Tendulkar is today's Bradman, says Brian Lara

[Raghav_12]

expecting Rett n Yoda to post any time soon ...

:hatsoff::hatsoff:

[Gunner_Mania]

The debate resumes..................

[zen]

Anyways, this is getting boring so will take a break from this with the followoing thought: I am a big fan of Tendulkar and have followed most of his career but I can't really say he made a bigger impact in a game with his batting in tests than some of his peers. Almost 50 test 100s but there are not many that would pump you up and make you feel as if some magic has happened. The best performances that I can think are: - in the 1998 series against Aus, - in 2010 series against Aus, - the 50 in the turner against Aus at Mumbai - even though Ind lost that test against Pak at Chennai, I would rate his 100 in it as impactful. Only if the tail had got those 15 runs Compare that to Sehwag, who has like 80 odd tests: - Triple in Pakistan that took the steam out of Pak attack (the bowling powerhouse :P ) - Triple against SA in a game that Ind could have lost if not for his triple - Double in SL to help Ind win the game - Those big hundreds against SL in the recent home series to help Ind win the series. I think Ind became #1 after that series - That 80 odd against Eng to make it possible for Ind to win that test by chasing 300+ - That 100 against SA at Kolkatta, which took the steam out of SA attack and enabled Ind to stay at #1 - That 100 in the last innings at Adelaide to help Ind draw the game and thus the series Those are just phenominal performances by Sehwag. These kind of performances also helps others in the team to get going as well .... When I see that someone like Sehwag avg 50 odd with these kind of performances and then when I try to put things into perspective and imagine what someone with the ability to make that kind of an impact would have done with an avg of 100 (or even 75), it feels just amazing to realize what someone achieved through his batting!

[CSK Fan]

It's nice to know that to the level of impact is proporrtional to the number of videos available :giggle:

Nah, the level of impact is directly proportional to the number of stories oldies swap over a camp-fire where the size of the fish/bear they bagged grow exponentionaly after each re-telling and are you trying to compare Bradman to Sehwag? Bradman did not have the kind of strike rate Sehwag had, did he? And as for your opinion about the impact Sachin had on tests, I am afraid you are in a minority(the same way I might be in the minority with Bradman though I do believe Bradman>Sachin). If Sachin had the luxury of a middle order Sehwag has in his prime, he would have similar strike rates

[zen]

Nah, the level of impact is directly proportional to the number of stories oldies swap over a camp-fire where the size of the fish/bear they bagged grow exponentionaly after each re-telling and are you trying to compare Bradman to Sehwag? Bradman did not have the kind of strike rate Sehwag had, did he? And as for your opinion about the impact Sachin had on tests, I am afraid you are in a minority(the same way I might be in the minority with Bradman though I do believe Bradman>Sachin). If Sachin had the luxury of a middle order Sehwag has in his prime, he would have similar strike rates

Appears as if you don't know much about Bradman. May be you can take a look at the link below: http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Articles/Article20010226.asp

He scored the fastest 200 in Test Cricket, 214 minutes at Headingley in 1934 and has scored the most runs in a day, 309 at Headingley in 1930. He scored a century in a session on 6 occasions.

[The Outsider]

Notice, how he says 'Tendulkar is today's Bradman' and not 'Bradman was yesterday's Tendulkar'. :giggle:

[dial_100]

If Lara saying what he what he did, anyday weighs lot more than us saying it. He is saying that the opinions are from those who have seen DGB's era. They should have made it very clear if they had thought that DGB with 99.94, the best batsman, period. He put it very moderately and in correct way. I think I am done talking this subject now.

[ravishingravi]

So, how does this settle the debate. Bradman is usually used as a metaphor for Batting greatness and he has called Tendlya today's "Bradman". Tendlya's calibre among current batsmen was never in doubt.

[Ram]

Whenever people seem to compare Sachin with Bradman, it doesnt feel like they're actually praising him, but as though they're making a concession by mentioning him in the same breadth as the Don. Sachin doesnt need these comparisons. He is who he is – the greatest batsmen of his time who maintained stunning consistency, even as three different generations of cricketers came and went. Bradman may have had some jaw-dropping numbers that no one else could manage, but Sachin’s ability to maintain consistency over nearly 21 years of cricket, especially in this commercialized era where the pressure to perform from the fand and the constant scrutiny from the medea is excruciating, is equally stunning if not more.

[ludhianvi]

Does it not show Lara's humbleness? When Lara retired he had scored 11953 in 232 innings. And Tendulkar and Ponting both got their 12,000 runs in 247 innings. Was there really that much of a difference between these players for one to be labeled Bradman? :hmmm:

[ravishingravi]

Whenever people seem to compare Sachin with Bradman' date= it doesnt feel like they're actually praising him, but as though they're making a concession by mentioning him in the same breadth as the Don. Sachin doesnt need these comparisons. He is who he is – the greatest batsmen of his time who maintained stunning consistency, even as three different generations of cricketers came and went. Bradman may have had some jaw-dropping numbers that no one else could manage, but Sachin’s ability to maintain consistency over nearly 21 years of cricket, especially in this commercialized era where the pressure to perform from the fand and the constant scrutiny from the medea is excruciating, is equally stunning if not more.

Spot on

[shubham45]

u cant really compare the two greats ....

[dial_100]

Well, I wish, Lara had called tendulkar today's Hutton, Hammonds, Sutcliffe or Sobers. That way it would have been clear. They all had better averages than SRT. Wonder why?

[yoda]

Well' date=' I wish, Lara had called tendulkar today's Hutton, Hammonds, Sutcliffe or Sobers. That way it would have been clear. They all had better averages than SRT. Wonder why?[/quote'] Well Bradman's name is synonymous with cricketing excellence, that's why, which itself has been denied by many here.

[dial_100]

Well Bradman's name is synonymous with cricketing excellence' date=' that's why, which itself has been denied by many here.[/quote'] Yoda, that is absolutely not true. No body in his senses can deny the fact that DGB was best of his time. For me, it is impossible to compare modern greats with anyone from 30s. So even the likes of RD, JK or RP cannot be compared with the oldies.

[zen]

Some of you guys have no idea the weight of expectations that Don had to carry too (being Don Bradman itself is something). On top of that, the era that he played in went through a lot of turmoil including the great depression and WW2

[gloryof83]

http://atrochatro.com/read.php?read=4549 No other batsman has made an impact on this game as Sir Don Bradman has :winky:

could you elaborate on that please....

[CSK Fan]

Appears as if you don't know much about Bradman. May be you can take a look at the link below: http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Articles/Article20010226.asp

I would definitely like to know how many overs were bowled in one day, one session, etc during Bradmans's time as compared to mordern time

[Sachin=GOD]

I would definitely like to know how many overs were bowled in one day' date= one session, etc during Bradmans's time as compared to mordern time

easily around 110-130 overs per day.

[zen]

I would definitely like to know how many overs were bowled in one day' date=' one session, etc during Bradmans's time as compared to mordern time[/quote'] What would be the purpose of that? If it is to know how quickly Bradman scored then a 100 in one session gives you a pretty good idea. Also by asking these question, you are not putting things in to perspective as in those days when there were no ODIs or T20s. You have to look at this relative to the time. If your point is to try to get some idea about that era then you could try to refer to cricinfo and look at the scorecards to see if such a information is available.