20 years back, on this day - Tendulkar outwits Warne

[narenpande1]

2 hours ago, rtmohanlal said:

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.

 

Did anybody seek your validation ? Are you some authority on cricketing analysis ? You are a just another biased fan boy, a nobody.

 

Ofcourse, you would get pinched at the mention of " finish of matches" , especially chases because your god/hero has seldom done that in tough matches although he has played nearly 800 games for India. In a career of over 25 years, how many matches has he seen the team through in a tough dog fight ?  Can already think of dozens of matches that Kohli has seen us through batting at #3, Laxman was similarly a clutch player in close chases in test matches,batting with the tail..etc. Yuvraj and Dhoni similarly have seen India through so many tight chases. QUite pathetic of your hero.

 

Regarding 24 years..etc..Typical of a Sachin fan, quantity over quality. Yes, its not Ponting's fault. He plays for Australia, where the team and country is always way above the individual, the selectors have the power to drop any non performer, unlike in India 

where with a mafia like Sachin , the selectors fear losing their jobs , and he kept playing shamelessly after the 2011 WC to reach his 100 100th,  averaging in 20's in his last 15 test matches and a disgracefully slow and selfish 100 that saw us knocked out of the Asia Cup against a lowly Bangladesh.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8532/scorecard/535797/bangladesh-vs-india-4th-match-asia-cup-2011-12

 

Had he played for Australia, his he would have been axed a long time back.

 

Its about quality and not quantity - Kohli does not have to play a single ODI more to have established that he is 2 times the player Sachin ever was . He can shove his extra number of runs , up where the sun dont shine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kira]

lol pande abhi tak dande kha rha hai sab se 

[rtmohanlal]

37 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

Did anybody seek your validation ? Are you some authority on cricketing analysis ? You are a just another biased fan boy, a nobody.

 

Ofcourse, you would get pinched at the mention of " finish of matches" , especially chases because your god/hero has seldom done that in tough matches although he has played nearly 800 games for India. In a career of over 25 years, how many matches has he seen the team through in a tough dog fight ?  Can already think of dozens of matches that Kohli has seen us through batting at #3, Laxman was similarly a clutch player in close chases in test matches,batting with the tail..etc. Yuvraj and Dhoni similarly have seen India through so many tight chases. QUite pathetic of your hero.

 

Regarding 24 years..etc..Typical of a Sachin fan, quantity over quality. Yes, its not Ponting's fault. He plays for Australia, where the team and country is always way above the individual, the selectors have the power to drop any non performer, unlike in India 

where with a mafia like Sachin , the selectors fear losing their jobs , and he kept playing shamelessly after the 2011 WC to reach his 100 100th,  averaging in 20's in his last 15 test matches and a disgracefully slow and selfish 100 that saw us knocked out of the Asia Cup against a lowly Bangladesh.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8532/scorecard/535797/bangladesh-vs-india-4th-match-asia-cup-2011-12

 

Had he played for Australia, his he would have been axed a long time back.

 

Its about quality and not quantity - Kohli does not have to play a single ODI more to have established that he is 2 times the player Sachin ever was . He can shove his extra number of runs , up where the sun dont shine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

" You can keep your views but they don't stand up against any objective qualitative measure " - I accept that I am not any authority, but then who are you to make up things like these???? not worth to discuss  further.

[narenpande1]

16 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

" You can keep your views but they don't stand up against any objective qualitative measure " - I accept that I am not any authority, but then who are you to make up things like these???? not worth to discuss  further.

 

 

I am not " making up anything". I said objective qualitative measure. And in that post also mentioned what the objective criteria are.  How many years has he dominated  ICC batsmen rankings in his 24/25 years career ? What is the greatest performance rating that he has scaled for ODIS and tests ? These are " objective criteria".

 

For someone some elevated so high by an irrational fanbase, he falls seriously short on most objective criteria, when he should be crushing it.

 

 

Edited March 12, 2018 by narenpande1

[Bublu Bhuyan]

LOL, I wonder why Kohli himself considers Sachin his guru? Must be blind to obvious facts. Not only him, I wonder why so many of them consider him his guru including Sehwag and Yuvraj? All of them must be blind. They need to read this thread to realize the truth and wake up from their slumber.

[rtmohanlal]

32 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

 

I am not " making up anything". I said objective qualitative measure. And in that post also mentioned what the objective criteria are.  How many years has he dominated  ICC batsmen rankings in his 24/25 years career ? What is the greatest performance rating that he has scaled for ODIS and tests ? These are " objective criteria".

 

For someone some elevated so high by an irrational fanbase, he falls seriously short on most objective criteria, when he should be crushing it.

 

 

I repeat........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 .......this is the basic principle on which every Sachin hater or every  person who opposes Sachin operates.And you are no different.

[Bublu Bhuyan]

3 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

I repeat........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 .......this is the basic principle on which every Sachin hater or every  person who opposes Sachin operates.And you are no different.

For example, how good Sehwag was against spinners. What about his miserable performance outside Asia where he doesn't even hold a candle to Sachin? Sangakkara's average ... well how about his average away from Asia? Kallis's consistency .... well how about his horrible strike rate and the fact that he never, ever was able to dominate attacks like Sachin did?

Edited March 12, 2018 by Bublu Bhuyan

[Trichromatic]

On 3/11/2018 at 3:31 PM, narenpande1 said:

 

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.. 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.

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kallis played 280 innings. In his first 280 innings SRT had better century to innings ratio than kallis.

[rtmohanlal]

4 hours ago, Bublu Bhuyan said:

For example, how good Sehwag was against spinners. What about his miserable performance outside Asia where he doesn't even hold a candle to Sachin? Sangakkara's average ... well how about his average away from Asia? Kallis's consistency .... well how about his horrible strike rate and the fact that he never, ever was able to dominate attacks like Sachin did?

But then..... nothing matters to these  blind Sachin haters.How ever clearly facts are conveyed to them , they will come back with the same senseless bull ****, because that is their sole intention.

[putrevus]

14 hours ago, Bublu Bhuyan said:

For example, how good Sehwag was against spinners. What about his miserable performance outside Asia where he doesn't even hold a candle to Sachin? Sangakkara's average ... well how about his average away from Asia? Kallis's consistency .... well how about his horrible strike rate and the fact that he never, ever was able to dominate attacks like Sachin did?

Sehwag is never mentioned as All time best .He does not have his fans fighting when someone points his flaws.Sehwag in full flow against spinners is not just good but he was in my book the best against spinners.He is the best Indian batsman in Asia , unlike any other Indian batsmen he has excellent record in Pakistan and Srilanka.His unbeaten 201 is one of the best knocks by any Indian batsmen.

 

He was pathetic against fast bowlers away from Asia.He would agree with that assessment also.What attacks has Sachin dominated away from India, I have never seen Sachin dominate like Sehwag did in Asia.Did Sachin dominate any attack like Sehwag did in Asia if yes where, I would love to know it.

[Bublu Bhuyan]

When did anyone claim that Sachin dominated attacks away from Asia? Also when did anyone claim that Sachin dominated attacks in Asia as much as Sehwag did? All I said is that Sachin did dominate attacks in the 90's, something Kallis couldn't do in his entire career. What about Sehwag being a walking wicket most of the times outside Asia? So if Sehwag holds an advantage over Sachin of being being better in Asia (mind you Sachin was brilliant as well), Sachin holds the advantage of being awesome away from Asia (something Sehwag fails miserably in).

 

It's hilarious seeing people bringing in multiple factors from multiple players and comparing all of them with a single player i.e Sachin. Sehwag's dominance, Ponting's team victories, Kallis's and Sangakkara's superior overall average, Dravid's slightly better average away from Asia (although he was a big time flop in SA, and wasn't anything special in Aus) ...... and then compare all of them to a single player :))

Edited March 13, 2018 by Bublu Bhuyan

[rtmohanlal]

5 minutes ago, Bublu Bhuyan said:

When did anyone claim that Sachin dominated attacks away from Asia? Also when did anyone claim that Sachin dominated attacks in Asia as much as Sehwag did? All I said is that Sachin did dominate attacks in the 90's, something Kallis couldn't do in his entire career. What about Sehwag being a walking wicket most of the times outside Asia? So if Sehwag holds an advantage over Sachin of being being better in Asia (mind you Sachin was brilliant as well), Sachin holds the advantage of being awesome away from Asia (something Sehwag fails miserably in).

 

It's hilarious seeing people bringing in multiple factors from multiple players and comparing all of them with a single player i.e Sachin. Sehwag's dominance, Ponting's team victories, Kallis's and Sangakkara's superior overall average, Dravid's slightly better average away from Asia (although he was a big time flop in SA, and wasn't anything special in Aus) ...... and then compare all of them to a single player :))

Heard that Gary Kirsten was a brilliant tournament final  player and his stats in one day finals is out of the world. Let us hope, that too would come into play for pitting against Sachin  by any of these Sachin bashers soon.

[Bublu Bhuyan]

42 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

Heard that Gary Kirsten was a brilliant tournament final  player and his stats in one day finals is out of the world. Let us hope, that too would come into play for pitting against Sachin  by any of these Sachin bashers soon.

Yea, averages 67.93 @ SR - 74.15 compared to Sachin who averages 54.44 @ SR - 87.68 in tournament finals.

 

Sure, they might as well make Kirsten's average a point. But then again they would ignore the SR factor which is equally as important in ODI cricket. But against that's the name of their game, that's how they play it.

Edited March 13, 2018 by Bublu Bhuyan

[rtmohanlal]

1 hour ago, Bublu Bhuyan said:

Yea, averages 67.93 @ SR - 74.15 compared to Sachin who averages 54.44 @ SR - 87.68 in tournament finals.

 

Sure, they might as well make Kirsten's average a point. But then again they would ignore the SR factor which is equally as important in ODI cricket. But against that's the name of their game, that's how they play it.

1 hour ago, Bublu Bhuyan said:

 

 

And we can find even 'mad stray dog level' posts too.To be more precise suppose that there are multiple functions going on and speeches are conducted  on all of these functions. As far as a mad stray dog is concerned , what ever comes from each of these areas are mere noises and it will just bark  along with these noises. Here too ,we can see such 'blind anti Sachin' comments in topics that have nothing related with Sachin.Just as is the case of that stray dog, for like minded posters, each and every topic is an oppertunity to bash Sachin.

  To our misfortune, some time fall into this trap of responding, however strongly  restraint ourselves from doing so.    

Edited March 13, 2018 by rtmohanlal

[putrevus]

When did anyone claim that Sachin dominated attacks away from Asia? Also when did anyone claim that Sachin dominated attacks in Asia as much as Sehwag did? All I said is that Sachin did dominate attacks in the 90's, something Kallis couldn't do in his entire career. What about Sehwag being a walking wicket most of the times outside Asia? So if Sehwag holds an advantage over Sachin of being being better in Asia (mind you Sachin was brilliant as well), Sachin holds the advantage of being awesome away from Asia (something Sehwag fails miserably in).
 
It's hilarious seeing people bringing in multiple factors from multiple players and comparing all of them with a single player i.e Sachin. Sehwag's dominance, Ponting's team victories, Kallis's and Sangakkara's superior overall average, Dravid's slightly better average away from Asia (although he was a big time flop in SA, and wasn't anything special in Aus) ...... and then compare all of them to a single player :))

Ok Sachin didn’t dominate away from him , whom did he dominate at Home like Sehwag.Other than his 155 and him dominating Warne who did Sachin dominate at home.

