The greatest triple

[Richard]

Re: Bradman, it's strange how his 334 has passed into folklore almost, while his 304 on the same ground four years later is relegated to a footnote. Almost as if people were expecting it by then. Reflected in the voting here.

Absolutely, always thought that. First heard of the first of those innings in 2001, and wasn't until 2004 that I heard of the second.

 

[stumpski]

Just looking at the card for that '34 game, it could be said that the England attack wasn't the strongest - no Larwood, Voce or Farnes, for various reasons. Playing three slow bowlers at Headingley seems very strange now, while Hammond had to open the bowling - but Bowes and Verity on their home ground should have been a handful.

Bradman was very ill on that tour, wasn't he? I've seen a photo of him making a public appearance and he looked far older than his 26 years.

 

[pasag]

Just looking at the card for that '34 game, it could be said that the England attack wasn't the strongest - no Larwood, Voce or Farnes, for various reasons. Playing three slow bowlers at Headingley seems very strange now, while Hammond had to open the bowling - but Bowes and Verity on their home ground should have been a handful.

Bradman was very ill on that tour, wasn't he? I've seen a photo of him making a public appearance and he looked far older than his 26 years.

Yeah appendicitis, nearly died etc. Not sure if he was carrying any effects of it during the triple, but if he was you'd think it should be elevated ala Paynter.

 

[Goughy]

As has been hinted at.

Its clear that few of these innings were 'great' (meaning to be included amongst the very best). They are statistical achievments rather than cricketing ones.

Mainly in draws, on flat tracks, where others also make big scores against attacks that are not the strongest.

Goes to show that a 300+ score really means little apart from a personal milestone.

 

[Jono]

I haven't read enough on many of the triples to make an opinion.

What I will say is that Hanif's reads as the most inspirational, and Sehwag's recent 319 was the biggest display in one innings of a man completely 'in the zone' I have seen, perhaps on par with Nathan Astle's fastest double ton.

 

[Jono]

As has been hinted at.

Its clear that none of these innings were 'great'. They are statistical achievments rather than cricketing ones.

Mainly in draws, on flat tracks, where others also make big scores against attacks that are not the strongest.

Goes to show that a 300+ score really means little apart from a personal milestone.

How on Earth's was Hanif's (for eg.) not 'great'?

Coming back from a certain loss to draw a match isn't a 'meaningless' draw. Its saving a test match.

To say that scoring 300 runs, and in Hanif's case staying out there so bloody long when your team is staring down the barrel, means little is ridiculous.

 

[roseboy64]

Only seen 4 of those. Lara's, Gayle's and Sehwag's 319. Of those, Sehwag's was the best in terms of someone dominating the bowling and playing unbelievable shots. Lara's 375 was more attacking than his 400* but the 400* was pretty much chanceless. Gayle's was decent. Going for Sehwag.

 

[Goughy]

How on Earth's was Hanif's (for eg.) not 'great'?

Coming back from a certain loss to draw a match isn't a 'meaningless' draw. Its saving a test match.

To say that scoring 300 runs, and in Hanif's case staying out there so bloody long when your team is staring down the barrel, means little is ridiculous.

Id certainly have Hanifs effort as one of the better mammoth scores. Certainly wasnt as sterile as Laras 400 or against an attack as weak as Huttons

However, it was still a track that only 27 wickets fell on in 6 days of cricket. Others playing in the same game scored heavily and the attacks were not great.

It was an innings that certainly had value, but I wouldnt put it near the top of my list of greatest innings played. Near the top of 300+ scores, certainly. However, that difference shows why I think the massive scores are overvalued.

One of the reasons why its fair to put Hanif's innings higher than most on the list is that it made a difference to the games outcome whether he scored 200 or his eventual score. Far too many of the others are soft powder puff, meaningless runs where the result would not have been impacted if they had scored 200 or 300+.

 

[Richard]

Only seen 4 of those. Lara's, Gayle's and Sehwag's 319. Of those, Sehwag's was the best in terms of someone dominating the bowling and playing unbelievable shots. Lara's 375 was more attacking than his 400* but the 400* was pretty much chanceless. Gayle's was decent. Going for Sehwag.

Both of Lara's record-breaking innings, and Sehwag's 319, were chanceless.

 

[roseboy64]

I know Lara's 400 and Sehwag's were but wasn't too sure about the 375. He was playing some swashbuckling shots and I don't remember it as much as the 400* and 319.

 

[Unattainableguy]

Sehwag, not easy to score 300+ with a strike rate better than 100.

 

[deira]

did any of these triple hunderds won the game for the team? surely if there is that would be the best

 

[chaminda_00]

did any of these triple hunderds won the game for the team? surely if there is that would be the best

Jayawardene's did, as did Hayden's.

 

[Richard]

Gooch too, for one other. Hutton's did, but the game was a timeless one anyway and Australia were missing 2 batsmen.

Inzamam's caused one of the most crushing victories there's ever been.

 

[Richard]

I know Lara's 400 and Sehwag's were but wasn't too sure about the 375. He was playing some swashbuckling shots and I don't remember it as much as the 400* and 319.

Better knock than the 400* for mine - possibly the 319 was on a par with it. As I say, they were all chanceless, but he rarely played a false stroke in the 1994 innings apparently (though I've not seen a hell of a lot of it), despite going for plenty of them.

