Areas where Kohli is better than Tendulkar as a player.

[Vijy]

3 minutes ago, Gambit said:

Sangakkara averages 37 from 29 tests in India, England, South Africa and West Indies. I don't think any other ATG among his contemporaries will have a lower average than this when their performances away from home in 4 out of the other top 7 countries are analysed. 

is this srt vs kohli vs sanga vs X now?

 

Bruce Lee was the best, then Chuck Norris

[rkt.india]

On 12/11/2016 at 11:33 AM, Gambit said:

While obviously India under Tendulkar was a dud team, he has the highest batting average for any Indian captain barring Kohli (higher than Gavaskar and Dravid).

SRT got captaincy when he was at his peak. Dravid when he was in decline. David's peak was 2002-2006. He averaged 43 after 2006.

[Vijy]

1 minute ago, rkt.india said:

SRT got captaincy when he was at his peak. Dravid when he was in decline. David's peak was 2002-2006. He averaged 43 after 2006.

Did something happen wrt Vengsarkar? I felt he was never quite the same after Eng series

[narenpande1]

11 minutes ago, Gambit said:

Sangakkara averages 37 from 29 tests in India, England, South Africa and West Indies. I don't think any other ATG among his contemporaries will have a lower average than this when their performances away from home in 4 out of the other top 7 countries are analysed. 

 

West Indies is/was a below avg  bowling team all through Sangakkara's career and playing Indian spin bowling is no challenge/benchmark to Lankans

who are brought up on spinners as much as us. So don't think this idea of just squeezing in 4 teams for the sake of eking out some analysis is legitimate.

 

Sangakkara is third or fourth among equals of his era. 

 

A dishonest, fake character he is, one whose accent all of a sudden changes when he talks to the Western cricketing press.

 

But not too many holes on his batting CV.

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by narenpande1

[rkt.india]

13 hours ago, sandeep said:

^  Apart from his longevity, Tendy's performances were simply colossal in his 1995-2002 prime.  What Kohli has done in the last year or so, is what Tendy did for almost a decade.  And without having any blips like Kohli did in England - Everywhere he went for the first time, he ended up doing well, I think scoring hundreds if I'm not mistaken.  

 

Worth looking up, here we go:

 

• First tour to NZ?  Scored 88 - missed being the youngest bat to score a test 100.  
• First tour to England - 100 at Manchester
• First Aussie tour?  100 at Sydney and that famous 100 at perth.    
• First tour to SA?  100 at Johannesburg.
• First tour to SL? dropped a 100
• First tour to WI?  no hundreds but 3 scores > 90

 

@narenpande1

@putrevus

@MCcricket

@vvvslaxman

 

Name one player other than Tendy who can boast of such a record.  And all of this well before he was even 25 years old!  

 

Contrast this to VK - he started test cricket very poorly and was dropped - needed a few years to sort it out, and only now has become the truly topclass test bat he is.  This is not to knock Kohli.  But to point out that Tendy was just so good in tests right away.  In fact until his injury issues, he had NEVER had a slump in his career.  This is why, inspite of his one flaw - the absense of really massive scores - he still had an obscenely high average.  

 

To clarify, this is not to say he was perfect, and didn't have flaws etc etc.  But to overlook such an amazing record - and call a player of this calibre all kinds of names is just wrong.  

 

 

SRT never scored 500 runs in a series then how did he do for so many years what Kohl had done. Khohli has already scored 500 runs a series twice. This is the fact. Yet, I I would comparison to SRT the test batsman with Kohli is not even close. Kohli has a long way to go before being compared to SRT the test batsman. ODIs you can, but test, not really. Kohli has just entered into 50 plus average. SRT test averaged reached up 59 once. 

[rkt.india]

2 hours ago, Vijy said:

Yes, and it's true that many chased records. Merchant for example finished with second highest FC avg of all time, just after Bradman - only other to avg 70+

If Pujara had only played FC cricket, even  he could have averaged 70. He was close to that when debuted for India. Even SRT averages very high if you only count FC cricket.

