Who is the Most Overrated Cricketer?

[Guldozer]

Wasim Akram is definitely over-rated.. He picked bunch of tailender wickets with doctored balls. His best wicket haul is like 7 for 100 plus something. :fishing:

So we ignore the fact that he has 6 6-wicket hauls because he has 1 7-wicket haul...please...think. All went for lower than 91.

[velu]

So we ignore the fact that he has 6 6-wicket hauls because he has 1 7-wicket haul...please...think. All went for lower than 91.

bro .. i pity you because some of our guys troll you badly :icflove: do you know the meaning of this smiley :fishing: that vvs used ??

[HippoSucks]

So we ignore the fact that he has 6 6-wicket hauls because he has 1 7-wicket haul...please...think. All went for lower than 91.

You didn't respond to the ball tampering and tailender wickets part.

[Guldozer]

You didn't respond to the ball tampering and tailender wickets part.

Well I don't know of that. If there is something that tarnished his career it is something more serious than that...you should know what I'm talking about.

[Guldozer]

bro .. i pity you because some of our guys troll you badly :icflove: do you know the meaning of this smiley :fishing: that vvs used ??

Well I don't expect much from people here in terms of intelligence so you can understand why I often overreact.

[velu]

Well I don't expect much from people here in terms of intelligence so you can understand why I often overreact.

if you are intelligent then probably you wont be referring yourself as a paki outside pakistan :finger:

[CSK Fan]

we argued abt judging the player based on other comments before in multiple forums ... do we need to restart it ?

Yes and after getting pwned you never replied

Wisen top 100 innings is selected by the esteemed and knowledgeable cricketers and critics.. how many of sachins innings is listed in it ??? i think answer is absolute zero..

The saem Wisden which lists Sachin second greatest after Bradman? Try again. Or maybe you think if a player plays one innings, scores great and retires, he is better than Bradman?

sachin is one of the greatest player we had even .. but he is still overrated.. he got his legacy because of his longevity and his ODI exploits in 90s..

The very fact that you have no clue that Sachin was untouchable in TESTS in the 90s and not ODIs shows me how much you even know. He averaged close to 60. Only 2 other batsmen even crossed 50, second was Lara with 51 And as has been said again and again and you ignore, he was considered a legend in the 90s, way before any longevity and before he broke a single record. So another lie from you

but he was never ever a player like don or viv ' date=' who were head and shoudlers above others ..[/quote'] Another lie, for most of his career, he averages over 60, easily over his peers. See, this is what I call wilful ignorance by shutting your eyes We are not tallkig about some TV show were some player is playing to the gallery. We are talking about all time XIs where people give concrete reason why they include someone. Bradman did not just say Sachin plays like me, he included Sachin in his all time list above his own countrymen like Ponting (your example of Miandad is a countrymen preferring his own) We are talking about panel after panel of judges always placing him in top 3. We are talking about him being an ATG chosen by most judges in most panel

[Muloghonto]

i think you are supporting my point :giggle: 60 vs 58 .. but whose average was near 99 ?? IMO bradman is also overrated .. wont be averaging 99 in this era .. again if sachin played in bradmans era , he wont be anywhere closer to that 99 average

I don't see why Sachin wouldn't be approaching that figure, given that Sachin has played on harder pitches and against way, way better bowlers.

[Muloghonto]

Trust me you don't want to bat on the decks that Bradman played on. They were horrible. Not as bad as the 1910's to 20's but they were tough. And if I could be bothered I would argue against the whole Bradman Sachin thing but eh.

The decks on 1910s were atrocious but the 20s-40s were one of the easiest times to bat. Uncovered slow pitches make batting against spinners and slow-medium cutters hard but Sachin had mastered that art. IMO Don would've found it way harder to bat on the 1990s WACA or 1980s Barbados/Sabina Park pitches than Sachin in 1930s Lords.

[Stuge]

Rohit Sharma in current times .

