The jury's out the most significant number the cricket monthly _ espn cricinfo

4/23/2015 The Jury's Out | The most significant number | The Cricket Monthly | ESPN Cricinfo

http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/853269/the-most-significant-number 1/29

Sign in | Issues

© Getty Images

Bradman himself

never seemed to

mind that he failed

to finish with a

perfect 100

THE JURY'S OUT

The most significant

http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/

http://submit.espncricinfo.com/tcm/content/submit/auth/web/login.html?referer=http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/853269/the-most-significant-number

http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/archive/index



99.94

Bradman's average

By David Frith

D on Bradman's Test average

of 99.94 is possibly the most

famous piece of flotsam in the great

ocean of cricket statistics. It remains

the subject of quite a lot of ongoing

lament too. I've lost count of the

number of people who have shaken

their heads in irritation and

frustration, almost disbelief. If only…

I was around at the time. In August

1948, as a schoolboy in north-west

London, I remember seeing a man

standing as if in shock by the Rayners

Lane railway station exit while he read

his evening newspaper. It was

something about England's Test-

match collapse. Australia had

humiliated them: all out for 52 runs at

From periods of dominance to missed

milestones and false legacies, cricket's history

can be told by its key numbers. Five writers

pick theirs

number

APRIL 2015

₹898.85 ₹602.91 ₹2,265 ₹497.00

More

By FVD Suggestions

http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia/content/player/4188.html



The Oval (Len Hutton 30). Late that

afternoon, after Arthur Morris and

Sid Barnes had posted 117 for the first

wicket, in went Bradman.

Australia's captain and king of run-

makers received a stirring ovation

from the Oval crowd and the England

players. He played legspinner Eric

Hollies' first ball to mid-off.

Newcomer commentator John Arlott

was on air, and described how the

Bradman drive went in the direction

of the Houses of Parliament, though

the ball didn't go quite that far, of

course. Of course. Pity it didn't, for

Bradman would then have been

guaranteed a lifetime Test average of

100.

It took a while for the Bradman

lifetime average of 99.94 to

touch public consciousness.

The game was so much

simpler, almost naïve, in those

days

Hollies bowled again (not around the

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/62689.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/player/14240.html



wicket but over: that famous newsreel

sequence is manipulated). If DG

Bradman had a weakness it was

against quality wristspin. He played

hesitantly forward. Bowled him!

There was a stunned pause. The Don

quickly turned on his heel, tucked his

prolific bat under his arm and set off

back to the pavilion, where he sat

down, removed his pads and said,

"Fancy doing a thing like that!"

When his former team-mates and

now journalists Jack Fingleton and

Bill O'Reilly saw Bradman's wicket

disturbed, according to EW Swanton,

they shrieked with delight, tastelessly

revealing their feelings about their

former captain, at a time, too, when

the press box was maintained as a

cathedral of decorum.

It was not a statistically minded age.

There was, as far as I can recall, no

forewarning that he needed only four

runs to sustain a lifetime Test average

of 100. It took a while for 99.94 to

touch public consciousness. The game

was so much simpler, almost naïve, in

those days.

The mystique of that figure lives on.

In Australia it was embedded in the

address of the Australian



Broadcasting Commission, when

cricket-loving supremo Sir Charles

Moses made it the ABC's postal box

number. It has been the subject of

quiz questions galore. Despite the

futility of it, some desperate zealots

have even trawled through the fine

print of Test cricket's records to try

and find Bradman four more runs:

perhaps a boundary of leg-byes that

had really come off the bat edge, or a

bad umpiring decision (Bradman did

quietly claim that one of his double-

centuries in England ended with a

caught decision when the ball had

merely brushed his shirt).

Maybe it's not the Greek tragedy that

many consider it to be. Bradman

certainly never moaned about it

publicly or to friends, as far as I know.

I always steered clear of talking to him

about Bodyline, for obvious reasons,

and can't recall ever bringing up this

business about his Test average. He

himself simply wrote: "I had a rather

sad heart about my own farewell as I

wended my way pavilionwards."

Strange as it may seem, there was no

reference to that wretched 99.94.

