Sachin tendulkar vs brian lara?? players views

[gaurav92]

SRT = GOD

[TumTum]

LOL it's funny reading the opinions here. When a Sachin vs Lara comparison arises, it is unanimous that Tendulkar is better on all levels. However when a Sachin vs Ponting comparison starts, there is a sizable amount of people that vote for Ponting and it is a very comparative argument. But when a thread start about the great Test batsmen, it is always Tendulkar and Lara that come up but never Ponting :finger:

[TumTum]

Cat got ICF users tongues? Here I'll say what is in all of your minds, the reason for the above post: 1. You want the Tendulkar monarchy of modern batsmen to be unchallenged (maybe so the Sachin/Bradman arguments to be valid). So therefore you only include Tendulkar and Lara in your great Test batsmen list, as you all well know Tendulkar is the clear leader out of the 2. But if Ponting was also included then Tendulkar's lead would be so marginal that it will effect other arguments such as Sachin vs Bradman/Richards/Pollock/Headley/Chappell/Sobers/Gavagaskar and would not make Tendulkar seem as great as before. 2. It is just pure jealousy/hatred of Ponting that you do not mention him as one of the Tests great batsmen in the same league as Tendulkar and Lara. :icflove::icflove::icflove:

[Bublu Bhuyan]

The reason I don't include Ponting in the Sachin/Lara league is because of one factor - the era in which he excelled in. That's the same reason why I rate Viv Richards slightly above Sachin, it's because of the era in which Viv excelled in. Tendulkar was the best batsman in the 90's with no competition from anyone. No one was even marginally close to him in that era. Viv dominated from his debut till about 1982-83. He still was a great batsman after that period, but it is believed looking at his figures that he wasn't the same after that period. Now compare the bowlers and conditions Viv faced with the of Sachin. Sure Sachin in the 90's faced lot of great bowlers. It was an era where bowlers excelled and tracks weren't flat like now. However, in Viv' time the bowlers were even better. That's simply the reason why Viv comes out on top of Sachin by a hair in any list of all time great batsmen/cricketers. Same is the case with Ponting. The era he excelled in was a complete joke compared to the era Sachin excelled in. In the last era, even a monkey could have averaged more than 50 if trained how to hold a bat. It was an era of flat tracks and the bowling attack was a joke. Make no mistake, Ponting is a great batsman, really wonderful. But the same argument applies in his case. The era he dominated was nowhere close to the era in which Sachin excelled. Heck, in the 90's, only 4 batsman averaged more than 50 (among those who scored at least 2000 runs in those 10 years). Compare that with how many batsman averaged more than 50 in the next era, and compare the bowlers of both the eras, you'll get an idea on how difficult batting was in the 90's compared to the next era.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[TumTum]

The reason I don't include Ponting in the Sachin/Lara league is because of one factor - the era in which he excelled in. That's the same reason why I rate Viv Richards slightly above Sachin, it's because of the era in which Viv excelled in. Tendulkar was the best batsman in the 90's with no competition from anyone. No one was even marginally close to him in that era. Viv dominated from his debut till about 1982-83. He still was a great batsman after that period, but it is believed looking at his figures that he wasn't the same after that period. Now compare the bowlers and conditions Viv faced with the of Sachin. Sure Sachin in the 90's faced lot of great bowlers. It was an era where bowlers excelled and tracks weren't flat like now. However, in Viv' time the bowlers were even better. That's simply the reason why Viv comes out on top of Sachin by a hair in any list of all time great batsmen/cricketers. Same is the case with Ponting. The era he excelled in was a complete joke compared to the era Sachin excelled in. In the last era, even a monkey could have averaged more than 50 if trained how to hold a bat. It was an era of flat tracks and the bowling attack was a joke. Make no mistake, Ponting is a great batsman, really wonderful. But the same argument applies in his case. The era he dominated was nowhere close to the era in which Sachin excelled. Heck, in the 90's, only 4 batsman averaged more than 50 (among those who scored at least 2000 runs in those 10 years). Compare that with how many batsman averaged more than 50 in the next era, and compare the bowlers of both the eras, you'll get an idea on how difficult batting was in the 90's compared to the next era.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. But don't you think statistic wise that the difference between both Lara and Ponting's records is too great to be overcome by the different eras? I mean if you subtract the bowling average of 00s with the 90s, divide by 2 (because Lara playing equally in both eras) and add it onto Lara's Test average, I think you'll find that Ponting would still average higher. And going by that the 00s were easier to bat on, why couldn't Sachin and Lara no where near emulate Ponting's success during that period? Why does this get ignored but only their batting stats of the 90s get highlighted? And may I add that Ponting was still a youngster when playing in the 90s and it was only till 2002 where he peaked and matured as a batsmen. So it is unfair to use his 90s stats against him, maybe he would have performed just as well as Tendulkar in the 90s, nobody knows.

[Sachinism]

Tendulkar was in out of the team due to injuries Also Ponting went through a golden period and had his average bumped up. Consistency should count for something

[TumTum]

Tendulkar was in out of the team due to injuries Also Ponting went through a golden period and had his average bumped up. Consistency should count for something

Or should it really? That is an interesting call. Why would you take credit away from a player that has looked unstoppable at one part of his career?

