Was Sachin eyeing for 100?

[kabira]

I was fortunate enuf to watch later half of India's innings. I would have believed that he did wanted to go for century against the interests of the team if I hadn't watch. Here are the reason why he was not eyeing for century. 1) After Dravid's dismisal, I saw him run some quick singles for Yuvraj. One direct hit he would have gone, running for his team-mate. 2) If someone wants hundred he would not attempt suicidal second run. He ran for the team..and you can see he did not for a moment regret it getting out on 99. 3) He took some chances after crossing 70. I remember him making some room to play over cover off Andre Nel. Only criticism one should have is his first 40 odd runs. It was his slowest fifty ever. He missed out on some easy boundary or two flicking straight to the fielder. He should have run some singles if going was tough.

[Ram]

Yes, Sachin first half the innings was slower than the pace usual pace, tough conditions to bat and Ntini not withstanding. I can only assume that he planned to go on a all out attack after the century. When he was out India still had 27 balls left. Assuming he faced half of them and scored two runs every ball, he would have been left with a score of 134 of 160 balls, which would given him a respectable strike rate of 84.

[suma25]

Man, this board needs to get over sachin tendulkar obsession...5 threads and counting....:haha:

[gator]

Assuming he faced half of them and scored two runs every ball

dream on.... wen was the last time, he did tht.... and please dont name minnows..

[Chandan]

Sachin had paced the innings well. The first 50 runs came off 95 deliveries but it was when the going was extremely tough with pitch being a slow one, having a variable bounce and the ball talking a lot in the first 20 overs, two of India's wickets lost cheaply! We could see that it was very difficult to time the shot perfectly on this track as Ganguly found out and later Sachin and Dravid struggled too. If we had a fully fit attack with Zaheer, Sree and Agarkar as well as the two spinners, we'd have made a match of it, poor fielding notwithstanding! BBut Zaheer and RP Singh, both were under the weather and even Powar was not fully fit. In such circumstances, I'm quite satisfied with our efforts!

[Donny]

If we had a fully fit attack with Zaheer' date=' Sree and Agarkar as well as the two spinners, we'd have made a match of it, poor fielding notwithstanding![/quote'] Two names: Graham Smith & Shaun Pollock. Now tell me who would've been better off with full strength sides.

[yoda]

Chandan, are the saffies missing anyone?

[Ram]

dream on.... wen was the last time' date=' he did tht.... and please dont name minnows..[/quote'] ALL of his centuries , which invariably have excellent strike rates have ended in such fashions, with him scoring agressively of the last bunch of balls he faced. I dont need to quote examples to prove that.

[SightForTheGods]

As the commentators said, the pitch was pretty slow and difficult to score runs. Felt sorry for Tendulkar who was struggling. Kallis was calm and layed out a good plan for SA. I wonder how Dhoni would have handled this slow pitch. I guess we will find out in a few days.

[Chandan]

Two names: Graham Smith & Shaun Pollock. Now tell me who would've been better off with full strength sides.

Oh well. Then I can say that we too do not have a fully fit Munaf here, nor were Yuvraj and few in the team fully fit!! I'm not comparing here. SA's attack was much better than what India could get on the park and their current players were fully fit as well compared to their Indian counterparts! Under those circumstances, I'm certainly not disappointed by the result!

[chanakya]

Hey we expected to loose. At least we lost respectably. Managing expectations that's the formula.

[beetle]

>>>>I can only assume that he planned to go on a all out attack after the century. Why ..? why after the century? why is that even a consideration? Why not before?We need to stamp out this " personal milestone"mentality ...and this sets a wrong message to theyounger lot some of who are playing for a place in the team.

[King Tendulkar]

Yes us indians are so stupid. Players like sachin are always eyeing up personal milestones and trying to get centuries. You never see other players form other countries bothered about personal milestones, they always play for the team. You watch the aussies when one of their guys gets a ton their is barely a flicker of emotion from them and the crowd. The players on the balcony do not even clap it and the batter does not even raise his bat, its all about the team for the aussies and the rest. Ponting and co are so selfless in the 90s. They just try and smash everything and dont give a cr#p if they get out. Same with all the countries like england etc they dont give a sod about tons and in fact they increase their run rates in 90s. Personal milestones mean nothing to these team players. Its only sachin and us indians who care about tons! We are such idiots!

[beetle]

I don't care what the aussies do? They win enough matches hence can justify whatever they do... We don't win that many matches .When we look for reasons for our defeat and if one of the reasons happens to be slow batting ....then we have every right to point it out ....no matter who was responsible.

[King Tendulkar]

Why stupid threads like sachin was eyeing 100 or selfish tendulkar. Every god dammn cricketer since WG Grace, when he gets in to the 90s eyes a ton and proceeds with a certaina amount of caution. Thats why they term in it the nervous 90s. Why pick on sachin when ALL players in the history of the game have done it. ALL players eye a ton and anyone who tells you diff is a bu##sh##ter or has never played the game at a decent level!

[beetle]

When it starts affecting the team ....then it is time to mention it.When even against Bangladesh your century becomes irritating for people because it seems to be too slow .....so much so that it people remember that more than the century...then it is time to talk.

[Donny]

dsr, It's not hard to understand your passionate disapproval of certain criticisms written on this board and elsewhere in the media but exaggeration, sarcasm and insults do your cause no good. You just give more ammunition to those with an opposing opinion.

[Chandan]

I don't care what the aussies do? They win enough matches hence can justify whatever they do... We don't win that many matches .When we look for reasons for our defeat and if one of the reasons happens to be slow batting ....then we have every right to point it out ....no matter who was responsible.

Radhika, Have you ever analysed why we don't win enough matches while the other teams (England, Australia, SA) do?

[King Tendulkar]

I could give numerous exaples were Sachin has raced throught he 90 s and hit a 6 to get to a ton. What people dont realise is there is a bowler at the other end. If he bowls well in 90s then dont score quickly, if he bowls poor then can race throught he 90s. When you have been in the 90s as many times as the great Sachin then you will have got to ton in so many ways! Cant standars the selfish aussies and english players. The way they celebrate their tons is ridiculous, they clearly value this more then the teams overall goal. This OTT obssession with milestones has now gone to their bowlers who are obssessed with 5 wickets and then holding the ball in the air to the crowd!

[Chandan]

When it starts affecting the team ....then it is time to mention it.When even against Bangladesh your century becomes irritating for people because it seems to be too slow .....so much so that it people remember that more than the century...then it is time to talk.

Again, does it affect the team? Why do we NEVER discuss why our bowlers couldn't defend a decent total? Why do we NEVER discuss why a certain fielder didn't dive to stop the opposition from taking 2runs or sometimes converting twos into threes? Why do we always get after a player who has been the most successful for the team? Why do we never get after those players in the XI who are also expected to contribute? Why do we never question the defensive field settings of our captain who defeats the very attempt of defending a fighting total? Why do NEVER question why a bowler bowls six wides in such circumstances when every run needed to be saved? Why???