Well recently, I came across Sachin Tendulkar's 50th ton in test match cricket and just though from where to where is the records heading towards. I can just recall the 34 centuries by the Indian batting great Sunil Gavaskar whose record was for a change broken by a non Sachin Tendulkar when Brian Lara scored his 35th test hundred against one of the eight test playing nations whose name is not important at the moment. This was some 5 -6 years down the lane. And now, Sunil Gavaskar's record stands in the 6th place behind Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Ricky Ponting and Kallis.
Likewise, Sunil Gavaskar was the first and the only one until the above mentioned ones took his place and then overtook him to score 30 centuries in tests or more. Sunil Gavaskar was the only non colored player to have scored more than 30 hundreds in tests. The other batsman to cross 30 hundreds was Steve Waugh who had worn the yellow color. As a matter of fact, the color dress in one day cricket was introduced in the 1992 world cup played in Australia/New Zealand while Sunil Gavaskar retired from all forms of cricket in 1987. Since then, all the aforementioned players have worn their team color.
Now, with totally six players joining the 30+ hundred club, shifting our focuses on batsmen who have scored 20 or more hundreds, the list is even more long with batsmen from all teams barring Zimbabwe and Bangladesh being excluded from the list. The 30+ club includes 3 batsmen from India, 1 from South Africa, 1 from West Indies and 3 from Australia, with teams like Sri Lanka, New Zealand, England and Pakistan missing out from the list. However, the 20s club does not exclude batsmen from these countries with the list going endless with as many as 33 players from 8 nations making it to the club.
Coming to the one dayers, 17 centuries by Desmond Haynes was the highest ever scored which stood for almost a decade and now, that figure stands in the 10th position jointly held by Kallis and is ever decreasing. Similar to the fate of 30+ hundreds scores in tests, 20+ centuries in one dayers stand at number six with Jayasuriya, Sachin Tendulkar, Ponting, Ganguly, Saeed Anwar and Gibbs having achieved that. Keeping in mind these figures, there might be more number of batsmen in the days to come to score atleast 40 hundreds in tests and 30 in one dayers. Of course, very few might do a combo of 50 hundreds in both forms of the game.
Showing posts with label Steve Waugh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Steve Waugh. Show all posts
Monday, January 17, 2011
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Not a bad move
Well finally, some decent decisions are found to be taken by the ICC regarding the mega event namely the world cup that is due to start the coming year. Whatever, the news or the decision, whatever you may call as comes into picture only on or after the 2015 world cup once again thought to be held in Australia and New Zealand. Coming to the matter, the ICC is on a decision to reduce the number of teams for the mega event from the existing 16 to 10, which obviously means showing the gates to the non test playing nations.
However, the list might not include Zimbabwe and Kenya or Ireland for, their performance in international cricket is comparatively satisfactory. Zimbabwe has a history of playing test cricket while Ireland and Kenya have shown to be no less than a test playing nation like Bangladesh or West Indies. Other teams that can be thought of to be shown the gates would be Bermuda, Scotland, Holland, Namibia to name a few though not that important. But, should this decision be criticized by anyone let alone the associate countries? With their role being limited in the event, how do the nations ask for a change not to take place?
If anyone would ask me, I would suggest that the presence of such teams can only ruin the excitement of the world cup nonetheless making way for unwanted politics in the mega event. Since the 1999 world cup, major teams have made it to the next level of the tournament though not deserving to be there. In the 1999 world cup, Zimbabwe made it to the super sixes at the cost of England. India lose their match to Zimbabwe by underestimating them and then South Africa lose to Zimbabwe not before confirming their place in the super sixes. As a result, India had to end their world cup campaign in the super sixes itself.
So was the case in the 2003 world cup when Sri Lanka made much of New Zealand forfeiting their group stage match to Kenya by intentionally losing (may be) to Kenya so that New Zealand faces a tough task ahead. In the 2007 world cup, though there was no room for any such politics, underestimation was at its peak with India and Pakistan paying the price for the same in their league stage match against Bangladesh and Ireland respectively. In the super eights of the same, South Africa paid the price by losing to Bangladesh by 67 runs. Are such teams required who can spoil the reputation of the tournament?
Another thing to be noticed is that due to the presence of the minnows, players can make a killing by reserving all their fortunes against these teams. One can remember that the highest team total till date in a world cup - 413 was scored by India against Bermuda in the 2007 edition. In that edition, India didn't even get past the league stage of the tournament. Glenn McGrath's 7/15 happened to be against Namibia in 2003 which cast a bad image on him despite being known for his accuracy. In that version, Sourav Ganguly scored three hundreds all of which came against non test playing nations.