[Bublu Bhuyan]

And may I add that Ponting was still a youngster when playing in the 90s and it was only till 2002 where he peaked and matured as a batsmen. So it is unfair to use his 90s stats against him' date=' maybe he would have performed just as well as Tendulkar in the 90s, nobody knows.[/quote'] I was thinking the same about Sachin. What if he played in Viv's time, maybe he would have performed the same that he did in the 90s. But then against, I can't assume it because he ultimately didn't play in Viv's era. That's not his fault, rather his fate. He'll have to live with it. Same with Ponting, it's not his fault that he matured as a batsman from 2000 onwards. But that's his fate, and he'll have to live with it. Make no mistake, I consider Ponting a wonderful, top class, gifted batsman. Sheer talent is what that guy is made up of. I'd rate him the 3rd best Australian batsman after Neil Harvey. The 2nd best would be the legendary Greg Chappell. I don't think I need to name who's the best Australian batsman is. And the fact that Ponting comes out at the 3rd spot in my list doesn't take away any of his credibility, rather it shows the type of batsman produced by Australia.

And going by that the 00s were easier to bat on' date=' why couldn't Sachin and Lara no where near emulate Ponting's success during that period? Why does this get ignored but only their batting stats of the 90s get highlighted?[/quote'] I don't think that would be a good argument. That's like saying Mohammad Yousuf is as good as his average suggests, irrespective of the fact that he cashed in extremely heavily against Bangladesh and the West Indian attack post Ambrose and Walsh. If others were as good, why couldn't they capitalize as much against those attacks as he did? One point though, Sachin was literally crippled from 2003 till about the end of 2006. He became a living museum of injuries in that period. But then again, I'm not making excuses. That's his fate and he'll have to live with it.

[Sachinism]

Or should it really? That is an interesting call. Why would you take credit away from a player that has looked unstoppable at one part of his career?

because then Mohammed Yousuf would be the best modern day batsman for his glorious 99.88 average in 2006

[TumTum]

I think it's not right to compare Mohammad Yousuf to Ponting, because a thing that all 3 off Tendu, Lara, Punter have in common is that they scored runs against most attacks in the world and they have done it for at least a decade. Jaques Kallis has also been an exceptional batsmen but he hasn't really set the world on fire either (slow scoring + no doubles). But I agree with everything else you said, just think Ponting deserves to be classed in the same league as Tendulkar and Lara.

[TumTum]

because then Mohammed Yousuf would be the best modern day batsman for his glorious 99.88 average in 2006

Yeah but what I meant is that both the purple patches and form slumps are recorder into the batting average, so why manipulate it?

[f2000560]

Yeah but what I meant is that both the purple patches and form slumps are recorder into the batting average' date= so why manipulate it?

not exactly average doesn't give you a measure of consistency, to get a grip on that you would have to calculate variance (lesser the better)

[TumTum]

not exactly average doesn't give you a measure of consistency' date=' to get a grip on that you would have to calculate variance (lesser the better)[/quote'] But again is consistency really worth more than inconsistency? If one players manages to score heaps of runs in a short space of time, isn't that a wonderful achievement?

[don_corleone840]

Top 10 batsman of all time 1 Don bradman 2 Sachin tendulkar 3 Wally hammond 4 Vivian richards 5 sutcliff 6 Sunil gavaskar 7 Brian lara 8 Len hutton 9 Garry sobers 10 Virendra sehwag

[TumTum]

10 Virendra sehwag

:hysterical:

[Bublu Bhuyan]

I think it's not right to compare Mohammad Yousuf to Ponting, because a thing that all 3 off Tendu, Lara, Punter have in common is that they scored runs against most attacks in the world and they have done it for at least a decade. Jaques Kallis has also been an exceptional batsmen but he hasn't really set the world on fire either (slow scoring + no doubles). But I agree with everything else you said, just think Ponting deserves to be classed in the same league as Tendulkar and Lara.

I think I went too far. I'd say that yes, Ponting is indeed in the league of Sachin and Lara. But if a list of all time great cricketers/batsmen is made, Ponting I believe will find a spot below them. I mean Greg Chappel was a master of his art, and certainly in the same league as King Vis. But in a list of all time great cricketers/batsmen, Chappell would come behind Viv. That's what I mean. And it's an utter joke to even mention Mohammad Yousuf in the same sentence as Ponting. Yousuf is a good batsman, nothing more. In fact I'd rate Inzamam 10 times ahead of him.

[Bublu Bhuyan]

Top 10 batsman of all time 1 Don bradman 2 Sachin tendulkar 3 Wally hammond 4 Vivian richards 5 sutcliff 6 Sunil gavaskar 7 Brian lara 8 Len hutton 9 Garry sobers 10 Virendra sehwag

The 2nd spot would probably go to Gary Sobers, followed by Viv Richards in the 3rd spot. After that it'll be a pick between Sachin, Hammond, Hobbs and Hutton (in my books that is).

[satyam1729]

The 2nd spot would probably go to Gary Sobers' date=' followed by Viv Richards in the 3rd spot. After that it'll be a pick between Sachin, Hammond, Hobbs and Hutton (in my books that is).[/quote'] Sobers was a minnow basher.

[f.b.m]

Statsguru is god. And I like babbling about players that I've never seen. Thus I become knowledgeable.