Why Tendulkar must retire now

[Ultimate_Game]

Clearly you have no idea about how cricket works as team game. Its one of the very rare games where there are 3 equally important aspects, batting, bowling and fielding. No matter how much you influence one factor (eg Sachin with batting) and other factors will be equally important in team wins. No matter if a batsman scores 600 runs by itself, it wont win you a game if your bowlers still dont pick 20 wickets BTW Sachin has one of the best records in finals of games and most of the finals India has won (including first ever series win in Aus) is because of Sachin. I am sure you have no idea about this at all. Yes, you bring 2 world cup finals into question but a grand sample of 2 matches, in one where he was chasing 360+ is not enough to come to any conclusions. There is a reason most experts of the game, past and current players, etc rate Sachin. And remember Sachin was rated as one of the best ever before he broke even one single record. So all this talk of stats you guys bring up are just clutching at straws, because you are being dishonest about his being rated as one of the best ever in the 90s. Sachin is the first mordern name being put in the team list for any world XI, by any expert of the game. From Bradman to Viv to Donald, all rate Sachin highly. Because they know that if Sachin had a better team, he would have won many more matches. One of the prime example is that, In India's rise to no 1 in test, he was one of the highest contributor. This was when he was past his peak, imagine if he had a similar team in his peak!! One of the biggest lies which Sachin detractors bring up is that he is all about stats. they wilfully ignore the fact that Sachin was rated as one of the best ever much, much before he broke a single record. And all I have to say is that if you find yourself on the opposing side of most experts of the game, all past and present players, any critic, etc, then its more likely that its you who are competely wrong with your assumptions (particularly since you seem to have a clear bias against a player) than all of them being so wrong about a player whom they rate so highly. And no, no expert is ever going to rate anyone on the basis of stats. They know who plays how, they know a player's potential, they know his capabilties. When a bowler like donald rates him, its not on the basis of how many 100s was scored against him. Don Bradman didnt look at Sachin's longetivity while rating him. Nor did any of the other experts. If they all unanimously rate him so highly, its because they understand the game. Experts might have their biases, but no other player has such an unanimous consesuses of greatness in mordern times like Sachin has. ditto for the fan following, when the common man on the street still cheers for him, he doesnt look at the 100s column. they cheered for him much before his recirds started piling in. The records are just a plus. They love the man becuase he has been one of the best for India, and stood up for India all these times. Talking about stats, something incidental which happened after 16-17 years of a player's career and ignoring the period before that time is the height of dishonesty and something which I only expect from some dishonest Pak fans

Give it a rest, will you. We have all seen Tendulkar for a long time and yep he loves his stats/records/milestones. One of the indicators of greatness in sports is who steps his game when everything's on the line. In other words who's "clutch". In soccer, which player would you rather have the ball in front of goal in the dying minutes of the game with football WC on the line? In NFL/football, which QB would you rather have the ball in his mind with your team behind and just 2 mins to go at the end of Super Bowl? Which player would you want to have the ball in the dying seconds of Game 7 of NBA Championship? Which batsmen would you want to have in the middle in the series decider of a World Championship or if the partnership was batting fo your life? In soccer I would pick Pele or Maradona, in NFL I would pick Montana or Brady, in NBA I would pick Jordan, in sprinting I would pick Bolt, but in cricket if it was a 50-50 gme of a decider in a one-off game I would never even think of Tendulkar. In Tests if I could pick any player I would pick Brdmn and Richrds to be in the middle, and in odis I would have Dhoni & Bevan on the pitch (maybe Richards, Hussey or Gilchrist as contenders). This is what I meant by Tendulkar not being in the same ball-park as others. You my disgree and it's your prerogative, but to me Tendulkar hasnt been clutch. For a player of his abilities and stats/records he comes up short when he needs to step up. Hell, even Dravid & VVS have been more clutch than Tendulkar in Tests for India.

[The Outsider]

1. You are continuing to show your ignorance. Folks who have a bit of knowledge about NFL would know who Brett Favre is, and for the record his name's pronounced "Faarve" even though it's spelt Favre in case you want to chat with someone with NFL knowledge about him. The guy has most of the passing/QB records in the game including most passing yards, most passing TDs and is the winningest QB in NFL. Yes, he's even ahead of the likes of Montana in these stats.

I didn't know of him, but I know of Montana. See the difference. Anyhow, I had a small discussion in office today with a couple of NFL followers and their consensus was that he would probably rank somewhere between 5-10 among quarterbacks, mind you not all players quarterbacks. The NFL all time rankings show him at number 28. I looked up a few NFL forums as well and most people have him ranked somewhere between 3-10 among QBs. So he is hardly the legend you are trying to prove him to be. A great yeah, legend no. Probably the cricketing equivalent would be Inzi bhai or Miandad.

