Sachin's 241 not out vs Cook's 244 not out -Which is better?

[Gollum]

12 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

you probably did not even watch SRT's innings.

I watched every single ball of that series. 

[Gollum]

16 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Cummins is not better than Brett Lee at the same stage. Cummins has 32 wickets after 8 tests at an average of 27. Brett Lee at 42 wickets in his first 7 tests at an average of 16. Brett Lee had started with a bang in test cricket.

How was Blondie after his initial bang? I recall he was bang mediocre for most of his career after his good start. 

[vvvslaxman]

Other than 24* and not out there is nothing in common. An odd comparison. First one was when Sachin was going through a bad patch because of his error in judgement outside the off stump. So he cut out those shots and played with discipline and constructed an innings brick by brick. He had the company of Laxman.  Cook, on the other hand, was also going through a bad patch. But context is different here. England has to salvage some pride or at the least avoid whitewash. There is nothing common between these two knocks.

[rtmohanlal]

3 hours ago, Gollum said:

Gillespie trundled along in SCG, I watched that match ball by ball. Lee was pathetic back then, Macgill never scared me like Lyon these days. Aussies weren't lucky in 2004, we were lucky to escape with 1-2 when they could have won 3-1 if not for last day washout in Chepauk. 

I also watched the match live.if he struggled why they played him at the first place??I think the team management knew better about his physical fitness more than you and I.Isn't it?Lee was more or less the same bowler then too....blowing hot and cold thru out.Just check his cumulative average. It does not matter as to what you or me think about Mcgill, but the fact is that he averages much better than Lyon and when he played along with Warne he took more wickets than even Warne.

So you feel India would have not have chased down some 220 with all 10 wkts in hand?????Ok ...I think otherwise.It was comfortably

tilted in India's favour.Any way each to his own

[Unleashed]

Sachin's innings was better due to context. Anyone who says otherwise is a moron.

[rtmohanlal]

As many members already pointed out, the pressure factor itself tilts hugely in favour of Sachin.He was terribly out of form thru out the series,series deciding match and an once in a generation oppertunity,his own over all  legacy of being the best batsman would have severely damaged had he failed in that inns because then his stats in AUS would have taken a severe beating.... all these factors would have been going thru his mind.Yet he soaked the initial pressure and came out victorious.

[mancalledsting]

typical Alistair cook special: series already won for Aussies, post xmas, Australia's main bowler out injured, dropped catches x 3 and he amasses one of his classic scores. Credit to him, when the luck goes his way and everything is in his favour, he capitalises big and does not throw it away like Viru used to. Don't forget did nothing all series when his team needed him most. It would have served England better if instead of 243 in one innings he ammassed a KL Rahul esque 50 across 5 innings. Also look how the tailenders fared in this match. Stuart broad got a significant contribution...if your tail can get a milestone, shows its a flat wicket.  

[rkt.india]

3 hours ago, Gollum said:

How was Blondie after his initial bang? I recall he was bang mediocre for most of his career after his good start. 

how most of his career matter. you are saying Cummins is better based on his first 8 tests. same way based on his first 8 tests Lee was better than Cummins. Cummins is not better than Brett Lee of any stage at this point. Brett Lee had 135 wickets in 36 tests before SCG test 2004. how is that mediocre, almost 4 wickets per test is not mediocre by any means. Many countries would have loved to have a lead bowler like Lee. India would certainly have. He was just overshadowed by greater bowlers in McGrath and Warne. James Anderson with under 4 wickets per test is the lead bowler of England.

Edited December 29, 2017 by rkt.india

[Gollum]

25 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

how most of his career matter. you are saying Cummins is better based on his first 8 tests. same way based on his first 8 tests Lee was better than Cummins. Cummins is not better than Brett Lee of any stage at this point. Brett Lee had 135 wickets in 36 tests before SCG test 2004. how is that mediocre, almost 4 wickets per test is not mediocre by any means. Many countries would have loved to have a lead bowler like Lee. India would certainly have. He was just overshadowed by greater bowlers in McGrath and Warne. James Anderson with under 4 wickets per test is the lead bowler of England.