David Frith is a leading cricket

historian and author



****

15

West Indies' unbeaten run

By Fazeer Mohammed

A s numbers go, 15 is pretty

innocuous. It doesn't figure

when measuring on a scale of one to

ten, and when giving marks out of a

hundred, it is so low that it barely

deserves a mention.

But when it represents the number of

years that West Indies remained

unbeaten in Test cricket at a time

when the standard of the game was

unquestionably high, 15 becomes

absolutely staggering. And when

positioned against the 20 years of

decline and struggle that have

immediately followed the era of

invincibility, it is entirely bewildering.



Mean in maroon: West Indies took hold of the Test crown and didn't give it

up for well over a dozen years © Getty Images

First, though, the facts.

From the start of the five-match

series in England in the northern

summer of 1980 to the end of a two-

Test jaunt in New Zealand in February

of 1995, West Indies played unbeaten

through 29 rubbers, 16 of them away

from home. There were also one-off

first-ever Tests against South Africa,

in which the hosts pulled off a

stunning come-from-behind victory

on the last day at a deserted

Kensington Oval, and against Sri

Lanka, a soggy draw in Moratuwa.

There were stretches of

unprecedented dominance even

within that 15-year period, with 1984

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60488.html


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/team/4.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;spanmax1=01+Mar+1995;spanmin1=01+Apr+1980;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team;view=series





often identified as West Indies cricket

at its most fearsome. Australia, all of

Allan Border, Dean Jones, Terry

Alderman and company, were brushed

aside 3-0 in the Caribbean with the

home team, amazingly, not losing a

single second-innings wicket through

the five matches. England,

notwithstanding the presence of Ian

Botham, David Gower, Allan Lamb and

other notables, then endured the

humiliation of a 5-0 "blackwash" on

home soil, a treatment that was to be

repeated two years later in the

Caribbean.

Then, just to rub the Aussies' noses

deeper into the red dirt of their own

homeland, Clive Lloyd's awe-inspiring

troops closed off 1984 by taking the

first three matches of the five-Test

series down under, stretching their

winning streak to a then record 11

matches, forcing a tearful resignation

from the Australian captaincy by Kim

Hughes in the process.

At a time when the likes of

Imran and Gooch were among

the giants of the game, it would







have been incredibly difficult to

not lose a series for even three

years

Curiously, though, the invincibility in

Tests did not extend to the 50-over

World Cups - although the stunning

upset suffered at the hands of India at

Lord's in 1983, when a hat-trick of

titles seemed there for the taking, was

the spur for a 3-0 domination of India

at the end of the year.

This recollection is not about

unfurling once again the record of

majestic innings by Viv Richards et al,

or the devastating exploits of the

fearsome foursome of Andy Roberts,

Michael Holding, Colin Croft and Joel

Garner, but reinforcing that they, and

so many other outstanding players of

that era, were able to establish and

sustain a record of almost complete

dominance. It is a standard that will

surely remain as elusive as the Don's

99.94.

Yes, there were some notable

capitulations, like being routed for 53

by Pakistan (who fought West Indies

to three high-class 1-1 series draws




from 1980 to 1990) in Faisalabad in

1986, and the utter destruction

wreaked by legspinner Narendra

Hirwani, who claimed 16 wickets on

debut in Madras in 1988. And there

were also a few notable escapes:

controversial umpiring in Barbados in

1988 ensuring a drawn series against

Pakistan, and blatant time-wasting in

Trinidad preventing England from

going 2-0 up in 1990, just to name two.

Rather than stain West Indies' record,

though, they reinforce how incredibly

difficult it would have been, at a time

when the likes of Imran Khan and

Graham Gooch were also among the

giants of the game, to not lose a single

series for even three or four years. To

have remained unbeaten for all of 15

then, when surrounded by so many

champion opponents, is truly

astonishing.

Fazeer Mohammed is a Trinidad-based

broadcaster and journalist who has

been covering West Indies cricket for 25

years

****

0

The duck







By S Rajesh

C ricket's most significant

number has to be 0. It's the

number every batsman dreads, the

number almost none can avoid. Even

the greatest have had their tryst with

the duck. In all international cricket,

2569 players have combined to

contribute 14,041 ducks, which works

out to an average of five and a half per

player. Compared to that, only 5194

centuries have been scored - that's a

ratio of 2.70 ducks per century. Only

831 batsmen have experienced the

feeling of scoring an international

century, compared to 2569 who have

made international ducks, again a

ratio of 3 to 1. The low of getting out

for 0 is an experience far more

common than the high of scoring a

century.



