Brian Lara and Sachin Tendulkar's stats vs best bowlers

[Scrolln]

This is where I have an issue.

Look at the spin you're trying too put on it.

A legit Pakistan attack? An overweight, diabetic Wasim and a Waqar returning from a career threatening back injury as a shell of his former self. I think Mushy may have played to, even though he was finished as a world class bowler 2 seasons prior. But let's not allow the facts to get in the way. And yet SRT didn't succeed did he? When the pressure was applied he folded and saw his team succumb to defeat.

What spin?

Saqlain was at his peak, and Akram might not be at his best but he was swinging the ball miles. He got Pakistan's favorite Indian batsman out twice in the same over. Waqar was rubbish throughout the series but still found some form in that innings by knocking out both Indian openers in no time. Wasim and Saqlain both averaged in their lower twenties in the series, and doing that against Indian batsmen in India says a lot.

He could not finish it off as his cramping body gave up neither could the Indian lower order with 13 to win with 3 wickets in hand, otherwise he might have found a mention in your favorite book Wisden

 

[miandadrules]

Honestly speaking, the same could be said of Australian attack too. You conveniently forgot Saqlain's role. Plus in that match it was Wasim and Waqar who did the early damage in the second innings.

Once again putting a spin on it.

Please scrutinise the Australian attack in comparison to that Pakistan attack.

I didn't leave out Saqlain, as I was mentioning bowlers who were past their sell by date. Saqlain was the only peak bowler on display.

 

[#GreenRoars]

Came in an all important dead rubber after failing to score anything significant in all matches that mattered.

I think we can let this go.

Next please.

Then i think every victory and achievement at dead rubber by every player should be eliminated from their records

 

[#GreenRoars]

If you watch the video, it is clear that no way in the world, could Moin not know it. It was not a close bump catch, but a clear half foot rebound. Plus his urgency to make Saqlain bowl the next delivery soon was making it all clear.

Afridi dismissal on the other hand, was appealed by the WK and surely you don't expect a bowler to know from 22 yards if the faint edge happened or not. While analysing his wickets, Kumble later confirmed that in his opinion, Afridi did edge the ball, that makes it clear that at least he didn't knowingly appeal.

Seriously you can't compare these two dismissals.

About Ganguly claiming catch of Gilly, most likely he was just trying to inject some life in the lost match, and he laughed about it too after the appeal was rejected. Though I agree, he had no business appealing that.

) yes yes he was injecting life while Moin was doing cheating.

 

[miandadrules]

Didn't the same attack nearly win you a world cup 4 months down the line?

Great logic!

Let's forget about the constraints of different formats and English conditions in April to an Indian dust bowl.

 

[tempus123]

Here we go again.

Moin cheated, yet Ganguly was injecting life.

Do you have reading comprehension problem ? First you talked about Kumble. When your example was thrashed completely, because your allegation was baseless against Kumble, you quickly jumped guns at Ganguly.

You conveniently ignored my comment about "no business appealing that" part. What are you trying to prove here ?

 

[tempus123]

) yes yes he was injecting life while Moin was doing cheating.

Seriously you too have a reading comprehension problem. What happened ? All Pakistanis are reading the same lines ?

 

[miandadrules]

What spin?

Saqlain was at his peak, and Akram might not be at his best but he was swinging the ball miles. He got Pakistan's favorite Indian batsman out twice in the same over. Waqar was rubbish throughout the series but still found some form in that innings by knocking out both Indian openers in no time. Wasim and Saqlain both averaged in their lower twenties in the series, and doing that against Indian batsmen in India says a lot.

He could not finish it off as his cramping body gave up neither could the Indian lower order with 13 to win with 3 wickets in hand, otherwise he might have found a mention in your favorite book Wisden

Wasim was no where near his best regardless of how much you want to spin it.

Body cramping or not he failed. That's sport for you. History remembers those who succeeded not those who might have done if their back wasn't sore.

 

[tempus123]

Once again putting a spin on it.

Please scrutinise the Australian attack in comparison to that Pakistan attack.

I didn't leave out Saqlain, as I was mentioning bowlers who were past their sell by date. Saqlain was the only peak bowler on display.

Huh.. Wasim and Waqar did the early damage in the 2nd innings.

 

[IndianWillow]

In the Chennai match, batting conditions were not difficult. Even Afridi made 141. There were some big partnerships and flurry of wickets in that match. Both teams struggled because of pressure. After a see-saw battle for dominance, Sachin and India choked towards the end.

 

[miandadrules]

Do you have reading comprehension problem ? First you talked about Kumble. When your example was thrashed completely, because your allegation was baseless against Kumble, you quickly jumped guns at Ganguly.

You conveniently ignored my comment about "no business appealing that" part. What are you trying to prove here ?

I'm sorry but it was evident that Afridi hit his bat with his pad. It was a blanta t act of pressurising the umpire.

A reading comprehension? It must be.

I find it strange that you vilify Moin yet excuse Ganguly for the exact same offence. The only difference between the two being their nationality. I see cheating as cheating and I don't go to pitiful lengths to justify it because of nationalistic jingoism.

