|
Cricket Join fellow Tigers fans to discuss all things Cricket
|
April 4, 2008, 10:16 AM
|
|
Cricket Savant
|
|
Join Date: June 30, 2005
Location: Little Rock
Favorite Player: Viv Richards, Steve Waugh
Posts: 32,798
|
|
Difference between a triple and double century
Is not 100.
the Doubles are more of a match winning knock. The triple pushes you towards a draw unless against minnows.
__________________
The Weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the Strong." - Gandhi.
|
April 4, 2008, 10:36 AM
|
|
Cricket Legend Fantasy Winner: BD v NZ 2008
|
|
Join Date: December 17, 2004
Posts: 7,713
|
|
A triple century is also rarer than a test victory
__________________
sig?
|
April 4, 2008, 10:40 AM
|
|
Cricket Savant
|
|
Join Date: June 30, 2005
Location: Little Rock
Favorite Player: Viv Richards, Steve Waugh
Posts: 32,798
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spitfire_x86
A triple century is also rarer than a test victory
|
Absolutely. There is only 23 triple hundred scored in test history. So as a player which one he should go after? A (double) win (not garanteed though) or a triple?
__________________
The Weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the Strong." - Gandhi.
|
April 4, 2008, 10:42 AM
|
|
Cricket Savant
|
|
Join Date: June 30, 2005
Location: Little Rock
Favorite Player: Viv Richards, Steve Waugh
Posts: 32,798
|
|
I think the triples are over-rated.
__________________
The Weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the Strong." - Gandhi.
|
April 4, 2008, 11:05 AM
|
|
Cricket Sage
|
|
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 18,718
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
Is not 100.
the Doubles are more of a match winning knock. The triple pushes you towards a draw unless against minnows.
|
Agree 100%
Double centruy is equally good for the team as well as for the player personally (and fans) and have some significance in game outcome. One the other hand a Triple Century is only good for the Player, their fans and for the stat; No real value in outcome of the game itself.
Therefore double century may do more good to team than a triple century.
|
April 4, 2008, 11:21 AM
|
|
Cricket Legend
|
|
Join Date: June 5, 2004
Location: England
Favorite Player: Shakib Al Hasan
Posts: 6,711
|
|
U ppl!...Let me tell u the difference....The Difference between a triple and double century is 1 run! When u are on 299 its a double but when u score 1 more run its triple! Problem solved!.
|
April 4, 2008, 11:22 AM
|
ODI Cricketer
|
|
Join Date: September 25, 2005
Posts: 914
|
|
Good post ..Lara if he were not the captain would not have had the 375 and 400.He literally killed the match for the records.
Hard to see a non-captain break the record unless its a maniac like Shewag.But again I dont think he can do it again.
Speaking of Captains I remember Mark taylor declaring when he was at 336 and dint go for the 365 record of Sobers.Now I call that selflessness.
|
April 4, 2008, 11:34 AM
|
|
Cricket Guru
|
|
Join Date: August 17, 2005
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Favorite Player: Brian Charles Lara
Posts: 9,242
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bharat
Good post ..Lara if he were not the captain would not have had the 375 and 400.He literally killed the match for the records.
Hard to see a non-captain break the record unless its a maniac like Shewag.But again I dont think he can do it again.
Speaking of Captains I remember Mark taylor declaring when he was at 336 and dint go for the 365 record of Sobers.Now I call that selflessness.
|
lara wasn't captain when he scored 375. you can bash lara as much you can but i believe he did the right thing. there's only one player didn't go for the record and that was mark taylor.
|
April 4, 2008, 11:37 AM
|
|
Cricket Savant
|
|
Join Date: June 30, 2005
Location: Little Rock
Favorite Player: Viv Richards, Steve Waugh
Posts: 32,798
|
|
Shehwer is correct. Only one run.
Out of the 23 triple hundreds, 15 of them resulted draw (includinging Mark Taylors 336*). Among the seven that had results,
1. Sobers's one came on six day (if counting the break day it would be seventh day).
2. L Hutton's was in 1938.
3. Edrich's came against NZ (minnow back then).
4. Hayden's came against Zim.
So basically 3 out 19 triples were worth a winning knock.
Jayawardene 374 against SA at Colombo '06.
Gooch 333 against India at Lords '90.
Inzi 329 against NZ at Lahore '02.
__________________
The Weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the Strong." - Gandhi.
|
April 4, 2008, 11:48 AM
|
ODI Cricketer
|
|
Join Date: September 25, 2005
Posts: 914
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sovik
lara wasn't captain when he scored 375. you can bash lara as much you can but i believe he did the right thing. there's only one player didn't go for the record and that was mark taylor.
|
maybe you are right on the 375, was in the mid 90's I guess.But where am I bashing Lara ...common..why do you have to defend evrey non-Indian and bash every Indian.
