PDA

View Full Version : 200* vs 194


al Furqaan
February 24, 2010, 07:08 PM
in Sachin's corner:


reproducibility - has hit 186* and 175 before, and against G8 sides


chancelessness - was never dropped, although he didn't play all along the ground. thats genius. a run out chance and stumping are all part of the game and i don't count them as positive chances for a batter, but as negative chances for the fielding side.


opposition - steyn may be ordinary in ODIs, but parnell is certainly solid, either way, SA are one of the top sides in the world.

effort - no runner taken even though the legend cramped up
misc - carried the bat too

in Anwar's corner:

era - his 194 was the only instance of anyone getting really close to 200 except for Richards on two, maybe one occaisions. by the time tendulkar hit 200, many players came close, and one (MS Dhoni) could certainly have reached the double first.


powerplays - SRT carried the bat and batted for all 50 overs, meaning he had the benefit of 5 more overs of restricted fields. given that anwar failed to carry the bat, and was only 6 shy of the record, he likely could have gotten it with 30 additional balls of powerplays when well set.


conditions - SRT's knock was on a small field with a quick outfield.

deshifan
February 24, 2010, 07:15 PM
where is Coventry's corner? /:)

Kabir
February 24, 2010, 07:18 PM
There's no reason to compare. These two are legends, end of discussion.

I've always maintained that Anwar was one of the best batsmen we've seen, and perhaps will see. But then, Tendu is THE greatest.

Cricket already misses Anwar. It will miss Tendu when he retires. All I know is, there are two of the biggest scores against India. It's time that India got it too ;)

Kabir
February 24, 2010, 07:21 PM
where is Coventry's corner? /:)

Mainka chipa

Ajfar
February 24, 2010, 07:28 PM
I don't think we should compare it. by comparing it in a way we are looking down on it. I'm glad someone broke Anwar's record and scored the first ODI double century. and I can't think of a single person that deserved it more than Tendu.

AsifTheManRahman
February 24, 2010, 07:29 PM
Oh flames!

I watched Anwar's 194 live but not Sachin's 200*, so can't compare.

Shehwar
February 24, 2010, 08:07 PM
U really can't compare. Powerplays and free hits nowadays....the game has changed a lot...Anwar's was one hell of a knock though...against India in India back in those days...sheer brilliance....and I remember him getting out in the 44th over too....had he stayed on heaven knows what would have happened....Hats off to Tendulkar though....No one deserves it more...
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition (Android)

One World
February 24, 2010, 09:33 PM
Comparison is like stats, in other words it's rajeshing.

al-Sagar
February 24, 2010, 09:48 PM
in Sachin's corner:


reproducibility - has hit 186* and 175 before, and against G8 sides


chancelessness - was never dropped, although he didn't play all along the ground. thats genius. a run out chance and stumping are all part of the game and i don't count them as positive chances for a batter, but as negative chances for the fielding side.


opposition - steyn may be ordinary in ODIs, but parnell is certainly solid, either way, SA are one of the top sides in the world.

effort - no runner taken even though the legend cramped up
misc - carried the bat too

in Anwar's corner:

era - his 194 was the only instance of anyone getting really close to 200 except for Richards on two, maybe one occaisions. by the time tendulkar hit 200, many players came close, and one (MS Dhoni) could certainly have reached the double first.


powerplays - SRT carried the bat and batted for all 50 overs, meaning he had the benefit of 5 more overs of restricted fields. given that anwar failed to carry the bat, and was only 6 shy of the record, he likely could have gotten it with 30 additional balls of powerplays when well set.


conditions - SRT's knock was on a small field with a quick outfield.
what was saeed's age and what is sachins age

AsifTheManRahman
February 24, 2010, 09:57 PM
No takers for Gavaskar's 36*?

smashyboy
February 24, 2010, 10:22 PM
Tendulkar reached 195 at 45.3 overs. He added only 5 runs after that thanks to Dhoni taking the strike mostly.

Neel Here
February 24, 2010, 11:32 PM
No takers for Gavaskar's 36*?

