Sachin Tendulkar or Vivian Richards?

[Raghav_12]

Going by that logic Zaheer has been greater "one man army" for Indian cricket than what Kapil ever was . http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=bowling_average;qualmin2=30;qualval2=wickets;spanmax1=29+Jun+2011;spanmin1=29+Jun+2006;spanval1=span;team=6;template=results;type=bowling and Dale Steyn even bigger for his SA team. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=bowling_average;qualmin2=30;qualval2=wickets;spanmax1=29+Jun+2011;spanmin1=29+Jun+2006;spanval1=span;team=3;template=results;type=bowling and no need to dig stats to prove how big "one man army Murali has been. Moral of the story is that certain concepts can not be understood and explained based on the stats. Kapil carried India's bowling on soldiers for good amount of time and Sachin carried India's batting for long.

How is he a greater one man army than Kapil - I see Kumble, Harbhajan, Sreesanth, Ishant having averages in the 30-35 range. How? Morkel, Ntini, and Kallis have very acceptable bowling figures even though in the case of Kallis the wickets per match ratio is lower for obvious reasons. And Murali has been a one man army in the absence of Vaas - you can see the effects of his retirement in the fact that Sri Lanka are yet to win a test since and are struggling to bowl sides out. Only fan boys can rubbish the achievements of players like Azhar, Dravid, Ganguly, Sidhu (in tests and ODIs) and Jadeja (in ODIs). Name one bowler who Kapil bowled with in the 80s who was in the class of these batsmen - on the other hand Tendulkar had at least 2 of these in the line up, on occasions more during the 90s.

All of these examples are the cases where one bowler has been so far ahead of others that you can say that person was carrying the attack. Morkel, Ntini may have decent figures but they no doubt pales in comparison to Steyn and I would say it was Steyn who did most of the work. Anyways, we can keep digging stats to prove/disprove something which I believe is very much obvious. However I would like to go by what Virat Kohli had said after WC win and that is "Sachin carried India on his shoulders for 22 years". Nothing more to be said. And yes, I am a fanboy and a proud one :two_thumbs_up:

[The Outsider]

All of these examples are the cases where one bowler has been so far ahead of others that you can say that person was carrying the attack. Morkel, Ntini may have decent figures but they no doubt pales in comparison to Steyn and I would say it was Steyn who did most of the work.

One bowler being far ahead of the rest does not imply the rest were crap. I don't want to come between you and your belief system, but thought to point out the logical fallacy in your argument anyways.

[Sooda]

How about Ghvari and Doshi as Kapils support act(s)? I suppose both were not around long enough Also there is a case to be made for all round strength of the Indian side in Kapils days vs thhat of the late 90's / noughties. I mean bowlers need something to bowl with and batsmen are not exactly going to take wickets to win matches. Kapil had a resoanbly strong batting lineup...SRT had Kumble at home (and an assortment of support acts from Raju, Chauhan) and Sri abroad

[Sachin=GOD]

I feel if someone starts a comparison between Goddy and Sir Aggy as batsmen then some people here will try to "prove" that Sir Aggy has contributed more with the bat than Goddy :hahaha:

[ganeshran]

I feel if someone starts a comparison between Goddy and Sir Aggy as batsmen then some people here will try to "prove" that Sir Aggy has contributed more with the bat than Goddy :hahaha:

:agree:

[The Outsider]

No my analysis wasn't absurd. Your example of Dhoni has just one similarity with my analysis and that was batsman who has highest averages in matches won' date=' doesn't have highest average in matches lost. I agree on that count, my analysis puts both Dhoni and Sachin on same plateform. But there were more aspects of my analysis which I had clearly mentioned in my another post (which you had replied with accusation of me having an agenda).[/quote'] Which is why I asked you to explain your 'analysis' before I dove into it - all you talked about at that time was average in matches won and lost. All the remaining caveats were introduced after it was shown that the 'analysis' does not fit the billing to be a one man army.

[The Outsider]

How about Ghvari and Doshi as Kapils support act(s)? I suppose both were not around long enough

Well, I took the period of the 80s (analogous to Tendulkar's 90s) and Ghavri did not play much in the 80s. Doshi was there for a couple of years, but again effective mostly at home.

[Lurker]

Going by that logic Zaheer has been greater "one man army" for Indian cricket than what Kapil ever was .

Dude. Do you understand the concept of one-army band? I mean you selectively keep trying to prove this one way or other. Yes Murali has been a one-man army. Yes Kapil was a one-man army. Yes Hadlee was a one-man army. Warne was NOT a one man-army. Sachin was NOT a one-man army. All this speak of late 90s LOI is frankly ridiculous. Whats next? Joseph Angara is one-man army for zimbabwe 20/20 team in 2010?? How can you pull out numbers like that. xxx

[Lurker]

How about Ghvari and Doshi as Kapils support act(s)? I suppose both were not around long enough Also there is a case to be made for all round strength of the Indian side in Kapils days vs thhat of the late 90's / noughties. I mean bowlers need something to bowl with and batsmen are not exactly going to take wickets to win matches. Kapil had a resoanbly strong batting lineup...SRT had Kumble at home (and an assortment of support acts from Raju, Chauhan) and Sri abroad

Doshi lost his best years to Bedi. He would have better record but for the Sardar being in Indian team. He was a very good spinner actually but like most spinners his success was more on home turf. Ghavri was a good left arm medium pacer with good action. He made a potent combo with Kapil when they started and there is this thing about how no opening batting pair had a century stand when Kapil and Ghavri opened the bowling for India. However if you looked deeper you can almost always find a trend of Kapil doing the initial hits. In the tests where Kapil and Ghavri opened they took around 200 wickets collectively with Kapil picking around 125, almost 60% plus at an average around 26. That this was in his first 2 years of cricket and he was already India's match winner should set him well ahead of the likes of SRT who took their own time to garner the workload. In fact this is a fact many youngsters, and old Sachin fanboys, conviniently forget, that for the longest time Kapil was averaging around 25-26 with a shade over 4 wickets per test, the holy grail for fast bowlers anywhere. The lack of support and total dead tracks did him in. He was never the same after the knee operation in 84 but sadly had to keep going for another 8 years. xxx

[The Outsider]

Dude. Do you understand the concept of one-army band? I mean you selectively keep trying to prove this one way or other. Yes Murali has been a one-man army. Yes Kapil was a one-man army. Yes Hadlee was a one-man army. Warne was NOT a one man-army. Sachin was NOT a one-man army. All this speak of late 90s LOI is frankly ridiculous. Whats next? Joseph Angara is one-man army for zimbabwe 20/20 team in 2010?? How can you pull out numbers like that. xxx

Adding on, if one really wants to see a one man army in recent test matches, then Andy Flower would be the man to choose. The threshold for a one man army for Tendulkar fan boys is where Tendulkar qualifies.

[zen]

May be someone can use antilog to show how Sachin was an one-man army :hysterical: And one also needs to understand how one or two years in 90s qualifies as the whole 90s :P

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

Adding on' date=' [b']if one really wants to see a one man army in recent test matches, then Andy Flower would be the man to choose. The threshold for a one man army for Tendulkar fan boys is where Tendulkar qualifies.

Thats a very telling example actually. Andy Flower was truly a one-man band for Zimbabwe. He probably got overshadowed by theatrics of Gilchrist but Flower carried Zimbabwe entirely on his back. I would bet during his time the differential between his batting average and the next one would be 15-20 runs, maybe even more. And thats only his batting. SRT would be hard-pressed to cover that differential.

[zen]

I won't be surprised if Lara had less support than Tendulkar in the 90s

[The Outsider]

Thats a very telling example actually. Andy Flower was truly a one-man band for Zimbabwe. He probably got overshadowed by theatrics of Gilchrist but Flower carried Zimbabwe entirely on his back. I would bet during his time the differential between his batting average and the next one would be 15-20 runs, maybe even more. And thats only his batting. SRT would be hard-pressed to cover that differential.

And it's more than the differential - the remaining batting line up was mediocre (Viv Richards like) to crap. Most would be averaging in the late 20s - early 30s I would guess. There was a period when Ponting was averaging 75 and clearly above everyone else in the Australian line up, hardly a one man army though considering others were still in the 50-60 bracket.

[Lurker]

I won't be surprised if Lara had less support than Tendulkar in the 90s

The only support I can remember, of any consequence, for Lara would be Richie Richardson, Jimmy Adams, Shivnarine Chandrapaul and Ramnaresh Sarwan over Lara's entire career. This is certainly lot weaker than what Indian batting line-up put infront of batting crease between 90s and 2000s. The strangest, and to me idiotic, thing is how many modern-day fan keep claiming how India in early 2000s onwards have fielded the best possible team ever (Golden era yada yada) and then suddenly dismiss all of that and start supporting Sachin as the man who led an extremely weak team to glory. Blind faith and all that jazz.

[maniac]

The only support I can remember' date= of any consequence, for Lara would be Richie Richardson, Jimmy Adams, Shivnarine Chandrapaul and Ramnaresh Sarwan over Lara's entire career. This is certainly lot weaker than what Indian batting line-up put infront of batting crease between 90s and 2000s. The strangest, and to me idiotic, thing is how many modern-day fan keep claiming how India in early 2000s onwards have fielded the best possible team ever (Golden era yada yada) and then suddenly dismiss all of that and start supporting Sachin as the man who led an extremely weak team to glory. Blind faith and all that jazz.

What about Carl Hooper with the bat and Ambrose and Walsh with the ball??? Thw WI had a decent bowling unit till 2000.

[Lurker]

What about Carl Hooper with the bat and Ambrose and Walsh with the ball??? Thw WI had a decent bowling unit till 2000.

Dude we are talking of batting here. Carl Hooper was a glorious batsman to watch but a huge underachiever. Averaged in low 30s so not sure how much difference he actually made..

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[zen]

Appears as if the fanatics are getting rattled up w/ another of the myths getting busted, i.e. I used to swith my TV off once blah blah equating to Ten being an one man army in the whole 90s :P