amiret Posted October 29, 2015 Posted October 29, 2015 NEW DELHI/MUMBAI: Stirring a hornet's nest, former India captain Kapil Dev has suggested that Sachin Tendulkar, despite his numerous records, may not have done full justice to his talent. Tendulkar "did not know how to make double hundreds, triple hundreds and 400 though he had the ability to scale such peaks" and was "stuck in the Mumbai school of cricket", he said."Don't get me wrong, but I think Sachin didn't do justice to his talent. I always thought he could have done much more than what he did," Kapil was quoted as saying by the Khaleej Times during an event in Dubai.Kapil said the Master Blaster could have modelled himself more on Vivian Richards and applied himself like Virender Sehwag. "He (Sachin) got stuck with Bombay cricket. He didn't apply himself to the ruthless international cricket. I think he should have spent more time with Vivian Richards than some of the Bombay guys who played just neat and straight cricket.""He (Sachin) had the ability. He was technically sound but I felt he was there to get his hundred and that's it. Unlike Richards, Sachin wasn't ruthless, he was more of a perfect, or rather correct cricketer. Had I spent more time with him I would have told him 'go enjoy yourself, play like Virender Sehwag'. You will be a much better cricketer." The 56-year-old made these remarks before a select crowd at an event at a Dubai hotel which also had legends like Shane Warne, Wasim Akram and Ian Botham "stuck in the Mumbai school of cricket""I felt he was there to get his hundred and that's it."
vvvslaxman Posted October 29, 2015 Posted October 29, 2015 Yup he could have done better. So could Kapil who was a better batsman than the stats suggest.
G_B_ Posted October 29, 2015 Posted October 29, 2015 Looks like this guy is India's Sanga's Dad kosingh 1
Ankit_sharma03 Posted October 29, 2015 Posted October 29, 2015 What more cud he have done,Everybody cant do every thing Rather saying that Admit he shud have himself done more for the country after retirment n help india develop fast bowlersLekin nahin, baith ke commentry dena aur comment krna asaan hai . Sachin few xtra runs wudnt have helped us more than Kapil dev developing fast bowlers.
diga Posted October 30, 2015 Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) the cussedness(khadoos mentality) instilled by the bombay school of cricket is partially responsible for our defensive play... we play more for survival and a draw before risking a win. Gavaskar/Tendulkars records as a captain is a testimony to that fact. Batting long hours/ batting for 100's are instilled in evey school boy cricketer, but not sure of the skill to play for a win.But they have the most titles in the domestic cricket Edited October 30, 2015 by diga
Deleted_User_1 Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) What did he say wrong? For all the talent he had, his average was less 54. He failed many times in the 4th innings in test when it was crunch time. Sure "bhakts" will point out a few innings here and there, but the man has played 200 tests!!!!!! In contrast VVS has stepped up and has been a more impact player for team India that resulted in wins. With the god gifted talent he had, SRT should have been head and shoulders above the rest. Feck, even Whinga has better average than him. Gavaskar was the same damn way.......must be the Mumbai influence!!!!!I would have taken a SRT that played only 10 - 15 years, less tests, averaged over 60, scored less hundreds, but more meaningful ones, dominated bowling like Bradman did, and did not waste his time with captaincy.For ODIs, I think he did his talent much more justice than tests. He was a much more impact player. For tests, sadly his performance was not commensurate with his talent. Edited October 31, 2015 by dandaroy BlueBee and adi B 2
express bowling Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Is there anyone in this forum who thinks that Sachin did not have the ability or talent to average atleast 57 + in test matches if not more OR score atleast one triple century ?I think even Sachin Tendulkar himself would agree on this issue.
jusarrived Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I have said the same thing million times before , but was branded as a hater . Tendulkar should have won more matches for India than he did ,its not just about averaging higher than he did which would have happened anyway had he been a little more aggressive .
