G_B_ Posted March 15, 2014 Posted March 15, 2014 The biggest problem with shane warne is off the field controversies. Thats why he was never made australia captain. From supplying info to bookies to serving a 1 year ban for taking a banned substance to texting an english nurse all sorts of lewd messages.
moniker Posted March 15, 2014 Posted March 15, 2014 except he was not..... Oh OK. Maybe I was flippant, was posting based on what I remember. This link suggests he was going to be banned. Not sure if he actually served it. He was accused of not informing the umps that he was going to clean the ball, and the suspension might well have been for that. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/496743.html I'd gladly welcome any corrections to my posts if there was any wrong information, the least that could've been done is to point out what was wrong instead of deleting the post outright.
Yoda-esque Posted March 15, 2014 Posted March 15, 2014 Oh OK. Maybe I was flippant, was posting based on what I remember. This link suggests he was going to be banned. Not sure if he actually served it. He was accused of not informing the umps that he was going to clean the ball, and the suspension might well have been for that. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/496743.html I'd gladly welcome any corrections to my posts if there was any wrong information, the least that could've been done is to point out what was wrong instead of deleting the post outright. No big deal, these same people call MSD corrupt without any charges ,different rules
G_B_ Posted March 15, 2014 Posted March 15, 2014 Oh OK. Maybe I was flippant, was posting based on what I remember. This link suggests he was going to be banned. Not sure if he actually served it. He was accused of not informing the umps that he was going to clean the ball, and the suspension might well have been for that. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/496743.html I'd gladly welcome any corrections to my posts if there was any wrong information, the least that could've been done is to point out what was wrong instead of deleting the post outright. barring Sehwag all accusations during that affair were overturned. Sachin was given a suspended ban anyways. Even Mike Denness thought that he wanted to clean the ball but should have notified the umpires about it. Hence Denness handed him a suspended ban. The ICC overturned that ban.
G_B_ Posted March 15, 2014 Posted March 15, 2014 And that honorable network and website created a special award to specially give it Sachin. When was the last time such an award was given? When Lara, Ponting, etc. retired? When will the next one be given? May be for players who retire in 2014, 2015, .... :cantstop: I would have had no problem if they had just given it to Sachin, who is amongst the deserving candidate. Espn just needed to say that cricinfo staff believes that Sachin is one, why create this farce :dontknow: I do believe it was to celebrate cricinfo's 20 year anniversary. I am guessing 10 year anniversary they were not that well known. Neither was the internet that well spread around the world. We have to keep in mind that cricinfo was originally owned by the Wisden group who named Sachin the second best test and odi cricketer of all time in 2000 and have consistently backed Sachin over his peers. Even though cricinfo has passed ownership they do have similar preferences to Wisden.
Muloghonto Posted March 16, 2014 Posted March 16, 2014 Tendulkar might've been a specialist batsman who hurt his overall figures in the last tenth of his career ( he could've easily finished with 14900 runs @ 57 average instead of 15900 at 53+ average) but he is easily, the cricketer of this generation. Two of the most underrated aspects of human accomplishments is longetivity and prodigal nature. In most endavours, its very hard to climb to the top professionally. You need equal amounts of guts, determination and skill to get there. But its harder to stay on the top, because as the saying goes, when you are gunning for the top, you are just one of the many wolves trying to bring down the tiger but when you are at the