I dont beleive in the concept of "match-winning" innings because it is hard to justify that only 1 person played an innings that won the match....Consider a game where a team won by 1 run and in that team someone made 2, theoretically that person played a "match-winning" innings because had that person not made 2 then the other team would have won..Another example, in our world record chase against AUS, who played the "match-winning" innings? Srawan, Chanderpaul, Banks or Drakes or is it a case where all 4 played important knocks that helped the team win???

I beleive that a game can be won with more than one person playing a "match-winning"
. Just listening to some people on here they beleive that unless you make a century oor remain not-out you did not play a "match-winning" innings. The concept of "game-winning goal" to a lesser extent is also flawed but lets stick to the cricket.

In reply to Samwells

The term refers to 4th innings batting performances when the innings significantly dictate the outcome, which is a win.

In reply to Samwells let me help you click here

In reply to thefan can there be more than one "match-winning" innings in the run chase?

In reply to Samwells

Leh mi put it this way, if yuh caan bat fi a minimum 30 overs, you're not a contender.

In reply to Samwells

Don't rely on thefan too much. For him test matches happen only in the 4th innings and the rest being practice.

In reply to Samwells

yes there can. shiv and sars in the record chase are perfect examples

In reply to Chrissy So a team chasing 400, Lara beat off 100 in 25 overs and get out and Adams make 48 and bat for 40 overs...Adams played the "match-winning" innings????

Try and put is anada way cause u just post tripe

In reply to thefan did Banks and Drakes play "match-winning" knowcks in that game as well??

In reply to Chrissy

In reply to Samwells

if u aint not out u did not get it done.........

In reply to Oval291

You een serious. 213 at Sabina - dat was di match.

In reply to Chrissy and Oval you see why I say I say its not staright forward??

In reply to Chrissy

Lara did not get it done in that match

In reply to thefan How many people can play "match-winning innings" in an inning?

In reply to Chrissy

he set up the match with his knock in the 1st inns.....different concept

In reply to OVAL291

Arrite I concede dat one.

Clueless one - he did not have to bat in di second innings.

In reply to Samwells

Depends on the score being chased. If its a big score (400+) then the matchwinning innings would have to be centuries. Classic example is Shiv and Sars in the 418 chase. Both scored hundreds and contributed more than 50% of total runs chased. Those are matchwinning innings. The reality is that scoring a hundred in the 4th innings of any test match is a significant feat which increases in value by each of these:

1. when its a matchwinning or matchsaving scenario
2. when its against a good or great bowling team
3. when it is on a difficult pitch
4. when its away from home
5. when its to win a series
6. when it consumes a higher % of team score

Considering those factors, let's compare Lara's 153* to Smith's 154*. Both were equal on 1, Lara ahead on 2, equal on 3, Smith ahead on 4, Smith ahead on 5 and Smith ahead on 6.

In reply to thefan
7. Percentage of runs scored with tail

In reply to thefan So Banks and Drakes did not play match winning innings???

In reply to thefan what if you batting in the 3rd innings and you team won by 1 run..how many people can play match winning innings from that team? cause really if a man make 2 he really played a match-winning innings as his innings helped his team win the match

In reply to Samwells

You are trivializing it, bro.

In reply to Surya how am I doing that??? I am stating a fact

In reply to Samwells

Look if u out b4 the end it nuh match winning knock....Vassie and Banks played the match winning knocks in the run to 418....Shiv and Chanders contributed but punked out in the end.........

In reply to thefan

In reply to Trinidave and Oval thats y I stay away from saying people playing "match-winning" innings cause it too subjective