Tendulkar 200* Vs Sehwag 219

[gaurav92]

:nice:

[akshayxyz]

Lets get this right first. I am a die hard Sachin fan (you know it already), and I feel that 219 was once in a lifetime kind of an innings. You will probably not see an innings like that ever again (at least by an Indian). I like Veeru's batting style and who doesn't? He is a treat to watch. But I feel it will be lame to compare the two innings, only two have made it in the club, and we must take pride in saying that two of the greatest entertainers have made it to the club rather than debating which one was superior to the other. I personally feel that Sachin's 200 was better because it cam against better opposition, and it was chanceless, but does that really matter? If to others Veeru's innings was better - I don't feel they are wrong, it is their opinion and I wont feel bad unless they start saying that Sachin's 200 was inferior to Veerus'. There is no need to demean one's innings to point out the others' superiority.

this.

[mishra]

Coventry getting three times vore to to that of Anwar. ICF amar rahe :hehe:

[zen]

Dhoni was taking singles becoz he knew Sachin wasn't going to go all out as he was suppose to be suffering from fatigue .... In fact, there was a chance of a two or something like that and Sachin refused indicating that dhoni take over. This can also be seen in the manner Sachin played the balls in the last few overs .... In fact he made no effort to hit out at all (200 on his mind) even when he got to play a few balls in a row But m I seeing some ppl blaming dhoni :hysterical:

[Magneto]

Dhoni was taking singles becoz he knew Sachin wasn't going to go all out as he was suppose to be suffering from fatigue .... In fact, there was a chance of a two or something like that and Sachin refused indicating that dhoni take over. This can also be seen in the manner Sachin played the balls in the last few overs .... In fact he made no effort to hit out at all (200 on his mind) even when he got to play a few balls in a row But m I seeing some ppl blaming dhoni :hysterical:

Rett ... I don't think you have ever played cricket with a red ball. That's why you say that Sachin was not going all out. What do you mean by Sachin not going all out? You think every Steyn/Parnell deliveries are there to be hit for a six? Then why did Dhoni fail to hit almost anything till the 48th over? Sachin started cramping a bit only near the end of the 48th over, and after that he had played only one ball in which he scored a single. You do not understand that no decent batsman on earth goes for a ball which is not in the zone for him unless he is that desperate. Dhoni was playing a swing and a miss game and was hardly connecting till the 48th over. In fact, he scored only 2 of 4 balls in the 48th over, and over all gave 6 dot balls in the last 3 overs. If Dhoni would have rotated the strike better and not taken singles pointlessly on the last ball of every over, India and Sachin would have scored a lot more runs. Why didn't Dhoni go for his six and fours on the last ball of the last 5-6 overs? And in no situation did Sachin refuse to run for a second. Your not playing cricket gives you a false perspective of the game, where you misunderstand the basic physical aspects of the game.

[zen]

Rett ... I don't think you have ever played cricket with a red ball. That's why you say that Sachin was not going all out. What do you mean by Sachin not going all out? You think every Steyn/Parnell deliveries are there to be hit for a six? Then why did Dhoni fail to hit almost anything till the 48th over? Sachin started cramping a bit only near the end of the 48th over, and after that he had played only one ball in which he scored a single. You do not understand that no decent batsman on earth goes for a ball which is not in the zone for him unless he is that desperate. Dhoni was playing a swing and a miss game and was hardly connecting till the 48th over. In fact, he scored only 2 of 4 balls in the 48th over, and over all gave 6 dot balls in the last 3 overs. If Dhoni would have rotated the strike better and not taken singles pointlessly on the last ball of every over, India and Sachin would have scored a lot more runs. Why didn't Dhoni go for his six and fours on the last ball of the last 5-6 overs? And in no situation did Sachin refuse to run for a second. Your not playing cricket gives you a false perspective of the game, where you misunderstand the basic physical aspects of the game.

that's ^ as believable as sourravs 183 being the best :--D And the guy who has been playing since over #1 could not hit a boundary of the last 12-13 balls mainly becoz his partner took pointless singles, great! If that's the case we know Sehwag's 200 is better Thanks

[Magneto]

that's ^ as believable as sourravs 183 being the best :--D And the guy who has been playing since over #1 could not hit a boundary of the last 12-13 balls mainly becoz his partner took pointless singles, great! If that's the case we know Sehwag's 200 is better Thanks

Amazing ... I told you sometime like you who's never held a cricket bat in his life will only apply video game logic (or the lack of it) to everything. There'll be many matches that where a guy playing from Over 1 scores a century and fails to score a boundary in the last 12-13 balls. In this case, his partner hogged the strike all the time, but again, I am repeating myself. Most cricket-intelligent people know which knock is better, and you don't surely seem to be one of them. And yes, Sourav's 183 did come overseas against the defending World Champions in a must-win WC game, so it has a lot of things going for it. Much more than many of the other knocks we talk about.

[zen]

Amazing ... I told you sometime like you who's never held a cricket bat in his life will only apply video game logic (or the lack of it) to everything. There'll be many matches that where a guy playing from Over 1 scores a century and fails to score a boundary in the last 12-13 balls. In this case, his partner hogged the strike all the time, but again, I am repeating myself. Most cricket-intelligent people know which knock is better, and you don't surely seem to be one of them. And yes, Sourav's 183 did come overseas against the defending World Champions in a must-win WC game, so it has a lot of things going for it. Much more than many of the other knocks we talk about.

That^ looks more like video game logic to me :--D I doubt you are good at cricket :P Can you list those matches where a guy has 150+ score and cannot hit a boundary despite playing 12-13 balls in the last few overs .... Even a guy who just walks in could get one away and there would be many matches to show that duh

[Magneto]

That^ looks more like video game logic to me :--D I doubt you are good at cricket :P Can you list those matches where a guy has 150+ score and cannot hit a boundary despite playing 12-13 balls in the last over .... Even a guy who just walks in could get one away and there would be many matches to show that duh

Had I been that good I would have been playing FC, no? But I have played enough to know the basics of the game well, which you should work on. UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS.

[zen]

Had I been that good I would have been playing FC, no? But I have played enough to know the basics of the game well, which you should work on. UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS.

The basics you understand told you that sourravs 183 is the best ODI inninds ever despite Dravid hitting a aggressive knock of 145 in the same game :hysterical: PS ppl are being nice to you here, don't change that by trying to be too personal :winky:

[Magneto]

The basics you understand told you that sourravs 183 is the best ODI inninds ever despite Dravid hitting a aggressive knock of 145 in the same game :hysterical: PS ppl are being nice to you here, don't change that by trying to be too personal :winky:

You should at least know when and how to use a smiley. Anyway, my purpose here is not to pointlessly flame like you. KTHXBYE

[Sachin=GOD]

Had I been that good I would have been playing FC, no? But I have played enough to know the basics of the game well, which you should work on. UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS.

don't waste your time in discussing cricket with Rett - he doesn't know anything and would go to any lengths (however absurd) to prove his point.

[zen]

You should at least know when and how to use a smiley. Anyway, my purpose here is not to pointlessly flame like you. KTHXBYE

Who asked you what your purpose is? .... I know if I discuss seriously with you your points wouln't even last long, which ll further create a situation where you will doubt your own basics :winky: So comment on the topic .... If you are writing all you do with seriousness then you have problems :P Bye bi whatever

[Magneto]

don't waste your time in discussing cricket with Rett - he doesn't know anything and would go to any lengths (however absurd) to prove his point.

I've already seen that in those other discussions, haven't I? Some people make sincere arguments because they argue on something they sincerely believe in it, and some argue for the sake of arguments for one-upmanship. Not interested in the second kind at all!

[ganeshran]

I've already seen that in those other discussions, haven't I? :winky: Some people get sincere arguments because they argue on something since they sincerely believe it, and some argue for the sake of arguments for one-upmanship. Not interested in the second kind at all!

This. No point in wasting time with posters who lack the intellectual capacity to engage in a mature discussion without posting smiley ridden nonsense.

[Magneto]

Who asked you what your purpose is? .... I know if I discuss seriously with you your points wouln't even last long, which ll further create a situation where you will doubt your own basics :winky: So comment on the topic .... If you are writing all you do with seriousness then you have problems :P Bye bi whatever

Coming from you, that's really funny. The whole ICF has seen your debating skills and the merit of your points. You yourself know how sound they are. Trolling pointlessly might be your only hobby, so keep at it.

[zen]

Now the usual procession of advising each other begins :giggle:

[Sachin=GOD]

I've already seen that in those other discussions, haven't I? Some people make sincere arguments because they argue on something they sincerely believe in it, and some argue for the sake of arguments for one-upmanship. Not interested in the second kind at all!

:nice:

[zen]

Coming from you' date=' that's really funny. The whole ICF has seen your debating skills and the merit of your points. You yourself know how sound they are. Trolling pointlessly might be your only hobby, so keep at it.[/quote'] Yes, I m honored to be judged by idiots :hatsoff:

[Sachinism]

Having the highest score proves very little. Even the high and mighty Don Bradman did not have the highest Test score while he retired. Sachin's average ranks at the topmost layer for any cricketer who's played more than a 100 matches. So, undermining a visibly great player just because the hype around him is excessive, is very unjustified.

Perfectly put. People like jonas would be an ideal troll victim