:-D

Tigers_eye
February 24, 2010, 11:45 PM
185 > 200* + 194

Sohel
February 24, 2010, 11:58 PM
This was epic in many ways. Expect Tendy to go on and score many more of those BIG test 100s, 200s and maybe a 300 or two from now on end. He's peaking again after 20 years and will probably end up with 55+ hundreds both in tests and ODIs by the time he retires in 3-5 years. Wickedly consistent application has its rewards ... :notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:

Nocturnal
February 25, 2010, 12:27 AM
I've seen both matches live on TV and there is no way you can compare those two mammoth innings. Both are different and great knocks by great players.

Sohel
February 25, 2010, 12:29 AM
Without taking any of the greatness away from Tendy, I still rate Richards, Lara and Ponting as better batsmen amongst the ones I've seen. That said, this 200* is easily the classiest ODI innings I've been blessed to witness.

bharat
February 25, 2010, 01:16 AM
Not much to choose between Anwar's 194* and Sachins 200.

I rate Kapils 175* better than both though.The team was 27 for 5 when he came on to bat .25 extra runs from Tendulkur would not make it better than the 175* for me .But yes had India won the match against SL where Tendulkar made 180 odd , I would have placed it at the best.

Coming to the best ever ! It has to be Sachin for me .Comparing Anwar with Sachin is like comparing Zaheer with Wasim.Good players are brilliant to exceptional in certain games or when in form but to maintain the consistency of Sachin is simply out of the world.

Rabz
February 25, 2010, 01:23 AM
A 200 would always be a 200.
There are great innings, but there aint a double century.

Jesus87
February 25, 2010, 01:43 AM
Sachin did most of the running himself whereas Anwar got a runner. So Sacihn's innings is more genuine.

Surfer
February 25, 2010, 04:37 AM
in Sachin's corner:


reproducibility - has hit 186* and 175 before, and against G8 sides


chancelessness - was never dropped, although he didn't play all along the ground. thats genius. a run out chance and stumping are all part of the game and i don't count them as positive chances for a batter, but as negative chances for the fielding side.


opposition - steyn may be ordinary in ODIs, but parnell is certainly solid, either way, SA are one of the top sides in the world.

effort - no runner taken even though the legend cramped up
misc - carried the bat too

in Anwar's corner:

era - his 194 was the only instance of anyone getting really close to 200 except for Richards on two, maybe one occaisions. by the time tendulkar hit 200, many players came close, and one (MS Dhoni) could certainly have reached the double first.


powerplays - SRT carried the bat and batted for all 50 overs, meaning he had the benefit of 5 more overs of restricted fields. given that anwar failed to carry the bat, and was only 6 shy of the record, he likely could have gotten it with 30 additional balls of powerplays when well set.


conditions - SRT's knock was on a small field with a quick outfield.


Sachin took 50 overs to score the 200, but he broke Coventary's/Anwar's record in a little more than 45.

One biggest hurdle in making a mammoth score like that is fitness. Anwar had outside help that considerably diluted his achievement. Sachin has always hated taking a runner because he likes to judge his own runs and does not like depend on others judgments or for his own runs. If I remember right, he took a runner only once in his career.

Banglatiger84
February 25, 2010, 04:56 AM
One biggest hurdle in making a mammoth score like that is fitness. Anwar had outside help that considerably diluted his achievement. Sachin has always hated taking a runner because he likes to judge his own runs and does not like depend on others judgments or for his own runs. If I remember right, he took a runner only once in his career.

Anwar faced a tougher environment in terms of crowd + heat&humidity

Kabir
February 25, 2010, 10:21 AM
Comparing Anwar with Sachin is like comparing Zaheer with Wasim.

Weird analogy.

Good players are brilliant to exceptional in certain games or when in form but to maintain the consistency of Sachin is simply out of the world.

Err, there's a difference between Good Players and Great Players.

End of the day, it all boils down to definition. Zaheer Khan is a good player. But is he a great player? I hope quality for cricket hasn't gone down that much.

