Re: The 2011 Trivia Thread

[Allan D]

Grace?

He only managed three decades, I think. Along with the likes of Bob Simpson, Javed Miandad, Allan Border, Steve Waugh, and Sanath Jayasuriya.

Grace appeared in only 2 decades in Tests - 1880-99 although his fc career from 1864-1908 stretched across 5. Grace captained England in the 1st Test of the 1899 Ashes series at Trent Bridge - his first Test appearance since the previous Australian series in England three years earlier. When it came to picking the side for the following Lord's Test Grace, who was also a selector, walked out of the meeting when informed that Archie MacLaren, who had been injured and not played at Nottingham, was available for selection as he did not think MacLaren would play without being captain although MacLaren later said he would have been quite happy to play under Grace.

Consequently Grace, who was a few weeks short of his 51st birthday, never appeared in Tests again. At the end of that season he was removed from the Gloucestershire captaincy in favour of Gilbert Jessop resulting in Grace's formation of London County based at Crystal Palace. What turned out to be Grace's final Test appearance also saw not only the debut of Wilfred Rhodes who links the eras of Grace and Bradman but also the debut of Trent Bridge as a Test ground.

[WideWally]

Compton?

[Allan D]

Spot on as usual, Wal. DCS, who made his debut as a 19yo in the Oval Test against the Kiwis in August 1937, made his last appearance against the Saffies at Port Elizabeth in March 1957.

[Bradman]

There's no such thing as cheating when it comes to answering trivia.

Well that's news to me after your brain snap last year.

[skully]

Brain snap?? I merely said you were cutting and pasting from a particular source rather than doing the research (search and destroy) like JGK, MB and others. If you find cutting and pasting exciting and challenging, knock yourself out.

[JGK]

Enough of this bickering... how about a question?

[skully]

See what I can do.

[skully]

In the recent 1st Test NZ v Pak, the 2 sides 1st innings were only 92 runs different (NZ 275 v Pak 367) yet the wacky Paksters went on to win by 10 wickets. Can you name the 3 instances in Tests where a side made a 1st innings total of less than 50 runs greater than the opposition yet went on to win by 10 wickets?

[JGK]

Harmi's 7/12 match?

[JGK]

Poms at Ebgbaston in 1909 where Blythe and Hirst smashed us.

[Paul Keating]

Close but no cigar

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63682.html

[skully]

Harmi's 7/12 match?

Aye.

Poms at Ebgbaston in 1909 where Blythe and Hirst smashed us.

Aye.

Winning by 10 wickets after leading by less than 50 on the 1st innings:
Lead
28 WI (311 & 47) v Eng (339 & 20-0) Kingston 2003-04
?
47 Aus (74 & 151) v Eng (121 & 105-0) Birmingham 1909

[skully]

Close but no cigar

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63682.html

Great knock by SRW in Aus 1st innings but.

[JGK]

Aye - it was Pidge's first real bagful as well I think.

[embee]

Does leading by less than 50 include trailing by 42?

Oz vs Poms at the Gabba in 1990/91

[horace]

Brain snap?? I merely said you were cutting and pasting from a particular source rather than doing the research (search and destroy) like JGK, MB and others. If you find cutting and pasting exciting and challenging, knock yourself out.

phurt at you all.. my view is that no aids other than memory should be all

[JGK]

Depends on the question. A lot of skully's questions are set on the basis of being tricky to research (at least I find it that way and enjoy the challenge).

The brothers on different teams question was a basic one which most would have known the answer to off the top of their heads anyway.

[skully]

Does leading by less than 50 include trailing by 42?

Oz vs Poms at the Gabba in 1990/91

Good point, MB. I was looking at the scorecard from that match last night and wondered if any team had achieved the feat that Aus did. I had remembered the game slightly wrong in that I thought Aus had a small lead. On checking, I found that they trailed by 42 on 1st innings yet still won by 10 wickets. That match is not on my list as the question specifically refers to leading on the first innings and winning by 10 wickets. I guess you could correctly argue that trailing by 42 is leading by less than 50.

Winning by 10 wickets after leading by less than 50 on the 1st innings:
Lead
28 WI (311 & 47) v Eng (339 & 20-0) Kingston 2003-04
?
47 Aus (74 & 151) v Eng (121 & 105-0) Birmingham 190

[JGK]

Skully is stuffing up a triv question shock.

[JGK]

Windies v Zimboks in 2000

[JGK]

Australia beat the Windies in Georgetown in 1973 by 10 wickets after trailing on the first dig.

Jeff Hammond the destroyer FFS.

[skully]

Skully is stuffing up a triv question shock.

Hehehe, bite me, ya cross-dressing nancy boy.

Windies v Zimboks in 2000

Indeed.

Winning by 10 wickets after leading by less than 50 on the 1st innings:
Lead
28 WI (311 & 47) v Eng (339 & 20-0) Kingston 2003-04
31 Zim (308 & 102) v WI (339 & 75-0) Kingston 1999-00
47 Aus (74 & 151) v Eng (121 & 105-0) Birmingham 190

Australia beat the Windies in Georgetown in 1973 by 10 wickets after trailing on the first dig.

Jeff Hammond the destroyer FFS.

Keep digging. See if you can find any more.

[skully]

Here's another one.

Snoozer uber-sh!t-bat Chris Coldplay Martin recently reached his 100th Test run in his...wait for it...87th Test innings!!! Can you name the other 8 player to take more than 30 Test innings to reach the 100 run "milestone"?

[JGK]

Pidge

[Fred Nerk]

Jim Higgs - if he ever got there

[Sponsored content]