Talented Vs Hard working

[Anakin]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working Actually the same thing happened even after RD and SCG came, may be on a lesser extent till at least 02-03

[Predator_05]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working I classify Tendulkar's career into two separate phases - 1) Pre Tennis Elbow (up until the '03 WC) and 2) Post Tennis Elbow (fall of '04 onwards) In 1) he was the best batsman in the world, and in 2) a mere shadow of himself, abilities on the wane - never to be the same player again

[head coach]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working [code:1c058cb394] Tendulkar 31 2648 248* 60.18 9 7 11 3/31 39.45 0 17 0 Dravid 34 3497 270 76.02 9 18 - - - - 67 0 [/code:1:1c058cb394] These are the numbers of both Tendulkar and Dravid from matches India won after Dravid came into Test scene. Tendulkar played in 31 won test matches and Dravid played 34. Sachin Averaging 60 per match and Dravid averaging 76 per match Numbers do not lie! Who performed well during the same period, same conditions, same opposition and contributed more towards India's success? Make your own judgement!

[King]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working Look no further than Waugh brothers for comparison between talent and hard work. M.Waugh a very naturally gifted, absolutely talented that could wake up in the middle of the night and could hammer bowlers all over the park. Another a meticulous planner and a tough cookie put away hook and pull shots as he was getting out to these two shots often. One was like poetry in motion and the other an ugly but a scoring machine. The one with the talent made his mark from the first game he played but struggled towards the end when the reflexes that is so much a part of talent slowly gave away and the other struggled through for the first few years but ended up being one of the best cricketer ever played. The rest is history of course. Both had fantastic cricketing career but the one with the hard work has more to show in terms of runs and wins as compared to his younger twin. Also the one with the talent never really showed much of a leadership skilled and was pretty happy with his role the other went on to become one of the greatest captains. Whom would you like to go and watch though? Personally I would love to watch both. You need both types otherwise life will get pretty boring. Both compliment each other quite well. If you are looking for a contest between talent vs grit/hard work then you will be disappointed. Without the other complimenting it ends up a flop show usually. Make no mistake you need both types not just in cricket but in every walk of life and in every profession. It is a futile exercise to figure out what is better.

[Anakin]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working LOL, same conditions, same oppositions? That was funny. I'm sure you'll agree too, so just checking out, Inzy is better than both of them right? Do some search and check out dada_rocks' thread on average before 02 or 03. And a batsman alone can rarely win test matches, before you repeat yourself again.

[head coach]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

And a batsman alone can rarely win test matches' date=' before you repeat yourself again.[/quote'] Who said that? Did you read anywhere that a batsmen can win matches? We're talking about performance and contributions towards team's success not about some show piece item that you polish and kiss everyday!

[Anakin]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working You're implying that in every post, avg in winning test matches or whatever, guess drawn matches or lost ones don't have runs. And comfortably ignoring the performance of the whole team in the 90s and few successes since then. As I said, go ahead, take a look at that thread by DR.

[head coach]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

You're implying that in every post, avg in winning test matches or whatever, guess drawn matches or lost ones don't have runs. And comfortably ignoring the performance of the whole team in the 90s and few successes since then. As I said, go ahead, take a look at that thread by DR.

Hello Anakin bhai, Success for a team in laymen terms means games won! No need to search else where see the numbers and makeup your mind...

[Anakin]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working Whatever makes you happy, but you're quite wrong

[Holysmoke]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

Predator' date=' I'm not arguing with you on Tendulkar's Talent. I'm hundred percent in agreement that tendulkar is more talented than Dravid. But give me a straight answer, out of these two who has contributed more towards India's success in series played away from Indian subcontinent or Test matches overall? Dravid or Tendulkar?[/quote'] Like i said, it's a completely different subject altoegther - not relevant to the discussion we are having here. Sure, open a new thread and i'll give it a go.

Dont practise eating your words! Look at the thread title Talented Vs Hard Working or Tendulkar Vs Dravid if you want it that way!

Sure, your call. In short; i don't think you can look at their achievements in isolation. It's a team sport after all - one man's effort might be up to the task, but if the rest fail then history will remember him as a loser. That is the case with Tendulkar. Dravid has contributed more in test series wins, but then again - he never batted under the same pressure or expectation as Tendulkar did when he was at his peak, and he also played in a decent Indian test side - not the case with Tendulkar who, at his peak - played in comparitively worse XI's. You have to look at it from every possible angle. But yeah, straight up - Dravid has contributed more, although Tendulkar was the better player

Predator, Dont you think saying Tendulkar played under pressure as utter nonsense. Just say Tendulkar cannot play under pressure or he crumbles under pressure.

