The resemblances are startling. New Zealand trailed Australia by 290 runs in Perth in 1988-89, India trailed New Zealand by 315 in Napier in 2008-09. For New Zealand the rescuer was a man who would turn into an innovative pinch-hitting opener. In Napier it was one who until last year was considered a one-day specialist. Mark Greatbatch batted for 655 minutes, played 435 deliveries, and hit 17 boundaries in his 146 not out. Gautam Gambhir batted 643 minutes, faced 436 deliveries, and hit 18 boundaries in his 137. Greatbatch looks back at his Perth marathon.

Two beers and done: Greatbatch's preparation routine during the Perth Test included a couple of pints of Guinness every night

Two beers and done: Greatbatch's preparation routine during the Perth Test included a couple of pints of Guinness every night © Getty Images

What do you remember of the lead-up to that innings?
We played Australia in Two tests, one in Australia in Perth, in November, then another one back in new Zealand, in Wellington, in February. Wasn't really a series, just two matches.

We didn't have much preparation, and [Richard] Hadlee was out injured. John Bracewell and Andrew Jones were in. We were well under strength, and I remember Australia batting first on a really good wicket. David Boon got 200 and Dean Jones got 99. They got 520. I got 76, Martin Crowe 50-odd, but we were still 290 behind. They enforced the follow-on, and they had [Terry] Alderman, [Geoff] Lawson, [Carl] Rackemann, and Merv Hughes who bowled very well. And they didn't play a spinner, [Allan] Border was the only spinner.

How do you approach such an innings?
There was a bit of a long haul, over two days, six sessions. You bat nearly 12 hours. It's a long time, and I was very slow, I averaged about 12 runs an hour, but it was the situation of the game, really. Probably for those two days I played the best I have played at that level, in the context of having to save the game and trying to bat time and being focused every ball.

I remember getting up early every morning, going for a swim, having a shower, having breakfast, and going down to the nets early. Brendon Bracewell was my room-mate, and he would bowl to me every morning for an hour.

There were routines I followed during that game. I used to go and have two pints of Guinness at the pub across the road from the Sheraton, where we stayed. Religiously. No more than two. You need to bat the next day.

Did you believe then you had it in you to play such an innings?
I had started my Test career quite well. I hadn't batted that long before, but I had scored a hundred in my first Test. The year before I went to Perth, we went to India in 1988. I got caught bat-pad off Arshad Ayub in the first Test and thought, "How I am I going to survive out here?"

But in the next Test I got my bat out in front of the pad and started to hit the spinners - not aggressively, but just hit them as opposed to bat-pad. In Hyderabad, we were 220-odd for 6 at the end of the first day's play, and I was 60 or 70 not out, and the next day we lost four wickets for 30 runs and I was left on 90 not out. But going into Perth I had had a little bit of success in Test cricket.

How difficult is to not get bogged down?
I never really had a worry about not scoring runs. If you are playing well on a good pitch, the runs come. Yeah, they come slower than you like. I actually remember not playing the cut shot through the innings, 11 hours, until the last half-hour, when the game was saved.

Why the cut?
Well, just cutting out that there [plays a cut with his hands] is a risky shot, than this [plays straight down the ground]. Mentally I was like, "I have to play straight as I can, as long as I can." I didn't say, "Don't play the cut," I just said, "I have to play straight, I have to play straight." I got into a rhythm when I was leaving stuff I could have probably hit, but I could have also got out, with a couple of gullies in.

What keeps you going in such a long innings where there are no milestones?
I had a really long time in the 90s, and I'd be lying if I said I never thought about the century. But the slowness helped: if you are scoring at 13 an hour, it means the century will take some time coming.

There was also the context of the game. You are following on, 290 behind, and it was about batting time, you know - little targets. An over meant four minutes, four overs 15 minutes. Eight overs meant half an hour. Fifteen overs an hour.

"I was going around asking guys for a pair of trousers, and most of them didn't fit. John Bracewell gave me his, but they were quite tight. And I actually went out there with them on. I felt really conscious, which worried me quite a lot. We're batting on the last day and we have a chance to save it and I'm worried about trousers"

The only focus was to blunt the four-pronged attack. Merv Hughes bowled bloody quick in that match, and then Rackemann, who kept hitting the deck, and Alderman and Lawson, who were swing bowlers. You look at Test cricket today, it is pretty entertaining, scoring at four an over. Back in those days, you were two and a half. You might have a day here and there where you might score three and a half. There was a different mentality back then.