Brett Lee was great in 1999-2000 when those 8 tests were played. In 2003-04 period he was struggling averaging a lot worse than what Cummins is averaging presently. 

[AmreekanDesi]

12 hours ago, speedheat said:

Look at the bowling attack of Australia when sachin scored 241, Lee Gillespie bracken and mcgil so sachin for me, and for cooks inning I have only one answer NO STARC!!! 

Lol I voted sachin but Lee and Gillespie weren't the main bowlers for that Aus side.

it was McGrath and Warne who didn't play

 

so saying No Starc isn't really saying much against cook...

 

bracken and mcgill were actually pedestrian

[AmreekanDesi]

5 hours ago, Unleashed said:

Sachin's innings was better due to context. Anyone who says otherwise is a moron.

Well that settles it then....

[AmreekanDesi]

Hazelwood > Bracken

Cummins = Lee (in test cricket though Cummins will beat Lee who had an average test career but let's give this a tie for now)

Bird < Gillespie

Lyon > McGill 

 

obv if you replace Bracken and McGill with McGrath and Warne then it's a no brainer but this comparison is even and prolly this line up shades it a bit.

[AmreekanDesi]

And yes Lyon is far superior to MacGill in Aussie conditions

 

MacGill normally played when the pitch was a turner and hence 2 spinners so statistically will have an advantage due to friendly conditions.

 

you just need to see the epic choke job he did whenever he played as a lone spinner to see that he's not on same level to Lyon.

[Laaloo]

Sachin keeps winning

[speedheat]

9 hours ago, AmreekanDesi said:

Lol I voted sachin but Lee and Gillespie weren't the main bowlers for that Aus side.

it was McGrath and Warne who didn't play

 

so saying No Starc isn't really saying much against cook...

 

bracken and mcgill were actually pedestrian

You say that now??? its so easy isn't it?? yes that attack was secondary but by no means was pedestrian on their home grounds, brackan and McGill may have flopped but at home they were as good as any at THAT TIME... And lul wut??? No starc isn't saying much??   guy who got cook twice with shooters , a guy who bowls threatening lines around 145-150k a guy who is a major difference btwn 2 sides wouldn't have made any difference??

Edited December 30, 2017 by speedheat

[rkt.india]

9 hours ago, AmreekanDesi said:

And yes Lyon is far superior to MacGill in Aussie conditions

 

MacGill normally played when the pitch was a turner and hence 2 spinners so statistically will have an advantage due to friendly conditions.

 

you just need to see the epic choke job he did whenever he played as a lone spinner to see that he's not on same level to Lyon.

Abey how Lee and Gillespie were not main bowlers? These four together formed that feared bowling attack.  Starc is the top wicket taker this series and has made a hell lot of difference.

Edited December 30, 2017 by rkt.india

[rkt.india]

9 hours ago, AmreekanDesi said:

Hazelwood > Bracken

Cummins = Lee (in test cricket though Cummins will beat Lee who had an average test career but let's give this a tie for now)

Bird < Gillespie

Lyon > McGill 

 

obv if you replace Bracken and McGill with McGrath and Warne then it's a no brainer but this comparison is even and prolly this line up shades it a bit.

why you comparing bird and Gillespie?  Compare Hazlewood = Gillespie, Bracken = Bird. Lyon = McGil.  Cummins = Lee. McGil had a better test record than Lyon. very comparable attacks.

[Cricketics]

1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

Abey how Lee and Gillespie were not main bowlers? These four together formed that feared bowling attack.  Starc is the top wicket taker this series and has made a hell lot of difference.

Lee came of from injury lay off too. and wasn't the bowler which he regularly was. It took him a while. Just FYI.

 

Honeslty, comparison is B.S. Don't know why we are comparing the two knocks. Both are equally good in a tame draw.

[AmreekanDesi]

3 hours ago, rkt.india said:

why you comparing bird and Gillespie?  Compare Hazlewood = Gillespie, Bracken = Bird. Lyon = McGil.  Cummins = Lee. McGil had a better test record than Lyon. very comparable attacks.

Hazelwood pisses over Gillespie 

[Cricketics]

I liked Dravid's double Hundred more from that tour where India won in Adelaide.  Screw Tendulkar's and Cook's double hundred which came in a draw.