But next morning, I had mixed feelings. It was certainly the most incredible one-day match I had seen. For the sheer improbability of it, it even exceeded India’s World Cup win in 1983. And surely, it was a spectacle. But was it really the greatest ODI match ever? I wasn’t so sure.

How did it rank against the tied semi-final between Australia and South Africa at Birmingham in the 1999 World Cup? It had less runs in the whole match than one innings here, but to me it had everything that a perfect one-day match should have. Occasion, tension, some good batting, magical bowling, twists and turns and an incredible finish. I felt for Lance Klusener for days.

That runs equal excitement is such a hollow premise that it isn’t even worth arguing against it. One of the most boring one-day series I have suffered was between India and West Indies in 2002-03. Almost every match produced nearly or more than 600 runs, targets were chased down as easily as they were set. There was no joy; on many occasions I felt I was watching the match because I was being paid.

Chasing down 434 would have been incredible on any count, but would we have felt the same way had South Africa run away with the match in the 48th over with five wickets in hand? The match felt as it did because it went to the wire and could have gone any way until the last over.

A couple of days after the match, we sat down to draw up a list of the greatest one-day matches. In the list of 11, there was only one more match with 300-plus innings: the NatWest series final between India and England. And it was there because halfway through India were five down for 140-odd. There were plenty of scores between 200 and 250 and a couple below 200. The common thread among most of the matches was an element that forms the heart of cricket: a contest between bat and ball.

We saw a great match at Wanderers earlier this month. But it was Bat v Bat. Between bat and ball, there was no contest. It was impossible not to get swept away by the sheer thrill of the chase, but somewhere down there, it didn’t feel right. It was a freakish match, let’s hope it doesn’t become the norm.

Lets assume a team was bowled out for 55 in the first innings of an ODI. The team batting second is wiped out for 53. Now what would the reaction of the general public, press and the experts be?
The curator will be hung.

awesome sheshadri, awesome.
the nail is dead.

the whole bloody point is that we hypocrites keep debating like old fashioned dinosaurs while the baniyas walk away with the votes and the money and rule/ruin the game as they please.
that joburg game was trash. why? because on a normal cricket pitch with a bit of unpredictability, i believe
that mick lewis will get flattrackbully gibbs 9 times out of 10. bet on it.

Good Point.
But what abt the chase of Paistan for 350 , required 6 of lastball but Moin got out. PAK finished 344-6. I think it must be in top 10.
I also can imagine of excitement getting opposition out below 53.
Well, i remember when Pakistan was out on 43 in SA in 1993.But Wasim & waqar took 3 top WI wickets in no time.If Aaqip had taken the catch of Lara, WI could have been 21-4. I still can feel the WASIM's terrific bowling to Richardson, the fright in the eues of Richadson.
Well---- long enough, bye

Well I do agree with you Sambit Bal, it was not the "Greatest ODI Match".. Only runs are not require to call a match the Greatest one and on the other side it was the lack of bowling ability and slight captaincy err from both the teams to let bats do the talking.. And if cricinfo and other webs call it the *Greatest ODI* then what about the Javed Miandad's Last Ball 6 Match @ Sharjah, IndoPak contest @ Karachi and many more..

To me there aint any Greatest Match, you just can never match any contest with the other, every contest has its own beauty in it.. For SouthAfricans it might be the Greatest ODI Match but what about Australians..? Will they call it the Greatest Match..?

As a neutral it was a good game of cricket, but it was just about good batting and bad bowling gelled with bad captaincy..

I thoroughly agree that it was certainly not the greatest ever because it was just bat vs bat and cricket is not just that. On the 55 and 53 match as mentioned it will become a ball ball contest which is again discouraging. Why dont we take a leaf out of matches such as the Birmingham semifinal, Lords chase etc. which give a complete first hand account of fantastic one dayers defining a contest between Bat and Ball. A match should for the performer irrespective of a batsmen or a bowler unlike the Wanderers match which could turn any Bangladeshi batsmen great and Any of the 70s West Indian Bowler look mediocre!!!!!!! Lets face it!! Let cricket live by the game and lovers of the sport and not just attract attention of unknown spectators only to see the cherry flying to all parts of the ground.

I'm sure it won't be the norm. The way the batsmen were swinging away, on any other given day they could have been bowled out for a "mere" 300 score, or less.

Besides, haven't you heard? Bowlers have a new ally now, the ghost of Johnny Cash, who thanks to a great movie is making the comeback of a life (or afterlife) time. And If Mike Selvey doesn't like it, he can Cry Cry Cry.

Zing!

