World test team of the decade

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Tendulkar.......more consistent......if u exclude the 2 injury ravaged year he had he has been outstanding.

[S.Bond]

ok i will fisrt let you awnser between lara and tendulkar at 4 in this decade, and then give you the comparaison with other player... But i also think if someone can bat three in test cricket there is no much difference with 4,5,6 theis is all midle order, and you should adjust for team.. There is specefic positions in test cricket, : Openers, Midle order, Wicket kepper, Fast Bowlers, Spin bowlers, there is no batsman that is a one down and can't bat at 4, 5 and 6... But that apart i will proove you sachin is not even the best 4... Your theory is like you should play just two fast bowlers because they take the new ball in thir team, if you pik a third fast bowler he should not take the new ball in his team because he is not going to take it with the world XI.....

[S.Bond]

Tendulkar.......more consistent......if u exclude the 2 injury ravaged year he had he has been outstanding.

hahahahahahahahahahaha blind, stupid fan..... Lara has also played just 6 years in the deacde... can''t acepet facts even???

[S.Bond]

Tendulkar.......more consistent......if u exclude the 2 injury ravaged year he had he has been outstanding.

but even if you can't accpet, i will continue... just tell me were you wrong when you said lara , kallis bat at 3????? just to see if you can accept things or u can't....

[S.Bond]

Tendulkar.......more consistent......if u exclude the 2 injury ravaged year he had he has been outstanding.

So lets continue, Kallis at number 4 in this decade exluding minows... 114 innings, 6130 runs at 61.91 with 22 hundreds... That mean 8 more hundreds, in 7 less innings and more than 15 plus averages Mate, tendulkar is aformidable batsman, 2 or third of this era maybe but acept it, he is noway near in the world test team of the decade... Kevin pieterssen is also better than him... I am not even talking about yousuf because i think you don't likehim too much, and yousuf is also not in my world XI of the decade....

[Sooda]

The numbers from statsguru are actually 53.20 and 21 - but close enough. Since you brought up the numbers - of all batsmen who scored more than 5000 runs during the decade, Tendulkar is #9 in averages and #7 in hundreds. And it gets worse if you exclude minnows. There is no way he makes the team of the decade by any stretch of imagination. Even at #4, which is really the only place SRT ever bats in tests, he is comfortably behind Kallis, Moyo and Jayawardene. Look, I am not bagging Tendulkar. I am hugely disappointed at his output this decade, especially after 2002. A combination of injuries, slowing reflexes and continued bad luck with umpiring (that is a separate discussion - IMO Tendulkar is the unluckiest batsman ever when it comes to the balance of umpiring decisions over one's career). For another data point, consider this. IIRC the ICC awards were instituted in 2003. For test player of the year, I don't think Tendulkar has even been nominated in any year, let alone winning it. And I don't think he made the ICC Test team of the year more than once in the 6 (?) years the awards have been around. So how does he make the test team of the decade? Tendulkar is still probably the best batsman of the last 20 years, but many other have been better in the last 10. Yes he has been unlucky, but you can't argue with the numbers other have put up.

Just digging a little deeper into those numbers over the last decade SRT average vs Aus and SAf this decade 50.12 with 7 centuries in 29 tests Average Overseas excl minnows 49 MoYo Average overseas incl minnows 51 Average versus Aus and SAf is 33 Jayawardene Average vs Aus and SAf is 55- boosted by a double and a triple ton (at home of course) versus the Saffies Average overseas 42 (lent much weight by an Ave of 62 in India) Kallis Averages 48 away from home excluding minnows Versus Aus is 47, versus Aus and India is nearly 50

[vicks]

Just digging a little deeper into those numbers over the last decade SRT average vs Aus and SAf this decade 50.12 with 7 centuries in 29 tests Average Overseas excl minnows 49 MoYo Average overseas incl minnows 51 Average versus Aus and SAf is 33 Jayawardene Average vs Aus and SAf is 55- boosted by a double and a triple ton (at home of course) versus the Saffies Average overseas 42 (lent much weight by an Ave of 62 in India) Kallis Averages 48 away from home excluding minnows Versus Aus is 47, versus Aus and India is nearly 50

