I have heard that there have been only 2 ties in the history of international Test Cricket. Is that true?
Nope. It's a draw, as there had only fallen 9 wickets in the 4th innings.Does this qualify as a tie?
3rd Test: India v West Indies at Mumbai, Nov 22-26, 2011 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo
Oh, the 2nd one is interesting. Australia declared twice, and too early. In this case, a win should be given to Australia, because they declared.
I have no words.Oh, the 2nd one is interesting. Australia declared twice, and too early. In this case, a win should be given to Australia, because they declared.
And follow-on should be allowed if the batting-first side is leading even 1 run. If Australia had chosen follow-on, Australia could have won.
So the 1st one is the only real tie in Test Cricket.
Confirmed.I bet Jono has terrible taste in ties.
Am I the only one with blood coming out of my ears?Oh, the 2nd one is interesting. Australia declared twice, and too early. In this case, a win should be given to Australia, because they declared.
And follow-on should be allowed if the batting-first side is leading even 1 run. If Australia had chosen follow-on, Australia could have won.
So the 1st one is the only real tie in Test Cricket.
You can sort of see what he's saying though. The 1960 test is more of a 'pure' tie, in the sense that both teams lost their allotment of 20 wickets for the exact same number of runs. The second test ended as a tie because Australia chose to declare and set India a gettable 4th innings target.Am I the only one with blood coming out of my ears?