The Outsider Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 1. An away average of 47.8. In an era where is peers have comfortably averaged in the 50s, Lara holds a ridiculously low away average. For comparison, Tendulkar holds an away average of 55.44 and Dravid an away average of 57.12. The flatness of WI tracks has been an ongoing debate for many years now and it's clear that his ability to adapt on those flatbeds has boosted his overall average tally. 2. Does he really even average 50 overall? Take out his 400* and 375 scored on the Antigua Recreation Highway, which has since then been replaced by another stadium altogether because of the ridiculous nature of the wicket and Lara does not even average 50 in his career. Ends up with 49.xx - that's in the league of Inzamam-ul-Haq. 3. No century in India, the home of spin. A meagre average of 33. Clearly shows him incapable of handling the Indian spinners in their backyard, one of the biggest challenges of the modern game, at least till Kumble was around. Not for no reason was India nominated as the "Final Frontier" by the captain of the most successful test team in history and not the Antigua Recreational Highway. 4. Not that any of this improves against India overall by much. The average inches up to 34.55 over 17 tests. Obviously he could not handle the Indian spinners even at home, where he thrived on the flatbeds laid out for him. One of my most poignant memories is to watch Lara give a sarcastic clap to the groundsman when Harbhajan spun a ball across his bat in what was his final test at home. Clearly unused to pitches with anything in them had him flummoxed. 5. One would still think maybe India was an aberration. The fact is he did not average 50+ in any country except Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe. New Zealand, where the pitches have a lot of lateral movement, gives you another mediocre performance of 36.9 6. Has the dubious distinction of not being able to score a single hundred against Donald, Waqar, Akram, Saqlain, or Harbhajan in 22 test matches. But he didn't spare South Africa or Pakistan once these stars were not playing plundering 8 centuries in 13 more tests. 7. One of the best indicators to compare batsmen is when they played in similar conditions. In a head to head between Lara and Tendulkar, Lara has managed in average of 37.7. Tendulkar averages 53.8. What can be more equitable than comparing players batting on the exact same surface at similar stages of their career? This is a sample of 13 tests. Dravid in a head to head with Lara averages 64.2 as opposed to Lara's 33.8. Is it any wonder when you consider that when Lara was busy applauding the groundsman at Sabina Park sarcastically, Dravid was constructing a series win for India? 8. His record against Australia is often talked about in glowing terms. Let's look a bit deeper in it and it emerges it's all on the back of performances at home. In Australia, the average plunges to 41.9, regularly hounded and dismissed by McGrath. Has just 4 centuries in 19 tests in Australia. 9. Till as late as his 80th test, in April 2000, his average was 47.7. Guess what happened at the turn of the decade? The likes of Donald, Waqar, Akram retired or started fading and the pitches started becoming flatter and flatter till people ran out of adjectives allowing our flat track messiah to rack up the runs on featherbeds against depleted bowling attacks. 10. When the going got tough for him form wise, he would skip series rather than have his average lowered. In summary, highly overrated on the performance scale. Yes, was a treat to watch and had his own flair, flamboyance, and style. But look into the record with a bit more scrutiny and the facade of greatness crumbles down in a few minutes.
Sooda Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 Well well, Good post and riposte to the many SRT ke record mein hole pokers. I have to say I was/am one of those who rated him (Lara i.e) as THE best of his gen ahead of everybody else. In the past few weeks we have established that the following batsmen actually were not THAT great: Bradman, Tendulkar, Gavaskar and now Lara... If we look so closely at any great players stats we are bound to find such holes it seems, Its fun and makes for good debate. We should start a seperate 'myth debunking' forum where we do this and nothing else :cantstop:
thevortex Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 When it has been proven that neither Tendulkar nor Lara is great I guess the mantle automatically falls upon Ponting's head. I am sure we will all be jumping over one another to absolutely whittle down Ponting. So, I guess the greatest is who stands next. Inzamam probably? Or Dravid? What pointlessness!
rabinjackman Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 when we consider both, the ODI's as well as Tests, then the best batsman of this genration will emerge right in front of your eyes. and we all know who that is.
Sooda Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 When it has been proven that neither Tendulkar nor Lara is great I guess the mantle automatically falls upon Ponting's head. I am sure we will all be jumping over one another to absolutely whittle down Ponting. So, I guess the greatest is who stands next. Inzamam probably? Or Dravid? What pointlessness! Well really the point is not to prove that one or otherISNT great- they are to say otherwise is stupid, just to try and show who is greatest of them all... Surely Lara is great despite all these flaws which the OP outlines, Tendulkar is despite all the many holes people have been highlighting across many threads, as is Gavaskar even with the post SJS put up in that SG vs ST thread. Its all relative.
Chandan Posted April 5, 2010 Posted April 5, 2010 when we consider both, the ODI's as well as Tests, then the best batsman of this genration will emerge right in front of your eyes. and we all know who that is. statsguru?
pensionplan Posted April 1, 2011 Posted April 1, 2011 BUMP for sfs ...Thanks. But bear in mind I rate SRT higher than BCL all said and done especially after how SRT's last 2 years have progressed and prospered edging out all other modern batsman pretty much IMO. So in that sense all this is a little moot though the OP makes for an interesting read. Only when I put the records in perspective did I say that SRT took 15 innings more to cross BCL's World record at the time just to point out at a given point in time there were players that matched up to SRT statistically. A lot of water has flown under the bridge since then and clearly SRT has emerged as the one who now is ahead of the group of modern day greats IMO all things considered in batting as of now. Having said that Lara is a great great batsman with a lot of flair and style to his batting with audacious strokeplay that everyone longs to see. His appetite for big hundreds and solo knocks is legendary in Test cricket.
goose Posted April 1, 2011 Posted April 1, 2011 Lara's biggest achievement was to have a playstation game named after him.
pensionplan Posted April 1, 2011 Posted April 1, 2011 One thing I want to mention though. Lara did something no one does to Murali that consistently in his own backyard. That is to plunder runs by the tons in that 2001 series in SL. And he also has a double hundred in Pakistan. So he to me more than made up for his lack of scoring a century in India one of the sub-continental venues as been observed in the OP.
gaurav92 Posted April 1, 2011 Posted April 1, 2011 Lara's biggest achievement was to have a playstation game named after him. Same for :punter: :--D
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