Yep.Has been on a Ponting-esque run for the last 2-3 years.
He hasn't owned us on roads tbh. In fact on most occasions he's had a fair bit of help from the pitch and conditions. Not to take anything away from him though. He's bowled extremely well against us in most tests (particularly in this series).As long as the Indian batting lineup is around, Steyn will never be short of wickets.He's owned us on roads, he's owned us on seaming wickets.. you name it.
They do destroy teams TBF. When they get it right, they are spectacularly good. They have beaten India (home and away), England and Australia by an innings in the past couple of years. They just aren't that good at grinding out results while not playing that well, and have a tendency to put in poor performances at home, every so often.Still baffles me how SA isn't destroying anyone in sight tbh.
Nagpur earlier this year? I didn't watch his spell, but heard that it was a pretty flat wicket.He hasn't owned us on roads tbh. In fact on most occasions he's had a fair bit of help from the pitch and conditions. Not to take anything away from him though. He's bowled extremely well against us in most tests (particularly in this series).
The problem is whenever Steyn bowls an awesome spell on a flattie, People say the ball was swinging as though it's a completely random occurrence irrelevant to the skill of the bowler extracting said swing.Nagpur earlier this year? I didn't watch his spell, but heard that it was a pretty flat wicket.
Saying that, from what I saw of the Nagpur match in the NZ series, it was a very good Test match wicket, with enough to keep everyone (batsmen, fast and spin bowlers) interested.
Haha, I get your point. When McGrath and Warne were around, it was funny how the Aussie pitches were complete roads for home batsmen and minefields for visiting batsmen.The problem is whenever Steyn bowls an awesome spell on a flattie, People say the ball was swinging as though it's a completely random occurrence irrelevant to the skill of the bowler extracting said swing.
Nah!!I actually think there is some chance that someone might come up with an average better than Bradman primarily because of the way the pitches are being built these days.
While this is the longest standing record in test history it's far from unbreakable. Several batsmen have come very close to it, most notably Michael Slater who scored 123/184. If he had just scored one more run in the same total he would have the record.Charles Bannerman's record for highest percentage of runs scored by one player in a completed innings (67.34%; 165 runs out of 245ao) has stood since the very first test, so I think that one's a keeper.
Yeah see the thing about that particular spell is that it was a good spell but it was made to look awesome due to the ball being changed and him ripping out the tail because that. That particular ball was almost near perfect for reverse swing. Before that he had bowled really well but it wasn't a "tear through the line up" kind of thing. It was only when the ball had changed just before tea and then about 5 overs after tea India were bowled out. He himself credited the ball changeNagpur earlier this year? I didn't watch his spell, but heard that it was a pretty flat wicket.
Saying that, from what I saw of the Nagpur match in the NZ series, it was a very good Test match wicket, with enough to keep everyone (batsmen, fast and spin bowlers) interested.
I think Kapil is the closes to that with 8 centuries and 23 fivers.Let's not forget Ian Botham. It wil take a rarest of rare genius to even his 2 staggering records:
Scoring 10+ centuries (14) and taking 10+ fivers (27) in career.
Scoring a century and taking a fiver in the same match 5 times.
I don't know if the number of tests being played will increase though. It may even drop as more and more T20 tourneys get factored in. Still, if anyone about the place has enough time on his side, it's Cook.50 Test centuries (assuming Tendulkar quits at around this mark, but I don't think he will) could be broken. 15 years back I didn't think Gavaskar's 34 centuries would be surpassed at all.