Jump to content

20 years back, on this day - Tendulkar outwits Warne


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

This is no ordinary filtration.

McGrath is the greatest pace bowler in the last 20 years - he raises his game in big matches. Check out his record in knockouts and finals. And he inadvertently gets the top player of the opposition side out in big games - there may be exceptions but Sachin is not an exception.

 

Sachins average against Australia in both ODIs and tests with and without McGrath - huge difference. 

 

it is also a fact that apart from Warne there is not a single great bowler on whom Tendulkar has been able to impose himself consistently.

 

why is the talk never on how Sachin dominated Murali - the other great spinner of his era - because he never has.

 

Lara has destroyed both  Warne and Murali 

( Murali in his own den ), with devastating consistent step out hits and HUGE tons in Lanka dominating Murali big time 

 

In a god damn 25 year old career over 450 ODIS all sachin Bhakts can remember his 3-4 memorable match winning knocks. Sharjah storm, olanga, and the 2003 WC against Pak. Keep salivating and orgasming  on this all your lives.

 

Sachin even at his very best in the 90s lacked the ruthless match winning ability and consistency of Kohli and ability to finish off games  - Kohli has  easily surpassed him many times over.

 

as a test player it can be argued that sangakkara and Kallis have surpassed him in consistency all round the world with their averages and runs. Tendulkars greater number of runs is just because he stretched his career to an unprecendeted  200 test matches - rather than being a truely stand out quality 

 

Many players in the 2000s have had long purple patches where they have outdone Sachin’s best purple matches - namely Ponting, Kallis and Sangakkara in the 2000s.

 

For someone so hyped - he has never stood out of the league. He is just one among the many greats of his era. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All in all  it is just simple.Sachin avg:ed 45+ @ 87  scoring  18000+ runs  from 89 NOV  onwards withstanding unreal amount of pressure than normal.This 'basic  data' is convincingly better than that of any of his contemporaries.You can filter out any data to belittle him, but the fact is such filtration can be done for any  batsman.For instance just because Lara was so good against Murali, you projects him, but what about his lack of even a single 100+ score against Wasim,Waqar & Donald  3 best fast bowlers of their time??????In short  Why Sachin is evaluated higher than his contmeporaries is because 'he ticks more boxes  combined' than  any other batsman. To  project another batsman's strength(deliberately concealing his other major weaknesses)  compared to that of Sachin's  in a particular factor is just senseless,pathetic and a deliberate attempt to belittle a master batsman

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

All in all  it is just simple.Sachin avg:ed 45+ @ 87  scoring  18000+ runs  from 89 NOV  onwards withstanding unreal amount of pressure than normal.This 'basic  data' is convincingly better than that of any of his contemporaries.You can filter out any data to belittle him, but the fact is such filtration can be done for any  batsman.For instance just because Lara was so good against Murali, you projects him, but what about his lack of even a single 100+ score against Wasim,Waqar & Donald  3 best fast bowlers of their time??????In short  Why Sachin is evaluated higher than his contmeporaries is because 'he ticks more boxes  combined' than  any other batsman. To  project another batsman's strength(deliberately concealing his other major weaknesses)  compared to that of Sachin's  in a particular factor is just senseless,pathetic and a deliberate attempt to belittle a master batsman

 

it is actually the pathetic attempt of your lot to elevate him above anything and everything when there have been equal and better performers - the sensible ones like us just put him at level pegging with the other best.

 

When your blind beliefs are hammered with cold facts, then comes intangibles like " pressure " on him.

 

When you play for your country at the international level - there is pressure. Period.

 

Murali was much more to Lanka - yet he reveled and thrived under pressure.

 

See how Kohli becomes a beast in pressure chases. Thats where the truely great standout.

 

Only in a country like India do fans get orgasms over an Indian batsmen smashing a shitty Zimbabwean seamer. Talk about heights of silly hero worship.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by narenpande1
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

it is actually the pathetic attempt of your lot to elevate him above anything and everything when there have been equal and better performers - the sensible ones like us just put him at level pegging with the other best.

 

When your blind beliefs are hammered with cold facts, then comes intangibles like " pressure " on him.

 

When you play for your country at the international level - there is pressure. Period.

 

Murali was much more to Lanka - yet he reveled and thrived under pressure.

