Areas where Kohli is better than Tendulkar as a player.

[narenpande1]

11 minutes ago, maniac said:

The same Wisden rates Sachin as the 2nd greatest test batsman behind Bradman and 2nd greatest ODI batsman behind Richards....You can't pick and chose stats and sources to suit your argument.

 

I don't. Unlike the fanboy brigade. What you stated was a subjective selection done by an illustrious panel and has enormous credibility.

 

The Wisden best 100 innings is not subjective.

 

But, I would love to see Wisden come up with the list again ..as they do from time to time. 

 

The last time they came up with it 2000/2001 it was start of a new millennium. As I had said, Sachin was past his best then, barring a handful of knocks.

 

What is equally amusing is the disdain that the fanboy brigade have for ICC Player ratings in which Sachin was 1/2 only for a handful of years.

 

All this " dominated of attacks for 19, 20 years "  etc is BS in the mind of the fanboy brigade, does not hold true statistically/ factually.

 

He was dominant for 6-7 years at his peak after which he was an accumulator and all his records are a function of accumulation as a function of longevity. This is the reality. 

 

 

 

Edited December 13, 2016 by narenpande1

[narenpande1]

Another speciality of the fanboy brigade is if you don't force down his cult status down your throat and insist on calling a spade a spade you get called a " sachin hater "  and " baiter " by the brigade.

Edited December 13, 2016 by narenpande1

[sandeep]

3 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

Another speciality of the fanboy brigade is if you don't force down his cult status down your throat and insist on calling a spade a spade you get called a " sachin hater "  and " baiter " by the brigade.

[maniac]

9 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

I don't. Unlike the fanboy brigade. What you stated was a subjective selection done by an illustrious panel and has enormous credibility.

 

The Wisden best 100 innings is not subjective.

 

But, I would love to see Wisden come up with the list again ..as they do from time to time. 

 

The last time they came up with it 2000/2001 it was start of a new millennium. As I had said, Sachin was past his best then, barring a handful of knocks.

 

What is equally amusing is the disdain that the fanboy brigade have for ICC Player ratings in which Sachin was 1/2 only for a handful of years.

 

All this " dominated of attacks for 19, 20 years "  etc is BS in the mind of the fanboy brigade, does not hold true statistically/ factually.

 

He was dominant for 6-7 years at his peak after which he was an accumulator and all his records are a function of accumulation as a function of longevity. This is the reality. 

 

 

 

So what is the problem then?

 

 

[narenpande1]

3 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Facts pe maar khaya toh bakwaas pe utar aaya. Proof ke kiski jali 

[sandeep]

So the hater argument boils down to 'Sachin was great only in the 90s, but was less than great for the 2nd half of his career"  So if he retires in 2004, then he would be considered great?  Its somehow a knock on the guy, that even at 70% of himself he was able to have a more than respectable 8 years addition to his career.  That doesn't turn him into just an "accumulator".  That's actually an additional feather in his cap.  The likes of Lara, Ponting, etc barely managed to survive for a season or 2 once they passed their prime.  Then they were not good enough to make their national team, let alone be considered amongst the best in their profession.

[narenpande1]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;spanmax1=08+Dec+2013;spanmin1=01+Jan+2000;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

 

Outdone for more than 60 % of his career by his peers, is called " dominating attacks for donkeys years "

 

New  millennium ..through his retirement in 2013 Dec.

 

Happens only in the mind of the fan brigade.

Edited December 13, 2016 by narenpande1

[sandeep]

1 minute ago, narenpande1 said:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=1;spanmax1=08+Dec+2013;spanmin1=01+Jan+2000;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

 

Outdone for more than 60 % of his career by his peers, is called " dominating attacks for donkeys years " . 

 

Happens only in the mind of the fan brigade.

Cherry-picking exposed - Take Tendy's worst half of his career, compare it to younger guys who peaked in that time-frame.  Own goal Proof at its best.

[maniac]

How is this topic not exhausting  

[Muloghonto]

20 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

I don't. Unlike the fanboy brigade. What you stated was a subjective selection done by an illustrious panel and has enormous credibility.

 

The Wisden best 100 innings is not subjective.

 

But, I would love to see Wisden come up with the list again ..as they do from time to time. 

 

The last time they came up with it 2000/2001 it was start of a new millennium. As I had said, Sachin was past his best then, barring a handful of knocks.

 

What is equally amusing is the disdain that the fanboy brigade have for ICC Player ratings in which Sachin was 1/2 only for a handful of years.

 

All this " dominated of attacks for 19, 20 years "  etc is BS in the mind of the fanboy brigade, does not hold true statistically/ factually.

 

He was dominant for 6-7 years at his peak after which he was an accumulator and all his records are a function of accumulation as a function of longevity. This is the reality. 

 

 

 

Yes it is. 

Don't make absurd claims. Just throwing numbers around doesnt make an observation objective. Grounding in EMPIRIC facts is required, which the rating system, by its OWN BLOODY ADMISSION does not have.

 

From 1992 to 2010 he had 12000+ runs at 60 average, with a peerless consistency. That is as dominating as they come, for the duration in question.

You trying to arbitarily pick 6-7 years as his peak doesnt make it so.

 

[narenpande1]

7 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Cherry-picking exposed - Take Tendy's worst half of his career, compare it to younger guys who peaked in that time-frame.  Own goal Proof at its best.

 

13 years across 127 tests is called " Cherry picking " . LOL.

 

If I pick the numbers from 89 to 94 - I will be told he was still young.

 

Then it comes down to 95/96-2000 - which was his peak.

 

But everybody has had such 6-7 years of dominating peak. Infact players in that span of peak have been much more prolific, so whats your point ?  

 

 

Edited December 13, 2016 by narenpande1

[Muloghonto]

Just now, narenpande1 said:

 

13 years across 127 tests is called " Cherry picking " . LOL.

 

If I pick the numbers from 89 to 94 - I will be told he was still young.

 

Then it comes down to 95/96-2000 - which was his peak.

 

But everybody has had such 6-7 years of dominating peak. Whats your bloody point ?  

You saying that is his peak, doesnt make it so. 

Your arbitrary analysis is of useless value.

 

As i said, learn the basic difference between things like objective, empiric and subjective. You thinking pitch rating is empiric just about says how little your education in mathematics is.

 

[Laaloo]

5 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

 

13 years across 127 tests is called " Cherry picking " . LOL.

 

If I pick the numbers from 89 to 94 - I will be told he was still young.

 

Then it comes down to 95/96-2000 - which was his peak.

 

But everybody has had such 6-7 years of dominating peak. Infact players in that span of peak have been much more prolific, so whats your point ?  

 

 

Lol Somebody getting rattled. Why'd you change your post  from what's your bloody point? to what's your point? It's apparent you have some personal problems with Sachin. Your posts on his social work are evident. You ran off to US (boston right Patriot?) and want others to be good citizens. Sachin ne tujhe autograph dene ka mana kiya kya?

[sandeep]

Just now, narenpande1 said:

 

13 years across 127 tests is called " Cherry picking " . LOL.

 

If I pick the numbers from 89 to 94 - I will be told he was still young.

 

Then it comes down to 95/96-2000 - which was his peak.

 

But everybody has had such 6-7 years of dominating peak. Whats your bloody point ?  

Point is that most batting careers have a peak middle bracketed by a short development phase, and a brief decline.  In Tendy's case, he was young enough, and still good enough to have a decline phase that was 10 years instead of 2.  That doesn't make him an "accumulator".  The point is that the timeframe and numbers used in an attempt to attack him, are actually flattering to him if you are honest and objective enough to view them in appropriate context.   His decline phase doesn't nullify his freakish unique consistency and the high notes he hit in the 90s.  

 

But doesn't matter.  please stick to your "empirical" belief and "proofs".  You are special, OK? You are no fanboy.   You are soooooper objective and a very smaaart boy.  You are smarter and a better judge of talent than not only the rest of these intellectual midgets on ICF but also Bradman, Wisden all of them.  Stupid Bradman had the nerve to die before Tendy declined and didn't even bother living till Veeru played.  

[goose]

narenpande Wisden says you need to get laid.

[sandeep]

10 minutes ago, goose said:

narenpande Wisden says you need to get laid.

Goosy strikes!  Having fun with the cricket Goosy?  You need to make more special appearances in the Predictions threads.  You have quite a track record with those.

 

 

[narenpande1]

36 minutes ago, laaloo said:

Lol Somebody getting rattled. Why'd you change your post  from what's your bloody point? to what's your point? It's apparent you have some personal problems with Sachin. Your posts on his social work are evident. You ran off to US (boston right Patriot?) and want others to be good citizens. Sachin ne tujhe autograph dene ka mana kiya kya?

Huh ? What is ran off to the US ? I have been here for 12 years. 

 

Do you still work in a dollar store ? You seem to have a lot of time on hands. You can sell his pictures there for a dollar each.

 

I don't have any problem with him - like most sane unbiased cricket followers I don't buy his cult status.

Edited December 13, 2016 by narenpande1

[narenpande1]

16 minutes ago, goose said:

narenpande Wisden says you need to get laid.

 

Goosed for good ?

[Laaloo]

2 minutes ago, narenpande1 said:

Huh ? What is ran off to the US ? I have been here for 12 years. 

 

Do you still work in a dollar store ? You seem to have a lot of time on hands. You can sell his pictures there for a dollar each.

 

I don't have any problem with him - as most sane unbiased cricket followers I don't buy his cult status.

Yeah ran off to US. It doesnt matter when you ran off though. Geez you dont understand that part do you? The point is you've had these same conversations years ago. Then ran away and now came back with a different id and stirring the pot again. It's apparent you have some personal problems with Tenulkar or Tendulkar fans in general and you come to ICF to blow off some steam because you don't have the guts to say it to them face to face. I seem to have a lot of time on my hands? Seriously? I write one liners dude. You're the one going on cricinfo and filtering stats.

[Vilander]

I see this has now downgraded to proper tendulkar fans vs not fans fight.