ESPNCricinfo Awards 2010

[Howe_zat]

Yeah, and he will. People will always remember the first double hundred, how long it took for it to occur, who scored it and exactly how fitting it was for such a great to finally break the barrier. It'll go down in history - nay, it already has gone down in history - as a landmark limited overs knock.

While some may see that as further justification to give him the award here, I see it the opposite way, if anything. Historical significance stands alone and doesn't need to be incorporated into awards like this; it has an intrinsic place above. If it was the best innings regardless I'd give him the award, but the Razzaq innings was (IMO anyway) better, so it deserves proper recognition too for being what it was.

This.

Friggin this.

Also, some more of this.

 

[Cevno]

razzaq versus mathews would be a interesting comparison as well.

 

[Teja.]

I reckon people wrongly give extra credit to the ATG knocks of ATG batsmen. IIRC, It was Uppercut who hoped that people won't forget Razzak's Innings because it was he and not Viv who played it. I don't think there would have been this debate if Tendulkar played the Razzak knock tbvh.

 

[vcs]

Razzaq's knock was amazing.

Did anyone watch the Afridi innings? Just look at his SR and compare it with everyone else in that match. I know it's Afridi, but WTF. I think I missed something special.

 

[Prince EWS]

razzaq versus mathews would be a interesting comparison as well.

Yeah no doubt, but I tend to favour Razzaq because he did it by himself. His only support was the tail playing out dot balls and running themselves out. Matthews had Malinga.

 

[Howe_zat]

razzaq versus mathews would be a interesting comparison as well.

The difference would be, I think, that Razzaq did it pretty much on his own and against the clock, whereas Matthews had Malinga striking it really well at the other end and plenty of time.

 

[silentstriker]

How the **** has Trott's innings at Lord's vs Pakistan not been nominated?

I would not give any innings by or against Pakistan any awards this year.


My votes would go to VVS and Steyn. The only bowler in the world currently who can (and did on that occasion) take the pitch out of the equation.

However, Johnson is very close, and actually might be ahead - I wouldn't mind seeing him win it either.

 

[Prince EWS]

The difference would be, I think, that Razzaq did it pretty much on his own and against the clock, whereas Matthews had Malinga striking it really well at the other end and plenty of time.

I beat you.

 

[Howe_zat]

I beat you.

Because you live inside the machine and have no physical manifestation. The rest of us actually have to type **** out.

 

[Prince EWS]

Because you live inside the machine and have no physical manifestation. The rest of us actually have to type **** out.

Don't hate the player; hate the game.

 

[smash84]

Don't hate the player; hate the game.

 

[blahblahblah]

Don't hate the player; hate the game.

 

[Cevno]

I reckon people wrongly give extra credit to the ATG knocks of ATG batsmen. IIRC, It was Uppercut who hoped that people won't forget Razzak's Innings because it was he and not Viv who played it. I don't think there would have been this debate if Tendulkar played the Razzak knock tbvh.

I don't neccesarily agree with you.

Specially since the argument being made against Tendulkar's innings mainly here is that such a landmark breaking knock coming from him is not a surprise ,but one coming from Razzak in such a situation was not expected.

It basically contradicts what you are implying.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I see it but I don't believe it. Are people actually downplaying Tendulkar's innings in comparison to Razzaq's on the basis that the former was merely a 'historical landmark' ??

As good as Razzaq's innings was, Tendulkar's was 200 frikkin runs in an ODI innings against an attack featuring only the best bowler playing the game, FFS.

Read that aloud again,

200*

Piece of cake, obviously. The only innings that matter are those where you limp towards the end and then launch an optimistic blitz kreig, rather than do the sensible thing by pacing yourself better than anyone has ever managed.

 

[Howe_zat]

I see it but I don't believe it. Are people actually downplaying Tendulkar's innings in comparison to Razzaq's on the basis that the former was merely a 'historical landmark' ??

No, we're saying that Tendulkar's innings was amazing - brilliant, wonderful, etc. - but it didn't blow the roof off my head like Razzaq's did.

As good as Razzaq's innings was, Tendulkar's was 200 frikkin runs in an ODI innings against an attack featuring only the best bowler playing the game, FFS.

I assume you mean van de Merwe?

Steyn was hardly bowling his best that day, to be fair.