 

 

 

 

 

:hysterical:.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

it is actually the pathetic attempt of your lot to elevate him above anything and everything when there have been equal and better performers - the sensible ones like us just put him at level pegging with the other best.

 

When your blind beliefs are hammered with cold facts, then comes intangibles like " pressure " on him.

 

When you play for your country at the international level - there is pressure. Period.

 

Murali was much more to Lanka - yet he reveled and thrived under pressure.

 

See how Kohli becomes a beast in pressure chases. Thats where the truely great standout.

 

Only in a country like India do fans get orgasms over an Indian batsmen smashing a shitty Zimbabwean seamer. Talk about heights of silly hero worship.

 

 

 

 

 

That's the problem.People like you see only  'an Indian batsmen smashing a shitty Zimbabwean seamer.' And you deliberately neglects other positivies.And this is 'heights of  logic.' Yeah Kohli became a beast in 2015 world cup  SEMI vs AUS and also in 2017 CT final. And Murali was much more to Lanka.Infact Murali was winning test matches for fun against India   in these utmost spinner friendly pitches in  India  because of him being the greatest off spinner the world has ever seen.Isn't it????Get a life maaaaan... 

Edited by rtmohanlal
Link to comment
1 hour ago, narenpande1 said:

 

 

Dude, unlike you I don't live in a fictional world or believe in idol worship of just another very good consistent player.

 

I talk facts without biased emotions.

 

Below is the peak purple patch of tendulkar - unless you want to find a better one..good ahead and prove it.

Attached is also Sangakkara and Ponting's peak. Their peaks have been as good at the very least and even better for more number of runs.

 

You say I have made " random" statements - yet you cannot deny anyone of them with facts.

 

Its just too hard for folks like you to accept that he is just another great player in a legion of great players - 

 

Folks like even fight with you family and spoil relations to defend this guy - who would not give a damn if you were to die tomorrow - this is what they call " idol worship "

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sachin peak.jpg

Sangakkara peak.jpg

Ponting peak.jpg

 

1 hour ago, narenpande1 said:

 

 

Dude, unlike you I don't live in a fictional world or believe in idol worship of just another very good consistent player.

 

I talk facts without biased emotions.

 

Below is the peak purple patch of tendulkar - unless you want to find a better one..good ahead and prove it.

Attached is also Sangakkara and Ponting's peak. Their peaks have been as good at the very least and even better for more number of runs.

 

You say I have made " random" statements - yet you cannot deny anyone of them with facts.

 

Its just too hard for folks like you to accept that he is just another great player in a legion of great players - 

 

Folks like even fight with you family and spoil relations to defend this guy - who would not give a damn if you were to die tomorrow - this is what they call " idol worship "

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sachin peak.jpg

Sangakkara peak.jpg

Ponting peak.jpg

 

 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
unfiltered 1989-2013 200 329 33 15921 248* 53.78 29437+ 54.04* 51 68 14 2058+ 69 Profile
filtered 1993-2002 70 113 13 6510 217 65.10 11669 55.78 24 26 4 876 34

 

Still waiting for answer on how Kallis was more consistent by facts.

 

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

it is actually the pathetic attempt of your lot to elevate him above anything and everything when there have been equal and better performers - the sensible ones like us just put him at level pegging with the other best.

 

When your blind beliefs are hammered with cold facts, then comes intangibles like " pressure " on him.

 

When you play for your country at the international level - there is pressure. Period.

 

Murali was much more to Lanka - yet he reveled and thrived under pressure.

 

See how Kohli becomes a beast in pressure chases. Thats where the truely great standout.

 

Only in a country like India do fans get orgasms over an Indian batsmen smashing a shitty Zimbabwean seamer. Talk about heights of silly hero worship.

 

 

 

 

 

Listen you joker 

 

everyone knows that in Sachin era the greater team through it all was mighty Australians . In fact that aussie team imo was greatest team and dominance in history of world cricket . Machine that literally disintegrated all that stood in its way . Sensational team . Relentless 

 

now joker . Go check srt record v then both home and away . 

 

Dont do crap filters lol keep it very simple . How did Sachin do v these monsters both home and away . You will then understand how great he was as delivered v the best their was when it mattered 

Link to comment

A common mistake by Statsguru noobs is that they think batsman A's stats in games involving bowler B depend entirely on A's ability to negotiate B. They are utterly blind to variables like form, sample size of games, strength of the rest of the sides, match/series context, point in their careers when A is playing B (for instance playing Waqar in the early 90s is an entirely different challenge than playing him in the early noughties, getting Sachin out in late 90s is much tougher than getting him out in 2012 and so on), the opportunities that a player gets during his peak etc etc.

 

Anyone who actually saw SRT bat against full strength Australian attacks including McGrath in 1999 and 2001 would know that he cruised to 580+ runs in 12 innings without even close to being his best. In those series SRT top scored for India in 7 out of 12 innings including the all important series decider in Chennai 2001. So much for McGrath's dominance over Sachin in big games :phehe:. At that point of time, no one even thought that McGrath had any sort of an edge over SRT.

 

So when exactly did McGrath own SRT in Tests?

1. An inconsequential 4th innings of a one-off Test in Delhi 1996 when the game was dead and buried. Ironically back then it wasn't even considered a particularly good attack with Warne missing.

 

2. The Nagpur Test in 2004 when he was rushed back in the side for the 3rd Test without much match practice during the infamous tennis elbow phase.

 

In the subsequent Test in Mumbai, SRT scored 55 on a minefield to help India win the Test. But because the sample size is on the lower side (just 9 Tests with McGrath missing out on playing in India in 1998 due to an injury when SRT was at his absolute peak), the odd failures in Delhi/Nagpur are enough to bring the overall average "against" McGrath down to 36+. The sensible followers of the game like us :winky: who saw these events would get the context and won't read too much into the one-off failures. The jaahils on the other hand would simply look at the raw stats on Statsguru as the Universal Truth and use this as proof that McGrath owned SRT in Tests. More power to them.

 

I guess the jaahils must believe Tendulkar owned Saqlain even more than Warne. Why? Because statsguru said so :winky:

 

695c3f1a-bf2e-47e6-8eee-3a925d139e32.png

 

And they also must believe that Ponting was utterly mediocre against the greatest pace bowling spearheads of his time i.e. Wasim/Ambrose/Donald/Steyn. Why? Because statsguru said so :winky:.

 

dd5d15ab-be0a-4d41-ae3f-116086f0dd7b.png

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Akhtar and Lee were faster than both of them.

 

And you don't have to imagine him facing Johnson at peak.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Keeping aside the battle of belittling and overhyping Sachin, his batting was an art. Never seen a batsman like Sachin. :adore:

 

Edited by Pollack
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Trichromatic said:

 

 

 

Career averages
  Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s  
unfiltered 1989-2013 200 329 33 15921 248* 53.78 29437+ 54.04* 51 68 14 2058+ 69 Profile
filtered 1993-2002 70 113 13 6510 217 65.10 11669 55.78 24 26 4 876 34

 

Still waiting for answer on how Kallis was more consistent by facts.

 

 

Please tell me how this is better than Ponting or Sangakkara's purple patch, for significantly much lesser number of runs @6510 

Its also so surprising that for a player touted so great and better than his peers, his numbers are at best comparable to the best of the era.:phehe:. The bhakts have always known to be intellectually dishonest. Instead of plaining and fairly accepting that there were

equally great players, they will defend him as if their livelihoods depend on showing him better.:giggle:

 

Kallis is more consistent because he ended his career with a greater average and had an equal to greater conversation rate to 100's and 50's. Nobody asked Tendulkar to keep playing and bring down his average by several points because he wanted to selfishly build his personal glory and build overall runs records that would be hard to break. Cant have it both ways.

 

Tendulkar:

50 and above  in every 4.83 innings

100 and above  in every 6.45 innings

 

Kallis:

50 and above in every 4.82 innings

100 and above in every 6.22 innings

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, King Tendulkar said:

Listen you joker 

 

everyone knows that in Sachin era the greater team through it all was mighty Australians . In fact that aussie team imo was greatest team and dominance in history of world cricket . Machine that literally disintegrated all that stood in its way . Sensational team . Relentless 

 

now joker . Go check srt record v then both home and away . 

