Sachin second only to Bradman - Michael Clarke

[CG]

clarke played a measly 5 innings on the lankan soil which is hardly enuf sample for us to compare with ponting ponting's 141 against an ageing pakistan bowling lineup increases his average on srilankan soil the only comparable area b/w ponting and clarke is their innings on the indian soil. clarke outclasses him over here. you shouldn't bring bad decisions by the umpires into discussions when talking about statistics. everyone gets bad decisions and sometimes, the batsmen make the maximum use of it. even our batsmen got many wrong decisions giving them extra life and made big runs from then on in those innings.

It is enough sample to compare.We are talking about away tests. Ponting completly outclassed clarke in 2008 tour and 2010 tour of india even when he was at end of his career speaks a lot of pitches and indian attack of 2001 and ponting .:hatsoff: I bring bad decisons as they clear edges not lbws.

[SLICKR392]

Don > Sachin (IN TESTS) AND THAT IS A FACT. But SRT also played well in ODIs, so well done

You mean 'THAT's IS THE STAT'? If you go by facts, SRT>Don.

[putrevus]

Sachin's inability to score big hundreds is always going to work against him, he was consistent but not match winning overseas both in odis and tests. Bradman will always remain ahead just due to gigantic number 99.6.

[Temujin Khaghan]

Sachin's inability to score big hundreds is always going to work against him, he was consistent but not match winning overseas both in odis and tests. Bradman will always remain ahead just due to gigantic number 99.6.

did you just rob Bradman of 0.34 ??? :cantstop:

[putrevus]

did you just rob Bradman of 0.34 ??? :cantstop:

I did my bad

[MCcricket]

Sachin's inability to score big hundreds is always going to work against him, he was consistent but not match winning overseas both in odis and tests. Bradman will always remain ahead just due to gigantic number 99.6.

Different era and different challenges but the very fact that no player after Don has even come close to the ave 70 says a lot I believe the next best is mid 60's, I agree Sachin was not a match winner for most part in his test career, Probably Laxman, Sehwag, Rohit, even Kohli might win more tests single handedly, he is the best we have seen in our lifetime talent wise maybe as good as anyone , his stats although don't show his genius besides the length of his career and consistency, many players ave more then him.

[adi B]

Ponting doesn't deserve to mentioned in the same sentence as sachin-lara-kallis-dravid wrt to allround batsmanship... he is an OZ-great... thats it. one of the greatest players of fast bowling on green, bouncy, seaming tracks and swinging conditions ... but he completely failed on the dustbowls in India - the test which kallis passed with flying colours. unfortunately lara played only 3 tests in india... but gave a whopping to muralitharan - 3 centuries in 7 innings at an average of 100. he also killed kaneria in pakistan. no doubt he would have passed with flying colours in india against kumble and bhajji btw... the best of ponting's centuries in srilanka - the 141 was against pakistan in 2002. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64001.html

i concur but dravid was a big flop in saf,kallis in england and aus(until this tour) so every batsman barring srt and lara had their shortcomings but yeah wrt overall consistency and avg, kallis and dravid pip over ponting,who avged 37 in tests after 2006 which is abysmal

[adi B]

clarke is a very good player of spin in odis,he uses his feet magnificently to manouver the ball and score consistently,though in tests he is a suspect against spin..he scored a lucky ton at b`lore,scored a ton on a flat kotla track where every batsmen feasted,scored another lucky ton in chennai ,barring these he has struggled..heck!! jadeja picked him 5 times

[putrevus]

Different era and different challenges but the very fact that no player after Don has even come close to the ave 70 says a lot I believe the next best is mid 60's' date=' I agree Sachin was not a match winner for most part in his test career, Probably Laxman, Sehwag, Rohit, even Kohli might win more tests single handedly, he is the best we have seen in our lifetime talent wise maybe as good as anyone , his stats although don't show his genius besides the length of his career and consistency, many players ave more then him.[/quote'] Talent has to be quantified by outlandish feats to be termed as goat and sadly Sachin does not have those, he has been greatest compiler who was very consistent rather than a game changer for me. Everyone had gone gaga over Sachin 114 in Perth just because it was a 19 year old who scored it. IMO lack of big scores even though he utter consistent was direct result of him getting Indian cap at age of 16, he never developed the habit of making huge scores in FC cricket. Sunny could never score triple hundreds as he was too slow and he consumed lot of energy just reaching 100, Sachin was different he was such an attacking force but he never had that practice of scoring big hundreds.