Once you have batted a considerable amount of time, you actually start believing you can do it, as opposed to just starting out in hope. Is it more difficult to keep your concentration then?
When you are trying to save a game like that, if you start thinking about the end you are history. So, little targets. I used to get off - slowly you got to an hour, the drinks break, and then two hours, lunch break or tea break. Get off, get a shower, get a cup of tea, new gear on and start again. Just restart each time. Yeah, you have done great for a couple of hours, but you have got to go back and do it again.

The Aussies must have sledged the life out of you?
They were pretty grumpy. If you bat for two days, they got grumpier and grumpier. Border, they called him Captain Grumpy not for nothing. Steve Waugh and Border. Boonie was pretty quiet. He was a non-Aussie, really, when it came to sledging, but Steve Waugh made up for it. And, you know, Rackemann.

I didn't react, I just listened to it. Steve Waugh called me a name about - I played 435 balls - 435 times. Plus the over change. It wasn't a very nice name. There were subtle variations to that name where the word "fat" was used too. At the end of the game I said "Thanks [followed by the same name, Kiwi replaced by Aussie]." I enjoyed that.

But isn't it satisfying to give it back to them with a clever one-liner when you are doing well?
You have got to be careful when you are batting. If you get involved too much, you lose your focus to bat. I think Hughes spat at me once in Auckland. He just came down the wicket - and he used to swear all the time - but this time he decided to spit at me, and he got me in the pad. And he got into trouble because he was on TV. He got reprimanded for that.

I went to their dressing room and had a beer. He had ice on his ankles, his knees and his hips. Sitting down on the floor. I had a beer with him for half an hour, giving him some about spitting at me.

Did you drink with them during the Perth Test too?
In the dressing rooms we used to drink. After the game, good guys. Border was a tough competitor on the park, but off the park he would have a beer with you and chew the fat, and you learned from those guys.

How was it to bat in someone else's trousers?
You wouldn't believe it. I think it was the last morning. Must have forgotten my pair of trousers. I had my shirts, my socks… and I got there and realised hadn't got my trousers. Don't know how I forgot them. Because I had batted for so long, they might have been dirty, or might not have been washed.

And I'm one of the bigger guys around. I was going around asking guys for a pair of trousers, and most of them didn't fit. John Bracewell gave me his, but they were quite tight. And I actually went out there with them on. I felt really conscious, which worried me quite a lot. We're batting on the last day and we have a chance to save it and I'm worried about trousers. I think someone went to the hotel and got my trousers. I was able to swap Brace's trousers for mine at lunch. I felt really comfortable.

Sidharth Monga is a staff writer at Cricinfo





  • POSTED BY Gavin on | April 2, 2009, 1:00 GMT

    I am surprised that Martin Snedden has not even cracked it for a mention (in the article nor the comments). Greatbatch's inning was the standout, but without a rearguard with Snedden (especially with Morrison and Watson - two absolute bunnies - left to bat) he may not have the same result. His innings is given more credit for helping save the Test. Without Snedden I doubt the test would have been saved.

  • POSTED BY Abhyuday on | April 1, 2009, 16:45 GMT

    I didnot actually know of this innings by Greatbatch, so it was wonderful to read this article. For an attacking batsman like him it must have been a huge source of satisfaction to play such an innings. @ rooboy, we also have to remember which certain Aussie "spoilt brat" of a drunken allrounder said all sorts of nasty things about Indians in India in 2007 and also categorically stated that he thought opponents on the cricket field cannot be friends. Well, even any hardcore aussies would have to admit that he is the worst behaved cricketer in the world at the moment. And the Indian spinner has certainly turned over a new leaf which the drunken allrounder has so far been unable to achieve, both on and off the field.

  • POSTED BY Roger on | April 1, 2009, 16:24 GMT

    I was in the team's hotel in the morning of the last day when I overheard the Australian team manager tell his players that he had them booked out on a 1pm flight. Of course, I told this to the NZ team and I think they used it as motivation. Perhaps it was also a reason why the Australians were so grumpy as 1pm came and went. Not mentioned was the great batting performance by Martin Sneeden. Having given up on trying to get Greatbatch out, the Aussies concentrated of Sneeden. He put up a real dogged performance right to the end and wore many, many balls to the body. It was the only match where I have counted down the number of balls left in the last session. It was an epic draw.

  • POSTED BY Nick on | April 1, 2009, 3:10 GMT

    I remember the innings very well. There was a feeling that MGb was going to be the saviour for NZ from stumps on day 3. He just needed someone to stick with him thru the innings and both the Crowes were able to do so. It was tense to watch let alone being out in the middle. What a great article. Thanks cricinfo!!

  • POSTED BY Nathan on | April 1, 2009, 2:13 GMT

    I remember that knock well and what a beauty it was! But all this continual whining about Aussies playing the game hard is getting tiresome. Why is no one whining about what South Africa dished out to Hughes, which surely has to be some of the most vicious and vitriolic attacks ever against a 'youngster'? I guess it's because instead of whining like a stuck pig and carrying on like a baby to the media, Hughes just said it's OK and bring it on, as a man playing a man's game should. And then, as Greatbach says, the Aussies are quite prepared to be civil when play is over, unlike a certain indian spinner I could mention. That's OK sabina2009, riteshjsr etc ... keep pretending Australia are the only team to have words on the field, it just highlights the extent of your delusion and provides good entertainment for the rest of us.

  • POSTED BY Marcio on | April 1, 2009, 2:11 GMT

    "One big difference, though, the New Zealanders did not sledge, spit or snarl,whereas the Aussies of 2009 would have done all those and more. " Where is the evidence for this? Not only is this factualy incorrect - there are cameras, mics and umpires on the field to catch all of this - all of this would be heard and seen. The fact is that the Australian team has played all its recent cricket in good spirit - win, lose or draw. Australia also has less total citations for improper conduct than both India and Pakistan, so how does this add up? This article is also irresponsible. The comments about sledging comprise a small part of Greatbatch's comments. So why the headline calling the Australian team a "mob"? Let's keep the Aussie bashing to acceptable levels. Please. Lastly, why are people allowed to post this stuff on cricinfo.com, while people who point out that it is not only incorrect, but totally unnecessary are silenced?

  • POSTED BY Dinesh on | March 31, 2009, 21:57 GMT

    Very interesting story. I agree with all the other readers regarding the on field behavior of the Australian cricket team. However, when the Australians get beaten they are the first to admit that they were beaten by a better side and are quite graceful in defeat. I don't think I can say that about a team like New Zealand or Sri Lanka.

    I have been following the India - NZ series on TV and have to say that the New Zealand commentators don't handle defeat very well and their partisan commentary is appalling to say the least.

    Whenever the lankans lose, it is always the case of "not playing up to our potential". I have always wondered what would happen if they actually played to their "potential", maybe we might need an "All Time World XI" featuring guys like Sir Don Bradman, Sir Gary Sobers and Viv Richards to beat them.

    So at least in this aspect I respect the Australians.

  • POSTED BY pankaj on | March 31, 2009, 15:06 GMT

    Nice effort by MGb. I was expecting Gambhir's interview though :) One of the main commonality between GG and MGb is that they are both aggressive in nature and want to attack all the time. they play well that way. But in the innings that we are talking about here, they both curbed their natural instincts. This is pratically very difficult to do. Hats off tho them.

  • POSTED BY Vipul on | March 31, 2009, 13:54 GMT

    "I think Hughes spat at me once in Auckland...He got reprimanded for that." WTF....he still got just admonished???

    Nevertheless, I did not know Greatbatch was not always an explosive batsman. That must have been a great innings.

  • POSTED BY Minhaj on | March 31, 2009, 10:46 GMT

    Nice article. I like the way Mark Greatbatch responded to the Aussies. Aussies are like this, we know it. The only best way to give them a nice painful answer is to either bowl them out at a lesser score or bat for longer innings. This is the best way to irritate them.

    Mark Greatbatch is one of my favorite players and I still have not forgotten his role in 1992 World Cup cricket.

  • POSTED BY Siddharth on | March 31, 2009, 10:14 GMT

    Nice to read this article !! Though fans expected a lot more from Indians but they came up with some decent performance in the end of this test. But I would really appreciate the spirit with which the NZ team played. It would be really interesting to see the third test after such a performance and fightback given by both the teams.

  • POSTED BY Neil on | March 31, 2009, 9:59 GMT

    I remember Greatbatch's innings quite well. It was incredibly infuriating to watch him take everything our guys were throwing at him. It was a great match saving innings. He did his country proud.

  • POSTED BY Ritesh on | March 31, 2009, 8:28 GMT

    I didn't see Greatbatch's innings but it must have been one heck of an effort. The fact that he did it against the Aussies in Perth makes it even more special. Aussies are known to play hard and occasionally cross the line. They might call it 'mental disintegration' but it's just bad, boorish behavior. He withstood the verbal volleys from the Aussies and managed to save the test. This proves that the guy has guts. I remember the explosive starts that Rod Latham and he used to give NZ in the 1992 World Cup. He was quite a terror. Gambhir played an innings under pressure in Napier which was similar to Greatbatch's innings in Perth. The Kiwis must have been frustrated at not being able to get him out but not once did they sledge or abuse him. That's the way to play cricket - hard but with grace. Vettori already has many fans in India, and the behavior of the NZ team on this tour will win him some more.

  • POSTED BY Henry on | March 31, 2009, 7:03 GMT

    Great story, and I love the way that Indians and New Zealanders come together to b*tch about those evil Australians! That's what international dialogue is all about!

  • POSTED BY Kumar on | March 31, 2009, 6:30 GMT

    I second that jamrith. Loved Gambhir's batting. But Greatbatch doing it on fast perth pitch facing aussie bowlers THAT should have been something.

  • POSTED BY sony on | March 31, 2009, 6:03 GMT

    As in management so in cricket. I have heard of the great Micheal Jordan breaking down monumental goals into simple ones. In basketball, it meant getting your baskets right on 5 occasions and your rebounds on 3 occasions in every quarter. That totals about 30 plus points and a healthy percentage of rebounds. In management too it's a very efficient technique. Nudge yourself towards the goal by setting little targets and working towards them. Greatbatch's innings is all the more valuable as he batted on a surface with a bit of life and against a quality attack. And as he said, he had to keep it going against the wagging tongues on the field too. Guess he used it to motivate himself. Focus, focus, focus and then re-focus. Good advice in cricket and in life.

  • POSTED BY Ajit on | March 31, 2009, 5:54 GMT

    Very interesting read - Gambhir was top class in this test. Greatbatch morphed into a real dasher during the world cup of 91...as jamrith said, the kiwis played real hard but only cricket - not with their mouths like the Aussies did and continue to do. I know people say that it's all part of the game but I believe the kiwis showed people how to play hard and with dignity (i am an india supporter).

  • POSTED BY Muthuvel on | March 31, 2009, 5:39 GMT

    this current NZ side is a very good side, hope they give some good performances and reach a position that they deserve soon. They have got one more chance to have a go at india..

  • POSTED BY savan on | March 31, 2009, 5:26 GMT

    There is an even bigger difference between these two matches. Check the names of gr8 players in the Indian team and NZ team to lead/guide/support/ Gambir and Greatbatch in their respective innings.

  • POSTED BY Jairam on | March 31, 2009, 4:13 GMT

    Interesting, and the similarity of situation with the Napier Test is uncanny. One big difference, though, the New Zealanders did not sledge, spit or snarl,whereas the Aussies of 2009 would have done all those and more.

  • POSTED BY Warks on | March 31, 2009, 3:54 GMT

    I missed this innings but Australia could have used a Greatbatch or a Gambhir in the recent Test against South Africa in Cape Town. It shows how much concentration is required, something not appreciated by the T20 crowd, but integral to the real game of cricket. Simon Katich was having a go at it in Cape Town but one loose shot and he was gone. To bat all day and then another takes something extraordinary. Some might think it boring but how could you be bored with the building tension? This is what will always separate Test cricket from the rest, may it live forever!