Lara V Tendulkar

[zen]

Rett, for one moment, can u answer this, how then you explain Zimbabwe the bowling unit, having a better average than that of SL and NZ in the 90s? Then we can talk about Tendulkar having to take comfort from Zim stats and all that blah blah... Zimbabwe lost a lot of matches in the 90s than it won, but that was primarily owing to their dire batting lineup which didn't have a notable batsman barring Andy Flower. Their bowling, though workmanlike was effective however. But Sachin faced their bowlers, not their batsman, so their batting avgs or wins is of no consequence here.

Because Sachin only avg 26 against Zim in 90s .... no wonder you think Zim was a force to reckon with :hysterical: sachin vs Zim in 90s

Career averages  Span Mat Runs HS Bat Av100 Wkts BBI Bowl Av 5 Ct St  
unfiltered 1989-2012 188 15470 248* 55.44 51 45 3/10 54.33 0 113 0 Profile 
filtered 1992-1998 3 103 62 25.75 0 0 - - 0 0 0 

it's not hard to figure out why as Zim played a lot of sub continent teams in Zim link

[velu]

Too many smilies in a post is a sure give away that the point you are making is weak. Zim played 39 tests in the 90s, 12 of those vs Pakistan who were perhaps the 2nd best side of that time and 10 vs SL who were strong at home with the emergence of Murali in the mid 90s. Add 3 vs India and SA each..do your maths and tell me how Zimbabwe played the minnows most of the times to have a better bowling average?

quoting about smileys rather than focusing on what is said is a clear case of running out of points my dear :icflove: and wanting to add Zimbabwe because it enhances sachis stats is not a fair game ... infact in other forum ( PP ) we put NZ in minnow list bcoz they are a poor tets team :)))

[Precambrian]

average difference of 1.32 and you are commenting that "Tendulkar comfortably comes on top" :D again you came with a flawed analysis based on stats , let me give an example Lara played 15+ test matches vs McGrath but sachin played only 9 when McGrath played.. concluding anything based on this stats will make only people to sleep and nothing else cricket is a very simple game , but will be a very complex thing if they play for stats :hatsoff:

Well.. tell that to Rett then, he's the one who created arbitrary statistical critiera and all that in a vain attempt to show Lara's superiority over Tendulkar. Coming back to your point, stats are however a good indicator of how good a batsman is, regardless of the romanticism associated with beauty of strokeplay and whatnot. Given a choice between Yuvraj singh and Jonathan Trott as regards to their stroke play I would definitely choose the former. But when asked to select one for the test team, I'd happily go for the latter although that'd mean I'd have to watch the cricketing equivalent of paint drying.

[saneindian]

quoting about smileys rather than focusing on what is said is clear case of running out of points my dear :icflove:

SO why dont you answer what I said in that post? 39 tests, 28 of those vs Pakistan, SL, India and SA..how did they play most of their matches vs minnows?

[Precambrian]

this is enough for me :D and i very well meant the tests.. atleast in ODIs minnows get a chance play vs strong teams , in tests obviously they play more with minnows :cantstop::cantstop: how many tests bangladesh played vs england and how many we played vs england in the same period. :giggle::giggle:

I don't get you what has Bangladesh got to do with the nineties as test nation?

[zen]

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

[velu]

SO why dont you answer what I said in that post? 39 tests' date=' 28 of those vs Pakistan, SL, India and SA..how did they play most of their matches vs minnows?[/quote'] surely dear .. and i will check it and reply :winky: i will surely accept zim as non-minnow if they did play more matches vs strong teams

[velu]

I don't get you what has Bangladesh got to do with the nineties as test nation?

thats an example :hatsoff: minnows play more minnows rather than playing strong teams in tests

[Precambrian]

Because Sachin only avg 26 against Zim in 90s .... no wonder you think Zim was a force to reckon with :hysterical: sachin vs Zim in 90s

Career averages  Span Mat Runs HS Bat Av100 Wkts BBI Bowl Av 5 Ct St  
unfiltered 1989-2012 188 15470 248* 55.44 51 45 3/10 54.33 0 113 0 Profile 
filtered 1992-1998 3 103 62 25.75 0 0 - - 0 0 0 

it's not hard to figure out why as Zim played a lot of sub continent teams in Zim link

That proves nothing... Even if you extend the period to cover 2002 (when Sachin last faced Zimbabwe), the bowling avg of Zimbabwe becomes about 39, comparable to NZ's 36, England's 34.5 & India's 34.3. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=6;opposition=7;opposition=8;opposition=9;orderby=won;spanmax1=28+Feb+2002;spanmin1=1+Jan+1990;spanval1=span;team=1;team=2;team=3;team=4;team=5;team=6;team=7;team=8;team=9;team_view=bowl;template=results;type=team

[Precambrian]

thats an example :hatsoff: minnows play more minnows rather than playing strong teams in tests

Yes and which "minnow" did zim play repeatedly in the 90s and early 00s?

