The irrational value of a century

[The Falcon Strike]

5/751.

hmmm..... secured the draw at least, i mean they batted 2.5 days and had the other team 5 wickets down in the second dig still behind the score.

One might think a few extra overs and perhaps a bowling attack with a rest might have got a victory

But 400* will go in the record books to the detriment of a side potentially winning a test match.

To me that is irrational. Others, maybe not

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Are birthdays irrational?

 

[Stopher]

Bit like kicking 100 goals in a season, isn't it?

 

[corbies]

Bump.

People genuinely think Australia should have delayed winning a Test match and risk a greater chance of losing (i.e. greater than a 0% chance) so an individual milestone could be reached.

 

[PhatBoy]

Bump.

People genuinely think Australia should have delayed winning a Test match and risk a greater chance of losing (i.e. greater than a 0% chance) so an individual milestone could be reached.

This. Especially when the previous ‘deviation’ in the match was two wickets in two balls.

What if that happens again and suddenly there’s two runs to win, one wicket in hand and it’s Hazlewood on strike with Cummins at the non striker’s end having just given up easy runs the previous over?

 

[flamethrower]

It is amazing how important 1 run can be depending on the circumstances.

Making 1 doesn't have the same stigma as making a duck.

And making 99 is viewed a lot differently to making 100.

 

[Jimthegreat]

It is amazing how important 1 run can be depending on the circumstances.

Making 1 doesn't have the same stigma as making a duck.

And making 99 is viewed a lot differently to making 100.

These circumstances, winning the match was first and foremost. Nothing else matters. One wicket and you never know. We play a team game. 4 down maybe different, not with the tail. I'm sure Carey will be very excited winning a game for his country 98no.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Centuries are a great achievement in any level of cricket. Its significance is purely lifting your individual score beyond double figures. Its major achievement is when it contributes to a team victory.

I remember as a kid, South African batsman Graeme Pollock made 209 in Cape town against Australia in the second Test in 1966-67. When asked about it in later years, he asked what the point was when South Africa lost the Test match.

Yesterday Alex Carey helped guide Australia to a very good win over New Zealand. I would bet he would have been much happier with that 98 not out than if he had been dismissed for 100 and Australia lost.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Not a big deal....you'd take 98* with a win every day of the week.

Would think the person least worried about it would be Alex.

 

[Wallaby]

That 98* is the 3rd highest score ever made in the 4th innings of a test match batting No 7 or lower where the batter's team won the match.

Better than probably 90-95% of all test centuries.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Bump.

People genuinely think Australia should have delayed winning a Test match and risk a greater chance of losing (i.e. greater than a 0% chance) so an individual milestone could be reached.

Clearly I agree