[rkt.india]

59 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

There is nothing 'glorifying about the past' about it- it is just how it was. You simply fail to accept the fact that pitches were at their juiciest from mid 70s through to late 90s in these overseas countries : Geoff Boycott would be the first to say that the pitches in England in the 70s were much harder than the ones in the 60s to bat- same has been said by Colin Cowdrey too. It isn't a random 'glorify the past' comment, but era-specific comment.

In South Africa,  Port Elizabeth & Durban were faster & seamier in the 90s than today. In Australia, WACA was way,way faster, Brisbane was much more seamier and MCG was much juicer than before. The only Aussie pitches that have remained relatively the same are Sydney and Adelaide.

In WI, Sabina Park has slowed down massively, so has bridgetown & Antigua- which always had a huge bouncy pitch before the new stadium came around. In Trinidad, the pitches were a lot more uneven bounce than they are now.

Same goes for pitches in England and New Zealand and the reason is obvious : Cricket didnt have as much TV viewersihp in the 80s and teams focussed solely on pitches that gave them an advantage. Since the 90s, there has been a concerted effort to make matches last 5 days, thus ease out the pitches in favour of batsmen, for better TV revenues.

This is reflected by the FACT that since the 90s, batting averages all over the world have gone up and so have bowling averages.

 

Port Elizabeth was always a slow pitch. Yes, Durban was fast in 90s but Wanderers is fast now while Wanderers used to be a good batting pitch in 90s. Look at Capetown these days in test cricket. It has sen teams getting out to less than 50s in last few years. Did you see the pitches in England 2011 and 2014 against us. These days pitches are designed based on the opposition they are facing in several countries. England prepared dry pitches for Ashes when Australia toured there in 2013, but we had to face some of the greenest pitches you will sever see at Lords, greenest and bounciest pitches you will ever see at Old Trafford and Rose Bowl.

[Gambit]

45 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

West Indies is/was a below avg  bowling team all through Sangakkara's career and playing Indian spin bowling is no challenge/benchmark to Lankans

who are brought up on spinners as much as us. So don't think this idea of just squeezing in 4 teams for the sake of eking out some analysis is legitimate.

 

Sangakkara is third or fourth among equals of his era. 

 

A dishonest, fake character he is, one whose accent all of a sudden changes when he talks to the Western cricketing press.

 

But not too many holes on his batting CV.

 

The legitimacy of this exercise is that there are only 7 other teams in world cricket excluding BD and Zimbabwe and if among them, a supposed all time great averages only 37 against more than 50% of them away from home (a 20 point average drop as compared to career average), it doesn't make his case very strong and is a hole in his CV. 

[narenpande1]

5 minutes ago, Gambit said:

The legitimacy of this exercise is that there are only 7 other teams in world cricket excluding BD and Zimbabwe and if among them, a supposed all time great averages only 37 against more than 50% of them away from home (a 20 point average drop as compared to career average), it doesn't make his case very strong and is a hole in his CV. 

 

I would look at the bowling attack that he has failed against, rather than the team for the analysis to be qualitative.

 

Are you thinking that " failing " against the weak  West Indian attack and Indian spinners are big factors for a Lankan ?

 

 

 

 

[putrevus]

13 hours ago, Cricketics said:

I know why you feel whatever the way you are feeling about Tendulkar.

You are not wrong and neither completely right about Tendulkar.

 

Tendulkar was a cult figure, a once in a liftime player who had scored plenty of runs by 1998 after having been a prodigy. that "Desert Storm" knock couldn'thave come at a better time and the following knock in the final changed the whole world for Sachin. He was being preached all over the world by Indian fans after that.

Indian Cricket for many was all about Sachin that is where many fanatics and critics also started looking Tendulkar differently. 

 

Tendulkar created three different categories of people

Fans siince that Sharjah series have Symbolized Tendulkar and feel he is the best even when he wasn't at certtain things.

