Battle of the Test Innings

[Burpey]

Tugger

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Waugh pretty easily. Gavaskar's innings was obviously a fine one, but it wasn't a matchwinner, and Waugh had a pretty good attack to deal with, even if the pitch was presumably somewhat easier.

Waugh's innings also had the significance of clinching the first series win for any team in the West Indies for a good 20 years or so.

 

[cricketboy29]

Gavasker, absolutely brillant innings on a minefield.

 

[Sanz]

Sunny Gavaskar.

 

[Slifer]

Waugh

 

[Jono]

Gavaskar just slightly. Definition of a 5th day knock on a minefield with no one else capable around him.

 

[oz_fan]

Waugh

 

[Dasa]

Gavaskar. Waugh's innings is memorable more for the circumstances surrounding the match and series rather than the quality of batting.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Waugh's innings is memorable more for the circumstances surrounding the match and series rather than the quality of batting.

I'll have to disagree there, assuming you are referring to the world championship win factor. There were other circumstances surrounding the innings that made it great, but I think they are relevant to the quality as well.

Waugh in that series was just about the most difficult batsman to dismiss I have ever seen. He stuck it out against a great pace attack on some horrible pitches, often in difficult circumstances and in the face of tremendous intimidation. In a series where the average team score for a completed innings of 10 wickets was 256, he scored 429 runs and was only dismissed 4 times.

That innings of 200 to finish the series was the culmination of a whole series of getting on top of Ambrose and Walsh. On the flattest wicket of the four (though by no means a road), he just dominated, and it's definately in the top 5 finest innings I've ever seen.

Mind you, I'm sure Richard thinks it's crap.

 

[Dasa]

I'm not saying Waugh didn't bat well, not at all - he obviously played brilliantly both in the innings in question and throughout the series. I think though that the innings is being rated higher by some because of the impact it had in regard to the series. Assessing the innings on the batting alone, leaving aside anything else in the series, I rate Gavaskar's 96 marginally higher.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

I'm not saying Waugh didn't bat well, not at all - he obviously played brilliantly both in the innings in question and throughout the series. I think though that the innings is being rated higher by some because of the impact it had in regard to the series. Assessing the innings on the batting alone, leaving aside anything else in the series, I rate Gavaskar's 96 marginally higher.

But don't additional factors, as well as quality of batting, come into it? Surely there's numerous criteria including batting quality, match state, series state, quality of bowling, overall pressure, quality of pitch etc.

 

[Dasa]

But don't additional factors, as well as quality of batting, come into it? Surely there's numerous criteria including batting quality, match state, series state, quality of bowling, overall pressure, quality of pitch etc.

Of course. I place most emphasis on quality of batting, quality of pitch and bowling. Others may use different criteria.

 

[cameeel]

SR Waugh

 

[SJS]

Gavaskar

 

[BoyBrumby]

Voting seems to be going down Indian/Aussie lines, perhaps not surprisingly.

Anyhoo, as a neutral (or as neutral as any Pom gets when an Aussie is up against a non-Aussie...) I'll have to go for SR Waugh here. The sort of innings the great man was all about.

 

[bagapath]

waugh. they won the match. that matters a lot. gavaskar's effort was a gem. i remember most of it quiet well. but it wasn't enough. unfair to hold it against him. but thats how it goes waugh all the way.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Voting closed. 'Steveda' through 9-5.

Next up:

Stan McCabe 187* v England, SCG, 1932
http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1930S/1932-33/ENG_IN_AUS/ENG_AUS_T1_02-07DEC1932.html

vs.

Graham Gooch 333 and 123 v India, 1990
http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1990/IND_IN_ENG/IND_ENG_T1_26-31JUL1990.html

 

[Burpey]

Gooch

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Bodyline-era McCabe for me, with situation over weight of runs.

McCabe's knock, coming as it did in circumstances where every other batsman struggled, and where he was facing potentially lethal bowling in an utterly fearless manner, was one of the finest of its time. Notable that not one other Australian batsman passed 50 in the match, while of course England didn't have to contend with the... interesting tactics.

Gooch's innings was obviously an impressive feat of concentration, but you couldn't really say that the attack was up to much, and the surface was famously terrible.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

and the surface was famously terrible.

Is that horrendously flat or horrendously difficult?