Time to shed the century fixation

[Ram]

Last 49 runs off 47 balls is most definitely accelerating , especially in a match where both sides scored at 5 runs/over average. When somoene has 99 from 150-odd balls and the last 49 from 47 balls, its utterly ridiculous to say that this player was wasting balls for a century. A more apt charge would be that Tendulkar played very slowly in the first half of his innings and that cost us a lot of momentum. Still, his batting effort today was the third best in the match from either side- only Kallis and Dravid played a better innings than Tendy but it must also be said that the pitch eased out significantly from 20/25 overs mark onwards in the first dig. Sure, not a 'stellar' performance but as someone said, 'still better than most'. Tendulkar is not batting like a God and hasnt batted like a God very often in the past 4 years. He may never bat like a God again ( in terms of consistently dominating innings) but he is still definitely good enough to play ODI cricket for India. Hopefully he has enough gas left in the tank to give another topclass year in the future but lets not hold the 'old tendulkar' to the same standards of the 'young tendulkar'.

Excellent Analysis !

[yoda]

Last 49 runs off 47 balls is most definitely accelerating ' date=' especially in a match where both sides scored at 5 runs/over average. When somoene has 99 from 150-odd balls and the last 49 from 47 balls, its utterly ridiculous to say that this player was wasting balls for a century. [/quote'] For the logically and mathematically challenged: Tendulkar: 99/143 (SR: 69) Rest of India: 130/147 (SR: 89) He hogged half the deliveries at 69 SR. Obviously that impacts our overall RR. DUH! And why did Saffies score at 5 RPO? That was the asking rate. DUH!

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[CC1981]

For the logically and mathematically challenged: Tendulkar: 99/143 (SR: 69) Rest of India: 130/147 (SR: 89)

For the logically, mathematically and honesty-challenged, the charge was that Tendulkar didnt accelerate near the end and 'puttered around for his ton'. This is a categorically false charge since he scored at MORE THAN run-a-ball for the last 50% of his runs. Dont go shifting around the goalposts now, yods. I find your criticism of the third best batsman from either side yesterday a bit hollow in its objectivity.

[yoda]

For the logically, mathematically and honesty-challenged, the charge was that Tendulkar didnt accelerate near the end and 'puttered around for his ton'. This is a categorically false charge since he scored at MORE THAN run-a-ball for the last 50% of his runs. Dont go shifting around the goalposts now, yods. I find your criticism of the third best batsman from either side yesterday a bit hollow in its objectivity.

Bottom line is that we were runs short and lost the match. If only the guy could have played at the same SR as the rest of the team we could have possibly won. This 69 SR performance is not praise worthy!

[yoda]

I dont think the numbers you got are right ... heres the numbers I got .. Since 01-01-2007 in ODIs

RD            15   12   3   501  78   74   66   55.66   0   6   0
SRT        [COLOR=#ff0000]   12   11   2   413 100*  99   60   45.88   1   4   2[/COLOR]

although the avg says 10 point diff he is just 88 runs short Since 01-01-2006 in ODIs

RD              42   39   4  1420 105   92   78   40.57   1  14   2
SRT            [COLOR=#ff0000] 28   27   4  1041 141* 100* 100   45.26   3   7   3[/COLOR]

He actually avgs 5 points more than RD (Cant compare the runs since he has played much less than RD in the past year and half )and I can assure you the SR would be as good (if not better) than RD.

06 is history. yes his SR has always been pretty good, which is why this innings isn't worth much.

[CC1981]

If only the guy could have played at the same SR as the rest of the team we could have possibly won. This 69 SR performance is not praise worthy!

In other words, you didnt watch the match. :hysterical: Dude, when Tendy was batting, pitch was definitely hard to bat on and Ntini was bowling brilliantly. Batsmen dont go bat against bowling machines- if you want to see the difference between Saffie openers' strike rate and Tendy's, the answer is simple : Ntini. We dont have an opening bowler even HALF as good as Makhaya on these types of pitches. Bottomline: third best batting performance for the MATCH means you lampooning Tendulkar is without cause. If he'd batted like rest of Indian lineup did yesterday, India would've been 180 all-out in 40 overs. Then you'd have lampooned him even more. Here is a task for you: look up the word 'objectivity' in the dictionary. :giggle:

[Lurker]

^^ It tells a story that SRT who is unraguably the greatest Indian batsman in LOI is now compared to Rahul Dravid, who by all accounts would not make it to an all-time Indian XI(unless as a keeper). SRT might still be good enough to play for India. But that is because everyone else is seriously crap too. I mean which team in the world would be proud of having RD as their best LOI batsmen? Australia have a string of bats, SL have a few good men, SA have Kallis, England have KP etc etc. SRT is not even India's best LOI batting today! The unfortunate thing is that even SRT's ardent fan don't realize that the more he plays the more he taints his legacy. Initially the criticism was hush-hush,today you have to open any media(Indian or overseas) and see how experts are slowly venting against the greatest Indian batsman of our time. I will still support him for this series as I had mentioned before but the problem to SRT might very well come from the fans that believe in him, and not from those who do not! xxx

[CC1981]

06 is history.

Well then yesteday is history too. So stop commenting. Who deciedes where this 'history' and 'present' demrcation lies ? is it last match, 5 matches, 10 matches, 1 yr, 2 yr, 1.5554 years ? :haha: Bottomline: Tendulkar was the third best batsman yesterday out of 17 who batted yesteday. Deal with this fact please, which makes every other 'kintu/but' irrelevant.

[CC1981]

The unfortunate thing is that even SRT's ardent fan don't realize that the more he plays the more he taints his legacy.

Err no. The more he plays, the more he ENHANCES his legacy, atleast in the ODIs. Your legacy is to do well in your field- since Tendulkar's presence in the ODI team is very much on merit, each further contribution is an extra milestone in his legacy.

[Lurker]

Err no. The more he plays' date=' the more he ENHANCES his legacy, atleast in the ODIs. Your legacy is to do well in your field- since Tendulkar's presence in the ODI team is very much on merit, each further contribution is an extra milestone in his legacy.[/quote'] That would be true....in your mind only. SRT was easily the best LOI bat of 90's, possibly even early 2000's. Is he the world's best LOI batsman today? Does he get counted amongst top 5 even? If your answer to both(or either) is NO help me understand how he is not degrading his legacy please? xxx

[King]

Let me be honest Tendulkar batted well but never really dominated. I'm not saying he didn't look good but he had patches where he looked fantastic on anything pitched up but struggled to put away anything short. He had to bat slow at the start as the ball did a fair bit also with wicket falling around him meant he had to grit out there. I thought he desperately wanted to get to his 100 and that costed his wicket. I'm sure if he wasn't to get out he eventually would have ended up scoring close to run a ball. I didn't think too many would be worrying on this board about his knock considering India lost but Tendulkar catches attention whatever he does I suppose.

[Lurker]

Let me be honest Tendulkar batted well but never really dominated. I'm not saying he didn't look good but he had patches where he looked fantastic on anything pitched up but struggled to put away anything short. He had to bat slow at the start as the ball did a fair bit also with wicket falling around him meant he had to grit out there.

And therein lies the story Ravi. How often, in the past year or two, have we read the same lines? That SRT was tentative at start, played some good strokes in between and then seemed to fizzled out in the end? Is this the first time? NO. In the end what matters most is that India lost. It matters little that SRT or someone else did not score a century. But a case needs to be made that if we are going to lose against a half-strength South African attack anyway why not give the youngsters a chance and push out the old dead wood? xxx

[yoda]

I didn't think too many would be worrying on this board about his knock considering India lost

Contrary. It is only because India lost that I even bother discussing his SR.

[CC1981]

That would be true....in your mind only.

So lemme get this straight- you are right now displaying the temerity and insubordination to speak for every other mind but mine ? How effing ridiculous and pompous !

Is he the world's best LOI batsman today? Does he get counted amongst top 5 even? If your answer to both(or either) is NO help me understand how he is not degrading his legacy please?

Your legacy is not just your numbers- nobody keeps performing at 'optimal efficiency' throughout their careers. If he is good enough, he plays. A player that scores at 35 average after 350 games is better than one who called it quits before 350 games ( assuming their records up to 350 game point is similar). Even though the former player has lower average, he is better. Why ? because he was STILL GOOD ENOUGH to play on while the other one wasn't. Your legacy enhances even in your diminished output mode, so long as your presence in the team is based on merit. If Tendulkar scores another 2000 ODI runs @35 and ends up with 42-ish average, his legacy then would be greater than him scoring 2000 ODI runs les and ending today with 44 average.

[yoda]

Well then yesteday is history too. So stop commenting. Who deciedes where this 'history' and 'present' demrcation lies ? is it last match, 5 matches, 10 matches, 1 yr, 2 yr, 1.5554 years ? :haha: Bottomline: Tendulkar was the third best batsman yesterday out of 17 who batted yesteday. Deal with this fact please, which makes every other 'kintu/but' irrelevant.

most relevant fact is that we were runs short and lost the match cause one of our best bats hogged deliveries.

[Predator_05]

^^ It tells a story that SRT who is unraguably the greatest Indian batsman in LOI is now compared to Rahul Dravid, who by all accounts would not make it to an all-time Indian XI(unless as a keeper). xxx

Eh ? He would easily make it into an all-time Indian ODI XI !! 10,000 runs @ 40 is an absolutely superb return over a 10 year long career.

[CC1981]

That SRT was tentative at start, played some good strokes in between and then seemed to fizzled out in the end? Is this the first time? NO.

Again, spoken like someone who didnt watch the match. Tendulkar's slow start is because of Ntini ! Gangoo is not the best rotator of strikes...meaning if Ntini bowls well (Which he did), Tendulkar doesnt get a chance to face the opposition bowler. By saying Tendulkar started slow, you are totally ignoring the FACT that Ntini bowled a brilliant opening spell that no other bowler from either side matched! You cannot fault Tendy for his slower scoring because he was doing bulk of the facing against the best bowler on either side today!

[King]

Since the world cup this is India has only won twice against Bangladesh and that's about it. Against South Africa India has lost 5th ODI in a row. South Africa is without couple of its full time players but India still struggles to beat South Africa. People seemed to be more concerned about just Tendulkar and nothing else. Not the bowling, not the rest of the batters but just Tendulkar.

Contrary. It is only because India lost that I even bother discussing his SR.

Why only him? Rahul Dravid struggled to put bat to ball too and threw his wicket away in the end. I remember him not being able to pick a run against Ntini in the 43rd over. Rahul picked up the SR pretty well in the middle but didn't set the world on fire either. Towards the end he struggled to even consistently pick singles. I hate to stereotype but most Indian followers are obsessed with individual cricketers rather than the team. Some section feel happy if say Tendulkar or Rahul or Ganguly score not with standing what result the team produced.

[CC1981]

most relevant fact is that we were runs short and lost the match cause one of our best bats hogged deliveries.

Again, spoken like someone who didnt watch the match. Tendulkar was not batting againts a bowling machine that he'll score at whatever rate he felt like. Match situation & NTINI has to figure in there too. This is like faulting a man for scoring slower when he is facing Ambrose and you are facing Agarkar ! WTF ! Conclusions that only 'mindless number-crunchers who do not watch the match' can come up with! ITs better to score 150-ball 90 than 20 ball 25.