top, you are the tiger that is being hunted by the pack of wolves. To stay at the top level in sports for over a 5-6 year span, is very tough. Ponting for example, had a crazy good 4-6 year span in the early 2000s but the 5-6 years on either side of that span, he was good but not top rate ( Ponting did something like average 44 for 5 years in the 90s to 2001, 70+ from 2002 to 2006 and then 40-something for 2006 to 2011). To stay at the top level category for a decade or so, is extremely rare. This is a category where, in cricket, only the likes of Tendulkar, Steve Waugh, Warne, McGrath, Donald, Wasim,Murali, Ambrose and maybe one or two others have done. Not even the likes of Kumble, Waqar, Walsh, Dravid, Gillchrist, etc. have a ten year patch where they are consistently one of the top 2% players in the period. That goes to show how hard it is to have a decade of elite performance. Tendulkar on the other hand, had been positively elite category ODI batsman from 95 to 2009. That is 15 years of being the mark. In Tests, Tendulkar entered elite zone in 1994 and from there to 2010, he had only two or three seasons where he wasnt top notch. That is 2-3 seasons spread over a 17 year period where he was the top echelon batsman. That is incredible. To be an elite player for a duration that is longer than most elite player's entire careers is mindboggling. That requires a clarity in technique, determiation and concentration that is practically unfathomable to 99.999999% of humanity. So to me, longetivity is a huge factor when it is so pronounced. Don't get me wrong, i don't care which player had the extra one year career or two years more at the top, those are hair-splitting differences. But when you get longetivity at Tendulkar's scale ( another would be Federer. He's a top 6 player longer than most tennis player's careers last!) then it becomes a huge difference maker. The other thing is prodigal production. One of the hardest things to do, for us, is to excel outside our age group, particularly when we are young. This is because, developmentally- mentally and physically, there is a huge difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old ( much, much more than a 33 year old and 34 year old). I skipped a grade in school ( never went to grade six. I went from grade 5 to grade 7 due to moving related issues) and while I've always been a stellar student, i went from being the top 2 in the class easily till grade 6 to being one of the top 15 in class in grade 7. When i went to college, i met a math whiz in my math class. This guy didn't actually get much greater grades than me in integral calculus ( i actually got 5 marks lower than him despite partying more) but while i was an 18 year old first year student in my second semester, he was a 15 year old in his second semester. That part, is mindboggling. He was acing first year calculus at an age where i was busy acing basic algebra and geometry in ICSE grade 10! Tendulkar is that kind of a prodigy. He is easily, by a bradmansque and lightyear's distance. the best batsman the game has ever know as a 15 to 25 year old. At sixteen, he was doing what Lara, his closest batting rival in the age, couldn't do till Lara was 22! At 22, he was doing much, much more than what any batsman has ever done at the age of 22! True, as with prodigal nature, prodigies always shine brighter in their younger years than later, because they are so far ahead of the curve at a yong age, where the curve relating to age exists. But it is something that cannot be overlooked or undervalued either. If i had a guy in my office or team, who was performing at a worldclass level, despite being 5 years younger than the next-best guy, it would be a huge factor to call them the best.
Muloghonto Posted March 16, 2014 Posted March 16, 2014 Who care what that greedy bugger had to say? He did not even buy round of drinks for his team mates after a fan gifted him $1000 for scoring triple century. You pakis always lack logic ? A greedy bugger who is the best of his time in a profession, has an opinion about his profession is worth far more than a pious nobody like you or me. That should be obvious logic 101.
