Never to be broken records.

[SJS]

That is unbelievable.

If I were the captain then and was batting, I would have dropped myself for the next Test.

If you cant score off a bowler in 23 overs, you should be shot.

Well you couldnt shoot one of England's greatest batsmen ever, Ken Barrington for he faced most of these overs while scoring 80 in 312 balls !

If you think thats slow, just remember that Bolus, the opener at the other end during this partnership scored 8 more than barrington and took 103 balls more !!

 

[SJS]

Depends on the circumstances.

If the team need to survive on a raging bunsen pitch for the 5th day then that is great batting, and those 32 overs are actually a complete waste.

You have to give him more credit than that. He was a remarkable bowlers. England were not the only team not to be able to score off him and he had the same effect irrespective of the stage of the match and India's position at that stage. As someone said, he gave the batsmen two scoring options only : NIL or negligible !

Chew on some of his analysis against all comers over a fairly long period :

Overs Maidens Runs Wickets Against Year

32 24 23 0 Pakistan 60-61
34 24 24 1 do do
52.4 38 43 4 do do
28 13 34 0 WIndies 61-62 (away)
32 27 5 0 England 63-64
42 24 38 2 do
20.4 10 33 4 Australia 64-65
36 21 42 2 NZLand do
36.3 19 31 2 do 67-68 (away)
30 12 43 6 do do
14 6 16 1 do do
Windies included Worrell, Hunte, Nurse, Sobers, Kanhai !!

AT over 44% he has bowled a larger proportion of maidens (6 ball overs or more) than any other bowler in history and at 1.67 runs per over has the second best economy rate in ever !

Besides his 88 test wickets he also had a test hundred and had a highest first class score of 283 not out with an average over 40.

In addition he was one of India's finest ever close in fielders at gully or slips.

He would have made a great one day cricketer.

 

[bennyr]

I've got a feeling Wilfred Rhodes' test career span of 30 years 315 days is unlikely to ever be surpassed.

 

[a massive zebra]

I've got a feeling Wilfred Rhodes' test career span of 30 years 315 days is unlikely to ever be surpassed.

And his 4000 wickets in a career will take some beating.

 

[Neil Pickup]

James Southerton - Test Debut, aged 49.

 

[Sanz]

Muralitharan's 44 5-wicket hauls.

 

[chicane]

AA's record of fastest to 50 wickets.

 

[luckyeddie]

Given the enormous gulf between the strongest and weakest teams at the moment, coupled with the unpredictability of the ICC and whoever (or whatever) they are going to promote next, I don't think there's such a thing as an unbreakable match record - some of the individual aggregate records will never be broken, though, because there is no longer the amount of first class cricket in a season which used to be played (see AP Freeman).

Hedley Verity's 10-10 will take some beating, though

 

[NikhilN]

Percy's throw

 

[Neil Pickup]

Percy's throw

Probably never happened

 

[marc71178]

shahid afridi's 100 of 36 balls....doubt that will ever be beaten

The way ODI is going in favour of the batsman, I wouldn't bet against it.

 

[marc71178]

You have to give him more credit than that.

In the specific situation I suggested his bowling would have been as worthy as someone who bowled 32 overs for 150 runs if he took no wickets when the team needed them.

 

[pakster]

anwars 194??

Soo many have come close, but never seem to get past it.

There hasnt been a big big ODI century (170+) for a while, and with the ODI game likely to be shortened in the next 10 years or so (inevitible), players would have less overs to get it!!

Another factor is that many of the great batsmen of our age are nearing the end of their careers (lara, tendu, inzi...had to put him there )

IMO the ODI double century is one hell of a tough ask, most great batsmen only seem to get one chance to get such a high score.

The likes of jaysuria, ganguly, tendulker, ghilcrist and lara have already got their big 100s and are unlikely to get anywhere near that again!!


Will the ODI double century continue to allude the greats??

 

[krkode]

Personally, I think records like Jim Laker's 19 wickets in a game, Don Bradman's exploits in general, and even Chaminda Vaas's ODI 8-wicket haul, will take some effort to beat. Add to that Anwar's 194. Lots of people can lambast a terrifyingly aggressive innings but few can hold out for that long. 194 would in general require anywhere between 140-150 balls and that'd take some effort. The fact that it has come close to being beaten so many times says something about its possibility, though.

Shahid Afridi's 37-ball hundred is another near-unbeatable one, also, I think.

