I saw an ODI double century and nearly didn’t rate it

By Brett McKay / Expert

This column reads very differently to how it was going to when words first hit the screen.

But such was the transformation in Chris Gayle in his record-smashing innings yesterday at Manuka Oval in Canberra, that it was impossible to have the same opinion by the end of it.

For the record, Gayle’s 215 is the first ever World Cup double hundred, surpassing Gary Kirsten’s 188no against the UAE in Rawalpindi in the 1996 tournament.

It’s the third highest score in ODI history, but the first ODI 200 by someone other than an Indian player, and the first outside India.

It’s the highest ever one-day score in Australia (by a male, before anyone picks me up), beating Mark Waugh’s 173 against the West Indies at the MCG back in 2001.

Gayle now has a Test triple century, an ODI double century, and was the first player to record a Twenty20 international century.

Gayle and Marlon Samuels came together on the third ball of the match, and batted right through the innings, with Gayle out off the last ball. Together, they added 372, the highest partnership in the history of the 50-over game.

Gayle’s innings was extraordinary for so many reasons, but none more so than the breakdown of his score, and the acceleration within.

His first 50 came from 51 balls, and his second from 54 balls. He then went from 100 to 150 in 21 balls, before the final 50 was raised in 12 balls. Twelve freaking balls!

From 151*, Gayle’s last 20 balls went: 6 4 6 4 6 6 6 1 6 1 4 4 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 out.

His 215 came from 147 balls all told, with 10 fours and a whopping 16 sixes. Gayle and Samuels added a staggering 157 from the last 10 overs.

Samuels finished 133 not out from 156 balls, also coming to life in the back end of his innings, after reaching his fifty in 95 balls.

The early part of the innings gave no indication of likely fireworks. In fact, it was damn near sleep inducing, crawling to 1/92 from the first 20 overs. And this was where I was starting to get annoyed.

Watching Chris Gayle bat of late has been an exercise in desperate hope. So much of the West Indies’ chance in any given game hangs on Gayle’s hefty bat, but he’s been battling like a middle-order clubman.

He survived an LBW referral second ball he faced, only by virtue of being giving not out, and in which Hawkeye may have been rather generous.

In the opening overs he looked tentative, his front foot leaden to the crease, as he waved his bat across the line. He got an early boundary away, but more often than not found himself in trouble against the Zimbabwe opening bowlers, Tenashe Panyangara and Tendai Chatara – who bowls surprisingly rapid for a paceman not fond of using his front arm.

Gayle’s modus operandi for his first 80-odd was just swinging the bat. He’s never moved his feet much anyway, and in recent years he’s made Virender Sehwag look like Fred Astaire. Essentially, if the ball is full he’ll clear the front leg and just swing hard – in any direction. He’s strong enough that edges and miscues will still find the boundary. If the ball is back of a length, then he plonks the front foot down the line of leg stump and swings around it.

At one stage, he decided a slog sweep was the shot to play to a slightly back-of-a-length ball outside the line of a second set of stumps. To say it looked ‘agricultural’ is offensive to country cricketers.

In the last two years, Gayle has averaged less than 20 in ODIs and was dumped by the Sydney Thunder in the Big Bash League. Think about just how damning that is, being told the worst T20 team in Australia doesn’t require your services any longer.

At the end of the 29th over, I was surprised to see him 89 not out, because he hadn’t looked in control at all to that point, and I’m not convinced he’d middled one.

In fact it was only when he crawled through the 90s, taking more than 20 balls to do it, that he finally looked like he knew what he was doing. And to be fair, if I hadn’t made an ODI ton in more than 18 months, I’d be making sure I got there as well.

From there, he just went bang. I’ve never seen the shackles broken in such spectacular fashion, and by the end of it, Gayle’s feet were moving and he was middling everything. It was some return to form.

Of the three World Cup games to be played in Canberra, this game was the one with the slowest ticket sales, and was the hardest sell overall. After the Windies got touched up by Ireland, it was very difficult to have much confidence in their cricket. But those who did take the punt on this game were rewarded with a historic performance, and I suspect in time there will be far more than just the 5,544 in attendance.

But I’m very glad I was one of them. Even if I thought Gayle’s first hundred wasn’t much chop.

The Crowd Says:

AUTHOR

2015-02-26T04:25:05+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Ah, my mistake, I read your figures as being the total and number of losses, rather than 'win and loss', so yes, my maths is out. So the losing rates should actually read: South Africa 7.5% New Zealand 8.8% Australia 9.6% India 13.1%

2015-02-26T03:28:37+00:00

spruce moose

Guest


Agree to disagree. Just an fyi, your maths is wrong and you used your wrong maths to say I was wrong. You've divided the wrong numbers with NZ. You applied maths correctly for australia (7/73) but incorrect against NZ (you went 3/31 instead of 3/34 - it's the only way you came up with 9.7% instead of the correct 8.9%. In fact, you only applied the right math for Australia and was wrong with every other division. So, my figures, when maths is applied correctly shows Australia's losing rate to be higher - all but tied with India in fact, and South Africa's to be amazingly good.