I am not sure I get Seshadri's point. If the pitch produced a game of 55 and 53, the curator will be hung and rightly so. Not because of the fact that there were not enough runs but there was not enough of a game. I subscribe to Sambit Bal's view: a contest is between two teams that battle it out with both bat and ball. Contests between bat and bat or ball and ball or for that matter contests decided by the toss are all deplorable.

A very low scoring game can still be gripping - one of the few one day games outside of World Cups that sticks in my memory was between Western Australia and Queensland in Perth shortly before World Series Cricket. WA batted first, all out 77. Qld with one Viv Richards opening and Greg Chappell at no.4 looked sure things (at least to a Qld-er like me). Except Dennis Lillee had other ideas and Qld could get only 62. I don't remember complaints about the pitch - just the tension and amazement at the heights that very great players could take themselves to.

Best match ever? I don't know, but I think it takes a bigger stage and more of a contest (which is more than just closeness) than the recent Jo-burg game.

Thanks God there was no India involved in it...otherwise you would make it greatest ever....

it was the death of bowlers

I'm afraid to say that I disagree with all of the comments made so far. That match certainly was one of the greatest matches of all time, if not the greatest. Granted, the match was nothing but a slugfest in the first innings, but think a bit why this happened. The Ausies were humiliated earlier on in the series and then made a comeback. In this match they tried to drive the point home that they were superior to the South Africans, which they most likely are, they got an early advantage and drove the point home.

South Africa threw caution to the wind and showed what can be done when required.

"Best match ever? I don't know, but I think it takes a bigger stage and more of a contest (which is more than just closeness) than the recent Jo-burg game." Let's recap: South Africa had just returned from Australia where they were humiliated. The Ausies were then thrashed in the first two games. They made a remarkable comeback and this was the final game of the series, between the top two ODI sides in the world, winner takes all. The second last ball of the match was bowled to the number 11 batsman, facing his first ball of the game, bowled by the fastest and one of the best bowlers in the world. Let's not forget that Wanderers is not one of the grounds that regularly produces games with scores in excess of 300. That was application by the batsmen and self-belief on both sides of the highest quality.

I don't know about you, but to me that sounds like it has all the elements required for a truly great game. Perhaps the best game ever?

SAF vs AUS....this is the match for a life time...neither there has been a match of such a kind nor there will be any match as such.course its only a battin based match...but the way it pulled the crowds was really awesome....
i can never forget this match...every moment was astounding...ponting's six of kallis,,,,gibbs' offside hit of lewis...wicket of hall in the 50th over....and the final boundary of boucher...everyone who saw the match will remember it for years

I agree with you Sambit. Too much emphasis is placed nowadays on high scoring games, not just in the ODI's but in the test format as well. If anyone recalls the 2003-04 test between Australia and India at Mumbai which finished in just over two days, there was a huge amount of uproar at the pitch. I guess what they say is true, about cricket becoming more and more of a batsman's game, but whatever happened to that saying "bowlers win you matches?"

Sambit, I disgaree with you on this. Yes, a contest between bat and ball is what all true fans of cricket desire. That is why we still are hooked to the 5-day matches especially the ones which produce results on the last day. It is also true that consistently 300+ scores are being chased with a sense of purpose in the last few years. However, having said all that, what are the odds that a team which is the first to pile on 400+ runs would go on to lose the match?

Yes, scoring 434 in the 1st innings itself signifies the death of cricket in some sense but it doesn't happen consistently and infact, is bound to be as rare as winning a test match following on. Ofcourse, the counter argument about a team being bundled out for 53 doesn't hold much water since one-day cricket is a batsman's game firstly.

Chasing 400+ runs requires some guts and skill irrespective of how beautiful the pitch was for batting. Why, on the same wicket, exactly 3 yrs ago the much famed Indian batting line-up collapsed under the pressure of a huge target and the expectation of a billion people in the biggest game of their lives!!!!

What Gibbs did was truly remarkable and will be remembered for sheer greatness. This, in no way, reduces the 1999 WC semifinal thriller but all said and done, SA atlast got their revenge back at the Aussies!!!!!!

You all talk about flat track and it is easy to hit. but batting is not only about flat track. it is also about keeping concentration and focus for every single ball. a batsman Lives only once.

Really? Cricket is a game that is supposed to be a battle between batsmen and bowlers. When one party is all but removed from the equation, the game becomes poorer.

At the same time, I consider myself unlucky not to have watched it. For sheer entertainment, the match has few peers.

Anyone who wants to watch the greatest one day match of all time needn't look beyond the 99 world cup semi final between the same teams. My God, what a game that was.

