Has modern master Tendulkar eclipsed The Don?

[ravishingravi]

That uncovered pitches excuse is one of the biggest bakwaas used by DGB fanboi's .... I have shown in that monster thread on DGB how the batting avgs of those times were far better than those in the 90s and 00s put together and over a sample size that was roughly 3 x times that of the 30s + 40s IIRC ..... But the DGB bhakti is based on stories and yarn not facts which arent allowed to get in the way.

Firstly, I am not a DGB fanoy. I haven't watched him play. So, I can only go by the next best thing, stats. I ll look up the thread you mentioned, but I really don't think there is any myth associated with uncovered pitches or lack of cricketing gear. Anybody who has played or watched cricket at any decent level will acknowledge that uncovered pitches were more challenging for the batsman and it really goes without saying that batting without gear i.e helmet or arm guard is a different kettle of fish. Ofcourse one doesn't even have to go through the above the exercise when the most obvious fact of 99.94 hangs over every known legend of the game. Bear in mind my point is not say that Sachin may not be the greatest, but the fact that it is an impossible argument to win considering they played in completely different eras.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Fair Game]

LOL, same old discussion again. As explained a gazillion times, you don't just take a Bradman and take him through a time machine and drop him in today's world with his baggy outfit and no helmets and expect him to average 99.94 or even a 56.5. You extrapolate and see that given his performances of those years where he was light years ahead of his peers, if he was born in this era and grew up in the same conditions of current players, would be do better than a 56.5 average.

Yeah but you give tendulkar the flimsy bat that bradman used in stead of the 20 kilo mallet that he uses now and see if he can average over 50 and hit so many boundaries. I don't think so

[Hindustani]

Yes

[Pratters]

LOL @ this thread. I am a HUGE fan of Tendulkar, as big as any on this forum if not bigger but this is just silly. Reality check - forget being the greatest of all time, Tendulkar is not even the undisputed king of his era. A fair argument can be made that Lara was the better test batsman than Tendulkar. For his batting in clutch situations, I always rate Lara as the greatest test batsman. Gary Sobers recently made the comment that in his mind, Gavaskar was greater. Opinionated writer Mukul Kesavan stated the same in his book Men in White. Only Bradman is the clear number 1. A fair argument can be made for a lot of cricketers to be ranked any where between 2-10. My two cents.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Pratters]

And the reason you forgot what DGB himslf had to say about SRT is because ....... ? Uncomfortable fact much ? Cue : Relocation of Goal post.

Err. I said a fair argument can be made for him to be ranked any where between 2-10. Bradman never said Tendulkar was better than him now did he? I have essentially made my point but since you bring in Don's perspective, he was mesmerised by Sobers too when Sobers played that great innings in Australia v ROW. Heh.

[King Tendulkar]

Firstly' date=' I am not a DGB fanoy. I haven't watched him play. So, I can only go by the next best thing, stats. .[/quote'] So you have never watched him play and just going by stats. So according to stats who is best bowler ever? Rememebr you do not have to have seen them play!

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest Gunner]

Without the pitches being docile how do you reckon the timeless test matches lasted for soo many days ? And regarding batting without protective gear : http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/455228.html

It would appear that the don handled short pitched bowling rather ordinarily.

[Pratters]

To say that Lara or Ponting was a better bat is certainly more credible and palatable an opinion' date=' although a minority one. I think Boss's point is that all these modern greats, not just Sachin, will be deemed superior simply because Cricket as a sport has completely changed - from modern tools used for analysing opposition to the exacting physical standards. Bradman might have excelled in this era but his outlandish average alone won't entitle him an unquestioned lead over Goddy and his contemporaries.[/quote'] Ah. That's a line of argument all right. I don't agree with it at all though and most cricket fans around the world won't agree with this line. A case can definitely be made for cricket standards but I would no way reduce Bradman's stats by more than 1/4th given there were some damn good cricketers in his era too. Harold Larwood is one of the greatest bowlers in the game bar none and Bill Voce was pretty good too. Bradman's average then would be 75. That is still 15 points more than the next best. Bradman was a run machine and they way he kept piling the big scores match after match, it was amazing. I mean even if we completely discount the attacks of those days, it is still out of this world to score like Bradman did. Just look at the records of a Lara or a Tendulkar against the weaker opponents like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. They haven't been able to massacre them like Bradman massacred the bowlers he faced now have they.

[Pratters]

DGB never said SRT was inferior to him .... everybody knows exactly the context and meaning of his words. Secondly DGB was impressed with Sobers but I suspect he never invited him to his house and go out of his way to say he bats like him. Move on to the next goal post already.

Bradman said Tendulkar had a similar style to his and batted like him. He never said Tendulkar was greater than Sobers or Sobers was greater than Tendulkar. Regarding inviting to his house - Bradman was far younger during Sober's time and an active administrator of ACB. Hell he even used to go to pick cricketers from the airports like he did once with Tony Greig. Cheers.

[ravishingravi]

So, what's the decent level you've played at? I've played in Kolkata's 1st division league for two years. The clubs there have their own grounds with turf wickets that are left uncovered even on match days. Now get this, overnight dew, heavy dew, makes the pitch EASIER to bat on. Unless there's been heavy rain, an uncovered pitch HELPS batsmen. Unless you can tell me about Bradman batting on flooded pitches, keep this uncovered pitch nonsense away if you want an informed discussion.

I have played in Kanga league in Mumbai and no I had not observed this great phenomenon of pitches getting better to bat on after rain or dew. I should have played in Kolkata I guess. I think then pitches in Kolkata like you demonstrate some unique qualities. One of which is with the moisture on surface ( you do understand the difference between "moisture" and "flood wet" ), the pitch gets flatter to bat on. Damn!! I fell for the likes of Gavaskar, Chappell and Boycott who brainwashed me into believing the unpredictable bounce of uncovered tracks. Now expecting an informed discussion based on categorically stating an opposing view point as "nonsense" makes it aptly clear why you have such "in depth understanding of the game" (This was sarcasm not chasm). So, before you can enter or even remotely understand what "civilized discussions" are all about, keep your fanboyism aside and learn to present a counter point. I understand Tendulkar means a lot for some.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Pratters]

Bradman - v India 1947-1948 5 6 2 715 201 178.75 4 1 0 view innings v South Africa 1931-1932 5 5 1 806 299* 201.50 4 0 0 view innings

[ravishingravi]

Without the pitches being docile how do you reckon the timeless test matches lasted for soo many days ? And regarding batting without protective gear : http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/455228.html

It could be put down not just to the pitches, but the quality of bowling or the general tempo of play which was more survival oriented. For all I know even you haven't watched the ten day test matches, so again we come back to the same point, how do you compare this era from one almost 80 years back and even if we do compare the eras which most here seem to be willing to do, how was Don so ahead of any of the players of his era statistically if pitches were truly this docile. I mean bowling this decade is considered to be poor compared to 90s and 80s. Shouldn't Tendulkar be averaging much ahead of the players of his era ? As for the body line article, there were still no gears on the body. So, while the bouncer might have gone out of fashion for some time, bowlers could still bowl a shot a ball and hit you in the body. So, still not quite the same thing as today. Btw, the 1948-49 series of the "invincibles" had overcome the bodyline syndrome and shot balls were bowled in the series. And Don didn't do too bad there. So, citing Bodyline as Don's weakness against short ball is like citing SL loss thanks to Mendis as India's weakness against spin. Bouncer was tactic unheard of till the bodyline with the leg side field and every batsman suffered.

[vamos_rafa]

The only time,in that era, Don faced something which was strategically planned ,which was not common place,saw a drop in the run making of the Don. Imagine the kind of mental battles that a batsman of today has to face. The word about the weakness of a batter flows like a jungle on fire. Agreed that the quality of the bowling is not that fearsome,though its naive to believe that all the bowlers whom the Don faced were of Marhsall and Holding quality,but the demands have increased manifolds. And Cricket is not that gentlemanly a game as it was then. The article that BossBhai has posted on CI,indicates that even some of the English players condemned the tactics as not being in the spirit of the game.

