How many times did Gavaskar get a wrong decision in Australia? A fair few times I would think.Gavaskar basically becoming a tail ender when Lillee bowled is why he can't be rated in the truly top echelon of all time opening batsmen. Did well here on the 77-78 and 85-86 tours when we had joke attacks riven by WSC and Rebel Tour defections. That aside, he was a liability here, which means he's cod ordinary.
Murali Vijay >>>>>>>> Gavaskar in Australia.
Hmmmm, I don't know. The way he said it made it seem as though he was more disappointed about the fact that he made a senior member walk off as if he was ordering him around instead of it actually being a **** thing to do.To narrate the whole thing. Gavaskar said the wrong decision wasn't the reason he staged an almost walk off. It was because of the abuses hurled after the decision. Despite the strong views he held against abusing he said that he should not have done it. He was the captain and he should have let tempers be inside the dressing room. He also said he did not like pushing Chetan Chauhan in the heat of things whom they all respected. Said it still made him guilty when he saw it.
That's patent bull****. Anyone who saw that incident knows Gavaskar blew up at the lbw, and when he did, Lillee rightly pointed out he should go. This is the worst kind of revisionism by a rank **** on Gavaskar's part.To narrate the whole thing. Gavaskar said the wrong decision wasn't the reason he staged an almost walk off. It was because of the abuses hurled after the decision. Despite the strong views he held against abusing he said that he should not have done it. He was the captain and he should have let tempers be inside the dressing room. He also said he did not like pushing Chetan Chauhan in the heat of things whom they all respected. Said it still made him guilty when he saw it.
The only time I can recall is Craig McMillan having to be told by Brendon McCullum that he'd got his 100 in the Hadlee/Chappell whitewash of 2007.hahaha, when's the last time a batsman didn't notice they were on a hundred?