Tendulkar's performance in Australia and how much of a rope should batsmen get?

[Lurker]

You say that in hindsight. But before the series' date=' [b']would have believed India would come close to a drawn series in Aus, winning in Perth of all grounds.

Not really CA. I was one of the rarest ones who had said here that India is going to win the series in Australia. Of course that was deemed as "jingoistic Indian fan" slogan but anyone who knows me should know I am anything but jingoistic, heck many of jingoistic fans keep muttering how I put down India, go figure! A funny observation has been how SRT fans have now come out shouting how great he was in the series and eggs on his face of detractors etc etc. The same people were nowhere to be seen when I had raised how much would SRT score(beleive Bumper was asking the same question) in Australia and many of his ardent fans couldnt promise a series@50. I remember saying(probably to Holysmoke) that I would be happy if SRT/Dravid/VVS score at what their average in Australia is(50) and I still see them very capable of doing so. Turns out SRT did score at 50 plus and VVS about 45. Onwards to bowling I did not find an attack of Lee-Clarke-Johnson-Tait too much of worry and but for Lee it eventually turned out thus. So yes I am not at all surprised by a 2-1 outcome. xxx

[The Outsider]

A funny observation has been how SRT fans have now come out shouting how great he was in the series and eggs on his face of detractors etc etc. The same people were nowhere to be seen when I had raised how much would SRT score(beleive Bumper was asking the same question) in Australia and many of his ardent fans couldnt promise a series@50. I remember saying(probably to Holysmoke) that I would be happy if SRT/Dravid/VVS score at what their average in Australia is(50) and I still see them very capable of doing so. Turns out SRT did score at 50 plus and VVS about 45.

Yeah, Bumper had posed that question before the Pakistan series and it doesn't make sense to predict averages on a series by series basis because of the small sample size, the misunderstanding of which prompted the likes of you to proclaim Tendulkar a failure in England because of his 30s average disregarding the fact that two of his failures were in utterly meaningless innings. At that point, I had predicted a 45-55 average for him over the next 20 odd tests we are slated to play till March 2009 and he is well on his way to achieving it with an average of 70+ in 6 of those tests.

[Anakin]

Not really CA. I was one of the rarest ones who had said here that India is going to win the series in Australia. Of course that was deemed as "jingoistic Indian fan" slogan but anyone who knows me should know I am anything but jingoistic, heck many of jingoistic fans keep muttering how I put down India, go figure! A funny observation has been how SRT fans have now come out shouting how great he was in the series and eggs on his face of detractors etc etc. The same people were nowhere to be seen when I had raised how much would SRT score(beleive Bumper was asking the same question) in Australia and many of his ardent fans couldnt promise a series@50. I remember saying(probably to Holysmoke) that I would be happy if SRT/Dravid/VVS score at what their average in Australia is(50) and I still see them very capable of doing so. Turns out SRT did score at 50 plus and VVS about 45. Onwards to bowling I did not find an attack of Lee-Clarke-Johnson-Tait too much of worry and but for Lee it eventually turned out thus. So yes I am not at all surprised by a 2-1 outcome. xxx

Trying to predict an avg for a batsman is really useless. There are too many factors besides the form. BTW another funny thing is how the youth brigade has gone missing with their mission statements (eg drop SRT).

[Lurker]

YAt that point' date=' I had predicted a 45-55 average for him over the next 20 odd tests we are slated to play till March 2009 and he is well on his way to achieving it with an average of 70+ in 6 of those tests.[/quote'] Here is what I had written on that debate and I still stand by it.