Magneto Posted March 16, 2014 Posted March 16, 2014 Tendulkar might've been a specialist batsman who hurt his overall figures in the last tenth of his career ( he could've easily finished with 14900 runs @ 57 average instead of 15900 at 53+ average) but he is easily, the cricketer of this generation. Two of the most underrated aspects of human accomplishments is longetivity and prodigal nature. In most endavours, its very hard to climb to the top professionally. You need equal amounts of guts, determination and skill to get there. But its harder to stay on the top, because as the saying goes, when you are gunning for the top, you are just one of the many wolves trying to bring down the tiger but when you are at the top, you are the tiger that is being hunted by the pack of wolves. To stay at the top level in sports for over a 5-6 year span, is very tough. Ponting for example, had a crazy good 4-6 year span in the early 2000s but the 5-6 years on either side of that span, he was good but not top rate ( Ponting did something like average 44 for 5 years in the 90s to 2001, 70+ from 2002 to 2006 and then 40-something for 2006 to 2011). To stay at the top level category for a decade or so, is extremely rare. This is a category where, in cricket, only the likes of Tendulkar, Steve Waugh, Warne, McGrath, Donald, Wasim,Murali, Ambrose and maybe one or two others have done. Not even the likes of Kumble, Waqar, Walsh, Dravid, Gillchrist, etc. have a ten year patch where they are consistently one of the top 2% players in the period. That goes to show how hard it is to have a decade of elite performance. Tendulkar on the other hand, had been positively elite category ODI batsman from 95 to 2009. That is 15 years of being the mark. In Tests, Tendulkar entered elite zone in 1994 and from there to 2010, he had only two or three seasons where he wasnt top notch. That is 2-3 seasons spread over a 17 year period where he was the top echelon batsman. That is incredible. To be an elite player for a duration that is longer than most elite player's entire careers is mindboggling. That requires a clarity in technique, determiation and concentration that is practically unfathomable to 99.999999% of humanity. So to me, longetivity is a huge factor when it is so pronounced. Don't get me wrong, i don't care which player had the extra one year career or two years more at the top, those are hair-splitting differences. But when you get longetivity at Tendulkar's scale ( another would be Federer. He's a top 6 player longer than most tennis player's careers last!) then it becomes a huge difference maker. The other thing is prodigal production. One of the hardest things to do, for us, is to excel outside our age group, particularly when we are young. This is because, developmentally- mentally and physically, there is a huge difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old ( much, much more than a 33 year old and 34 year old). I skipped a grade in school ( never went to grade six. I went from grade 5 to grade 7 due to moving related issues) and while I've always been a stellar student, i went from being the top 2 in the class easily till grade 6 to being one of the top 15 in class in grade 7. When i went to college, i met a math whiz in my math class. This guy didn't actually get much greater grades than me in integral calculus ( i actually got 5 marks lower than him despite partying more) but while i was an 18 year old first year student in my second semester, he was a 15 year old in his second semester. That part, is mindboggling. He was acing first year calculus at an age where i was busy acing basic algebra and geometry in ICSE grade 10! Tendulkar is that kind of a prodigy. He is easily, by a bradmansque and lightyear's distance. the best batsman the game has ever know as a 15 to 25 year old. At sixteen, he was doing what Lara, his closest batting rival in the age, couldn't do till Lara was 22! At 22, he was doing much, much more than what any batsman has ever done at the age of 22! True, as with prodigal nature, prodigies always shine brighter in their younger years than later, because they are so far ahead of the curve at a yong age, where the curve relating to age exists. But it is something that cannot be overlooked or undervalued either. If i had a guy in my office or team, who was performing at a worldclass level, despite being 5 years younger than the next-best guy, it would be a huge factor to call them the best. Mulo got double promotion in school. :hatsoff:
Laaloo Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 Mulo got double promotion in school. :hatsoff: so he must have skipped typing class and is using ICF for typing practice now
velu Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 so he must have skipped typing class and is using ICF for typing practice now :hysterical:
