First to score an ODI double century

[Barney Rubble]

This tale ender thing is an old joke in this thread .Aint that funny any more. Get out of it guys ........

Yeah, I apologise for my part in the destruction of an otherwise harmless thread!

 

[FRAZ]

Barney dude , NOt to You not to you not to you my friend .....
Peace !!!!!!!!

 

[Richard]

Yet your beloved Zimbabwe were competing just as infrequently and you don't consider them even substandard...

One rule for one...

"My beloved" Zimbabwe competed far better than Bangladesh at any point in their history in the time between 2000\01 and 2002\03.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Barney dude , NOt to You not to you not to you my friend .....
Peace !!!!!!!!

It's ok Fraz, I know we went a bit off topic - couldn't remember if I'd played a part in it or not, my message was a jovial apology, not sarcasm! It's hard to tell sometimes

Besides, we weren't half as off-topic as this Zimbabwe-Bangladesh debate......

 

[Richard]

Title topics are a conversation-starter and no more!
Threads do not stay on title-topic for very long (except *Official* threads).

 

[marc71178]

"My beloved" Zimbabwe competed far better than Bangladesh at any point in their history in the time between 2000\01 and 2002\03.

That of course depends on the definition of competed.

 

[Richard]

If you're talking "didn't look like defeat was totally inevitable after the first couple of sessions" then Zimbabwe competed regularly, Bangladesh almost never.
That, basically, is the gist of my definition of "competed" - looked like they had a chance of avoiding defeat for some part of the match.

 

[marc71178]

2 sessions is not competing.

1st innings is a better idea IMO.

 

[Neil Pickup]

My definition of competing is having a chance of winning, or still having a chance to draw on the final morning.

 

[Richard]

Neil's is a bit harsh AFAIAC. IMO (for instance) Bangladesh competed well in The First Test against England, but if we look at it sensibly, rather than in the heat of the moment, we can see that they never really had any chance of winning. A draw was only ever likely if we got more weather like the first-day.
First-innings is a bit harsh, too. If someone is replying to 400ao and gets to 150 for 3, IMO they've already provided competition, even if they then collapse to 220ao and lose by 180 runs.
Really, the best way to get a feel as to whether someone competed is to watch the game and of course it's impossible for us to do that all the time.

 

[marc71178]

150-3 against 400 isn't any way of judging it since you don't know what the rest of the side will bat like.

 

[Richard]

No, you don't - but nonetheless, after probably about 2-and-a-half days you're still in the game.
That's what matters for mine.