Lara V Tendulkar

[CSK Fan]

^ I know you wrote this seriously Nov 1989 to Nov 2006 is just a part of someone's career (17 yrs) A player needs more than 226 innings to be compared with another one with similar innings. Sachin's 226th inng happened in 2008

No, a player's entire career needs to be compared with anothers. Why take 226 innings? why not 100? or 150? You are cutting a part of Sachin's career, why not Lara's? I will again repeat this, you have dishoneslty chosen a part where Sachin really went down because of injury, and missed his re-suregence. this is your only reason for chosing 2006

[zen]

From the period of 1989 to 2012 Sachin - average 55 Bradman 0 Sachin is much more effective agressive and better than Bradman

Great implication .... So now how we compared two players who stared their careers around the same time and a period of 16-17 years is like comparing two batsmen who played in different time .... Continue the comedy :hysterical: What's the next conclusion on SRT: since we dont hv a record of anyone playing cric on planet x, SRT is the best batsman of planet x PS if you had cricketing sense, you would hv taken Don's avg as ' not available' and not zero. As you can see the type of folks, I m trying to discuss with :P

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Laaloo]

Abe Yaar, koi mujhe batao ki when did swann play against Lara?

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[zen]

No, a player's entire career needs to be compared with anothers. Why take 226 innings? why not 100? or 150? You are cutting a part of Sachin's career, why not Lara's? I will again repeat this, you have dishoneslty chosen a part where Sachin really went down because of injury, and missed his re-suregence.

Taking the point they both started playing cricket till Lara retired is a fair comparison as it takes in to account the factors both of them faced over 16 to 17 years. Only a fool like you would think that it is unfair to compare careers spanning 17 years and over 100 tests. And if you think SRT needs more than 226 inngs to be considered better or compete with Lara, then that itself closes the doors on Tendulkar. Your posts are like cutting the very branch you are sitting on And if you really understood my posts, you would have seen a link showing SRT's career against those teams, after Lara retired. He avgs 52 (refer to the post you quoted in #225) while there are players who avg more. So again asking for whole career to be compared is jumping around for nothing Taking about dishonesty, it is something you hv shown plenty. What's funny is that you are dishonest with your own self. You think SRT to be greater but need zim to make him competitive and think a career spanning 17 yrs, over 100 tests and 226 innings is inadequate. Shows how greater SRT is than Lara in tests :haha:

[zen]

why? It's written in the post itself :winky: .... in his last years, Lara easily over shadawod Tendulkar Also their career till Lara retired are similar (with Lara still having an edge) so not much point in comparing those as you can see from below: Excluding Zim and BD, and taking their career's till the point Lara retired (Nov 2006) Tests: Lara: 127 Ten: 120 Runs: Lara: 11,558 (12k) Ten: 9,249 (9.5k) Adv: Lara (in 32 more innings, Lara has approx. 2.3 k more runs, which is at an avg of 72 w/0 considering not outs ) Avg: Lara: 52.53 (53) with only 6 not outs Ten: 52.85 (53) with a staggering 19 not outs Adv: Lara (6 not outs vs 19 not outs) 100s: Lara: 32 in 226 innings Ten: 31 in 194 innings Adv: Ten If you take their careers till the point Lara retired, Lara has an advantage Lara Ten Test batting after Lara retired: LINK (dec 1, 2006 till today) But you are free to think that SRT is the more effective test batsman :P .... I am just giving my opinion here :icflove:

All the questions have been answered above but some 'dishonest' folks still have some :hysterical: these dishonest folks on one hand think SRT > lara and on the other ask for Zim to be added to make SRt competitive, think 17 yrs of cricket spanning over 100 tests is not enough .... if that's not enough for SRT than why dishonestly toot his horn :hehe:

[Crookbond]

Its not SRT's fault that McGra wasn't upto it to play in 98 and 03 test series.

It's ok you worship you're hero but if by any chance you meant here that McGrath chickened out, I think you need to revisit your statement.

[Crookbond]

Great implication .... So now how we compared two players who stared their careers around the same time and a period of 16-17 years is like comparing two batsmen who played in different time .... Continue the comedy :hysterical: What's the next conclusion on SRT: since we dont hv a record of anyone playing cric on planet x, SRT is the best batsman of planet x

It's interesting isn't it. Sachin vs Lara -- Use statistics, Wisden Sachin vs Bradman | Hobbs | (?:[a-zA-Z]+)* -- Don't use statistics, Don't listen to Wisden Criticizing Sachin's "one" innings - Dude, What have you done? He's given his life to cricket for 20 years. Best part - none of the posters disagree that he's a legend. Sometimes I wonder what everyone's arguing about except DTW though, he can also claim Sreesanth wrote Alice in Wonderland and that Alice is actually Sreesanth's middle name.

[zen]

Summery:

Lara after his magical comeback against SL and in his last 51 tests vs Ten during the same period Lara: LINK .... look at some of the big scores there, a lot of 150+ scored SRT during that period: Link If you remove Zim and BD: Lara: LINK Ten: LINK Lara vs Ten from Nov 2001 (Lara's comeback) to Nov 2006 (Lara retired) Excluding Zim and BD: Tests Lara: 47 Ten: 44 Runs Lara: 5025 Ten: 3021 Avg Lara: 60.54 (61)with only 2 not outs Ten: 47.06 (47) with 7 not outs 100s: Lara: 17 in 85 innings (a hundred every 5th inning) Ten: 8 in 71 innings (a hundred every 11th inning) SR: Lara: 59.77 (60) Ten: 51.69 (52)

why? It's written in the post itself :winky: .... in his last years, Lara easily over shadawod Tendulkar Also their career till Lara retired are similar (with Lara still having an edge) so not much point in comparing those as you can see from below: Excluding Zim and BD, and taking their career's till the point Lara retired (Nov 2006) Tests: Lara: 127 Ten: 120 Runs: Lara: 11,558 (12k) Ten: 9,249 (9.5k) Adv: Lara (in 32 more innings, Lara has approx. 2.3 k more runs, which is at an avg of 72 w/0 considering not outs ) Avg: Lara: 52.53 (53) with only 6 not outs Ten: 52.85 (53) with a staggering 19 not outs Adv: Lara (6 not outs vs 19 not outs) 100s: Lara: 32 in 226 innings Ten: 31 in 194 innings Adv: Ten If you take their careers till the point Lara retired, Lara has an advantage Lara Ten Test batting after Lara retired: LINK (dec 1, 2006 till today) But you are free to think that SRT is the more effective test batsman :P .... I am just giving my opinion here :icflove:

To summarize: Excluding Zim and BD, after 226 innings (Lara retired) Runs: Lara: 11,558 Ten: 10,465 Adv: Lara Avg: Lara: rounded 53 (only 6 not outs) Ten rounded 51 (staggering 21 not outs but avg is still less) Adv: Lara 100s Lara: 32 Ten: 33 Almost the same! Lara wins hands down in tests ....

Also when the following pairs are in the opposition: Vaas-Murali, Amb-Walsh, Wasim-Waqar, Pollock-Donald, mcGrath-warne, morkel-styen, murali-mendis

	M	I	No	R	Avg
BCLara	36	68	3	3370	51.85
Sachin	39	66	3	2694	42.76

Avg: Lara 52 vs SRT 43

To summarize my picks: Tests: Lara ODIs: Sachin T20s: would probably flip a coin

:icflove:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[zen]

It's interesting isn't it. Sachin vs Lara -- Use statistics, Wisden Sachin vs Bradman | Hobbs | (?:[a-zA-Z]+)* -- Don't use statistics, Don't listen to Wisden Criticizing Sachin's "one" innings - Dude, What have you done? He's given his life to cricket for 20 years. Best part - none of the posters disagree that he's a legend. Sometimes I wonder what everyone's arguing about except DTW though, he can also claim Sreesanth wrote Alice in Wonderland and that Alice is actually Sreesanth's middle name.