 

Critics who were also Indian Cricket fans and had high hopes from Sachin since that Sharjah tour started expecting too much from Tendulkar. They started being nit picky everytime Tendulkar did not score in a 4th innings or at some crucial stage, often forgetting that many times when he scored runs, it was also a crucial stage in the game. Critics would start comparing Sachin then with some of his contemporaries who could do certain things better than Tendulkar and often forget that his contemprories actually had many flaws in different areas where Tendulkar was a master.

 

The FenceSitters like me who were in awe of all the greats and kept calm and loved players like Dravid equally. I enjoyed them all. Couldn't care less if Tendulkar was failing or performing, we were enjoying what he was doing for the country like the Fans and would be out there discussing about his weaknesses like the Critics but would not make a big deal but just accept that he is not the one to be relied upon in every situation.

 

All in all, Tendulkar gave us all. At times we expected too much of him, and at times he under performed a bit. But the reason why many felt he under performed is why he is one of the greatest as everyone expected the great to Always Shine.

 

One thing I will say is that cricket today in India and many parts of the world won't have been the same had the prodigy which was Tendulkar, not played the game. 

 

My $0.02

I have never said Tendulkar was not good but to me he never was so far superior to his peers as he is made out to be especially in tests.We can never blame Tendulkar for not winning world cup earlier than 2011 because he played out of his skin in all the world cups.It is test matches especially overseas where he along with all batting great team mates let team down on many occasions.

 

 

[express bowling]

20 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

In general, Sachin played against vastly superior attacks on vastly harder pitches than Kohli. The attack of England was similar to what they have today - the only difference between Anderson & Broad vs Angus Fraser/Andy Caddick/Darren Gough is longetivity- they took almost exactly same # of wickets, at similar average & strike rate. South Africa attack in the 90s was superior too - Donald-DeVilliers-Pollock-Ntini were superior to Steyn-Morkel-Philander, pretty much because except for Steyn, Pollock, Ntini & Devilliers were superior to Morkel-Philander-Abbott. 

New Zealand had a similar attack as now in pace but better overall because Vettori was their best spinner ever. Tendulkar also played against an ATG attack in Pakistan, Sri Lanka too had a much, much better attack because of Vaas-Murali.

 

 

 

I have the highest regard for Tendulkar regarding his ability of playing good bowlers on tough pitches. Like...

•  The way he played the attack of McGrath, Lee and Warne in Australia in 1999 , was really commendable.
• His handling of Warne in India was just wow.
• The way he played Murali and Saqlain  in Asia.
• Lee, Johnson in Australia in 2008 ...hot pace.
• Steyn, Morkel in 2010.

 

But, many of the attacks you have pointed out either did not all play together against us, or were not at their full ability while doing so or were not superior to current day attacks.

 

• Tendulkar never played Ambrose at his peak and played Walsh at his peak only once, that too in India,  when the rest of the attack was very weak. In 1997, both Walsh and Abmrose were in their mid-30s.
• He never played Waqar at his peak. In 1989, Waqar was a rookie too like him.  In 1999, both Wasim and Waqar had lost pace.
• Donald, Pollock, Devilliers and Ntini never played together against us.  Generally, it was just two or even one of them playing against us like.......  Donald  or     Donald, Pollock, or     Donald, Devilliers, or      Pollock, Ntini.....and that was by no stretch of imagination superior to the combined attack of Steyn, Morkel and Philander in 2013 / 14 tour....mostly inferior.
• Can't remember when he scored against Caddick, Fraser and Gough playing together.
• Many of the attacks he faced were quite ordinary too.
• On the one hand you are saying that pitches have become  easier now but, on the other hand, you are saying that  bowlers having similar averages now and in the '90s are of similar quality.  It is a given that IF  pitches are easier then, generally,  bowlers will have higher averages.

