Pak-Zimbabwe cricket series: 3 matches shifted from Multan ...

Why is there so much hatred towards India on this sub?

Every time I am on this sub, it feels like India ( mostly BCCI) is responsible for everything that ever goes wrong in cricket world.
The reason this thought came to my mind was because I was reading the post about how the 2020 t20 wc was postponed to 2022 and the 21 WC in India will go ahead as scheduled and the most of the comments were hurr durr BCCI used their influence to set this up. What I don't understand is how Australian government not wanting to host a world cup in 2020 is BCCI's fault? If they don't want to host it in 2020, why does India have to move the one it is hosting in 2021? For all we know, when the time comes, that might get cancelled as well. Did India influence Australian government somehow?
Also, the 10 team world cup was ECB and CA's idea but it is because of BCCI apparently that we are having it. India makes more money from non ICC events they host or participate in. Yet, all the hatred is against India because ICC tries to maximize the number of games for India. The revenue is going to ICC. But the hatred is against India.
ECB Or CA has done nothing to promote the games to any associate nation. Hell, ECB won't even help Scotland or Ireland but everytime the associate cricket is brought up, its BCCI evil, stealing money from the poor associate nations. Meanwhile, corrupt Zimbabwe cricket board gets twice as much money from ICC as Afghanistan and Ireland.
It is well known, that the teams make most amount of money when they host India. Let's see how much the big nations are doing to help the poorer cricket countries. Bangladesh for example. India has toured Bangladesh 5 times since they started playing tests. England 3 times. Australia twice. SA thrice. Pakistan thrice. SL 4 times. WI 4 times. NZ 3 times. But BCCI doesn't want to promote cricket at all. Meanwhile NZ cricket board cancels like half their test series and no one thinks that's killing test cricket.
Here's another one. India has toured Zimbabwe 4 times for tests. AUS and Eng 1 times each. Meanwhile their closest neighbor SA has toured 4 times.
We all know how much racism and classism BCCI had to face to take the world cup to India away from it's "HOME" England in 80s. That wasn't a long time ago. IMO, some of the criticism is justified but a lot of it is still racism as in how do these Indians think they are. Trying to run the world cricket. Of course, some amateur guy in Netherlands bowling 70mph pies deserves ICC funding more than Ramesh from Indian hinterlands whose whole team can afford 2 bats and 1 set of pads shared between 2 batsmen. What is BCCI gonna do with all that money anyways? They make enough from IPL. Gotta grow the game in poor Scotland. They need all the funding they can.
submitted by crazyjatt to Cricket [link] [comments]

Why is there so much hatred towards India on this sub?

Every time I am on this sub, it feels like India ( mostly BCCI) is responsible for everything that ever goes wrong in cricket world.
The reason this thought came to my mind was because I was reading the post about how the 2020 t20 wc was postponed to 2022 and the 21 WC in India will go ahead as scheduled and the most of the comments were hurr durr BCCI used their influence to set this up. What I don't understand is how Australian government not wanting to host a world cup in 2020 is BCCI's fault? If they don't want to host it in 2020, why does India have to move the one it is hosting in 2021? For all we know, when the time comes, that might get cancelled as well. Did India influence Australian government somehow?
Also, the 10 team world cup was ECB and CA's idea but it is because of BCCI apparently that we are having it. India makes more money from non ICC events they host or participate in. Yet, all the hatred is against India because ICC tries to maximize the number of games for India. The revenue is going to ICC. But the hatred is against India.
ECB Or CA has done nothing to promote the games to any associate nation. Hell, ECB won't even help Scotland or Ireland but everytime the associate cricket is brought up, its BCCI evil, stealing money from the poor associate nations. Meanwhile, corrupt Zimbabwe cricket board gets twice as much money from ICC as Afghanistan and Ireland.
It is well known, that the teams make most amount of money when they host India. Let's see how much the big nations are doing to help the poorer cricket countries. Bangladesh for example. India has toured Bangladesh 5 times since they started playing tests. England 3 times. Australia twice. SA thrice. Pakistan thrice. SL 4 times. WI 4 times. NZ 3 times. But BCCI doesn't want to promote cricket at all. Meanwhile NZ cricket board cancels like half their test series and no one thinks that's killing test cricket.
Here's another one. India has toured Zimbabwe 4 times for tests. AUS and Eng 1 times each. Meanwhile their closest neighbor SA has toured 4 times.
We all know how much racism and classism BCCI had to face to take the world cup to India away from it's "HOME" England in 80s. That wasn't a long time ago. IMO, some of the criticism is justified but a lot of it is still racism as in how do these Indians think they are. Trying to run the world cricket. Of course, some amateur guy in Netherlands bowling 70mph pies deserves ICC funding more than Ramesh from Indian hinterlands whose whole team can afford 2 bats and 1 set of pads shared between 2 batsmen. What is BCCI gonna do with all that money anyways? They make enough from IPL. Gotta grow the game in poor Scotland. They need all the funding they can.
submitted by Ghostly_100 to CricketCopyPastas [link] [comments]

Zimbabwe had a really good squad for the 1999 and 2003 World cup

Was just reminiscing the good old days of Zimbabwe cricket. They had a really good 1999 world cup campaign and was right around the time their team talent wise was peaking. I still remember how they beat SA to make the qualifier and edge England out of the World Cup. Neil Johnson was my favorite player from that world cup and was my MOS that tournament. Looking back it was extremely disappointing to see how his career ended due to pay dispute and what could have been.
Zimbabwe still had a good squad inspite of the growing unrest and disfunctional cricket board. Back then it feels like there was a phase where they gave India a really tough time and no longer felt like minnows. I still have nightmares about Douglas Marrilier scooping his way to an improbable victory.
They had a good squad again for the 2003 world cup and it honestly felt like they were going to make a deep run. Unfortunately that was the end of Zimbabwe cricket. Looking back the black armband protest not only mourned the death of democracy in Zimbabwe but it also was the death of Zimbabwe cricket. The under dogs we all love to cheer for were dead.
Also I don't think it's spoken enough out here about how Andy Flower would have been one of the greatest keeper batsman on any other team. He averaged over 50 in test cricket while carrying the entire team single handedly at times. They were several other players who were not on the same level but were still fan favorites. I personally loved Heath Streaks action, Grant Flowers slow left arm spin bowling, Olongo when he initially burst onto the cricketing world, Alistair Campbell as an orthodox opener, Paul Strangs variety at leg spin and I can go on about alot more players.
It's really sad to see what ended up happening to a bunch of very good talented cricketers.
Squads from the two world cups
https://www.espncricinfo.com/bdeshvaus/content/squad/471487.html
https://www.espncricinfo.com/CI/content/squad/434626.html
submitted by anonbutler to Cricket [link] [comments]

