vvvslaxman Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 Fact that you have to use so many intangible factors and still can't get anywhere close to proving Tendulkar is better than Bradman should have given you an idea that you are fighting a losing case.
The Outsider Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 You cannot deduce from that he will average low in other places also. Let us take two best countries where Sachin has performed well Bangladesh and Srilanka 1585 runs avge 88 . Compare that to 6996 runs at 100 !! It is still 12 points less than Bradman! Even if Bradman had played in West Indies, South Africa, India, or New Zealand and done well, do you think the fan boys would have counted those numbers? They would have been discarded as minnows. :giggle:
The Outsider Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 But you can deduce he would average as high in other places ? No, he would have averaged higher. Because so did all his peers : http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;home_or_away=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=6;orderby=batting_average;qualmin1=300;qualval1=runs;spanmax1=01+Jan+1955;spanmin1=01+Jan+1925;spanval1=span;team=1;team=2;template=results;type=batting It's quite funny how you discount these teams as minnows on one hand and make it out as a big deal playing at their home on the other. :hysterical:
The Outsider Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 Wonderfull logic so going by that logic all Ponting had to do was not play in India and he could have piggy backed on the if a > b and b > c then a > c logic ... stoopid Ponting if only he had met you . Oh...I completely forgot. By your logic even Ponting > Bradman, so Bradman's prospective average in India is 9.4323245 :hysterical: except that it caused you a lot of heartache and out came all the smilies .. remember ? So have you made a U-Turn then ? You should write a book on sophistry - it has already been shown that Tendulkar even with just minnows and England/Sri Lanka is not even in the same ballpark as Bradman.
vvvslaxman Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 May have been something to do with a certain spinner who is considered the very best of all times ? Tell that to Virendar Sehwag. If you are great you should be able to negotiate him. He finished with an average of 18 in the most recent tour. A disaster. Lara finished with an aggregate of 688 against the same Murali.
vvvslaxman Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 Last time I checked Sehwag never played in half the series against SL that you used where you said SRT avged 88. And how much does he Avg against BD and Zim (Who werent minnows by any stretch in the 90s ). But in anycase I have no problems if you want to use Sehwag or BCL to compare against DGB. So Again how can you deduce he (DGB) would average as high in other places where he never played ? And what is the point in harping on the 99 > 55 when you very well know that SRT had the disadvantage of playing in far many different conditions. How can you deduce he would NOTaverage as high in other places where he never played :cantstop: Playing in different conditions has not been done by not just sachin. Every goddamn cricketer in the 90s, 2000s played in different conditions. So you are going to go around saying everyone is better than Bradman? Sakeb Ul Hasan has played in West Indies, New Zealand, Bangladesh, South Africa, Zimbabwe. So he is better than Bradman?
The Outsider Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 So here suck on your own words in this post http://indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=1003777&postcount=418 So whats it going to be were they Minnows or not ? ... ( Well to be honest I dont know why I bother because either ways there are so limit to what your imagination can conjure up but what the heck ... ) Is that what you understood from the post you quoted? That I am not sure whether they were minnows or not? Seriously, you should quit embarrassing yourself like this. So Again how can you deduce he (DGB) would average as high in other places where he never played ? And what is the point in harping on the 99 > 55 when you very well know that SRT had the disadvantage of playing in far many different conditions. Already been shown that in grounds where Tendulkar played the most, he averaged in the 50s-60s.
Sachinism Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 How long are you guys gonna go back and forth? Nobody is convincing the other party of anything.
The Outsider Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 How long are you guys gonna go back and forth? Nobody is convincing the other party of anything. Maybe it's time to rename this thread as The Never Ending Thread. :icflove:
vvvslaxman Posted April 2, 2010 Posted April 2, 2010 because he NEVER did. Its one thing to assume that having excelled playing on tougher pitches like those you find in SAF,NZ,Ind ... it would be easier to do well on the rest but quite ingenious to say the opposite. But ofcourse this is in real world not in the imaginary world that you and your comrade live in. Tendulkar never layed on uncovered pitches ,without protective equipments, in any matches. He also never scored runs under those conditions. So he would have never succeeded. :hysterical:. He never scored 500 runs in a series. He has never scored 300 in an innings. So he would have never achieved those. You want me to keep going? You can go anyway you want.. i can find 1000 loopholes in your arguments :cantstop:
vvvslaxman Posted April 2, 2010 Posted April 2, 2010 except that the stats and even the writers whose accounts you take as gospel tell you that the pitches in 30s and 40s were absolutely flat. And that DGB was never known to be a good player on the odd sticky wicket that showed up once in a blue-moon. And intimidatory bowling used to be frowned upon. The freakin Aussies took the issue of Larwood bowling bouncers to the British embassy .... and had a official protest in a telegram ... hehehe. Why do i keep reading the article about "test matches dying because of flat pitches". in recent times? Especially subcontinent pitches.Subcontinent pitches are the worst pitches when it comes to producing flat pitches. Why do always drag the average of batsmen in England and Australia anytime we talk about greatness of a batsman? In these patta pitches even Tait who is supposed to be the fastest in the world is a cannon fodder.All you need is bit of skill and concentration power to play on and on and on like Mahelas, Samarweeras, Younis Khans.
vvvslaxman Posted April 2, 2010 Posted April 2, 2010 you forget that the pontings and the graeme smiths were struggling to make runs on the same pitches hence overall batting avgs will give you a correct picture for the time period in question ... Hayden, Martyn, Border, Harvey, Kim Hughes they all have decent records in India. They are also Aussies.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now