sachins 97 against pakistan in wc 2003

[Swervy]

Nope, no-one has ever mentioned in seriousness anything known as a "second-chance" theory.

and only you have talked with any great seriousness about the First Chance theory as well

 

[Jono]

The most salient feature of that innings was a simple catch given to Abdur Razzaq on 47.

A stupendous 47 it may have been, but it wasn't as good as it's made-out.

Far out, I've argued with you regarding this every year since I came to this forum back in 2004.

FFS, Razzaq wasn't in position for the catch, he was further in then he should have been, and was never going to catch the ball.

I watch that innings with some mates from my cricket club every few months when we're bored, and that wasn't a regulation catch because Razzaq screwed up, he should have been at the edge of the circle considering how Sachin was batting. Hence, it wasn't an easy catch.

 

[Sanz]

I've far more of an idea than you, chum...

What you define as 'IDEA' is called 'CRAP' in most people's book.

 

[Richard]

No, in yours.

 

[Richard]

Far out, I've argued with you regarding this every year since I came to this forum back in 2004.

FFS, Razzaq wasn't in position for the catch, he was further in then he should have been, and was never going to catch the ball.

I watch that innings with some mates from my cricket club every few months when we're bored, and that wasn't a regulation catch because Razzaq screwed up, he should have been at the edge of the circle considering how Sachin was batting. Hence, it wasn't an easy catch.

Look, I've no desire to get the two of us fighting over something so trivial AGAIN so I'll leave it there...

 

[Richard]

and only you have talked with any great seriousness about the First Chance theory as well

Not actually 100% true.

 

[marc71178]

No, in yours.

No, in more than just his.

Thing is people are just sick of it, so can't be bothered to continue to point out the flaws.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Stop please.

*snap*