This forum is surely going in the wrong direction ...not the same as it used to be around 3 years back when I joined ...phew
|
April 4, 2008, 11:54 AM
|
|
Cricket Guru
|
|
Join Date: August 17, 2005
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Favorite Player: Brian Charles Lara
Posts: 9,242
|
|
no body was bashing any indian batsman, i just told you the fact
|
April 4, 2008, 12:11 PM
|
BanglaCricket Staff
|
|
Join Date: April 15, 2007
Location: Manchester,UK
Favorite Player: bhujee kom
Posts: 22,656
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shehwar
U ppl!...Let me tell u the difference....The Difference between a triple and double century is 1 run! When u are on 299 its a double but when u score 1 more run its triple! Problem solved!.
|
299 reminds me of Martin Crowe
Check his stats
__________________
I love Bangladesh cricket and that's why I found BanglaCricket.com
|
April 4, 2008, 12:13 PM
|
|
Cricket Guru
|
|
Join Date: August 17, 2005
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Favorite Player: Brian Charles Lara
Posts: 9,242
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MohammedC
299 reminds me of Martin Crowe
Check his stats
|
and bradman and he was not out
|
April 4, 2008, 12:41 PM
|
|
Cricket Legend Fantasy Winner: BD v NZ 2008
|
|
Join Date: December 17, 2004
Posts: 7,713
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
So basically 3 out 19 triples were worth a winning knock.
Jayawardene 374 against SA at Colombo '06.
Gooch 333 against India at Lords '90.
Inzi 329 against NZ at Lahore '02.
|
+ Sehwag's 309 against Pakistan.
And don't forget that a triple can also be a match saving knock. Without Sehwag's 319 India could've lost the 1st test, as the rest of their batsmen didn't bat too well. The same can be said about Lara's 400, considering how well his team fared in that test series without his contributions. Even after his late declaration, they had 2 and half days to bowl out England twice.
__________________
sig?
|
April 4, 2008, 01:47 PM
|
Cricket Legend
|
|
Join Date: February 21, 2005
Location: in the blue planet
Posts: 3,822
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spitfire_x86
+ Sehwag's 309 against Pakistan.
And don't forget that a triple can also be a match saving knock.
|
Not sure of the ones you mentioned as those were "what-if" but H Mohammad's 337 was definite one and only one in the team's second innings and possibly fourth innings of the test.
__________________
Twenty20 is not a gentleman's game. It's like a one-night stand and not a marriage. It is a street format and the goonda doesn't know what is a late cut or a cover drive
|
April 4, 2008, 02:05 PM
|
|
Cricket Guru
|
|
Join Date: September 3, 2006
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Favorite Player: Sakib - the real Tiger
Posts: 11,194
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bharat
maybe you are right on the 375, was in the mid 90's I guess.But where am I bashing Lara ...common..why do you have to defend evrey non-Indian and bash every Indian.
This forum is surely going in the wrong direction ...not the same as it used to be around 3 years back when I joined ...phew
|
Bharat...aren't you over-reacting?
I guess it'll be right to say that your post is going in the wrong direction...nobody bashed an Indian player here.
And when it comes to Sehwag - I'll still maintain that he's an overly mega ultra over-rated player, and lacks many of the basics. Now don't ask me why he's here...may be he just manages to play with the "mental" part of his abilities.
__________________
cricket is a PROCESS, not an EVENT or two. -- Sohel_NR
Fans need to stop DUI (Dreaming Under Influence)!
|
April 4, 2008, 08:19 PM
|
|
Cricket Sage
|
|
Join Date: February 18, 2004
Location: New York City
Favorite Player: Mominul, Nasir, Taskin
Posts: 24,918
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
Shehwer is correct. Only one run.
Out of the 23 triple hundreds, 15 of them resulted draw (includinging Mark Taylors 336*). Among the seven that had results,
1. Sobers's one came on six day (if counting the break day it would be seventh day).
2. L Hutton's was in 1938.
3. Edrich's came against NZ (minnow back then).
4. Hayden's came against Zim.
So basically 3 out 19 triples were worth a winning knock.
Jayawardene 374 against SA at Colombo '06.
Gooch 333 against India at Lords '90.
Inzi 329 against NZ at Lahore '02.
|
the sehwag one could have been a winning knock given it was the fastest one by far. over a run a ball. had he taken 100 more balls to score the same runs, it could still have been a winning knock. the pitch killed the game, result wise.
but then again, on another pitch sehwag would have scored less than 319, perhaps 313 less.