 

[tempus123]

In the Chennai match, batting conditions were not difficult. Even Afridi made 141. There were some big partnerships and flurry of wickets in that match. Both teams struggled because of pressure. After a see-saw battle for dominance, Sachin and India choked towards the end.

Even Afridi made 141, and others could not handle the pressure .. lol.. what a logic!!

 

[miandadrules]

Huh.. Wasim and Waqar did the early damage in the 2nd innings.

So, now because Wasim and Waqar took two wickets they were world beaters again?

 

[miandadrules]

Even Afridi made 141, and others could not handle the pressure .. lol.. what a logic!!

You're absolutely right. It is us that has the problem with comprehension.

 

[tempus123]

I'm sorry but it was evident that Afridi hit his bat with his pad. It was a blanta t act of pressurising the umpire.

A reading comprehension? It must be.

I find it strange that you vilify Moin yet excuse Ganguly for the exact same offence. The only difference between the two being their nationality. I see cheating as cheating and I don't go to pitiful lengths to justify it because of nationalistic jingoism.

First of all, I didn't defend Ganguly at all. I clearly said he had no business appealing that. The preceding statement was just to show that India was demoralized.. not to say that Ganguly was doing a correct thing.

Second, the point I was arguing was with respect to Kumble. Seriously you are being naive if you compare appealing for a rebound with a bowler appealing for a caught-behind.

 

[tempus123]

So, now because Wasim and Waqar took two wickets they were world beaters again?

Not world beaters, but if you cared to watch the match, it was Wasim who hurt India big time. Even he was the one who broke Mongia-Tendulkar partnership to bring Pak back in the match.

The way he got Dravid out, you just have to watch that entire over to see how good he was bowling, one of the technically sound batsmen like Dravid had no clue against the ball which was moving both ways without any change in wrist action. Scoreboard doesn't always show the correct picture.

 

[tempus123]

You're absolutely right. It is us that has the problem with comprehension.

Did you even read his comment "batting conditions were not difficult" ?

 

[Scrolln]

Wasim was no where near his best regardless of how much you want to spin it.

Body cramping or not he failed. That's sport for you. History remembers those who succeeded not those who might have done if their back wasn't sore.

I can go on and on about cricket being a team sport but i dont want to carry this on for another 10 pages.

Will history remember the bowler who has the most 10 wicket hauls in a losing cause in test history?

I am sure they'll remember him for making Pak's fav look clueless in 'that' Chennai innings. Here's how he was bowling -

 

[tempus123]

I can go on and on about cricket being a team sport but i dont want to carry this on for another 10 pages.

Will history remember the bowler who has the most 10 wicket hauls in a losing cause in test history?

I am sure they'll remember him for making Pak's fav look clueless in 'that' Chennai innings. Here's how he was bowling -

I was there in Chennai stadium watching this match and people sitting close to me were in awe of this over by Wasim. They were chanting his name when he was in his run-up. It was just too good watching it live. He got Dravid out twice.

 

[miandadrules]

First of all, I didn't defend Ganguly at all. I clearly said he had no business appealing that. The preceding statement was just to show that India was demoralized.. not to say that Ganguly was doing a correct thing.

Second, the point I was arguing was with respect to Kumble. Seriously you are being naive if you compare appealing for a rebound with a bowler appealing for a caught-behind.

Pressurising the umpire is cheating whether you like it or not.

I have at no point defended Moin. But I find it strange the surety with which you can condemn Moin yet brush off any Indian indiscretions.

The Ganguly reference was to Romali's statement that it was the greatest bump ball catch ever, conveniently forgetting Gangully's attempt.

 

[tempus123]

Pressurising the umpire is cheating whether you like it or not.

I have at no point defended Moin. But I find it strange the surety with which you can condemn Moin yet brush off any Indian indiscretions.

The Ganguly reference was to Romali's statement that it was the greatest bump ball catch ever, conveniently forgetting Gangully's attempt.

Bhai, I didn't argue over Ganguly.

I am only saying you don't have a solid point against Kumble at all. If we go and analyse each wrong caught behind in the history, no bowler would be left untouched. Seriously, what are we getting at here ?

A bump catch vs a bowler appealing for a faint edge from 22 yards away ?

 

[miandadrules]

Not world beaters, but if you cared to watch the match, it was Wasim who hurt India big time. Even he was the one who broke Mongia-Tendulkar partnership to bring Pak back in the match.

The way he got Dravid out, you just have to watch that entire over to see how good he was bowling, one of the technically sound batsmen like Dravid had no clue against the ball which was moving both ways without any change in wrist action. Scoreboard doesn't always show the correct picture.

But I did watch the match, in its entirety.

Wasim could have short spells of penetration but it was rarely sustained at that point of his career. Are you disputing that 2Ws were passed their sell by date? That Mushy was spent? That this "legit" Pakistani attack was only so on paper? That it was inferior to the Australian attack Lara faced?

 

[miandadrules]

Bhai, I didn't argue over Ganguly.

I am only saying you don't have a solid point against Kumble at all. If we go and analyse each wrong caught behind in the history, no bowler would be left untouched. Seriously, what are we getting at here ?