Crickets New Years Resolutions

With the New Year finally getting under way I thought we should make a list of resolutions for each of the test nations
For example:
India - Gotta go fast. Historically to be a truly dominant team in cricket you need world class fast bowlers. India has the best pace attack in their history right now and needs to capitalize. My advice is to build depth and load manage.
New Zealand - Ties are lame anyway. Don't want to lose in a super over or from a boundary count back? Don't let it get to that stage. You also don't want to constantly lose the first test of a series and be forced to rely on your fight back credentials. It's time to shake the "almost but not quite" tag.
South Africa - A house divided. Unfortunately the biggest story for South African cricket this year has been off the field. With Smith and Boucher on board things are starting to look up but there's still a lot of healing left to take place between the board, coaching staff and players. South Africa it's a year for reconciliation and you're probably sick of hearing that.
England - Structural support. Great white ball results and the miracle of Headingly have over shadowed what was a miserable outing for England in tests in 2019. To turn it around this year stop collapsing for under 100 in an innings. Say it with me: Tim Murtagh can't hurt you anymore.
Australia - Ok maybe we do care about T20s. You had a pretty good 2019 Australia, at least compared to the black hole that was 2018. But you also let someone else win the CWC. That's not like you. Time to redeem yourself by winning your first ever T20 world cup.
Sri Lanka - Do it for Mickey. Ok you couldn't beat Pakistan and provide everyone's favourite grumpy school teacher the memetastic revenge we all wanted. Hopefully Mickey Arthur can lead the much needed coaching revamp in Sri Lankan cricket. But you'll need to actually follow his advice. Or pull a Watson. Your choice.
Pakistan - Home sweet home. Cricket has returned to Pakistan and now we need to keep it there. In order to do that you need to not only be safe but appear safe. Boards will be guided by perception as much as anything when planning future tours. I'll settle for no less than 100% safe. Anything more is just gravy. Also justice for Kaneria.
West Indies - We will rise again. I imagine every West Indian player from the last 2 decades is sick of being compared to THAT team. But unfortunately I doubt it's ever going away. If you want to be dominant again you can start by not being easy beats. Become a potential banana peel for touring sides like you were to England and build on that. Oh and Holder > Stokes.
Bangladesh - Embrace the new wave. Whether it be agreeing to a pink ball tour match in India or creating a T20 league to rival any outside the IPL Bangladesh has surprisingly been quick to adapt to changes in the cricketing landscape while other boards languish behind. Now it's time to adapt that flexibility into on field results and finally force other cricketing nations to take you seriously. You know how you play at home? Like that but everywhere. Also if you overhear talk of spot fixing for the love of God report it.
Afghanistan - Please sir, may I have some more. Right now Afghanistan is a tier below the rest of the test nations (minus Zimbabwe and Ireland) but the good news is you'll only get better the more you play. The bad news is financial considerations mean you don't play much. So for 2020 it's your resolution to prove you can draw a crowd, provide a challenge and are worth playing for the other full member nations.
Zimbabwe - Ever heard of Lazarus? Ok Zimbabwe cricket isn't quite dead but it is on life support. So get better. That's how it works right? Where's my "thanks I'm cured"?
Ireland - Good craic. Remember when you bowled England out for 85 runs? And then lost by 143? I'm not sure if I should be angry with you for losing from that position. Or proud that you were ever in that position in the first place. Maybe I'm holding a team new to the test arena to unfairly high standards. Maybe high standards for 2020 are what you need to improve. Also $$$ so you can play more.
submitted by wailinghamster to Cricket [link] [comments]

Sikandar Raza not given Zimbabwe contract

http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/24614632/sikandar-raza-not-given-zimbabwe-contract
" Sikandar Raza has not been offered a new central contract by Zimbabwe Cricket (ZC), who claim the batsman breached the conditions of his previous agreement with the board.
In a statement issued on Saturday, ZC revealed Raza had played club cricket in England without a no-objection certificate (NOC), then applied for one - which was denied - and then terminated his contract to play in Canada's Global T20 tournament."
Isn't this ridiculous? The board will not pay player salaries for months at a time but players get refused central contracts for what appears to be whimsical reasons.
submitted by NahimBZ to Cricket [link] [comments]

ICC suspends Zimbabwe Cricket

The International Cricket Council (ICC) suspended Zimbabwe Cricket on Thursday with immediate effect, saying that the Full Member had failed to prevent government intervention in the administration of sport in the country. The decision was taken at the ICC Annual Conference in London. Read the full article here
submitted by Sportcoio1 to u/Sportcoio1 [link] [comments]

Just found out Sikander Raza is signed by Montreal Tigers. Do you think he'll play?

Given the circumstances with the Zimbabwe cricket board not paying the players and the players boycotting the trilateral series against Pakistan and Australia, do you think Raza will just go to Canada to play the league?
Also, does he require NOC from his home board?
submitted by onebananalong to Cricket [link] [comments]

Brendon McCullum you beauty!

Sixes hit in Tests in 2014:
31- Brendon McCullum
31- Indian Cricket Team
25- Cricket South Africa
25- England Cricket
22- Zimbabwe Cricket Team
submitted by Vijayganesh2768 to Cricket [link] [comments]

Zimbabwean Cricket Team

The Zimbabwe Cricket Board have just announced that they've discovered ebola in their cricket team.
However, they still don't have ebatsman and efielda.
submitted by timmmmb to Cricket [link] [comments]

Today I Learned about the The 2020–22 ICC Cricket World Cup Super League. It will feature thirteen countries, the twelve Full members of the ICC and the Netherlands. Each team will play an ODI series against eight of the twelve opponents, four series at home and four away. (Zimbabwe too)

submitted by oximaCentauri to Cricket [link] [comments]

What happened to the great Zimbabwe team?

