April 23, 2012

Tales from the top of the table

The stories behind the highest individual scores in Tests
61

Charles Bannerman, 165*
Very neatly, Australia's Bannerman made a big score in the very first Test of all - in Melbourne in March 1877 - to ensure a ringing start to this list. He faced the first ball in Test cricket (from England's Alfred Shaw), scored the first run from the second ball, and made his way to 165 before retiring hurt with an injured hand. Australia were all out for 245 not long after his departure: remarkably, Bannerman's share of the innings total (67.34%), remains a Test record to this day. John Arlott wrote of Bannerman, who was born in Kent: "Although he hit the ball extremely hard he had the contemporary reputation that he rarely made an uppish hit."

Billy Murdoch, 211
Bannerman's record for the highest Test score lasted for more than seven years, until the Oval Test of 1884, when it was broken by Australia's captain, Murdoch, an imposing man with an even more imposing moustache. Murdoch had threatened Bannerman's mark with 153 not out at The Oval in 1880, and made no mistake back there four years later. His 211 - Test cricket's first double-century - was a careful innings, lasting more than seven hours, in which he hit 24 fours. "He was essentially an off-side player, his cut and drive being equally fine," said Wisden of Murdoch's general approach, adding: "His style [left] no loophole for criticism."

Tip Foster, 287
You can't do much better than break the world record in your first match, and that's what Reginald "Tip" Foster of Worcestershire did, hammering 287 on his Test debut for England in Sydney in 1903-04. "The latter part of his innings was described on all hands as something never surpassed," enthused Wisden. Foster never touched such heights again - his highest score in seven further Tests was 51 - but he held the individual Test record for more than 26 years.

Andy Sandham, 325
Probably the least-heralded name on this list, Sandham of Surrey and England compiled Test cricket's first triple-century, in a timeless match against West Indies in Kingston in April 1930. And he did it in borrowed boots that made his feet sore: he was apparently encouraged by the umpire (the Englishman Joe Hardstaff) to keep going. Sandham, who was almost 40, carried on past 300, and ended the second day with 309 not out. He felt better on the third morning but was soon out for 325, after batting for ten hours in all. Strange as it may seem, Sandham never played another Test - and his record lasted little more than three months.

Don Bradman, 334
His name just had to appear on this list: Bradman, the greatest batsman cricket has ever seen, erased Sandham's name from the record books with a superb 334 in the third Ashes Test of 1930, at Headingley in July. The Don came to the crease in the second over, after the early loss of Archie Jackson. According to Percy Fender, "Bradman took command at once, and never lost it all day." He reached his hundred before lunch - only the third such instance in Test history (there has been only one since on the first day) - and had rolled remorselessly to 309 by the close. Bradman was finally out early the following day, having batted for 383 minutes and hit 46 fours.

Wally Hammond, 336*
Destined for much of his career to be slightly less great than Bradman, England's Hammond took out his frustrations on a callow New Zealand side after the 1932-33 Bodyline tour. He slammed ten sixes, the Test record at the time, and 34 fours in hurtling to 336 not out in 318 minutes, in what was only a three-day game (rain ruined the final day, so it was drawn). Hammond had warmed up with 227 in the first Test, in Christchurch, and finished the series with the handy average of 563.00.

Len Hutton, 364
Back in 1938 there was a general feeling that only Ashes matches really counted as Tests, so there was more fuss when Yorkshire's Hutton passed Bradman's 334 in the final Test at The Oval than when he actually broke his captain Hammond's record of 336. This was a monumental innings in what was another timeless Test: Hutton batted for almost 13 and a half hours, and collected 35 fours from 847 balls. Eddie Paynter - who was out for a duck - described his team-mate's concentration as "fanatical". The Oval pitch was so good and true that Bradman might have reclaimed the record a few days later... but he wasn't able to bat, having broken his ankle in a foothold during a rare bowl. It's said that Hammond only declared (at 903 for 7) when he was assured that Bradman couldn't go in.