A bump catch vs a bowler appealing for a faint edge from 22 yards away ?

Did Kumble and the Indians pressurise the Umpire during that match?

Is that cheating when they clearly knew it wasn't out?

 

[miandadrules]

I can go on and on about cricket being a team sport but i dont want to carry this on for another 10 pages.

Will history remember the bowler who has the most 10 wicket hauls in a losing cause in test history?

I am sure they'll remember him for making Pak's fav look clueless in 'that' Chennai innings. Here's how he was bowling -

Once again trying to put spin on it. Wasim couldn't sustain such form otherwise we wouldn't probably be having this discussion because Tendulkar might not have reached 3 figures.

You can make excuses all you want but Tendulkar had over 300 chances to make his mark.

 

[tempus123]

Did Kumble and the Indians pressurise the Umpire during that match?

Is that cheating when they clearly knew it wasn't out?

Not sure about the entire match, but not in the case of Afridi. Umpire himself raised his finger before Kumble could turn and appeal. Do you understand "pressurizing" or "sustained appeal" ? If sustained appeal was cheating, I am sure even Hashim Amla is a cheater.

Secondly no one can put the blame on Kumble. At most you can blame Mongia for the appeal because he was near it, that too since the nick was there (bat hitting the pad or whatever), it could be an honest mistake.

 

[tempus123]

Once again trying to put spin on it. Wasim couldn't sustain such form otherwise we wouldn't probably be having this discussion because Tendulkar might not have reached 3 figures.

You can make excuses all you want but Tendulkar had over 300 chances to make his mark.

What a logic ? So Wasim only bowled good deliveries to others and not to Tendulkar, o/w Tendulkar would never have reached 3 figures. Laughable indeed.

 

[miandadrules]

Not sure about the entire match, but not in the case of Afridi. Umpire himself raised his finger before Kumble could turn and appeal. Do you understand "pressurizing" or "sustained appeal" ? If sustained appeal was cheating, I am sure even Hashim Amla is a cheater.

Secondly no one can put the blame on Kumble. At most you can blame Mongia for the appeal because he was near it, that too since the nick was there (bat hitting the pad or whatever), it could be an honest mistake.

Before Mongia who was best placed was jumping for joy?

Honest mistake? Please.

 

[miandadrules]

What a logic ? So Wasim only bowled good deliveries to others and not to Tendulkar, o/w Tendulkar would never have reached 3 figures. Laughable indeed.

Wasim couldn't sustain such spells at that stage in his career. Is this hard to understand?

Had Tendulkar made those runs against a Wasim that could sustain it then you obviously could laud it as an iconic knock. But obviously the chances of him getting out also increase. Is this a difficult concept to grasp?

 

[Scrolln]

What a logic ? So Wasim only bowled good deliveries to others and not to Tendulkar, o/w Tendulkar would never have reached 3 figures. Laughable indeed.

We should only consider runs scored against Wasim and Waqar during their 20 match peak, when they had a good sleep and aloo ka paratha for breakfast having passed proper motion in the morning, as serious runs.

All other runs should be discarded unless they have been scored by Lara, Richards or Ponting.

 

[tempus123]

But I did watch the match, in its entirety.

Wasim could have short spells of penetration but it was rarely sustained at that point of his career. Are you disputing that 2Ws were passed their sell by date? That Mushy was spent? That this "legit" Pakistani attack was only so on paper? That it was inferior to the Australian attack Lara faced?

I am not disputing Waqar/Wasim weren't at their prime. I am only saying that both did in fact did the most early damage and opened the gates. Wasim got Dravid out and he was bowling beautifully without getting rewards for it, Saqlain got benefited at the other end, because batsmen weren't able to put Wasim away.

It was only Tendulkar who played comfortably against him, he even had a life which Moin gave him coz Saqi was bowling his doosras which were unknown commodity.

The pressure was immense, and each run was hard to come by.

 

[Rickz]

Harby has more inconic tests than Wasim, Waqur, Imran. SO Harby is better than all 3?

1) Tendulkar has an overall better average even though Lara has scored more innings of 150+ scores, including that 375 and 400. Tendulkar's average dipped during his tennis-elbow period.

2) Tendulkar has a better average away from home then Lara including all the top countries

3) Lara has never scored a test hundred against Donald

4) Tendulkar has hundreds which resulted in test win's 14% more than Lara's 22%

5) Tendulkar has fared better against better bowlers than Lara (Donald, Ambrose)

6) in the bowlers era, Tendulkar averaged 59 in the 1990s, much higher than Lara's

7) Out all of his hundreds Lara has won the match 8 times, were as Tendulkar has 20

8) Lara has averaging over 50 16 times in series, excluding Zimbabwe, Bangaldesh. 32 times Tendulkar has averaging 50+ in series's excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Lara had the better of Murali, McGrath had the better of Lara, Tendulkar had the better of Warne, Donald has dismissed Lara 6 out of 7 times in a single series in the late 90s. Tendulkar faced Ambrose.

Sources say Waqur stated Tendulkar's 136 was the greatest against the Pakistani attack.

Tendulkar has taken Donald to the cleaners (which Lara has never). He has also faced a rampaging Steyn and has played the lone hand many times.

 

[tempus123]

Before Mongia who was best placed was jumping for joy?

Honest mistake? Please.

Yaar, every WK appeals for caught behinds like these. If you are arguing over it, let's close the discussion agreeing to disagree. Just let me know once you find a WK who didn't appeal on suspect, and only did so when he was fully sure.

 

[tempus123]

Wasim couldn't sustain such spells at that stage in his career. Is this hard to understand?

Had Tendulkar made those runs against a Wasim that could sustain it then you obviously could laud it as an iconic knock. But obviously the chances of him getting out also increase. Is this a difficult concept to grasp?

You'd be better advised to hear Wasim's own opinion about that innings.

 

[miandadrules]

I am not disputing Waqar/Wasim weren't at their prime. I am only saying that both did in fact did the most early damage and opened the gates. Wasim got Dravid out and he was bowling beautifully without getting rewards for it, Saqlain got benefited at the other end, because batsmen weren't able to put Wasim away.

It was only Tendulkar who played comfortably against him, he even had a life which Moin gave him coz Saqi was bowling his doosras which were unknown commodity.

The pressure was immense, and each run was hard to come by.

But this wasn't a 'legit' Pakistan attack who couldn't sustain their quality over long periods. This has to be seen in reference to the Aussie attack Lara faced.

No body is disputing it was a fine knock but it wasn't an iconic one against a great Pakistan attack. And despite all this Tendulkar succumbed to the pressure, and that is what separates the great knocks from the iconic ones.

 

[miandadrules]

You'd be better advised to hear Wasim's own opinion about that innings.

The one he gives to the Indian media that pays his wages?

If that is the case then we might as well hear Waqar rate Lara over Tendulkar too. Can't have it both ways.

 

[miandadrules]

Yaar, every WK appeals for caught behinds like these. If you are arguing over it, let's close the discussion agreeing to disagree. Just let me know once you find a WK who didn't appeal on suspect, and only did so when he was fully sure.

But Moin was more assured than Mongia?

 

[tempus123]

But this wasn't a 'legit' Pakistan attack who couldn't sustain their quality over long periods. This has to be seen in reference to the Aussie attack Lara faced.

No body is disputing it was a fine knock but it wasn't an iconic one against a great Pakistan attack. And despite all this Tendulkar succumbed to the pressure, and that is what separates the great knocks from the iconic ones.

Whether Wasim was able to sustain during that part of his career, I don't know. In that match, on that day, he was able to. He created a lot of problems for all the top order batsmen and no one was at ease against him.

I don't care whether he was diabetic or a 90 year old. He was bowling superb that day.

 

[Scrolln]

Harby has more inconic tests than Wasim, Waqur, Imran. SO Harby is better than all 3?

1) Tendulkar has an overall better average even though Lara has scored more innings of 150+ scores, including that 375 and 400. Tendulkar's average dipped during his tennis-elbow period.

2) Tendulkar has a better average away from home then Lara including all the top countries

3) Lara has never scored a test hundred against Donald

4) Tendulkar has hundreds which resulted in test win's 14% more than Lara's 22%

5) Tendulkar has fared better against better bowlers than Lara (Donald, Ambrose)

6) in the bowlers era, Tendulkar averaged 59 in the 1990s, much higher than Lara's

7) Out all of his hundreds Lara has won the match 8 times, were as Tendulkar has 20

8) Lara has averaging over 50 16 times in series, excluding Zimbabwe, Bangaldesh. 32 times Tendulkar has averaging 50+ in series's excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Lara had the better of Murali, McGrath had the better of Lara, Tendulkar had the better of Warne, Donald has dismissed Lara 6 out of 7 times in a single series in the late 90s. Tendulkar faced Ambrose.

Sources say Waqur stated Tendulkar's 136 was the greatest against the Pakistani attack.

Tendulkar has taken Donald to the cleaners (which Lara has never). He has also faced a rampaging Steyn and has played the lone hand many times.

this concept of 'match-winning' hundreds is another one i strongly disagree with. Lara played his last few years with the most inept batsmen ever to wear WI clothing. Not his fault most of his hundreds came in losing causes.

 

[tempus123]

But Moin was more assured than Mongia?

Yes.

PS: So now, the gun shifts to Mongia ?

 

[tempus123]

The one he gives to the Indian media that pays his wages?

If that is the case then we might as well hear Waqar rate Lara over Tendulkar too. Can't have it both ways.

No.. his opinion he gave when IPL wasn't even conceived. I heard it in 2000s.

 

[Rickz]

Ok Point taken. However, Lara's average in 4th innings compared to Tendulkar's is still lower.

 

[miandadrules]

Harby has more inconic tests than Wasim, Waqur, Imran. SO Harby is better than all 3?

1) Tendulkar has an overall better average even though Lara has scored more innings of 150+ scores, including that 375 and 400. Tendulkar's average dipped during his tennis-elbow period.