[ravishingravi]

I think you're a LIAR and a CRYBABY with a fetish for unrelated rants about 'civilized discussions' etc. Kanga league is played smack in the middle of Mumbai monsoon. Often on wet and slippery pitches. That's very different from a turf soaked with overnight dew. Ofcourse you'd have NO idea. Now that you've quoted some big names supporting your cooked-up theory, could you please be so kind to let us all know when and where Gavaskar and Boycott said overnight dew make a pitch tough to bat on? Because it's almost intuitive for anyone who's batted on such a track to realize that it becomes easy to play a shot since the ball skids nicely on the bat without any spin or swing..

Again if resorting to personal abuse can cover up for the lack of cricketing logic then suit yourself. And you are expecting an informed discussion. :giggle: Btw, you probably do not comprehend a very simply written post. ( no sarcasm here). It is precisely why Kanga league is played the middle of monsoon that I called your theory bogus or maybe just an isolated case of "curious case of pitches in Kolkata" Here is Geoffrey Boycott, "I was very good on uncovered pitches. Most people don’t realise today, that we played on uncovered pitches until 1979 in county cricket. They have no knowledge, recollection or idea of what playing on these pitches is and it’s difficult,” says Geoff. "“We played Championship matches two times a week for a few days on uncovered pitches. You got a great variety of surfaces with the weather as it is in this country. The weather changed the outlook of the match daily. If it rained and you were playing on an uncovered pitch the whole match could swing one way or another.”" http://www.50connect.co.uk/leisure/interviews/where_are_they_now/an_interview_with_geoffrey_boycott You can listen to him here too. "Nov 15, 2007: Why technique is key and the need for uncovered pitches in Test cricket - Geoffrey Boycott answers readers' queries" http://www.cricinfo.com/talk/content/current/multimedia/feature.html?genre=21&skiplimit=70 As for Chappell and Gavaskar, I heard on them on Chat show that comes on Star Cricket. So, no links there.

[ravishingravi]

Again something on uncovered pitches "Ray Illingworth, the former England captain, played most of his career on uncovered pitches, and was a big fan. "They produced better batters and bowlers," he wrote in his autobiography, arguing that bowlers learned to exploit helpful conditions, and batsmen to hone their techniques. Uncovered pitches in England were phased out in the 1960s - something Richie Benaud blames for the decline of the wrist-spinner. Since then, with the exception of some indecently raging turners at Northampton, the only luxuries afforded English bowlers have been greentops, leaving mediocre seamers to grab all the wickets and spinners to fight over the scraps. Another side-effect of covering pitches has been the normalisation of batting conditions all round the world. During the 1936-37 Ashes series, Australia responded to a classic sticky dog - created when a wet pitch is exposed to the sun - in Melbourne by reversing the order. It worked a treat: Don Bradman came in at No. 7, scored 270, and Australia won by 365 runs. These days the batsmen are more pampered and such an innovation isn't necessary. Which makes you wonder how much Bradman would have averaged had he been born 50 years later." http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/461172.html

[zen]

Weak opposition is a relative term. Even the weakest of them all nowadays do a thorough homework on every aspect of Sachin's (or Lara's if you want) batting and exploit every little weaknesses. All of this backed up by a fielding standard that'd be unheard of in Bradman's days. We are not even discussing off-field factors like thousands of air-miles clocked every week etc. I'd not venture into silly extrapolations and assumptions like deducting 25% of his average but the point remains valid. The game has not just evolved it's completely changed in character and dynamics. So' date=' if you want to establish Bradman as the undisputed numero uno, you need to bring something else to the table than just his freak average. Simple.[/quote'] By that logic, every modern batsmen will have to be > those from old era. Reminds me of that Hammond vs Rameez Raja thread :P