Contextually speaking..

Graham Gooch's 154: the greatest Test innings ever according to many

Nearly every sporting achievement is measured based on the context. What is the context after all and why is it so paramount? What does it involve and who decides the parameters? Greatness, after all separates the extraordinary from the ordinary, and can be bestowed only to the deserving. What makes a performance special and what makes the circumstances demanding? Majority of these context-related questions are typically raised in a conversation over a drink or two. While the discussions rarely end with a unanimous choice, they do provide a keen insight into the sports fan's mind.

Sample this discussion in a pub between two cricket buffs A and B. One may ask why cricket? Well...after all it is Test cricket and discussions on the topic hardly require a particular time or place..

A: Well, it's been a long time. How have you been? Am fairly sure you have been following all the action lately.

B: Yeah, it has been a while. Of course, I have been following all the matches. Who would miss the cricket after all?

After a couple of usual questions inquiring about trivial stuff such as career and the job, the topic inevitably shifts to the much more serious analysis of Test cricket..

A: Well, After taking a look at the stupid XI that the ICC put up, I wonder if the people who voted ever watched or read about cricket

B: You're not alone. It's a bloody disgrace not to have Sobers and Richards in a team. Sobers for me goes into any XI even ahead of Bradman..

A: I have to agree but it would be even more interesting to see a top 10 innings list. I would imagine it being populated by Tendulkar and Sehwag efforts considering what people exposed to. However, what would be your picks?

B: Read about many and watched quite a few too. But Laxman's 281 for me stands out. An outstanding bowling attack led by two of the greatest ever in Mcgrath and Warne. 274 runs behind and following on. Can it really get better? Add to it the impact he made on the match and series itself. Simply the best..

A: Interesting choice. But I would perhaps rate Gooch's 154 at Headingley slightly higher. Ok, England had a 25-run lead going into the second innings but no other player even crossed 20 while Gooch batted throughout the innings against Marshall, Ambrose, Patterson and Walsh. That beats the Autralian attack for me which at least had a couple of weaker bowlers in Kasprowicz and Mark Waugh.

B: Dude, you must be kidding me. Laxman started when India were 222 adrift and took them to a score of 608 i.e. 334 ahead and effectively sealed the Test. Look at the context and impact.

A: Righto. But he had Ganguly for support first. Ganguly made a crucial 48 which is easily forgotten and then Dravid, who made a brilliant 180 which is overshadowed by Laxman's effort. What did Gooch have anyway? He made 154 out of 252 and carried his bat through the innings. Add to it the fact that the pitch was fairly tough and that he was up against the finest pace attack going around. And yeah, helped England win a Test at home against West Indies after 22 goddamn years...

B: If you are looking at the quality of the attack, then Kim Hughes' effort in Melbourne is probably an even better one. He came in at 8 for 3 and soon 26 for 4 and faced Roberts, Holding, Croft and Garner. Simply superb 100 out of 198.

A: Yeah, the Hughes effort was exceptional. But we have to consider the fact that Lillee's burst at the end of the day which left West Indies at 10/4 was the turning point and what's more, he nailed Viv Richards.

B: Don't drag the bowlers in now. In that case, all Tests are won by bowlers. Harbhajan Singh had to win it for India and so did the England bowlers after Gooch's effort. Why, even Bob Willis' 8 for 43 is more responsible than Ian Botham's 149.

A: Nonsense. Botham gave England a chance in a game where they had no hope. Dilley and Old played a minor role, but Botham transformed the mood of the series.

B: Lara's 213 and 153? Surely, they figure right up there. Imagine the plight the West Indians were in. 51 all out in Trinidad and 34/4 in Jamaica chasing 256. He responds with the 213 and in Barbados, he steers them to a target of 308 from 78/3. Mcgrath, Gillespie, Warne and Macgill. These are two of the best knocks man.

A: Warne was not as potent man and was coming back from the surgery. That was the case in 1998 in Chennai too when Tendulkar took to him. And yeah, the attack had no Mcgrath and featured Gavin Robertson. How pathetic is that? What about Tendulkar's special in Chennai in 1999? Akram and Saqlain were brilliant and Tendulkar nearly took them home from a hopeless 82/5.

B: Mark the words nearly. He didn't help them cross the line that's all. You are remembered not for aiming at the target but for hitting it. Did not win it simple. Can't quite be up there because of that.

A: That's stupidity. So all top efforts in losses can't be on top you mean? Gavaskar's stunning 96 on a bloody hard Bangalore track where Tauseef and Qasim bowled nearly 90% of the overs. Tendulkar's 169 in Cape Town after India fell to 58/5. Lara's efforts in Sri Lanka. Come on, you must rethink.

B: No man. There is no need to rethink. The best knocks in history are always ones that result in wins. Greenidge's 214 made a mockery of England's target at Lord's, Gavaskar's 221 is an exception because it came so close to a win.

A: It was a draw. Don't contradict yourself. What about Bradman's 270 on a spiteful MCG pitch. 2-0 down in the series and turning it around completely.

B: Hold your horses man. Australia had made 200 and kept England down to 72. Bradman astutely sent the tail enders first and when the pitch got better, Fingleton joined him at 98 for 5 in a 346-run stand. It's not the score but the quality of support you have to look at here.

A: All said and done, the 270 turned the series around and he followed it up with 169 and 212 to win the series 3-2. Amazing really!

B: I'll make one exception though. Stan McCabe's 187 against Larwood and Voce is top class even though its a loss. Doing it against Bodyline. Stuff of legend man.

A: Contradicting yourself. Bradman was back in the next Test and made a duck and hundred leading Australia to a win. So perhaps, that is the better effort. Although Bradman himself says Stan was better.

B: Ponting's fourth innings classic at Old Trafford. He did it all alone for Australia.

A: If Mcgrath and Lee had not held out for four overs, Ponting's effort would have been in vain. What a thin line? Dravid's 233?

B: Agreed that India were up against it trailing by 556. But an Aussie attack without Mcgrath and Warne. Instead Brad Williams. It's a good knock not a great one. Dravid averaged just 15.5 in 1999 when both the greats were there. So you see, there is a difference. I think Steve Waugh's 200 was better.

A: He had Mark Waugh for support. I personally think the West Indian attack in that series was not as good as 1993 when Ambrose blew Australia away.

B: Gavaskar's 236 maybe?

A: Dead rubber. 3-0 down and although it was 0/2, I would rather think his 94-ball century in Delhi was better. Sobers' 254 man. Sadly not considered an official Test. Not often would Bradman call a knock the finest in Australia.

B: Yeah. Would have to agree. Lillee at his searing best and on a pair, the knock is right up there man. Fredericks 169 for its ferocity i suppose. And how about Miandad's century in Jamaica. Stunner!

A: Definitely one of his best knocks. The closest any team came to beating West Indies in the Caribbean. Richard's 109 in Delhi also great. Four down chasing nearly 280. Good effort although not a great attack.

B: So can we come to a conclusion man. Seems like we have evaluated the context and impact for many knocks now.

A: Laxman, Gooch, Hughes, Lara, Botham the top five in order for me i guess.

B: I'd put Gooch, Lara, Hughes, Laxman and perhaps Bradman..

A: Hmmm.. not quite the list according to me.

B: Nor is yours. Needs a relook..

A: Perhaps, next time, we can discuss in detail.

B: Wasn't this good enough.. Guess we rope in few more guys next time..Great fun it was though. Adios..

A: Yup. I just recalled. Forgot Gilly's 149 in Hobart. But not quite top tenner maybe.