__________________
Bangladesh: Our Dream, Our Joy, Our Team
#OneTeam1Dream
|
April 5, 2008, 03:06 AM
|
|
Cricket Guru
|
|
Join Date: March 7, 2007
Location: elsewhere
Favorite Player: ZAR
Posts: 9,896
|
|
300 goes to only class players
__________________
﴾اَلَاۤ اِنَّ اَوۡلِيَآءَ اللّٰهِ لَا خَوۡفٌ عَلَيۡهِمۡ وَلَا هُمۡ يَحۡزَنُوۡنَ ۖ ۚ ﴿۶۲
"Listen, the friends of Allah shall have no fear, nor shall they grieve" (Yunus: 62)
|
April 5, 2008, 09:01 AM
|
|
Test Cricketer
|
|
Join Date: January 3, 2005
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Favorite Player: Ian Bell
Posts: 1,662
|
|
Unless you can play with a high strike rate you won't be able to make 300. All the players who made 300s play fast. Jaques Kallis, Dravid, Jaffer, etc don't have 300 because they are too tired to continue after their 200 because they've exausted all their energy trying to get to 200. In Kallis's case he is still not made a 200. Someone like Shewag who relies mainly on boundaries and during his knock of 319 was still fresh after 200. In fact he was sprinting for doubles in the 250s. 300 demoralises the opposition so it can't be that bad and to suggest that 200's are always match winning is simply not true. Whether it's against a minnow or a top team not many can get 300. I know Hayden's 380 came against Zimbawae, others 300 were against good teams with good fast bowlers.
|
April 5, 2008, 09:03 AM
|
|
Cricket Legend
|
|
Join Date: August 8, 2002
Location: London, UK
Favorite Player: Michael Slater
Posts: 3,959
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fazal
Agree 100%
Double centruy is equally good for the team as well as for the player personally (and fans) and have some significance in game outcome. One the other hand a Triple Century is only good for the Player, their fans and for the stat; No real value in outcome of the game itself.
Therefore double century may do more good to team than a triple century.
|
I daresay if Sehwag had kept going on day four, India would have been able to declare and set South Africa four sessions to bat. The way it turned out India was going to have to bat again and that contributed to the game just dying on day five. It certainly wasn't easy for South Africa to draw that game either. They had to score 700 runs or so themselves which in most instances would be enough to win.
I certainly do see cases of teams batting on for too long (Lara's 400, Taylor's 334 - even though he eventually declared on himself it still went on longer than it should have). I don't think this test was one of those cases.
__________________
41.3 Gabriel to Liton Das, FOUR runs,... Bangladesh have just demolished West Indies in stunning fashion. Highest successful chase in Bangladesh's ODI history, and highest in this World Cup.
|
April 5, 2008, 09:26 AM
|
Test Cricketer
|
|
Join Date: February 18, 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,939
|
|
This is why I usually get myself out in the 290s
|
April 6, 2008, 04:05 AM
|
|
Cricket Guru
|
|
Join Date: March 7, 2007
Location: elsewhere
Favorite Player: ZAR
Posts: 9,896
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aritro
This is why I usually get myself out in the 290s
|
ja koilen ...
__________________
﴾اَلَاۤ اِنَّ اَوۡلِيَآءَ اللّٰهِ لَا خَوۡفٌ عَلَيۡهِمۡ وَلَا هُمۡ يَحۡزَنُوۡنَ ۖ ۚ ﴿۶۲
"Listen, the friends of Allah shall have no fear, nor shall they grieve" (Yunus: 62)
|
April 6, 2008, 08:20 AM
|
|
Cricket Savant
|
|
Join Date: December 23, 2007
Location: The Quiet Place
Favorite Player: Curtly Ambrose
Posts: 27,469
|
|
well think of this
5 batsmnan scring centuries to score 600 for the team in the 1st innings
2 bastman scoring double to score 600 for the team in 1st innings
1 batsman scoring 300 to score 600 for the team in 1st innings
in all these case these are situations created for winning.... now itsa up to bowlers.
now if a team score 500-600 in the 1st innings then the other team needs to avoid defeat or get into a winning position then someone has to score those triple centuries.
remeber as well as scoring a big score you need to bowl well.
|
April 7, 2008, 12:39 PM
|
|
Cricket Savant
|
|
Join Date: June 30, 2005
Location: Little Rock
Favorite Player: Viv Richards, Steve Waugh
Posts: 32,798
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spitfire_x86
+ Sehwag's 309 against Pakistan.
And don't forget that a triple can also be a match saving knock. Without Sehwag's 319 India could've lost the 1st test, as the rest of their batsmen didn't bat too well. The same can be said about Lara's 400, considering how well his team fared in that test series without his contributions. Even after his late declaration, they had 2 and half days to bowl out England twice.
|
You bring an excellent point that I didn't think of. A 300+ knock can save a team from an heavy defeat. wow!!
A would like to rephrase my previous comment.
"So basically 3 out 19 triples were a winning knock and 2 triples were match-saving knocks."
__________________
The Weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the Strong." - Gandhi.
|
April 7, 2008, 01:57 PM
|
Club Cricketer
|
|
Join Date: September 21, 2007
Posts: 151
|
|
There is a huge different between triple and double century, but usually triple century win you match or atleast bring team is in good position and set opponent in under pressure situation to survive. I'd prefer a century in sporting pitch than triple century in flat dead track which is completely dead end for fast bowlers. Inzimam inning unbeaten 92* was best of all the times faced SA in SA and same goes with Mohammad Yousuf with his double century in England pitch although it was flat pitch, but had little bounce for fast bowler.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:27 AM.
|
|