What's funny is: On a Lara vs SRT thread, I have only given my opinion and didn't bother much discussing with those who thought SRT is better .... But these guys, can't even take someone thinking Lara to be more effective in tests (already said SRT is more effective in ODIs) And one guy's definition of trolling seems to be posting anything that says 'x > srt' :haha:

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[zen]

Also my posts on SRT's "longevity" from other thread(s)

* SRT 186 tests in approx. 22 years ----> approx. 8.5 tests per year * Sobers 93 tests in approx. 20 years ----> approx. 4.7 tests per year So how is he suppose to play more, keep playing in old age or somehow increase the number of tests he played in his time :giggle: Ok, so we use filters after filters to see that Viv is not an ATG :haha:

^ that's pure nonsense :hysterical: Let's address your key issue: playing 185 tests is no joke Dravid 1996 - 2011 ----> 161 tests in approx 16 years -----> 10 tests per year ponting 1995-2011 -----> 160 tests Kallis 1995 - 2011 ----> approx. 150 tests that's means SRT has only 24-25 tests more 1989-1994 time frame .... which is at approx 4 tests per year .... and we are suppose to think that's somekind of an achievement :haha: Btw, no one is tallking abt doubling or halving the records but seeing things in proper perspective :winky:

test played SRT and Dravid Before Dravid * SRT: 1989 - June 1996 -----> 39 tests in approx 7 years @ 5.6 tests per year Link Since Dravid-2011 * SRT: 146 tests in 15.5 years @ 9.5 tests per year LINK * Dravid: 161 tests in 15.5 years @ 10.4 tests per year Link SRT and Dravid are roughly of the same age

Enough said on this threads .... the fanboys are free to jump around "dishonestly" And yes, they are also free to think SRT > Lara even in tests .... nobody stopped them from having an opinion :dontknow:

[Crookbond]

What's funny is: On a Lara vs SRT thread, I have only given my opinion and didn't bother much discussing with those who thought SRT is better .... But these guys, can't even take someone thinking Lara to be more effective in tests (already said SRT is more effective in ODIs) And one guy's definition of trolling seems to be posting anything that says 'x > srt' :haha:

To add, you become "unreasonable" and "insane" if you don't agree to some of them! :woot: TBH, I don't agree with you that Lara > SRT but since you feel he's to be more effective in Tests so be it. A lot of cricketers feel Lara was a better Test match player. So? Big deal. But, only the fanatics (not the fans mind you) will come and say - "Shya, this is common knowledge". I just hate it when people pull down other players just to show their favorite (no matter how great the player be) as the best. I can't get why one can't agree that there could be "multiple great players". I see no wrong in that part. Finally, you will find the fanatics only on threads involving "Sachin Tendulkar". I doubt they think much beyond that in either case.

[zen]

^ nicely summed up /thread

[Crookbond]

Its ok you worship any cricketer except Tendulkar but if you think only you and your lot can use Lahori Lagic ... think again. And ? You think only you can hurl rhetorical statements ?

I don't worship any cricketer. I can send sign this on a piece of stamp paper and have it mailed to your postal address. The only thing I worship is "cricket". Be it Australia, Zimbabwe, West Indies, New Zealand. I can (and will) criticize Don Bradman or any other player (let me know the name) if that satiates your Tendulkar-mind. But, what I wouldn't do is pull down another great of the game to show my favorite players is the best. You know the reason? I don't have a favorite player. The only favorite thing I have is the game called "cricket". Lastly, you've once again started calling names. My post was in the most parliamentary language possible. Let me still know if you want to go down that road, your call.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[zen]

So the reason why Dravid stopped playing is ..... ?

He retired to help India build the team and not keep youngsters out :hatsoff: Unless ofc you think he would not have delivered on Ind pitches :giggle:

[Crookbond]

So the reason why Dravid stopped playing is ..... ?

He wanted to watch Sachin Tendulkar on TV from his AC apartment and eat home-made jam. Lately, all the jam bottles were used by his kids and Vijeeta couldn't do anything about it.