Oh come on - you can't pick and choose criteria which make your candidate look better than the others. Again, I don't want to come across someone who's bagging Tendulkar (he is my favorite player ever), but consider this: 1. Two tours to Pakistan this decade, on the most batting friendly wickets imaginable. Apart from one knock (the 194* where Sehwag got a triple) he has hardly scored a run. Take out that 194 and the average would probably be in single digits. 2. Since 2003 in India, again on extremely batsman friendly tracks, he averages 40 !!! 3. Average of 37 against SA and 34 against Sri Lanka this decade. My point again is that we can cherry pick stats to prove whatever we can about our favorite players. At the end of the day, over a long enough time period, it is the overall consistency that matters. And relative to some others, Tendulkar has fallen short this decade.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

ok i will fisrt let you awnser between lara and tendulkar at 4 in this decade, and then give you the comparaison with other player... But i also think if someone can bat three in test cricket there is no much difference with 4,5,6 theis is all midle order, and you should adjust for team.. There is specefic positions in test cricket, : Openers, Midle order, Wicket kepper, Fast Bowlers, Spin bowlers, there is no batsman that is a one down and can't bat at 4, 5 and 6... But that apart i will proove you sachin is not even the best 4... Your theory is like you should play just two fast bowlers because they take the new ball in thir team, if you pik a third fast bowler he should not take the new ball in his team because he is not going to take it with the world XI.....

hahahahahahahahahahaha blind, stupid fan..... Lara has also played just 6 years in the deacde... can''t acepet facts even???

So lets continue, Kallis at number 4 in this decade exluding minows... 114 innings, 6130 runs at 61.91 with 22 hundreds... That mean 8 more hundreds, in 7 less innings and more than 15 plus averages Mate, tendulkar is aformidable batsman, 2 or third of this era maybe but acept it, he is noway near in the world test team of the decade... Kevin pieterssen is also better than him... I am not even talking about yousuf because i think you don't likehim too much, and yousuf is also not in my world XI of the decade....

Kallis is a all rounder is already in a team.....i want a pure batsman at no.4 and tendulkar it is......avgs 53.66 with 20 hundreds and he was ravaged by injuries ...........still maintains such high standards.....he is a player who can score againist every country and every where....for me he is better then lara......many one will say lara was better it is a personal choice.....but both of them are surely better then kallis as a pure batsman.....kallis ofcourse is the best allrounder.......and dont forget Tendulkar has avgd more than 50 through 2 decades..... KP...check his avg in asia......in 30s kallis in england 19 SRT avgs near 40s in all continents.......take that freak series of mendis out and his avg againist SL is also very good....

[Malcolm Merlyn]

As far as pakistan is concerned...Younis Khan is way better than that FTB Yousuf

[vicks]

Sorry, come again ? How is the consistency gone ? You expect a special knock everytime he comes out to bat ? How did you arrive at this based on what I wrote? I don't expect a special knock from Bradman every time he bats, let alone from others who average half as much as him. Are you denying that Sachin's consistency has gone down hugely in this decade? It is painfully obvious, without actually doing the math, that his standard deviation from the mean in this decade (especially since 2003) has been much higher - not only relative to his own performance in the 90s but also to other top performers in this decade. For example, consider 2004, the year in which Sachin averaged 91.5 (915 runs in 10 tests). Bradmanesque, right? Here are the innings by innings scores: 241*, 60*, 194*, 2, 8, 1, 8, 2, 5, 55, 3 , 20, 32*, 248*, 36 Would you call that consistent? By the way, the 248* was against Bangladesh, the 194* in Multan where Sehwag got a triple. Please explain this: Sachin should have had 15,000 runs and 50 test hundreds by now. His productivity over this period has been sub-par, not only by his own standards but also the ones others have set.