[G_B_]

^ sachins great strength has been longevity. That is an outlandish feat. Bradman hardly played much cricket. 52 tests in 20 years works out less 3 tests a year. Thats poor even if you include the second world war. Sachin has had to play non stop cricket and maintain his performance all the time through the years. Foolish to compare the professional era to the part time era/amature era. The real question is could Bradman adjust from Tests to ODis? Its foolish to compare them both simply in tests when clearly ODIs did heavily impact Sachin. Dont just ignore one format. 669 innings in 20 years of playing works out about 34 innings a year. You take out the war years it works out to about 45 innings a year. Ranji batsman have more innings that that per year now a days.

[G_B_]

We can end this debate by saying Badman has been the best batsman of the amateur era. When cricket was a past time and a hobby if you may will. Sachin has been the best batsman of the professional era which I would have extended from the 90s when central contracts came into place across the boards. Cricket was your full time job. Many people for example dont realise but somebody like Gavaskar worked full time for Air India (or state bank of india which one i forget) outside his cricketing commitments. Ie a normal desk job. Thats how different it was back then. You could potentially walk into a bank and he would be working there at a desk.

[Executioner]

You mean 'THAT's IS THE STAT'? If you go by facts, SRT>Don.

But averages are more important than number of centuries. Anyways we all know Don did not play more than a third of what SRT played

[G_B_]

But averages are more important than number of centuries. Anyways we all know Don did not play more than a third of what SRT played

he also played at a time when outside England and Aus rest everybody was a minnow. cricket was just taking shape. In todays context its like playing newest member Ireland.

[MCcricket]

Talent has to be quantified by outlandish feats to be termed as goat and sadly Sachin does not have those, he has been greatest compiler who was very consistent rather than a game changer for me. Everyone had gone gaga over Sachin 114 in Perth just because it was a 19 year old who scored it. IMO lack of big scores even though he utter consistent was direct result of him getting Indian cap at age of 16, he never developed the habit of making huge scores in FC cricket. Sunny could never score triple hundreds as he was too slow and he consumed lot of energy just reaching 100, Sachin was different he was such an attacking force but he never had that practice of scoring big hundreds.

I agree for most part.

[putrevus]

^ sachins great strength has been longevity. That is an outlandish feat. Bradman hardly played much cricket. 52 tests in 20 years works out less 3 tests a year. Thats poor even if you include the second world war. Sachin has had to play non stop cricket and maintain his performance all the time through the years. Foolish to compare the professional era to the part time era/amature era. The real question is could Bradman adjust from Tests to ODis? Its foolish to compare them both simply in tests when clearly ODIs did heavily impact Sachin. Dont just ignore one format. 669 innings in 20 years of playing works out about 34 innings a year. You take out the war years it works out to about 45 innings a year. Ranji batsman have more innings that that per year now a days.

How can you say he cannot adjust to odis. He scored 117 FC hundreds in 234 games he would have scored those hundreds in tests if played tests instead of FC. Sachin is one of the best in modern era but he is not the best.

[SLICKR392]

But averages are more important than number of centuries. Anyways we all know Don did not play more than a third of what SRT played

he also played at a time when outside England and Aus rest everybody was a minnow. cricket was just taking shape. In todays context its like playing newest member Ireland.

Yep, that's what I meant. Not centuries vs average. Batting against the same team throughout your career isn't a mass achievement. If Kohli plays SL throughout his career, he would end with an avg. of over 200.

[Sachin=GOD]

Talent has to be quantified by outlandish feats to be termed as goat and sadly Sachin does not have those, he has been greatest compiler who was very consistent rather than a game changer for me. Everyone had gone gaga over Sachin 114 in Perth just because it was a 19 year old who scored it. IMO lack of big scores even though he utter consistent was direct result of him getting Indian cap at age of 16, he never developed the habit of making huge scores in FC cricket. Sunny could never score triple hundreds as he was too slow and he consumed lot of energy just reaching 100, Sachin was different he was such an attacking force but he never had that practice of scoring big hundreds.

Performing as well as he has done on a consistent basis for 24 years with the kind of pressure he has had to face is an outlandish feat in itself.

[putrevus]

Performing as well as he has done on a consistent basis for 24 years with the kind of pressure he has had to face is an outlandish feat in itself.

if it is for you so be it, but to me it is just a cope out.

[G_B_]

How can you say he cannot adjust to odis. He scored 117 FC hundreds in 234 games he would have scored those hundreds in tests if played tests instead of FC. Sachin is one of the best in modern era but he is not the best.

the point is its futile to compare the eras. Somebody like sunny was super in the tests but dud in the ODIs. Does not mean thay Bradman would have made it in the odis if played back then. Its remains an open question. Cricket back then effectively was a closed shop between Aus and England. Bradman for example played against the first Indian team comprising most of royals who were chosen on the basis of their station in life rather than actually meriting selection.

[Crookbond]

IDK why people have to prove X > Y that too across eras :wall: