Originally Posted by Fatslogger
If he was listening, I expect SDC did. I'm not trying to say that it was likely that England would lose the game from when Bell was out, merely that in pure game state terms, his innings was less valuable than Prior's or a hypothetical 20* from 80 balls. In terms of its affect on his average and possibly his career, let alone in aesthetic terms obviously it was a very good innings. In terms of the match, it was still a very good innings, actually because it did contribute significantly to England saving the game. It just wasn't as good, in those narrow terms but rather important terms, as not being out would have been, irrespective of runs scored.
Don't wear yourself out with the back-pedalling, FS.
I can't believe that anyone would say that a hypothetical 20* from 80 balls was better than 67 from 65 balls unless the team were 8 or 9 down. The point is that Bell wasn't deliberately trying to score quickly. He was trying to save the match but the runs were there for the taking, and he took them.