How many runs is acceptable for you to raise your bat at the end your innings?

[shankar]

Sreesanth? One good series and people annoint him the savior, but he wasn't even consistent in that series. He had some nice bursts but remember in WI when he couldn't even make it to his crease? A Test quality bowler does not break down like that, especially considering it wasn't physical problems that he was having. That's some major mental issues that have to be worked out right there.

AFAIK the problems he had in WI were with his action. Yet, apart from 2 innings where he lost it, he bowled well. And in SA I don't know by what scale he was inconsistent. I mean if you expect him to be a 'savior' and demolish the SA batting regardless of the conditions, then Yes he was inconsistent. But if you see him as a good swing bowler who can exploit the conditions when they suit him and can still bowl at a decent level when they don't - then he absolutely, was consistent.

 

[Perm]

But if you see him as a good swing bowler who can exploit the conditions when they suit him and can still bowl at a decent level when they don't - then he absolutely, was consistent.

I think that is what silentstriker is getting at, when the conditions didn't suit then he wasn't bowling at a "decent level" and keeping up the pressure.

 

[shankar]

I think that is what silentstriker is getting at, when the conditions didn't suit then he wasn't bowling at a "decent level" and keeping up the pressure.

Ha ha, yeah and that's what I'm disputing. He did bowl well invariably in that series. Just look at his figures.

 

[tooextracool]

Sreesanth? One good series and people annoint him the savior, but he wasn't even consistent in that series. He had some nice bursts but remember in WI when he couldn't even make it to his crease? A Test quality bowler does not break down like that, especially considering it wasn't physical problems that he was having. That's some major mental issues that have to be worked out right there.

1 good series? Sreesanth was extremely impressive against England on debut and he bowled quite well in that final test in the WI. Honestly the reason why I like Shreesanth is not just because hes talented, but because he actually has a good cricketing brain, he uses the crease well, which i think is somewhat underrated when it comes to fast bowling.

 

[tooextracool]

Ive honestly never understood the point of raising your bat for a 50. Its almost as pointless as celebrating 6 month anniversaries with your girlfriend. No one should be satisfied with a 50, if you've gotten all the way to a 50 and didnt get to a 100 then well you didnt finish the job off.

 

[JBMAC]

I fyou have done "the job" for your team whether it be a 50 or 100 or even kept your wicket safe for say an hour or so to force a draw,you have EARNT the right to hold your bat in the air

 

[Perm]

Ive honestly never understood the point of raising your bat for a 50. Its almost as pointless as celebrating 6 month anniversaries with your girlfriend. No one should be satisfied with a 50, if you've gotten all the way to a 50 and didnt get to a 100 then well you didnt finish the job off.

What if your 50* is in a side bowled out for 51? Or if your innings is the one that brings your team home from a difficult position to win the game?

 

[stumpski]

Ive honestly never understood the point of raising your bat for a 50. Its almost as pointless as celebrating 6 month anniversaries with your girlfriend. No one should be satisfied with a 50, if you've gotten all the way to a 50 and didnt get to a 100 then well you didnt finish the job off.

For a top-order batsman, certainly, but for a number 9? If Ryan Sidebottom, say, gets a 50 in the next Test (if they ever get started) England will be delighted - no-one will be criticising him for not getting a ton.

 

[Richard]

Ive honestly never understood the point of raising your bat for a 50. Its almost as pointless as celebrating 6 month anniversaries with your girlfriend. No one should be satisfied with a 50, if you've gotten all the way to a 50 and didnt get to a 100 then well you didnt finish the job off.

There are matches when 42 is more valuable than 100 would be in other games.

Purely and simply, the merit of a score is relative to the match it's scored in.

 

[sohummisra]

There are matches when 42 is more valuable than 100 would be in other games.

Purely and simply, the merit of a score is relative to the match it's scored in.

You're right. The answer is obviously 42!