Battle of the Test Innings

[BoyBrumby]

Lara, just. Criminal one of these has to lose, but I guess that's as it should be in the last 16.

 

[Xuhaib]

Lara by a whisker.

 

[Slifer]

Lara

 

[cameeel]

Waugh

 

[oz_fan]

Lara

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Voting closed. Lara through, 12-5.

Next up:

Don Bradman 334 v England, Headingley, 1930
http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1930S/1930/AUS_IN_ENG/AUS_ENG_T3_11-15JUL1930.html

vs.

Ricky Ponting 156 v England, Old Trafford, 2005
http://aus.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2005/AUS_IN_ENG/SCORECARDS/AUS_ENG_T3_11-15AUG2005.html

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Take your pick, really.

Bradman, I guess. Both remarkable innings though, with Bradman scoring a triple century by stumps on day 1, and Ponting saving a test in remarkable fashion.

 

[Jono]

Sir Don.

 

[bagapath]

don. sorry punter. you were good. but don was better in this case.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Don.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Sir Donald for me. Punter's was a great knock, but strictly speaking didn't actually save the test. Not that that fact necessarily lessens the quality of the knock, but if we'd be able to prise out McGrath or Lee I wonder if it would've been quite so fondly remembered?

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Sir Donald ]for me. Punter's was a great knock, but strictly speaking didn't actually save the test. Not that that fact necessarily lessens the quality of the knock, but if we'd be able to prise out McGrath or Lee I wonder if it would've been quite so fondly remembered?

What if the aussies had gotten Walsh out at Bridgetown? What if Harby didn't spin out Australia at Calcutta and Laxman's knock meant (essentially) nothing?

All what if's, and should be irrelevant to decisions in this thread, IMO.

 

[BoyBrumby]

What if the aussies had gotten Walsh out at Bridgetown? What if Harby didn't spin out Australia at Calcutta and Laxman's knock meant (essentially) nothing?

All what if's, and should be irrelevant to decisions in this thread, IMO.

Fair enough. I did say it doesn't necessarily lessen the quality of the knock. Unfortunately in team sports the context for individual performances is often given by the actions of others tho. Could you honestly say you'd feel the same about it if England had won the test? Is a test saving knock generally better than a stirling, but ultimately fruitless rearguard knock? I'd say the result makes Punter's knock look better than it would've had we taken last wicket.

To draw an analogy with another sport, look at the football WC final; if France had won the penalty shoot-out Zidane the daft lad whose emotions got the better of him, as they lost he's the man who cost his country the world cup & ended a glorious career in disgrace. Context, you see?

 

[Jono]

I agree with Brumby. Results obviously matter, and whilst I don't think they should, its clear that in mosts mind they do. Look at Tendulkar's knock against Pakistan in 1999, should have and almost did win the match for India, but his teammates around him were not good enough and too dumb to help India get over the line. Hence his knock, which was absolutely sublime when everything is put in context (vs. Pak, back injury, first test of the series) isn't held in as high regard as Lara's 153 or Ponting's 156. The same can be said for Gavaskar's 96 as well.

 

[honestbharani]

The Don

 

[Xuhaib]

Punters.

 

[thedarkmullet]

Bradman

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I agree with Brumby. Results obviously matter, and whilst I don't think they should, its clear that in mosts mind they do. Look at Tendulkar's knock against Pakistan in 1999, should have and almost did win the match for India, but his teammates around him were not good enough and too dumb to help India get over the line. Hence his knock, which was absolutely sublime when everything is put in context (vs. Pak, back injury, first test of the series) isn't held in as high regard as Lara's 153 or Ponting's 156. The same can be said for Gavaskar's 96 as well.

For me, it does matter. There is a big difference between doing enough and doing not quite enough in terms of the impact it has on the quality of the knock. Ponting getting out for 156 meant that the last pair had to face four overs, and if one of them had gotten out it would have meant that Ponting didn't do enough to save the game. As it is, he did. Tendulkar didn't, and Lara did. It might seem unfair to judge a player on the quality of his support, but really, that's what a batsman tries to do - score enough runs to win the game. If everyone else fails and the team falls short, unless that batsman is not out, you have to say they didn't do enough.

 

[wpdavid]

Bradman - Larwood & Tate are two of the best bowlers we've ever produced. Plus he kept it going for much longer than Ponting.

 

[Burpey]

Bradman