Tendulkar becomes ODI top scorer!!!

[Richard]

Gotta feel bad for young Charles Coventry.

I imagine he'll be thoroughly relieved to be relieved of a record he knows full well he only acquired through impostership (though that impostership was entirely the fault of cricketing authorities, not Coventry himself).

 

[Furball]

I imagine he'll be thoroughly relieved to be relieved of a record he knows full well he only acquired through impostership (though that impostership was entirely the fault of cricketing authorities, not Coventry himself).

I would bet the life of my unborn child that he doesn't.

 

[Top_Cat]

I imagine he'll be thoroughly relieved to be relieved of a record he knows full well he only acquired through impostership (though that impostership was entirely the fault of cricketing authorities, not Coventry himself).

Hah, ridiculous thing to say.

 

[Richard]

So (either of) you think he views himself as someone who was worthy of holding Highest ODI Score do you?

I rather doubt it TBH.

 

[Top_Cat]

So (either of) you think he views himself as someone who was worthy of holding Highest ODI Score do you?

I rather doubt it TBH.

Who knows? My experience with athletes, though, is that it's far less likely he'd be thinking "Thank Christ someone passed my score, the guilt was eating me up."

 

[Furball]

So (either of) you think he views himself as someone who was worthy of holding Highest ODI Score do you?

I rather doubt it TBH.

Why the hell wouldn't you?

If I somehow managed to play for Scotland and smashed 201* against Bermuda, and the match held official ODI status, I wouldn't give a **** that Tendulkar was a far better player than me, I'd be bloody proud that I'd achieved a feat in batting that no-one else in the international game had managed to achieve.

By your insane logic, every single England batsman who's managed to post a Test score of 212 or more is an imposter, because Hobbs didn't achieve such a feat.

 

[Richard]

Not really. Highest individual score for one country is rather different to highest individual score in an entire format.

Coventry should rightly be proud that he managed to score 194*, but he has no right being proud of being classified as the holder of the record for highest ODI score - and I rather doubt he ever was. I imagine he was embarrassed. Not because of any inferiority of his to Saeed Anwar, but through the realisation that the game received a classification it never remotely merited.

I'd be proud if I managed to score 201* for anyone - but I'd realise full well that such a game would never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever deserve ODI status.

 

[Pothas]

Why the hell wouldn't you?

If I somehow managed to play for Scotland and smashed 201* against Bermuda, and the match held official ODI status, I wouldn't give a **** that Tendulkar was a far better player than me, I'd be bloody proud that I'd achieved a feat in batting that no-one else in the international game had managed to achieve.

By your insane logic, every single England batsman who's managed to post a Test score of 212 or more is an imposter, because Hobbs didn't achieve such a feat.

Well to be fair a certain Australian captain turned commentator might subscribe to that view.

Anyway Richard has his own special logic, and of course we love him for it.

 

[Furball]

Not really. Highest individual score for one country is rather different to highest individual score in an entire format.

Coventry should rightly be proud that he managed to score 194*, but he has no right being proud of being classified as the holder of the record for highest ODI score - and I rather doubt he ever was. I imagine he was embarrassed. Not because of any inferiority of his to Saeed Anwar, but through the realisation that the game received a classification it never remotely merited.

I'd be proud if I managed to score 201* for anyone - but I'd realise full well that such a game would never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever deserve ODI status.

That's your elitist perogative.

 

[Top_Cat]

Coventry should rightly be proud that he managed to score 194*, but he has no right being proud of being classified as the holder of the record for highest ODI score - and I rather doubt he ever was. I imagine he was embarrassed. Not because of any inferiority of his to Saeed Anwar, but through the realisation that the game received a classification it never remotely merited.

I disagree!

</drivebyargument>

 

[Richard]

Who knows? My experience with athletes, though, is that it's far less likely he'd be thinking "Thank Christ someone passed my score, the guilt was eating me up."

I was thinking more "thank Christ\Other that someone scored more than me in a game that got an accurate classification of what it was rather than one that got an inaccurate classification".

Batsmen have scored more than Coventry, many times. Players better and worse than he. But any time they did such for New South Wales B doesn't tend to register, because such games are rightly not classified as ODIs.

 

[Richard]

That's your elitist perogative.

It's mine and one I feel is based on the way cricket has always been. Cricket has always been a game based on the merit\correctness of elitism. Unlike for instance football where an international between Sweden and Andorra falls under the exact same classification as Argentina vs. Spain.

In cricket, certain matches deserve a certain status; other matches deserve other status. It has always been that way, I hope it always remains that way and the fact that it has remained that way for a very, very long time now tends to suggest that most have also always wanted it to remain that way and might well continue to.

 

[Top_Cat]

I was thinking more "thank Christ\Other that someone scored more than me in a game that got an accurate classification of what it was rather than one that got an inaccurate classification".

Haha, even less likely he's thinking that!

 

[Richard]

You imagine he genuinely believes that Zimbabwe vs. Uganda or whoever it was merits ODI status as much as Pakistan vs. India?

 

[Top_Cat]

You imagine he genuinely believes that Zimbabwe vs. Uganda or whoever it was merits ODI status as much as Pakistan vs. India?

I'd imagine he wouldn't give a crap about anything other than "Hey I scored a massive ton! WOOOO HOOOOOOOOO!"

90% of the debates on CW.net do not reflect a) what pro's are thinking and b) whether they'd even bother with them.

 

[Richard]

I'd imagine he wouldn't give a crap about anything other than "Hey I scored a massive ton! WOOOO HOOOOOOOOO!"

So you think he'd think of that 194* as the same as something of similar magnitude that he scored for Mashonaland Country Districts B, do you?

I hope so, but your previous posts seem to suggest you think otherwise.

 

[Furball]

So you think he'd think of that 194* as the same as something of similar magnitude that he scored for Mashonaland Country Districts B, do you?

I hope so, but your previous posts seem to suggest you think otherwise.

There's 16 sides with official ODI status, maybe more than you'd like but ODI level is still fairly elitist.

 

[Top_Cat]

So you think he'd think of that 194* as the same as something of similar magnitude that he scored for Mashonaland Country Districts B, do you?

I hope so, but your previous posts seem to suggest you think otherwise.

Now, hang on a sec; this has nothing to do with what you or I think. We're wondering what Coventry would be thinking and both GF and I reckon the last thing he'd be thinking is what you reckon he would be (or should be) thinking.

I think.

 

[Anil]

 

[Sir Alex]

Just checked - Ponting is the next closest, 6000 runs behind. Then there's Lara who is not going to add to his tally obviously, but then come Dravid and Kallis - both of whom are 10,000 runs behind and are not going to catch up.

So no one active really has a shot besides Ponting. Ponting would have to play for - say 5 years longer than Sachin? I don't think that'll happen since Sachin will go on until at least the WC, and I doubt Ponting will stick around till 2015 - though maybe he's aiming for the 2014 Ashes and may have an outside shot.

90% I am sure Tendulkar will hang around till he sees Ponting's back.