Why has Zimbabwe cricket become so weak after the Flower period. Was it due to the exodus of players due to the tyranny of Mugabe?
submitted by DanielPutin to Cricket [link] [comments]

Why do people impersonate others on twitter?

I'm sure it could be funny with the right hoax account (eg: Pretending to be the Queen who has sat on her corgi, or something) .. but there are plenty of people who go to a lot of effort to impersonate someone fairly obscure .. for no apparent reason. Why would they do it?
Here's an example: https://twitter.com/#!/t_bone47
That guy/gal/other is pretending to be John Traicos - who captained the Zimbabwe cricket team a couple of decades ago but has long since retired. That's fairly obscure. Why on earth would someone go to any effort to impersonate him?
The impersonator is just prattling on about minor things - there seems to be no setup to scam money.
It just seems so pointless. What do you think is the motivation for these kind of people ?
submitted by Mac_H to AskReddit [link] [comments]

Deja vu: I saw Lahore police cars crash into each other near Gadafi stadium when Zimbabwe came to play to end the jinx of no international cricket. There was literally no other car on the road! One was standing and the other guy just smashed into it.

Deja vu: I saw Lahore police cars crash into each other near Gadafi stadium when Zimbabwe came to play to end the jinx of no international cricket. There was literally no other car on the road! One was standing and the other guy just smashed into it. submitted by bubbleburst1 to pakistan [link] [comments]

Dad texting me regarding the state of African Cricket.

" The Zimbabwe Cricket Board have just announced that they discovered ebola in their cricket team, but this has not caused any concern since they also found ebatsman & efielda..."
submitted by Sam0n to dadjokes [link] [comments]

Not that I'm not happy for Afghanistan, but Scotland, Zimbabwe and Ireland deserved so much better. ICC is killing cricket in small nations. Something has to be done to protect cricket FROM the ICC.

Not that I'm not happy for Afghanistan, but Scotland, Zimbabwe and Ireland deserved so much better. ICC is killing cricket in small nations. Something has to be done to protect cricket FROM the ICC. submitted by kartiksoni2209 to Cricket [link] [comments]

Zimbabwe cricket is going down the drains. Zimbabwe who once played against the top teams in the world are now forced to play with UAE. I don't know if UAE is actually progressing by with Zimbabwe or they're better off playing with Nepal or Hong Kong.

submitted by thegreatescape990 to Cricket [link] [comments]

I spotted a fan in an Eagles beanie during a cricket test match in Zimbabwe

I spotted a fan in an Eagles beanie during a cricket test match in Zimbabwe submitted by FlukeCoins to AFL [link] [comments]

"I think this can be the best period of Zimbabwe cricket": Brendan Taylor speaks

submitted by SepulchreOfAzrael to Cricket [link] [comments]

The England cricket team is so bad that I am now having to use my dual nationality and tell people I support Zimbabwe.

submitted by HolySheesh to britishproblems [link] [comments]

[r/Cricket] Not that I'm not happy for Afghanistan, but Scotland, Zimbabwe and Ireland deserved so much better. ICC is killing cricket in small nations. Something has to be done to protect cricket FROM the ICC.

[Cricket] Not that I'm not happy for Afghanistan, but Scotland, Zimbabwe and Ireland deserved so much better. ICC is killing cricket in small nations. Something has to be done to protect cricket FROM the ICC. submitted by lyonsy1 to IrelandonReddit [link] [comments]

Unusual Batting Feats

Introduction

Brian Lara's 400*. Don Bradman averaging 99.94. Sachin Tendulkar scoring 15,921 Test runs. Chris Martin scoring 12*. The batsmen who achieved these Herculean feats have all gone down in cricket history. However, these are not the only batting performances which exist. There are multiple cases in which a batsman has achieved something unusual, or even at times truly unique, yet they do not get recognition. This post is dedicated to all those batsmen who have managed to achieve what few others have achieved, regardless of whether those achievements are good or bad.

Howzat?