2. The discussion never started as a comparison between Favre and Tendulkar as players. The discussion was how Green Bay Packers made a very tough call back in 2007 when they decided to "drop" an ATG (Favre) so that they could go ahead with a talented but unproven player (Rodgers), and how India/BCCI didn't do anything of the sort with their ATG (Tendulkar). That situation was being compared when you butted in and tried to say how Favre couldn't be compared to Tendulkar etc. when in fact the comparison was pretty valid. Pls go back and feel free to check what the discussion was before you showed up.

See above. Tendulkar is a legend and synonymous to the game like Pele, Maradona, Federer. Favre is not. The analogy to drop thus does not hold because of their different stature in the game.

[King Tendulkar]

See above. Tendulkar is a legend and synonymous to the game like Pele, Maradona, Federer. Favre is not. The analogy to drop thus does not hold because of their different stature in the game.

There I agree. But now I feel angry you have left others out.:--D Ali, Tiger Woods, Gareth Edwards, Frankel, Senna, etc etc

[Ultimate_Game]

I didn't know of him, but I know of Montana. See the difference. Anyhow, I had a small discussion in office today with a couple of NFL followers and their consensus was that he would probably rank somewhere between 5-10 among quarterbacks, mind you not all players quarterbacks. The NFL all time rankings show him at number 28. I looked up a few NFL forums as well and most people have him ranked somewhere between 3-10 among QBs. So he is hardly the legend you are trying to prove him to be. A great yeah, legend no. Probably the cricketing equivalent would be Inzi bhai or Miandad. See above. Tendulkar is a legend and synonymous to the game like Pele, Maradona, Federer. Favre is not. The analogy to drop thus does not hold because of their different stature in the game.

We can disagree on the Favre & Tendulkar ranking part coz to me Favre would be ranked around 5 all time and Tendulkar would be around the same spot after Bradman, Hobbs, Sobers & Kallis. Again Tendulkar could be ranked anywhere from 2 to 7 depending whom you ask similar to Favre. Favre's not exactly Inzi bhai category coz no cricket fan will ever put Inzi Bhai top 10 of all times. Inzi Bhai would be lucky to get into top 25. Atthe top of my head I can think of Ponting, Lara, Dravid, 3 Ws of WI cricket, Braaington, Chappells etc. to go with the ones I mentioned earlier. Favre can be as high as 3 and lowest I've ever heard any NFL fan rank him is around 7th - at least the ones I had discussion with. At least both Tendulkar and Favre are in the same ball-park with a rank here or there - not the greatest but definitely one of the premiew ATGs out there. The analogy doesn't hold because soccer is a global sport where more people are likely to know the major superstars, whereas hrdly will know of any NFL stars beyond North America. As an example, try asking people about Pele and Montana. I can bet globally more people would have heard about Pele than Montana. And hardly anyone in India would have heard of Wayne Gretzky. Doesn't mean they don't have the same stature in their respective sports. Tendulkar is more known as he plays a sport followed by billions and has a worldwide following whereas Favre plays a sport confined to North America. Anyhow the discussion was around how Packers handled Favre's exit who was at the same stage of his career to where Tendulkar was after 0-8. Packers kicked Favre out though he had a rabid fan base - those cheeseheads really loved Favre - whereas BCCI took the easy way out by sticking with him. Packers reaped the benefits for their brave decision by winning a SB in 2010 while we may end up the price by prolonging our transition beyond the SA tour later this year.

[Lurker]

I didn't know of him, but I know of Montana. See the difference. Anyhow, I had a small discussion in office today with a couple of NFL followers and their consensus was that he would probably rank somewhere between 5-10 among quarterbacks, mind you not all players quarterbacks. The NFL all time rankings show him at number 28. I looked up a few NFL forums as well and most people have him ranked somewhere between 3-10 among QBs. So he is hardly the legend you are trying to prove him to be. A great yeah, legend no. Probably the cricketing equivalent would be Inzi bhai or Miandad.

Actually Favre was quite similar to SRT in some ways. He played for 1 team for a long time, was always one of the top 3 elite QBs (although NEVER being the absolute best). His fans celebrated him as a a great QB but he would often fold in crunch games and lifted the trophy once, if I am not mistaken. Not unlike SRT in that respect :winky: He is a celebrated NFL QB though. Wont make my top 10 all time QBs let alone top 5.