 

You are also undermining current day attacks

• Steyn, Morkel and Philander bowling together in SA  in 2013-14  is easily the toughest SA attack I have seen.
• Johnson, Harris, Hazlewood, Lyon in Australia in 1914-15 was a tough attack.
• Boult, Southee, Wagner in NZ are very good.
• Anderson, Broad, Woakes in England are a handful
• Swann, Panesar in  India in 2012.
• Starc, Hazlewood, Pattinson, Lyon  is a very good attack

 

 IF the pitches are flatter now (  not that easy to conclude )   then many of these attacks are even better than earlier years as they have excellent stats.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by express bowling

[putrevus]

8 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

We are talking about the 90s here. Do you know how many batsmen scored 500 runs in a series in the 90s or how often ? IIRC, it was only done 4-5 times the whole bloody decade. Think on that for a moment- 6 specialist batsmen per team, no bangladesh, so 9 teams- 45 batting positions, playing 7-8 tests per annum on average, ten years and its been done around half a dozen times in the entire decade.

Plus to boot, those who did it- Lara(multiple times), Steve Waugh, etc. batted 10-12 times per series (yes they had six test series back then occasionally too) and Tendy, IIRC never batted more than 7 times a series in the ENTIRE 90s. That series against Walsh-Ambrose, he got to bat 6 times IIRC.

 

So no, 500 runs+ series isn't a fair criteria at all- its like saying any batsman who hasn't scored a triple ton is crap.

Tendy not only delivered when his team needed him most - he saved us from defeats many, many times or was the only guy worth his salt in losing causes overseas. 

 

This is the classic difference between a Lara or a Tendulkar type : lara would give you 2 series of 700+ runs with 10 series on averaging in the high 20s squished in between, Tendy would go give your team a solid performance every 2-3 tests without fail. 

If never/rarely failing for more than 2-3 tests in a row isn't dominating, consistent performance, i don't know what is.

 

I'd easily have a batsman who gives us 300 runs @ 50 average every series over a guy who goes for 700 runs @ 100+ in one and 100 runs @ 10.00 average in the next two.

In most sport, including cricket, the rarest breed is consistency of excellent performance, not the 'once in a lifetime performance' that looks good in isolation, but doesnt make up for far more 'no-shows'.

 

It is not about 500 runs it is about delivering when his team needed his talent and skill, Sachin might be the only batting great who has not scored century in each innings, what it means is Tendulkar rarely carried his form for whole series, he had good performances everywhere but not for whole series.

I rather have a batsman in my team who when in form will carry my team to wins and we can withstand his loss of form. Lara you are talking about having lean series in between high series has 34 100s and 48 50s compared to Tendulkar's 35 100s and 41 50s. after 131 tests.

So I will gladly take Lara over Tendulkar as I know when on song he will win matches and series for me, Lara never got to play with batting lineups which Tendulkar did and yet did very well.

Edited December 12, 2016 by putrevus

[mishra]

1 hour ago, express bowling said:

You are also undermining current day attacks

1. Steyn, Morkel and Philander bowling together in SA  in 2013-14  is easily the toughest SA attack I have seen.
2. Johnson, Harris, Hazlewood, Lyon in Australia in 1914-15 was a tough attack
3. Boult, Southee, Wagner in NZ are very good.
4. Anderson, Broad, Woakes in England are a handful
5. Swann, Panesar in  India in 2012.
6. Starc, Hazlewood, Pattinson, Lyon  is a very good attack

Donald Pollock was better. Infact all time best from South Africa. Dug a Score card for us. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/62290.html

Never rated Kiwi test attack.

Forget Mcgratch Wasim, Waqar(even second stint one) Walsh Ambrose, Vaas,Akhtar,Gough,Flintoff i will call Gillespie a better bowler then all the names I have striked out in your list. On song, these pacers would take wickets in any conditions. In current era, Starc and Steyn are only bowlers who has that ability. of which Steyn is allready past his prime

 

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by mishra

[express bowling]

16 minutes ago, mishra said:

Donald Pollock was better. Infact all time best from South Africa. Dug a Score card for us. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/62290.html

Never rated Kiwi test attack.

Forget Mcgratch Wasim, Waqar(even second stint one) Walsh Ambrose, Vaas,Akhtar,Gough,Flintoff i will call Gillespie a better bowler then all the names I have striked out in your list. On song, these pacers would take wickets in any conditions. In current era, Starc and Steyn are only bowlers who has that ability. of which Steyn is allready past his prime

 

 

That is just your opinion.  I have followed bowlers' careers closely for the last 33 years and only the WI quartet of the  '80s and the Aussie attack of the late '90s were clearly superior than any attack nowadays.

 

All these modern  bowlers have impressive stats in an era where batsmen have dominated.   A high percentage of batsmen nowadays have much better stroke-making ability and higher averages than the '90s and,  despite that, top bowlers have done really well.  Just look at how impressive most of them have been on the last 5 years.

 

 

 

 

Overall figures

Player	Span	Mat	Inns	Overs	Mdns	Runs	Wkts	BBI	BBM	Ave	Econ	SR	5	10
DW Steyn (SA)	2011-2016	37	67	1229.1	310	3537	168	6/8	11/60	21.05	2.87	43.8	10	1
VD Philander (SA)	2011-2016	35	65	1086.2	265	2960	128	6/44	10/102	23.12	2.72	50.9	8	2
MG Johnson (AUS)	2012-2015	26	51	888.1	193	2945	123	7/40	12/127	23.94	3.31	43.3	5	1
R Ashwin (INDIA)	2011-2016	40	74	1883.0	391	5480	225	7/59	13/140	24.35	2.91	50.2	22	7
RJ Harris (AUS)	2012-2015	19	38	711.2	196	1910	78	7/117	9/187	24.48	2.68	54.7	3	0
HMRKB Herath (SL)	2011-2016	43	81	2214.0	437	5977	241	9/127	14/184	24.80	2.69	55.1	22	7
RA Jadeja (INDIA)	2012-2016	24	45	1105.1	302	2518	101	6/138	8/76	24.93	2.27	65.6	5	0
PP Ojha (INDIA)	2012-2013	10	20	505.0	136	1273	51	5/40	10/89	24.96	2.52	59.4	5	1
JR Hazlewood (AUS)	2014-2016	23	43	807.2	200	2408	94	6/70	9/136	25.61	2.98	51.5	4	0
JM Anderson (ENG)	2012-2016	59	112	2215.5	584	5972	227	6/42	10/45	26.30	2.69	58.5	10	2
Saeed Ajmal (PAK)	2011-2014	19	36	1034.4	213	2618	99	7/55	11/118	26.44	2.53	62.7	6	3
SCJ Broad (ENG)	2012-2016	60	111	2087.1	483	6198	234	8/15	11/121	26.48	2.96	53.5	11	2
MA Starc (AUS)	2012-2016	29	54	982.3	195	3369	125	6/50	11/94	26.95	3.42	47.1	7	1
MDK Perera (SL)	2014-2016	14	27	619.1	105	1866	67	6/70	10/99	27.85	3.01	55.4	4	1
Yasir Shah (PAK)	2014-2016	20	39	1057.5	165	3236	116	7/76	10/141	27.89	3.05	54.7	8	2
TG Southee (NZ)	2012-2016	39	73	1488.3	341	4277	150	7/64	10/108	28.51	2.87	59.5	4	1
PM Siddle (AUS)	2011-2016	35	68	1211.1	336	3433	120	5/49	9/104	28.60	2.83	60.5	4	0
N Wagner (NZ)	2012-2016	27	51	966.5	201	3097	108	6/41	8/103	28.67	3.20	53.7	4	0
M Morkel (SA)	2011-2016	38	71	1195.1	290	3487	121	6/23	8/196	28.81	2.91	59.2	2	0
KAJ Roach (WI)	2012-2016	23	42	699.1	130	2286	79	5/41	10/146	28.93	3.26	53.1	4	1
S Shillingford (WI)	2012-2014	11	19	541.0	98	1624	56	6/49	10/93	29.00	3.00	57.9	6	2
JL Pattinson (AUS)	2011-2016	15	26	485.4	100	1635	56	5/27	6/108	29.19	3.36	52.0	2	0
TA Boult (NZ)	2012-2016	46	86	1678.4	371	4963	169	6/40	10/80	29.36	2.95	59.5	5	1
KTGD Prasad (SL)	2012-2015	17	31	507.5	82	1778	59	5/50	8/169	30.13	3.50	51.6	1	0
GP Swann (ENG)	2012-2013	24	43	1074.2	199	3232	102	6/82	10/132	31.68	3.00	63.1	6	2
Shakib Al Hasan (BDESH)	2011-2016	19	31	698.4	122	2236	70	6/59	10/124	31.94	3.20	59.8	7	1
Junaid Khan (PAK)	2012-2015	18	33	627.2	121	1870	58	5/58	8/151	32.24	2.98	64.8	4	0
Mohammed Shami (INDIA)	2013-2016	22	42	717.4	114	2478	76	5/47	9/118	32.60	3.45	56.6	2	0
ST Finn (ENG)	2012-2016	24	42	723.0	116	2454	75	6/79	8/117	32.72	3.39	57.8	2	0