There are ten methods of dismissal (formerly eleven) in cricket, but of these, only five can be considered 'normal': Bowled, caught, LBW, stumped and run out. One could also make a case for hit wicket, and it's common enough that I don't think it counts as being truly unusual. What about the other five, then? Has any batsman in international cricket been dismissed through any of those methods? Thankfully, Wikipedia has a list which I highly advise you to check out, so I'll just be summarising in this section.
First, there's obstructing the field. Only one batsman has ever been dismissed obstructing the field in Tests, and that batsman is Len Hutton against South Africa in 1951. After striking the ball, he noticed that it was about to land onto his stumps and thus bowl him, so he used his bat to strike the ball a second time and protect his stumps. This is actually a legal manoeuvre for a batsman provided that it doesn't prevent a fielder from taking a catch; unfortunately for Hutton, there was a fielder nearby who was ready to take a catch, so he became the first (and so far only) batsman in Test history to be dismissed obstructing the field.
Interestingly enough, there have been seven instances in ODIs of batsmen being given out obstructing the field. In all of those cases, the batsman in question obstructed throws from fielders in order to avoid being run out, in contrast to Hutton who obstructed a catch in order to avoid being caught. In three of those cases, the batsman used his bat or his body to deflect the ball away from the stumps while out of his crease, and in three other cases, the batsman changed his direction of movement while running in order to block the ball. Ben Stokes was out obstructing the field in the most unusual way, however, when he pulled a Maradona and used his hand to prevent the ball from hitting the stumps in a 2015 ODI against Australia.
There have been two instances of a batsman being dismissed obstructing the field in T20Is. Jason Roy was given out in a 2017 T20I against South Africa for changing his direction of movement while running, and Maldivian cricketer Hassan Rasheed was given out obstructing the field in 2019 for...I don't know, actually. It's pretty hard to find articles on bilateral T20Is between the Maldives and Qatar. If there's anyone here who is an expert on Maldivian or Qatari cricket then I'd appreciate finding out more about this incident.
As for handling the ball, this has happened ten times in international cricket (seven times in Tests and three times in ODIs). In 2013, the Laws were changed so that only the striker could be given out handling the ball and even then only before he had finished playing his stroke (strikers handling the ball after the completion of his stroke, and non-strikers handling the ball at any time, would be given out obstructing the field). In 2017, this method of dismissal was removed entirely and instead came under obstructing the field.
I won't go through all the players, but I will pick out some particular highlights. South Africa's Russell Endean was the first batsman in international cricket to be dismissed handled the ball in 1957 when he used his free hand to knock the ball away from the stumps, but according to a later interview, he actually wanted to head the ball away at first; I don't know whether that's actually against the Laws, but given that they didn't wear helmets back then, I can't imagine that it would have ended well. Michael Vaughan was the last player to be dismissed in this manner in Tests back in 2001, and Zimbabwe's Chamu Chibhaba holds the distinction of being the last cricketer to be dismissed handled the ball in international cricket after he was given out for handling the ball in an ODI against Afghanistan in 2015.
This post is about unusual feats, however, and when it comes to being given out handled the ball, there is none more unusual than the story of Australia's Andrew Hilditch. In a Test match against Pakistan in 1979, following a wayward throw from a fielder, Hilditch (who was at the non-striker's end) decided to return the ball to the bowler. It's actually against the Laws for a batsman to return the ball to a fielder without that fielder's permission, and controversially, the bowler (Sarfraz Nawaz) decided to appeal, which led to Hilditch's dismissal. This would be the only instance in international cricket of a non-striker being given out handled the ball, so Hilditch takes the biscuit when it comes to this unusual method of dismissal.
Retirement is rather unusual in that depending on the situation, the batsman can be considered out or not out. Generally, retirement occurs due to injury, in which case the batsman is considered 'retired hurt' and is entitled to return to the crease upon the fall of a wicket or upon another batsman's retirement. This situation is not at all unusual. What is unusual, though, is a batsman retiring for reasons other than injury, and unless there is some other acceptable reason for their absence (which I'll talk about shortly), the fielding side has the right to prevent them from returning to the crease, in which case they are retired out.
This has only occurred three times in international cricket. In a Test between Bangladesh and Sri Lanka in 2001, in which Sri Lanka demolished the then-new Test nation of Bangladesh, the Sri Lankan captain (Sanath Jayasuriya) retired Marvan Atapattu after he scored his double-century, and later in the same innings, retired Mahela Jayawardene after he smashed 150(115). Obviously, this move was criticised by some for breaching the spirit of the game, and these are the only two instances of batsmen being retired out in Test cricket. The other such instance in international cricket is when Bhutan's Sonam Tobgay was retired out in a 2019 T20I against the Maldives (something about the Maldives and unusual dismissals for some reason), but I can't find any further details of the incident.
Now, this post is generally meant to be a light-hearted celebration of unusual batting achievements, but this next story is rather more sombre. In a 1983 Test between the West Indies and India, Gordon Greenidge was on 154* in the West Indies' first innings when he received news that his daughter was dying; he retired in order to be able to visit her, and she sadly passed away two days later. Although Greenidge had not been injured, he was given as 'retired not out' due to the tragic circumstances. To this day, this is the only instance in international cricket of a batsman being given retired not out.
Hit the ball twice and timed out are perhaps the most unusual dismissals of all in the sense that no batsman has ever been given out for those reasons in international cricket (not yet, anyway; there's a first time for everything). There was one instance, however, in which a batsman could have been timed out in Test cricket, but ultimately wasn't.
The Law states that a batsman must be at the crease within three minutes, else they can be timed out. In a 2007 Test between India and South Africa, Sachin Tendulkar was due to come in at #4. However, he had temporarily been off the field during South Africa's innings, and he still had unserved penalty time when two Indian wickets quickly fell, meaning that he couldn't bat at #4. As a result, India, who were confused by the whole ordeal, didn't send out a batsman for six minutes until Sourav Ganguly finally arrived at #4. Both the umpires and South Africa's captain, Graeme Smith, agreed that an appeal would be against the spirit of the game, but had Smith appealed, this would have been the only instance in international cricket of a batsman being timed out.

The Best Since Bradman

It's common knowledge among cricket fans that Don Bradman holds the record for the highest Test batting average, at 99.94. However, this isn't strictly speaking true. It is correct to say that Bradman has the highest average among batsmen who have played a minimum of twenty innings, but among all batsmen, Bradman only comes in at a measly third (what a fraud). Who are ahead of him, then?
Firstly, let us dispel with the notion that a batsman who is never dismissed has an infinite average. That is not true. A batsman who is never dismissed has an undefined average, since it is impossible to have a batting average without any dismissals. Pakistani off-spinner Afaq Hussain holds the record for the most Test runs scored without being dismissed, having scored 65 runs in four innings.
Looking at batsmen who have been dismissed, however, we come across West Indian wicketkeeper Andy Ganteaume in second place. The poor lad struggled to get into the Test team because of his slow scoring rate in tour matches, but an injury to Jeff Stollmeyer forced the selectors to play him against England. In his only Test innings in 1948, Ganteaume hit 112 but was criticised (once again) for scoring too slowly and was subsequently dropped; he would never play another Test match. Still, he can lay legitimate claim to having a higher Test batting average than Bradman, which only one other batsman has achieved.
Who's the best since Bradman, then? With a minimum cut-off of twenty innings, we have Adam Voges, Steve Smith and Marnus Labuschagne, all Australian, two of them still active international cricketers. As is tradition at this point, the batsman with the highest Test batting average of all time is an active Australian cricketer, Kurtis Patterson to be precise. He forced himself into the team after scoring twin centuries in a tour match and although he only scored 30 in his first innings, he scored 114* in his second to end up with an average of 144.
Australian fans go crazy over Smith and Labuschagne, declaring them to be the best since Bradman. Little do they realise that they have in their ranks a batsman who is not only statistically better than Bradman but who is also statistically better than the GOAT Test batsman Andy Ganteaume.
How about ODIs, though? Who has the highest ODI batting average of all time? I'll give you a hint: He's a Dutch player. No, it's not Ryan ten Doeschate; it is, in fact, Max O'Dowd. He scored 86* in his first innings followed by a score of 59 in his second innings to end up with an average of 145. South African Irish cricketer Curtis Campher comes in at second with an average of 127.
Who has scored the most runs in ODIs without being dismissed, though? Well, let me ask you a different question: Who is England's greatest ever ODI player? If you said Jos Buttler then you'd be wrong. By law, anything that Buttler can do, Foakes can do better, and Ben Foakes does in fact hold the record for the most runs in ODIs without being dismissed, having scored 61* in his only ODI innings. Buttler would never.
In T20Is, the greatest ever batsman is someone who you probably haven't even heard of. Chris Gayle calls himself 'Universe Boss', but the true Universe Boss is surely the guy who averages 126 in T20Is. Enter Portugal's Najjam Shahzad, who scored 27* in his first innings, 46 in his second and 53* in his third. Not only does he have the highest T20I average of all time but he's also improving with every innings, so it won't be long until Portugal becomes a powerhouse in T20I cricket thanks to megadaddy hundreds from Universe Boss Najjam Shahzad.
If Shahzad is the Universe Boss, however, then Saudi Arabia's Mohammad Adnan is the Multiverse Boss. He holds the record for the most runs in T20Is without being dismissed, scoring 14*, 38* and 8* in his three innings. Not only that, but he has a career strike rate of 193.54, so he doesn't waste time. Give this man an IPL contract already.