_Rafi_
February 25, 2010, 11:04 AM
200>194...chanceless innings by Sachin. But I rate his knock against Pak in 98 World cup better than this.
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition

Neel Here
February 25, 2010, 11:11 AM
Weird analogy.



Err, there's a difference between Good Players and Great Players.

End of the day, it all boils down to definition. Zaheer Khan is a good player. But is he a great player? I hope quality for cricket hasn't gone down that much.

he is saying both zaheer and anwar don't rate as greats, which sachin and wasim do. can't say I disagree, this innings aside, anwar would just be a very good player, not a great.

smashyboy
February 25, 2010, 11:20 AM
Anwar faced a tougher environment in terms of crowd + heat&humidity

Anwar broke down very very early in the innings. Dravid lasted much longer than him in that innings without a runner. Under the same humid conditions Sehwag scored 319 runs right after fielding for 550 runs. It is all part of game. Dean Jones made 210 at the same venue despite vomitting all the way. He didn't need a runner.

aklemalp
February 25, 2010, 11:35 AM
even though this innings was special for tendulkar,it hasn't the hype,i rate two special innings' in one match,ponting's 165 and gibb's 171 are too psecial for tendukar

aklemalp
February 25, 2010, 11:36 AM
say something smash boy

bharat
February 25, 2010, 11:54 AM
Weird analogy.



Err, there's a difference between Good Players and Great Players.

End of the day, it all boils down to definition. Zaheer Khan is a good player. But is he a great player? I hope quality for cricket hasn't gone down that much.

I guess you got me wrong ! What I mean is Zaheer is a good player at best .He might match a great like Wasim in a spell or two (or a season ) but he can never be classified as a great !

The same goes with players like Anwar ,Inzi ,Jaya and Gibbs. They were simply great in certain seasons but they could never match greats like Pointing ,Lara ,Sachin and of course Viv.Who is better among these is very subjective and depends on how you look at it .The fact that we are discussion who is better among the 'greats' shows that there is no clear winner .


P.S - Among the current lot I only see Shewag challenging the 'greats' and that too only in Tests.But again for me a Great player has to be good at all formats they play most .Dravid could have been considered a 'great' but for his pathetic ODI record.

Beamer
February 25, 2010, 12:03 PM
Not much to choose between Anwar's 194* and Sachins 200.

I rate Kapils 175* better than both though.The team was 27 for 5 when he came on to bat .25 extra runs from Tendulkur would not make it better than the 175* for me .But yes had India won the match against SL where Tendulkar made 180 odd , I would have placed it at the best.

Coming to the best ever ! It has to be Sachin for me .Comparing Anwar with Sachin is like comparing Zaheer with Wasim.Good players are brilliant to exceptional in certain games or when in form but to maintain the consistency of Sachin is simply out of the world.

Yes. I agree with you. There has been many good one day players, but greats are known by their longevity and consistency. If you wanted me to name five greatest one day players, I would have to put Tendulkar at the top ( sheer numbers ) with Richards a very close second. Anwar was devastating for a period, and his innings of 194 could be considered as one of the great, but comparing the body of work that is Sachin, he won't even come close.

My personal ranking :
1 Tendulkar
1A Viv Richards
.
.
.
2 Jayasuriya ( check longevity and consistency )
3 Ponting
4 Gilchrist
5 Bevan

Raynman
February 25, 2010, 12:11 PM
To all the Anwar fans, What would it take for anyone to qualify having a better innings than his 194?

Would 300 be enough or would that also be tainted by the modernized game? Does it have to be another Pakistani to break it for it to be acceptable?

smashyboy
February 25, 2010, 12:29 PM
even though this innings was special for tendulkar,it hasn't the hype,i rate two special innings' in one match,ponting's 165 and gibb's 171 are too psecial for tendukar

Neither of them scored those runs lol Obviously you don't even remember how much they scored. "That much special"

_Rafi_
February 25, 2010, 02:19 PM
Btw why Sunil Gavaskar rating Sachin above Bradman on the basis of Sachin's ODI innings? Is not this idiotic?
My question to Mr. Gavaskar how many double century Sachin has scored in test cricket(real cricket)?
Brian Lara scored 9
Bradman 12(not sure)
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition

Neel Here
February 25, 2010, 02:38 PM
where did he said that ? couldn't find it on cricinfo.