Well I would have to just about disagree with Sambit on the "Greatest ODI Ever". What we saw at the Wanderers was a tribute to how Batting has evolved over the years..albeit mainly through one-day cricket. The match truly was great if you look at the calibre of the two competing sides - Australia and South Africa. True, low-scoring ODIs that go down to the wire are also wonderful to watch. Yet a tight contest between bat and ball though makes an "ideal" game of cricket, it doesnt match the thrill of 872 runs falling almost from heaven! Ask the spectators at the Wanderes that day. That was a priceless match, the likes of which we may never see again in our lifetime.

Another great match I remember was the India vs SA in the Champions Trophy 2002.
SA were cruising along with a century from Gibbs when he retired due to cramps. And then a combination of yorkers from Zaheer Khan and teasers from Sehwag controlled the run rate in such a manner that SA needed 22 runs from the last over with a good no. of wickets still intact. I would call that a good contest between bat and ball.

Which are the 11 most thrilling / great matches that you have mentioned in the article.

I agree with what Sambit says.

Cricket is different when it comes to saying we want a 'contest'. Its not as simple as runs on the board, be it 400+ or sub 100. Whether we want a contest between bat n bat or one between ball n ball? Neither are good for the game. We will have the odd freak games but we should not go overboard and instead be put it in perspective. It has a to be bat v ball. And thats why many games with 200-250 scores justifiably make it into the top 10 games. Hell, the Jo'burg may have been one of the most exciting ever, but it does leave a sour aftertaste.

The marketers will argue that games like these will draw in new crowds. But can the game afford to lose its already thin conventional support base at the cost of new crowds, who think that cricket is, like baseball, all about hitting the ball out of the park?

may be it wasn't the best odi ever....i have certain doubts regarding to the captaincy of ponting in that historic match..when SA needed 30 odd runs from the last three overs lewis was given the ball who has already been thrown out off the park.He had given 18 runs in that crucial over that took the game away from the Aussies..why didnt Ricky opt for Brett lee who has bowled considerably well in that high scoring match??? even in the last over he bowled his heart-out..At the end of the day the bowlers were victimised....The younger generation seeing that match would never ever want to become a bowler from there on....

I watched the match live and I still get goose bumps about it. The only reason I agree upon the notion that it was the greatest match ever is because nobody in their wildest dreams imagined South Africa to chase 434. In contrast, the WC99 chase had both teams with a great chance of winning the match. Although, this "greatest match" title will probably be changed pretty soon as there is too much cricket these days!

Rubbish, what you lose sight of is that the world record was broken twice in just over 3 hours. What happened will never become the norm. There have been many one-days where the batting track has been a runway but what happened in joburg was nothing short of unbelievable. For SA to keep up with that required run rate was incredible. At any stage Gibbs could have holed out to a man in the deep or could have been run out or played on etc. The unbelievable thing about that game is that it just kept on going in the batsmen’s favour. And what if van der Walt hadn’t been there? The game would have ended with SA 40 runs short and everyone would have praised the Aussies for scoring 434. Really great games always come down to a knifes edge and that’s what makes them great, to say if SA had chased the runs in 48 overs it would just have been remember as an unbelievably high scoring game but no a great game is a silly thing to say, of course it wouldn’t be remembered as a great game. The same can be said of the semi final between Aus and SA back in 1999, what if Klusener had been caught off his second ball? SA would have lost by 40 runs and no one would have remembered the game.

All this "age of batting" stuff is so tiresome. If it's the "age of batting" why are more tests than ever finishing in results? I'm sure you all know this, but a result in a test match requires one team to lose twenty wickets... so much for an "age of batting".

To the SA/Aus game -- one often forgotten fact about that particular ODI is the wicket count.

Aus: 434 for 4 after 50
SA: 438 for 9 after 50

So without the artificiality of the end-point, what do we say about those numbers? That Australia are twice as good (and then some) as South Africa?

The same score, the same time, half as many wickets lost.

The back-to-back Test Series played around that ODI certainly bear out the "twice as good" call.

Yet another reason why pyjama cricket ain't the real thing, and the results are utterly meaningless.

Cricket is an unique game, different from others in the sense, that one type of skill(batting) is pitted against an entirely different type of skill(bowling). In most other sprts, it's the same skill Vs. the same skill. So, it's best when it's a contest between bat and ball and not between the 2 sets of batsmen or the 2 sets of bowlers. Apparently, the rules gotta favour the batmen slightly more than it favours the bowlers. Not because of the fact that the paying public likes to see batting more than bowling. The rules weren't framed keeping the spectators in mind! But because all it needs for a batsman to get out is one ball whereas a bowler can get a wicket even at the end of a very bad over! That's the reason the benefit of doubt should always go to the batsmen!

Anyways, Au VS SA is a one-off, it's a freak game. It's highly unlikely to happen again. But low scoring games are more boring. A total between 250 and 300 is ideal in the modern day one-day cricket!

I don't think the stage needs to be big - the match has to be entertaining. The match I most remember getting worked up about was between India and WI at Perth in 1991-92. India made 126 batting first and West Indies managed 126 for 9 before Cummins was caught brilliantly by Azharuddin at slip of the part-time bowler Tendulkar to leave the match tied. It was absolutely riveting stuff.

I dont agree that it cannot be counted as greatest ever match for when a common man sits to watch the match he doesnt mind whether its a run feast or a daemon residing in pitch trying to gallop all the wickets in no time.its the nature of closeness and the see saw battle between teams (and not bat and ball) which makes this game great.this match has all the excitement till the last over which all the above mentioned matches by you have .but it also has one more thing which seperates it from others is expect the never expected factor...there was always a hope that something never seen before is going to happen
which added to its greatness.for a simple cricket lover this match was much more than a cry for lifeless pitch or poor captancies and tactical blunders.in short it was a carnival of cricket and lets keep these aftermatch pitch and captancies reviews to experts only

I like tight, low scoring ODI's too. In 1997 Pakistan defended 149 against Aus comfortably after getting them all out for 120-odd. Australian pitches of the 90s and 80s were the best, you'd get scores of 200-250, even sub-200 scores at times and wickets came to bowlers who were prepared to bend their backs. The true bounce meant that strokeplayers would get plenty of runs too, but they had to earn them. Nowadays even Australian and NZ wickets are batting friendly - its disgusting!

Leaving aside Sheshadri's hypothetical 55 vs 53 example, I do remember a couple of very exciting low scoring matches. Do not know if it meets Sambit's Bat Vs Ball qualification but it dis match up the batting skills, bowling skills, captaincy and every other parameter. Just that the batting skills tested on that day was the defensive abilities....swaying out of the swinging ball, dead bat the rising ones...
Remember the 125 odd WI was chasing against India at Perth in the innagural match of the VB series. India used up all the seamers by the 40th over and taken all but the last wicket. Sachin turned his arm around and on the last ball of his first over got Patterson out...with the scores tied. Interesting stuff....we were all trying to guess who Azhar will throw the ball to after Sachin's over is done.

The match was essentially a six hour slog fest on a pitch which seemed to have been prepared using a spirit level.

Despite this i was enthused as the target, let alone the chase, suggested two great sides playing the greatest ever match. However neither side was at full strength, the pitch offered nothing to the bowlers and generally the fielding for both sides was sloppy. The end result? A poor showcase of the skills required for the one day game and a match decided at the toss.

Hardly the criteria for the greatest ever match.

where is that greatest matches list?

Well, while I can see that the match in question has a claim to have generated more records than any other, I am not sure that alone makes it great. I should like to know how the boundary/wicket ration compares to other grounds. Personally I think that the greatest contests are ones where the ball is doing enough to make batsmen really fight. That's where excitement comes in, for me. Mind you, I shall always prefer Test Matches to ODI as the real acid test of greatness. That's where you see the real subtlety and elegance of the Great Game!

Well, I think the 1999 semi-final match between Australia and South Africa was perhaps the greatest one-day match. I also think the match where we scored 125 and bowled out Pakistan for 84 or 87 was another great one-day. A match where just the bat or the ball dominates is quite boring. :-)

Cheers

Dan

i agree with john. sambit's probably mad that it was SA and not india who chased that mammoth target. remember the WC final?

I agree, it was not the best game. But I wonder if anyone remembers the first time 300 runs were chased. It was an Indo-Pak encounter, and I think India were chasing 314 odd. I rememeber Hrishikesh Kanitkar finishing it off with a four. That match in my view was an excellent example of what a game should be.It had the occasion (no occasion is greater than India-PaK) Batsman scored,bowlers kept the pressure on, catches landed in no mans territory, nerves were lost; besided that game set the precedent of chasing excessive scores... wonder if that game is in the top 11.

Look I dont care wat u guys think but I think it was the greatest match ever in the history of one day cricket .I can't see any match closing close to this one .It is the greatest match simply bcuz ppl come to witness sixers n action n more action n they precisely got watever they needed.Scoring 434 itself was huge n chasing that total has to be something supreme .I think it was a God created wicket and the match was scripted by the Almighty himself.No wonder he chose the best 2 teams in the world..

Cheers
KP

It was a great game, but it tended towards one-dimensionality. For me there are six aspects that make a good game: passion, suspense, contest, action, unpredictibility and a showcase of all the elements of cricket. The fact that both teams from the outset looked like making a big score, the fact that there wasn't an even battle between bat and ball reduced that from being a really great game for me.

As a New Zealander I often remember NZ Australia games (that we won) with the most fondness, just as people from India and Pakistan remember games between those teams as great. Chris Pringle's last over maiden when Australia needed 2 runs to win will always stay in my mind as a great game, but the two ultimate games in my memory were the first two games in the Chappell-Hadlee series. In the first NEw Zealand looked down and out twice, first after some great batting by Gilchrist, Hayden and Ponting, before being rescued by some great bowling and feilding, particularly by Vettori, Styris and Cairns. Then secondly in the chase, where some great Australian bowling had New Zealand needing 10 an over for the final few with only 3 wickets in hand. Enter McCullum and Hamish Marshall, and through a combination of great running, and the occasional cheeky shot (McCullum) they got home.

In the second match Australia started magnificantly (140/1 off 20) through some great batting, stumbled (160/6 off 30) through some stuborn bowling and feilding then finished off majesticaly to post an imposing, but achievable target of 261. at 86/6 off 22 overs the game looked all over, but the New Zealand bowlers had other ideas. Kyle Mills, the normal no 11 (with a 1st class batting average of 50, but in a team full of all-rounders), and Daniel Vettori came together with 90 runs needed in 13 overs. Chris Harris had dislocated his shoulder and had been advised by the doctors not to bat, and so Mills and Vettori looked like the last pair. 4 comsecutive Mills 6's made the game a lot closer. The pair looked on track, needing only 6 an over from the last 5 overs, when a piece of brilliance in the feild saw Vettori removed via a Ponting run-out. Enter Chris Harris, batting with one hand he managed to hang around long enough to almost give Kyle Mills a chance to win the game, before Glen McGrath got through his defences.

The two games had drama, tension, passion, great finishes, unpredictibility, but also great cricket from all involved. There was some quality swing bowling from Kyle Mills, firy fast bowling from Brett Lee, accurate seam bowling from Oram, Gillespie and McGrath, crafty and persistant medium pace from Styris and Cairns, subtlty and guile from Vettori and sharp turning wrist spin from Hogg, aswell as early inssing batting power from Gilchrist and Astle, invention from Lehman and McCullum, sharp running from Marshall and big 6 hitting at the end from Mills and Cairns.

There wasn't 600 runs scored in any game, but there were all the elements that make cricket a passion for millions.

That is what makes a good game.

Not the greatest match. The great matches are in the longer version of the game.

That high-scoring one-day match was only a match that offered more thrills. We all know that the scores and results can change depending on different outcome of a variety of plays. How may times have we not seen that? Ntini could have been lbw to that late cut; Boucher's ball could have gone to hand like Hall's shot did. Gibbs could have been caught earlier by Bracken. Lots of things could have happened to change the outcome. What it boils down to is just a freak outcome of a number of events..............

More than anything i would remember this match for the courage and guts with which SAFs batted. The way Smith started the innings and the way Gibbs batted was really superb and also towards the end boucher played gem of an innings...

Sambit ball like always somehow gets india involved. NatWest final between India and England was a great match. Agreed! But it was missing the emotional, political and rivalry that India/Pakistan matches do have. For me greatest match ever was Indian Vs Pakistan 2004 ODI. It had Runs of 600 Plus, It had excellent final over by Ashish Nehra and superb fielding catch by kaif and lets do not forget the grest ODI hundred one can imagine by Inzy. It was a complete Match. SA and Australia would get away but the pressue Indian/Pakistani players go through is just unbelievable. Ask Wasim Akram or Tendulkar!

Good analysis

man, you people have to be kidding me .... Is there even one person here or anywhere who at the start of SA's innings could have predicted or even dreamt that they would chase it down. It was essentially the equivalent of being 140-5 and chasing 300. But not even because no matter how dire of a situation you are in, you get one good partnership, one century stand and that's it, you're on you're way... not this match. you score and score and score. you get nearly two hundreds, and you still need another 200 to win. Now the only match that you could make a case for, would be the SA-Aus Semi-final at the World Cup. If Ponting or Gibbs or even Graeme Smith has played these innings in any other game, they would be hailed as one of the greatest innings of all time... and you got all three in the same game... Just because the scores were excessive, should not take away from the fact that this was a great game ... if not the greatest.

Sambit Pal...tell me which is the good match n bad match,matches are matches..it dont have most the word ' The Greatest Game ever'

the boundaries were very short ..even my aunt can hit a six in wanderes, once the ball got air it always went into the crowd.... had it been the lieks of sehwag and afridi playing for the same team then i guess 550 would have been a perfectly chassbale score...
LOL at thx God india wasnt playing that game or otherwise it would have been the greatest sport game the world has ever seen

Certainly a great match just because of how close it was. But I remember a very recent match that no one has mentioned yet- one that had action, suspense and tension, that didn't amount to a slogfest and that the better team in fact lost- I mean of course Australia vs. Bangladesh at Cardiff.