Sachin has 1347 runs in past 25 tests, 38 innings @35.4 I say I would let him play till 25 tests becomes 40. That would mean about 60 innings. I would like at the end of this 60 innings to have Sachin's average at 50(still 5 less than his 54). In other words in this 60 innings he should have scored 60*50 = 3000. He has already scored 1347 so he needs to score 1653 in next 22 innings@ 75. If he does that I will say he earned the right to play 40 tests simply because he was that good for 17 years, if he doesnt then he was simply not worth the leeway.

http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=234058&postcount=127 That was when I was deemed a Sachin "hater" all and sundry even though I had given Sachin a chance to score@50 in 40 Tests without being dropped once! This has been a glorious series for little master and I do hope he gets around to that whole 3000 runs in 40 Tests@50. xxx

[Anakin]

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[Lurker]

Trying to predict an avg for a batsman is really useless. There are too many factors besides the form.

No it is not. It is rather simple. Average and form goes hand in hand. I will take Ishant Sharma's performance in this series even though his average is lousy simply since the numbers dont tell the full story. However if Sharma sucked in 9 consecutive series(like Sachin was) I wouldnt keep him in. It is rather simple.

BTW another funny thing is how the youth brigade has gone missing with their mission statements (eg drop SRT).

No they are not. The Indian success was built as much on Sachin as it was on Ishant Sharma and RP Singh. Sure a Yuvraj Singh failed but so did Dravid and Ganguly. The only senior brigade that covered himself with glory was Sachin and to an extent VVS. Kumble was never under the scanner. RD and Gangs had an average to bad series. xxx

[The Outsider]

Here is what I had written on that debate and I still stand by it. http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=234058&postcount=127 That was when I was deemed a Sachin "hater" all and sundry even though I had given Sachin a chance to score@50 in 40 Tests without being dropped once! This has been a glorious series for little master and I do hope he gets around to that whole 3000 runs in 40 Tests@50. xxx

What you have quoted there is meaningless number crunching much like what you did for the South Africa and England series. Sadly, the number jugglery is not working out for you in the Pakistan and Australia series, so you have changed your tune by saying stuff like, "I still see them very capable of doing so" when a few months back post after post thread after thread you were calling for his retirement/dropping. Do you really want me to bump up those posts and threads?

[Anakin]

Said it before too, you're too lost in numbers and the worse thing is they are mostly out of context

[Lurker]

What you have quoted there is meaningless number crunching much like what you did for the South Africa and England series.

Lets not make this overly complicated Shwetabh, lets keep it simple. Question: If Sachin plays for 40 Tests(about 70 innings, with say 5 not outs) what is your expectations at the end of those 40 tests? How many runs and at what average? Yes all runs are not equal, those in crunch situations against Aussies count more than those scored against say Zimb, still I am giving you a good 40 Tests/70 innings run. Should make for a fair run I say. So tell me what do you expect the final run tally to be after 40 Tests 70 innings for Sachin. xxx

[Lurker]

Said it before too' date=' you're too lost in numbers and the worse thing is they are mostly out of context[/quote'] Good. Thanks for your time and all.

[Anakin]

Good. Thanks for your time and all.

You're welcome, now get to more number crunching, BTW Jumbo is a better batsman than SCG now :giggle:

[The Outsider]

Lets not make this overly complicated Shwetabh, lets keep it simple. Question: If Sachin plays for 40 Tests(about 70 innings, with say 5 not outs) what is your expectations at the end of those 40 tests? How many runs and at what average? Yes all runs are not equal, those in crunch situations against Aussies count more than those scored against say Zimb, still I am giving you a good 40 Tests/70 innings run. Should make for a fair run I say. So tell me what do you expect the final run tally to be after 40 Tests 70 innings for Sachin. xxx

Firstly, I don't know where you got those numbers from. Adding 6 tests to the 25 you have quoted ie. 31 tests :

 	Span  	Mat  	Inns  	NO  	Runs  	HS  	Ave  	BF  	SR  	100  	50  	0  	4s  	6s  	
unfiltered 	1989-2008 	146 	237 	25 	11782 	248* 	55.57 	21769+ 	54.07* 	39 	49 	13 	1551+ 	47 	Profile
filtered 	2004-2008 	31 	51 	6 	2302 	248* 	51.15 	4332 	53.13 	6 	12 	1 	295 	9 

He is already averaging 50+. Secondly, everything has to be seen in context. South Africa and England series were generally low scoring ones where having one or two extra not outs can lead to a huge difference in average, something which happened with Tendulkar failing in a couple of meaningless innings. Thirdly, you are picking the tests from the worst part of his career when he had one injury after another without looking at the context. It's called juggling numbers to prove a non existent point.