 

Dont do crap filters lol keep it very simple . How did Sachin do v these monsters both home and away . You will then understand how great he was as delivered v the best their was when it mattered 

 

Typical of the SRT pack of wild dogs fan brigade to keep using personal abuse when their hero is questioned - without any provocation - instead of agreeing to disagree. They would even abuse their family members if they had a difference of opinion over their overrated hero.

 

Going by your dimwitted  ( common symptom of your lot ) reasoning harbhajan must be a much greater bowler than Muralitharan 

because his best performances came against  Monsters, beasts, machines alligators etc. etc  Australia :phehe:

 

Sachin vs Australia with and without Mcgrath ...such a big drop in performances. Its not a coincidence. 

 

And nor is Sachin's exaggerated performance. He shat in the entire 2003 series in Australia when the pitches were spicy, and then in the final test match on a Sydney patta wicket where India scored some 700 plus runs, played a pathetic selfish notout knock to boost his numbers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

A common mistake by Statsguru noobs is that they think batsman A's stats in games involving bowler B depend entirely on A's ability to negotiate B. They are utterly blind to variables like form, sample size of games, strength of the rest of the sides, match/series context, point in their careers when A is playing B (for instance playing Waqar in the early 90s is an entirely different challenge than playing him in the early noughties, getting Sachin out in late 90s is much tougher than getting him out in 2012 and so on), the opportunities that a player gets during his peak etc etc.

 

Anyone who actually saw SRT bat against full strength Australian attacks including McGrath in 1999 and 2001 would know that he cruised to 580+ runs in 12 innings without even close to being his best. In those series SRT top scored for India in 7 out of 12 innings including the all important series decider in Chennai 2001. So much for McGrath's dominance over Sachin in big games :phehe:. At that point of time, no one even thought that McGrath had any sort of an edge over SRT.

 

So when exactly did McGrath own SRT in Tests?

1. An inconsequential 4th innings of a one-off Test in Delhi 1996 when the game was dead and buried. Ironically back then it wasn't even considered a particularly good attack with Warne missing.

 

2. The Nagpur Test in 2004 when he was rushed back in the side for the 3rd Test without much match practice during the infamous tennis elbow phase.

 

In the subsequent Test in Mumbai, SRT scored 55 on a minefield to help India win the Test. But because the sample size is on the lower side (just 9 Tests with McGrath missing out on playing in India in 1998 due to an injury when SRT was at his absolute peak), the odd failures in Delhi/Nagpur are enough to bring the overall average "against" McGrath down to 36+. The sensible followers of the game like us :winky: who saw these events would get the context and won't read too much into the one-off failures. The jaahils on the other hand would simply look at the raw stats on Statsguru as the Universal Truth and use this as proof that McGrath owned SRT in Tests. More power to them.

 

I guess the jaahils must believe Tendulkar owned Saqlain even more than Warne. Why? Because statsguru said so :winky:

 

695c3f1a-bf2e-47e6-8eee-3a925d139e32.png

 

And they also must believe that Ponting was utterly mediocre against the greatest pace bowling spearheads of his time i.e. Wasim/Ambrose/Donald/Steyn. Why? Because statsguru said so :winky:.

 

dd5d15ab-be0a-4d41-ae3f-116086f0dd7b.png

 

 

 

Nobody is getting misguided by your bells and whistles . I hope your dad does not disagree with your views on Tendulkar else , you may call him a jahiil too, such is your extreme rabidness.

 

Failures in multiple  WC encounters  finals, semis ..etc bear out undeniable facts.

 

 

Your hero is not better off..over a much larger " sample size" of 32 test matches against 4 of the greatest fast bowlers in the last 25 years.

 

What a remarkable fall of almost 17 points in average when pitted against the very best and average of 35/36

 

But..but I thought he was the greatest thing ever in batting since Bradman,  or perhaps even greater no ? :giggle:

 

Such things should not happen to somebody who is better than his peers no ? :giggle:

 

 

 

 

Tendulkar vs the best.jpg

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

Typical of the SRT pack of wild dogs fan brigade to keep using personal abuse when their hero is questioned - without any provocation - instead of agreeing to disagree. They would even abuse their family members if they had a difference of opinion over their overrated hero.

