Brian Lara and Sachin Tendulkar's stats vs best bowlers

[miandadrules]

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

Wow, your ignorance is quite shocking.

Do they have comparable records to Lara and Tendulkar?

 

[miandadrules]

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.

Do Gooch and Mahmood have comparable overall records to Lara and Tendulkar?

And your penalising Lara for not scoring against Ambrose? Great logic. Despite the fact he scored it towards the end of Ambrose's career.

 

[Rickz]

All I'm stating is tendulkar faced more dominant bowlers than Lara.

When Lara faced dominant bowlers(Donald, Wasim, waqur) he played, he tried, he failed to score a hundred.

In comparison to tendulkar, he played, he tried and succeeded what was in front of him.

You cannot argue against tendulkar not facing Wasim and waqur at their peak. However lara did and did not score a hundred.

As already stated, if Lara was the premier batsman he would have scored hundreds when he played Wasim, waqur, Donald.

 

[ChachaCricket]

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.

Tendulkar is more comparable to McGrath if we're talking careers.

Based on iconic performances and peer rating, Wasim and Lara have the edge.

Their careers are also comparable.

 

[StreetSmart]

Yeh Cheez mera bhai

" Still People arguing Lara didn't get a century in Australia and Subcontinent blah blah but not looking what they both have achieved in their career instead of memorizing some great moments from both them people are trying to prove who was much better " Bahut farigh time hai bhai logo kay pass

 

[tempus123]

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

You put imaginary incentives when Wasim called that a great innings, without any proof of bias.

 

[miandadrules]

You put imaginary incentives when Wasim called that a great innings, without any proof of bias.

Did I?

Or did I say that you can't eliminate the possibility of bias?

What would quantify proof of bias for you?

 

[miandadrules]

Yeh Cheez mera bhai

" Still People arguing Lara didn't get a century in Australia and Subcontinent blah blah but not looking what they both have achieved in their career instead of memorizing some great moments from both them people are trying to prove who was much better " Bahut farigh time hai bhai logo kay pass

I'm not even saying which one is better. I'm merely pointing out a flaw in their reasoning.

Apparently, it's beyond the pale to state Tendulkar is anything less than perfect.

 

[IndianWillow]

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

The few players who overcame the pressure of playing against Pakistan and vice versa posted decent scores. Others didn't. Sachin overcame that pressure but fell at the last hurdle. If he had won that match for India, it would have been considered an iconic knock.

 

[miandadrules]

The few players who overcame the pressure of playing against Pakistan and vice versa posted decent scores. Others didn't. Sachin overcame that pressure but fell at the last hurdle. If he had won that match for India, it would have been considered an iconic knock.[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

Like if a sprinter had run 0.01s faster he would have won the Gold. That is the nature of sport.

 

[miandadrules]

All I'm stating is tendulkar faced more dominant bowlers than Lara.

When Lara faced dominant bowlers(Donald, Wasim, waqur) he played, he tried, he failed to score a hundred.

In comparison to tendulkar, he played, he tried and succeeded what was in front of him.

You cannot argue against tendulkar not facing Wasim and waqur at their peak. However lara did and did not score a hundred.

As already stated, if Lara was the premier batsman he would have scored hundreds when he played Wasim, waqur, Donald.

If Tendulkar was the greatest batsman ever he would surely have at least one iconic innings especially after 200 Tests.

 

[tempus123]

Did I?

Or did I say that you can't eliminate the possibility of bias?

What would quantify proof of bias for you?

Seriously when the opinion came about, his Indian commitments weren't even conceived. Going by your logic, every opinion needs to be put under scrutiny because somewhere the incentive connection might be there.

You have to prove that he gave this opinion in 2000s knowing it would benefit his India commitments.

 

[tempus123]

The few players who overcame the pressure of playing against Pakistan and vice versa posted decent scores. Others didn't. Sachin overcame that pressure but fell at the last hurdle. If he had won that match for India, it would have been considered an iconic knock.

LOL at few players thing. Who were those "few" players who overcame the pressure ? The match ended in 4 days with no team being able to score 300, and it was a good batting pitch ?

 

[tempus123]

If Tendulkar was the greatest batsman ever he would surely have at least one iconic innings especially after 200 Tests.