[Lurker]

 	Span  	Mat  	Inns  	NO  	Runs  	HS  	Ave  	BF  	SR  	100  	50  	0  	4s  	6s  	
unfiltered 	1989-2008 	146 	237 	25 	11782 	248* 	55.57 	21769+ 	54.07* 	39 	49 	13 	1551+ 	47 	Profile
filtered 	2004-2008 	31 	51 	6 	2302 	248* 	51.15 	4332 	53.13 	6 	12 	1 	295 	9 

He is already averaging 50+.

Hmmm you didnt give me a direct answer to a rather simple question. Anyway lets pick from what you have suggested thus far 31 Tests 2302@51. In other words if in his next 9 tests(about 15 or so innings) SRT scores another 700 runs(close to 45 an innings) he should still end up with 40 Tests 3000 runs. So tell me now why/how was that number(40 Tests@3000 runs) not realistic when it was raised the first time? It was basically a lack of confidence by the SRT supporters that they did not want to spell it aloud. I would be curious to know of any phase of 40 Tests where SRT has not scored 3000 runs, give or take a 100. xxx

[The Outsider]

Hmmm you didnt give me a direct answer to a rather simple question.

I already gave my expectation before the Pakistan series - average of 45-55 depending on pitches/bowling over the next 20 odd tests and he is well on his way.

So tell me now why/how was that number(40 Tests@3000 runs) not realistic when it was raised the first time? It was basically a lack of confidence by the SRT supporters that they did not want to spell it aloud. I would be curious to know of any phase of 40 Tests where SRT has not scored 3000 runs, give or take a 100.

Well my statement above certainly does not show any lack of confidence in Tendulkar and is more relevant than your criteria because it is not taking into account past performances. Why just Tendulkar? I can list any number of great batsmen who would fail to meet that criteria at some point in their careers including Ponting, Lara, Richards etc.

[The Outsider]

One thing is for sure though - Tendulkar's performance against Pakistan and Australia has made ICF a duller place. No more 100+ post threads are coming out regularly on the topic.:D

[Lurker]

I can list any number of great batsmen who would fail to meet that criteria at some point in their careers including Ponting' date=' Lara, Richards etc.[/quote'] Over a 40 Test period? I would be interested if you could show me that. Specially for Lara and Ponting. For Richards I would agree. His last years were his worse(cant recall any other lean patch for him) and so bad it was that he was kicked out even though he maintained he was good enough, atleast in short version. Not very different with how it went for Kapil Dev. But it was NOT that Richards was not criticized tremendously at this time. But yeah I would be interested if you could dig me the phase where Lara & Ponting have failed to score about 3000(give or take a hundred or so) in 40 odd Test matches.

[The Outsider]

Here you go. Ponting in his first 40 tests had 2475 runs. Allowing for the fact that, it takes some time for a batsman to settle into international cricket, between tests 20 and 60 he had 2790 runs. Lara between tests 40 and 80 had 2846 runs. Again between tests 60 and 100, he had 2991 runs. Richards, you have already agreed with and should be an easy one to refute. And I didn't even have to pick out tests between 34 and 74 etc. to make my point. It was a relative simple exercise accomplished only through numbers like 10,20,30 etc. Now, what's next that you have in your non contextual numbers arguments?