 

Going by your dimwitted  ( common symptom of your lot ) reasoning harbhajan must be a much greater bowler than Muralitharan 

because his best performances came against  Monsters, beasts, machines alligators etc. etc  Australia :phehe:

 

Sachin vs Australia with and without Mcgrath ...such a big drop in performances. Its not a coincidence. 

 

And nor is Sachin's exaggerated performance. He shat in the entire 2003 series in Australia when the pitches were spicy, and then in the final test match on a Sydney patta wicket where India scored some 700 plus runs, played a pathetic selfish notout knock to boost his numbers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Typical of blind  haters of Sachin.....By general conscience there are various factors that determines  the greatness of a batsman .Take any particular factor.Filter out  data of a batsman who is better  to Sachin in that particular factor & neglect all other factors as non existant.Even the context w.r.t that filtered out data can be neglected. Then claiming that Sachin was over all a lesser batsman.

For instance the peak data you filtered out  is a prime example of this.Firstly even if another batsman is slightly better to Sachin in this particular factor , that doesn't mean Sachin is a lesser over all batsman.Secondly there is a context to it. For instance Sachin played only far lesser no: of tests in  his filtered out peak period.Conveniently neglect this context too.

 

 

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

Typical of blind  haters of Sachin.....By general conscience there are various factors that determines  the greatness of a batsman .Take any particular factor.Filter out  data of a batsman who is better  to Sachin in that particular factor & neglect all other factors as non existant.Even the context w.r.t that filtered out data can be neglected. Then claiming that Sachin was over all a lesser batsman.

For instance the peak data you filtered out  is a prime example of this.Firstly even if another batsman is slightly better to Sachin in this particular factor , that doesn't mean Sachin is a lesser over all batsman.Secondly there is a context to it. For instance Sachin played only far lesser no: of tests in  his filtered out peak period.Conveniently neglect this context too.

 

 

 I am not blind like your lot. 

 

I am rational and fair. I don’t elevate someone by blind worship. I have never said that he is not a true great.. but so are many of his peers. He does not stand out as his irrational Bhakts want others to believe. Statistically and factually others are as great. Sangakkara was a god damn keeper, also captain and Ponting was a long time captain - huge responsibilities. Tendulkar just had to focus on his batting for most of his career. Yet he does not stand out 

 

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 I am not blind like your lot. 

 

I am rational and fair. I don’t elevate someone by blind worship. I have never said that he is not a true great.. but so are many of his peers. He does not stand out as his irrational Bhakts want others to believe. Statistically and factually others are as great. Sangakkara was a god damn keeper, also captain and Ponting was a long time captain - huge responsibilities. Tendulkar just had to focus on his batting for most of his career. Yet he does not stand out 

 

I too am not a blind believer. it is just that when every factors combined, Sachin was the better to  each and every one of his peers for me.And I too do not have any ill feelings towards others who considers  some other batsman better to Sachin.But the criteria people like you use is simply of double standard and hence the problem.For instance you projects Lara the better player of Murali's bowling than Sachin.But  you conveniently  neglects Lara's lack of 100s vs 3 ATG fast bowlers.Similarly you puts forward peak data.But again does not take into account that Sachin is the only batsman with 40+ avg: in every country he played   in despite   scoring almost 20% more  runs than nearest  Ponting.In short ,projecting another batsman's  slight brilliance over Sachin in one  batting factor, then completely neglecting Sachin's convincingly better brilliance over the other batsman in  another batting factor....Then calling yourself   rational and fair.

Edited by rtmohanlal
Link to comment
1 hour ago, narenpande1 said:

 

Nobody is getting misguided by your bells and whistles . I hope your dad does not disagree with your views on Tendulkar else , you may call him a jahiil too, such is your extreme rabidness.

 

Failures in multiple  WC encounters  finals, semis ..etc bear out undeniable facts.

Speak for yourself brah. Sensible followers of the game know exactly where I am coming from. But yes for Statsguru Nazis it may come across as bells and whistles. Understandable. 

 

My dad ain't much of a cricket fan but I hope your dad doesn't like Sachin all that much. Otherwise you may end up calling him an idiotic Sachin fan being the jaahil that you are.