Garry Sobers, 365*
Hutton's record stood for nearly 20 years before the great West Indian left-hander Sobers broke it, extending his overdue maiden century into an innings of 365 not out. Pakistan were short of bowling options - Mahmood Hussain broke down with a thigh injury in the first over, and slow left-armer Nasim-ul-Ghani broke his thumb early in the match. Captain AH Kardar had gone into the game with a broken finger, so he was soon left with two fit bowlers (although he did manage to send down 37 overs himself): Fazal Mahmood, who finished with 2 for 247 from 85.2 overs, and Khan Mohammad, who ended up with 0 for 259, still a record for a wicketless innings in a Test. Sobers, 21, took full advantage, gliding to 365 in 614 minutes, with 38 fours. West Indies declared at 790 for 3, and not surprisingly won by an innings. "Pandemonium broke out," announced the Jamaica Gleaner newspaper, when Sobers broke Hutton's record.

Brian Lara, 375
Sobers was there when his record was broken, 36 years later, by another West Indian left-hander. Brian Lara, just short of his 25th birthday, carved England to shreds in Antigua, batting for 766 minutes and hitting no fewer than 45 fours. About the nearest he came to a dismissal was when he almost trod on his stumps in collecting the runs that took him past Sobers' mark - and triggered a parade (and a raised-bat salute) on the ground. "It had to go someday," said Sobers sportingly, "and who better to do it than this guy? No one can bat like him. He does not play with his pad, he plays with his bat."

Matthew Hayden, 380
Big Matt Hayden made a habit of bullying opposing attacks, and few were riper for that than the overmatched Zimbabweans who arrived in Australia late in 2003. In the first Test, in Perth in October, Hayden slammed 380, overshadowing Adam Gilchrist's century in 84 balls on the second day. Hayden blitzed 38 fours and 11 sixes from 437 balls: "At his most destructive, during the 35 minutes and 32 balls it took him to speed from 100 to 150, he was perfectly still in his stance but swift and brutal when he wielded his bat," pronounced Wisden. Zimbabwe succumbed to their expected innings defeat, and Hayden had the record... for six months.

Brian Lara, 400*
The only man to reclaim this record, Lara gave a repeat performance against the same team (England) at the same ground (Antigua) as his 375 ten years previously. The circumstances were different, though: this time West Indies had lost the first three Tests of the series and were staring at an embarrassing whitewash. The chances of that, though, receded far into the distance as, on another supreme St John's batting surface ("the best road in Antigua," according to some), Lara kept going. "He was ridiculously good," wrote Colin Bateman in the Express. But, like the 375, even Test cricket's first quadruple-century couldn't bring victory: the pitch was just too good, and England escaped with a draw. The only man who fielded through both Lara's record innings was Graham Thorpe (while Darrell Hair umpired both games).

Steven Lynch is the editor of the Wisden Guide to International Cricket 2012.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • JG2704 on April 26, 2012, 17:58 GMT

    @ PROSYNINC on (April 26 2012, 15:30 PM GMT) - maybe do that on a related thread

  • PROSYNINC on April 26, 2012, 15:30 GMT

    i think what need to be done is to set up a system to resolve the who is the greatest by averaging out all batters to a hundred test. for example if sachin play 100 test he would only score 8151 runs with 27 hundreds avg would remain the same. with this he looks ordinary. i think the current schedule allows for players to play more test than in the old days. for example look at Micheal clarke he has played 80 test to date and he is a relative new comer to the game. but i believe that when graham smith is finished playing he would have played more test, have the most hundred and most runs based on his age. but to conclude sachin is a great player but he is just another one of many. he is not the greatest.

  • JG2704 on April 26, 2012, 14:35 GMT

    @ chapathishot on (April 26 2012, 12:20 PM GMT) Boycott was once dropped I believe after scoring big because he was too slow.I think the it's self explanitory why it is the faster scorers who are at the top. Basically for the slower scorers to score 3-400 they'd also need the other batsmen to stay with them for so much longer

  • chapathishot on April 26, 2012, 12:20 GMT

    If you look at the scores seriously ,it is the really aggressive batsmen ,Like Shewag,Lara,Bradman,Hayden etc have made more 300s than players who are more technically perfect like Sachin,Dravid,Boycott etc.I think carefree attitude with skills will only give big scores than cautious approach ,However if we take the mean deviation (Std deviation) players like sachin ,Kallis (took long time to score even 200)dravid and boycotts will score higher than most of the above except Don that is why he is number one all the time

  • YorkshirePudding on April 26, 2012, 6:50 GMT

    A nice article it good to see how the highest score record has been moved, and it seems that the records tend to fall in clusters of scores, 3 records in the 1930's, and the same happened again in between 1994/5 and 2004/5. I dont think that anyone of the current batsmen will break Lara's record unless they get a flat pitch.....you got to love the Sachin Fan-boys putting in a mention for thier man, especially the one asking about how many average more than SRT, well, theres quite a few (qual 30+ innings), Bradman, Pollack, Headley, Sutcliffe, Paynter, Barrington, Weekes, Hammond, Sobers, Hobbs, Kallis, Walcott, and Hutton, who average more than SRT.