Sachin=GOD Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 Tendulkar might've been a specialist batsman who hurt his overall figures in the last tenth of his career ( he could've easily finished with 14900 runs @ 57 average instead of 15900 at 53+ average) but he is easily, the cricketer of this generation. Two of the most underrated aspects of human accomplishments is longetivity and prodigal nature. In most endavours, its very hard to climb to the top professionally. You need equal amounts of guts, determination and skill to get there. But its harder to stay on the top, because as the saying goes, when you are gunning for the top, you are just one of the many wolves trying to bring down the tiger but when you are at the top, you are the tiger that is being hunted by the pack of wolves. To stay at the top level in sports for over a 5-6 year span, is very tough. Ponting for example, had a crazy good 4-6 year span in the early 2000s but the 5-6 years on either side of that span, he was good but not top rate ( Ponting did something like average 44 for 5 years in the 90s to 2001, 70+ from 2002 to 2006 and then 40-something for 2006 to 2011). To stay at the top level category for a decade or so, is extremely rare. This is a category where, in cricket, only the likes of Tendulkar, Steve Waugh, Warne, McGrath, Donald, Wasim,Murali, Ambrose and maybe one or two others have done. Not even the likes of Kumble, Waqar, Walsh, Dravid, Gillchrist, etc. have a ten year patch where they are consistently one of the top 2% players in the period. That goes to show how hard it is to have a decade of elite performance. Tendulkar on the other hand, had been positively elite category ODI batsman from 95 to 2009. That is 15 years of being the mark. In Tests, Tendulkar entered elite zone in 1994 and from there to 2010, he had only two or three seasons where he wasnt top notch. That is 2-3 seasons spread over a 17 year period where he was the top echelon batsman. That is incredible. To be an elite player for a duration that is longer than most elite player's entire careers is mindboggling. That requires a clarity in technique, determiation and concentration that is practically unfathomable to 99.999999% of humanity. So to me, longetivity is a huge factor when it is so pronounced. Don't get me wrong, i don't care which player had the extra one year career or two years more at the top, those are hair-splitting differences. But when you get longetivity at Tendulkar's scale ( another would be Federer. He's a top 6 player longer than most tennis player's careers last!) then it becomes a huge difference maker. The other thing is prodigal production. One of the hardest things to do, for us, is to excel outside our age group, particularly when we are young. This is because, developmentally- mentally and physically, there is a huge difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old ( much, much more than a 33 year old and 34 year old). I skipped a grade in school ( never went to grade six. I went from grade 5 to grade 7 due to moving related issues) and while I've always been a stellar student, i went from being the top 2 in the class easily till grade 6 to being one of the top 15 in class in grade 7. When i went to college, i met a math whiz in my math class. This guy didn't actually get much greater grades than me in integral calculus ( i actually got 5 marks lower than him despite partying more) but while i was an 18 year old first year student in my second semester, he was a 15 year old in his second semester. That part, is mindboggling. He was acing first year calculus at an age where i was busy acing basic algebra and geometry in ICSE grade 10! Tendulkar is that kind of a prodigy. He is easily, by a bradmansque and lightyear's distance. the best batsman the game has ever know as a 15 to 25 year old. At sixteen, he was doing what Lara, his closest batting rival in the age, couldn't do till Lara was 22! At 22, he was doing much, much more than what any batsman has ever done at the age of 22! True, as with prodigal nature, prodigies always shine brighter in their younger years than later, because they are so far ahead of the curve at a yong age, where the curve relating to age exists. But it is something that cannot be overlooked or undervalued either. If i had a guy in my office or team, who was performing at a worldclass level, despite being 5 years younger than the next-best guy, it would be a huge factor to call them the best. Meh...who cares about all that. ICFer said he was not a match winner so he wasn't :dontmentionit:
FischerTal Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 Tendulkar might've been a specialist batsman who hurt his overall figures in the last tenth of his career ( he could've easily finished with 14900 runs @ 57 average instead of 15900 at 53+ average) but he is easily, the cricketer of this generation. Two of the most underrated aspects of human accomplishments is longetivity and prodigal nature. In most endavours, its very hard to climb to the top professionally. You need equal amounts of guts, determination and skill to get there. But its harder to stay on the top, because as the saying goes, when you are gunning for the top, you are just one of the many wolves trying to bring down the tiger but when you are at the top, you are the tiger that is being hunted by the pack of wolves. To stay at the top level in sports for over a 5-6 year span, is very tough. Ponting for example, had a crazy good 4-6 year span in the early 2000s but the 5-6 years on either side of that span, he was good but not top rate ( Ponting did something like average 44 for 5 years in the 