Duck, Duck, Goose

Ducks and golden ducks are not unusual in and of themselves. That doesn't mean that scoring a duck or golden duck can't still be unusual feats, however; it all depends on how those ducks or golden ducks come about.
You might be aware that New Zealand's Geoff Allott holds the record for the most balls faced for a duck in Tests, having faced 77 balls against South Africa in 1999 (he also holds the record for the longest duck, having batted for a whopping 101 minutes). What about the other formats, though? The late West Indian batsman Runako Morton holds the record for most balls faced for a duck in ODIs, having scored 0(31) against Australia in 2006 (unsurprisingly, the West Indies lost that match). Morton took 56 minutes for his duck, which is also an ODI record.
T20Is are where it gets juicy, however. Canada's Sandeep Jyoti holds the record for most balls faced for a duck in T20Is, scoring 0(12) against Zimbabwe in 2008 (it was a close match, though, as Canada only lost by 109 runs). In terms of minutes batted, however, Zimbabwe's Brendan Taylor holds that record, having batted for 19 minutes in a T20I against South Africa in 2010 for a five-ball duck; Jyoti, by comparison, batted for 15 minutes.
The record for most balls faced for a golden duck is...one. By definition, golden ducks involve the batsman facing exactly one ball. However, who took the longest time for their golden duck?
In Tests, that accolade belongs to Bangladesh's Nazmul Hossain, who spent 14 minutes at the crease against India in a 2004 match before being run out for a golden duck. England fans were probably waiting in anticipation for a superb knock from the #3 batsman, Martyn Moxon, when they were 47-1 against Australia in a 1985 ODI, but after 19 minutes of tension, Moxon was dismissed LBW off his first ball. In a 2015 T20I between England and Pakistan, Pakistani opener Rafatullah Mohmand somehow conspired to spend 17 minutes at the crease before being dismissed LBW in the third over for a golden duck; amazingly, he was only two minutes away from equalling the record for the longest duck in T20Is!
What if a batsman just doesn't feel like scoring runs, though, and ends on 0*? Obviously, batsmen can end on something like 0*(0) or 0*(1) or 0*(5), and that wouldn't be too unusual. The truly remarkable feats are when a batsman plays a marathon innings and yet still finishes on 0*. Some of these players put Geoffrey Boycott to shame.
Firstly, let's consider Tests. In 1968, England scored 351/7d in the first innings and bowled Australia out for 78, forcing them to follow on. Cricinfo states that Paul Sheahan 'never completely mastered the art of crease occupation', which is a bizarre claim to make about a player who faced 44 balls in Australia's second innings without scoring a run, thus not only securing the draw but also setting a record which remains unbroken to this day. His marathon innings took 52 minutes, which is a joint record along with New Zealand bowler Danny Morrison's 0*(30) against South Africa in 1995.
Fun fact: Had Jack Leach not scored that single at Headingley while still remaining not out, he would have broken this record having batted for 60 minutes, yet assuming that he completed his final over, he would have only faced 20 balls (fewer than half the balls Paul Sheahan faced). I think this demonstrates just how effective Stokes was at farming the strike.
Moving on to ODIs, Zimbabwean #11 batsman Chris Mpofu (who averages 2.85 with the bat) holds the record here, having scored 0*(20) in a tenth-wicket partnership of 12(38) against Bangladesh in 2006. His partner was the #10 batsman (and Zimbabwe's captain) Prosper Utseya, who certainly didn't prosper with his 21(42), thus stranding Mpofu 80 balls short of his dentury. Who holds the record for the longest 0*, though?
Picture the scene. It's March 2019 and Sri Lanka is struggling in an ODI against South Africa. It's the first innings and Lasith Malinga has been run out for a duck, leaving Sri Lanka on 131/9 after just 33.4 overs. Everyone knows about Kusal Perera's incredible 153* earlier that year, but what happened next, while not nearly as impressive, was nonetheless incredible. #9 batsman Isuru Udana and #11 batsman Kasun Rajitha put on a tenth-wicket stand of 58 runs from just 34 balls. Udana ends on 78(57). Rajitha ends on 0*(9), having batted for exactly half an hour. South Africa still won comfortably, but Rajitha's immense innings saw him enter the history books as having scored the longest 0* in ODI history. Udana's innings was alright as well.
Finally, in T20Is, the record for the most balls faced for a 0* is held by Bermuda's Rodney Trott, who scored 0*(7) against the Netherlands in 2019. Cricinfo doesn't know how long it took, however. For that, we have to look towards India's Yuzvendra Chahal, who took 15 minutes for his 0*(4) against Australia in 2019. Solid contribution from him.
All these feats are just in one innings, though. Some batsmen go above and beyond that and spend their entire career not scoring runs (either that or they don't know what a batsman's main job is). Two Sri Lankan players (Ishara Amerasinghe and Dinuka Hettiarachchi) hold the joint record for most balls faced in Tests without scoring a single run, both having faced 25 balls. In fact, the entire top four is made up of Sri Lankans; clearly, a significant proportion of Sri Lankan cricketers view run-scoring as optional. Hettiarachchi (who Cricinfo reckons is an all-rounder despite an FC batting average of 9.55) beats out everyone when it comes to minutes batted, though, having batted for 39 minutes in Tests without scoring a single run.
Bangladesh's Harunur Rashid holds the record for most balls faced in ODIs without scoring a run, having faced 17 in total. However, we have to look to our old friend Rajitha to find the player who's batted the most minutes in ODIs without scoring a run; he has batted at least 32 minutes, almost all of which comes from his partnership with Udana. Portugal's Sukhwinder Singh has faced nine balls in T20Is without scoring a run, which is the record, but Shaheen Shah Afridi and Mathew Sinclair both hold the joint-record for having batted seven minutes in T20Is without scoring a run.