  • JG2704 on April 25, 2012, 11:27 GMT

    @anantbio on (April 23 2012, 12:09 PM GMT) You're probably correct , if you give him about 20-30 inns to do so I'm sure he would

  • karthik_raja on April 25, 2012, 8:52 GMT

    @Shan156. Yep Murali said so. Bt, ask Warne. He will give another name. Point is. Lara and Sachin r gems of games. Instead of pushing other down, why cant v hail them both. Indeed they played like "One Man Team" for most of their career.

  • Philter_Kaapi on April 25, 2012, 6:21 GMT

    Actually Sachin was brought in by the first guy just as a joke..its the rest who took it quite seriously :P

  • SouthPaw on April 25, 2012, 2:03 GMT

    all you Sachin fans: This article is called "Top of the Table" and let me explain this to you because going by your comments, you obviously don't understand what it means! This is a list of people who have scored the highest individual score progressively over the years, not a list of "Top batsmen of all Times" or some such thing. So, now go figure if you still want Sachin in it :)

  • Keepa-batsman on April 25, 2012, 1:08 GMT

    sachins average of 55 is exceptional especially as he has played so many test. but he has played 111 of his tests on the pitches that he knows best-sub continent roads. for the zillionth time this is the progressive list of high scores thus explaining why he is not on the list, unless his highest score of 248* against BANGLADESH was made before 1902 then he can't be on the list.

  • JG2704 on April 26, 2012, 17:58 GMT

    @ PROSYNINC on (April 26 2012, 15:30 PM GMT) - maybe do that on a related thread

  • PROSYNINC on April 26, 2012, 15:30 GMT

    i think what need to be done is to set up a system to resolve the who is the greatest by averaging out all batters to a hundred test. for example if sachin play 100 test he would only score 8151 runs with 27 hundreds avg would remain the same. with this he looks ordinary. i think the current schedule allows for players to play more test than in the old days. for example look at Micheal clarke he has played 80 test to date and he is a relative new comer to the game. but i believe that when graham smith is finished playing he would have played more test, have the most hundred and most runs based on his age. but to conclude sachin is a great player but he is just another one of many. he is not the greatest.

  • JG2704 on April 26, 2012, 14:35 GMT

    @ chapathishot on (April 26 2012, 12:20 PM GMT) Boycott was once dropped I believe after scoring big because he was too slow.I think the it's self explanitory why it is the faster scorers who are at the top. Basically for the slower scorers to score 3-400 they'd also need the other batsmen to stay with them for so much longer

  • chapathishot on April 26, 2012, 12:20 GMT

    If you look at the scores seriously ,it is the really aggressive batsmen ,Like Shewag,Lara,Bradman,Hayden etc have made more 300s than players who are more technically perfect like Sachin,Dravid,Boycott etc.I think carefree attitude with skills will only give big scores than cautious approach ,However if we take the mean deviation (Std deviation) players like sachin ,Kallis (took long time to score even 200)dravid and boycotts will score higher than most of the above except Don that is why he is number one all the time

  • YorkshirePudding on April 26, 2012, 6:50 GMT

    A nice article it good to see how the highest score record has been moved, and it seems that the records tend to fall in clusters of scores, 3 records in the 1930's, and the same happened again in between 1994/5 and 2004/5. I dont think that anyone of the current batsmen will break Lara's record unless they get a flat pitch.....you got to love the Sachin Fan-boys putting in a mention for thier man, especially the one asking about how many average more than SRT, well, theres quite a few (qual 30+ innings), Bradman, Pollack, Headley, Sutcliffe, Paynter, Barrington, Weekes, Hammond, Sobers, Hobbs, Kallis, Walcott, and Hutton, who average more than SRT.

