BTW, I don't think England's bowling was especially BAD. It was average and they weren't able to find a yorker to save themselves or contain him, but their bowling didn't go to pieces or anything. Their fielding and field placements let them down (never liked the "1st and half" slip positioning and it got shown up today), but I thought Hoggard, Harmison and particularly Paneser bowled pretty well today. Sometimes it doesn't matter when there's a freight train like Gilchrist was today at the other end. Although its clear why Hoggard and even Harmi aren't considered options for the one-day squad.Matt79 said:Yes, I'm sure Viv's 56-ball ton came against unrelentingly brilliant bowling from an all-time great attack. To have an innings like Viv's and Gilchrist's it's kinda obvious that the bowling is going to be average at best. You can go on about how scoring rates have increased in general yada yada yada, the fact is its a 21 year old record and the previously second, now third, fastest hundred was Jack Gregory from the 1920s...
I'd have had a slight regret for another of Viv's records to be surpassed, but Gilchrist would be an extremely worthy successor - I bet Viv enjoyed watching today's knock if he saw it.
Difference is - I'd buy a DVD of today.Craig said:Knowing Ch 9 and Cricket Australia, there will be a DVD out soon on this innings. I mean they produced one after the Adelaide Test, so why not now?
Says a lot.silentstriker said:Funny thing that both Viv's and Gilly's fastest came against the English.
Are you deliberately paraphrasing a comment about Mick Lewis and a world record chase?NZTailender said:Even with Lee in the side, this total should be safe.
Well, that's what this would indicate:marc71178 said:Are you deliberately paraphrasing a comment about Mick Lewis and a world record chase?
andyc said:
Proud of you Thomas
So would I.Matt79 said:Difference is - I'd buy a DVD of today.
reading through this thread, and from reports i've read it comes accross that they didn't actually bowl that badly (at least until the gilchrist onslaught)Dravid said:Indeed, due to two factors. 1) Gilchrist is a beast, 2) England can't bowl
Dravid said:Viv was a much better batsman than Yousuf...are you happy Yousuf beat his record?
Its ridiculous not to want records broken IMO. Lara has a higher best score than Bradman, and good for him. It would be quite boring if there were some unbeatable records.mohammad16 said:I was and wasnt at the same time, i thought vivs record was more deserving then yousuf without a doubt
It might happen in Melbourne if Hussey keeps batting like he has so farsilentstriker said:I hope I'm alive to see 99.94 being broken (though I highly doubt it).
im not saying that they shouldnt be broken, but i think his century was entertaining enough as it is, if he was on 99 with 30 balls faced, then id badly want him to break itsilentstriker said:Its ridiculous not to want records broken IMO. Lara has a higher best score than Bradman, and good for him. It would be quite boring if there were some unbeatable records.
I hope I'm alive to see 99.94 being broken (though I highly doubt it).
Well they wasn't great Marc, pretty much got a nice big hand from the Australian batsman.marc71178 said:So were England crap when bowling Australia out on the first day then?Or were they crap for the whole morning session today?
Bowled better than they did in the first innings if that is hard to believe.superkingdave said:reading through this thread, and from reports i've read it comes accross that they didn't actually bowl that badly (at least until the gilchrist onslaught)