Diamond Ducks Are Forever

Ducks and golden ducks aren't too unusual for the most part, but diamond ducks (in which a batsman is dismissed without facing a single ball) are. Think of what needs to happen for a diamond duck to occur. The player can't be a striker for obvious reasons, so bowled, caught, LBW, stumped, hit wicket and hit the ball twice (all of which can only apply to the striker) are out of play. Timed out is out of play as soon as a batsman enters the crease. This leaves just three possible dismissals for a diamond duck: Run out, obstructing the field and retired out. The latter two almost never happen, so diamond ducks almost always occur due to run-outs.
There have been 153 diamond ducks in ODIs and 53 diamond ducks in T20Is, so in those formats, diamond ducks aren't that unusual. This makes sense, of course, as run-outs are more likely to occur in those formats. Tests are where diamond ducks count as an unusual batting feat, as there have been in the history of Tests only 29 diamond ducks that we know of. Chris Martin holds the unfortunate distinction of being the only cricketer in the history of Tests to be dismissed for a diamond duck twice (one of which came in his final Test innings, which is a perfect summation of his batting career).
Most of these diamond ducks have of course come through run-outs, but there have been seven international diamond ducks (three in ODIs and four in T20Is) which have come through stumpings. On the surface, this shouldn't be possible; how can a batsman be stumped without facing a ball? The answer is simple: Leg-side stumpings. In white-ball cricket, any leg-side delivery tends to be given as a wide, and the odd thing about wides is that they do not count as a ball faced by the striker yet the striker can be dismissed stumped or hit wicket off of them. This would explain why this kind of diamond duck has occurred seven times in LOIs yet has never occurred in the history of Test cricket.
FWIW, there has yet to be an international diamond duck from a method of dismissal other than run out and stumped, but it is theoretically possible for a batsman who is dismissed hit wicket (off a wide), obstructing the field or retired out to achieve a diamond duck. Will any batsman be brave enough to make history and try to achieve what would be a unique feat by being dismissed for a diamond duck through one of these modes of dismissal? We'll have to wait and see.

Specialist Six-Hitters

So far, this post has been focusing largely on defensive stalwarts, but those are boring to watch. Everyone knows that real cricket is about walking up to the crease and hitting sixes from the get-go, so this section will be dedicated to those players who consider a strike rate under 600 to be too defensive. No score illustrates this mentality better than the rare 6*(1), so let's start with that.
In all the Tests throughout history, only once has a batsman finished on a score of 6*(1). The year is 1993 and Sri Lanka's Sanath Jayasuriya enters the crease with his team five wickets down but needing just four runs to beat England. Phil Tufnell is the bowler who is trying to take his wicket and help pull off a miracle for England, but Jayasuriya is having none of it and promptly smacks his first delivery for six. As far as Tests go, Jayasuriya's 6*(1) is a true case of batting scorigami (maybe I'll do a cricket scorigami post at some point).
As for ODIs and T20Is, a final score of 6*(1) is more common as you might imagine. In fact, it has occurred nine times in ODIs and thirteen times in T20Is. It appears to be the case that when a batsman is dismissed on the penultimate ball of the first innings, the batting team will send out a specialist six-hitter to get the job done. Credit goes to Afghan wicketkeeper Shafiqullah and England all-rounder Chris Jordan for being the only two players to achieve this unusual feat twice (Shafiqullah has achieved it twice in T20Is whereas Jordan has achieved it once in ODIs and once in T20Is).
A 6*(1) is probably my second-favourite score, but you know what my favourite score is? 6(2). I don't think any score illustrates the dual nature of batting quite like this one does. You can be dominating a bowler and smashing them for six one moment, then the very next moment, you can find yourself dismissed by the same bowler. It's poetic. It represents not only the duality of batsmen but the duality of man himself; you can be breezing through life one second then you could be rock-bottom the next. 6(2) is not just a score; it is a representation of life itself, cricket's ode to the erratic nature of mankind's existence.
Much like 6*(1), 6(2) has only occurred once in Test cricket, in 1958 to be precise. The West Indies were 401 runs behind Australia heading into the third innings and they required a miracle just to stay in the game. A 179-run partnership between Walcott and Sobers gave the West Indies hope, but they then proceeded to collapse from 244/3 to 283/8. In comes Frank King at #10 with his team needing over a hundred runs just to make Australia bat again. Not wanting to go down without a fight, he heaves the bowler for six off his first ball. Alas, his very next ball results in him being caught, but one cannot fault King for his effort in the face of certain defeat (apart from the fact that he had Everton Weekes at the other end, but we'll just ignore that).
This scoreline of 6(2) has occurred ten times in ODIs and eleven times in T20Is. No batsman in international cricket has ever achieved it twice. The first player to achieve it twice will thus have their names etched in the history books for their unique feat.
South Africa's Mangaliso Mosehle deserves special mention, though. He has achieved the ultimate cricket scorigami: His score of 6(1) against Sri Lanka in a 2016 T20I is the only such score in the entire history of international cricket. He came in at #6 at the end of South Africa's ninth over and hit his first international ball for six. He was then run out as the non-striker in the next over, leaving him on a score of 6(1). Not only did his team win the match, but Mosehle achieved what no other batsman has achieved before or since. Truly, his name must be counted among the likes of Lara, Tendulkar and Bradman for this one-of-a-kind feat.
In cases such as 6*(1) and 6(1), the batsman was left with a strike rate of 600. Can it go higher, though? Has any batsman done better than 600? For the first question, the answer is surprisingly yes. It is indeed theoretically possible for a batsman to finish an innings with a strike rate greater than 600. If he hits a ball for three and the fielding side then throws the ball to the boundary, the number of runs scored off of that delivery will be 3 + 4 overthrows = 7. This is how it would theoretically be possible for a batsman to conclude an innings with a strike rate greater than 600.
Does this mean that there is a batsman out there who has struck at a rate greater than 600? Unfortunately, no. Though it is doable, it has never happened in international cricket. The highest SR ever achieved in an international innings is 600; that includes Mosehle, all the players who have scored 6*(1), and Afghanistan's Dawlat Zadran, who against Oman in 2016 scored 12*(2) to win his team the T20I by three wickets with three balls remaining. He clearly did his job as specialist six-hitter very well indeed, for he is the only batsman in international cricket to have finished an innings with a strike rate of 600 having faced more than one ball.
Since no batsman has struck at greater than 600 in an innings, it stands to reason that no batsman has struck at greater than 600 over their career. Has anyone struck at exactly 600, though? Is there a batsman who hit their only ball in international cricket for six?
No-one's done it in Tests, that's for sure. The batsman with the highest confirmed career strike rate in Tests is Australia's Fred Freer, who hit 28*(21) in his only innings for a career SR of 133.33. However, Bill Howell (also Australian) may have had an SR of up to 205.88, though we don't have full ball-by-ball data for his innings.
In ODIs and T20Is, the records are undisputed. South African pace bowler Johann Louw holds the accolade in ODIs, having scored 23(7) in his only innings for a career strike rate of 328.57, and Bahrain's Qasim Zia hit a four off his only international delivery to take the record for the highest career strike rate in T20Is.
As you can see, not only has no batsmen ever finished with a career SR greater than 600, but none have even managed to finish with an SR of exactly 600. To strike at greater than 600 over the course of an innings would be unique in international cricket; to strike at exactly 600 over the course of a career would be truly special; to strike at greater than 600 over the course of a career, however, would be the holy grail of unusual batting feats. The player who manages to achieve that would surely go down in cricketing folklore for all eternity.