Easy. For someone considered next only to Bradman by his fans, 13,000 runs in 20 years is clearly underwhelming. Ponting and Dravid have player for 7 less years and yet are within 2000 runs of Sachin. Remarkable really. It's a shame that we now have reached a point where we have to justify Tendulkar's greatness in online forums against the likes of Yousuf, Jayawardene and Sangakkara. I mean - Tendulkar should be blowing them out of the water with his numbers. With his talent/ability/greatness, he really should have been averaging in the mid 60s, instead of mid 50s where all these pretenders are as well. Looking at this another way, it is clear from the averages that this decade has been much better for batting than the 90s (there was an article recently showing only 4 people averaging 50 in the 90s vs. every Tom, Dick and Hussey in this decade). When you consider that Tendulkar was the clear leader in the 90s, against some of the greatest fast bowlers around, it is mind boggling to think how far behind the pack he has fallen in this decade, on significantly better batting wickets against much-weaker bowling. I mean - Ponting has scored 2300 more runs and 11 more hundreds than Tendulkar this decade. Go figure! So whichever way you look at this - whether by Tendulkar's own high standards in the 90s, or by the productivity of other top players this decade, he has fallen 1500-2000 runs short of where he should/could have been at this point in time.

[S.Bond]

Kallis is a all rounder is already in a team.....i want a pure batsman at no.4 and tendulkar it is......avgs 53.66 with 20 hundreds and he was ravaged by injuries ...........still maintains such high standards.....he is a player who can score againist every country and every where....for me he is better then lara......many one will say lara was better it is a personal choice.....but both of them are surely better then kallis as a pure batsman.....kallis ofcourse is the best allrounder.......and dont forget Tendulkar has avgd more than 50 through 2 decades..... KP...check his avg in asia......in 30s kallis in england 19 SRT avgs near 40s in all continents.......take that freak series of mendis out and his avg againist SL is also very good....

u r just blinded.... Kallis and lara are both largelyyyyyyyy better than tendulkar in this decade... How can you say sachin averages 53???21 tons????? Stop lloking at all his runs he is making agaisnt minows....... It's easy to pick one or two negative point in every player, as the average of tendulkar in sri lanka.... Overall LAra and Kallis are SOOOOOOOOOO MUCHHHHHHHH in front........ If he is injurd, that's his own problem... Or are you putting him in the team because ofmost injuries??? So lets have a bowling attack with Shoaib akhtar and ShaneBond... they played so litle due to injuries still mantain high satandards.... Theyr are better than mcgrath... Youpi!!! You should realise that your favorite player is normal in this decade and wayyyyyy bhind others....

[Sooda]

Oh come on - you can't pick and choose criteria which make your candidate look better than the others. Again, I don't want to come across someone who's bagging Tendulkar (he is my favorite player ever), but consider this: 1. Two tours to Pakistan this decade, on the most batting friendly wickets imaginable. Apart from one knock (the 194* where Sehwag got a triple) he has hardly scored a run. Take out that 194 and the average would probably be in single digits. 2. Since 2003 in India, again on extremely batsman friendly tracks, he averages 40 !!! 3. Average of 37 against SA and 34 against Sri Lanka this decade. My point again is that we can cherry pick stats to prove whatever we can about our favorite players. At the end of the day, over a long enough time period, it is the overall consistency that matters. And relative to some others, Tendulkar has fallen short this decade.

The criteria I chose show how those batsmen have a) fared vs the strongest teams of the decade, and b) away from home where the test of that batsmans ability is greater. The point being to show that consistency over a period of time is one thing-it means you can score versus poor attacks, but ability to score when the batsmen are genuinely being tested is much rarer. This is where people like Yousuf and Jayawardene clearly fall short. If they were 'better' batsmen youd have expected them to have outscored Tendulkar in those categories that I have filtered- these are sterner tests of their ability. I think the three points youve mentioned in your post are much more a case of cherry picking instances -where he has'nt been quite so good.