Pressure, as in the the expectations from the public - back in the 1990's, Tendulkar WAS India. Not just for Indians but for the opposition - HIS was the wicket which was key - get Tendulkar, and the game is YOURS. That was the state of the Indian cricket team back then, and that was also testament to Tendulkar's immense ability to influence the course of a match. Dravid NEVER commanded that kind of respect - prized wicket he may be. Tendulkar was expected to score a hundred in each and every match...THAT is PRESSURE. Not to mention the time he was captaining a mediocre outfit, but the public still expected him to be the saviour of the Indian cricket team simply because HE was at the helm. These were the unusual circumstances Tendulkar THRIVED in. Dravid by comparision, has NEVER played under such burden of expectation or pressure. On the contrary, he has had it easy. So to say Tendulkar couldn't play under pressure is a point which holds no water as far as i am concerned, sorry. Your "analogy" (if you can call it that !) is vague and silly; because you are completely overlooking other factors involved. BOTH Dravid and Tendulkar had talent and devoted hard-work into developing their game. Individually they BOTH became the most successful batsmen in Indian cricket history. You can't weigh the importance of one over the other. I recognise Tendulkar as the better player since he had MORE talent and an equally strong work-ethic as Dravid.

Lets talk of the years before Dravid came into the team and cemented his place. Tvs used to shut down over the entire country once Sachin got out. That was what the state india was at that time. As for pure talent there is no one comparable to Sachin in the Indian squad. Dravid is a classical player. he will always be a plasure to watch. But for one to jump out of his seat and celebrate Sachin WAS the man. There are fewer sights in world cricket more pleasurable to watch than Sachin or Lara in full flow.

QFT. (Quoted For Truth) and quoted for Head coach to read again.

[Holysmoke]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

Numbers do not lie!

So, do you think Bradman was THAT much better than say SRT, or Dravid, or Ponting, or Viv Richards, ???

[head coach]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

Predator' date=' I'm not arguing with you on Tendulkar's Talent. I'm hundred percent in agreement that tendulkar is more talented than Dravid. But give me a straight answer, out of these two who has contributed more towards India's success in series played away from Indian subcontinent or Test matches overall? Dravid or Tendulkar?[/quote'] Like i said, it's a completely different subject altoegther - not relevant to the discussion we are having here. Sure, open a new thread and i'll give it a go.

Dont practise eating your words! Look at the thread title Talented Vs Hard Working or Tendulkar Vs Dravid if you want it that way!

Sure, your call. In short; i don't think you can look at their achievements in isolation. It's a team sport after all - one man's effort might be up to the task, but if the rest fail then history will remember him as a loser. That is the case with Tendulkar. Dravid has contributed more in test series wins, but then again - he never batted under the same pressure or expectation as Tendulkar did when he was at his peak, and he also played in a decent Indian test side - not the case with Tendulkar who, at his peak - played in comparitively worse XI's. You have to look at it from every possible angle. But yeah, straight up - Dravid has contributed more, although Tendulkar was the better player

Predator, Dont you think saying Tendulkar played under pressure as utter nonsense. Just say Tendulkar cannot play under pressure or he crumbles under pressure.

Pressure, as in the the expectations from the public - back in the 1990's, Tendulkar WAS India. Not just for Indians but for the opposition - HIS was the wicket which was key - get Tendulkar, and the game is YOURS. That was the state of the Indian cricket team back then, and that was also testament to Tendulkar's immense ability to influence the course of a match. Dravid NEVER commanded that kind of respect - prized wicket he may be. Tendulkar was expected to score a hundred in each and every match...THAT is PRESSURE. Not to mention the time he was captaining a mediocre outfit, but the public still expected him to be the saviour of the Indian cricket team simply because HE was at the helm. These were the unusual circumstances Tendulkar THRIVED in. Dravid by comparision, has NEVER played under such burden of expectation or pressure. On the contrary, he has had it easy. So to say Tendulkar couldn't play under pressure is a point which holds no water as far as i am concerned, sorry. Your "analogy" (if you can call it that !) is vague and silly; because you are completely overlooking other factors involved. BOTH Dravid and Tendulkar had talent and devoted hard-work into developing their game. Individually they BOTH became the most successful batsmen in Indian cricket history. You can't weigh the importance of one over the other. I recognise Tendulkar as the better player since he had MORE talent and an equally strong work-ethic as Dravid.

Lets talk of the years before Dravid came into the team and cemented his place. Tvs used to shut down over the entire country once Sachin got out. That was what the state india was at that time. As for pure talent there is no one comparable to Sachin in the Indian squad. Dravid is a classical player. he will always be a plasure to watch. But for one to jump out of his seat and celebrate Sachin WAS the man. There are fewer sights in world cricket more pleasurable to watch than Sachin or Lara in full flow.

QFT. (Quoted For Truth) and quoted for Head coach to read again.

Holy look at the numbers. It speaks for itself! I was going to contradict these by writing pages then decided to pull the numbers. No need to do a garbage in garbage out or FIFO here it is that simple. Get it?

