Tendulkar at his peak

[sensible-indian]

See, SRT is the BENCHMARK for batsmen. Hence he is dissected the most. No one else is dissected as much as him cos they are NOT the benchmark. The fact that everyone compares every great batsman with SRT and not others and everyone dissects SRT the most to see how he stacked up against every odds says all about who he was. :hatsoff:

[Precambrian]

No doubt Sachin was the best batsman for the past 30 years. I think older batsmen are hyped to some extent, so it could well be that Sachin is the best ever. Bradman's numbers are unreal for his era, but Bradman can't hold a candle to even batsmen like Sehwag in absolute ranking because cricket has evolved considerably since the 1930s. However, some of the blemishes in Sachin's records are 1. He never had a single series where he dominated every match, which is why he could not get past 500 runs in any test series. Sachin could rarely maintain a high scoring streak beyond two tests. Batsmen like Ponting, Lara, Dravid etc some times dominated the bowling so much that they took 500, 600 or 700 runs in a series multiple times in their career. 2. Sachin's failure to play big individual knocks - Sachin easily had the ability to get triple tons and more doubles tons than he managed. 3. Sachin's failure to play a Laxman 281 or Dravid 180/233 like legendary All time best knocks in pressure. 4. Sachin's failure to play a top knock at the top of the batting order. Sachin never left his comfort zone at #4 or below in his 200 match test career.

1. Its not his fault that India did not play more 4 and 5 test match series during his physically peak period of the late 90s. India went on to concentrate on ODIs and did not start playing the 4 test series till well into the 2000s, when Dravid achieved his peak. What is this hogwash about Sachin not dominating every match in a series? Just take 1998 Aus series for example. Or the 2007 down under series? 2. Many of his sterling 100s came under pressure, when others were falling in a pack at the other end, and inevitably he had to go for his shots (usually batting with 8,9 wickets down). If scoring big hundreds is the benchmark, then Marvan Attappattu is three times better batsman than Aravinda De Silva. (6 double hundreds to 2) And bloody hell, he has six 200+ scores (should've been seven), aren't those "big knocks"? WHat is this stupid talk about "failure to score big hundreds"? WHat a joke! 3. Lol, how about a 4th innings hundred in record chase? How about the two 100s in SA vs Dale Steyn at his peak, when none of the other batsmen even bothered to turn up? How about the masterclass 155 in the second innings at Chennai? How about the 100 with Prabhakar to save a test match vs England? How about the blitzkreig 155 at Bloemfontein? Or the legendary 169 at Cape Town? Ridiculous. 4. Now this is ridiculous territory really. Batting at no.4 meant he had the maximum responsibility to steer the innings through. And it's not as if India were gifted with great openers throughout his career (maybe save the last few years), that he could come in when all was settled. Also read point 1, batting at no.4 meant he had lesser time and wickets around him to bat with, especially while essaying those "one-man acts".

[rtmohanlal]

No doubt Sachin was the best batsman for the past 30 years. I think older batsmen are hyped to some extent, so it could well be that Sachin is the best ever. Bradman's numbers are unreal for his era, but Bradman can't hold a candle to even batsmen like Sehwag in absolute ranking because cricket has evolved considerably since the 1930s. However, some of the blemishes in Sachin's records are 1. He never had a single series where he dominated every match, which is why he could not get past 500 runs in any test series. Sachin could rarely maintain a high scoring streak beyond two tests. Batsmen like Ponting, Lara, Dravid etc some times dominated the bowling so much that they took 500, 600 or 700 runs in a series multiple times in their career. 2. Sachin's failure to play big individual knocks - Sachin easily had the ability to get triple tons and more doubles tons than he managed. 3. Sachin's failure to play a Laxman 281 or Dravid 180/233 like legendary All time best knocks in pressure. 4. Sachin's failure to play a top knock at the top of the batting order. Sachin never left his comfort zone at #4 or below in his 200 match test career.

w.r.t point (3), let alone Sachin, not even Dravid's 233 at Adelaide can be compared with VVS's 281 I feel. that 281 was epic knock , it was a finix knock when the series was lost big time.From there Laxman lifted India to 2-1 victory instead of a 2-0 or perhaps 2-1 defeat. so that knock is with out parallel. w.r.t 233 knock of Dravid, I don't think SRT didn't play such knocks.Infact he has such knocks aplenty. Only problem was that not all of his such knocks resulted in Indian win baring a handful because of several factors which any way were beyond his control.

[India-KXIP fan]

Tendulkar between January 1993 and January 2011 ( that is 18 years), had this record: Tests: 157 innings: 259 Not outs: 30 Runs: 13607 Average: 59.41 Centuries: 47 Fifties: 55 Record at home : 6536 runs @ 57.33, 22 centuries, 27 fifties Record away: 7071 runs @ 61.48, 25 centuries, 28 fifties lowest average : 44.66 in Paksitan, averaged 60+ in Aus, Bangladesh, SL and England, Averaged 50-60 in India, New Zealand and South Africa, averaged 45+in West Indies and Zimbabwe. Quite stunning.

Was unaware holy chit :omg: This is some consistency...44 his lowest average ffs! And to add to that visually he was by far the best to watch with his technique, timing and elegance. Skill wise he has always been a notch above others and there's a reason 44 was his lowest average in a country over an 18 year period.

[vamos_rafa]

w.r.t point (3), let alone Sachin, not even Dravid's 233 at Adelaide can be compared with VVS's 281 I feel. that 281 was epic knock , it was a finix knock when the series was lost big time.From there Laxman lifted India to 2-1 victory instead of a 2-0 or perhaps 2-1 defeat. so that knock is with out parallel. w.r.t 233 knock of Dravid, I don't think SRT didn't play such knocks.Infact he has such knocks aplenty. Only problem was that not all of his such knocks resulted in Indian win baring a handful because of several factors which any way were beyond his control.

Yeah. Sydney 2007 would be a classic example. Cape Town 2011 was another one. Sachin has played many such knocks but as you said, they didn't end up in a victory for things beyond his control. I feel, had he finished off in Chennai in '99, it would have been a notch below 281. As you said, nothing comes close to that 281 but Chennai '99 could have almost matched that inning.

[goose]

Sangakarra scores his 3rd 100 in a row at a mediocre run-a-ball versus Aus and he is a legend. If Sachin did the same it would be a blemish on his career proving him to be nothing more than a accumulator of match-losing 100s.

[India-KXIP fan]

Yeah. Sydney 2007 would be a classic example. Cape Town 2011 was another one. Sachin has played many such knocks but as you said, they didn't end up in a victory for things beyond his control. I feel, had he finished off in Chennai in '99, it would have been a notch below 281. As you said, nothing comes close to that 281 but Chennai '99 could have almost matched that inning.

Individual performance matters simple as that. Same with Lara He's in a chitty team with chitty trundlers who win one game every 5 years away don't look at his wins

[Sachin=GOD]

Here is a thing to consider: Tendulkar debuted as a sixteen year old and took some time to become an ATG player. Then he played for a couple of years past his best. These two things impacted his record. But one thing to consider- Tendulkar had jaw-dropping numbers for most of his career. If one considers a 'normal' cricketing span - such as players who show up as a finished product at the age of 20/21 ( Ponting, Inzamam, etc) and retire at 37/38, here is a startling fact: Tendulkar between January 1993 and January 2011 ( that is 18 years), had this record: Tests: 157 innings: 259 Not outs: 30 Runs: 13607 Average: 59.41 Centuries: 47 Fifties: 55 Record at home : 6536 runs @ 57.33, 22 centuries, 27 fifties Record away: 7071 runs @ 61.48, 25 centuries, 28 fifties lowest average : 44.66 in Paksitan, averaged 60+ in Aus, Bangladesh, SL and England, Averaged 50-60 in India, New Zealand and South Africa, averaged 45+in West Indies and Zimbabwe. Quite stunning.

Those who say that he only has longevity in his favor - please show me just ONE batsman who played at this level for even 100 tests, let alone 157.

[Captain]

He's called the "Little Master" for a reason.Those are sublime stats over 157 test matches particularly considering the fact that he played in a mediocre team during half of that period and the fact that the contest between bat and ball used to be even in those days unlike now. :hatsoff: Averaging 60+ in three nations,50-60 in two nations and 45+ in the remaining two nations. The fact that he made it to the team as a 16 year old hurt his stats and so did the last 2 years of his career.