_Rafi_
February 25, 2010, 02:57 PM
I read it in daily star
http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=127861
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition

Neel Here
February 25, 2010, 03:13 PM
I don't think sunny based his comments on this innings, his arguments for sachin's case are well known.

personally, I don't think greats from different era can be compared, the game changes too much. for that reason I'll also not call Sir Don the best of all time. that sunny insists on doing this comparison, I would put it down to his affection for his city protege. ;)

Beamer
February 25, 2010, 03:37 PM
I will have to call Sir Don the best of all time. 99.96 avg takes the cake.

bharat
February 25, 2010, 04:04 PM
Btw why Sunil Gavaskar rating Sachin above Bradman on the basis of Sachin's ODI innings? Is not this idiotic?
My question to Mr. Gavaskar how many double century Sachin has scored in test cricket(real cricket)?
Brian Lara scored 9
Bradman 12(not sure)
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition

Its a good point that you bring up Rafi. Sachin (nor does Pointing and Richards) for his class for sure does not have a lot of double hundreds. That should go against these three .
+1 for Lara on that.

Neel Here
February 25, 2010, 04:05 PM
and yet he only ever played in australia or england, other teams he played against, then WI India or SA were little more than minnows or that the bowlers had very little variety in those days. not to mention the pressure and analysis a modern batsman is subjected to.
or that he didn't face bowling of the likes of WI pace battery/pakistani bowling line-up of the 80's and 90's/aussie bowling of 70's, 90's and early 2000's/SA bowling of mid 90's and current. or that he didn't face murali at his home. the differences go on.

that's why I say that the greats from different era are incomparable.

99.96 avg takes the cake.
that only says that he was head and shoulders above his contemporaries. but nobody doubted that in the first place ! who knows what a sachin, a viv or a sunny might have done in that era ?

btw, nasser hussain thinks sachin is the greatest ever.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-1253563/NASSER-HUSSAIN-Mighty-Sachin-Tendulkar-tops-Lara-Ponting-The-Don.html
NASSER HUSSAIN: Mighty Sachin Tendulkar even tops Lara, Ponting and The Don!

By Nasser Hussain Last updated at 1:42 AM on 25th February 2010

* Comments (0)
* Add to My Stories

I have never liked comparisons between great players, but after Wednesday’s incredible game it must be said — Sachin Tendulkar is the greatest batsman of all time.

Better than Brian Lara and Ricky Ponting, the other two great players of my era. Better than Sir Viv Richards, Sunil Gavaskar and Allan Border. And I would even say better than Sir Don Bradman himself.

Now he has the first double hundred in a one-day international — hitting 25 fours and three sixes as India beat South Africa by 153 runs — he has swung it for me.
Indian batsman Sachin Tendulkar

Little master: Record-breaker Tendulkar celebrates reaching his landmark
SACHIN BY NUMBERS

46 One-day international hundreds

47 Test hundreds

166 Test matches played

240 Sixes in all international cricket

442 One-day internationals

13,447 Test runs scored

17,598 one-day international runs

45.12 One-day international batting average

55.56 Test batting average

I played against Tendulkar on my first England tour, the Nehru Cup in India in 1989, and I could still see that excited boy in big pads in Gwalior.

That extraordinary drive and enthusiasm are what make Tendulkar so special. He has been playing international cricket for 20 years under the intense scrutiny being an Indian superstar brings, so it is remarkable he still loves holding a bat as much as ever.

Halfway through the Indian innings on Wednesday, Tendulkar was already on more than a hundred. It’s almost a given that he will reach three figures. But even he had not turned it into a double in a 50-over international before, and this was not against a lowly side but South Africa, one of the most formidable bowling attacks in the world.

There was no slogging — just pure, attacking strokeplay.

