Missed Milestones

[bagapath]

Derek Underwood finishing with 297 wickets was quite painful. at least "billy" mcdermott chose to stop at 291 on his own. underwood, on the other hand, badly wanted the milestone but was denied the opportunity. the spinners who came after him for england, emburey and edmonds, were no patch on him.i still feel bad about this injustice!

gilchrist missing the fastest test century by a mere couple of deliveries was also a very close call.

 

[Richard]

I often wonder how many Test wickets Underwood would have got but for WSC.

And how many he'd have got had wickets not become covered (and had WSC and Rebel tours not happened) doesn't bear thinking about. Murali and Warne might well have been overtaking him, not Courtney Walsh, if that'd been the case.

 

[Richard]

If you see it as unfair that the public make a big fuss over centuries, then why does it annoy you that batsmen get out in the 90s, surely you shouldn't care.

It annoys me because then people sometimes (not always) think that someone who made 104 has done enormously better than one who made 95, when in reality the difference is almost always nothing.

It doesn't impact upon how I rate batsmen, but it sometimes does on how others do. When others get it wrong (ie, don't look at things the way I do ) that's irritating, as you may have noticed.

its not as though anyone thinks less of Stevie Waugh because he got out in the 90s a few times

How do you know? How do you know how different it might have been had he converted the lot of them? You don't, because it didn't happen. All you know is that he was still a magnificent batsman even with those little blips.

 

[Perm]

gilchrist missing the fastest test century by a mere couple of deliveries was also a very close call.

AWTA.

 

[pasag]

Yeah what was annoying about Gilchrist's was that it was a very wide ball from Hoggard so there was nothing much he could do. Not like he just mucked up the shot.

 

[99*]

Martin Crowe's 299.

 

[Perm]

Yeah what was annoying about Gilchrist's was that it was a very wide ball from Hoggard so there was nothing much he could do. Not like he just mucked up the shot.

Yeah, I remember yelling abuse at Hoggard (well, the TV) when it happened. Easily the most memorable innings I've seen.

 

[NUFAN]

Damian Fleming misses out on his 2nd Test hattrick as Shane Warne dropped a catch at first slip.

Only Trumble, Matthews and Akram have 2 Test Hattricks.

 

[bagapath]

In 1990, sachin got out for 88 in new zealand. 12 more runs would have made him the youngest cricketer to score a test century.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah what was annoying about Gilchrist's was that it was a very wide ball from Hoggard so there was nothing much he could do. Not like he just mucked up the shot.

One of my all-time favourite deliveries, that

 

[Richard]

Yeah, I remember yelling abuse at Hoggard (well, the TV) when it happened.

Yeah, he should just have fed the thing up and put the thing on a place for Gilchrist.

 

[Perm]

Yeah, he should just have fed the thing up and put the thing on a place for Gilchrist.

 

[Richard]

It's you that deserves the Rolleyes for that comment TBH.

 

[Perm]

It's you that deserves the Rolleyes for that comment TBH.

How? I got caught up in the moment of my favourite ever player about to break the record for the fastest Test century and then Hoggard bowls a wide, denying him the opportunity. I'm not saying Hoggard should've bowled a full-toss or anything, but I still thought it was poor form to bowl that wide. But I was venting my frustration at Gilchrist missing out moreso than Hoggard's bowling.

 

[Richard]

As a bowler your principal job is to stop batsmen scoring runs. You must do whatever you can in order to do that. I don't think it's poor form to do your job.

 

[Indipper]

And giving up extras so the other guy can't break a record is doing your job?

 

[_Ed_]

I don't think it was as bad as when Pat Symcox tried to bowl a wide that went for 4 to stop Nathan Astle getting a ton before NZ got to the target in an ODI here once.

 

[Spikey]

Bradman's 299* is one I can think of. Laker missing out on 20 wickets in a test by a wicket is another

Border not getting a series win over the Windies is something among the same lines too

 

[Swervy]

It annoys me because then people sometimes (not always) think that someone who made 104 has done enormously better than one who made 95, when in reality the difference is almost always nothing.

It doesn't impact upon how I rate batsmen, but it sometimes does on how others do. When others get it wrong (ie, don't look at things the way I do ) that's irritating, as you may have noticed.

How do you know? How do you know how different it might have been had he converted the lot of them? You don't, because it didn't happen. All you know is that he was still a magnificent batsman even with those little blips.

you know best

 

[Richard]

And giving up extras so the other guy can't break a record is doing your job?

Like Alok Kapali did with the Herschelle Gibbs five-wides in 2002/03?

Look I won't deny that that was a bit underhand, and naturally he's always denied doing it deliberately (dubious TSTL). But how on Earth is bowling a ball that's difficult to score off when a batsman is scoring exceptionally quickly anything other than doing your job?