 

[archie mac]

Bradman 300 in a day, against the best opposition in the world at the time, for mine

 

[a massive zebra]

Yeah appendicitis, nearly died etc. Not sure if he was carrying any effects of it during the triple, but if he was you'd think it should be elevated ala Paynter.

Bradman's diagnosis for appendicitis came after the conclusion of the tour.

For some considerable time before the voyage out from Australia, Bradman felt very unwell and was in some doubt as to whether he was well enough to go on the tour. Therefore at his own expense, Bradman went to the leading physician in Adelaide to ask if he could find anything wrong. Nothing was found, but the physician did say that Bradman was very run down and badly in need of a rest. Although he agreed that Bradman was well enough to go on the tour, he didn't wish the great batsman to play any matches at all until he got to England.

On arrival at England, Bradman was still very unwell, suffering regular migranes and lameness, but as no one could find anything wrong, he played. His form suffered early in the tour, with just two centuries and 952 runs at 52.94 by July 13th, a disastrous return by his meteoric standards. However, Bradman's health seemed to improve for a time when he found his form in the Fourth Test, scoring a triple century, again at Leeds, and with Bill Ponsford putting on 388 in a record fourth wicket partnership. In the Fifth Test, Bradman made 244 and Ponsford 266, their partnership of 451 was the highest ever made in Test cricket. Seemingly restored to full health and tip top form, Bradman hammered two more centuries in the final two games of the tour.

However, upon returning to London to prepare for the voyage back to Australia, he experienced severe abdominal pain. It took more than 24 hours of detailed scrutiny and observation for the doctors to diagnose acute appendicitis and a surgeon had little choice but to operate immediately. Unfortunately, the four hour operation caused serious complications and his condition worsened into peritonitis, which in those days, with penicillin and modern antibiotics still a long way off, regularly proved fatal. On 25 September, the hospital issued a statement that Bradman was struggling for his life.

Bradman's wife Jessie started a month-long journey to London as soon as she received the precarious news. While en route, in Melbourne, she heard a rumour that her husband had died. However, she was a woman with a rather optimistic view of life and refused to believe it, but decided to ring the hospital to confirm. Of course he wasn't dead so she continued her voyage. By the time she reached London, Bradman had begun the slow road to recovery, but was still very weak. He followed medical advice to convalesce, and upon returning to Australia took several months rest at his wife's father's farm in New South Wales, and he missed the entire 1934–35 season in addition to a tour of South Africa which did not take place until nearly 12 months afterwards.

 

[archie mac]

Bradman's diagnosis for appendicitis came after the conclusion of the tour.

For some considerable time before the voyage out from Australia, Bradman felt very unwell and was in some doubt as to whether he was well enough to go on the tour. Therefore at his own expense, Bradman went to the leading physician in Adelaide to ask if he could find anything wrong. Nothing was found, but the physician did say that Bradman was very run down and badly in need of a rest. Although he agreed that Bradman was well enough to go on the tour, he didn't wish the great batsman to play any matches at all until he got to England.

On arrival at England, Bradman was still very unwell, suffering regular migranes and lameness, but as no one could find anything wrong, he played. His form suffered early in the tour, with just two centuries and 952 runs at 52.94 by July 13th, a disastrous return by his meteoric standards. However, Bradman's health seemed to improve for a time when he found his form in the Fourth Test, scoring a triple century, again at Leeds, and with Bill Ponsford putting on 388 in a record fourth wicket partnership. In the Fifth Test, Bradman made 244 and Ponsford 266, their partnership of 451 was the highest ever made in Test cricket. Seemingly restored to full health and tip top form, Bradman hammered two more centuries in the final two games of the tour.

However, upon returning to London to prepare for the voyage back to Australia, he experienced severe abdominal pain. It took more than 24 hours of detailed scrutiny and observation for the doctors to diagnose acute appendicitis and a surgeon had little choice but to operate immediately. Unfortunately, the four hour operation caused serious complications and his condition worsened into peritonitis, which in those days, with penicillin and modern antibiotics still a long way off, regularly proved fatal. On 25 September, the hospital issued a statement that Bradman was struggling for his life.

Bradman's wife Jessie started a month-long journey to London as soon as she received the precarious news. While en route, in Melbourne, she heard a rumour that her husband had died. However, she was a woman with a rather optimistic view of life and refused to believe it, but decided to ring the hospital to confirm. Of course he wasn't dead so she continued her voyage. By the time she reached London, Bradman had begun the slow road to recovery, but was still very weak. He followed medical advice to convalesce, and upon returning to Australia took several months rest at his wife's father's farm in New South Wales, and he missed the entire 1934–35 season in addition to a tour of South Africa which did not take place until nearly 12 months afterwards.

I hope people who do not know a great deal about Bradman read this post, quality stuff

 

[roseboy64]

Nah I'll pass.

 

[roseboy64]

Better knock than the 400* for mine - possibly the 319 was on a par with it. As I say, they were all chanceless, but he rarely played a false stroke in the 1994 innings apparently (though I've not seen a hell of a lot of it), despite going for plenty of them.

Probably was a better knock than the 400* ITBT.