This was equaled to the one scored by Mark Waugh in 1996 where he did the same against India, Kenya and New Zealand. Does the comparison justifies itself?
However, the list might not include Zimbabwe and Kenya or Ireland for, their performance in international cricket is comparatively satisfactory. Zimbabwe has a history of playing test cricket while Ireland and Kenya have shown to be no less than a test playing nation like Bangladesh or West Indies. Other teams that can be thought of to be shown the gates would be Bermuda, Scotland, Holland, Namibia to name a few though not that important. But, should this decision be criticized by anyone let alone the associate countries? With their role being limited in the event, how do the nations ask for a change not to take place?
If anyone would ask me, I would suggest that the presence of such teams can only ruin the excitement of the world cup nonetheless making way for unwanted politics in the mega event. Since the 1999 world cup, major teams have made it to the next level of the tournament though not deserving to be there. In the 1999 world cup, Zimbabwe made it to the super sixes at the cost of England. India lose their match to Zimbabwe by underestimating them and then South Africa lose to Zimbabwe not before confirming their place in the super sixes. As a result, India had to end their world cup campaign in the super sixes itself.
So was the case in the 2003 world cup when Sri Lanka made much of New Zealand forfeiting their group stage match to Kenya by intentionally losing (may be) to Kenya so that New Zealand faces a tough task ahead. In the 2007 world cup, though there was no room for any such politics, underestimation was at its peak with India and Pakistan paying the price for the same in their league stage match against Bangladesh and Ireland respectively. In the super eights of the same, South Africa paid the price by losing to Bangladesh by 67 runs. Are such teams required who can spoil the reputation of the tournament?
Another thing to be noticed is that due to the presence of the minnows, players can make a killing by reserving all their fortunes against these teams. One can remember that the highest team total till date in a world cup - 413 was scored by India against Bermuda in the 2007 edition. In that edition, India didn't even get past the league stage of the tournament. Glenn McGrath's 7/15 happened to be against Namibia in 2003 which cast a bad image on him despite being known for his accuracy. In that version, Sourav Ganguly scored three hundreds all of which came against non test playing nations.
This was equaled to the one scored by Mark Waugh in 1996 where he did the same against India, Kenya and New Zealand. Does the comparison justifies itself?
Friday, December 18, 2009
The Only Way Benn Can Make News
The headlines today has its say that the West Indian batsman bowler player if not anything else has been handed over a 2 match ODI ban for reasons none other than being involved with an ugly spat with the Australian players Mitchell Johnson and Brad Haddin during the third test match between Australia and West Indies at Perth on Thursday. On the other side, Australia's Mitchell Johnson and Brad Haddin have been let off just with a petty fine I suppose. Reasons for this sort of biased treatment regarding the Aussies is not something new for the world of cricket.
However, coming to Sulieman Benn's case, one can just say that this is an act of publicity by the West Indian player. Or else, why should anyone target a West Indian player who despite being 28 years of age has played just 11 test matches and an equal number of one day internationals that is followed by 10 T20 games? The incident just reminds me of Vinod kambli who after being almost absent for almost a decade one fine day comes in front of the world just to say that it was his old team mate Sachin Tendulkar who was responsible for the debacle of his cricketing career.
The man under discussion is just a year and a half old when his international cricket career is taken into consideration. The man is yet to hit a six in international T20 cricket and has already made news for getting banned for 2 ODIs against Australia for sledging. All that his career can highlight is the 5 wicket haul he has been able to achieve against Australia in the second test in the ongoing series between the same two countries. This coming almost a year and a half after making his international test debut against Sri Lanka in March 2008 at Providence.
Not only Sulieman Benn but the entire West Indies team needs to maintain a lot of discipline taking into consideration their caliber and the position in test cricket they are placed not only in today's rating but also considering their test rating since the last decade or so. Of course, no one is expected to display such a sort of behaviour on the field in front of a million spectators on TV as well as in the stadium. However, someone like Steve Waugh, Glenn McGrath or Adam Gilchrist can be given a pass for such an act but not someone who is just a learner of cricket still in the initial stages of his career. May be this is the reason that the ICC has been taking more strict measures regarding sledging day by day.
However, coming to Sulieman Benn's case, one can just say that this is an act of publicity by the West Indian player. Or else, why should anyone target a West Indian player who despite being 28 years of age has played just 11 test matches and an equal number of one day internationals that is followed by 10 T20 games? The incident just reminds me of Vinod kambli who after being almost absent for almost a decade one fine day comes in front of the world just to say that it was his old team mate Sachin Tendulkar who was responsible for the debacle of his cricketing career.
The man under discussion is just a year and a half old when his international cricket career is taken into consideration. The man is yet to hit a six in international T20 cricket and has already made news for getting banned for 2 ODIs against Australia for sledging. All that his career can highlight is the 5 wicket haul he has been able to achieve against Australia in the second test in the ongoing series between the same two countries. This coming almost a year and a half after making his international test debut against Sri Lanka in March 2008 at Providence.
Not only Sulieman Benn but the entire West Indies team needs to maintain a lot of discipline taking into consideration their caliber and the position in test cricket they are placed not only in today's rating but also considering their test rating since the last decade or so. Of course, no one is expected to display such a sort of behaviour on the field in front of a million spectators on TV as well as in the stadium. However, someone like Steve Waugh, Glenn McGrath or Adam Gilchrist can be given a pass for such an act but not someone who is just a learner of cricket still in the initial stages of his career. May be this is the reason that the ICC has been taking more strict measures regarding sledging day by day.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
A Mess Finds Sri Lanka Fall Just Short
After the thrashing that the Sri Lankan cricket team got in the first one day international at Dambulla, the second one day international match between the same saw Sri Lanka getting into the contest to draw something from their opposition. But, at the end of the day, all that the Sri Lankans could end up doing was to just curse themselves for coming so close to winning the game and yet again ending up as losers. This is not professional at their peak. For, the good work went unnoticed and deserving or undeserving Sri Lankans had no other choice but to accept defeat.
Though the second innings started rather shaky, the Sri Lankans continued to battle it out with a century stand between captain Mahela Jayawardane and Kandamby for the fourth wicket. And the equation was always in abalance between both India and Sri Lanka for most part of the game and Sri Lanka could have grabbed away the match at any time possible. But, that never happened. This is called as lack of preparedness on the part of the Sri Lankans. After the fall of Kapugedra, there was no one to lead the tempo going on despite Kandamby at the other end.
All the batsmen who followed Kapugedra ended their innings in a single digit. None of them could support Kandamby who not only lost out on scoring a century, but also was disappointed for ending on the losing side. There were three run outs in the Sri Lankan innings namely that of Muttiah Muralitharan, Ajantha Mendis and Kulashekara, whose contribution with the bat would have seen Sri Lanka through that match. This also meant that Kandamby could not get his hundred for no fault of his. Such hasty decisions at most times could be foolish as it has been in the past. One has to watch out for videos of Australia's Michael Beaven and Steve Waugh who can hold their breath despite wickets falling at the other end.
It is still in the memories of many cricket fans, the way Steve Waugh in the super sixes of the 1999 world cup at England, when his team was reeling at 135/5 chasing a target of 272 against South Africa who were undefeated until then, finally won the match by 5 wickets, which set the tone for the Aussies to win the world cup. And the way Michael Beaven batted despite pressure in the semis of the 1996 as well as 1999 world cup could be of some inspiration. And more recently, New Zealand defeated Australia in the penultimate ball of the innings with just two wickets remaining. Perhaps, had this been the approach of the Sri Lankans, the result would have been different.
Though the second innings started rather shaky, the Sri Lankans continued to battle it out with a century stand between captain Mahela Jayawardane and Kandamby for the fourth wicket. And the equation was always in abalance between both India and Sri Lanka for most part of the game and Sri Lanka could have grabbed away the match at any time possible. But, that never happened. This is called as lack of preparedness on the part of the Sri Lankans. After the fall of Kapugedra, there was no one to lead the tempo going on despite Kandamby at the other end.
All the batsmen who followed Kapugedra ended their innings in a single digit. None of them could support Kandamby who not only lost out on scoring a century, but also was disappointed for ending on the losing side. There were three run outs in the Sri Lankan innings namely that of Muttiah Muralitharan, Ajantha Mendis and Kulashekara, whose contribution with the bat would have seen Sri Lanka through that match. This also meant that Kandamby could not get his hundred for no fault of his. Such hasty decisions at most times could be foolish as it has been in the past. One has to watch out for videos of Australia's Michael Beaven and Steve Waugh who can hold their breath despite wickets falling at the other end.
It is still in the memories of many cricket fans, the way Steve Waugh in the super sixes of the 1999 world cup at England, when his team was reeling at 135/5 chasing a target of 272 against South Africa who were undefeated until then, finally won the match by 5 wickets, which set the tone for the Aussies to win the world cup. And the way Michael Beaven batted despite pressure in the semis of the 1996 as well as 1999 world cup could be of some inspiration. And more recently, New Zealand defeated Australia in the penultimate ball of the innings with just two wickets remaining. Perhaps, had this been the approach of the Sri Lankans, the result would have been different.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
The Aussie Debacle-Who Is To Blame?