[yoda]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working Obviously there are two eras in Sachin's test batting. While Sachin has been the king of ODIs forever, Dravid clearly has been the better performer in tests the past 6 or 7 years. Dravid has the talent to succeed in tests while Sachin has the talent to excel in ODIs. And neither is a pussy in the other form of the game as well. We always used to argue about these two in our old forum and come up with the conclusion that we are(were?) just blessed to have both play for the country.

[Holysmoke]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

Holy look at the numbers. It speaks for itself! I was going to contradict these by writing pages then decided to pull the numbers. No need to do a garbage in garbage out or FIFO here it is that simple. Get it?

Saw the numbers. Now tell me something honestly. Do you think Bradman was THAT much better than all the current players like Ponting, Dravid, SRT, Viv Richards, etc.

[head coach]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

Holy look at the numbers. It speaks for itself! I was going to contradict these by writing pages then decided to pull the numbers. No need to do a garbage in garbage out or FIFO here it is that simple. Get it?

Saw the numbers. Now tell me something honestly. Do you think Bradman was THAT much better than all the current players like Ponting, Dravid, SRT, Viv Richards, etc.

Not sure the context you're asking. But see for yourself why he is considered the greatest of all(including the ones in your post).

[Predator_05]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

[code:1:497d7b9783] Tendulkar 31 2648 248* 60.18 9 7 11 3/31 39.45 0 17 0 Dravid 34 3497 270 76.02 9 18 - - - - 67 0 [/code:1:497d7b9783] These are the numbers of both Tendulkar and Dravid from matches India won after Dravid came into Test scene. Tendulkar played in 31 won test matches and Dravid played 34. Sachin Averaging 60 per match and Dravid averaging 76 per match Numbers do not lie! Who performed well during the same period, same conditions, same opposition and contributed more towards India's success? Make your own judgement!

Yawn. Head Coach, you sound like a person who hasn't followed Indian cricket at all; hence your reliance on numbers to prove everything - like a typical statto. This is why you fail to recognise that Dravid's peak years (starting from '02 onwards) coincide with the period Tendulkar became fallible; so your stats are along EXPECTED lines - they DON'T prove one player was better than the other. Keep trying though.

[Predator_05]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

Obviously there are two eras in Sachin's test batting. While Sachin has been the king of ODIs forever, Dravid clearly has been the better performer in tests the past 6 or 7 years. Dravid has the talent to succeed in tests while Sachin has the talent to excel in ODIs. And neither is a ***** in the other form of the game as well. We always used to argue about these two in our old forum and come up with the conclusion that we are(were?) just blessed to have both play for the country.

I'd say Dravid has been the daddy of Indian cricket since '02. From '93 'til '01 - Tendulkar was the best in both forms of the game, by a fair distance. Still, your conclusion is spot on and we should leave it at that

[Holysmoke]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

Holy look at the numbers. It speaks for itself! I was going to contradict these by writing pages then decided to pull the numbers. No need to do a garbage in garbage out or FIFO here it is that simple. Get it?

Saw the numbers. Now tell me something honestly. Do you think Bradman was THAT much better than all the current players like Ponting, Dravid, SRT, Viv Richards, etc.

Not sure the context you're asking. But see for yourself why he is considered the greatest of all(including the ones in your post).

Well, if you were to judge by numbers, he would be the best ever wouldnt he???

[head coach]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working

[code:1:3bd15d5c39] Tendulkar 31 2648 248* 60.18 9 7 11 3/31 39.45 0 17 0 Dravid 34 3497 270 76.02 9 18 - - - - 67 0 [/code:1:3bd15d5c39] These are the numbers of both Tendulkar and Dravid from matches India won after Dravid came into Test scene. Tendulkar played in 31 won test matches and Dravid played 34. Sachin Averaging 60 per match and Dravid averaging 76 per match Numbers do not lie! Who performed well during the same period, same conditions, same opposition and contributed more towards India's success? Make your own judgement!

Yawn. Head Coach, you sound like a person who hasn't followed Indian cricket at all; hence your reliance on numbers to prove everything - like a typical statto. This is why you fail to recognise that Dravid's peak years (starting from '02 onwards) coincide with the period Tendulkar became fallible; so your stats are along EXPECTED lines - they DON'T prove one player was better than the other. Keep trying though.

Injuries and out of form are part and parcel of a cricketer's career. You have to count them against his performance. You are trying to put an elephant in the fridge(like the old joke) really. And calling him peerless because of the highlighted blitz early in the career is absurd!

[Predator_05]

Re: Talented Vs Hard working "Early in the career" LMFAO. Sure, if you think 14 years is a "highlighted blitz" occuring "early in his career". Whatever man, i'm done with this thread. From this point on, we'd only be repeating ourselves