Then, part of me feels that Agarkar's 23-game 50 wickets will also be a tough one to beat. Not only because it's Agarkar, and he's cool, and nobody beats cool peoples' records, but also because it isn't that often that you see a bowler burst upon the scene and take wickets like that for such an extended time period. You'll have one-game-wonders and even five-game-wonders, but to take it on for 23 games is something commendable.

 

[a massive zebra]

Shahid Afridi's 37-ball hundred is another near-unbeatable one, also, I think.

I think Bradman got a 22 ball hundred in an innings of 256 during a local club game in the early 1930s.

Blackheath Invitational XI v Lithgow, Blackheath 1931

Bradman reached his hundred off only 22 balls in an exhibition match.

He took 38 off the first eight-ball over he faced and then added four sixes and four fours in the second.

The 10th six of his innings took him to three figures and he hit 14 in all, plus 29 boundaries in only 150 minutes at the crease.

 

[pakster]

"Agarkar's 23-game 50 wickets will also be a tough one to beat"

i dnt think that will last long...sorry.

There are just too many young fast bowlers who burst on to the scene, and take bundles of wickets (eg pathaan), and IMO....that record doesnt seem all that great anyway, i mean...thats only 2 wickets per match !!

NM, im sure pathaan can get it....that way u can have one indian replacing another!!


"Shahid Afridi's 37-ball hundred is another near-unbeatable one"

got to agree with that, people can bludgen 70/80 odd but to keep it going consistently till u get a 100 and scoring 11 sixes in the process is just incredible!!


One more point i'd like to make is how both ind and pak have wasted to great talents...afridi and agarkar had potential to be greats if they were coached properly and their talent fully recognised.
But hey, their still young....maybe the best is yet to come from these 2!!

 

[krkode]

"Agarkar's 23-game 50 wickets will also be a tough one to beat"

i dnt think that will last long...sorry.

There are just too many young fast bowlers who burst on to the scene, and take bundles of wickets (eg pathaan), and IMO....that record doesnt seem all that great anyway, i mean...thats only 2 wickets per match !!

NM, im sure pathaan can get it....that way u can have one indian replacing another!!

You're wrong....sorry.

The thing a lot of people aren't understanding with regards Agarkar's record is that it was his first 23 games, culminating of his first 50 wickets. 50 wickets in 23 game is no big deal, you're right. It is after all, 2 wickets a game, essentially. Any long-lasting bowler, in times of good form must have a record equivalent to that, but these were Agarkar's first 50. That is why his record is so special. You have your Narender Hirwani's grabbing 16 wickets in his first game, and your Sinclair's scoring debut-double hundreds - but could they keep going for the time required to break this record?

Yeah, Pathan's had a great start, but unless he grabs another 26 wickets within 9 games he ain't gonna make it.

 

[Sehwag309]

anwars 194??

Soo many have come close, but never seem to get past it.

There hasnt been a big big ODI century (170+) for a while, and with the ODI game likely to be shortened in the next 10 years or so (inevitible), players would have less overs to get it!!

Another factor is that many of the great batsmen of our age are nearing the end of their careers (lara, tendu, inzi...had to put him there )

IMO the ODI double century is one hell of a tough ask, most great batsmen only seem to get one chance to get such a high score.

The likes of jaysuria, ganguly, tendulker, ghilcrist and lara have already got their big 100s and are unlikely to get anywhere near that again!!


Will the ODI double century continue to allude the greats??

I can say sehwag might do it. I was keenly watching the Ind/NZ match where tendulkar scored 186*, Jadeja was his partner and asked him if he wants strike (they had like 1 or 2 overs left) and tendulkar with his hand action told him to play and not worry abt trying to get him to the other end. He would have scored 200+ actually in that match if he had the strike.

I feel to the contrary that 194 will be broken the way the modern ODI is turning out to be, but to score 194 in chasing...very very tough a.k.a Anwar

 

[krkode]

I can say sehwag might do it. I was keenly watching the Ind/NZ match where tendulkar scored 186*, Jadeja was his partner and asked him if he wants strike (they had like 1 or 2 overs left) and tendulkar with his hand action told him to play and not worry abt trying to get him to the other end. He would have scored 200+ actually in that match if he had the strike.

But what really matters is he didn't. And surely, even for Tendulkar, that chance may not present itself very often.

 

[Craig]

I believe Hanif Mohammed (or one of the Mohammed clan) of Pakistan made his Test debut at 15 years of age (have no idea about days), will take some beating.

I dont think even Zibabwe will pick a player do that.