2) Tendulkar has a better average away from home then Lara including all the top countries

3) Lara has never scored a test hundred against Donald

4) Tendulkar has hundreds which resulted in test win's 14% more than Lara's 22%

5) Tendulkar has fared better against better bowlers than Lara (Donald, Ambrose)

6) in the bowlers era, Tendulkar averaged 59 in the 1990s, much higher than Lara's

7) Out all of his hundreds Lara has won the match 8 times, were as Tendulkar has 20

8) Lara has averaging over 50 16 times in series, excluding Zimbabwe, Bangaldesh. 32 times Tendulkar has averaging 50+ in series's excluding Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Lara had the better of Murali, McGrath had the better of Lara, Tendulkar had the better of Warne, Donald has dismissed Lara 6 out of 7 times in a single series in the late 90s. Tendulkar faced Ambrose.

Sources say Waqur stated Tendulkar's 136 was the greatest against the Pakistani attack.

Tendulkar has taken Donald to the cleaners (which Lara has never). He has also faced a rampaging Steyn and has played the lone hand many times.

Is The rest of Harby's career equivalent to the 2Ws?

So the argument that Tendulkar doesn't have iconic knocks because of being part of a poor team is void when it concerns Lara?

Please quote source with regards to Waqar. It is standard procedure on PP to substantiate any claims.

 

[Sidilicious]

The one he gives to the Indian media that pays his wages?

If that is the case then we might as well hear Waqar rate Lara over Tendulkar too. Can't have it both ways.

Well, then which of the two was actually chosen in their XIs chosen by Bradman and Benaud (to name a few). Were Bradman's and Benaud's wages also paid in India.

Bradman mentioning that he saw Sachin bat like him, and Benaud mentioning that Sachin is the greatest batsman after Bradman does it for me.

 

[miandadrules]

No.. his opinion he gave when IPL wasn't even conceived. I heard it in 2000s.

He never did any commentating?

 

[miandadrules]

Yes.

PS: So now, the gun shifts to Mongia ?

Here you go again.

Being sympathetic to your own, just like Ganguly lifting spirits.

You and I both know that I wasn't specifically targeting Kumble but his wickets. The fact that there was a distinct lack of probity on part of the Indian side.

Obviously, it suits your narrative that emphasis being on the person rather than the issue.

 

[tempus123]

He never did any commentating?

This opinion he probably gave even before his retirement in 2003, but I don't see how is that relevant.

He considered Martin Crowe as the most difficult batsman to bowl to, and he had no interest in NZ. If we start linking every opinion to commercial interest, we can go on and on.

 

[tempus123]

Here you go again.

Being sympathetic to your own, just like Ganguly lifting spirits.

You and I both know that I wasn't specifically targeting Kumble but his wickets. The fact that there was a distinct lack of probity on part of the Indian side.

Obviously, it suits your narrative that emphasis being on the person rather than the issue.

We are talking about person acts of cheating. You compared Kumble and Moin, which was completely off the mark.

 

[miandadrules]

Well, then which of the two was actually chosen in their XIs chosen by Bradman and Benaud (to name a few). Were Bradman's and Benaud's wages also paid in India.

Bradman mentioning that he saw Sachin bat like him, and Benaud mentioning that Sachin is the greatest batsman after Bradman does it for me.

Are they the definitive voices? Because if they are we should abandon this forum and any other cricket related media outlet as the truth has already been revealed.

Players who played against them are split, yet we shouldn't take in to consideration what they say?

 

[miandadrules]

We are talking about person acts of cheating. You compared Kumble and Moin, which was completely off the mark.

Kumble's wickets and the pressurising off the umpire.

But like I said it suits you to shift the emphasis.

 

[miandadrules]

This opinion he probably gave even before his retirement in 2003, but I don't see how is that relevant.

He considered Martin Crowe as the most difficult batsman to bowl to, and he had no interest in NZ. If we start linking every opinion to commercial interest, we can go on and on.

So your saying the personal interests won't dictate what he says to an Indian media outlet?

Watch Wasim's statements to Indian and non-Indian outlets and see the difference in the admiration he expresses.

 

[Rickz]

Lara has scored only a few hundreds against series pace. As stated Donald got Lara 6 times in one series and Lara never scored a hundred against him or Wasim and Waqur despite the former playing more times than Sachin.

Tendulkar has done it with Donald, Steyn, Lee, Ambrose.

Tendulkar averages better than Lara away from home, in top countries, has 50+ averages 32 times, 16 more than Lara in test series's, higher average in a bowler dominated era, higher average in 4th innings.

I'll look up for that source.

Obviously Wasim, Waqur is better than Harby, however I want to know do you use Iconic feats to suggest one individual is better than the other?

 

[miandadrules]

Lara has scored only a few hundreds against series pace. As stated Donald got Lara 6 times in one series and Lara never scored a hundred against him or Wasim and Waqur despite the former playing more times than Sachin.

Tendulkar has done it with Donald, Steyn, Lee, Ambrose.

Tendulkar averages better than Lara away from home, in top countries, has 50+ averages 32 times, 16 more than Lara in test series's, higher average in a bowler dominated era, higher average in 4th innings.

I'll look up for that source.