Easy. For someone considered next only to Bradman by his fans, 13,000 runs in 20 years is clearly underwhelming. Ponting and Dravid have player for 7 less years and yet are within 2000 runs of Sachin. Remarkable really. It's a shame that we now have reached a point where we have to justify Tendulkar's greatness in online forums against the likes of Yousuf, Jayawardene and Sangakkara. I mean - Tendulkar should be blowing them out of the water with his numbers. With his talent/ability/greatness, he really should have been averaging in the mid 60s, instead of mid 50s where all these pretenders are as well. Looking at this another way, it is clear from the averages that this decade has been much better for batting than the 90s (there was an article recently showing only 4 people averaging 50 in the 90s vs. every Tom, Dick and Hussey in this decade). When you consider that Tendulkar was the clear leader in the 90s, against some of the greatest fast bowlers around, it is mind boggling to think how far behind the pack he has fallen in this decade, on significantly better batting wickets against much-weaker bowling. I mean - Ponting has scored 2300 more runs and 11 more hundreds than Tendulkar this decade. Go figure! So whichever way you look at this - whether by Tendulkar's own high standards in the 90s, or by the productivity of other top players this decade, he has fallen 1500-2000 runs short of where he should/could have been at this point in time.

AGE Is the simple answer to why has not quite hit the heady heights he did in the 90's Its a measure of his greatness that you expect more than an average of 53 and 22 centuries. He is not the player he was in the 90's. Injuires and simply playing for so long have taken their toll. Another thing I personally, am 'justifying Tendulkar's greatness in online forums against the likes of Yousuf, Jayawardene and Sangakkara' in this decade only. Overall he DOES blow them out of the water with his greatness- because as you rightly point out he was the best batsman in an era when it was difficult to score runs, and only Lara bears real comparision amongst batsmen of the last 20 years. If he was 6 years younger his stats would be mind boggling

[Asim]

I want to add "Andy Flower" in the list :) realistically may be we cant but as for as stats are concerned I am really impressed with his effort in this decade :) He avg 61+, excluding vs BDn WI this decade.

[Sooda]

^good call, for a little while in the early 00's he was one of the best batsmen in the world

[vicks]

The criteria I chose show how those batsmen have a) fared vs the strongest teams of the decade, and b) away from home where the test of that batsmans ability is greater. The point being to show that consistency over a period of time is one thing-it means you can score versus poor attacks, but ability to score when the batsmen are genuinely being tested is much rarer. This is where people like Yousuf and Jayawardene clearly fall short. If they were 'better' batsmen youd have expected them to have outscored Tendulkar in those categories that I have filtered- these are sterner tests of their ability. I think the three points youve mentioned in your post are much more a case of cherry picking instances -where he has'nt been quite so good.

Sure he has done well overseas against Australia (not so much against SA). But how do you explain the sub-par performance on his own subcontinental wickets - avg. 40 in India since 2003, flop in Pak (except one knock) and total failure in the last series in SL. Should we just ignore all those because he had a couple of good series against Australia? Are we picking a "vs. Australia" World XI or an "overseas" World XI? If performance against Australia overseas is the primary criteria, then why aren't we talking about Vaughan and now Chris Gayle? As for performing against stronger attacks, let's be honest. Has Australia's attack without McWarne been great? That's when Tendulkar has scored most of his runs against them (in this decade). His performance against the other two teams with strong attacks (SA and Pak) has been distinctly mediocre, both in this decade and the last.

AGE Is the simple answer to why has not quite hit the heady heights he did in the 90's Its a measure of his greatness that you expect more than an average of 53 and 22 centuries. He is not the player he was in the 90's. Injuires and simply playing for so long have taken their toll. Another thing I personally, am 'justifying Tendulkar's greatness in online forums against the likes of Yousuf, Jayawardene and Sangakkara' in this decade only. Overall he DOES blow them out of the water with his greatness- because as you rightly point out he was the best batsman in an era when it was difficult to score runs, and only Lara bears real comparision amongst batsmen of the last 20 years. If he was 6 years younger his stats would be mind boggling

That is my point exactly. Over his 20 year career there is no doubt Sachin's place in any world team. However, during this decade, he doesn't quite cut it. You are selecting him in this decade based on his performance in the 90s, which is unfair to people who have actually done better in this decade. How is it their fault that Sachin has aged and been injured? When he plays in this hypothetical World XI, does he automatically become younger and start playing like he did in the 90s?