200*

Piece of cake, obviously. The only innings that matter are those where you limp towards the end and then launch an optimistic blitz kreig rather than doing the sensible thing

[/QUOTE]

It's hardly Razzaq's fault that his team-mates played poorly and got out, if anything it adds to his achievement, he was forced to rebuild a wreckage before playing a blinder - completely on his own.

pacing yourself better than anyone has ever managed.

Er... A touch of fanboyism, possibly? Sachin was outpaced by most of his team-mates in the same innings!

A fair few batsmen have reached big hundreds and got out - I'm especially thinking of Gibbs' 170-odd from 2006 - witht plenty of time to spare, so it's the weight of runs rather than the pacing that was really impressive. And while the pacing was a magnificent achievement, it's hardly "better than anyone has ever managed".

 

[Blaze 18]

Tests

Batting : VVS Laxman's seventy odd at Mohali.
Bowling : Dale Steyn's seven for fifty-one at Nagpur.


As for ODIs,I am going to go for Shahid Afridi's magnificent century at Dambulla - we all know how hard it is to chase a total there under lights. As good as Razzaq's innings was, he was helped by some abysmal bowling at the death from the South Africans. Afridi was afforded no such luxury. In fact, he had to bat with pain for a large part of his innings, much like Laxman did at Mohali.

ODIs

Batting : Shahid Afridi's hundred at Dambulla.
Bowling : I can't think of too many. Maybe Umar Gul's six for whatever in the second or third England ODI.

 

[G.I.Joe]

No, we're saying that Tendulkar's innings was amazing - brilliant, wonderful, etc. - but it didn't blow the roof off my head like Razzaq's did.



I assume you mean van de Merwe?

Steyn was hardly bowling his best that day, to be fair.





It's hardly Razzaq's fault that his team-mates played poorly and got out, if anything it adds to his achievement, he was forced to rebuild a wreckage before playing a blinder - completely on his own.



Er... A touch of fanboyism, possibly? Sachin was outpaced by most of his team-mates in the same innings!

A fair few batsmen have reached big hundreds and got out - I'm especially thinking of Gibbs' 170-odd from 2006 - witht plenty of time to spare, so it's the weight of runs rather than the pacing that was really impressive. And while the pacing was a magnificent achievement, it's hardly "better than anyone has ever managed".

Yeah, I must have missed all his teammates hitting 200s of their own in the innings. Its obvious what 'pacing' means in proper context. Dhoni can worry about people not remembering his 60 odd of 30 odd deliveries. Steyn wasn't bowling well, because I don't know, perhaps a certain batsman played him well enough to make it look so.

Fanboyism indeed. CW's gone to the dogs. Mention a positive in favour of Tendulkar, and you're accused of being a fanboy

 

[silentstriker]

Obviously the way you know if he was bowling at his best is if anyone scored 200*. Therefore, anyone who scores 200* against Steyn, their innings is irrelevant, as it came against Steyn who was evidently not bowling at his best.

I love it.

 

[smash84]

I see it but I don't believe it. Are people actually downplaying Tendulkar's innings in comparison to Razzaq's on the basis that the former was merely a 'historical landmark' ??

As good as Razzaq's innings was, Tendulkar's was 200 frikkin runs in an ODI innings against an attack featuring only the best bowler playing the game, FFS.

Read that aloud again,

200*

Piece of cake, obviously. The only innings that matter are those where you limp towards the end and then launch an optimistic blitz kreig, rather than do the sensible thing by pacing yourself better than anyone has ever managed.

Steyn not being his best on that day is a silly point IMO. However Steyn is not the best ODI bowler in the world at all. In fact his ODI record is quite pedestrian. A bowling average of almost 31. The SR is still decent but nothing sensational. Add to that an ER of 5.37 and you have a not so great ODI record.

 

[Howe_zat]

Fanboyism indeed. CW's gone to the dogs. Mention a positive in favour of Tendulkar, and you're accused of being a fanboy

I, as well as just about everyone here, has praised that 200 immensely.

The overall tone of your post was that nobody could ever manage anything like it or has ever come close in the past, due to the sheer numbers and nothing else, because you say so. Which smacks of fanboyism.

The point of this thread is to try and find a some criteria with which to rate outstanding performances, so I'm okay with conflicting opinions here - that's inevitable. So don't say "CW has gone to the dogs" whenever someone disagrees.