Tendulkar has gone back to being the fluent, almost flamboyant, batsman he used to be. In recent years his innings had become a bit mechanical, but I think he has remembered what made him great.

I interviewed Sachin for Sportsmail when he was touring England a couple of years ago — one of the highlights of my career since I stopped playing, and it was noticeable that he is not driven by money.
Brian Lara of West Indies
Former Australian Cricketer Sir Donald Bradman

Better than the rest: Tendulkar is better than Lara (left) and Bradman

He has become a very wealthy man, but that has been as a result of doing what he does best and enjoying it. It has not been the be all and end all for him.

What else is left for Tendulkar now? Well, it is sometimes said that he has not played enough match-winning innings on the really big occasion for India.

What better, then, than to score a hundred in the World Cup final against Australia — or maybe even England — on home soil this time next year.

That would be the full stop that would enable Tendulkar to ride off into the sunset with everything achieved in his career.

My admiration for him is total. To steal the nickname of a certain football coach who led Inter Milan against Chelsea on Wednesday, Sachin Tendulkar truly is The Special One.

_Rafi_
February 25, 2010, 09:37 PM
Gavasker=Naser=Idiots
I will always say Brian Lara is better than Sachin in test.
Bradman=Superman
Viv Richard>>>>Lara and Tendu
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition

Zeeshan
February 25, 2010, 11:08 PM
Can't compare. One is a milestone and the other was a high score. It's like comparing a 49 and 50.

AsifTheManRahman
February 25, 2010, 11:16 PM
I will have to call Sir Don the best of all time. 99.96 avg takes the cake.
But Ice Man > Brad Man. You know it. :)

al Furqaan
February 25, 2010, 11:27 PM
Yes. I agree with you. There has been many good one day players, but greats are known by their longevity and consistency. If you wanted me to name five greatest one day players, I would have to put Tendulkar at the top ( sheer numbers ) with Richards a very close second. Anwar was devastating for a period, and his innings of 194 could be considered as one of the great, but comparing the body of work that is Sachin, he won't even come close.

My personal ranking :
1 Tendulkar
1A Viv Richards
.
.
.
2 Jayasuriya ( check longevity and consistency )
3 Ponting
4 Gilchrist
5 Bevan

i sort of agree...sachin = viv.

viv had a higher average, batted at least part of his career without helmets, had a killer strike rate.

sachin is a complete product, was solid from the tender age of 16-20, and then just out of this world for most of ages 20-36. to be able to do it that long is amazing, considering he's not of the most athletic build.

beshideshi
February 26, 2010, 07:42 AM
I had the privilege to see both the innings, and from a cricket spectator's point of view, Sachin's innings was slightly better. Tendulkar's was more from the textbook.
But then again, when Anwar scored the 194, a ODI 200 was beyond everyone's imagination, and getting close to it was a great feat. But ODI 200 was threatened several times in the recent few years and was bound to happen.

Neel Here
February 26, 2010, 08:11 AM
But then again, when Anwar scored the 194, a ODI 200 was beyond everyone's imagination, and getting close to it was a great feat. But ODI 200 was threatened several times in the recent few years and was bound to happen.
I don't know what makes you think that. near 200 scores were as common then as they are now.

180+ scores by decade :
1980's
richards 189* vs eng
richards 181 vs SL

1990's
ganguly 183 v SL
kirsten 188* v UAE
sachin 186* v NZ
anwar 194 v Ind
2000's
hayden 181* v NZ
dhoni 183* v SL
jayasuriya 189 v Ind
coventry 194* v BD
2010's
sachin 200* v SA

Xavier
February 26, 2010, 11:48 AM
I think also the innings by Gibbs in the 438 chase, 175 off 111 balls, 21x4 7x6, and the 152 off 99 balls (20x4 4x6) by Jayasuriya in the "Headingley carnage" in 2006, were both really outstanding.