Poultry farmer: Chris Martin was one of cricket's most celebrated

tailenders, with 38 ducks to his name © Getty Images

Some players - not necessarily

specialist batsmen - have experienced

that feeling of walking back without

scoring a run many more times than

others. Three players have passed the

landmark of 50: Muttiah

Muralitharan, Courtney Walsh and

Sanath Jayasuriya.

For some it's a badge to be worn

proudly, the ultimate proof of a true

tailender. In modern times, no player

has done justice to the No. 11 tag as

New Zealand's Chris Martin has: in

112 innings he had 38 ducks.

However, it isn't just the lower-order

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/37700.html?class=11;filter=advanced;orderby=start;outs=1;runsmax1=0;runsval1=runs;template=results;type=batting;view=match



batsmen who are remembered for

their inability to get off the mark.

Some top batsmen have had

unforgettable 0 moments: anyone

who follows India-Pakistan cricket

will never forget Shoaib Akhtar's

perfect first-ball yorker that flattened

Sachin Tendulkar's middle stump in

the Kolkata Test of 1999; and what

about Marvan Atapattu's sequence in

his first six Test innings, which read 0,

0, 0, 1, 0, 0? Similarly, Ken Rutherford

made six ducks in his first 12 Test

innings, and yet managed to stretch

his career to 56 Tests, during which

period he also scored three hundreds

and 18 fifties (and ten more ducks).

At the other end of the spectrum are

players who have never experienced

scoring an international duck. Their

careers are clearly incomplete (and in

the cases of those who have retired,

they will stay that way). Among those

who belong in this group are Brijesh

Patel (47 international innings),

Brendan Nash (40), Chris Rogers (39),

and Dirk Wellham (28). There's only

one player who has batted more than

50 times without yet experiencing the

joy of a zero: he isn't a big name from

any of the big teams, but Afghanistan's

Samiullah Shenwari, who has batted


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/48124.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=start;spanmax1=15+Feb+1994;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting;view=match

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/38258.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround;view=match








57 times in international matches

without getting a duck (though he has

been out on 1 six times). Clearly, he is

still some distance from achieving

greatness.

For batsmen it's a list to avoid,

but for some others it's a badge

to be worn proudly, for it's the

ultimate proof of being a true

tailender

Shenwari might want to pick up a

lesson from AB de Villiers' Test

career. De Villiers waited 78 innings to

record his first duck in Tests, but in

hindsight that was a mistake: before

he scored his first duck, he averaged

41.08; since getting that zero, he has

averaged 63.67 in 83 Test innings.

Unarguably, though, the most famous

zero of all was made by the greatest

batsman of all. As David Frith writes,

without the duck there would be no

99.94.

Stats up to January 25, 2015

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/44936.html?class=1;spanmax2=25+Nov+2008;spanmin2=01+Nov+2004;spanval2=span;template=results;type=batting;view=match

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/44936.html?class=1;spanmin1=01+Dec+2008;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting;view=match



S Rajesh is ESPNcricinfo's stats editor

****

365 not out

Sobers' record

By Steven Lynch

T hree-sixty-five. The number

of days in a year. Nice and

easy to remember. And, for most of

the adult life of any cricket follower

aged from 30 to 70, it's the number we

associate with probably the most

redolent statistical table of all - the

one for the highest individual Test

score. Early in 1958 in Kingston,

Garry Sobers extended his first Test

century to 365. It was 365 not out, in

fact; the asterisk somehow makes it so

much better.

Even now, more than 20 years after

Lara, when I think of that list it's

Sobers and his 365 not out that comes

to mind first. Then I have to factor in

Brian Lara (twice), and Matthew

Hayden. Oh, and Mahela

Jayawardene's 374.