The greatest? Maybe not, but definately more fulfilling than the Jo'burg 800. And in case you're wondering, I'm Australian.

Terms like "greatest game ever" will always come with a lot of subjectivity, so it might be superfluous to argue about it. Most Proteas would argue that the Jo'berg game is the greatest , most aussies would vote for the '99 semifinal and most indians would prefer the Natwest final.

But, as an impartial observer whose batting-idol-list reads Gibbs/Ponting/Martyn/Youhana( in that order, and no indian batsmen in the list) , i must say that watching the Jo'burg game was like watching someone playing a video game. Every over had a boundary/sixer and it was almost unreal. And the circumstance was such that there was none of the ambivalent pressure that chasing teams face, where you are not sure if u should play safe or go for it. SA were in a situation where there was nothing to lose n everything to win. I am not sure if that really makes for a pressure-cooker match.

But one thing's for sure, this is good advertisement for Twenty-20 cricket !

It was a great game of batting, not a great game of cricket. Probably the most amazing game ever, but not the greatest. I guess it shows what happens when you take quality bowlers like McGrath and Pollock out of one day cricket. Can we make a version of cricket instead of Twenty20 that is loaded in favour of the bowlers? (shock, horror)

Well, this probably was the "greatest batsman's match" and the "worst bowler's match". But looking at the scores at the end, one cannot discount the effort of the Australian bowlers. They did get 9 wickets!!! That is an effort that would certainly get a mention in a match with a lower score. Sadly seemed to be forgotten here. May be, the bat-ball contest was limited to the second half of the match. So, becomes difficult to place the greatness of this match. Certainly not the greatest of all time.

Amazing! I can't believe that no one has even mentioned that famous Pak vs Ind game at sharjah where Javed Miandad played the most brilliant, sensational, exciting and dramatic ODI knock ever. I can't recall a more exciting and dramatic match. The tension and pressuere during that match was so immense that three persons lost their lives in the sub continent after suffering heart failure. There were also many reports of people fainting while watching that game on their TVs. And many even broke their televison screens and their radio sets during that game. Such was the frustration and unpredictability of that match and it took Javed Miandad (under the circumstances) the best shot ever played by a batsman under pressure in an ODI, to win that game for Pakistan by hitting a six on the last ball of the match.

Now, lets look at the after effects of that match. Chetan Sharma, the unlucky bowler who bowled that last ball for Ind. could never recover after that and slowly faded away and couldn't hold on to his place in the team for long. Pakistan, who had never won a big tournament, until that match, suddenly became almost unbeatable at Sharjah for many following years. Indians, who until that point, had a far better record in ODIs against Pakistan as they had won most of the games played against their arch rivals, cou,ld never win a match against Pakistan for the several following years. Such was the impact of that historic match. Yet, i don't see anyone even mention that match as one of the most amazing matches ever played if not the greatest match ever. I just laugh at some of the matches being mentioned here asbest ever when i compare those matches with the one i mentioned above.

Can't help but think........is it because India was the losing side???

Ok this bloke Sambit Bal does have a tendency to over-glamorize India. But do remember, he over-screws them too. I guess he's one of those critics who think more with their hearts than their minds....which is perfectly acceptable. Cut the man some slack guys, no ones perfectly free from biases.

And yea it was the greatest game of all time in that it had two highly rare events happen simultaneously over the course of a single match. What are the odds? Do the math! Whoever wasn't impressed by that game is either biased or is Sambit Bal (which is basically an axiom). Take your pick.

Just a personal list of the best matches Australia has been involved in. No offence to other countries.
Greatest tests in no particular order.
1) The first one
2) The Ashes one
3) Tied test one
4) Tied test two
5) Aus/Eng 1982/3 Melbourne
6) Aus/WI 1992/3 Adelaide
7) Pak/Aus 1994 Lahore?
8) Eng/Aus 2005 Edgbaston
9) Centenary Test 1977
10) Brian Lara game in the West Indies 1999 (153 not out)

Best ODI involving Australia again in no particular order.

1) World Cup final 1975
2) Aus/Eng 1986/7 (Alan Lamb 18 off the last over)
3) W/C semi final 1999
4) 2006 Jo'burg
5) Aus/NZ 1981/2 Melbourne (underarm match- Chappell's last over idiocy makes us forget a wonderful innings from Bruce Edgar, one of the first great one day innings.)
6) Aus/WI 1995/6 Bevan four off the last ball.
7) Aus/Eng WC 1975 Headingely
8) Aus/Eng WC final 1987 (Gatting will never live that down)
9) WSC 1977 (not an official ODI) Wayne Daniel hitting Mick Malone for 6 to win it.
10) Aus/Eng 2003 WC (Bichels bowling and Bevan bringing it home)

That's a fabulous list, Davo!

