Deleted_User_1 Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Stop talking in Southie andu gaaaaandu pandu languages, unless there is an English translation...:finger:
kabira Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 98 version was suppose to rule the world. It was given. But 2010 version, no one thought he can do it. So 2010 version for me
gaurav92 Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 How about Both ? And yes 2010 is better version for me :D
akshayxyz Posted October 24, 2010 Posted October 24, 2010 Even after going through all the view points so far, still cant make up mind.. I think a coin toss can not be any more wrong/right.
flamy Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 Neevu maado kelsa dinda, kempage iro avaru, tale ilde ishtik munche Sachin yavagu aata team kosra geddilla antha heltare. :headshake: :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: bobo pwned saali :finger:
flamy Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 Stop talking in Southie andu gaaaaandu pandu languages' date=' unless there is an English translation...:finger:[/quote'] hagbo robo haarbo re :kkr:
thevortex Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 Is there even a question about this?! Tendulkar of 1998 did not just stand up and compile runs. He did not weather attacks. He strode into them, decimated them. He carried his team and struck terror into his opponents' hearts. There was always that fleeting feeling of 'single handedness' whenever he strode in or trudged out. It was at once a boon and a bane for Sachin himself and his side. Tendulkar of 2010 shows just how strong his heart can be. It is a fine exhibition of putting mind over matter. Of giving control greater importance than flair and power. And there is no more that sense of single handedness. Sehwag or no Sehwag....that feeling has changed. And that should tell us something.
Jadoo Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 I would have to say 2010 for sure. Like mentioned by others, his glorious performances in 1998 were a given, as he was always destined for greatness. For him to still continue breaking records and setting new benchmarks at the age of 37 is just phenominal. What also makes 2010 even more special is that his detractors; whilst he was going through a rough patch, would not have even envisaged him being in the Indian team right now let alone dominant his peers in batsmanship in Test's and ODI's the way he has done this year.
akshayxyz Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 Sachin_2010 is scoring at about 90+ average, I would rather have him maintain (or better than that) than Sachin_1998 at avg of ~70. We have Sehwag, Raina, Dhoni and others for the fireworks part.
akshayxyz Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 98 version in the 2010 team :) :two_thumbs_up:
triam Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 The question is very tricky, Which do I prefer? - 1998 Which is better ? - I guess 2010 1998 was pure adrenaline, if he cant do with the bat he can do it with the ball or on the field (some of his runouts during that time were preposterous), more cavalier, more instinct than process, more highs and lows. 2010 is pure maturity, there seems to be a lot more planning and methodical, dont get me wrong his genius in strokeplay is still there, but the highs and lows are closer to each other.
thevortex Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 The 175' date=' 200* , 105*, 214+53 and 203 were all about Single handedness ... there was no contest had he not played like only he can. The only thing that has changed is that there are some other players who are capable of grabbing your attention. Earlier it was ALL him. But the fact that he still can stand on top of the run charts despite players like VS being in prime form tells the story.[/quote'] I am sure that is one way of looking at it, Bossbhai. However my contention was that even if a Sehwag or a Laxman were to have been there in that era ('98), Tendulkar would still have been inexorable and incomparable. He still is. But not by much, if you know what I mean. But hey, it is all esoteric. Why split hairs, when Tendulkar at any time is so good that there is hardly any need for a discussion! :)
RockStar Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 I am sure that is one way of looking at it, Bossbhai. However my contention was that even if a Sehwag or a Laxman were to have been there in that era ('98), Tendulkar would still have been inexorable and incomparable. He still is. But not by much, if you know what I mean. But hey, it is all esoteric. Why split hairs, when Tendulkar at any time is so good that there is hardly any need for a discussion! :) very well said.. :)
Guest Gunner Posted October 25, 2010 Posted October 25, 2010 1998 was Rafael Nadal / Boris Becker / Ayrton Senna etc. 2010 is Michael Schumacher / Roger Federer.
urbestfriend Posted October 26, 2010 Posted October 26, 2010 98 - back then Baasu was Indian team and Indian team was Baasu... If baasu gets out early, no interest to watch the match. If baasu gets the ball, we know that something is going to happen ...! Baasu battingge bandre Yenu kick maga....:eyedance:
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