zen Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Dont know only batsmen win you tests. Your are confusing things. This was in response to the belief that Tendulkar was the only good batsman for a big period of time ....
yoda Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 A test match is played over 4 innings. The match is set up over 3 innings and the 4th is just a culmination of 5 days play. To think that the 4th innings is most important is like praising the 4th runner in a relay race for winning the race. ^^There is no question that many pitches get more difficult to bat on as a match progresses and ofc the pressure build up as the match edges towards a close is much greater than at the beginning of a test with scores reading 0-0.
CSK Fan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 ^^There is no question that many pitches get more difficult to bat on as a match progresses and ofc the pressure build up as the match edges towards a close is much greater than at the beginning of a test with scores reading 0-0. But it is equally true than in many places like Australia, NZ, the 4th innings get progressively easier to play in. Talk to the openers about pressure when they open at 0-0 on a green pitch with overcast conditions Also many of the big 4th inning chases did not come on detiorating pitches
CSK Fan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Your are confusing things. This was in response to the belief that Tendulkar was the only good batsman for a big period of time .... He was. the period he played in the 90s is equal to most batsmen's entire career
pensionplan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Tendulkar has played over 300 Test innings many more than VVS and RD. On that pretext let us first take VVS Which of his innings would be rated higher than VVS in Indian wins. Eden 281 Durban 96 Mohali 73* Port of Spain 69* 74 Perth 79 Colombo 103* Johhanesburg 73 Mumbai 69 in a team total of 205 versus Aus. Chennai 66 chasing a total of 155 Adelaide 148
zen Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 He was. the period he played in the 90s is equal to most batsmen's entire career There was a thread on this where this myth was busted, iirc Ind batting in 1990s I see 6 batsmen with 40+ avg :winky:
CSK Fan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Tendulkar has played over 300 Test innings many more than VVS and RD. On that pretext let us first take VVS Which of his innings would be rated higher than VVS in Indian wins. Eden 281 Durban 96 Mohali 73* Port of Spain 69* 74 Perth 79 Colombo 103* Johhanesburg 73 Mumbai 69 in a team total of 205 versus Aus. Chennai 66 chasing a total of 155 Adelaide 148 Lets see Laxman's Eden 281- Bhajji hat-trick, Dravid 100 etc, etc, etc. Tired of repeating this but many of Sachin's epic innigns wuld have got similar results if a bowler or another batsman had stepped up. For example, in that chennai 136, another batsman had to make just 20 more runs for it to be an historical victory. There is a reason why with Sachin back in form and with this team, Sachin's win % has really shot up. If he had a team in the 90s like Laxman had in Eden, we would have been no 1 then too Its also no wonder, many of Sachins' match-winning innings have come at the end of his career when we have a good team
CSK Fan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 There was a thread on this where this myth was busted, iirc Ind batting in 1990s I see 6 batsmen with 40+ avg :winky: Dravid, Ganguly both after 96, till then Kambli was gone. How many did Sidhu play and where did he score? Azhar of course, scored only when he wanted. So basically, the 6 did not play at the same time. Till 96 Sachin mainly had Azhar and Sidhu and thats two batsmen averaging over 40(not even 50) in a line up of 6-7 batsmen Also look at the overseas records http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;home_or_away=2;orderby=batting_average;spanmax1=31+Dec+1999;spanmin1=01+Jan+1990;spanval1=span;team=6;template=results;type=batting
pensionplan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Lets see Laxman's Eden 281- Bhajji hat-trick' date=' Dravid 100 etc, etc, etc. Tired of repeating this but many of Sachin's epic innigns wuld have got similar results if a bowler or another batsman had stepped up. For example, in that chennai 136, another batsman had to make just 20 more runs for it to be an historical victory. There is a reason why with Sachin back in form and with this team, Sachin's win % has really shot up. If he had a team in the 90s like Laxman had in Eden, we would have been no 1 then too[/quote']Why don't you just consider the 2000's when VVS and SRT played together and we have a sample size of almost 11 years and 100 Tests. Come up with a list simiilar to mine. How difficult is that? I have no problem with you including the 136 though which in my books is a match winning knock.
desi.boy Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Lets see Laxman's Eden 281- Bhajji hat-trick, Dravid 100 etc, etc, etc. Tired of repeating this but many of Sachin's epic innigns wuld have got similar results if a bowler or another batsman had stepped up. For example, in that chennai 136, another batsman had to make just 20 more runs for it to be an historical victory. There is a reason why with Sachin back in form and with this team, Sachin's win % has really shot up. If he had a team in the 90s like Laxman had in Eden, we would have been no 1 then too Lol, Talking abt ifs, if Laxman was set on 136* he would have made sure that he saw his team through the finish line. it was grt innings. But I would have rated 136 much more higher if he had won it for india.
pensionplan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Lol' date=' Talking abt ifs, if Laxman was set on 136*[b'] he would have made sure that he saw his team through the finish line. it was very good innings. But I would have rate 136 much more higher if he had won it for india.Actually VVS did that in Colombo and Mohali in just the last year that ensured we retained the No.1 spot. It they ended up in close defeats has as happended in Chennai we would have lost the ranking to SA itself before the England series.
CSK Fan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Why don't you just consider the 2000's when VVS and SRT played together and we have a sample size of almost 11 years and 100 Tests. Come up with a list simiilar to mine. How difficult is that? I have no problem with you including the 136 though which in my books is a match winning knock. Well you are well aware of Sachin's injury and loss of form in the early 2000s. Plus dunno how its fair to include only half of a player's career and the entirety of another particularly when for Sachin, it does not include his peak years and for Laxman it does
CSK Fan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Lol, Talking abt ifs, if Laxman was set on 136* he would have made sure that he saw his team through the finish line. it was grt innings. But I would have rated 136 much more higher if he had won it for india. Laxman has never scored 136 or above in a chase. He has only scored one 100 in a chase. So you are talking of something which does not exist. Also Laxman depended on tail-enders like Ishant in some innings. In the Chennai match the tailenders failed Sachin
CasualVisitor Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Lol, Talking abt ifs, if Laxman was set on 136* he would have made sure that he saw his team through the finish line. it was grt innings. But I would have rated 136 much more higher if he had won it for india. Yep. VVS has some special privilege using which he can teleport some of his batting powers to a lower order batsman.:hysterical:
zen Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Dravid' date=' Ganguly both after 96, till then Kambli was gone. How many did Sidhu play and where did he score? Azhar of course, scored only when he wanted. So basically, the 6 did not play at the same time. Till 96 Sachin mainly had Azhar and Sidhu and thats two batsmen averaging over 40(not even 50) in a line up of 6-7 batsmen[/quote'] In short, there was also someone in the squad in the 90s whether its some ppl towards the end of their career or those starting out below is the breakdown of his performance by years year 1990 7 10 1 373 119* 41.44 1 2 1 year 1991 2 4 0 78 40 19.50 0 0 0 year 1992 7 11 1 419 148* 41.90 3 0 2 year 1993 8 9 2 640 165 91.42 2 5 0 year 1994 7 11 1 700 179 70.00 2 3 0 year 1995 3 4 2 58 52* 29.00 0 1 0 year 1996 8 15 0 623 177 41.53 2 2 1 year 1997 12 17 1 1000 169 62.50 4 3 0 year 1998 5 9 1 647 177 80.87 3 1 0 year 1999 2 3 0 203 136 67.66 1 1 1 In 5 of those years, he is avg around 40 or "much" less In the years, he avg 50+ 1993 and 1994, others had these scores Link From 1996 to 1999 link The above shows a different picture to what you are suggesting PS link ^1990-1992 link ^1995-1996
pensionplan Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Well you are well aware of Sachin's injury and loss of form in the early 2000s. Plus dunno how its fair to include only half of a player's career and the entirety of another particularly when for Sachin' date=' it does not include his peak years and for Laxman it does[/quote']LOL...Come on. You are just clutching on to your straws now.
Cricket_2_Death Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 I don't get what this whole Inzamamfanatic charade is about. For all the talk about everyones success besides Sachin along with ONLY how Sachin fails he still averages higher than all the players during his time, only Dravid comes close with a career of shorter length too. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;home_or_away=1;home_or_away=2;result=1;spanmin1=15+Mar+1989;spanval1=span;team=6;template=results;type=batting
The Outsider Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 Dravid, Ganguly both after 96, till then Kambli was gone. How many did Sidhu play and where did he score? Azhar of course, scored only when he wanted. So basically, the 6 did not play at the same time. Till 96 Sachin mainly had Azhar and Sidhu and thats two batsmen averaging over 40(not even 50) in a line up of 6-7 batsmen Funny how the same "Oh Tendulkar was the lone batsman of any calibre in the 90s" is brought up in the very thread where that argument was discredited around page numbers mid 30s. What do you expect as decent support? That there are 6 40+ batsmen playing at the same time. Of course they payed at different points, but at any point in time during the 90s Tendulkar had at least 2-3 40+ batsmen in the lineup, which is not close to being a poor support. And how many batsmen averaged in the 50s in the 90s anyway for you to set the benchmark as decent support to be 50+ - Gooch, Waugh, Tendulkar, and Lara. And all played for different teams.
yoda Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 But it is equally true than in many places like Australia, NZ, the 4th innings get progressively easier to play in. Talk to the openers about pressure when they open at 0-0 on a green pitch with overcast conditions Also many of the big 4th inning chases did not come on detiorating pitches There is no question about 4th innings pressure vs 1st innings simply because you have almost the whole the match to recover in case of the latter. Ofc we are talking about a 4th innings in context here, where the match is on the line and the target not trivial.
Sachin=GOD Posted November 21, 2011 Posted November 21, 2011 See, the thing is when other players score heavily then they are always given the benefit of doubt and its said they tried their best and played very well irrespective of the result of the match but when Goddy scores heavily, then because of the unrealistically high expectations people have of him, many people expect India to win, whatever be the circumstances of the match or whatever the caliber of the other 10 players in the team or whatever the ground. People have raised the expectations so very, very high for him that even if he scores heavily, some people expect him to somehow magically elevate the level of the other 10 guys in the team and when that does not happen then they have got a fantastic scapegoat for the loss in form of this guy who scored the highest number of runs.
Recommended Posts