Obviously Wasim, Waqur is better than Harby, however I want to know do you use Iconic feats to suggest one individual is better than the other?

If two players are of similar stature, it is their performances against the odds that elevate them.

 

[tempus123]

So your saying the personal interests won't dictate what he says to an Indian media outlet?

Watch Wasim's statements to Indian and non-Indian outlets and see the difference in the admiration he expresses.

Saying something like India is a one-man-army, not sure how is it to please Indian outlets? Anyway, can't argue much on this line.

 

[Sidilicious]

Are they the definitive voices? Because if they are we should abandon this forum and any other cricket related media outlet as the truth has already been revealed.

Players who played against them are split, yet we shouldn't take in to consideration what they say?

I dont think you'll find that its split. Its definitely in Tendulkar's favour. The question is by how much

 

[miandadrules]

Saying something like India is a one-man-army, not sure how is it to please Indian outlets? Anyway, can't argue much on this line.

Because it exhausts the God of Indian media. We've all seen the backlash to those who weren't willing to hail him as the greatest ever.

 

[miandadrules]

I dont think you'll find that its split. Its definitely in Tendulkar's favour. The question is by how much

Also we need to distinguish between the better batsman and the greater player.

Tendulkar was the better technical batsman and harder to bowl to but that doesn't equate the greater player which is judged on the value of their performances.

 

[IndianWillow]

Even Afridi made 141, and others could not handle the pressure .. lol.. what a logic!!

Afridi like his usual self batted freely on that good batting surface and made runs. What is so difficult to understand?

 

[Rickz]

Tendulkar has also played knocks under pressure against Warne, McGrath, Donald, Wasim, Waqur, Steyn. Lara could not play a single knock under pressure against Donald, Wasim, Waqur. That means no hundreds against series pace in the 90s.

Also look at Australia's second innings, Walsh, Ambrose got into the act, which favoured West Indies chaisng down 305. Tendulkar did not have such bowlers at his disposal.

However, you continue to ignore no hundred against Donald, which Lara got out to him 6 times in a single series and no hundreds against Wasim and Waqur despite Lara playing them on numerous occasions. Lara had his chances against 3 top/fast bowlers, the best 3 fast bowlers in the 90s and still could not do it.

While Tendulkar averaged 59 in a bowling dominated era. Lara's record away from home and 4th innings is lower than Sachin's.

4th innings is pressure, away from home is a true test, facing fast bowling is a true test, especially when he had lots of chances to score a hundred against Donald and Wasim, Waqur. Also he did not have to play Ambrose.

 

[miandadrules]

Tendulkar has also played knocks under pressure against Warne, McGrath, Donald, Wasim, Waqur, Steyn. Lara could not play a single knock under pressure against Donald, Wasim, Waqur. That means no hundreds against series pace in the 90s.

Also look at Australia's second innings, Walsh, Ambrose got into the act, which favoured West Indies chaisng down 305. Tendulkar did not have such bowlers at his disposal.

However, you continue to ignore no hundred against Donald, which Lara got out to him 6 times in a single series and no hundreds against Wasim and Waqur despite Lara playing them on numerous occasions. Lara had his chances against 3 top/fast bowlers, the best 3 fast bowlers in the 90s and still could not do it.

While Tendulkar averaged 59 in a bowling dominated era. Lara's record away from home and 4th innings is lower than Sachin's.

4th innings is pressure, away from home is a true test, facing fast bowling is a true test, especially when he had lots of chances to score a hundred against Donald and Wasim, Waqur. Also he did not have to play Ambrose.

Do you cut and paste the same post over and over?

 

[Rickz]

@miandad rules, you stated against the odds,

Facing Donald, Wasim, Waqur are great bowlers, yet he did not score a single century against them although he had many times to acquire this feat. Tendulkar has more hundreds under pressure against better bowlers than Lara, why don't you comment on that?

Under hard circumstances, Tendulkar has a better average away from home (playing sway from home is harder) and in 4th innings. Tendulkar has placed great bowler under pressure, scoring a hundred when the odds were against him. Donald 169, Warne 155, McGrath Aussie series 99, Wasim, Waqur 99. Lara only got that 153, which was an amazing innings.

I've replied to your posts, check it yourself, you cannot comment on why Lara has no centuries against Donald, how he got out 6 times in a single series against him, how he had the chances to score a hundred against Wasim, Waqur, he could not do it.

 

[Sidilicious]

Also we need to distinguish between the better batsman and the greater player.

Tendulkar was the better technical batsman and harder to bowl to but that doesn't equate the greater player which is judged on the value of their performances.

What is the value of performance? The value of a 400 might be greater to one, and not to the other. How do you distinguish such subjective points.

Ideally you would use a two printed approach of Stats + Views of Pundits

 

[tempus123]

Afridi like his usual self batted freely on that good batting surface and made runs. What is so difficult to understand?

So only Tendulkar and Afridi could play on that good batting surface, and everyone else got out early due to pressure ? How about Dravid ?

 

[tempus123]

Because it exhausts the God of Indian media. We've all seen the backlash to those who weren't willing to hail him as the greatest ever.