  • JG2704 on April 25, 2012, 11:27 GMT

    @anantbio on (April 23 2012, 12:09 PM GMT) You're probably correct , if you give him about 20-30 inns to do so I'm sure he would

  • karthik_raja on April 25, 2012, 8:52 GMT

    @Shan156. Yep Murali said so. Bt, ask Warne. He will give another name. Point is. Lara and Sachin r gems of games. Instead of pushing other down, why cant v hail them both. Indeed they played like "One Man Team" for most of their career.

  • Philter_Kaapi on April 25, 2012, 6:21 GMT

    Actually Sachin was brought in by the first guy just as a joke..its the rest who took it quite seriously :P

  • SouthPaw on April 25, 2012, 2:03 GMT

    all you Sachin fans: This article is called "Top of the Table" and let me explain this to you because going by your comments, you obviously don't understand what it means! This is a list of people who have scored the highest individual score progressively over the years, not a list of "Top batsmen of all Times" or some such thing. So, now go figure if you still want Sachin in it :)

  • Keepa-batsman on April 25, 2012, 1:08 GMT

    sachins average of 55 is exceptional especially as he has played so many test. but he has played 111 of his tests on the pitches that he knows best-sub continent roads. for the zillionth time this is the progressive list of high scores thus explaining why he is not on the list, unless his highest score of 248* against BANGLADESH was made before 1902 then he can't be on the list.

  • on April 24, 2012, 13:47 GMT

    Lets talk about Tendulkar. How many batsmen averages more than him. He played the most game and thats why he's got more 100's. Give ponting and Kallis the same amount of games then you would see more hundreds and that on more difficult wickets. Cricket in India might be about Tendulkar and he's a great guy that everybody likes but stop thinking he is the God of cricket because he is not. to us he is just another player who can be bowled out for a duck from a first ball he face. Even the great don bradman scored a duck in his last innings. I've checked on youtube and every article the Indian guys always want their players in it. They even want their bowlers to be the top ranked. Please guys the cricket world is not about India. Case closed.

  • Philter_Kaapi on April 24, 2012, 9:39 GMT

    hmmmm nice article!!! and since everyone is talking Sachin here, let me too :P:P

    Lara may have been more destructive, when he chose to that is, but Sachin has been more consistent and a better organized player, than Lara ever was...

    Just coz Sachin does not have a big score to his name, does not take anything away from him...He simply is the best player his generation has seen...

    And Happy B'day the GOD of CRICKET :P

  • on April 24, 2012, 9:25 GMT

    Great article, I wonder why there so many rubbish comments posted about it.

  • on April 24, 2012, 6:36 GMT

    375s, 400s and 500s just happen. It is like in a video game you trying on and on and if you are good enough you get such numbers. No big deal. For such numbers to occur pitch must be really dead and really no chance of a result. It is no wonder that such scores often are not associated with results. Yet they are great achievements and one of the reasons why Lara often gets compared to you know who :)

  • SouthPaw on April 24, 2012, 5:28 GMT

    @anantbio: Sachin might have the max number of runs in Test cricket and might have scored 100 international centuries, but he is definitely not the best batsman in the game! When you consider batsmen like Victor Trumper, Jack Hobbs, Ranjit Singhji, Everton Weekes, Garry Sobers, Don Bradman, Wally Hammond, Viv "the one and only" Richards, Brian Lara, Sunil Gavaskar, etc., then you know what a "great batsman" is made of!! In fact, I would also add Aravinda "Mad Max" de Silva to this list of great batsmen because he brought Sri Lanka to the fore-front from being minnows. Finally, if you still want Sachin on Cricinfo somewhere, why don't you go wish him "Happy Birthday"!! (today is Sachin's birthday)

  • Gone-4-Six on April 24, 2012, 2:45 GMT

    for those who don't know, the list is the progressive record holder for runs scored in an innings

  • Meety on April 24, 2012, 1:03 GMT

    @AdrianVanDenStael - yep 300 in a day, mind boggling! Funny his S/R was "only" 74, whereas Hayden's (against outclassed opposition) was nearly 90 & took around 5 sessions! They must of bowled about 120 overs that day against Bradman. These days most sides struggle for 90 overs!! Could you imagine how much the crowds would flock to Test cricket if there was 33% more cricket in the day?????

  • Puffin on April 23, 2012, 23:12 GMT

    go on, give us the list of best bowling performances too. Perhaps Tendulkar might get a mention somehow.