 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=bowling_average;qualmin1=50;qualval1=wickets;spanmax1=12+Dec+2016;spanmin1=12+Dec+2011;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by express bowling

[narenpande1]

 

@Gambit  @sandeep @Muloghonto

Since all those whose swear by the " cult figure " have never gone beyond his so called " mystical genius " at his prime and done some qualitative analysis, here goes:

 

Below is a piece of revealing and indisputable state. 

 

The 6 best bowlers at the peak of the cult figure's powers: 1) Glenn Mcgrath, 2) Donald 3) Ambrose 4) Akram 5) Waqar 6) Pollock

 

Here is how he stacks up when faced against atleast 1 one of them in a test match.

 

2451 runs @ 37.13 in 69 innings with 6 tons. ( Tendulkar ) 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=default;player_involve=1775;player_involve=1884;player_involve=1935;player_involve=2011;player_involve=2101;player_involve=2228;template=results;type=batting

 

On doing a similar analysis for Lara ( excluding Ambrose, since they play for the same team )

 

3761 runs @ 42.73 in 90 innings with 8 tons. ( Lara ) 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52337.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=default;player_involve=1775;player_involve=1935;player_involve=2011;player_involve=2101;player_involve=2228;template=results;type=batting

 

What's the next argument in defense of the peerless cult figure ?

Edited December 12, 2016 by narenpande1

[putrevus]

7 hours ago, rkt.india said:

SRT never scored 500 runs in a series then how did he do for so many years what Kohl had done. Khohli has already scored 500 runs a series twice. This is the fact. Yet, I I would comparison to SRT the test batsman with Kohli is not even close. Kohli has a long way to go before being compared to SRT the test batsman. ODIs you can, but test, not really. Kohli has just entered into 50 plus average. SRT test averaged reached up 59 once. 

What was Sachin's average after 52 tests,  it was 49.77 with  11 hundreds , Kohli has better stats than Sachin after 52 tests.Except England where Sachin scored 100s Kohli has done very well everywhere in comparison to Sachin.That being said Sachin had better technique than Kohli.Let us give Kohli a chance to build something who says he cannot reach 59 average, he has average in odis which Sachin never reached in his career.

I said before the season started if Kohli does not reach above 50 average during this home stretch  he will never reach that average and Kohli increased his average from 43 to 50 in last ten matches that is awesome for any player.

[Gambit]

18 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

Since all those whose swear by the " cult figure " have never gone beyond his so called " mystical genius " at his prime and done some qualitative analysis, here goes:

 

Below is a piece of revealing and indisputable state. 

 

The 6 best bowlers at the peak of the cult figure's powers: 1) Glenn Mcgrath, 2) Donald 3) Ambrose 4) Akram 5) Waqar 6) Pollock

 

Here is how he stacks up when faced against atleast 1 one of them in a test match.

 

2451 runs @ 37.13 in 69 innings with 6 tons.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=default;player_involve=1775;player_involve=1884;player_involve=1935;player_involve=2011;player_involve=2101;player_involve=2228;template=results;type=batting

 

What's the next argument in defense of the peerless cult figure ?

You are as guilty of cherry picking as anyone else. You have conveniently left out 3 bowlers out of which 2 are amongst best of all time, (Warne and Murali) and one, the best of his generation and amongst top 10 fast bowlers of all time, Steyn. Adding these three to the mix results in the following numbers:

 

4823 runs @ 45.93 in 113 innings with 18 tons. What's more is that his average rises to 48 away from home. 