Every opinion can be proved to be biased. Seriously can't argue on these lines.

 

[miandadrules]

What is the value of performance? The value of a 400 might be greater to one, and not to the other. How do you distinguish such subjective points.

Ideally you would use a two printed approach of Stats + Views of Pundits

My point is similar to the reasoning applied in the Wasim vs McGrath comparison.

Wasim was more talented and I think harder to face. However, that doesn't necessarily mean he was better and had stronger performances.

 

[miandadrules]

Every opinion can be proved to be biased. Seriously can't argue on these lines.

I'm not saying there is absolute bias. But to rule it out, especially because it agrees with your sentiments is naive.

 

[miandadrules]

@miandad rules, you stated against the odds,

Facing Donald, Wasim, Waqur are great bowlers, yet he did not score a single century against them although he had many times to acquire this feat. Tendulkar has more hundreds under pressure against better bowlers than Lara, why don't you comment on that?

Under hard circumstances, Tendulkar has a better average away from home (playing sway from home is harder) and in 4th innings. Tendulkar has placed great bowler under pressure, scoring a hundred when the odds were against him. Donald 169, Warne 155, McGrath Aussie series 99, Wasim, Waqur 99. Lara only got that 153, which was an amazing innings.

I've replied to your posts, check it yourself, you cannot comment on why Lara has no centuries against Donald, how he got out 6 times in a single series against him, how he had the chances to score a hundred against Wasim, Waqur, he could not do it.

Why doesn't Tendulkar have any truly iconic knocks?

The likes of which the majority agree on? Like him or not the majority agree on the value of Lara's knocks. The same cannot be said of Tendulkar.

It can be argued that Tendulkar has a higher average because he didn't face the 2Ws at their peak in conditions ideally suited for reverse swing.

What great under pressure knocks?

 

[Rickz]

Why doesn't Tendulkar have any truly iconic knocks?

The likes of which the majority agree on? Like him or not the majority agree on the value of Lara's knocks. The same cannot be said of Tendulkar.

It can be argued that Tendulkar has a higher average because he didn't face the 2Ws at their peak in conditions ideally suited for reverse swing.

What great under pressure knocks?

He has only one truly iconic knock and that is ranked at 105. However, this shouldn't be used as to guage how great a player is over the other.

To be a better player than the other, in my opinion, like you stated, you have to score hundreds in challenging situations, against harder teams and opponents, Lara did not achieve this against Donald, Wasim or Waqur even though he had many, many times to achieve this. Tendulkar did and faced another premier bowling in Ambrose. Tendulkar did better then Lara in under pressure 4th innings.

His 136 vs Pak under pressure, his 169 vs SA tearing Donald to peices, which Lara failed to do.

 

[miandadrules]

He has only one truly iconic knock and that is ranked at 105. However, this shouldn't be used as to guage how great a player is over the other.

To be a better player than the other, in my opinion, like you stated, you have to score hundreds in challenging situations, against harder teams and opponents, Lara did not achieve this against Donald, Wasim or Waqur even though he had many, many times to achieve this. Tendulkar did and faced another premier bowling in Ambrose. Tendulkar did better then Lara in under pressure 4th innings.

His 136 vs Pak under pressure, his 169 vs SA tearing Donald to peices, which Lara failed to do.

Amazing that you dismiss Lara's double century yet laud Tendulkar's 136 against an ageing off form Pakistan attack in which he ultimately failed.

Tendulkar didn't succeed against Wasim and Waqar we have already established this.

 

[Rickz]

To be the premier batsman, hundreds against the premier bowlers is a prerequisite, especially when Lara had the chances. Saqlain was deadly and he was still facing Wasim, Waqur who went onto play for another 4 years.

I know Tendulkar never faced Wasim, Waqur at their peak, Lara did and ultimately he could not score a hundred against them. You are not the best batsman if you had the chances against Wasim, Waqur and could not score a hundred.

I'm just stating, why didn't Lara score a hundred when he had many chances? Surely if Lara is the premier batsman, he would've scored a hundred and people would say, well Lara scored a hundred against Wasim, Waqur at their peak and Tendulkar didn't. Therefore, Lara is the premier batsman.

 

[Indiafan]

This forum is obsessed with Sachin. Even on Indian forums, no one talks about Sachin since he retired

 

[Indiafan]

Amazing that you dismiss Lara's double century yet laud Tendulkar's 136 against an ageing off form Pakistan attack in which he ultimately failed.

Tendulkar didn't succeed against Wasim and Waqar we have already established this.

What on earth do you mean Sachin did not succeed against Waqar and Wasim when he didn't even play them in his prime?

 

[Indiafan]

Why doesn't Tendulkar have any truly iconic knocks?

The likes of which the majority agree on? Like him or not the majority agree on the value of Lara's knocks. The same cannot be said of Tendulkar.

It can be argued that Tendulkar has a higher average because he didn't face the 2Ws at their peak in conditions ideally suited for reverse swing.

What great under pressure knocks?

So an unbeaten 100 in the 4th innings in the highest run chase in India is not iconic enough for you?

 

[miandadrules]

To be the premier batsman, hundreds against the premier bowlers is a prerequisite, especially when Lara had the chances. Saqlain was deadly and he was still facing Wasim, Waqur who went onto play for another 4 years.

I know Tendulkar never faced Wasim, Waqur at their peak, Lara did and ultimately he could not score a hundred against them. You are not the best batsman if you had the chances against Wasim, Waqur and could not score a hundred.

I'm just stating, why didn't Lara score a hundred when he had many chances? Surely if Lara is the premier batsman, he would've scored a hundred and people would say, well Lara scored a hundred against Wasim, Waqur at their peak and Tendulkar didn't. Therefore, Lara is the premier batsman.

How can you dismiss Lara's performance against the 2Ws when Tendulkar didn't even face them?

Why couldn't Tendulkar score a single iconic innings in 200 matches?

 

[miandadrules]

So an unbeaten 100 in the 4th innings in the highest run chase in India is not iconic enough for you?

Against an England attack ill suited to Indian conditions. Should we also hail the innings by Sehwag, Yuvraj and Gambir as iconic too?

Is this his most iconic innings?

 

[miandadrules]

What on earth do you mean Sachin did not succeed against Waqar and Wasim when he didn't even play them in his prime?

He keeps saying Lara failed against the 2 Ws in comparing him to Tendulkar. Yet Tendulkar never faced them in a decade when they were dominant.

How many Test innings did Tendulkar have against Wasim and Waqar from 1990-1998?

 

[Mamoon]

They both were great no need to compare them. I dont think there should be any comparison in between players they play in different conditions different bowlers. Sachin`s stats goes down a little because of his tennis elbow issue time otherwise I dont think there was any difference in class of both batsmen. Batsman class can be seen in crunch games where he is under pressure and took away the whole game single handed.

For eg Younis khan have More centuries then Miandad or Inzi it doesn't mean he is greater player then them. It is absolutely rubbish and insulting when people compare two players on their stats. That`s why I like [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]`s Comments he always rate a player on his performance not his stats

I think Tendulkar was better than Lara and a lot of the support for Lara on this side of the border has a lot to do with our reluctance to acknowledge the former's greatness, but comparing to legendary players based on statistics only is doing them great disservice.

If you consider statistics only, Kallis is a better Test batsman than Tendulkar and Lara and Amla is a better ODI opener than Gilchrist, but great players bring much more to the table than numbers only.

Just looking at numbers, Pollock seems comparable to Wasim as a bowler, yet the difference in class between the two is clear as daylight and although there have been bowlers with a better record than Wasim, there's a reason why most batsmen who have faced him consider him as the toughest adversary.

No disrespect to both Kallis and Younis, but as you said, it is difficult to appreciate someone like Younis without looking at his numbers because he does not capture the imagination with his batting the same way as Inzamam did.

As you grow up, you learn to appreciate and love certain players well before you have an understanding of how averages and strike rates work, because it is the flair and attitude of certain players that you admire most, and coupled with great statistics, these are the players who go down as legends that inspire generations.

If you have a player who lacks personality or a player who has no performances, you'd end up with a Kallis or an Afridi.

 

[Rickz]

He keeps saying Lara failed against the 2 Ws in comparing him to Tendulkar. Yet Tendulkar never faced them in a decade when they were dominant.

How many Test innings did Tendulkar have against Wasim and Waqar from 1990-1998?

Lara did not score a single hundred when he had the chance to do so. He faced them.

Tendulkar faced Donald and scored hundred in early and mid 90s against him. He faced him and scored hundreds.

In contrast to Lara he faced Wasim, waqur, Donald and did not score one hundred!

Dominant bowlers lara faced:

Wasim, waqur: no hundreds
Donald: no hundreds
Warne, McGrath: hundreds
Murali: hundreds

Tendulkar:

Donald: hundreds
Ambrose: hundred
Warne, McGrath: hundreds
Murali: hundreds
Wasim, waqur: hundred

Tendulkar 4, lara 2.

 

[miandadrules]

Lara did not score a single hundred when he had the chance to do so. He faced them.

Tendulkar faced Donald and scored hundred in early and mid 90s against him. He faced him and scored hundreds.

In contrast to Lara he faced Wasim, waqur, Donald and did not score one hundred!

Dominant bowlers lara faced:

Wasim, waqur: no hundreds
Donald: no hundreds
Warne, McGrath: hundreds
Murali: hundreds

Tendulkar:

Donald: hundreds
Ambrose: hundred
Warne, McGrath: hundreds
Murali: hundreds
Wasim, waqur: hundred

Tendulkar 4, lara 2.

Why are you including Wasim and Waqar for Tendulkar? Tendulkar scored that century two years AFTER Lara last played them.

At the very least be consistent.

Using your logic after 200 Test matches why couldn't he produce a single iconic innings?

 

[Rickz]

Azhar mahmood is ranked number 8, gooch number 3 in iconic innings, are they better than tendulkar, lara. No.

 

[Rickz]

The 4 to 2, I never included Wasim, waqur if that was the case then it is 5-2 to tendulkar.

Gooch is better than tendulkar going by your iconic knock and so mahmood.