Irrelevant gargantuan records (400, ten wickets an innings, and more)

[Arjun]

Brian Lara's 400 not out was the stuff of legends, or at least, the stuff that drives massive sales and gets massive attention. However, some experts, including the late Tony Greig, were critical of Lara, because it was negative, and he played for himself ahead of the team. While the achievement is by no means small, there have been several smaller scores by the man, which have won games for his team. Then there are several discussion on who's likely to make the next four hundred- but does it really matter? It's hardly a match-winning statistic, and goes down as one of the most irrelevant records of all time

Then there's the Big Ten- when a bowler takes ten wickets in an innings. Twice, it has happened- first it was Jim Laker, then Anil Kumble. A point to note is the rather poor cricket played by the Indian team to help Kumble get all ten. We saw Srinath bowl innocuous wide deliveries, with no intention of taking a wicket- and some were rightly called wides. Another attempt was made by the Lankans to help Muralitharan get an all-ten, which reached ridiculous proportions, when the other bowlers were bowling innocuous rubbish, and Henry Olonga, tried to give his wicket away to Vaas, who accidentally let out a feeble appeal, which gave him a wicket he didn't want.

How many other irrelevant records exist? Massive in proportion, but irrelevant in changing the course of a game.

 

[smash84]

yeah, the antics for the Kumble 10fer were funny but that was by no means an inconsequential 10-fer, it did win India the match

 

[OverratedSanity]

yeah, the antics for the Kumble 10fer were funny but that was by no means an inconsequential 10-fer, it did win India the match

Yeah and they only started after he'd taken the first 8 wickets or so

 

[andyc]

Still, as the OP implies, it does leave somewhat of a strange taste in the mouth*. I much prefer, for example, Hadlee catching out the 9th wicket to fall against Australia to deny himself the 10 than something like that.



*

 

[benchmark00]

Jason Krejza's dressing room record is pretty gargantuan.

 

[Ferraz]

Brian Lara's 400 not out was the stuff of legends, or at least, the stuff that drives massive sales and gets massive attention. However, some experts, including the late Tony Greig, were critical of Lara, because it was negative, and he played for himself ahead of the team. While the achievement is by no means small, there have been several smaller scores by the man, which have won games for his team. Then there are several discussion on who's likely to make the next four hundred- but does it really matter? It's hardly a match-winning statistic, and goes down as one of the most irrelevant records of all time

Then there's the Big Ten- when a bowler takes ten wickets in an innings. Twice, it has happened- first it was Jim Laker, then Anil Kumble. A point to note is the rather poor cricket played by the Indian team to help Kumble get all ten. We saw Srinath bowl innocuous wide deliveries, with no intention of taking a wicket- and some were rightly called wides. Another attempt was made by the Lankans to help Muralitharan get an all-ten, which reached ridiculous proportions, when the other bowlers were bowling innocuous rubbish, and Henry Olonga, tried to give his wicket away to Vaas, who accidentally let out a feeble appeal, which gave him a wicket he didn't want.

How many other irrelevant records exist? Massive in proportion, but irrelevant in changing the course of a game.

Where's Rob, need to see a clip of that!

 

[grecian]

Just silly to put in 10-wicket hauls in a winning cause along with a tame 400. Clearly not irrelevant whatsoever.

 

[jonbrooks]

I think Kumble's 10fer was hardly irrelevant. Agree with Lara's 400 and the disgraceful effort by the Sri Lankans.