So many memories there!

Any DVD makers out there -- put those games in a box set and I'll buy a copy for every uncle I have...

Dr.feelgood has Hit the Bulls Eye- I completely agree that Pak-vs India Sharjah match in 1986, and Pak-vs India Karachi ODI in 2004 are the greatest matches ever! Its often suggested that Miandad's Six was a psychological blow to Indian cricket, its impact lasted for years! Sambit Bal would not agree, for him obviously any match involving India's win is great! India is a boring team of overrated cricketrs. Dravid can make anyone fall a sleep on deathbead! Dhoni is untested and overated for Nothing and Sehwag would lose a 50M race against Inzemam Ul haq!

most of the matches involving india and pakistan which have gone down the wire were great matches. the atmosphere is tense and nerve wracking.its political,its emotional phew..
also some of australia v south africa matches especially the 99 wc super six and semifinals.

I fully agree with anyone who says that the game is completely biased towards the batsmen. The SA/Aus fixture was great spectacle perhaps, but no way could it be considered to be a great game.

I'm going to go as far as saying that the pitch was unsuitable for international cricket. How can we reconcile how a county can be fined, lose points or take off the test match rota if wickets fall like skittles, yet a flat featureless strip of earth that has nothing in it for the bowler and allows the batsmen to play his shots with no risk is a great cricket wicket.

It can probably be said "greatest chase" in terms of runs but certainly not the greatest match ever.

On the graveyard of bowlers you cannot term a match the greatest one.

The match seemed a bit like a farce to me. I did not see it, but have been watching the highlights. Am I wrong, or was Andrew Symonds bowling off breaks?

One game which doesnt find mention is the Aus-India encounter in Sharjah (1997?), where Tendulkar played his best innings ever.

A lot was happening outside the field,Tendulkar was in a bad run of form after taking up the captiancy and was getting a lot of flak as any Indian captain routinely does, and Australia led by Steve Waugh had already established themmselves as the best in the world. A remarkable innings from Tendulkar, not one which he saved the match, that the match was Australia's was a given as they had to chase 280 odd( a complete contrast to his Chennai Innings in the Asian Test Championship against Pakisthan) brute force in the initial 15 overs to make sure that India could make the cut in terms of run rate to make it into the final, then followed by the tactical brilliance that the master is known. And India did went on to loose the match.

Not a complete performance by everyone on the field, but it was the most defining innings Tendulkar ever played. A great game nevertheless.

All i can think is, poor bowlers, it is truly heartbreaking to be smashed all over the ground for fours and sixes, and when you don't take any wickets in compensations, it makes you want to cry.

You can't say anything about how the game was played, everyone gave it their best and its already been and gone.

I think Australia will continue to use these tacrics in the future, when you look at their batting lineup, you are struck in awe, no team can ever take control until they are at least 7 wickets down, and even then they will provide a fight.

The game was definately unnatural and never balanced, but it was new and refreshing. Any game where the underdogs take to the challenge is a good game.

well, what about the Sharjah match in which India got out for 125 , and then bowled Pak for 87?
Ah! I forgot - it was India Pakistan right? Sharjah right? So, it must have been fixed.
I remember when India scored 349 and Pak got out for 344, match fixign commisioners visited Pakistan for inquiries. Why not for this 434 match? Oh! Again! SA and Aussies right? They cannot fix right? They dont have Asian blood right?

I would argue that the '99 WC semi was the greatest match of them all. One simple reason is the sheer drama of it all. Firstly, it was a semi-final, a knockout match for a tournament that takes place once every 4 years. That itself elevated the stakes a great deal above any other one day match. Anyone who's watched a high stakes knock-out match knows that tension is in the air from ball 1.

And who could forget all the stomach-churning twists and turns? Australia's early horrors, their fightback to post a respectable total, Shane Warne turning his stuff on, the way it turned towards Australia, enter L.Klusener and the impossible seemed increasingly possible. Meanwhile, wickets keep tumbling from the other end but Klusener is flailing, stroking, slogging almost everything that comes his way. Edgbaston is getting increasingly silent, tension just keeps building. Klusener keeps hitting. The lone hand - another Great Story. And Fleming's final over - ball 1 - BANG, ball 2 - BANG. At that moment we all knew we were mere mortals because we couldnt imagine having the nerve, the guts, the ability, the balls we had seen on TV. Of course, we think, its all over now. And then, 3 balls later, Australia are in the final. South Africa go home. Klusener is left high and dry.
Those who did not spare a thought for that man for the entirety of the next week, get your hearts checked: either they're not beating or made of asbestos.

