Sachin has not performed under pressure: Kapil

[Predator_05]

Go ahead and read the entire thread and see what people think of 1983 WC. Unless you are high on something and if you seriously believe Titan Cup was BIGGER than either of these I can only say you are delusional. But hey feel free to feel wrong again..:tounge_smile: And now my question - How many big tournaments like World Cup has Sachin won? Lets see if your dodge this question again. Here's a hint to help you out - The number I am looking for was invented in India. There you go. Rant rant and some more rant. Man atleast get original if you are going to repeat yourself. Easy. India win the World Cup. I would much rather be World Champions than beat any team, even the number 1 team in the world. xxx

I am just going cut this short, because i've reduced you into repeating yourself ad nauseum. The issue here isn't about which trophy is more prestigious. It's about how you judge the legacy of cricketers. The premise of your entire argument is weak - basically, you are saying that Kapil has won a World Cup, Tendulkar hasn't, ergo Kapil is better. That is why i brought up the Tom Moody argument, because quite literally - by your esteemed criteria, he would have a claim to be considered a better cricketer than Tendulkar (and Kapil) because he won that World Cup twice. But inspite of that achievement, he will never be anywhere near as good a player as either. That is my point - a cricketer's greatness cannot be solely determined by such criteria such as winning a World Cup, because that way you effectively cut out every other noteworthy achievement of theirs. Many legendary cricketers never won a World Cup. Do you think Tom Moody is better than Tendulkar because he won the World Cup twice ? The World Cup argument is the only way you can attempt to say that Kapil is a greater cricketer than Tendulkar. Why ? Because when it comes to raw talent, ability, standing in relation to other great players of their generation, statistics, peer review (as in being rated by the greatest player that ever lived), Kapil has NOTHING on Tendulkar. The World Cup is your only refuge, hence why you feel the need to denigrate every other trophy India have won during Tendulkar's time, because otherwise - your argument will fall flat on it's face. Using your criteria - by the same token, Kapil's achievements in Test cricket are WORTHLESS compared to Tendulkar's because he never beat the greatest team of his time ? Do you agree with that ? If you can't recognise how weak the premise of your argument is, then more power to you.

[Lurker]

I dont know on what basis, you state that Kapil's contribution in 83 cup was any lesser ? Kapil's stats in 1983 worldup. filtered 8 303 175* 60.60 1 0 12 5/43 20.41 1 7 0 E/R: 2.91 Batting average of 60 & a bowling avg of 20, with 12 wickets in 8 games (1.5 wickets per game) with one 5fer. Add to this an economy rate of 2.91 Not to mention that he was a captain to go with his batting & bowling achievements

To put that in perspective here are the stats for his fellow all-rounders. Botham 7 match 40 runs@10, 8 wickets@36 Hadlee 6 match 71 runs@14 14 wickets@13 Imran 7 match 283 runs@70 no wickets Yeah sure Kapils 303@60.6 and 12 wickets@20.41 should go down as the worst of the lot! xxx

[Lurker]

I am just going cut this short, because i've reduced you into repeating yourself ad nauseum. The issue here isn't about which trophy is more prestigious. It's about how you judge the legacy of cricketers.

I will keep it even shorter - you need to get some crash course in manners, specially when it comes to dealing with your country's greats. And you need to read this thread to check PRESSURE part in this thread. Thats where I stepped in and thats what has been my stance. Anyway lets call it quits since we both have better things to on a Friday. xxx

[Predator_05]

I will keep it even shorter - you need to get some crash course in manners, specially when it comes to dealing with your country's greats. xxx

Yeah, demonstrated by you in the manner by which you discussed Tendulkar's achievements. :haha: Come on, you spent more than an hour with your bluff and bluster, why not give this one more shot ?

The premise of your entire argument is weak - basically, you are saying that Kapil has won a World Cup, Tendulkar hasn't, ergo Kapil is better. That is why i brought up the Tom Moody argument, because quite literally - by your esteemed criteria, he would have a claim to be considered a better cricketer than Tendulkar (and Kapil) because he won that World Cup twice. But inspite of that achievement, he will never be anywhere near as good a player as either. That is my point - a cricketer's greatness cannot be solely determined by such criteria such as winning a World Cup, because that way you effectively cut out every other noteworthy achievement of theirs. Many legendary cricketers never won a World Cup. Do you think Tom Moody is better than Tendulkar because he won the World Cup twice ? The World Cup argument is the only way you can attempt to say that Kapil is a greater cricketer than Tendulkar. Why ? Because when it comes to raw talent, ability, standing in relation to other great players of their generation, statistics, peer review (as in being rated by the greatest player that ever lived), Kapil has NOTHING on Tendulkar. The World Cup is your only refuge, hence why you feel the need to denigrate every other trophy India have won during Tendulkar's time, because otherwise - your argument will fall flat on it's face. Using your criteria - by the same token, Kapil's achievements in Test cricket are WORTHLESS compared to Tendulkar's because he never beat the greatest team of his time ? Do you agree with that ? If you can't recognise how weak the premise of your argument is, then more power to you.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Holysmoke]

Righto .... So if SRT had hit 2 more sixers or 3 more fours in that 136 he would have he would then magically have been in Par (if not better) than Lara,KP,RD,VVS ... ? So the degree of seperation is 3 fours .... :haha:

no.. no ways degree of separation is the 2.. dropped catches by the aussies. not 1, but 2.

[Predator_05]

Dravid scored 233, not 221. ...and you expect people to value an innings scored against journeymen like Bracken, Brad Williams and Bichel higher than an innings against Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis and Saqlain Mushtaq - three of the greatest bowlers of their generation and three fo the greatest bowlers of all-time ? Where do Bracken, Williams and Bichel stand in comparision to other great bwolers of their generation ? Can they be compared to Wasim, Waqar and Saqlain ?

[Ram]

BB., I think it was coffe_annon who said " Whether an inning was great or not is decided by how much the number 11 of the team makes in that situation" in reference to Walsh hanging around for Lara to finish the match and India losing 4 wickets for 10 runs in the Chennai test match after Sachin got out. I cant find a better way to put it !

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Bumper]

Righto .... So if SRT had hit 2 more sixers or 3 more fours in that 136 he would have he would then magically have been in Par (if not better) than Lara,KP,RD,VVS ... ? So the degree of seperation is 3 fours .... :haha:

If you show me 10 knocks that Tendu has missed out because of 'ifs & buts' you have a point. In a career spanning 140 test matches, these 'ifs and buts' dont justify the absence of even ONE classy knock Suffice to say, he had ample opportunities to repair his reputation, but he squandered them all.

[Ram]

Which catches are u talking about holy :embaressed_smile:

I can distinctly remember Ian healy diving nicely across first slip and drop a catch that was going straight into mark waugh's hands. the other one , i dont know.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

If you show me 10 knocks that Tendu has missed out because of 'ifs & buts' you have a point. In a career spanning 140 test matches, these 'ifs and buts' dont justify the absence of even ONE classy knock Suffice to say, he had ample opportunities to repair his reputation, but he squandered them all.

Bumper please then show atleast 3-4 knocks by Lara , Laxman or Dravid that were made in similarly extreme high pressure situations. Having said that , i think Sachin 155 n.o against Aus in Chennai in 1998 is as good as it gets from an Indian player

[Holysmoke]

Which catches are u talking about holy :embaressed_smile:

mc1SRpo1NMU 4:44 and 7:47

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Ram]

Are you saying SRT should have "predicted" the future (since he was the 6th man out) ... daang we need to get our cricketers updated on Astrology ... Jyotish 101 anybody ? :tounge_smile::D

Bumper is conveniently saying Sachin cant handle pressure bcoz we lost that test match. But it was our incompetent tail end batsman coz of whom we lost that match . Sachin did what he could.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[living]

Anyone who saw SRT's innings at Chennai, would know how great that innings was. I happened to see it live, and it was definitely better than KP's innings at least. It's sad that the team couldn't complete a simple task of scoring around a dozen runs with 4 wickets in hand.

[Bumper]

Pls define "Classy knock" . What are your parameters ?

Classy knock is one that has a great degree of difficulty (a combination of quality of opposition, bowlers, match situation, pressure etc) associated with it. One that defies all odds stacked against the batsman, one that brings great amount of glory to his team and country. Here are some examples, on why the below knocks were classy. Facing a 500+ deficit at 85/3 Down Under, a typical Indian response would have seen India bundled out for 220. No one gave us a chance to save the test match, leave alone win it. Dravid's 233 & then the 70 odd in the 2nd innings were played by a man, blessed with nerves of steel, a man possessed to win. The knock gave us a win in Aussie soil for the first time in close to 20 years Following on India faced an uphill task of saving the game, leave alone win it against perhaps the greatest test team in history marching towards a world record, riding on 16+ winning streak. The odds simply dont get bigger than this. Laxman's 281 changed the way follow ons are enforced in the game. Pietersen's 158, came as a debutant playing his first ever Ashes. A typical English team in the last 10 years would show up in the Ashes, only to be put in its place. In 2005, we saw a resurgent England knocking on the doors of a series win for the first time in over a decade. But yet they find the Aussies impossible to put away. Lee is breathing fire, threatening to spoil the Pommie party. Pietersen is fighting a lone battle. A rookie fighting to save his team in these circumstances, is commendable enuff, but one taking the attack to the opposition and putting it across them convincingly, in a last innings, was simply UNEXPECTED. The result -- a Pommie Ashes triumph. Ditto with Lara's 153. No one gave WI chance against McGrath, Gillespie & Warney to win. And when WI was 5 down, their chance was as good as over. It took a very special knock from Lara to achieve the unachievable. Beating the pulp out of SriLanka at home (where they have never won a test match), or England at home (who have hardly done well in India), or winning a test against an under strength Aussie attack at home (where Aussies havent won for 30 years) arent exactly classy for me. To put it in a nutshell, ONLY if/when Tendulkar scores a match winning 100, that helps us win a test or series against BIG odds vs quality opponents, he would answer Kapil's criticism and my criticism. Until then he will remain just a man of numbers and averages, not one, who achieved anything significant for his country in Test matches