Beamer
February 26, 2010, 12:00 PM
Neel

Its impossible to compare eras as you have said. I agree, God knows what Sachin would have done if he played in Don's time. By that same argument, no one knows what Don would have done if he played in this era! Sachin has the numbers to back him up since he has also played so many more games than Don. What if Don played that many tests? Maybe his avg of 99.94 would have come down a bit, but there is no way of telling how many runs or centuries he would have compiled. Its a difficult argument. What is not arguable that these two men are the two greatest ever. Also, remember that Don never played an ODI innings. So, we have to compare Don with Sachin only in tests. Sachin has the numbers in terms or runs, centuries, games played. Don has the numbers in terms of avg, big centuries, playing half the games Sachin has played. Those are the concrete facts. Rest are projections. If Sachin played back then, maybe he would have averaged near 100 and maybe Don would have sported Sachin's number if he played tests and ODI's in this era. If you ask me, the test player vs test player comparison, that 99.94 avg is hard to bypass. The big double and triple centuries are impossible to ignore. In my mind, and its purely my own observation :
Greatest ODI player : Sachin, followed by Viv
Greatest Test player: Don, followed by Sachin and Hammond.
Greatest player of all time : Tricky, but I think Don edges Sachin slightly, though Sachin has every case for himself.

One World
February 26, 2010, 12:26 PM
No takers for Gavaskar's 36*?

He was in inhuman form that day. Only Boycott's mom could get the wicket. :floor:

nahaz
February 27, 2010, 08:24 AM
and yet he only ever played in australia or england, other teams he played against, then WI India or SA were little more than minnows or that the bowlers had very little variety in those days. not to mention the pressure and analysis a modern batsman is subjected to.
or that he didn't face bowling of the likes of WI pace battery/pakistani bowling line-up of the 80's and 90's/aussie bowling of 70's, 90's and early 2000's/SA bowling of mid 90's and current. or that he didn't face murali at his home. the differences go on.

that's why I say that the greats from different era are incomparable....


You just committed blasphemy in the world of cricket/sports, my friend. Let me tell you who this man, Bradman, was.

He was born in a small country-town called Bowral, south of Sydney. In his era, there was no training facilities, there was no match fees, there was no other way of living than doing it the hard way. Staying alive itself was a challenge.( Some potential great from his era died of Pneumonia or sth of that sort.) Playing cricket in those days involved travelling for a month or three on a ship. There was no thigh pads, there was no HELMET, no chest guard. Heck, was there even a guard? His training sessions involved hitting a golf ball with a stick in his garage relentlessly. Noone showed him how to play the back-foot drive, or the cut shot.

He used to play at a time of utter unprofessionalism. Yet, he scored at an average of a century every innings. He played against fast bowlers in the Bodyline Series and saw his teammates head to hospital one after another instead of the pavillion. Yet, despite facing one of the most unusual, brutal, unsportmanlike tactics ever, he scores at an average of 57. (what's tendulkar's test average again?) today, players run when there's uneven bounce. They consider it unsafe (india vs Lanka). He had a 6-? year break in his career because of the WWII. He comes back at the age of 40 to lead his side to a clean sweep in England. The only Ashes Australia ever lost while he played was the Bodyline series. How many World Cups, and how many overseas series has Sachin won for his country? Oh by the way, Bradman never got to play in those "tough" pitches at Nagpur. If he did, he'd be scoring 300 every game.

To be called the greatest ever, you really have to do more than 200 at one match. And yes, Saeed Anwar is not really comparable to Sachin. I don't even know how to rate him against Ponting. He has done so much better personally in terms of centuries, but Ponting has led the country (captaining or otherwise) to three successive WC wins. His dogged spirit is not something I see in Sachin in the days it matters. I was partially counting on Sachin to counter Ponting's knock in WC 2003. But not to be!!

I think it is...1. Bradman 2. Bradman's shadow 3. Viv Richards 4. Ponting 5. Sachin 6. Lara ...tho Sachin may well deserve to be ahead of Viv.

BD-Shardul
February 27, 2010, 08:42 AM
Ajaira.

magic boy
February 27, 2010, 08:46 AM
Ajaira.