[Scarves]

The decks on 1910s were atrocious but the 20s-40s were one of the easiest times to bat. Uncovered slow pitches make batting against spinners and slow-medium cutters hard but Sachin had mastered that art. IMO Don would've found it way harder to bat on the 1990s WACA or 1980s Barbados/Sabina Park pitches than Sachin in 1930s Lords.

Source?

[Muloghonto]

Source?

Source for what ? There were no real fast bowlers in the world from about 1920 to 1940s. Yes, there were Learie Constantine or Harold Larwood but seriously fast bowlers who bowled rib ticklers and bouncers ? No.

[Marut]

If Bradman scored those runs on uncovered pitches without helmets, I think he would have coped in the same way if not better. I've seen what uncovered pitches are like and how they deteriorate. If Bradman was from India, questions about his ability and average would never suffice.

The significance of uncovered pitches is overrated as well. Uncovered wickets of the 30s and 40s were flattish wickets, but they became hard to play when it rained. Bradman wasn't good at playing on sticky wickets, if conditions had required him to play a lot on these wickets, Bradman's average would be much less.

[kosingh]

Kevin Pietersen Eoin Morgan Waqar Younis (His highlight tapes are amazing. But watching entire spells of his is more revealing) Rohit Sharma Ishant Sharma (Still living off his spell to Ponting and his lucky spell at Lords) Any Sharma Stuart Broad MIchael Clarke Harbhajan Singh(still living off his 2001/02 series against Australia)

[velu]

Yes and after getting pwned you never replied

seriously lols .. you have the habit of posting something and run away if you know you cant counter it.. many times i noticed it in mutiple forums and you do follow the same strategy .. when you cnat reply you keep underground for sometime ( but will be busy posting in other threads ) , when things settle down you might come back or completely ignore ..

The saem Wisden which lists Sachin second greatest after Bradman? Try again. Or maybe you think if a player plays one innings, scores great and retires, he is better than Bradman?

i am ok with #2 for sachin .. but the rating clearly proves my point.. sachin played 0 innings which is included in wisden list but he is #2 in the list .. if anyone has a brain , atleast a tiny brain , they can conclude that sachin was there for his consistency and longevity ..

The very fact that you have no clue that Sachin was untouchable in TESTS in the 90s and not ODIs shows me how much you even know. He averaged close to 60. Only 2 other batsmen even crossed 50, second was Lara with 51 And as has been said again and again and you ignore, he was considered a legend in the 90s, way before any longevity and before he broke a single record. So another lie from you

average and centuries .. typical stats obsessed attitude :hmmm: show me a test series in which sachin completely dominated .. like how sehwag mauled lankans or lara mauled australia..

Another lie, for most of his career, he averages over 60, easily over his peers. See, this is what I call wilful ignorance by shutting your eyes

hello .. can you prove it the above point ? for most part sachin of his career he is always behind his peers .. aka lara , ponting etc if you take match winning and stellar innings, lara triumps him .. pointing completely overshadowed i late 2000s.. if we just go by average ( the metrics sachnstas follow ), sanga is the #2 behind only bradman

We are not tallkig about some TV show were some player is playing to the gallery. We are talking about all time XIs where people give concrete reason why they include someone. Bradman did not just say Sachin plays like me, he included Sachin in his all time list above his own countrymen like Ponting (your example of Miandad is a countrymen preferring his own) We are talking about panel after panel of judges always placing him in top 3. We are talking about him being an ATG chosen by most judges in most panel

he is rated for his consistency and longevity .. not necessarily for his series winning performance or utter domination ..

[Texan]

Sahebzaada Mohammad Shahid Khan Afridi urf Lalajee Closer to home, I would agree with some folks who said Sachin Tendulkar. He is a great cricketer but over-hyped.

[vipin]

Ishant Sharma. I know he is rated pretty poor, but even then he is overrated.