Sachin was a dominant force in Odis that too in Asia especially in 1998 and 1999.Sachin never dominated any test series away or home as evidenced by his lack of 500 plus in a single series or scoring hundreds in both innings.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bublu Bhuyan]

3 hours ago, putrevus said:

Ok Sachin didn’t dominate away from him , whom did he dominate at Home like Sehwag.Other than his 155 and him dominating Warne who did Sachin dominate at home.

Sachin was a dominant force in Odis that too in Asia especially in 1998 and 1999.Sachin never dominated any test series away or home as evidenced by his lack of 500 plus in a single series or scoring hundreds in both innings.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you were expecting Sachin to dominate like Sehwag or Gilchrist did, the problem lies with you. Sehwag and Gilchrist are known for them dominating attacks. A player doesnot necessarily have to score at an SR of 90+ in a year in order for him to be termed an aggresive or dominating batsman. Just an example, we all know Lara was known as someone who loved dominating bowlers. What's his career SR in Tests? It's 60, which is not even close to Sehwag or Gilchrist's SR. Why exactly was he known as an aggressive batsman with an urge to dominate attacks in that case? Same with Hayden, he had an SR of 60 odd. Why was he known to be an aggressive batsman? Sachin had an SR of 86+ in ODI cricket throughout the 90s. The only other batsman in that era with a better SR was Jayasuriya who had an SR of 89 back then, although he was terribly inconsistent. An SR of 70 was very respectable back then. That's why he was known to be a dominating/aggressive batsman. It's obviously a different case in Tests, he was the mainstay in the batting department and he could not cut loose like a maniac in that format, but most of all the format didn't require him to cut loose. Yet he played plenty of innings with an SR of more than 60 or 70. Now you'll tell me that an SR of 60 odd can't be termed as aggressive one. Why exactly were Lara and Hayden termed aggressive batsman in that case?

 

No, he did not dominate at home like Sehwag did, but then again no one apart from Gilchirst in history did so either. But most of all, does anyone claim that he dominated like Sehwag at home? Most rational cricket fans would prefer a complete batsman with a respectable strike rate who can score in all conditions and at all places rather than someone like Sehwag who would tonk bowlers in favorable conditions at home while become a walking wicket in alien conditions. Sehwag is someone one would have if the batting line up already has stalwarts who are good enough to take the team to a respectable score in case the hit and miss Sehwag goes missing. No one with a brain would consider Sehwag in a brittle line up because he is not someone the team can depend on to score runs particularly in alien conditions.

 

As for your second part, a player doesn't necessarily have score over 500 runs in a series to be the MVP in that series, he can be so even by scoring 499 runs. Yes, Sachin didn't score 500 or more runs in a series. But more so, why do we keep hearing that from some people? Because that's one factor they can knock on him. Basically they all keep looking for holes in him, the moment they find even a marginal one, they jump to rooftops and keep screaming about it for the others to take notice. A player can be the MVP of a series when he performs better than the rest of his team mates, not necessarily if he scores 500 odd runs or takes 30 odd wickets in the series.

Edited March 13, 2018 by Bublu Bhuyan

[Bublu Bhuyan]

Like I said before, it's easy to simply bring in Sehwag's superior ability to dominate attacks at home more than Sachin.  But batting has many other aspects, and many of them are far more important than just the ability to dominate at home. Let's just talk of one such aspect, let's compare Sachin and Sehwag's performances away from Asia

 

Sehwag - 63 (innings); Runs - 2145; 35.36 (ave); 100's - 5

 

Sachin - 128 (innings); Runs - 6007; 50.9 (ave); 100's - 18

 

 

So if we talk about Sehwag's superior ability of dominating attacks at home, why shouldn't we talk of Sachin's ultra superior ability of performing in alien conditions, an abilty which is far more important for a batsman? And mind you, Sachin wasn't a mug at performing at home, he did play aggressively (although nowhere as aggressively as Sehwag), but Sehwag was an absolute mug compared to Sachin in his ability to perform in alien conditions.

 

You see it's easy to bring in a certain aspect of a player's game and claim his superiority over Sachin based solely on that criteria. The thing to remember however is that there are many other far more important aspects where Sachin beats that player black and blue. Quite simple really.

Edited March 13, 2018 by Bublu Bhuyan

[kruiser]

Bhai kyon jawab dekar apni energy waste kar rahe ho.. just accept that md kaif was a much better and complete batsman.. Tendu only survived due to mumbai lobby.

All his records and humility and discipline will be accorded to Pakistan and we will disown Sachin.

[putrevus]

5 hours ago, Bublu Bhuyan said:

If you were expecting Sachin to dominate like Sehwag or Gilchrist did, the problem lies with you. Sehwag and Gilchrist are known for them dominating attacks. A player doesnot necessarily have to score at an SR of 90+ in a year in order for him to be termed an aggresive or dominating batsman. Just an example, we all know Lara was known as someone who loved dominating bowlers. What's his career SR in Tests? It's 60, which is not even close to Sehwag or Gilchrist's SR. Why exactly was he known as an aggressive batsman with an urge to dominate attacks in that case? Same with Hayden, he had an SR of 60 odd. Why was he known to be an aggressive batsman? Sachin had an SR of 86+ in ODI cricket throughout the 90s. The only other batsman in that era with a better SR was Jayasuriya who had an SR of 89 back then, although he was terribly inconsistent. An SR of 70 was very respectable back then. That's why he was known to be a dominating/aggressive batsman. It's obviously a different case in Tests, he was the mainstay in the batting department and he could not cut loose like a maniac in that format, but most of all the format didn't require him to cut loose. Yet he played plenty of innings with an SR of more than 60 or 70. Now you'll tell me that an SR of 60 odd can't be termed as aggressive one. Why exactly were Lara and Hayden termed aggressive batsman in that case?

 

No, he did not dominate at home like Sehwag did, but then again no one apart from Gilchirst in history did so either. But most of all, does anyone claim that he dominated like Sehwag at home? Most rational cricket fans would prefer a complete batsman with a respectable strike rate who can score in all conditions and at all places rather than someone like Sehwag who would tonk bowlers in favorable conditions at home while become a walking wicket in alien conditions. Sehwag is someone one would have if the batting line up already has stalwarts who are good enough to take the team to a respectable score in case the hit and miss Sehwag goes missing. No one with a brain would consider Sehwag in a brittle line up because he is not someone the team can depend on to score runs particularly in alien conditions.

 

As for your second part, a player doesn't necessarily have score over 500 runs in a series to be the MVP in that series, he can be so even by scoring 499 runs. Yes, Sachin didn't score 500 or more runs in a series. But more so, why do we keep hearing that from some people? Because that's one factor they can knock on him. Basically they all keep looking for holes in him, the moment they find even a marginal one, they jump to rooftops and keep screaming about it for the others to take notice. A player can be the MVP of a series when he performs better than the rest of his team mates, not necessarily if he scores 500 odd runs or takes 30 odd wickets in the series.

No one said Sehwag was better than Sachin nor no claimed Sehwag was the All time greatest batsmen. Like other very good batsmen of his Era Sehwag has his flaws too.

 

Sachin is only batsmen whom his fans in particular argue as ATG batsman and many of those rate him higher than Don Bradman.That is problem  and that is point of debate.Sachin in any book does not fit profile of greatest batsmen of all time.

 

He was great batsman who never had dominating run like many of his peers or past great batsmen.But he was very consistent without being dominating and he was technically very good so he could adapt in all conditions.I would rate him as technically most adaptable batsman of all time.Sachin had very long career ( we can argue whether it needed to that long but that topic is for another time) and that longevity is his greatest achievement.It shows how great he was in terms of adapting to changing needs of modern day cricket.

 

 

[flamy]

I don't remember watching this live, but I just watched the movie - Sachin - and this part was epic.