It was a remarkable innings by Sobers,

who was just 21, even if he had a bit of

help: the pitch was one of those Sabina

specials, polished and prepared until





you could almost see your face in it. It

was a great batting track, on which

Pakistan had made a middling 328 in

the first day and a half.

Sobers, Lara: the highest Test score has been a West Indian monopoly for

57 years, save for about six months in 2003-04 © PA Photos

Pakistan's attack was soon up against

it: seamer Mahmood Hussain ran in to

bowl the first over, and limped off

after five balls with a pulled thigh

muscle. He didn't return: it's probably

unfair, but I can't help imagining he

wasn't that keen to get back out there.

Abdul Hafeez Kardar, the tourists'

autocratic captain, had gone into the

match with a cracked finger, and the

16-year-old left-arm spinner Nasim-

ul-Ghani soon broke his thumb.

Sobers came in at 87 for 1 and put on



446 with Conrad Hunte, who was 40

runs short of his own triple-century

before he was run out. Everton

Weekes made 39, and when he was

out, Clyde Walcott - not a bad man for

a crisis - strolled in at 602 for 3. Not

long afterwards, Sobers broke Len

Hutton's old record, and West Indies

declared at 790 for 3.

Those injuries had left Pakistan with

only two fully fit bowlers (Kardar still

managed 37 overs, and Nasim 15).

Fazal Mahmood, their great medium-

pacer, trundled through no fewer

than 85.2 overs, in immense heat, to

take 2 for 247.

At the other end Khan Mohammad, a

bit quicker than Fazal but with fewer

variations, sent down 54 overs, and

finished with 0 for 259, still the most

expensive wicketless analysis in Test

history. Later in life, he shrugged it

off as one of those days: "Everyone

always talks about that 0 for 259. They

never ask me about the time I bowled

Len Hutton for nought at Lord's in

1954." That was probably Khan's

finest hour… although almost as

notable a Lord's achievement came

much later, when he persuaded the

notoriously eagle-eyed MCC




membership office that he lived

abroad - and thus qualified for a

much-reduced subscription - while

actually running a travel agency down

the road in Ealing.

Mahmood Hussain limped off

after five balls and didn't

return: it's probably unfair, but I

can't help imagining he wasn't

that keen to get back out there

The record would last till Lara made

375 against England early in 1994:

fittingly, Sobers was there in Antigua

to congratulate the new standard-

bearer. Sobers had held the blue-

riband record for 36 years, longer

than anyone else has managed. Hanif

Mohammad, who had made a triple-

century himself earlier in that 1957-

58 series, paid tribute. "It was an

unblemished innings, full of delightful

strokes - though we, who were on the

receiving end, could perhaps be

excused for not sharing in that

delight," he wrote. "It was an innings

that was indicative of Sobers's





brilliance, which continued to shine

even brighter as his career

progressed, making him an

incomparable player."

Steven Lynch is deputy editor of Wisden

Cricketers' Almanack

****

1996

Sri Lanka's twisted inheritance

By Vithushan Ehantharajah

A "World Cup legacy" is a strange

thing. It is a magnanimous yet

malleable entity that can be forced

into any shape to fit a particular

narrative, often one of an everlasting

love brought about through the

healing power of sport.

It is, ultimately, nonsense.

The sight of Aravinda de Silva, sleeves

billowing in the Lahore evening air for

an unbeaten 107, taking Sri Lanka

through to their maiden World Cup

win, even now takes me back to 1996. I

was crouched, battling with a cousin

for floor space next to the radio,

which was doing its darnedest to spit

out what it could of this faint, long-

wave broadcast. This isn't a side-





street cobbler in Jaffna, by the way -

this is St Stephen's Road, Ealing.

Heady and hellish: Sri Lanka's 1996 World Cup win brought glory and sowed

the seeds for endless politicking © Associated Press

"It really changed the fortunes for Sri

Lanka cricket," said de Silva, in an

interview in 2013. By that point, he

had taken on a number of roles within

Sri Lanka Cricket, including chairman

of selectors, in a period that saw the

relationship between the country's

players and administrators at an all-

time low.

The reason? Greed and corruption

stemming from that World Cup

victory. It was Sri Lankan cricket's



tipping point.