Was it the greatest game ever? Who cares. Are pitches being prepared to favour the batsmen? Undoubtedly! I do believe that one can look at evening up the playing field as it were, BUT!!! It is still a contest between bat and ball. Our batsmen vs their bowlers and vice versa. As a point of interest had I been the man of the match adjudicator at the 'Greatest game ever' I would have been sorely tempted to award it to Nathan Bracken. 5 wickets at less than 6 an over in the context of that game was incredible. Only points against him were he was on the losing side and perhaps more importantly dropped Gibbs when he was 140 odd. Brackens figures speak volumes in terms of what bowlers could have achieved on that wanderers pitch. Had that happened and had the batsmen not had and enormous amount of Gung-ho luck, the 'Greatest Match Ever' would never have happened

As a South African, call me biased.

I didn't see this game, but have heard enough to form an opinion. This game took our preconceived ideas about certain aspects of the game and asked us to re-evaluate them.

The ability to set a world-record total (and one that is a good 35 runs above the previous record), and for this total to be matched by a struggling South African team is immeasurable.

I believe that Australia was the better team. If they'd been the second team to bat, chasing a total of 500, I think they'd have done it. But as it were, they didn't push themselves as hard as they obviously could have.

South Africa, led by the famous (and infamous) Graeme Smith, fought vibrantly throughout the match, with a run rate of over 10 per over at the 33 over mark. Amazing and fearless! You cannot take away from the batters their incredible courage and skill to deal with the pressure and sheer improbability of the chase. Gibb's innings was magnificent, whilst Smith's was crucial. If Smith hadn't started the chase off so successfully and aggressively, the South Africans would've thought the cause hopeless.

Poor captaincy, not at all. I have a passionate hate for Ricky Ponting, but his decision to bowl the bowler who ended up having the worst ODI figures ever, was gutsy. Had it paid off, he would've been acclaimed a hero, one of the greatest captains ever. As it were, South Africa pulled off an almost impossible victory, and altered the record books for the first time in 4 hours. Such is the game of cricket.

As Smith said afterwards, if Australia could do it, why couldn't South Africa?

South Africa broke a world record less than 3 hours and 48 minutes after it was created, against the worlds strongest team - to clinch a series hanging in the balance and restore some national pride after a fairly ordinary tour away from home.

I'm South African and I was heart broken after watching the Aussies rip apart our bowlers, Ricky Ponting was sublime - treating all bowlers like high school kids. I was ready to give up on SA cricket - throw in the towel for a while and not bother to support the Protea's after they'd surely squandered a 2-0 series lead and let Australia post a world record score against us. It's as bad as watching your best friend getting beaten up and not being able to step in to help.

Then, sitting in absolute awe as the unthinkable unfolded in front of me - Graeme Smith taking the fight back to the Aussies with interest, shutting up even his most outspoken of critics. Herchelle Gibbs finally using some of the God given talent everyone knows he has, but so often wastes.

The entire team chipped in and made their country sit up and take notice and I regretted my earlier feelings towards the Proteas.

You could not really script a better game if you tried (besides the world cup match between the same sides as mentioned above). The worlds 2 best teams, comming face to face in a series deciding game at the Bull Ring...it was sheer cricketing poetry!

This game restored more than my own stupid and insignificant faith in SA cricket...just like the 95 Rugby World Cup, this game united a nation for a day and gave it's citizens a goofy grin for a week. It may not be the "Greatest Game" ever - but it touched millions of peoples lives.

Cricket is the beautiful game!

I find the accusations of racism in here totally bewildering. Wasn't this a discussion on a certain one dayer played not too long ago? Instead I read nonsense like Rajs "Why not for this 434 match? Oh! Again! SA and Aussies right? They cannot fix right? They dont have Asian blood right?"

What the...? A bit of advice Raj - if you spend your whole life looking for something then generally you will find it.
For me this is a real eye opener. I had previously thought that comments here regarding the "divide" between East and West were utter rubbish. I'm no longer naive enough to think that. It's clear we have a problem.

I can't remember who said "politics and cricket don't mix", but they were right. Bodyline, apartheid, Mugabe - now this. Why not leave the politicians to spout rubbish and the cricketers to play cricket?

PS - My fave one dayer? 90/91 - Tufnell needs four off the last ball after Bicknell and Fraser have somehow slogged England back into it...

come on guys!434 chased down successfully.This match could be remembered for the sheer SELF-BELIEF shown by the Proteas,Gibbs in particluar.Now tell me how many of you had thought SA would come close to the target let alone surpassing it!!If Aussies had had the last laugh or SA had won with some 5 overs to spare with six wickets in hand this match would not have been contesting for the 'greatest'match ever played...And dont forget this is a Series Decider after Ausies were 0-2 down with 93 all out in the 2nd game.
My brother who hardly watches games not featuring India was literally praying for SA to win!!