  • teo. on April 23, 2012, 21:34 GMT

    hahaha... strange how the Indian fans try to make every single article and argument, about Tendulkar.. We don't see fans from other countries behave in such a manner. Lets try and stick to the point of the article please... and avoid silly comments like #anantbio. Nice interesting article, especially about the first few batsmen to achieve the landmark!!! To have the bar set at 165* in the very FIRST test of all must have been pretty tough on those playing at the time!! haha

  • sparth on April 23, 2012, 20:37 GMT

    Surprised no Indians are on this list

  • teo. on April 23, 2012, 20:24 GMT

    @Pranath Pussella... It's because the author is only looking at the scores that became the world's highest score at that time. Mahela's 374 did not become the highest score, when he made it.

  • segga-express on April 23, 2012, 20:24 GMT

    If you take out all the innings where Lara got out his batting average was actually non-existent!!!!

  • JG2704 on April 23, 2012, 20:14 GMT

    lol@cloudmess - good sense of humour. Quite amazing , some of the other comms esp the guy obsessively trying to downgrade Lara. Lara is also the only man to score 500 in domestic English cricket and had a cricket bat named after him. When you consider some of the top bowlers like Mcgrath , Warne , Wasim, Waqar , Murali , Pollock , Donald etc and the fact that for much of his career WI were in decline - I'd say the guy is a modern legend. Just to bat (and keep concentration) for long enough to score these runs is an achievement in itself.Also regardless of pitch conditions the 375 he scored was against an attack which included Caddick and Gus Fraser and the 400 n/o he scored was against an attck consisting of Harmisson,Hoggard,Jones,Flintoff and Batty - with the 4 pacemen being thee 4 pacemen Eng used to reclaim the Ashes in 2005.

  • on April 23, 2012, 20:10 GMT

    @Pranath Pusella: Perhaps because Jayawardena's innings didn't set the Test record at the time.

  • hhillbumper on April 23, 2012, 20:00 GMT

    can we do a top 10 of articles not involving tendulkar yet he still gets mentioned.Lare could bat but Haydens was a slap happy waft against a poor attack.

  • on April 23, 2012, 18:14 GMT

    how about an article on "the stories behind the lowest team scores" - either like the article above when you give the lowdown about every successively lower team score or just the story behind each country's lowest innings score.

  • on April 23, 2012, 18:01 GMT

    How come the editor missed Mahela Jayawardena's epic 374 run fiest against Proteas??? It's the fourth highest individual score ever!!!

  • Shan156 on April 23, 2012, 18:00 GMT

    @prashant1, I think I get what you are saying - that Lara made it count when things went his way. But, may I ask, so what? His big scores mean that he had the perseverance and the ability to dig in and concentrate for long periods of time. Yes, the 400 was made on the flattest wicket on the planet but do you know the pressure he was in at that time? He was the captain and WI had lost the first three tests of the series with one to play. The Windies have never been whitewashed in a home series. They were a shambles and no one expected anything other than a 0-4 scoreline. What about his breathtaking 213 and 153* (in the fourth innings, no less) in successive tests in winning causes against the best attack in the world after the Windies were blown away in the first test? You see, it is not all about averages. It is also about the ability to perform under pressure. Murali said Lara is the best batsman he has ever bowled to - enough said.

  • ElBeeDubya on April 23, 2012, 17:29 GMT

    I agree that Lara's 400 and 375 should not count. They were not made in Test matches. They were made at home!! They were made against a weak side such as England! They were not made by TENDULKAR!

  • prashant1 on April 23, 2012, 16:48 GMT

    @Chris_P -oh Lara's made very sure to make 'em count when things went his way. Are we also going to throw in first class scores to make some point?

  • AdrianVanDenStael on April 23, 2012, 16:37 GMT

    @dan9; indeed, and if one had witnessed it at the time, one wouldn't have realised one was watching test cricket, since the match concerned was not classified as the first test match until some time later.

  • Chris_P on April 23, 2012, 16:19 GMT

    @prashant1. Of course you are correct..I mean anyone who has scored 2 of the highest 3 test scores in the history of the game as well as the highest first class score oh 501 just doesn't rate at all.

  • unregisteredalien on April 23, 2012, 16:02 GMT

    Nice work by the author and by omairhr ... prashant, "einstein" & co, I can only assume you are trying to show the world why the Tendulkarmy can't be taken seriously.