Cricketics Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I agree, Tendulkar could have easily taken more fivers with the ball. He was a better bowler than what his average suggests.
express bowling Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I agree, Tendulkar could have easily taken more fivers with the ball. He was a better bowler than what his average suggests. Tendulkar was the most talented leg spinner I have seen from India. I have never seen anyone turn the ball so much. His tennis elbow and responsibilities as a top order batsman stopped this aspect of him from flourishing.
CG Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 I have said the same thing million times before , but was branded as a hater . Tendulkar should have won more matches for India than he did ,its not just about averaging higher than he did which would have happened anyway had he been a little more aggressive . In the end Cricket is a team sport individual brilliance can win u odd match which becomes part of lore like lara or you choose to bat with degree of responsibility,caution like sachin did in his latter years.In His best batting years he did not have the support against some of the best attacks world cricket has seen in 90s.
CG Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 For all the talk of sachin not winning matches there is hardly any test match india has won when he failed with either bat or bowl.Even if he failed with bat he made up with it by his bowling be it kolkatta 2001 or adelaide.
goose Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) He was too busy being the world best ever one-day batsman. Edited October 31, 2015 by goose
kosingh Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Is there anyone in this forum who thinks that Sachin did not have the ability or talent to average atleast 57 + in test matches if not more OR score atleast one triple century ?I think even Sachin Tendulkar himself would agree on this issue. He certainly got more tests than anyone to prove that he could score a 300
express bowling Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) He certainly got more tests than anyone to prove that he could score a 300I know... and the fact that he could not, despite having the talent, would disappoint Sachin himself more than anyone else. Edited October 31, 2015 by express bowling
HippoSucks Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Big hundreds are a valid criticism but if we look at it from a team's perspective, how much more valuable is a triple hundred than a 150 for the team? A 150 in the first innings usually sets up the game for a win, while a triple hundred (or 400 in Lara's case) almost makes a draw a certainty. Even Ponting's highest score was 257.As for average that isn't a valid criticism. He averaged significantly higher than 53 for most of his career, and fell down near the end (similar to Ponting, Kapil etc). If not for injuries and prolonging his career he would have a much higher average. Edited October 31, 2015 by HippoSucks
jusarrived Posted November 1, 2015 Posted November 1, 2015 In the end Cricket is a team sport individual brilliance can win u odd match which becomes part of lore like lara or you choose to bat with degree of responsibility,caution like sachin did in his latter years.In His best batting years he did not have the support against some of the best attacks world cricket has seen in 90s.Agreed , my only complain is that not enough impact innings in such a long career , there is n excuse for some one whos so gifted . Lesser players like VVS and Dravid played all the big knocks with the same team and circumstances , so there was no reason Tendulkar should not have done more .
express bowling Posted November 1, 2015 Posted November 1, 2015 Big hundreds are a valid criticism but if we look at it from a team's perspective, how much more valuable is a triple hundred than a 150 for the team? A 150 in the first innings usually sets up the game for a win, while a triple hundred (or 400 in Lara's case) almost makes a draw a certainty. Even Ponting's highest score was 257.As for average that isn't a valid criticism. He averaged significantly higher than 53 for most of his career, and fell down near the end (similar to Ponting, Kapil etc). If not for injuries and prolonging his career he would have a much higher average.Why should these points be perceived as criticisms ? Sachin's talent was way higher than any batsman I have ever seen and these are a couple of issues which would disappoint Sachin himself.I personally don't care for records and like a fighting 90+ more than an easy century.
New guy Posted November 1, 2015 Posted November 1, 2015 Agreed , my only complain is that not enough impact innings in such a long career , there is n excuse for some one whos so gifted . Lesser players like VVS and Dravid played all the big knocks with the same team and circumstances , so there was no reason Tendulkar should not have done more . More like whom? Sachin has same no of 4th innings 100s in wins as Dravid if I am not wrong. Are you sure that's your ONLY complain about Sachin?
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