AUTHOR

2015-02-26T02:24:45+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Spruce, they're not "more likely to lose at all". All that list shows is that the biggest scores batting second have come against Australia. Using your win/loss figures there, Australia loses 9.6% of game when passing 300 batting first, compared to India's 15.1%, and South Africa's 8.2%. New Zealand's loss rate is 9.7% You can certainly make the point that Australia hasn't defended the highest scores ever, but your figures show that NZ's losing rate is marginally higher. And since both sides win at better than 9 in every 10 games when posting 300 first, it's not exactly a compelling argument you're putting forward, is it..

2015-02-26T00:22:26+00:00

b

Guest


Did you see the other lbw the commentators compared to Gayle's? Gayle was way out of his crease, the other guy was on the crease. Both hit in the same spot on the pads, one hitting, the other going over. From front on they looked the same, from side on the height difference at the stumps would have been substantial.

2015-02-25T23:58:27+00:00

Renegade

Roar Guru


So what was your original point then.... you've basically re-iterated what i said with those figures. It's a rare occurence that a side that scores over 300 in the first innings goes on to lose.

2015-02-25T23:14:05+00:00

spruce moose

Guest


Sigh Brett my point was that when a team passes 300, Australia is more likely to lose than the other teams...I should have clarfied that a bit better than my original statement. Of the top in this list http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/records/93518.html Australia actually feature 6 times in failing to defend a total. The other 2 were examples of teams successfully defending their super massive totals. My point is - and it is valid - Australia are actually less likely to defend their big haul than NZ. More stats to throw your way. NZ when it passes 300 are 31-3, South Africa are 49-4 and India 53-8. So,Australia only just shade India while NZ and South Africa are better than Australia...South Africa in particular. In fact, If Australia score 330 +, based on these stats, I'd be putting some coin down on NZ to chase it.

2015-02-25T20:42:09+00:00

Tristan

Guest


Exactly Spruce. Manuka is not a small playing surface.

2015-02-25T20:40:24+00:00

Tristan

Guest


Brett, I was also at the ground, and the only person there who didn't think that was plumb was Steve Davis for some reason. Still, gave us great entertainment. Agree with your sentiments of an innings in two halves too

2015-02-25T11:33:15+00:00

riddler

Guest


great article as per usual brett.. loved ur comment re over the years many will have been there.. am amazed how many saw larkham´s goal against the boks for one example.. seems like it was played in sydney rather than twickenham..

2015-02-25T10:33:07+00:00

Geoff from Bruce Stadium

Guest


I'm allowed my opinion Brett as are you. Guess we use a different set of criteria when making judgements about a great innings. I like to see batsmen perform when there is a contest between bat and ball. To my mind making runs on an unpredictable or seaming wicket against quality fast bowling or making runs against quality spinners on a raging turner rates more highly than big scores on a flat track against a pedestrian attack. And this is why in my mind great test innings rate more highly than big scores in one day internationals.

2015-02-25T10:15:44+00:00

Spruce moose

Guest


Manuka is bigger than the g mate. Check it out if you want.

2015-02-25T09:55:30+00:00

Rellum

Roar Guru


It actually dawned on me today(yes slow on the uptake) that the West Indies have not won the World Cup since 1979. Given how dominate they were in the 70's, 80's and early 90's it is staggering to realise that. When I look back though, they were not as dominate in the one day game as Test cricket.

2015-02-25T06:29:23+00:00

Prosenjit majumdar

Guest


Zimbabwe i think has the worst bowling attack among these 14 teams..conceded 285 even against uae! Fielding has gone down too.

2015-02-25T06:12:00+00:00

Lano

Roar Guru


the quality of the attack is really not the driving factor in scoring 200. Five 200s out of 3612 ODI is 0.13%, a rarity speaking more about batting quality than indifferent bowling.

2015-02-25T05:57:46+00:00

raz

Guest


Your are making it sound as if he hit 16 sixes on Mcg,its canberra .With these big bats of today even the tiny rahane was hitting sixes for fun against steyn and co. and mind you at Mcg too.

AUTHOR

2015-02-25T05:53:05+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


I'll give you this one Spruce: Of the 50 highest ODI scores made batting first, only two teams lost the game - Australia, both times! Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?batting_fielding_first=1;class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=team_score;runsmin2=350;runsval2=runs;template=results;type=team;view=innings

AUTHOR

2015-02-25T05:42:00+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Pretty much..

AUTHOR

2015-02-25T05:40:52+00:00

Brett McKay

Expert


Ah no, that's just not true at all, Spruce. Of the 73 times Australia has made more than 300 batting first in ODIs, they've lost SEVEN times (and with one NR). Australia did lose the 434 game, yes, but they've still only lost 4 of their top 17 scores batting first.. Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?batting_fielding_first=1;class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=team_score;runsmin1=300;runsval1=runs;team=2;template=results;type=team;view=innings

2015-02-25T05:37:35+00:00

spruce moose

Guest


Interesting Geoff that you mentioned only Australian games in your list. Cricketing fans (its a sport played by non Australians too) will remember Gayle's innings for a long time, in the same way cricketing fans will remember AB De Villiers innings or Sachin's 98 against Pakistan in 2003, or Rohit's 264 in the same way we remember great test knocks as well. I mean, people still talk about John Davidson's 100 against the West Indies. A Canada knock!

2015-02-25T05:32:39+00:00

Ryan O'Connell

Expert


So, it didn't start as a great innings, but ended up one? That's the crux of it?

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar