Vijay.Sharma Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Carnish, since you did not do the analysis I thought I'd quickly do it and see what the numbers say... Here's the analysis procedure for a recap - Performance in second innings = a. Ratio of particular batsman's Average in second innings to that of the top 1-6 batsmen excluding him. Example, if batsman A averages 45 and the rest of the top 6 averaged 34 then his performance = 45/34 = 1.33 b. Above Ratio is to be calculated as Home:Away :: 0.8:1.2. Example, if batsman scored 1200 runs at home and 900 away (total 2100) then they are considered as 960 and 1080 respectively (total 2140) I haven't included the minnow thingy. Maybe you can try that? The data - Sachin Runs = (0.8*Home + 1.2*Away) = 4451, Avg = 45.42 Team 1-6 Runs (w/o Sachin) = (0.8*Home + 1.2*Away) = 19252, Avg = 35.72 Total Innings = 121 for Sachin Lax Runs = (0.8*Home + 1.2*Away) = 3462, Avg = 52.45 Team 1-6 Runs (w/o Lax) = (0.8*Home + 1.2*Away) = 14966, Avg = 34.77 Total Innings = 86 for Lax The result - Given the above, Sachin un-adjusted performance = 45.42 / 121 = 1.27 Lax's un-adjusted performance = 52.45 / 34.77 = 1.50 Sachin:Lax :: 121:86 for number of innings i.e. Sachin : Lax = 1.41. Final performance, Sachin = 1.41* 1.27 = 1.79 Lax = 1*1.50 = 1.50 Inference - Whether you consider performance over 121 innings to need greater value than performance over 86 innings, or not, I think it is safe to say that Sachin and Lax are more or less the same because the amount they gain (or lose) by introducing the innings factor is the same. In all, I can say subjectively that Lax is infinitesimally better than Sachin in 3rd and 4th innings. Facts do not indicate any great practical difference to anoint one superior to the other like you did through selective memory.
The Outsider Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Has Tendulkar played any innings in the league of 281 and 96? No.
CSK Fan Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Has Tendulkar played any innings in the league of 281 and 96? No. What is the criteria ofr that 96? does it have to be 4th innings and winning side? dont see why the innings of 136 wouldnt qualify
rkt.india Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Has Tendulkar played any innings in the league of 281 and 96? No. 136 vs Pak, 146 vs SA, difference is one we lost and one was drawn.
The Outsider Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 What is the criteria ofr that 96? does it have to be 4th innings and winning side? dont see why the innings of 136 wouldnt qualify The next highest score in the entire match from both sides was 39. The third highest was again by Laxman - 38. As great as the 136 at Chennai was it wasn't even the highest score of the match.
The Outsider Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 136 vs Pak' date=' 146 vs SA, difference is one we lost and one was drawn.[/quote'] Afridi outscored Tendulkar at Chennai and Kallis at Cape Town got two hundreds in the test. Gambhir scored two 50s in the test from India at Cape Town and Mongia, Dravid, and Ganguly all got 50s at Chennai.
rkt.india Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Afridi outscored Tendulkar at Chennai and Kallis at Cape Town got two hundreds in the test. Gambhir scored two 50s in the test from India at Cape Town and Mongia' date=' Dravid, and Ganguly all got 50s at Chennai.[/quote'] but look at the difference of bowling attacks in terms of what Kallis faced tired Zak, dancing donkey, and out of form Ishant, all tired, down and out by that time. While Sachin had to play Styen in his best form and Morkel.
The Outsider Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 but look at the difference of bowling attacks in terms of Kallis. Laxman batted against the same attack at Durban and outscored even the South Africans including Kallis by miles on that pitch.
rkt.india Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Laxman batted against the same attack at Durban and outscored even the South Africans including Kallis by miles on that pitch. But it was not Kallis who was the difference. It was Indian bowlers who bowled pathetic by that Capetown Kallis innings. If I compare, we bowled very poorly to by the end of that Capetown test than what bowled in Durban. Our fast bowlers were completely tired. I saw Zak bowling at 115K dross when Kallis was batting. Ishant was a liability on that tour and Sreesanth was struggling to complete even his run up, let alone bowling well. We cannot compare Kallis' innings to Tendulkar's. It was as good as Laxman's innings. Difference was Laxman batted and we won the game and Capetown was a draw, due to our bowler's inept bowling.
saneindian Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Will the 119* at Oval, 122 at Nottingham, 155* at Chennai, 113 vs NZ not count at all?
The Outsider Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 But it was not Kallis who was the difference. It was Indian bowlers who bowled pathetic by that Capetown Kallis innings. If I compare, we bowled very poorly to by the end of that Capetown test than what bowled in Durban. Our fast bowlers were completely tired. I saw Zak bowling at 115K dross when Kallis was batting. Ishant was a liability on that tour and Sreesanth was struggling to complete even his run up, let alone bowling well. We cannot compare Kallis' innings to Tendulkar's. It was as good as Laxman's innings. Difference was Laxman batted and we won the game and Capetown was a draw, due to our bowler's inept bowling. Even if you ignore Kallis by hiding behind the excuse of the Indian bowling (which by the way was the same attack to dismiss South Africa twice for less than 350 in the previous test), Gambhir made more than 150 runs in the test so Tendulkar's innings was not as unique and rising above everyone else like Laxman's.
The Outsider Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Will the 119* at Oval' date=' 122 at Nottingham, 155* at Chennai, 113 vs NZ not count at all?[/quote'] 119 and 122 were not even the highest scores of the match. Lots of batsmen got runs at Chennai besides Tendulkar and Azhar scored a century as well at Wellington. None of them were miles ahead of the rest of the batsmen like Laxman's 96 was. I repeat the next highest score in the entire match was almost one third of what Laxman made.
saneindian Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Yep VVS' 96 is perhaps the best innings in the 90s of all time, closely followed by the 96 by SMG at Bangalore. And 281, irrespective of what anyone says, is the best test innings of all time.
Sachin=GOD Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 119 and 122 were not even the highest scores of the match. Lots of batsmen got runs at Chennai besides Tendulkar and Azhar scored a century as well at Wellington. None of them were miles ahead of the rest of the batsmen like Laxman's 96 was. I repeat the next highest score in the entire match was almost one third of what Laxman made. so an innings necessarily has to be the highest score of the match in order to be considered as being among the best?
BeautifulGame Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 Regardless of what stats say Laxman has played lot more valuble 2th innings than Sachin Not just Sachin he has played more great 2th innings than all our other batter combined.And more often than not he played those knocks with the tail which makes it even more special. Its not just the 281 or his knock in durban but the knock in Perth when he guided India to a match winning target in Perth along with RP singh or his knock in Mohali along with ishant his partnership with Zaheer in Johenesburg which we lost.And plenty more which cant simply be measured in runs.He not only have score runs but also ensure others didnt lose their wickets either because he always have to score these runs with tail enders to company.
The Outsider Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 so an innings necessarily has to be the highest score of the match in order to be considered as being among the best? Yes. If the competition is with an innings like 96, which was by far the highest score of the match then any innings to be considered competing with it must have a case of being by far the best in the match. Laxman took batting to a whole new level in a test where greats like Tendulkar, Dravid, and Kallis were playing as well as some very accomplished batsmen like Smith, Sehwag, DeVilliers and topped them all by a huge margin.
Sachin=GOD Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 basically one can employ whatever criteria one wants as long as it removes Goddy's innings from contention
The Outsider Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 basically one can employ whatever criteria one wants as long as it removes Goddy's innings from contention Too bad that Goddy has never dominated a test by country miles like Laxman did at Durban. :((
Jersey #10 Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 This is funny, make up your own mold to make sure that Sachin doesn't fit. :haha:
pensionplan Posted November 25, 2011 Posted November 25, 2011 The next highest score in the entire match from both sides was 39. The third highest was again by Laxman - 38. As great as the 136 at Chennai was it wasn't even the highest score of the match.Yup that was discussed a few times here. In fact VVS had the top 2 scores for the match 96 and 38 till Price I think almost at the end of the game got to 39. Remarkable indeed when you see that a total of 40 wickets fell and only one batsman scored 40 or more in the entire game which is 96 by VVS.
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