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=default;player_involve=1775;player_involve=1884;player_involve=1935;player_involve=2000;player_involve=2011;player_involve=2041;player_involve=2101;player_involve=2228;player_involve=47154;template=results;type=batting

[mishra]

25 minutes ago, express bowling said:

That is just your opinion.  I have followed bowlers' careers closely for the last 33 years and only the WI quartet of the  '80s and the Aussie attack of the late '90s were clearly superior than any attack nowadays.

 

All these modern  bowlers have impressive stats in an era where batsmen have dominated.   A high percentage of batsmen nowadays have much better stroke-making ability and higher averages than the '90s and,  despite that, top bowlers have done really well.  Just look at how impressive most of them have been on the last 5 years.

 

I have been only watching cricket on tele since Hirwani won us test match sensationally. I do not go on basis of articles, word wizardly, stats or anything. I seriously think stats are very small part not whole that reflects about a player. In my estimate, If Amir,Starc,Steyn are visiting any country, they will get wickets. In current series and just concluded series, I was only expecting Woakes to take wicket (but he became toothless probably down to inexperience and lack of support). Next time he will get. I was confident that every other pacer will just make up the numbers.

 

The reason Tendulkar isnt reflected highly as he is in odis is because odis can be won by individual brilliance. You can win Hero Cup by bowling one big over. but tests are team game where you wont have no motivation left if your team hasnt got ability to take 20 wickets.

 

 

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by mishra
PS: It was match againt Windies

[narenpande1]

11 minutes ago, Gambit said:

You are as guilty of cherry picking as the other posted you have accused it of. You have conveniently left out 3 bowlers out of which 2 are amongst best of all time, (Warne and Murali) and one, the best of his generation and amongst top 10 fast bowlers of all time, Steyn. Adding these three to the mix results in the following numbers:

 

4823 runs @ 45.93 in 113 innings with 18 tons.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;filter=advanced;orderby=default;player_involve=1775;player_involve=1884;player_involve=1935;player_involve=2000;player_involve=2011;player_involve=2041;player_involve=2101;player_involve=2228;player_involve=47154;template=results;type=batting

 

I did not include Steyn because his cult followers in this thread keep swearing that in the 90's era he was just something else...and the bowlers were among the best ever. Is it not ?

 

And if you have to include Steyn..might as well include Anderson, who is inching towards 500 test wickets...

 

Most of our top order Indian batsman have hammered Warne. Tendulkar is not different.

 

All this just goes to confirm that apart from Warne - there is not a SINGLE great bowler of his era that he has dominated.

 

A few good boundaries in a couple of overs here and there apart - he has not dominated a single great bowler in the above list at their peak.

 

Mcgrath 2 always had his number, be it 2 World Cup knockout games ( including final ) or crucial moments in test matches.

 

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by narenpande1

[Gambit]

7 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

I did not include Steyn because his cult followers in this thread keep swearing that in the 90's era he was just something else...and the bowlers were among the best ever. Is it not ?

 

And if you have to include Steyn..might as well include Anderson, who is inching towards 500 test wickets...

 

Most of our top order Indian batsman have hammered Warne. Tendulkar is not different.

 

All this just goes to confirm that apart from Warne - there is not a SINGLE great bowler of his era that he has dominated.

 

A few good boundaries in a couple of overs here and there apart - he has not dominated a single great bowler in the above list at their peak.

 

Mcgrath 2 always had his number, be it 2 World Cup knockout games ( including final ) or crucial moments in test matches.

 

 

You are willing to overlook holes in Sangakkara however glaring but want to selectively cherry pick stats for Tendulkar by not including 2 GOATs and Steyn. Furthermore, you included Waqar but not Walsh (who has similar numbers). That is a bit disingenuous. Despite all this, apparently Tendulkar is #1 for you. Doesn't quite add up.

 

BTW welcome back patriot. You have mellowed quite a bit.