Brian Lara 130 vs Pakistan 2005 Barbados

Brian Lara hits a scintillating century at Kensington Oval for the second time in 2005.

He was already scorching along at better than a run-a-ball at lunch, but in the afternoon session he really cut loose. He peppered the boundary all round the ground and by the time he fell, shortly before tea, he had faced just 120 balls.

He made a calculated attack on the Pakistani spinners - Danish Kaneria and Shahid Afridi - to such an extent that Kaneria was removed from the attack after eight expensive over as Younis Khan, Pakistan's stand-in captain, tried to restrain Lara.

The seamers were not exempt from the full force of Lara's bat, either, as he brought out his full array of drives, cuts and pulls. Anything seemed possible until he was bowled through the gate by Kaneria - after the legpsinner was bravely brought back into bowl - as Lara aimed another expansive drive through the covers. Kaneria deserves some plaudits for holding his nerve, a lesser bowler would have crumbled under such a powerful onslaught.

(Cricinfo)

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• Brian
• Lara
• WIndies

[ashokatibrewal]

from the start i said to club donald and steyn bevause it will be universally accepted that they are of similar level. if lara did not played steyn? so what? his stats against donald should be considered representative. he might have done better against steyn or worse but evidence shows his average. and because both are comparable taking record just against donald if you have not played steyn is fair.

[shamsmi]

@ashokatibrewal No they can't be classified as similar bowlers since they are different. While comparing the two it is fair to restrict comparison to the same bowlers they faced. This is the closest we can get since they can never be compared identically as they played in different batting units, pitches, bowler's form, personal form, etc.

[ashokatibrewal]

i have lots of youtube accounts because many lara fans block me. even though i have never used a single abusive word or a single wrong fact.

[shamsmi]

@ashokatibrewal Don't worry, neither have I used any abusive words against any user/player. As long as your language remains civil you won't be blocked :P

[ashokatibrewal]

you include a pollock who was not even fast medium. he was just a slow bowler when lara feasted on him. and everyone knows lara feasts on medium pacers. why not just consider donald or steyn ??? you repeat your points. it was never a question od donald only so there is no question of bringing in steyn. it was i who started these arguments and it was from the start steyn and donald.

and averages are very important but so are hundreds. both matter on seperate levels.

[shamsmi]

@ashokatibrewal Please use the reply button as it is otherwise hard to keep trac on the thread for external users who read it and can justify individual claims. Statistically Donald, Steyn, Pollock and Nitni are amongst South Africa's best bowlers. Again, pace alone is not enough. Else McGrath, Pollock,Ambrose and Walsh who lost their pace in later years wold not be just as successful if not more. I would venture to say runs per inns is more important that hundreds scored.

[hypersonicdragon]

MCGRATH said at the end of his career that Lara was Harder to bowl at than Sachin. MURALI said that Lara was the best he ever bowl to and he dominated him like no other ,when murali was at his lethal best. Shane Warne had to be dropped in 1999 series to prevent Lara from ripping him to Shreds & warne was in top form!! Lara has a higher strike rate,Lara test hundreds have Weight to them,as well as DOMINATING Flamboyance under Career-Ending Pressure,time& time again!!

[Lawlz0rz]

Some absolutely godlike strokes played right there.

[shamsmi]

@tony5486zo54l I think you now realize that Lara had a better record against SA - Donald or not. And you bring Steyn into the picture despite Lara not having played against him. You are back to tooting the hundreds tune as you've run out of arguments. Btw, just curious why the need to create a new account to post comments another another username?

[tony5486zo54l]

and the heartless fact remains. Lara failed to bat authoratively enough against a top class sa attack consisting donald or steyn to notch up a single hundred. Tendulkar made 6. Lara 0.

[tony5486zo54l]

ngam may have been almost as fast as hayward certainly not faster than him. Secondly lara or tenulkar never played him. I said nel was leading the attack cause he was the best then.pollock was not even fast medium by then. Ntini was always an average bowler and has fed on being in a transation period and so to gobble wickets. Hayward may not have long but he was very good in the time. Ur averages of lara gets pumped up because of a slow medium pabed(by then)allrounder pollock.