Bell falls for 199

What a sad way for Ian Bell to go, caught and bowled by Paul Harris for 199. When the disappointment has gone I hope he looks back on this innings with pride and uses it for inspiration to develop into the game-changer that he can be, rather than the follower he has tended to be.

David Lloyd has been chirping before and after the dismissal that no one has been out for 199, but there have actually been six occasions when a batsman has been out one shy of a double ton. Mudassar Nazar was the first, in 1984, and was followed by Mohammad Azharuddin, Matthew Elliott, Sanath Jayasuriya, Steve Waugh and Younus Khan. Andy Flower was once not out on 199.

I said in an earlier post that Bell needed to make a lot more than just 100 and he has done that. Ultimately the difference between 199 and 200 is little different to that between 189 and 190.  After all, Rob Key made a double hundred for England at Lord's and where is he now? What matters most is that he stayed in and, with superb batting support from the increasingly impressive Stuart Broad, pushed England on towards 600. And by getting out he has allowed Michael Vaughan to declare and given England the chance of a wicket or two before the close.

Incidentally, what a terrible decision by Graeme Smith to insert England. By making 593 for eight, England have achieved the tenth highest total by a side batting first after losing the toss. Some way behind the worst decision of all, when Zimbabwe won the toss and then spectated as Australia made 735 at Perth.

Comments

[The Pav]

Deat Tim,

Dream on old boy

[Straight Point]

lloyd was referring to english batsmen...

that apart...i will wait for this series to see how bells rings for bell...how he takes his game forward from game follower to game breaker...coz not long ago collingwood made double hundred that too against oz and look where he is now...

bt for now...well played bell...

but strangely nobody is talking about this lifeless pitch...what happened to lords??

[SanjayN]

Given that all of those 199 occurences are in the last 20 odd years, you have to wonder about David Lloyd. Of course he'll claim that he was referring to no English batsman having suffered the fate before Bell.

The Coventry lad has now hit a double and a 199 within days, that does say something about his mental strength. For Warwks, he was also looking good in the T20 as an opener. Like another former (and far better) Warwks and England player, Dennis Amiss, I think Bell will go thru his career never having the media and fans on his side.

I still find it hard to believe that Amiss played only 50 Tests and he was dropped not long after he scored an epic double ton against an absolutely frightening Windies attack at the Oval in '76.

And then you have the likes of Mark Butcher who played about 50 Tests too many IMO. Here's a man who lived off a century in a dead rubber game and who would have played more than a 100 Tests had Pieterson not qualified for England.

Some guys have all the luck.

[Tim]

Well played Bell. Flintoff for Colly and Prior (reluctantly) for Ambrose: then, add Jones for Anderson and we could have our Ashes-winning side.

http://www.third-umpire.blogspot.com/