90s to 2001, 70+ from 2002 to 2006 and then 40-something for 2006 to 2011). To stay at the top level category for a decade or so, is extremely rare. This is a category where, in cricket, only the likes of Tendulkar, Steve Waugh, Warne, McGrath, Donald, Wasim,Murali, Ambrose and maybe one or two others have done. Not even the likes of Kumble, Waqar, Walsh, Dravid, Gillchrist, etc. have a ten year patch where they are consistently one of the top 2% players in the period. That goes to show how hard it is to have a decade of elite performance. Tendulkar on the other hand, had been positively elite category ODI batsman from 95 to 2009. That is 15 years of being the mark. In Tests, Tendulkar entered elite zone in 1994 and from there to 2010, he had only two or three seasons where he wasnt top notch. That is 2-3 seasons spread over a 17 year period where he was the top echelon batsman. That is incredible. To be an elite player for a duration that is longer than most elite player's entire careers is mindboggling. That requires a clarity in technique, determiation and concentration that is practically unfathomable to 99.999999% of humanity. So to me, longetivity is a huge factor when it is so pronounced. Don't get me wrong, i don't care which player had the extra one year career or two years more at the top, those are hair-splitting differences. But when you get longetivity at Tendulkar's scale ( another would be Federer. He's a top 6 player longer than most tennis player's careers last!) then it becomes a huge difference maker. The other thing is prodigal production. One of the hardest things to do, for us, is to excel outside our age group, particularly when we are young. This is because, developmentally- mentally and physically, there is a huge difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old ( much, much more than a 33 year old and 34 year old). I skipped a grade in school ( never went to grade six. I went from grade 5 to grade 7 due to moving related issues) and while I've always been a stellar student, i went from being the top 2 in the class easily till grade 6 to being one of the top 15 in class in grade 7. When i went to college, i met a math whiz in my math class. This guy didn't actually get much greater grades than me in integral calculus ( i actually got 5 marks lower than him despite partying more) but while i was an 18 year old first year student in my second semester, he was a 15 year old in his second semester. That part, is mindboggling. He was acing first year calculus at an age where i was busy acing basic algebra and geometry in ICSE grade 10! Tendulkar is that kind of a prodigy. He is easily, by a bradmansque and lightyear's distance. the best batsman the game has ever know as a 15 to 25 year old. At sixteen, he was doing what Lara, his closest batting rival in the age, couldn't do till Lara was 22! At 22, he was doing much, much more than what any batsman has ever done at the age of 22! True, as with prodigal nature, prodigies always shine brighter in their younger years than later, because they are so far ahead of the curve at a yong age, where the curve relating to age exists. But it is something that cannot be overlooked or undervalued either. If i had a guy in my office or team, who was performing at a worldclass level, despite being 5 years younger than the next-best guy, it would be a huge factor to call them the best. as amits would say, STOP THE KEYBOARD ABUSE :hitler:
Roshanrocks Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 nicely written article Muloghonto... :two_thumbs_up: enjoyed reading it...
Yoda-esque Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 Looks like a couple of posts have been deleted from here? :facepalm: What's wrong in saying that Tendulkar was banned for ball tampering? Isn't that the truth? And anyway I had also mentioned that he was later cleared of the charges by the ICC. Ok Mods,why was my post deleted ?
zen Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 The biggest problem with shane warne is off the field controversies. Thats why he was never made australia captain. From supplying info to bookies to serving a 1 year ban for taking a banned substance to texting an english nurse all sorts of lewd messages. Since Warne was included in the final 3, it can be assumed that the performance on field would have been the top criteria - 700+ test wkts, big match player and the ability to turn the game on his own
Yoda-esque Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 Ok Mods' date='why was my post deleted ?[/quote'] Still no response
JaFanatic Posted March 17, 2014 Posted March 17, 2014 Still no response Too bored defending our captain eh?
SLICKR392 Posted March 29, 2014 Posted March 29, 2014 https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152010773097555&set=vb.18429207554&type=2&theater
CSK Fan Posted March 29, 2014 Author Posted March 29, 2014 Doubt any player in the future (or past) will retire with so much honour and respect as Sachin. A well planned retirement at home, with crowds of emotional fans, Cries of "Sachin, Sachin", a retirement speech watched all over the world Cricketer of the generation award Bharat Ratna Honourable MP
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now