[Laaloo]

Actually Favre was quite similar to SRT in some ways. He played for 1 team for a long time, was always one of the top 3 elite QBs (although NEVER being the absolute best). His fans celebrated him as a a great QB but he would often fold in crunch games and lifted the trophy once, if I am not mistaken. Not unlike SRT in that respect :winky: He is a celebrated NFL QB though. Wont make my top 10 all time QBs let alone top 5.

Not in the top is maybe exaggerating but in my list definitely not in the top 5 Manning Brady Marino montana johnny unitas in no particular order

[GoldenSun]

Actually Favre was quite similar to SRT in some ways. He played for 1 team for a long time, was always one of the top 3 elite QBs (although NEVER being the absolute best). His fans celebrated him as a a great QB but he would often fold in crunch games and lifted the trophy once, if I am not mistaken. Not unlike SRT in that respect :winky: He is a celebrated NFL QB though. Wont make my top 10 all time QBs let alone top 5.

I would place him atleast in 7th-10th place in all time QBs. He wasn't the MVP when he won the Super Bowl am I right?

[Lurker]

Not in the top is maybe exaggerating but in my list definitely not in the top 5 Manning Brady Marino montana johnny unitas in no particular order

The bold ones would be in for most fans I suppose. Brady and Manning would strong contenders. I will probably switch Manning with John Elway and have a toss up between Brady and Steve Young.

[The Outsider]

We can disagree on the Favre & Tendulkar ranking part coz to me Favre would be ranked around 5 all time and Tendulkar would be around the same spot after Bradman, Hobbs, Sobers & Kallis. Again Tendulkar could be ranked anywhere from 2 to 7 depending whom you ask similar to Favre. Favre's not exactly Inzi bhai category coz no cricket fan will ever put Inzi Bhai top 10 of all times. Inzi Bhai would be lucky to get into top 25. Atthe top of my head I can think of Ponting, Lara, Dravid, 3 Ws of WI cricket, Braaington, Chappells etc. to go with the ones I mentioned earlier. Favre can be as high as 3 and lowest I've ever heard any NFL fan rank him is around 7th - at least the ones I had discussion with. At least both Tendulkar and Favre are in the same ball-park with a rank here or there - not the greatest but definitely one of the premiew ATGs out there.

LOL! What kind of a analogy are you drawing? What's relevant is where does Favre rank as a player and not as a quarterback. Tendulkar as a cricket player would be in the top 5 of most people and certainly in the top 10 of anyone. He regularly makes all time XIs selected by pretty much every former player and cricket journalist. While Favre's rank is around 5-10 for quarterbacks, he does not feature even in the top 20 of any list of NFL players. I found him ranked 28th at one place. Someone who gets in the top 5 of most and top 10 of everyone is in the same ballpark as someone who does not make the top 20 of any list? LOL! Putting Kallis in the list of top 5 batsmen? That itself takes away any credibility from the post. Tell me one former player or senior cricket journalist who considers Kallis a top 5 batsman?

Anyhow the discussion was around how Packers handled Favre's exit who was at the same stage of his career to where Tendulkar was after 0-8. Packers kicked Favre out though he had a rabid fan base - those cheeseheads really loved Favre - whereas BCCI took the easy way out by sticking with him. Packers reaped the benefits for their brave decision by winning a SB in 2010 while we may end up the price by prolonging our transition beyond the SA tour later this year.

Quite simple - the stature of Tendulkar and Favre in their respective sports is on a different level, so any analogy between them will not make a whole lot of sense.

[Lurker]

I would place him atleast in 7th-10th place in all time QBs. He wasn't the MVP when he won the Super Bowl am I right?

You are right. I am not sure who started this whole Favre-Tendulkar analogy over here. But it may be actually very relevant. Here is another titbit. Both Tendulkar and Brett Favre played one of their best games right after their Dad passed away. The interview given by both these greats thanking their Dad would bring tears to most fans eyes. In a way it is spooky because there was similar sentiment of Dads looking down and not wanting the son to let the team (India and Packers) down.

[GoldenSun]

You are right. I am not sure who started this whole Favre-Tendulkar analogy over here. But it may be actually very relevant. Here is another titbit. Both Tendulkar and Brett Favre played one of their best games right after their Dad passed away. The interview given by both these greats thanking their Dad would bring tears to most fans eyes. In a way it is spooky because there was similar sentiment of Dads looking down and not wanting the son to let the team (India and Packers) down.

Me and UG started the analogy to compare Tendulkar and Favre's inability to hang up the boots when the time was right. In the words of Ultimate Game, the discussion never started as a comparison between Favre and Tendulkar as players. The discussion was how Green Bay Packers made a very tough call back in 2007 when they decided to "drop" an ATG (Favre) so that they could go ahead with a talented but unproven player (Rodgers), and how India/BCCI didn't do anything of the sort with their ATG (Tendulkar).

[Crookbond]

[Lurker]

Me and UG started the analogy to compare Tendulkar and Favre's inability to hang up the boots when the time was right. In the words of Ultimate Game' date=' the discussion never started as a comparison between Favre and Tendulkar as players. [b']The discussion was how Green Bay Packers made a very tough call back in 2007 when they decided to "drop" an ATG (Favre) so that they could go ahead with a talented but unproven player (Rodgers), and how India/BCCI didn't do anything of the sort with their ATG (Tendulkar).

lol. That makes it funnier, since personally I would have wanted SRT to retire around 2008 (like Packers moved Favre). SRT would have went out with a superbat aura :hatsoff: I am out of here, this is getting way too spooky for me :creep:

[Ultimate_Game]

LOL! What kind of a analogy are you drawing? What's relevant is where does Favre rank as a player and not as a quarterback. Tendulkar as a cricket player would be in the top 5 of most people and certainly in the top 10 of anyone. He regularly makes all time XIs selected by pretty much every former player and cricket journalist. While Favre's rank is around 5-10 for quarterbacks, he does not feature even in the top 20 of any list of NFL players. I found him ranked 28th at one place. Someone who gets in the top 5 of most and top 10 of everyone is in the same ballpark as someone who does not make the top 20 of any list? LOL! Putting Kallis in the list of top 5 batsmen? That itself takes away any credibility from the post. Tell me one former player or senior cricket journalist who considers Kallis a top 5 batsman? Quite simple - the stature of Tendulkar and Favre in their respective sports is on a different level, so any analogy between them will not make a whole lot of sense.

If you want to look at Favre as a player and not as a QB, though QB is the central and most pivotal position in NFL, you will have to do the same thing for Tendulkar as well. We were comparing Tendulkar as a batsman, not as a player coz if we start looking at top cricketers, and not just batsmen Tendulkar will slip even more. E.g., likes of Kallis, Sobers, Kapil, Warne, Murali, WI pacers etc. may arguably be ranked ahead of Tendulkar coz of the value they brought to their teams. The comparison of "Favre the QB" is more apt with "Tendulkar the batsman" coz I don't think Tendulkar will be ranked as high as a cricketer if we include all-rounders and bowlers in the discussion.

[harmuk]

Just because one or two here never heard of Favre, but heard of Peyton or Montana does not mean much, and his standing in the game of football is definitely as high as that of a Peyton or a Montana, though Montana is a bigger winner sorrounded by some of the best talent there ever was at any given time, in a team in the NFL. Just QB'ing wise statistically speaking (just as our own Tendulkar in cricket), Favre is much higher than Montana which does not mean he will be ranked higher than Montana by many, given Montana won 4 Superbowls as a starting QB which is incredible. Hope people learn to put things in proper perspective.

[GoldenSun]

Just because one or two here never heard of Favre, but heard of Peyton or Montana does not mean much, and his standing in the game of football is definitely as high as that of a Peyton or a Montana, though Montana is a bigger winner sorrounded by some of the best talent there ever was at any given time, in a team in the NFL. Just QB'ing wise statistically speaking (just as our own Tendulkar in cricket), Favre is much higher than Montana which does not mean he will be ranked higher than Montana by many, given Montana won 4 Superbowls as a starting QB which is incredible. Hope people learn to put things in proper perspective.

Well reasoned :hatsoff:

[harmuk]

If you want to look at Favre as a player and not as a QB' date=' though QB is the central and most pivotal position in NFL, you will have to do the same thing for Tendulkar as well. We were comparing Tendulkar as a batsman, not as a player coz if we start looking at top cricketers, and not just batsmen Tendulkar will slip even more. E.g., likes of Kallis, Sobers, Kapil, Warne, Murali, WI pacers etc. may arguably be ranked ahead of Tendulkar coz of the value they brought to their teams. The comparison of "Favre the QB" is more apt with "Tendulkar the batsman"[b'] coz I don't think Tendulkar will be ranked as high as a cricketer if we include all-rounders and bowlers in the discussion.

As you observed generally, just in Indian cricket he will be ranked second to Kapil, and we did not even bring in the likes of Sobers, Kallis, Imran, Viv, Bradman etc etc and one is not even sure if we discuss pure bowlers how they can be compared to the batsman, and extrapolated to arrive at overall ranking of best cricketers.

[The Outsider]

If you want to look at Favre as a player and not as a QB' date=' though QB is the central and most pivotal position in NFL, you will have to do the same thing for Tendulkar as well. We were comparing Tendulkar as a batsman, not as a player coz if we start looking at top cricketers, and not just batsmen Tendulkar will slip even more. E.g., likes of Kallis, Sobers, Kapil, Warne, Murali, WI pacers etc. may arguably be ranked ahead of Tendulkar coz of the value they brought to their teams. The comparison of "Favre the QB" is more apt with "Tendulkar the batsman" coz I don't think Tendulkar will be ranked as high as a cricketer if we include all-rounders and bowlers in the discussion.[/quote'] There is one QB in a team and 6 batsmen. How does it make sense to do an apples for apples comparison? That Tendulkar makes pretty much every all time XI that is thrown up shows where he stands in the game. You were feeling so proud of Favre making the team of the decade. That in itself should be enough to show you the gulf between the two. Anyhow, your ratings are not to be taken seriously anyway given how you put Kallis in the top 5 batsmen of all time.

[Ultimate_Game]

There is one QB in a team and 6 batsmen. How does it make sense to do an apples for apples comparison? That Tendulkar makes pretty much every all time XI that is thrown up shows where he stands in the game. You were feeling so proud of Favre making the team of the decade. That in itself should be enough to show you the gulf between the two. Anyhow, your ratings are not to be taken seriously anyway given how you put Kallis in the top 5 batsmen of all time.

Stats say otherwise. Kallis has been one of the best batsmen ever. He started slowly averaging sub 30 for initial part of his career but then took off. He has consistently scored runs for SA when it counted and was instrumental in taking SA where they are. You may not agree but 42 hundreds, 13K+ runs at 56+ is legendary and yup I put him higher than Tendulkar. Wouldn't have done that 2 years ago but now he is clearly higher. As for Favre "Team of Decade" thingy you asked me to show whether Favre was dominant for a decade like Tendulkar has been and that was my response. I don't have to be "proud" about anything. These are facts. In 90s Favre was as dominant a QB as Tendulkar as a batsman with 3 MVP seasons. Only Manning has more MVP seasons - 4. The guy was a legend and if you were a football fan you would know what Favre was all about. His legacy is as great in football/NFL as Tendulkar's is in cricket. The only different is he doesn't have the support of 1.2 billion people to call him "god" but if you go to "Packers land" and talk to any cheesehead he will tell you what Favre means to him/her and to him Favre would have the same special place as Tendulkar would for most of Indians. Regarding not taking my rankings seriously you surely came out objective calling Favre Martyn, Inzi or Miandad of football :giggle:

[Muloghonto]

In soccer I would pick Pele or Maradona, in NFL I would pick Montana or Brady, in NBA I would pick Jordan, in sprinting I would pick Bolt, but in cricket if it was a 50-50 gme of a decider in a one-off game I would never even think of Tendulkar. In Tests if I could pick any player I would pick Brdmn and Richrds to be in the middle, and in odis I would have Dhoni & Bevan on the pitch (maybe Richards, Hussey or Gilchrist as contenders). This is what I meant by Tendulkar not being in the same ball-park as others. You my disgree and it's your prerogative, but to me Tendulkar hasnt been clutch. For a player of his abilities and stats/records he comes up short when he needs to step up. Hell, even Dravid & VVS have been more clutch than Tendulkar in Tests for India.

Given Tendulkar's record in elimination matches, he is as clutch in ODI cricket as it comes. The most commonly touted 'greatest clutch innings of modern time' was Brian Lara's 153* against the Aussies in Bridgetown. Tendulkar's 130 against Pakis the same year is not seen in the same vein because 'when the going got really tough, Tendy gave a catch and was out'. Yet, Tendy was battig injured, Lara was not. Also, Lara offered a clear chance off McGrath when he was at 139, yet Mark Waugh spilled the only slip catch I've ever seen him spill. Lara got a reprieve and went on to win and get considered a 'clutch player'. Tendulkar didn't. Just goes on to show how subjective this whole 'perception of clutch' is. To me, match-winning/match-saving performances when team elimination is on the line is the definition of clutch. Does not matter if it is a must-win group match (eg: Pakis were in must-win vs us in 2003 World Cup and Anwar played a clutch innings), quarter finals, semis or the finals. Clutch is saving your team when all hope is nearly lost and a loss equals loss of tournament. And as it stands, Tendy's record in ODI is as clutch as any other batsman to've ever played the game. As for VIv being clutch in tests- LOL. Thats like saying Sehwag is a clutch test player. Viv, like Sehwag, didn't care if he came in at 20/1 or 150/1, didn't care if it was a 1st day pitch or a 5th day pitch, he whent 'whammo'. Like Sehwag. Sometimes it worked spectacularly, sometimes he failed spectacularly.