The team members became

marketable assets and there was

money to be made. The board, run by

volunteers up to this point, was

suddenly part of a multi-million dollar

organisation. Gradually the well-

intentioned were eased out and the

politically savvy, self-motivated

moved in. They have yet to be

displaced.

Almost 20 years on, there has been

little drive or consistency from those

on the countless selection panels and

interim committees. They simply line

their pockets, boost their profile and

move on. Voting was often rigged for

the highest bidders, and AGMs could

be violent affairs, with intimidation

frequently the strongest currency.

Financial impropriety meant the

government had to step in and

dissolve its own appointed interim

committee, as the board found itself

saddled with US$23 million of debt

after the 2011 World Cup.

Prior to that competition, which Sri

Lanka co-hosted, just as they had done

in 1996, Kumar Sangakkara had

offered his resignation as captain,




having become disillusioned with

tasks that included negotiating the

contracts of other players and battling

constant political interference. He

eventually relinquished the role after

Sri Lanka's defeat in the final to India,

but his gripes featured prominently in

his MCC Spirit of Cricket Cowdrey

Lecture at Lord's, delivered later that

year.

In 2012, Arjuna Ranatunga, the

captain in '96, condemned the state of

the SLC after their first elections in

seven years ended in controversy,

with one of the two groups contesting

withdrawing because of political

interference in the process. During

Ranatunga's brief tenure as SLC

chairman in 2008, he felt the effect of

that interference when he was sacked

by then sports minister Gamini

Lokuge without any hearing.

Almost 20 years on, there has

been little drive from those on

the selection panels and

interim committees. They

simply boost their profile and

http://www.espncricinfo.com/srilanka/content/story/522183.html



move on

Perhaps most galling of all is the

transformation of Sanath Jayasuriya,

Player of the Tournament in '96. In

2010 he became an MP, representing

the party of President Mahinda

Rajapaksa, the United People's

Freedom Alliance - the same

government suspected of serious war

crimes within Sri Lanka by UN and

human rights organisations.

Jayasuriya was then appointed as

national selector by sports minister

and fellow UPFA member

Mahindananda Aluthgamage. Since

then he has been embroiled in

countless disagreements with players,

ranging from contract disputes to

quarrels with Sangakkara and Mahela

Jayawardene, who have used their

profiles to aid the team over their

national board.

The glory of that March evening at the

Gaddafi Stadium inspired a nation.

Unfortunately, it also created an

administrative monster that shows no

sign of changing its ways.

Legacies aren't all they are cracked up




to be.

Vithushan Ehantharajah is a freelance

sportswriter. In 2014, he was named

the Christopher Martin-Jenkins Young

Journalist of the Year

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

RELATED ARTICLES

On the biggest

stage of them all,

after Sri Lanka

lost their openers

early, de Silva

stood head and

shoulders above

the competition

and his team-

mates

Men of the Finals

Aravindatakes it upa notch

Even today - and

not just to those

of a certain

vintage - Garry

Sobers remains

above every other

claimant to the

title of cricket's

greatest

allrounder

They brokethe mouldafter SirGarry

Bradman was

cricket's first

modern hero, a

man who

transcended his

game, embodied

the modern

Australian

journey, and

became a symbol

of mastery over

fate

The poorboy whocame towalkamongkings

http://www.espncricinfo.com/wctimeline/content/story/813303.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/wctimeline/content/story/813303.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/723297.html






LATEST

LOGIN TO POST YOUR COMMENTS

ALL 20 FEATURED 0

Email

Email

Password

Password

Forgot Password?New user? Create Account Now

Sign In

POSTED BY GUFRAN MOMIN ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 17:01 GMT

R U Kidding.....Number 100 n 99.94 .......just define themselves ....

POSTED BY NEILJTURNER ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 14:25 GMT

A cricket article about significant numbers, and 111 doesn't come up? Scandalous! :)

POSTED BY 4TEST90 ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 12:11 GMT

As a proud Victorian (Sheffield Shield champs again this summer !!) I just have to go for

1107. The highest ever first class innings, set at the MCG in 1926/7. No team, anywhere,

ever will beat that.