+1:up:

Ishtylish cricketer
February 27, 2010, 11:43 AM
A few things amazed me about Tendulkar's 200. When I watched the highlights of that inning, I couldn't help but marvel at the man's batting genius. I liked it all. The timing, placement, perfect defence, the balance between attack and defence, the unassuming way he treated each ball, belligerence puntuated with artistic clips off the pads. It was pure magic.

Tendulkar deserves praise for being the first to reach the landmark of 200 in 50 overs cricket. Achieving a double hundred in any format is not an easy feat, just ask Jaques Kallis. Tying and breaking records take lot of mental strength and self belief. Tendulkar showed a lot of courage in not opting for a runner despite visible cramps when most people in his place would have asked for one at the first sign of cramp. I was glad to see him run for all his runs.

I beg to differ slightly with those who said Saeed Anwar was not a great player. Saeed Anwar in the ODI format, (50 overs contest) should be seen as one of the great (top 10) batsmen of his era. While he was still playing he had the second highest number of centuries before retiring prematurely. The hallmark of great player according to me in addition to being consistent, should also include the ability to assert dominance over all opposition at all time. Saeed did it consistently in ODIs against all opposition for a significant period of time.

My ODI best batsmen ranking:

1) Tendulkar
2) Viv Richards
.
.
3) Sanath Jayasuriya
4) Ponting
5) Lara (others above have accomplished more in ODIs)
6) Gilchrist
7) Hayden
8) Saeed Anwar
9) Inzi
10)Bevan

beshideshi
March 7, 2010, 09:52 AM
I don't know what makes you think that. near 200 scores were as common then as they are now.

180+ scores by decade :
1980's
richards 189* vs eng
richards 181 vs SL

1990's
ganguly 183 v SL
kirsten 188* v UAE
sachin 186* v NZ
anwar 194 v Ind
2000's
hayden 181* v NZ
dhoni 183* v SL
jayasuriya 189 v Ind
coventry 194* v BD
2010's
sachin 200* v SA

Here is why I said the 200 mark was beyond expectations, before Sayeed Anwar scored the 194, only 3 batsmen crossed the 175 mark since 1971. That includes 2 innings from Viv Richards, and 3 innings from over a decade ago when ODI cricket was a 60 over game. Kapil's 175* came in a 60 over game, and Viv's 175+ scores came in a 55 over and one 50 over game.
So, only twice in the previous 1208 games did anyone come close to 200. [once against a less than ordinary UAE attack.] That shows why a 200 was so unexpected from a batsman in that period, specially against an international class bowling attack.
But in recent times, due to the T20 revolution, the heavier bats, smaller grounds, field restrictions etc scoring quickly is fast becoming the norm. And when you see people scoring 100+ in a 20 over game, a 200 in a 50 over game is not beyond expectations.
I have no intentions of undermining the greatness of the 200* by SRT. I honestly felt privileged to be able to see the knock live. And perhaps the best ODI innings I have seen[or will ever see]

Shehwar
March 7, 2010, 12:34 PM
Agree with you there ... imagine what Anwar would have done if he had just started powerplay on that 44th over ... not to mention all these free hits which was unheard of back then ... that still id the best innings I ever saw in ODI cricket.Here is why I said the 200 mark was beyond expectations, before Sayeed Anwar scored the 194, only 3 batsmen crossed the 175 mark since 1971. That includes 2 innings from Viv Richards, and 3 innings from over a decade ago when ODI cricket was a 60 over game. Kapil's 175* came in a 60 over game, and Viv's 175+ scores came in a 55 over and one 50 over game.
So, only twice in the previous 1208 games did anyone come close to 200. [once against a less than ordinary UAE attack.] That shows why a 200 was so unexpected from a batsman in that period, specially against an international class bowling attack.
But in recent times, due to the T20 revolution, the heavier bats, smaller grounds, field restrictions etc scoring quickly is fast becoming the norm. And when you see people scoring 100+ in a 20 over game, a 200 in a 50 over game is not beyond expectations.
I have no intentions of undermining the greatness of the 200* by SRT. I honestly felt privileged to be able to see the knock live. And perhaps the best ODI innings I have seen[or will ever see]
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition (Android)