Anyone watches Test Cricket here ?

Yes, I do. Usually only the England ones though.

So you following the Australian one ?

Only casually. I only checked the score after you mentioned it. Seems like it's moved on a bit since yesterday!

Rugby Union anybody?

Australia were absolutely stupid.They could have easily won the test.Why did they not declare with one over left to bowl ? Even though it sounds like bad sportsmanship,they could have won the test.

How did i not see this thread? I love random

@Holt - what? How could they have won? They did well to draw.

By the last over,Australia had a lead of about 50 runs.Why did they not declare then,leaving India an impossible task of scoring 50-odd runs in one or two overs ?

Guys did you know pidgeons can do math?

A New Zealand study suggests pigeons can distinguish between groups of different-numbered objects

@Holt - that's not how it works. It's not one day cricket. The only reason the sides agreed a draw was because there was no reasonable prospect of bowling Australia out and then chase down a target.

@Taavi - are they using calculators or is this mental arithmetic?

@Stephen This kind of event did take place.It was the 2000 test between SA and England,though the SA captain match-fixed(Cronjie).



http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63864.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cricket/south-africa-vs-england-hansie-cronje-went-to-hell-for-leather-on-one-of-test-crickets-darkest-days-a6826201.html

@Stephen They make them do taxes

@Holt - That's completely different, though, isn't it? You suggested Australia should declare to win. I say that's not right. You then imply it's been done before through match-fixing. I agree, if both sides had agreed to fix the outcome, Australia could have won. However, thankfully that didn't happen.

@Taavi - Excellent. I have some complicated insurance forms to complete. Maybe they could help with that?