To Be Or Not To Be On Strike

All of the aforementioned batting feats require that the batsman has actually faced a ball. What if that's not the case, though? What if a batsman's dedication to weirdness is so great that they do not even bother to get themselves on strike? Or, perhaps more accurately, what if a batsman's dedication to weirdness is so great that they do not allow their partner to take the strike?
That is precisely what happened in 2012 when England faced Pakistan in the first Test of the tour. With Pakistan on 319/9 in their first innings, Adnan Akmal evidently didn't trust his partner Aizaz Cheema to face even one delivery, with the result that the two batsmen put on a 19-run partnership for the tenth wicket despite Cheema not facing a single ball. What makes this notable is that Cheema batted for 20 minutes without facing a delivery, which is a Test match record. Amusingly, Cheema ended his career with five innings batted, five not-outs, a high score of 1*, 23 balls faced and a strike rate of 4.34.
As for T20Is, I must admit that I am rather bemused. Afghanistan's Amir Hamza holds the record for the most minutes batted in a T20I innings without facing a ball, having batted for 10 minutes against the Netherlands in 2013. However, I'm confused as to how he managed to achieve this. Afghanistan's ninth wicket fell on the final ball of the nineteenth over, and so Hamza's partner faced the first ball of the final over. However, Hamza was also run out for a diamond duck on the first ball of the final over. This means that the gap between the end of the nineteenth over and the beginning of the final over was 10 minutes. How is that even possible in a T20I? Cricinfo isn't helping me at all here.
Now for the reason I wanted to make this post in the first place. This particular innings took place in 2017, during an ODI between Australia and New Zealand. New Zealand had set the Aussies a target of 287 and the chasing side found themselves facing certain defeat on 226/9, with only Marcus Stoinis and Josh Hazlewood left at the crease.
What happened next was nothing short of spectacular. Stoinis somehow managed to farm the strike with such effectiveness that immediately prior to the final ball of the 47th over, the two batsmen had put on a tenth-wicket partnership of 54 runs and needed just six more runs to win. The kicker? Hazlewood didn't face a single ball. Stoinis had faced every single delivery in the partnership. Australia's innings finally ended on the final ball of the 47th over when Hazlewood was run out for a diamond duck while attempting to take a single, but if Stoinis had pulled it off, it would surely have been one of the greatest ODI innings of all time.
All in all, Hazlewood batted for 26 minutes, which is by far the longest innings by a batsman without facing a single ball in the history of international cricket. When I first heard about this stat, I couldn't believe it; I found it so unusual and so unique that I decided to look for more weird and wonderful batting feats, and that's how this post came about. Hats off to specialist non-striker Josh Hazlewood, then, for inspiring me to do this.
You might think that any batsman who faces zero balls in an innings can only end up with a score of either 0 or 0*, and if you think that, you'd be right. Nonetheless, while searching through Cricinfo's database to find the weirdest batting feats out there, I came across this scorecard. Apparently, this is due to a scoring error as the scorer incorrectly neglected to count the no-ball as a ball faced. The fact that this is the only such instance of this happening in Cricinfo's database supports this theory.
Hazlewood's achievement was superb, but even he only managed it in one innings. How about over an entire career? Who holds the record for the most minutes batted over a career without facing a ball? Unfortunately, Cricinfo won't let me find that out for Tests, and the ODI and T20I data present nothing at all unusual (the record is 2 minutes for ODIs and 5 minutes for T20Is, in case you're wondering).
Matches played is somewhat more interesting. Once again, Cricinfo won't let me do this for Tests, but India's Jaydev Unadkat holds the record for the most ODIs played without facing a single ball, having played in seven ODIs. However, he's also never had to bat; if we restrict our search only to those who have batted at least one innings, Lance Gibbs and Pakistan's Mohammad Khalil come out on top, both having played three ODIs without facing a ball.
The West Indies' Krishmar Santokie holds the record for the most T20Is played without facing a single ball, having played in twelve of them (talk about specialist bowler!), although India's Mohammed Shami and Scotland's Hamza Tahir are closing in on that record, both having played in eleven T20Is without facing a single ball. Unlike Unadkat (and Shami and Tahir, for that matter), Santokie actually batted in one innings (against Ireland in 2014), though that would be his only international innings with the bat.