[zen]

That proves nothing... Even if you extend the period to cover 2002 (when Sachin last faced Zimbabwe), the bowling avg of Zimbabwe becomes about 39, comparable to NZ's 36, England's 34.5 & India's 34.3.

I am tired of laughing Ok, so Zim which bowls in helpful conditions in Zim is suppose to avg 50 B-> The main point is don't you feel ashamed that you have to drag Zim in to this to show something abt a player you consider to be greatest :facepalm:

[tothepoint]

That proves nothing... Even if you extend the period to cover 2002 (when Sachin last faced Zimbabwe), the bowling avg of Zimbabwe becomes about 39, comparable to NZ's 36, England's 34.5 & India's 34.3. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;opposition=1;opposition=2;opposition=3;opposition=4;opposition=5;opposition=6;opposition=7;opposition=8;opposition=9;orderby=won;spanmax1=28+Feb+2002;spanmin1=1+Jan+1990;spanval1=span;team=1;team=2;team=3;team=4;team=5;team=6;team=7;team=8;team=9;team_view=bowl;template=results;type=team

And bowling avgs of India and Lanka is comparable to Australia, South Africa, Pakistan and West Indies of 90s. In the eyes of GOD we are all equal and the same. B->

[zen]

:two_thumbs_up: Precam and MTC for the laughs

[Precambrian]

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

Murali Mendis? :hysterical: So Lara faced Mendis? :two_thumbs_up: and why include Mendis in the list, and why not Caddick-Hoggard? Why not Kumble Srinath? Oh is it that it doesn't suit your convenience?

[Precambrian]

I am tired of laughing Ok, so Zim which bowls in helpful conditions in Zim is suppose to avg 50 B-> The main point is don't you feel ashamed that you have to drag Zim in to this to show something abt a player you consider to be greatest :facepalm:

yes, because then the batsmen get to face Zim in same unhelpful conditions.... I mean WTF are you onto about? Zimbabwe from 90s through 02 were comparable to the likes of SL, Ind, NZ etc... that's plain truth... as a bowling unit alone.... You may put whatever no. of smileys to counter that but unfortunately it's not going to change the truth...

[Precambrian]

And bowling avgs of India and Lanka is comparable to Australia, South Africa, Pakistan and West Indies of 90s. In the eyes of GOD we are all equal and the same. B->

So what do you propose?

[The Outsider]

And bowling avgs of India and Lanka is comparable to Australia, South Africa, Pakistan and West Indies of 90s. In the eyes of GOD we are all equal and the same. B->

:hysterical::hysterical: Difference of 5 points is comparable when it's India and Zimbabwe, now applying that logic India's attack was comparable to Pakistan and West Indies, extending it further Srinath and Prasad were comparable to Akram and Waqar or Ambrose and Walsh.

[tothepoint]

So what do you propose?

Nothing I am on your side...just extending your logic/truth/whatever it is a bit further. To make it clearer, if 39 and 33 is comparable. Then so should be 33 and 27, isn't it?

[zen]

I can't even click on this thread without laughing out load :hysterical: I need to find a more serious thread to ease myself up

[velu]

Yes and which "minnow" did zim play repeatedly in the 90s and early 00s?

just checked the stats , two of the strongest team in the era is SA and Aus. Pak is distance third. Played aussies once and saffers 5 times.. they played 12 games vs pak but we whole world know how good their batsmen are , esp when they travel.. check the bowling average of zim , 44 vs india , 43 vs aussies , 42 vs nz, 58 vs saffers and 41 vs sl :-D their bowling was decent only vs pak which is 30.24 .. and if you still argue that their bowling is non-minnosique i rest my case :angelic: IMHO sachinstas either boost the worse bowlers to make sachins record look good ( aka Lee in tests ) and tarnish the greats to make they are worse than sachin ( aka viv , sachin , too some extent Dravid ( other forums ) .. ) anyway this is my general observation and not directed at you :angelic: