Jimmy Neesham and Indian fan have an entertaining disagreement over Pranav Dhanawade's feat
While Pranav rests easy in knowledge that he has scripted a record that is almost impossible to beat, the world continues to fight over him
The world has been a different place since 15-year-old Pranav Dhanawade smashed 1009* in a school match earlier this week. Opinions have been polarised regarding the circumstances of the world record score. While young Pranav rests easy in the knowledge that he has scripted a record that will be almost impossible to beat, the world continues its fight over him.
One move that has been pointed out by critics of the record as injudicious is that Pranav’s team, KC Gandhi School, piled on a score of 1465/3 in their first innings, despite having bowled the opposition team out for a mere 31. The reason why there have been critics of this move is that this indicates that the team was playing so that Pranav could reach his record, risking their chance of a win.
However, this logic fails to hold water, as KC Gandhi did manage to bowl their opposition out for a mere 52 in the second innings as well, thus also claiming a win.
New Zealand cricketer Jimmy Neesham tweeted his opinion on the day of the feat that he could make no sense of the team not declaring their innings before 1465/3.
Am I the only person who thinks it was a real dick move scoring 1,400 after bowling the other team for 30?— Jimmy Neesham (@JimmyNeesh) January 5, 2016
Indian cricket fan and Twitter user Jagdeep Singh Gill from Bhatinda, Punjab, offered his views following up to Neesham’s thought, saying that he felt that KC Gandhi School had been in the right because the runs scored had come at a furious rate.
Neesham, someone who is known to readily interact with his Twitter followers, replied to the fan with a scathing comment. A real slayer:
You know what else doesn't make sense? Taking a photo of my tweet, then sending me that photo with a reply to it. https://t.co/3N0Aux2oyO— Jimmy Neesham (@JimmyNeesh) January 8, 2016
Taken aback, the fan rebutted that he was not a critic of Neesham’s playing career but a fan instead, whatever it may be that he thinks about Neesham’s ‘foolish thot’(sic).