Best ODI 200 Innings

[Richard Pryor]

There's usually been a fair bit of putting down of innings where a batsman makes 200 in an ODI, 'ground was too small, opposition was too bad' probably more I'm not thinking of, so which one 'counts' for you.

Rohit Sharma's 264* is the clear favourite on account of being a cricket video game score.

 

[CheekyMonkey]

i'd go with tendulkar. first ever 200, making a record that hadn't been achieved in over 30 years. it also happened before the rule changes

the opposition matters as well; south africa have a better bowling and much better fielding unit compared to the others and they hardly ever give up 150+ scores.

he hardly put a foot wrong throughout the whole innings; mistake-free batting for a full 50 overs, which is pretty staggering even in the most ideal batting conditions.

many have climbed mt. everest, but the guys who did it first are the ones you remember.

if you're talking about video game scores, i reckon watto would have made the ultimate video game score if banglardesh had given him a few more runs: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/503364.html

185* off 96 balls is flipping ridiculous as it is

 

[damochandler]

belinda clarke

 

[Richard Pryor]

belinda clarke

Fair call. Don't know how to edit a poll though.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

200s in ODIs don't really mean much anymore. Says a lot about the state of the game as a 'contest'.

 

[ioppolo]

Tendulkar's 200. First ever in an ODI, seemingly broke the barrier of ODI double centuries.

 

[Oaktree]

Tendulkar did it quite sometime ago, which gives it more weight.

However Rohit's 264 is simply insane. To keep going after getting past 200 in the manner he did was unbelievable.

 

[ioppolo]

Tendulkar did it quite sometime ago, which gives it more weight.

However Rohit's 264 is simply insane. To keep going after getting past 200 in the manner he did was unbelievable.

It's only been 5 years.

 

[Ashton Agar]

Tendulkar did it quite sometime ago, which gives it more weight.

However Rohit's 264 is simply insane. To keep going after getting past 200 in the manner he did was unbelievable.

It wasn't long before Sehwag's.

Has to be Rohit's 264 IMO. Batted at a normal rate to 100 before teeing off.

 

[Damon_3388]

200s in ODIs don't really mean much anymore. Says a lot about the state of the game as a 'contest'.

Lol, there's been five. Ever.

Geez people get jaded quick.

 

[Damon_3388]

Has to be Rohit's 264 IMO. Batted at a normal rate to 100 before teeing off.

Same with Gayle. Got his first 100 in 105 balls, then the second hundred in just 33 balls (compared to 100 then 51 for Sharma).

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Lol, there's been five. Ever.

Geez people get jaded quick.

That's kind of my point. None for a long period, now 5 in a short period of time. It shows how the game has changed, and not really for the better.

 

[Marklar_33]

I voted Tendulkar for quality of opposition, plus I watched all of that knock as opposed to the others, so that helps!

Gayle though, first outside of India must count for something

Also, the first 3 were under the '5 men out' law

 

[GROTTO]

For me its Tendulkar, first to do it and it was the psychological barrier too that it could never be down. ie the 4 minute mile.

Its been 5 years since it was cracked too.

Importantly it was against the best team in all the teams that have had 200 scored against them, ie against SA and against Steyn.

200 Not out also carries much more weight too.

 

[Ashton Agar]

Same with Gayle. Got his first 100 in 105 balls, then the second hundred in just 33 balls (compared to 100 then 51 for Sharma).

The fact Sharma got to 264 is something else.

 

[ioppolo]

The fact Sharma got to 264 is something else.

Wasn't the greatest attack. From memory it was Kulasekara, Ajantha Mendis, Gamage, Eranga or Lakmal and someone else, probably Dilshan.

 

[Taylor]

I watched Sharma's 264, it was a big innings but the bowling looked insipid, the ground as big a basketball court and just as rock hard.

 

[GROTTO]

Criticizing the bowling attack is poor comment, why hasnt the magical 200 been cracked years ago?

Plenty of times when good teams have batted first against poor opposition on small grounds. Shit argument. Making 200 like how Gayle did deserves its kudos, whether its the best, is another story. Cracking 200 in an ODI takes a great deal of skill and temperament.

 

[Costanza_]

Warner's 243 (128) from the NZ/Aus WC game way back on the 28th Feb, 2015.

 

[Millky95]

Was Gayle's the only one not in India?

 

[ioppolo]

Was Gayle's the only one not in India?

Yeah.

 

[Millky95]

Yeah.

It'll get mine vote then. Whilst scoring 200 is nothing to be laughed at or demeened, I always had a bigger interest in scores not done in India. Whilst Canberra's size sort of ruins that statement

 

[GROTTO]

It'll get mine vote then. Whilst scoring 200 is nothing to be laughed at or demeened, I always had a bigger interest in scores not done in India. Whilst Canberra's size sort of ruins that statement

I agree with the theory behind your comment, however, why havent we ever scored 200 batting first against shit teams including against India's bowling attack that has been laughed at all summer.

Bottom line is that 200 for around 30 years was the holy grail of batting regardless of opposition or ground size.

 

[HugeJohnson]

It'll get mine vote then. Whilst scoring 200 is nothing to be laughed at or demeened, I always had a bigger interest in scores not done in India. Whilst Canberra's size sort of ruins that statement

Manuka Oval is bigger than the MCG.

 

[Damon_3388]

It'll get mine vote then. Whilst scoring 200 is nothing to be laughed at or demeened, I always had a bigger interest in scores not done in India. Whilst Canberra's size sort of ruins that statement

Manuka Oval - 179m x 150m
MCG - 171m x 146m

Obviously both are roped in for cricket, but it's not a tiny ground there in Canberra, and Gayle cleared the fences easily numerous times.