[Lurker]

Here you go. Ponting in his first 40 tests had 2475 runs. Allowing for the fact that, it takes some time for a batsman to settle into international cricket, between tests 20 and 60 he had 2790 runs. Lara between tests 40 and 80 had 2846 runs. Again between tests 60 and 100, he had 2991 runs.

How is that very different?? You are giving me Lara around 154 runs less and Ponting about 200 less(when Ponting averages 53 in that period) in a data sample of 3000 runs! I had already left room with a hundred here and there, meaning 2900-3100, so you find exception by 54 runs in 40 Tests? I dont see that as a huge aberration really. If you use my logic(40 Tests @ 3000 runs) it actually seems pretty standard really. I mean the data that you have put above has to be the worst phase of Ponting and Lara, and so at the end of 40 Tests we should be in a fair position to judge who comes out trumps at the worst period of their career - Ponting, Lara or SRT? Fair?

Now, what's next that you have in your non contextual numbers arguments?

It actually turned out a rather interesting exercise which is how it should have been dealt with from start instead of going nutty about numbers and all that mumbo-jumbo. Like I mentioned previously let SRT play 9 more Tests, which most likely he will this year, and we will have the chance to compare 3 of the best batsman of our times at their lowest phase. xxx

[The Outsider]

How is that very different?? You are giving me Lara around 154 runs less and Ponting about 200 less(when Ponting averages 53 in that period)?? If you use my logic(40 Tests @ 3000 runs) it actually seems pretty standard really. I mean the data that you have put above has to be the worst phase of Ponting and Lara, and so at the end of 40 Tests we should be in a fair position to judge who comes out trumps at the worst period of their career - Ponting, Lara or SRT? Fair?

You were pretty categorical in stating this 40 tests 3000 runs demand as though it's the bare minimum required. Well even the best batsmen of the generation have had multiple periods like this. But yeah, let me go along with this benchmark that you have said and I can confidently say that Tendulkar will the 500 odd runs required to meet your standards comfortably in the next 9 tests, unless they turn out to be ridiculously low scoring affairs which is unlikely since we are playing the next 3 in India and the following 3 in Sri Lanka.

It actually turned out a rather interesting exercise which is how it should have been dealt with from start instead of going nutty about numbers and all that mumbo-jumbo. Like I mentioned previously let SRT play 9 more Tests, which most likely he will this year, and we will have the chance to compare 3 of the best batsman of our times at their lowest phase.

I still find the exercise devoid of any cricketing logic as per selection is concerned. What some batsman did 40 tests back is irrelevant today. Selections should be based on recent form and potential for performance and even when Tendulkar was out of form he had a huge upside in the form of potential for performance which he has shown against South Africa, England, Pakistan, and now Australia in 4 consecutive series.

[Lurker]

You were pretty categorical in stating this 40 tests 3000 runs demand as though it's the bare minimum required. Well even the best batsmen of the generation have had multiple periods like this. But yeah, let me go along with this benchmark that you have said and I can confidently say that Tendulkar will the 500 odd runs required to meet your standards comfortably in the next 9 tests, unless they turn out to be ridiculously low scoring affairs which is unlikely since we are playing the next 3 in India and the following 3 in Sri Lanka.

Which is why it is always better to ask the other person in a moment of doubt than to start getting defensive(or offensive) about the subject. The reason 3000 was picked had to do with 60 innings(out of 40 Tests). It will round up average to 50 which is generally considered a great batting average. Had I said 45 Tests 72 innings 3567 runs @52.13 would that have made any sense at all? I think not. Still lets take this a step further. Lets use Lara's worst phase and a score of 2846 runs in 40 Tests. Now my argument was when Sachin had scored 1347 runs in 25 Tests. Even if you take 2846 as cut-off(and not 3000) that would have still meant SRT needs to score 1499 runs in 15 Tests, 22 innings @68. Now tell me how many Sachin fans here were even betting on that? Most of them, including you, were going about 45-55 which would effectively leave him atleast 300 runs short of Lara's 2846. xxxx