POSTED BY GB_CRICKET ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 11:55 GMT

Most important numbers in random order are: 1) 99.94 by Don, it is 37 more than the

batsman at 2nd position. 2) 100 international centuries by Sachin, these are 30 more

than the batsman at 2nd position. 3) 90/9 by Laker 4) 800 wkts by Murali, around 90

more than 2nd position. Any of these numbers is unlikely to be overtaken ever, unless

there is some drastic change in the game's format.

POSTED BY WOOLDATA ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 10:20 GMT

http://submit.espncricinfo.com/tcm/content/submit/gplus/authorize.html?referer=http://thecricketmonthly.com/story/853269

https://www.facebook.com/dialog/oauth?scope=email&auth_type=rerequest&client_id=317198931778367&redirect_uri=http://submit.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/submit/fb/callback.html&state=http://thecricketmonthly.com/story/853269

http://submit.espncricinfo.com/tcm/content/submit/auth/web/forgotpassword.html?referer=http://thecricketmonthly.com/story/853269

http://submit.espncricinfo.com/tcm/content/submit/auth/web/registration.html?referer=http://thecricketmonthly.com/story/853269



This is a great article, and proves what is so great about cricket. No agreement needed,

just your opinion and something to wile away a pleasant few beers discussing. However I

think there are a couple of factual inaccuracies. The reputed instigator of 9994 as the ABC

PO Box was Moses's successor Talbot Duckmanton. I always thought the worst figures

in test cricket are 0-260 by South African leggie, Imran Tahir v Australia at Adelaide.

Although now that I check that was over two innings, so I correct myself.

POSTED BY NUTCUTLET ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 8:41 GMT

Another number that will never be beaten is the 197 first class tons scored by Jack Hobbs

in his career (1905-34). The fact that he was tantalisingly close to 200 is further

highlighted by the (much later) decision of the Association of Cricket Statisticians to add

two further tons, scored against Sri Lanka (or Ceylon as it was then). 197 or 199? Perhaps

it doesn't matter. I cannot help but feel that if Hobbs had been Indian, then it would have

been arranged for him to reach 200, probably in a Test match against the West Indies!

Even so, Hobbs himself wouldn't have been much interested in such gimmickry. He was

not the insatiable batsman that Bradman undoubtedly was. There are several occasions

when Hobbs reached his century and then gave his wicket way to some deserving

bowler. As a man, people spoke warmly of Hobbs in a way that they didn't of the Don. If

Bradman is the greatest of all batsmen, then Hobbs is undoubtedly the greatest opening

bat of all time.

POSTED BY STUART_ONLINE ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 6:31 GMT

I have to vote for 99.94 as the most famous cricket number, because it doesn't crop up in

other places. Google for 99.94 without any other context, and you will find Bradman.

Google for 365, or 501 and you won't find Sobers or Lara. One comment and one question

about David Frith's wonderful essay: Even in a more statistically minded age, Bradman's

0 would merely have left commentators speculating on whether he would get a chance

to make the necessary 104 in the second innings to get his average back above 100,

because it would not be known he was walking off for the last time. And why is it so

obvious that you steered clear of talking to him about Bodyline ? Was it still a taboo

subject 50 years later ?

POSTED BY AHSAN53 ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 4:51 GMT

Another number could be of some interest is "999 minutes batting in a test and that is

against West Indies by great HANIF MUHAMMAD of PAKISTAN"

POSTED BY TATTUS ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 3:55 GMT

For me, three records which would probably be never ever broken are 99.94 , 19/90 and

100.



POSTED BY INDIANINNEREDGE ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 2:41 GMT

63 - Phil Hughes....also as a tribute to heaps of those who chased their dreams but were

injured on the field and couldn't continue.

POSTED BY UPPERCUT07 ON | APRIL 22, 2015, 2:28 GMT

Ehantharajah seems to know VERY LITTLE abt Sanath's role in those Players vs Admin

battles withing the SLC. He was the MEDIATOR, otherwise Sanga & Mahela would've

retired long time ago. Better not talk abt somethings that u know very little about..