  • dan9 on April 23, 2012, 15:44 GMT

    @ AdrianVanDenStael - I guess you'd have to be a pretty remarkable person to have witnessed Bannerman's innings and still be alive today; given it was 135 years ago ;-)

  • AdrianVanDenStael on April 23, 2012, 13:56 GMT

    In my opinion (not that anyone need be remotely interested in it), Bradman's and Bannerman's innings probably remain the most remarkable. I didn't see them of course, and there must be very few people left alive who saw either, but to score 300 runs in a day, and to score 165 not out when the rest of your team mates (extras included) only managed 80 between them remain staggering achievements. Although clearly it doesn't qualify for inclusion, Hanif Mohammed's innings which has been mentioned was certainly a very special one because it came in the second innings and saved a match from an apparently hopeless situation (not true I don't think of any of these eleven innings). I like the comment that "Back in 1938 there was a general feeling that only Ashes matches really counted as Tests ..."; so far as some sections of the English media are concerned, not much seems to have changed!

  • prashant1 on April 23, 2012, 13:50 GMT

    @Chris_P - Oh i said Lara has essentially done very well only at home and the subcontinent. Infact , Lara avg.s 50+ "away" only in SL and Zim....Not very superlative one would think.

  • prashant1 on April 23, 2012, 13:12 GMT

    @jjamie15 - Oh, Noones "actually" taking out the Lara inn.s .Merely pointing out that for the remainder 230 innings Lara avg. less than 50.

  • Deuce03 on April 23, 2012, 12:37 GMT

    Sandham's Test career - the triple-century aside - was nothing much to write home about, but he was a legend at county level, scoring a hundred centuries and forming half of one of the greatest county opening partnerships of all time (with Jack Hobbs). Unfortunately for him he happened to play in an era when England was overflowing with world-class opening batsmen and he never got a sustained run in the Test side. He is the oldest man in the list, too - of the others only Lara (the second time) and Hayden were over 30 when they took the record; Sandham was 40.

  • anantbio on April 23, 2012, 12:09 GMT

    why is Sachin's name not in the list, he has got 100 hundreds, he is the best batsmen in the game, Lara might have got 400, i know for sure pretty soon sachin will 500 !

  • nazim_ali on April 23, 2012, 11:47 GMT

    very obvious that this list is about the highest scores in test cricket of their time (and obviously when broken by a new one). Just look at the scores, starts at 165 and progressively (and of course chronologically) goes to 400*. So plz stop twisting it in the comments.

  • AlbertEinstein on April 23, 2012, 11:45 GMT

    @jjamie: what do you mean why take out Lara's two highest scores. Why not ? They were made on flat tracks. Compare that with Tendulker's monumental feats against the mighty Bangladesh, Zimbabwe et al. on tricky Indian pitches and you'll know why all we Indians believe that he is a better batsman than Don Bradman.

  • CricketPissek on April 23, 2012, 11:23 GMT

    Could people PLEASE read the tagline "The stories behind the highest individual scores in Tests" before commenting? This would save us trawling through rubbish to find a good comment, and yourself some embarrassment for being seen as illiterate and/or stupid. Thanks

  • Chris_P on April 23, 2012, 11:12 GMT

    @prashant1. Ummm, have you looked at what he has done. Extremely poor average in the sub continent? 1530 runs @58.84. I guess I must be missing soemthing here. His average was tested in Australian & NZ conditions, but he had the misfortune to be around & face all the great bowlers of his era. He was, simply put, a superlative batsman.

  • smudgeon on April 23, 2012, 11:07 GMT

    excellent article, and a list of great innings. to me, i'll always remember Brian Lara for his 277 against Australia - magnificent.

  • jjamie15 on April 23, 2012, 10:53 GMT

    This is crazy - why would you take out Lara's two highest scores?! They happened!!! He got in, stayed in and scored more runs in a single innings than anyone else in the history of Test cricket. Twice!

    You may as well say Bradman wasn't the best batsmen ever because he 'only' scored 6996 runs. Therefore there are nearly 40 batsmen better than him in Tests. Clearly not the case.

    As Geoff Boycott said - Lara's runs may have been scored on flat tracks, but no-one else has done what he's done.

    Conclusion? There is so much more to cricket than stats, highest scores, most runs and most 100s - that's why there are averages; they tell much more of a story than volumes.

