 180 was lightyears ahead of anything his peers could conjure up. 300 in test cricket is going to become more and more a rarity. Modern batsmen simpy don't have the patience to last that long. To me, the qunitessential batting record (and perhaps one that will never be broken) is Lara's 400. That will take some getting!

I'll put that down to you not being aware of other high scores that came before that. The first of them was 171 by Glenn Turner in the 1975 World Cup...1975 WC before which hardly about 20 ODIs in all were played. After that came Kapil's 175 in 1983 by which time hardly about 300 ODIs in all had been played. So that argument dunn work very well really

[Vijay.Sharma]

At present Pakistan is only sub continent team that has decent bowling attack and they are the one which are actually winning low scoring matches.In Sl vs Pak series no team was able to pass 300 and almost all matches were low/average scoring ' date='so we are still seeing bowlers dominating.If your argument that game is cracked is true then SL with decent batsmen should had beaten Pakistan convincingly but that did not happen[/quote']My argument of ODI batting being cracked dunn mean all games will be high scoring ones. The main point is that I attribute high scores to style of play first and only then the others. In fact if I had to theorize and pick the key influencing factors for high scores I would arrange them in the following order - 1. Style of play 2. ODI rules (PPs) 3. Quality of batting equipment (edges go for sixes) 4. Pitches Bowlers have actually become better overall (do not compare ATGs here)

[Jersey #10]

Afridi will break all rikards

[OriginalCopy]

I think Afridi's record of 37 ball hundred will stand the test of time. That record will most likely not be broken for a long long time, leave alone in an ODI, but even T20.

[bulbul]

I think Afridi's record of 37 ball hundred will stand the test of time. That record will most likely not be broken for a long long time' date=' leave alone in an ODI, but even T20.[/quote'] also Afridi's Walking time From Pavillion to Crease and Return also stands for loooooooooooong time...no one can even imagine that..its faster than Light

[Magneto]

:haha: even tougher is to Cage is Avatar Dravid_The Wall :giggle:

:hysterical:

[Sid]

I think Afridi's record of 37 ball hundred will stand the test of time. That record will most likely not be broken for a long long time' date=' leave alone in an ODI, but even T20.[/quote'] And also Yuvi's 12 ball 50 is hard to break.

[vvvslaxman]

I think Afridi's record of 37 ball hundred will stand the test of time. That record will most likely not be broken for a long long time' date=' leave alone in an ODI, but even T20.[/quote'] That and Yuvraj's 12 ball 50. Insane. 37 ball 100 means 2.7 runs per ball. 12 ball 50 means 4.50 runs per ball.

[Magneto]

Actually, i dont reckon a 200 in a 50-over ODI is that difficult anymore. In this era of 20 overs of powerplay and Twenty20 hitters, 200 is more like the 150 of the yesteryears. Sooner or later, some body will break Sehwag's record, prolly Sehwag himself (he still had 4 overs to go when he got out yesterday, on a perfect day, that's another 30-40 runs) When SRT scored his 200, i mentioned that his record will be broken shortly & it happened just as i had predicted. To Outsider's Everest analogy, the equivalent of Tensing Norgay and Edmund Hillary is really Viv's 180+ (not SRT's 200). Viv's 180 was lightyears ahead of anything his peers could conjure up. 300 in test cricket is going to become more and more a rarity. Modern batsmen simpy don't have the patience to last that long. To me, the qunitessential batting record (and perhaps one that will never be broken) is Lara's 400. That will take some getting!

Twenty Four 300+ scores have been scored till now in Test cricket. 2001-2011 - 9 triple centuries 1991-2000 - 3 triple centuries 1981-1990 - 1 triple century 1971-1980 - 1 triple century 1961-1970 - 3 triple centuries 1951-1960 - 2 triple centuries 1941-1950 - None 1931-1940 - 3 triple centuries 1921-1930 - 2 triple centuries The last decade has seen a humoungous rise in the number of triple centuries. How can you just state that 300s will become a rarity? More 300s were scored in the last decade than the previous 40 years put together.

[mishra]

200 in odi is probably 400 or somewhere near to that in tests.

[carnish]

Twenty Four 300+ scores have been scored till now in Test cricket. 2001-2011 - 9 triple centuries 1991-2000 - 3 triple centuries 1981-1990 - 1 triple century 1971-1980 - 1 triple century 1961-1970 - 3 triple centuries 1951-1960 - 2 triple centuries 1941-1950 - None 1931-1940 - 3 triple centuries 1921-1930 - 2 triple centuries The last decade has seen a humoungous rise in the number of triple centuries. How can you just state that 300s will become a rarity? More 300s were scored in the last decade than the previous 40 years put together.

LOL seems you got Bumper with this YORKER... :hysterical:

[Laaloo]

Actually, i dont reckon a 200 in a 50-over ODI is that difficult anymore. In this era of 20 overs of powerplay and Twenty20 hitters, 200 is more like the 150 of the yesteryears. Sooner or later, some body will break Sehwag's record, prolly Sehwag himself (he still had 4 overs to go when he got out yesterday, on a perfect day, that's another 30-40 runs) When SRT scored his 200, i mentioned that his record will be broken shortly & it happened just as i had predicted. To Outsider's Everest analogy, the equivalent of Tensing Norgay and Edmund Hillary is really Viv's 180+ (not SRT's 200). Viv's 180 was lightyears ahead of anything his peers could conjure up. 300 in test cricket is going to become more and more a rarity. Modern batsmen simpy don't have the patience to last that long. To me, the qunitessential batting record (and perhaps one that will never be broken) is Lara's 400. That will take some getting!

Sehwag was out in the 44th over. He still had 6 more overs to bat.