POSTED BY INDIANINNEREDGE ON | APRIL 21, 2015, 23:27 GMT

For me 99.96 is the most significant one. Poetic justice it is - as 100 would be perfect, but

then no one is perfect and Sir Don was the closest, not that the missing four runs takes

away any of his prowess or ability but missing those 4 certainly adds on to the aura and

mystique. The indian in me forever latches on to 183 and 1983 being the score in the cric

world cup final of the same year (amazing similarity)when a bunch of no hopers shook

the world, with style , panache and most importantly joie-de-vivre (much missing

nowadays) in what has to rank as one of the most unexpected and amazing results of all

time , all sport. Nice article and just goes to show that cricket is, among other things a

vast gigantic statistical machine. 99.94 will live on ! cricinfo please publish.

POSTED BY SUSSEXMARTLET ON | APRIL 21, 2015, 21:05 GMT

19-90. Two numbers, sorry but connected - a record that is very unlikely ever to be

beaten.

POSTED BY CHARINDRA CHANDRASENA ON | APRIL 21, 2015, 18:45 GMT

I was happy to see that Vithushan Ehantharajah had remembered to include Sri Lanka in

this, even though Murali's 800 wickets had been curiously left out. If Murali was

Australian or English that would be a more iconic number than even 99.94. But I digress.

Kudos to Vithushan Ehantharajah for talking bluntly about the mess that is Sri Lankan

cricket administration. I just wish he had kept his own politics out of the article instead

of referring to Rajapaksa as a war criminal. It has nothing to do with the article and no

charges have been proven yet.

POSTED BY TAILENDER63 ON | APRIL 21, 2015, 18:38 GMT

So many numbers ... 499 is a Hanif, 174 a Randall, 63 a Phil Hughes.

POSTED BY SCHALK ON | APRIL 21, 2015, 18:37 GMT



SIGN UP FOR EMAIL UPDATES

Submit

Nice comment @robski. Although I'd posit 6. It represents both the rhythm of the game

in the number of balls in an over that contributes so much to the game's feel, in the

creation of individual battles within the larger game. And of course it represents the

maximum.

POSTED BY YVOHU ON | APRIL 21, 2015, 17:07 GMT

100. Number of International Centuries by Tendulkar.

POSTED BY RAKESHGPRADHAN ON | APRIL 21, 2015, 16:29 GMT

what about 36 - the maximum 6 sixes - definately iconic like the 9 darter and snookers

147

POSTED BY SWARZI ON | APRIL 11, 2015, 12:06 GMT

Bradman's 99.94 is definitely mind boggling! But, I think 400* is right up there with it.

Why? It's nothing to do with just the number itself. but also the circumstance under

which it was made; and who made it: It was made within only 6 months to regain a

similar record which that said player had lost - "ONLY SIX MONTHS" for a feat of such

magnitude is more than mind boggling! Imagine, the said player took only 3 seasons to

crush a similar record that stood nearly FOUR FULL DECADES! And, in his record is also

another mind boggling number of 500*! Because it's the same player who did all this,

and the circumstance under which he made 400*, makes it the most significant number

in cricket. Why more than Bradman's 99.94? Because, Bradman's number is associated

with a tinge of failure: he wanted to score "only 4 runs" for a special achievement but

failed; while Lara's number is an absolutely heroic and flawless feat: he wanted to score

400 and did - but they're ist and 2nd of All Time.

POSTED BY ROBSKI ON | APRIL 7, 2015, 7:04 GMT

Finishing with the most profound comment is always a splendidly journalistic concept,

so mazeltovs a-go-go to whoever edited this as well as to young Vithushan. The

estimable Mr Frith's tribute to 99.94 is as finely sculpted as we have grown to expect, but

one quibble: if scoring a century is every batsman's aim when he or she takes guard is a

century, then the glory of 99.94 is surely the way it confirms that even the greatest

sporting phenomenon of all was not flawless, and that sport will always make a mockery

of all those who believe perfection is possible (or even beneficial).



HOME ABOUT CONTACT PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF USE

http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/

http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/site/aboutus

http://submit.espncricinfo.com/tcm/content/submit/auth/web/contact_us.html

https://disneyprivacycenter.com/

http://disneytermsofuse.com/

http://espncricinfo.com/

Documents

The jury's out the most significant number the cricket monthly _ espn cricinfo