  • omairhr on April 23, 2012, 10:37 GMT

    Sorry guys... my comment was intended to be sarcastic. You guys killed it. RIP. :-(

  • jjamie15 on April 23, 2012, 10:35 GMT

    Why include ODIs? Clue is in the stats - they're not first class games. The next article should be the most FIRST CLASS hundreds...

  • prashant1 on April 23, 2012, 10:35 GMT

    Take out Lara's 375 and 400* and he ends up with a career average BELOW 50. Oops ! Just goes to show....Once he got in made the most of it, mostly in good home conditions...Extremely poor away record away from home and the subcontinent...

  • Meety on April 23, 2012, 10:13 GMT

    @omairhr - good one! @ CricIndia208 - keep up the good work! @Buster Booth - I am fairly certain he named Sachin in jest!

  • cambrose1211 on April 23, 2012, 9:56 GMT

    @omairhr after playing over 300 test innings Tendulkar has yet to get a triple century. So where and why should he be included. one more thing, anything and everything in cricket is NOT about India

  • cloudmess on April 23, 2012, 9:35 GMT

    yes where is tendulkar name and also dhoni who once played a good innings and sehwag... oh I see, it's about players who individually held the test-score record. Sorry, should have read that before I started typing out names of Indian players in lower case who are completely irrelevant to this article.

  • on April 23, 2012, 7:45 GMT

    Great article ... I guess an article on highest individual scores in ODIs is going to follow this

  • adityap on April 23, 2012, 7:36 GMT

    It would appear that omairhr's comments went over the heads of some of the later commenters.

  • on April 23, 2012, 7:00 GMT

    It seems really obvious that this list is about people who at one time or another had the highest individual test score. Did Tendulkar ever have that? Did Hanif Mohammed? If not, then they have no place on this list! Stop being so parochial and blinkered!! Not everything has to revolve around one or two players!!!!

  • on April 23, 2012, 6:56 GMT

    Cmon no Hanif Mohammad? You've got to be kidding me.

  • on April 23, 2012, 6:49 GMT

    @BusterBooth: Cultivate a sense of humor mate. Sachin was mentioned in jest.

  • on April 23, 2012, 5:28 GMT

    @omairhr. read what the article is about. tell your beloved sachin to go and score 401

  • on April 23, 2012, 5:19 GMT

    Dear Mr.Lynch, What about Hanif Mohammed's 337. Don't you think that innings has a good story attached to it?

  • CricIndia208 on April 23, 2012, 5:15 GMT

    i protest non-iclusion of Javed miandad in the list. HaHAHaHAHa!

  • on April 23, 2012, 4:57 GMT

    @OMAIRHR hahhahahahahahahahhahaha good one :P

  • omairhr on April 23, 2012, 4:21 GMT

    Very interesting!

    Although I protest (before anyone else does) non-inclusion of Tendulkar's name in this list!!! :P

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • omairhr on April 23, 2012, 4:21 GMT

    Very interesting!

    Although I protest (before anyone else does) non-inclusion of Tendulkar's name in this list!!! :P

  • on April 23, 2012, 4:57 GMT

    @OMAIRHR hahhahahahahahahahhahaha good one :P

  • CricIndia208 on April 23, 2012, 5:15 GMT

    i protest non-iclusion of Javed miandad in the list. HaHAHaHAHa!

  • on April 23, 2012, 5:19 GMT

    Dear Mr.Lynch, What about Hanif Mohammed's 337. Don't you think that innings has a good story attached to it?

  • on April 23, 2012, 5:28 GMT

    @omairhr. read what the article is about. tell your beloved sachin to go and score 401

  • on April 23, 2012, 6:49 GMT

    @BusterBooth: Cultivate a sense of humor mate. Sachin was mentioned in jest.

  • on April 23, 2012, 6:56 GMT

    Cmon no Hanif Mohammad? You've got to be kidding me.

  • on April 23, 2012, 7:00 GMT

    It seems really obvious that this list is about people who at one time or another had the highest individual test score. Did Tendulkar ever have that? Did Hanif Mohammed? If not, then they have no place on this list! Stop being so parochial and blinkered!! Not everything has to revolve around one or two players!!!!

  • adityap on April 23, 2012, 7:36 GMT

    It would appear that omairhr's comments went over the heads of some of the later commenters.

  • on April 23, 2012, 7:45 GMT

    Great article ... I guess an article on highest individual scores in ODIs is going to follow this