[Muloghonto]

seriously lols .. you have the habit of posting something and run away if you know you cant counter it.. many times i noticed it in mutiple forums and you do follow the same strategy .. when you cnat reply you keep underground for sometime ( but will be busy posting in other threads ) , when things settle down you might come back or completely ignore .. i am ok with #2 for sachin .. but the rating clearly proves my point.. sachin played 0 innings which is included in wisden list but he is #2 in the list .. if anyone has a brain , atleast a tiny brain , they can conclude that sachin was there for his consistency and longevity .. average and centuries .. typical stats obsessed attitude :hmmm: show me a test series in which sachin completely dominated .. like how sehwag mauled lankans or lara mauled australia.. hello .. can you prove it the above point ? for most part sachin of his career he is always behind his peers .. aka lara , ponting etc if you take match winning and stellar innings, lara triumps him .. pointing completely overshadowed i late 2000s.. if we just go by average ( the metrics sachnstas follow ), sanga is the #2 behind only bradman he is rated for his consistency and longevity .. not necessarily for his series winning performance or utter domination ..

It is clear that you have never played any organized sports/received coaching or seen through a manager/coaches eyes. In EVERY SPORT, the types of Sachin Tendulkar/Henrik Sedin/Jerry Rice are the model players because consistency is the #1 benchmark for a successful sportsman, not domination. Nobody wants the guy who scores 700 runs in one series and 120 runs six months later in the next series. It does not help your team to be the guy who can singlehandedly bail out the team one series and then compete with Anil Kumble for worse batting stats. But the guy who scores 300-400 runs every series for years and years ? Now THAT is a bankable player who is not a liability in any given series. Coaches/players/managers don't want the guy who is inconsistent. So you should apply metrics that ACTUALLY matter, not metrics that you came up with. The fact that Sachin averaged nearly 60 in a decade where only ONE other batsman (Steve Waugh) came close to averaging 60 is proof enough of dominating performance. The fact that Sachin had no series of 500+ runs (despite the fact that unlike Lara or Ponting, he didn't play 5 test series every calendar year) but hardly ever had a series were he didn't average 40, is proof of his consistency. And the reason Lara himself rated Tendulkar as the best batsman is because nobody combined dominance AND consistency as Sachin.

[CSK Fan]

Velu, I will reply to this so that you know, I have blocked you, you are simply not worth the time and effort. All your points you make in the post Muglo quoted has been torn to shreds multiple times particularly things like Lara being a match winner. Or Sachin not dominating series's (Remember aussies Series against Warne, of curse you don't). Border gavaskar sseries, 446 runs in 3 matches in not domination for you. It is simoly not worth debating the same points again and again to death. I would have still given you the courtesy if you were actually honest in your efforts, but you are not. You do not even know half of the points you are making, just heard them somewhere and the other half you are just making up. I have been advised multiple times not to engage you so I will follow that advise good luck If your simple brain cannot handle the fact that Ponting has winning innings because he had THE best bowling line up in his time, what else can one debate

[CSK Fan]

It is clear that you have never played any organized sports/received coaching or seen through a manager/coaches eyes. In EVERY SPORT, the types of Sachin Tendulkar/Henrik Sedin/Jerry Rice are the model players because consistency is the #1 benchmark for a successful sportsman, not domination. Nobody wants the guy who scores 700 runs in one series and 120 runs six months later in the next series. It does not help your team to be the guy who can singlehandedly bail out the team one series and then compete with Anil Kumble for worse batting stats. But the guy who scores 300-400 runs every series for years and years ? Now THAT is a bankable player who is not a liability in any given series. Coaches/players/managers don't want the guy who is inconsistent. So you should apply metrics that ACTUALLY matter, not metrics that you came up with. The fact that Sachin averaged nearly 60 in a decade where only ONE other batsman (Steve Waugh) came close to averaging 60 is proof enough of dominating performance. The fact that Sachin had no series of 500+ runs (despite the fact that unlike Lara or Ponting, he didn't play 5 test series every calendar year) but hardly ever had a series were he didn't average 40, is proof of his consistency. And the reason Lara himself rated Tendulkar as the best batsman is because nobody combined dominance AND consistency as Sachin.

And his absolute dishonest wt regards to the likes of Pontig shows his debating skills. Ponting on top for 5-6 years and he is amazing. Sachin on top for 17, that is just ok, means, Sachin was behind him Lara was never ahead of sachin by any big margin at any point of their career but he will still make up lies.