That's just the thing, they just won the wtc, why should they feel less worthy than anyone else to hold records.
Mulder did not mean to disrespect anyone, the decision that was made is hard to justify and is going to upset someone no matter what he said.
That was a really flat deck that Lara scored that 400 on too. Wasn't even close to getting a result in that match in the end, even if England were rolled cheaply in their first reply (probably in no small part to having fielded for over 200 overs).
Those who felt Mulder would have been disrespectful to score more runs didn't really respect him in the first place.
Lara was an active player back then, so makes sense that his fans would do that to someone breaking a record. But now he's been retired for 2 decades. So does anybody really care who breaks it. You want to see new world records, and then see Mulder's record getting overtaken too. You don't stay stuck in the past.
I agree with that first part. And even if it were Bradman's record, who cares? It wouldn't have been taking the P to bat half an hour more.
Yeah that's a fair point, too. But anyone who says it's disrespectful or egregious, honestly, their opinion isn't worth jack. It's clear to everyone that SA are going to, and were going to, win when they had 3.5 days to bowl Zimbabwe out. If there's a world record on offer, why wouldn't you take it? Zimbabwe are a Test playing nation. Mulder turned down the opportunity to say to his grandkids that he holds the world record Test score. Say that out loud a few times and tell me that's not a ridiculous thing to do, just because Brian Lara might be a big name and scored it against a 'major playing nation' even though as Stefan said, their bowling line-up was weak on an absolute featherbed.
It was the very 1st innings of the match and Lara batted on past lunch on day 3, only to get the record. Ended in bore draw. It was as selfish an innings could get, batting 2.5 days. And here someone (Mulder) is talking about opposition and principles of not breaking a record lol. Apparently the coach had the biggest say in this decision. I bet he's done Mulder significant financial harm. He could have got nice big commercials and sponsorships. It's a no brainer.
Also 329 is further than 367...
Sorry to be a pedant, I might be wrong but I think Lara was dropped in the teens in that innings, not on zero.
I was getting worried about that when he was in the 200s. He was scoring so fast vefore lunch that I thought the risk had passed.
Clarke had 2.5 days to bowl India out once. He could easily batted for even 2 more hours and Aus still would've won with a day to spare. They only needed 10 wickets. But I get your point that 72 runs were still required.
18 I believe. He was also bowled by Anderson Cummins off a no ball on 12, stepping across take a leg side swish, and was dropped on 283 (also by Cummins).
When I say 329* for Clarke, that is in reference to Mark Taylor's highest score as an Australia Test captain and Sir Don's highest score. Clarke could have obviously easily passed both but thought the PR was a better move, and probably right, too.
Not at all mate, good spotting. I didn't know he was bowled on a no ball on 12, either.
Yeah, plus rain etc. I have no problem with Clarke's one, although I do believe it was out of false modesty and not wanting to usurp the iconoclast that is Sir Don and the good Aussie battler in Tubby.
