The Dark Spots In The Sun….!

Behind Curtain

( The Chances Behind Most and Maximum Hundred Run Innings In The Test Cricket )

Yeah cricket is the game of batsmen rather than the bowlers. If we mind the role of bowlers and the balls then the Test match is the game of only 40 balls. Though it hasn’t happened so far since 1877 that the Test format is in action. Though the miracles have happened in the game when a bowler has taken 10 out of 10 wicket in an innings and 19 out of 20 in a Test match . Yes this phenomenon has done by Jim Laker who scalped 19 wickets out of 20 in a Test match . Yeah this is lone master in the history of Test cricket and that is Jim Laker. Yes, then Anil Kumble is another bowler who took 10 out of 10 wicket in an innings. Bob Messie is another bowler who have hunted 16 Test wickets in a Test . There are many examples in this regard that the bowlers have taken more than 15 wickets in the two innings individually in a Test Match. Yeah these are Muralidharan, J Briggs, Lehmon, Blythe, Varity, R Hadlee . So the number is showing that there are very few bowlers who claimed 15 Wickets at least in a Test Match.
But it hasn’t happened that the team would have bundled out in just 20 balls. And the opposition too got out in 20 balls. And to see the nature of the game there are no chances in far wide future to happen such a divine task. It is entirely impossible according to the nature of the game. Yes it can be happened in a movie but not in the real . Yeah I am pointing about the batsmen’s dominance in the Test. And the batsmen are buzzed greaterly than the bowlers. If we use literary metaphor for the batsmen and bowlers then the bowlers are the villain or giant and the batsmen are the angel or god . There are the batsmen who carry the match long by their skill and patience and by making runs do entertainment and in regular interval if the bowlers get wicket then the match reaches at the height. The batsmen are the real entertainer in the game of cricket. The bowlers are the destroter. They reduce or minimize the match .
Yeah to observe the dominancy of the batsmen Sir Don Bradman, George Hadlee, G Pollock, L Hutton ,J Hobbs , H Sutcliffe, W Hamand, C Crowdey , Ken Berrington, D Compton, P May, B Simpsons, B Posford, V Trumper, C Hill, WG Grace , A Wicks ,C Walcott, F Warrell , J Morris , B Lorry, C Lyod, R Kanhai, A Kalicharan, G Turner, M Crow ,V Richards , M Hanif, J Miandad ,G Sobers, Bery Richards , Zahir Abbas, S Gavaskar, GR Wishwnath, D Vengserkar, A Border , D Gower , G Gooch, G Griinidge ,D Hyans, R Richardson ,S Chandrapal, J Langer, M Hyden, R Ponting, B Lara , S Tendulkar, R Dravid , A Desilva , M Jayawardene, K Sanghkara, Saeed Anwar, Yusuf Yohana ,Yunus Khan, Misbah, Inzmam , V Sehwag ,VVS Lakshman K Williams, J Root, V Kohli these are the jewels of the batting arena and they are buzzed and echoed a lot. The batsmen whom I have mentioned are the master of their arena and have made a lot of runs and have more then 15 centuries on their worthy names excluding some name like WG Grace,C Hill,V Teumper. And to see the statistics of the career look so luminous. I am talking about Test centuries and behind or in that the holes . Yeah it means the drop chances or out chances in the century innings. The 4th Test of the Border-Gavaskar Trophy series (202021)there at Brisbane , Australia in which Australia’s Marcus Labuchagne made a century 112. And indeed this score has put Australia in a good position and in the record book it would be sparked as a good score or appear as the brilliant century. But there is ‘Dhol me pol in the indian perception , yeah it means in the sense of English – The black spots in the sun. Yes in M Labuchagne’s 112 innings got two drop chances. Yeah 1st at 37 and second at 61. Here to point this bitter fact that there are many Test centuries that are chance full or having black stains as the lives but registered as only as the century and when the reader reads it he stuns to see the score of 100 plus Wow what a hundred. So being sheer critic and dense lover of the game my cry is that in the history book it must be mentioned in front of that century CL in case of guiltless innings and CF in the case of guiltfull innings so that the critics and fans could rate him or that innings and could know the real height of his century innings . Yes if the batsman would have got life before hundred then no remark or put PC ( pure century) . But if batsman gets chance after hundred must be shown remark- CAH( chance after hundred ) . And if the batsman makes double century and gets no chance then PDC (pure double Century ) must be scripted ahead of the score. And the same nature should be followed for the triple and quadral century. If this fact is followed in the record book by the statistics then the critics can evaluate perfectly. In this subject I have already extracted it specially in Virat Kohli’s particular innings there in England and Australia in which he slammed century but got lives and the media showered accolade in abundant way by extracting and embellished great innings . Yeah if reads 151 and 149 yes no doubt appear as great score or innings but what about the drop chances in those innings. A shallow fan doesn’t mind this kind of close fact. But for a true lover of the game it does matter.To measure greatness of the batsmen this kind of real facts must be attended by the ICC and statisticians for transparency. If any batsman gets chance on ZERO and then he makes 300 plus run individual score then his real score should be counted none or duck and that score must be counted as the second innings . If the batsman gets chance like M Labuchagne and A Rahene who got easy drop chance in their so called great innings as century.
So the greatness of the batsmen and their centuries feat should be reviewed and need to put new status. In the Test 100 score is a big task and if batsman achieves it by chance and chances then that innings must be counted as inferior than the real chanceless innings. And we see only the score not see to have the hawk and vulture eyes , I mean postmortem or scrutiny . If we make postmortem of the innings then it is sure the so called great innings would get out from the list of great innings . One more thing that the batsman has made a big score but need to layer out that on which bowler he scored maximum run . I mean what standard or status the bowler has . About great SM Gavaskar it is said by the critics that Sunny has scored his maximum runs against the poorer bowling attack of the West Indies. If talk about the fearsome bowlers of the West Indies The Infamous Four for their sheer and brutal pace- A Roberts, M Holdings, C Craft and G Garner then Sunny Gavaskar hasn’t faced these for altogether in a Test match and if faced he remained flop. I am the witness of Ajinkya Rahane and M Labuschagne’s hundred plus and saw that they got easy chances in their innings so I couldn’t digest this bitter fact by being one of sheer and true lovers of the game particularly when I read and hear in the media and commentators that Wow what a great innings. Ultimately I do say we must start to say ‘ day is say and night is night’ . If the batsman gets the 1st chance then he should be considered out in the record book . If the same batsman gets the second chance in that same innings then in the record book his innings should count two innings . If gets three chance then count three innings . This matter could give the certain big height to the batsmen and more concentration could be seen in the batting field.
*NK Sevak “Sanatan”