[BlueBee]

FeG8hqQw1U8

[rtmohanlal]

Here is a thing to consider: Tendulkar debuted as a sixteen year old and took some time to become an ATG player. Then he played for a couple of years past his best. These two things impacted his record. But one thing to consider- Tendulkar had jaw-dropping numbers for most of his career. If one considers a 'normal' cricketing span - such as players who show up as a finished product at the age of 20/21 ( Ponting, Inzamam, etc) and retire at 37/38, here is a startling fact: Tendulkar between January 1993 and January 2011 ( that is 18 years), had this record: Tests: 157 innings: 259 Not outs: 30 Runs: 13607 Average: 59.41 Centuries: 47 Fifties: 55 Record at home : 6536 runs @ 57.33, 22 centuries, 27 fifties Record away: 7071 runs @ 61.48, 25 centuries, 28 fifties lowest average : 44.66 in Paksitan, averaged 60+ in Aus, Bangladesh, SL and England, Averaged 50-60 in India, New Zealand and South Africa, averaged 45+in West Indies and Zimbabwe. Quite stunning.

Quite an eye opener to a lot of people who dismiss Sachin's longevity as a nothing factor and to those who FAVOURABLY compares the likes of ABDV to Sachin just for scoring some heap of runs in todays batting paradise circumstances. As you said his first few years were his learning stage .more over if we go by stats only a few batsmen would have debuted at 19 y & 9 months(where Sachin's peak starts) , if any exists for that matter. and we all know he had a 23 test period in his decline years past 2011 world cup. So to have these no:s is absolutely stunnin****** that too carrying the pressure of expectations of crores of people, facing a wide range of high quality ATG to very good to good bowlers.not only that even ATG fielders in Rhodes, Ponting ,Gibbs , Adam Bacher etc etc. and that away avg: is 61.48 !!!. that 59.41 in 157 tests can easily worth 70 in 100 tests by today's standards.

[govinda]

sach:hatsoff:

[Laaloo]

Sangakarra scores his 3rd 100 in a row at a mediocre run-a-ball versus Aus and he is a legend. If Sachin did the same it would be a blemish on his career proving him to be nothing more than a accumulator of match-losing 100s.

Sach is life :sigh:

[velu]

Ricky Ponting 16 Aug 2001 to 2 Jan 2009 Matches = 82 Average = 65.68 100s = 30 probably only player in this era who can be compared to sachin

[HIC_NAA]

Ricky Ponting 16 Aug 2001 to 2 Jan 2009 Matches = 82 Average = 65.68 100s = 30 probably only player in this era who can be compared to sachin

Difference is 82 and 157 test matches. Almost twice more than Ponting.

[velu]

Difference is 82 and 157 test matches. Almost twice more than Ponting.

i think we can make it 120 matches by bringing his average from 66 to 60 :hmmm:

[HIC_NAA]

i think we can make it 120 matches by bringing his average from 66 to 60 :hmmm:

Yaa u can do anything. You are from the Sir Srini school of thought. Anything is possible.

[Precambrian]

i think we can make it 120 matches by bringing his average from 66 to 60 :hmmm:

105 matches at 61. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/7133.html?class=1;spanmax1=31+Dec+2008;spanmin1=01+Jan+1999;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting Still below avg numbers in England and India (41 and 21) which also results in huge diff between home and away numbers.

[velu]

105 matches at 61. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/7133.html?class=1;spanmax1=31+Dec+2008;spanmin1=01+Jan+1999;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting Still below avg numbers in England and India (41 and 21) which also results in huge diff between home and away numbers.

if we keep nitpicking the stats to prove sachin is the best , we can do it for other players too.. like in a 34 match streak , king viv averages 70++ .. i really dont think sachin had such stat..

[Sachin=GOD]

if we keep nitpicking the stats to prove sachin is the best , we can do it for other players too.. like in a 34 match streak , king viv averages 70++ .. i really dont think sachin had such stat..

There is a difference between 157 matches and 34 matches.