What's the definition of "iconic" for you ? A lot of experts world over have rated a few of his innings (like Perth/Sydney 1992) as one of the best they saw. Does it count good enough to you ?

 

[tempus123]

The few players who overcame the pressure of playing against Pakistan and vice versa posted decent scores. Others didn't. Sachin overcame that pressure but fell at the last hurdle. If he had won that match for India, it would have been considered an iconic knock.[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

Like if a sprinter had run 0.01s faster he would have won the Gold. That is the nature of sport.

And we were talking about a team sport here.

 

[miandadrules]

And we were talking about a team sport here.

The destiny of the team was in his hands. You can deny it all you want but there is no other way around it.

If it's purely a team game then why are you even discussing individuals?

 

[Stallion__]

Missed chances are part of the game, agreed but I can argue Moin Khan taking the greatest bumped catch of all time (Ganguly) was the reason why Pakistan won the game causing the SRT 136 to go in a losing cause...

Ganguly did the same thing in the very next Dehli match. Claimed a bumped catch but that wasn't given. Repeated it again in 03 final against Gilchrist.

 

[miandadrules]

All I'm stating is tendulkar faced more dominant bowlers than Lara.

When Lara faced dominant bowlers(Donald, Wasim, waqur) he played, he tried, he failed to score a hundred.

In comparison to tendulkar, he played, he tried and succeeded what was in front of him.

You cannot argue against tendulkar not facing Wasim and waqur at their peak. However lara did and did not score a hundred.

As already stated, if Lara was the premier batsman he would have scored hundreds when he played Wasim, waqur, Donald.

BTW, thank you for repetitive babble. I decided to check their records against Donald.

Tendulkar averages 32.90 in 20 innings with 2 100s and 2 50s

Lara averages 34.05 in 20 innings with 0 100s and 6 50s.

 

[tempus123]

The destiny of the team was in his hands. You can deny it all you want but there is no other way around it.

If it's purely a team game then why are you even discussing individuals?

The destiny of the team was in his hand, I agree, and there is no denying he couldn't succeed.

My objection is to judge a knock completely based on the team result. We should give percentage to knocks which won the match, but a failure to win the match shouldn't take away anything from the quality of the knock.

Failing at the last hurdle seems more apparent because it was the 4th innings, had the same been played in 3rd innings this point would not have come about.

 

[ChachaCricket]

The destiny of the team was in his hands. You can deny it all you want but there is no other way around it.

If it's purely a team game then why are you even discussing individuals?

Buried.

 

[miandadrules]

What's the definition of "iconic" for you ? A lot of experts world over have rated a few of his innings (like Perth/Sydney 1992) as one of the best they saw. Does it count good enough to you ?

For me iconic knocks are when a player defies the odds, like Lara's 153 against odds but that is subjective, so for arguments sake lets say the Wisden 100. Or a record breaking score or achieving a feat very few if any have achieved.

Are you disagreeing that the general consensus is that if there was one deficiency in Tendulkar's career it was his lack of truly great knocks.

The knocks you have mentioned are brilliant knocks but Lara has those sort of innings too. We are not comparing village cricketers here, we are comparing two of the greatest batsman that have ever lived, hence the standards are exacting.

The question isn't is Tendulkar is great? Or is he one of the greatest ever? It is whether he was undisputedly the greatest of his era. And to that the answer is he certainly is of one two that were the greatest of there era.

 

[StreetSmart]

Dont take it person my Brother i was not saying any thing to you i was talking about some Indian Posters here

 

[miandadrules]

The destiny of the team was in his hand, I agree, and there is no denying he couldn't succeed.

My objection is to judge a knock completely based on the team result. We should give percentage to knocks which won the match, but a failure to win the match shouldn't take away anything from the quality of the knock.

Failing at the last hurdle seems more apparent because it was the 4th innings, had the same been played in 3rd innings this point would not have come about.

Who is taking away from the quality of the knock?

Unfortunately, his failure to take the team over the line meant a potentially iconic knock is relegated to a great knock. Fine lines I agree but that is the harsh reality of sport and life.