[Malcolm Merlyn]

u r just blinded.... Kallis and lara are both largelyyyyyyyy better than tendulkar in this decade... How can you say sachin averages 53???21 tons????? Stop lloking at all his runs he is making agaisnt minows....... It's easy to pick one or two negative point in every player, as the average of tendulkar in sri lanka.... Overall LAra and Kallis are SOOOOOOOOOO MUCHHHHHHHH in front........ If he is injurd, that's his own problem... Or are you putting him in the team because ofmost injuries??? So lets have a bowling attack with Shoaib akhtar and ShaneBond... they played so litle due to injuries still mantain high satandards.... Theyr are better than mcgrath... Youpi!!! You should realise that your favorite player is normal in this decade and wayyyyyy bhind others....

You are blinded by your hate for tendulkar and india as i have shown he avgs well in every country and every condition and he has done it for 20 years and is still doing it.....and for your information lara and kallis are in my team and bowling attack:Bond is already in my team....akhtar.......well i say many pakistanis wont have him in their team because he lacks atttitude,his attitude is worthless......there are lots of bowlers better then mcgrath......for eg.akram,younis,ambrose,marshall i rank all of them above mcgrath......

[Andy]

Mcgrath = Bowling GOD :adore:

[S.Bond]

You are blinded by your hate for tendulkar and india as i have shown he avgs well in every country and every condition and he has done it for 20 years and is still doing it.....and for your information lara and kallis are in my team and bowling attack:Bond is already in my team....akhtar.......well i say many pakistanis wont have him in their team because he lacks atttitude,his attitude is worthless......there are lots of bowlers better then mcgrath......for eg.akram,younis,ambrose,marshall i rank all of them above mcgrath......

i just saw your team... that is pure nonsense.... Don't even want to argue anymore... You won it :two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up: No RICKY PONTING............... Poor guys, your tendulkar is a formidable batsman, 2nd or 3rd best, but sorry he is no way near other great batsan in this decade... with and average of 46-7, you can't be, and will never be in the test team of the decade whatever your name or record is....

[Malcolm Merlyn]

i just saw your team... that is pure nonsense.... Don't even want to argue anymore... You won it :two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up: No RICKY PONTING............... Poor guys, your tendulkar is a formidable batsman, 2nd or 3rd best, but sorry he is no way near other great batsan in this decade... with and average of 46-7, you can't be, and will never be in the test team of the decade whatever your name or record is....

that is a word reserved for your countrymen, and whatever yu guys and your whole country think the world agrees with us that tendulkar is the greatest batsman since bradman now go and cry in your green holes.....

[S.Bond]

that is a word reserved for your countrymen, and whatever yu guys and your whole country think the world agrees with us that tendulkar is the greatest batsman since bradman now go and cry in your green holes.....

hmmmmyou actually have problems... First you have cricket problems... You argued with methat lara and kallis can't be compared with tendulkar because they bat ath three.. I And you have in your team put lara at 5 and kallis at 6... Moreover i prooved you that both surpasses tendulkar by faaaaaaar, in average they both have about 9 hundreds more than tendulkar if they would have played same number of matches.... Whenever you tak about yousuf you say he is a minnow basher... Yousuf has an ovral average of 58.85 in this decade with in 119 innings with 23 centuries, if you excude minnows his average is 54.66 in 110 innings with 20 centuries.... Tendulkar average this decade is 53.20 with 21 centuries in 150 innings and it goes down to 47.19 with 15 centuries.... Tendulkar loses 6.01 averages in this decade when you exclude minnows and 6 centuries whereas yousuf loses 4.19 averages and 3 centuries. WHO IS THE BIGGEST MINNOW BASHER OF THIS DECADE????? As i know you like stupid comments, i know you will try to compare sachin with yousuf, but i already say to you, Tendulkar is a better batsman than yousuf no need to compare, even if you want tendulkar is better than yousuf in this decade, i don't think it but idont want to argue on this, i just want you to tell me who is the biggest minnow basher... Don't talk about FTB... or records agaisnt australia, just awnser me who i the biggest minnows basher of the decade........