Is Lara Overhyped?

[pensionplan]

I think Lara is pure genius and one of the greatest natural talents to have come into cricket since the 1990s and if he had been more consistent then he would've given Goddy a run for his money in terms of all the records (at least in test cricket).

Was Lara not the highest run scorer in Test cricket when he retired which Tendulkar broke couple of years or so later taking more innings to get to the Lara's World record mark. So what consistency are you talking about? To get to 11,953 Lara took 232 innings and Tendulkar to get to 11,953 took 247 innings a full 15 innings more than Lara to get to the same mark. So if Tendulkar was more consistent which Lara lacked then why did it take SRT more innings to get past Lara. What am I missing here? Your statement of not being consistent would have had some credence if Tendulkar set a mark and Lara failed to get there or fall short of the mark playing many more innings. That clearly is not the case here. Anyway to each his own.

[SachDan]

Was Lara not the highest run scorer in Test cricket when he retired which Tendulkar broke couple of years or so later taking more innings to get to the Lara's World record mark. So what consistency are you talking about? To get to 11,953 Lara took 232 innings and Tendulkar to get to 11,953 took 247 innings a full 15 innings more than Lara to get to the same mark. So if Tendulkar was more consistent which Lara lacked then why did it take SRT more innings to get past Lara. What am I missing here? Your statement of not being consistent would have had some credence if Tendulkar set a mark and Lara failed to get there or fall short of the mark playing many more innings. That clearly is not the case here. Anyway to each his own.

Consistency. Lara in between playing those long innings' went through rough patches quite regularly where as Tendulkar has been consistent all along.

[pensionplan]

Consistency. Lara in between playing those long innings' went through rough patches quite regularly where as Tendulkar has been consistent all along.

Still that does not answer why a more consistent Tendulkar would take 15 more innings to get to the same margin of 11,953 runs as Lara did despite the long innings of Lara. Something surely does not add up here.

[Sachin=GOD]

Still that does not answer why a more consistent Tendulkar would take 15 more innings to get to the same margin of 11' date='953 runs as Lara did despite the long innings of Lara. Something surely does not add up here.[/quote'] BTW Lara played 232 innings and made 34 hundreds in them (a hundred every 6.8 innings) and in 232 innings Goddy had made 39 hundreds (a hundred in every 5.9 innings) - much better consistency for Goddy I would say. The reason why Lara made 11953 in 15 less innings was that he had some very huge innings but the fact remains that in between those huge scores he was inconsistent. and you have now very conveniently turned this thread into a Lara vs Goddy thread and then you will be the first one to say that people try to disrespect other players.

[The Outsider]

http://indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=216298 http://indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=216313 It is so easy to go to stats guru and pick holes.

[Tapioca]

>> Goddy had made 39 hundreds (a hundred in every 5.9 innings) No. 38 & 6.1

[pensionplan]

BTW Lara played 232 innings and made 34 hundreds in them (a hundred every 6.8 innings) and in 232 innings Goddy had made 39 hundreds (a hundred in every 5.9 innings) - much better consistency for Goddy I would say. The reason why Lara made 11953 in 15 less innings was that he had some very huge innings but the fact remains that in between those huge scores he was inconsistent.

So this is the explanation you can come up with on why Tendulkar took 15 more innings than Lara to cross Lara's world record. Good. Or could it be simply that in the 232 innings stretch Lara overall was better statistically speaking as the total number of runs between the two would illustrate.

and you have now very conveniently turned this thread into a Lara vs Goddy thread and then you will be the first one to say that people try to disrespect other players.

I do not have to anything if you do not go from thread to thread and try to make inane statements with regards to other players which are not true like as in this case if only such and such is more consistent than Tendulkar he would have been better etc etc when in essence the facts do not support such claims.

[Sachin=GOD]

I think Lara is pure genius and one of the greatest natural talents to have come into cricket since the 1990s and if he had been more consistent then he would've given Goddy a run for his money in terms of all the records (at least in test cricket).

I do not have to anything if you do not go from thread to thread and try to make inane statements with regards to other players which are not true like as in this case if only such and such is more consistent than Tendulkar he would have been better etc etc when in essence the facts do not support such claims.

give somebody a run for their money - to be as good at something as someone who is known to be extremely good Show me where have I said that Lara (or for that matter any other batsman) could've been BETTER than Goddy. I had said that if he had been more consistent he could've given Goddy a run for his money (which means he could've been "as good"). next time you have trouble in understanding English, check the meaning on a dictionary before making baseless allegations. Now go and pick up someone else to follow around the forum with your sick posts because I'm going to put you in my ignore list because you've been following me around the forum and trying to infuriate me for quite sometime now :finger:

[pensionplan]

give somebody a run for their money - to be as good at something as someone who is known to be extremely good

Your reply#16 clearly proves your itch to bring in Goddy or whatever the hell you call him even while appearing to praise other players. That shows how obsessed you are with that one player.

Show me where have I said that Lara (or for that matter any other batsman) could've been BETTER than Goddy. I had said that if he had been more consistent he could've given Goddy a run for his money (which means he could've been "as good"). next time you have trouble in understanding English, check the meaning on a dictionary before making baseless allegations.

Looks like you have lost it here appearing to be blabbering failing to explain why Tendulkar's better consistency over Lara as per your claims would take him 15 more innings to cross Lara's mark. Mind you 15 inning difference is quite a bit.

Now go and pick up someone else to follow around the forum with your sick posts because I'm going to put you in my ignore list because you've been following me around the forum and trying to infuriate me for quite sometime now :finger:

I am flattered by your comments. You are welcome.

[Clarke]

Whoa, no Brian Lara vs Woorkeri Raman thread. In congressional terms, that's some progress. I am impressed :woot:

[hari504504]

Lara's backlift combined with his footwork is the mark of an absolute genius... I personally don't think anyone is '>' than anyone else among the top-tier.. they all have their distinctive styles and are greats at the same level.. that is Lara,Tendu,Ponting,Bradman (In no particular order..:winky:) We should be done with all the x > y theories and move on. As for Lara saying that Tendulkar is better..well, I am fairly sure Tendulkar if interviewed would not be arrogant enough to say that "Yea .I am better than Lara !"..he would also probably say that Lara is a legend as well

[don_corleone840]

for being overrated one needs to be rated. and who rates lara??