As most of us think it to be, it is neither the retirement of most of the cricketing greats all of a sudden from the Australian squad. For, this was more the less expected. Its just obvious that the so called greats of the likes of Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne would be retiring sooner or later. Or, did the Australian selectors be of the idea that these players would be serving Australian cricket forever or what? Australia did manage to win tests comfortably even without the services of these two great stalwarts, for as all of us are aware of, Shane Warne was banned from international cricket for a year and Glenn McGrath also lost a year inbetween, when injury forced him out.
For the case, Ricky Ponting was not available for the Border-Gavaskar trophy in 2004 that was held in India and Adam Gilchrist had to take the initiative. They did well to furnish Steve Waugh's dream of winning a test series in India by winning the series 2-1. And the fact was also that Shane Warne was no threat for the Indian batsmen. With the presence of Shane Warne who was in sublime form and Glenn McGrath as well, Australia lost the Ashes in 2005, after handing England a 239 run defeat in the first test, which had many think of England's whitewash, which didn't happen. It is just not fair for anyone to put the blame on the former players' retirement or even the lack of form of the present lot.
For, all of the greats who retired did serve Australian cricket to the maximum extent and their retirement was somewhere nearby. Who is to blame, if the Australian Cricket Board didn't take the matter seriously, if at all they were interested in Australia dominating the cricketing world? All the players who retired were in their late 30s. Didn't the Aussies have any considerable bench strength? Blame it on the IPL and the ICL, which made some players to dance to their tunes by sprinkling money. The category includes Jason Gillespie in particular. And where have the guys like Andy Bichel, Shaun March and others gone?
For, it is tough to find as to when did someone like Michael Beaven, Jason Gillespie, Andy Bichel- (who have played immense part in most of the Aussie wins) and likes play their last game for Australia before they one fine day called it a day? Did the selectors expect the aforementioned players to wait indefinitely for their turn to come so that they can represent the national side? Lets go to the situation when Steve Waugh was handed over the captaincy and all of a sudden players like Mark Waugh, Tom Moody, Damien Fleming vanish and, fellow players like Hayden, Gilchrist, Martyn, Lee etc being in their mid 20s and had lack of experience.
How come Steve Waugh was able to build that Australian team to a world dominating side and now Ricky Ponting blames the retirement of fellow players for his team's debacle? With all these facts in mind, one can come to the conclusion that all Ponting was found doing these days was to enjoy the good and hard work done by his predecessor-Steve Waugh and is now found to panic when things have gone beyond his control.
For the case, Ricky Ponting was not available for the Border-Gavaskar trophy in 2004 that was held in India and Adam Gilchrist had to take the initiative. They did well to furnish Steve Waugh's dream of winning a test series in India by winning the series 2-1. And the fact was also that Shane Warne was no threat for the Indian batsmen. With the presence of Shane Warne who was in sublime form and Glenn McGrath as well, Australia lost the Ashes in 2005, after handing England a 239 run defeat in the first test, which had many think of England's whitewash, which didn't happen. It is just not fair for anyone to put the blame on the former players' retirement or even the lack of form of the present lot.
For, all of the greats who retired did serve Australian cricket to the maximum extent and their retirement was somewhere nearby. Who is to blame, if the Australian Cricket Board didn't take the matter seriously, if at all they were interested in Australia dominating the cricketing world? All the players who retired were in their late 30s. Didn't the Aussies have any considerable bench strength? Blame it on the IPL and the ICL, which made some players to dance to their tunes by sprinkling money. The category includes Jason Gillespie in particular. And where have the guys like Andy Bichel, Shaun March and others gone?
For, it is tough to find as to when did someone like Michael Beaven, Jason Gillespie, Andy Bichel- (who have played immense part in most of the Aussie wins) and likes play their last game for Australia before they one fine day called it a day? Did the selectors expect the aforementioned players to wait indefinitely for their turn to come so that they can represent the national side? Lets go to the situation when Steve Waugh was handed over the captaincy and all of a sudden players like Mark Waugh, Tom Moody, Damien Fleming vanish and, fellow players like Hayden, Gilchrist, Martyn, Lee etc being in their mid 20s and had lack of experience.
How come Steve Waugh was able to build that Australian team to a world dominating side and now Ricky Ponting blames the retirement of fellow players for his team's debacle? With all these facts in mind, one can come to the conclusion that all Ponting was found doing these days was to enjoy the good and hard work done by his predecessor-Steve Waugh and is now found to panic when things have gone beyond his control.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)