**Official** England in The West Indies

[Tom Halsey]

OK, I'll get the ball rolling.


How selfish was Lara in batting onto 400 and not declaring?

Selfish, true. But as has been said, once the series was over 400* means more than 3-1.

 

[Craig]

I would think a team victory would be much better then a new world record would it not?

 

[marc71178]

Irrelevant on that wicket.

A result was a 1% chance.

 

[Revelation]

400* or 3-1? I think definitely 400* was more uplifting and significant to WI cricket. 3-1 would have been just like last year's series. that match in Antigua also ended with a world record 418/6 chase by the WI. it really was a muted thing when compared to the 400*.

 

[PY]

400* or 3-1? I think definitely 400* was more uplifting and significant to WI cricket. 3-1 would have been just like last year's series. that match in Antigua also ended with a world record 418/6 chase by the WI. it really was a muted thing when compared to the 400*.

Wasn't the world-record chase a world record and a win though?

Why not huge celebrations for that then? (Serious question)

Welcome to CW if you haven't already been welcomed.

 

[Revelation]

don't get me wrong. there were celebrations, but nothing on the scale of lara's 400*. but even the 400*was more muted compared to the 375.

what i'm saying is that the problem of WI cricket goes far beyond a Lara 400* or a 418/6 run-chase. Sure, in the last 5 series we've won 2 (Zim and SL) and lost 3 (Aus,SA and Eng), two against the top sides in world cricket, but i think that C'bean people want more. I think that the 400* wsa more meaningful to the WI public since it showed the strength of the captain and the team to rebound from 47 all out to 751. Last year, the match was very much closer, so close in fact that WI and Aus recorded identical scores of 240 in the first innings each and australia's 417 was beaten by the record chase.

The 400* was significant for the fact that it was the first of its kind in Tests, that it came from their captain who had a horrendous series and that they saw their team fight back against the opposition that had humbled them so badly. If you are saying that WI should have gone for a win then i ask you how was that going to be possible? Had Lara declared the minute he swept the 4 to bring up 384* this is the sequence that would have happened. the shot was played at 11.44 am and play resumed at 11.52am after the congratulatory team left the field. A declaration at that time (WI-716/5 and Jacobs on 92*) would have been unfortuante for Jacobs, who had literally guided Lara to his mark, and lunch taken since England would have required 10 mins to change innings. So they played on. By the time Jacobs had his century, Lara was on 390*. I don't think Lara would have been as stupid as a certain sub-continent captain to declare HIMSELF (of all people) in the 390s. People this is history. In addition, England showed quite capably how they could have come back into the match had a declaration been made too early. WI ended up with 5 wickets still to get at the close of play. Even if England were xyz/8 or 9, chances are that, to win the match WI would have still had to go out there and knock off 20 or 30 runs. They would have needed about an extra half hour just to get that. If you want to blame Lara for not winning the match i am with you, but not because he declared too late or was greedy for 400*. I think the match as a win was lost when he put down Flintoff of 26 who then went on to score 102*.

 

[tooextracool]

what i'm saying is that the problem of WI cricket goes far beyond a Lara 400* or a 418/6 run-chase. Sure, in the last 5 series we've won 2 (Zim and SL) and lost 3 (Aus,SA and Eng), two against the top sides in world cricket, but i think that C'bean people want more. I think that the 400* wsa more meaningful to the WI public since it showed the strength of the captain and the team to rebound from 47 all out to 751. Last year, the match was very much closer, so close in fact that WI and Aus recorded identical scores of 240 in the first innings each and australia's 417 was beaten by the record chase.

not really it shows how they can play in antigua and other flat tracks.....we've seen this time and time again from the west indies, when the ball seams about a little bit they come undone. we saw it in the ODIs against SA when they got 54 all out and then chased 300.
yes the 400 was more important for WI cricket than the victory....what ponting fails to see is the pointlessness of the victory, they would have only made it 3-1 and the series would forever been remembered for the thrashing that england gave them. however at least now when we lookback at the series laras 400* comes first while the england thrashing comes next.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I would think a team victory would be much better then a new world record would it not?

Quite simply Craig, you were not in the position of a West Indian supporter. A 3-1 margin and no record is not as pleasing as 400 not out from Brian Lara and a 3-0 scoreline. After the horrible batting and crushing defeats of the series previously, Lara's knock was huge for us.

 

[roseboy64]

Absolutely right.

 

[Revelation]

One has to remember that Lara is and for the next 3 years will be the WI team.

 

[Craig]

I think the match as a win was lost when he put down Flintoff of 26 who then went on to score 102*.

If he ever shows his face in here again and you hang around here long enough, you will meet a English lad named Richard (do a search under his name) and he will tell Flintoff did not deserve his 102* because he gave a chance on 26.

 

[Revelation]

so his idea of deserving innings is flawless innings?

IE; Lara's 501* would have been 11, his 400* would be 293, Thorpe's 120 odd that won the test would be 76 etc etc??

 

[PY]

You guessed it.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

so his idea of deserving innings is flawless innings?

IE; Lara's 501* would have been 11, his 400* would be 293, Thorpe's 120 odd that won the test would be 76 etc etc??

Lara never actually gave a genuine chance though. Both were extremely difficult and thus half-chances.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Lara never actually gave a genuine chance though. Both were extremely difficult and thus half-chances.

Correction, his 400* should have been 0.

And the 501 was a regulation caught-behind on 11.

 

[tooextracool]

If he ever shows his face in here again and you hang around here long enough, you will meet a English lad named Richard (do a search under his name) and he will tell Flintoff did not deserve his 102* because he gave a chance on 26.

you really love richard dont you?

 

[twctopcat]

you really love richard dont you?

I'm sure Richard is still here somewhere.....

 

[marc71178]

I'm sure Richard is still here somewhere.....

I agree!

 

[Revelation]

First of all, LAra was not dismissed on 0. The call by Hair was right on spot as confirmed by replays and a new software program introduced by Sky Sports called 'Ultra Motion' He gave a run out chance on 150 odd and the 293 was a catch through Batty's hand. There was also one on 350 odd, but that was though to be a genuine flick down leg side AWAY from the keeper.

Also, in the 501*, he was bowled off a no ball sometime during the innings. When the keeper dropped him he (the keeper) allegedly said 'oh dear, he'd probably make a hundred.'

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Correction, his 400* should have been 0.

Ah yes, it's a shame Mr. Hair knows a thing or two about umpiring otherwise you would have had you way.