Highest Test Score

[Richard]

It's a bit of fun - a concept you appear to be completely alien to.

Nope, I just don't find that particular thing in the slightest fun. Much, much more fun to see stumps castled every time.

 

[kendall]

So it's enjoyable to see bowlers made to look like fools?

Yes it is great fun to see test match standard bowlers being smashed around by lower order batsmen. Provides great little entertaining patches to test matches of cause high class play is good but whats wrong with a bit of slogging. i really dont know why i am either bothering to post this really

 

[sledger]

must say that once again richard is failing to take anything less than 100% serious, in a way i would say that it is more fun that watching batsman slog, its more exciting.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Oh dear.

 

[shaka]

It's enjoyable to see the numbers 10 and 11 chance their arm and see the ball fly into the stand, not just for the reaction of the bowler.

You mean like when Mills cracked four sixes in a row?

 

[Nate]

Haha, poor Rich.

*vision... blurring. hands... shaking. rage... taking... over!*

 

[ch00baka]

You mean like when Mills cracked four sixes in a row?

That was highly entertaining, but you would hardly call Darren Lehmann and Brad Hogg test standard bowlers.

 

[Isolator]

2. Matthew Hayden 380 - this score came up on another farcially flat pitch against an awful side that should have been stripped of test match status, this should therefore discount the score.

He was dropped, too.

 

[marc71178]

You mean like when Mills cracked four sixes in a row?

Yes that sort of thing - it's a bit of harmless fun basically - you know it's not going to last long, but when 30 or 40 runs come up in 20 minutes it's a laugh!

 

[Smudge]

Anyone getting the feeling Richard was calling the double bluff? Perhaps he read the thread, thought "oh, everyone will expect that even I will get the joke, so I'll pretend to take it seriously", and went ahead and did it.

Or the other option is he doesn't have anything remotely resembling a sense of humour.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Wrong, Lara most certainly was not caught behind on 2; as has already been pointed-out, all 200+ innings will almost beyond question come on extremely flat pitches.

It shouldn't discout it, but it should be taken in the context that the team was not Test-class and most certainly did not deserve to be playing cricket classed as Test-matches, so this innings should not be classed as a Test-match innings.

For the pitch see 2nd part of 1. England's bowling certainly wasn't poor given the pitch.

Er... what?

Even though no-one in Australia could possibly fear invasion?

Err... what?

Why should it have been declared void? For bit about pitch see 1 part 2.

Scored against a substandard side, yes - see Hayden.

No, not a fictional character - fictionally good, yes, but certainly existed and played this unbelievably good innings.

No, if anything it should be declared more than it was, because it clearly would have been but for a declaration on oneself.

Performance-enhancing drugs, what madness is this? Gooch between 1989\90 was quite sensationally good, he most certainly WAS NOT on performance-enhancing drugs and to say so is a disgrace to cricket.

Not unless he ran himself out - and for the record there were no run-outs in the innings.

For the pitch see 1 part 2; were West Indies Test-class in 1930? It's up for question. Possibly not, but it's certainly not as clear-cut as Bangladesh always has been.

A stupid pitch, yes, a pointless match, yes - but the significant thing is not either, it's the dropped catch on 80.

Got him, yeeeeeeessssss!

 

[andyc]

Anyone getting the feeling Richard was calling the double bluff? Perhaps he read the thread, thought "oh, everyone will expect that even I will get the joke, so I'll pretend to take it seriously", and went ahead and did it.

Or the other option is he doesn't have anything remotely resembling a sense of humour.

im probably gonna go with option one, give him the benefit of the doubt. especially since it made this thread a whole lot funnier

 

[Son Of Coco]

im probably gonna go with option one, give him the benefit of the doubt. especially since it made this thread a whole lot funnier

hahaha, um, yeah!

 

[Richard]

Yes that sort of thing - it's a bit of harmless fun basically - you know it's not going to last long, but when 30 or 40 runs come up in 20 minutes it's a laugh!

Far from fun, at all - came so close to producing the most unthinkable turnaround in ODI history.

 

[Richard]

Yes it is great fun to see test match standard bowlers being smashed around by lower order batsmen. Provides great little entertaining patches to test matches of cause high class play is good but whats wrong with a bit of slogging. i really dont know why i am either bothering to post this really

All you can say is you find it fun - no bowler, ever, will do so.

 

[Richard]

Anyone getting the feeling Richard was calling the double bluff? Perhaps he read the thread, thought "oh, everyone will expect that even I will get the joke, so I'll pretend to take it seriously", and went ahead and did it.

I'm frankly amazed anyone could possibly think anything else.

 

[SJS]

Wrong, Lara most certainly was not caught behind on 2; as has already been pointed-out, all 200+ innings will almost beyond question come on extremely flat pitches.

It shouldn't discout it, but it should be taken in the context that the team was not Test-class and most certainly did not deserve to be playing cricket classed as Test-matches, so this innings should not be classed as a Test-match innings.

For the pitch see 2nd part of 1. England's bowling certainly wasn't poor given the pitch.

Er... what?

Even though no-one in Australia could possibly fear invasion?

Err... what?

Why should it have been declared void? For bit about pitch see 1 part 2.

Scored against a substandard side, yes - see Hayden.

No, not a fictional character - fictionally good, yes, but certainly existed and played this unbelievably good innings.

No, if anything it should be declared more than it was, because it clearly would have been but for a declaration on oneself.

Performance-enhancing drugs, what madness is this? Gooch between 1989\90 was quite sensationally good, he most certainly WAS NOT on performance-enhancing drugs and to say so is a disgrace to cricket.

Not unless he ran himself out - and for the record there were no run-outs in the innings.

For the pitch see 1 part 2; were West Indies Test-class in 1930? It's up for question. Possibly not, but it's certainly not as clear-cut as Bangladesh always has been.

A stupid pitch, yes, a pointless match, yes - but the significant thing is not either, it's the dropped catch on 80.

Oh no !!!!!

Really Richard..... !!

 

[Richard]

I simply can't believe this...
Did anyone REALLY believe I was genuinely being serious?
I was having my version of fun - I found it utterly hilarious to pretend to take such a blatantly jokey thread seriously.
I can't believe Matt was the only one who spotted what I was doing.

 

[roseboy64]

He also said you might be devoid of sense of humour.

 

[Langeveldt]

Am I the only one who's spotted the underlying triple bluff here?