 

What is hilarious though is that you seem to seem to think of yourself as some who is "above" the rabid Sachin fanboys who belittle every other batsman. When the fact is you happen to be just as rabid and partisan when it comes to Sachin just in a different way. Self awareness is truly in short supply these days. :phehe:

 

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

I too am not a blind believer. it is just that when every factors combined, Sachin was the better to  each and every one of his peers for me.And I too do not have any ill feelings towards others who considers  some other batsman better to Sachin.But the criteria people like you use is simply of double standard and hence the problem.For instance you projects Lara the better player of Murali's bowling than Sachin.But  you conveniently  neglects Lara's lack of 100s vs 3 ATG fast bowlers.Similarly you puts forward peak data.But again does not take into account that Sachin is the only batsman with 40+ avg: in every country he played   in despite   scoring almost 20% more  runs than nearest  Ponting.In short ,projecting another batsman's  slight brilliance over Sachin in one  batting factor, then completely neglecting Sachin's convincingly better brilliance over the other batsman in  another batting factor....Then calling yourself   rational and fair.

 

Every batsmen has flaws in records and games and Sachin is no different. 

 

If you are a reasonable cricket follower you would agree that Lara is way more destructive against spinners - the best of the best and Murali has said this on many occasions, just like Warne has praised Sachin mostly. But having followed the game - Lara is way to ruthless against spinners. Lara too has his share of short comings, he scores huge hundreds and then series of poor scores  - more inconsistent. Lara struggles against raw sheer pace, have seen him struggle against Akhtar. But to his credit when he gets going he finishes off matches. It is your lot that indulges in selective cherry picking and intellectual dishonesty. You say Sachin has scored 20 % more runs than Ponting, but don't mention that he has played 32 more test matches, or 20 % more matches.

 

You can keep your views but they don't stand up against any objective qualitative measure. Neither has Sachin ever dominated batsmen ranking for any reasonable period, nor did he achieve any peak comparable to his peers in batting rating points, nor did any of his knocks of over 200 test matches ( most capped player ) find their way in Wisden rankings. That says a lot.

 

He is still a true Indian great, heaped many records due to his class and longetivity and was the backbone of out batting for  5-6 years and credit to him for that. But he does not stand out relative to his peers in terms of sheer quality.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
On 3/9/2018 at 9:41 PM, Mosher said:

Didn't Sachin smash Warne around in a warm-up game which Aussies had vs Mumbai before the test match? I think that onslaught set the template for the rest of series. 

Not just Sachin, a few other Mumbai batsmen also thrashed Warne like he was a club bowlerin that match. That set the tone for the series. Mumbai batsmen have a history of toying with Warne. Vinod Kambli was the first of them. He mauled Warne taking some 24 run in one over in Sharjah in 1994. YouTube has a video of this.

Link to comment
16 hours ago, narenpande1 said:

 

Every batsmen has flaws in records and games and Sachin is no different. 

 

If you are a reasonable cricket follower you would agree that Lara is way more destructive against spinners - the best of the best and Murali has said this on many occasions, just like Warne has praised Sachin mostly. But having followed the game - Lara is way to ruthless against spinners. Lara too has his share of short comings, he scores huge hundreds and then series of poor scores  - more inconsistent. Lara struggles against raw sheer pace, have seen him struggle against Akhtar. But to his credit when he gets going he finishes off matches. It is your lot that indulges in selective cherry picking and intellectual dishonesty. You say Sachin has scored 20 % more runs than Ponting, but don't mention that he has played 32 more test matches, or 20 % more matches.

 

You can keep your views but they don't stand up against any objective qualitative measure. Neither has Sachin ever dominated batsmen ranking for any reasonable period, nor did he achieve any peak comparable to his peers in batting rating points, nor did any of his knocks of over 200 test matches ( most capped player ) find their way in Wisden rankings. That says a lot.

 

He is still a true Indian great, heaped many records due to his class and longetivity and was the backbone of out batting for  5-6 years and credit to him for that. But he does not stand out relative to his peers in terms of sheer quality.

 

 

 

 

 

your analysis of Lara and Sachin is reasonable except  " when Lara gets going he finishes off matches". As if  somebody forced Ponting not to play for long 24 years & those extra 32 matches.,this is an utter crap reasoning on  your part.

 

And then comes pure emotional blah blah blah with out any reasoning at all.That's it.

Edited by rtmohanlal
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...