Extra, Extra!

I don't think Extras gets enough credit. The dude's been batting for 144 years and yet no-one praises his longevity. This final section will thus be dedicated to the man, the myth, the legend, Mr. Extras himself.
Despite his long and illustrious career, Extras has only top-scored in 19 completed Test innings. The lowest such score came in 1924; England scored 438 in the first innings while South Africa could only manage 30, with Extras scoring a swashbuckling 11 to lessen South Africa's humiliation. The skipper, Herbie Taylor, was the next-highest scorer with 7; a true captain's knock from him. Extras' highest score was a 76 for Pakistan against India in 2007 (he had also scored 38 and 41 in India's two innings, so it was a good match for him), but this was not the highest score in the innings.
In total, Extras has top-scored in 39 completed ODI innings. This includes a 2004 ODI between Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka, in which Extras scored 7 of Zimbabwe's 35 runs (tied with Dion Ebrahim for Zimbabwe's top scorer that game). Extras has also scored three half-centuries in ODIs, his highest score of 59 occurring twice in 1989 and 1999, both for Pakistan. For some reason, Extras just really loves scoring for Pakistan.
Extras has top-scored in 10 completed T20I innings, the lowest of which was once again a score of 7, this time coming for Turkey against Luxembourg in 2019 (Turkey scored just 28 runs in that match). Extras has never scored a half-century in T20Is, with his top score being 39 for Czechia against Turkey in 2019.
That's strange. This Extras fellow, despite having a 144-year-long batting career, has never scored a century, or even approached a century. I personally think that he's been given enough chances and should be dropped. I've heard that he can't even field or bowl, so what's the point in having him in the team if he's not scoring?

Conclusion

When discussing impressive batting feats, a lot of people place emphasis on comparisons: Who has the better average? Who has scored more runs? Who has the better strike rate in white-ball cricket? Who has the better beard? Who has the lower dot-ball percentage when batting in the third innings of the second Test in the series on a Tuesday with a lead of 100 runs or more?
However, the most unusual achievements in the art of batting tend not to derive from excellence in the craft but rather from unique circumstances which lead to bizarre stats or scorelines. To achieve what no batsman has achieved before in international cricket, even if it's something terrible such as becoming the first batsman in the history of international cricket to be out hit wicket for a diamond duck, is impressive in its own way. Also, the subsequent memes can be pretty funny.
I hope you enjoyed the read. Next time, I'll be doing the same thing but for bowling. Get ready for first-ball wickets and economy rates of 0.
submitted by MightySilverWolf to Cricket [link] [comments]

@AP: RT @AP_Africa: An exiled cricketer's song has become the anthem for a new Zimbabwe. 'I was pleasantly surprised.' https://t.co/ndcwNOQlp8

@AP: RT @AP_Africa: An exiled cricketer's song has become the anthem for a new Zimbabwe. 'I was pleasantly surprised.' https://t.co/ndcwNOQlp8 submitted by -en- to newsbotbot [link] [comments]

The Rise and Fall of Zimbabwe Cricket (1980 - 2020) - YouTube Highlights  Bangladesh vs Zimbabwe  3rd ODI  Zimbabwe ... Zimbabwe national cricket team - Topic - YouTube Zimbabwean Cricket Terms Zimbabwe cricket squad for the tour of Pakistan 2020 - YouTube

The Zimbabwe national cricket team visited Pakistan from May 19 to 31, 2015. During this tour I played 3 ODIs and 2 Twenty20s, all matches were held at Gaddafi Stadium in Lahore. This was the first tour of a national team capable of playing Test cricket since the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in 2009. Zimbabwe Cricket nearly debt-free after 'horrible' year, says chairman. Board sets focus on the revival of club cricket and the re-establishment of a national academy. 2020-06-24T10:21:51Z. Zimbabwe Cricket (ZC) has made a big show of intent to rejuvenate and grow cricket in the country following the launch of the potentially explosive National Premier League (NPL) which kicks off ... — Zimbabwe Cricket (@ZimCricketv) September 23, 2020 Zimbabwe have already begun preparations for the tour and a 25-member provisional squad has been called up for a training camp, which began in Harare on Tuesday, 22 September. Zimbabwe's national men's cricket team was granted permission by the government to tour Pakistan for a limited-overs series scheduled for October 30 to November 10, Zimbabwe Cricket, the sport's governing body in the country, announced. The tour will see three One Day Internationals (ODIs) and three Twenty20 (T20) games played.

[index] [6538] [6951] [4625] [6079] [7184] [597] [254] [6520] [3389] [764]

The Rise and Fall of Zimbabwe Cricket (1980 - 2020) - YouTube

Robert Mugabe loves cricket. But Zimbabwe cricketers haven't always felt the same way about him. Cricket hit rock bottom under his patronage. Would it be at ... Welcome to the first video on the channel. Today we look at the remarkable rise and fall of Zimbabwean Cricket. A story for cricket history. This video also ... PCB released a new schedule of Pakistan Vs Zimbabwe series. Pakistan vs Zimbabwe Series New Schedul 2020. #Alividz #Crickerinformation #Pakvszim All the terms, phrases and technical stuff you should ever need for a game of cricket in Zimbabwe... Highlights Bangladesh vs Zimbabwe 3rd ODI Zimbabwe tour of Bangladesh 2020 Series : Zimbabwe tour of Bangladesh 2020. Match Date : March 06, Friday 202...

#