Jarquis
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Are consecutive tests relevant though?Q4. No, not repeating the same thing over consecutive tests.
Are consecutive tests relevant though?Q4. No, not repeating the same thing over consecutive tests.
Q5. Yes.Are consecutive tests relevant though?
Is it a record to be proud of?Q5. Yes.
This could be answered both yes or no so I don't wish to count it as a question. I would tend towards no, personally.Is it a record to be proud of?
Q7. No - and hes still in his country's best test XI.Has he retired?
Q8. Yes, very much so.Are the number of runs scored important?
Q9. No, not even in the same country.Were the consecutive Tests against the same opposition?
Q10. Yes.Is he Indian?
Does it involve extremities of scoring? (e.g.100+ followed by 0)Q10. Yes.
Q11. Yes.Does it involve extremities of scoring? (e.g.100+ followed by 0)
Q12. You would have to have made at least one century in the first test, yes.Does part of involve making a century?
Q13. YesDoes part involve making a duck?
Very close - you've got the second part correct (a pair) but not the unbeaten century.Unbeaten century followed by a pair?
Thats the player - but not the exact feat I had in mind.Is it VVS Laxman (reason; 100+ followed by pair in the next test)