Had it been in the the 3rd innings it certainly wouldn't be seen as nab iconic knock. It's because in the 4th innings Tendulkar seized the initiative when his team mates were falling around him and was driving his team to victory on his own back. But unfortunately it wasn't meant to be.

 

[miandadrules]

Dont take it person my Brother i was not saying any thing to you i was talking about some Indian Posters here

First morning I've had off in months and I get dragged in to this.

I might seek some compensation from PP.

 

[Indiafan]

The destiny of the team was in his hands. You can deny it all you want but there is no other way around it.

If it's purely a team game then why are you even discussing individuals?

Yep a broken back of course doesn't count at all. Destiny blah blah

 

[tempus123]

For me iconic knocks are when a player defies the odds, like Lara's 153 against odds but that is subjective, so for arguments sake lets say the Wisden 100. Or a record breaking score or achieving a feat very few if any have achieved.

Are you disagreeing that the general consensus is that if there was one deficiency in Tendulkar's career it was his lack of truly great knocks.

The knocks you have mentioned are brilliant knocks but Lara has those sort of innings too. We are not comparing village cricketers here, we are comparing two of the greatest batsman that have ever lived, hence the standards are exacting.

The question isn't is Tendulkar is great? Or is he one of the greatest ever? It is whether he was undisputedly the greatest of his era. And to that the answer is he certainly is of one two that were the greatest of there era.

Probably, it will be impossible to prove Tendulkar as undisputedly greatest of his era. To be that, you have to be some distance ahead of your nearest competitor in every area of batsmanship. Doing that to a player of Lara's class is extremely difficult. At best you can have comparative studies of their career and separate them by some margin here and there. Following are the things I feel Lara was clearly better than Tendulkar.

1. Playing long innings (There is no comparison here, Tendulkar didn't have the temperament to play long innings)
2. Playing off spin or usually spin (It's also closer but I feel Lara played Murali much better)
3. Having the flair (it's closer, but Lara was better)
4. Higher peaks.

There are other things Tendulkar was much better:

1. Having a balance in ODI and Test performances.
2. Having the reputation of being a team man
3. Having better contours and more consistent performances.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Ganguly did the same thing in the very next Dehli match..

Proof ? never heard this before

 

[miandadrules]

Yep a broken back of course doesn't count at all. Destiny blah blah

I'm sorry about his back but that has no bearing on the result.

Maybe we can lobby the ICC to put an asterix next to the scorecard to say that had Tendulkar had a better back India would have won.

Funny, you don't consider the state of the spine of the opposition bowlers.

 

[Indiafan]

We come back to the same tired excuses to put Sachin down. Somehow only crossing the actual line constitutes iconic knocks even considering that only a handful of players have done it even once in their career. And somehow the same knock because bad when last 3-4 players throw their wickets away as compared to someone else whose team members don't throw their wickets away

And the best part. An unbeaten 100, chasing the highest 4th inning score in India of 387 is not considered iconic. Why? No idea.

 

[Indiafan]

I'm sorry about his back but that has no bearing on the result.

Maybe we can lobby the ICC to put an asterix next to the scorecard to say that had Tendulkar had a better back India would have won.

Funny, you don't consider the state of the spine of the opposition bowlers.

You were the one talking about destiny being in his hand but clearly a bad back means you have a handicap. Still no comment about the unbeaten 100 in the chase of 387. What was the excuse, Sehwag played great?

 

[miandadrules]

Probably, it will be impossible to prove Tendulkar as undisputedly greatest of his era. To be that, you have to be some distance ahead of your nearest competitor in every area of batsmanship. Doing that to a player of Lara's class is extremely difficult. At best you can have comparative studies of their career and separate them by some margin here and there. Following are the things I feel Lara was clearly better than Tendulkar.

1. Playing long innings (There is no comparison here, Tendulkar didn't have the temperament to play long innings)
2. Playing off spin or usually spin (It's also closer but I feel Lara played Murali much better)
3. Having the flair (it's closer, but Lara was better)
4. Higher peaks.

There are other things Tendulkar was much better:

1. Having a balance in ODI and Test performances.
2. Having the reputation of being a team man
3. Having better contours and more consistent performances.

I'm not disputing any of those points nor have I expressed who I think is better. It was merely a critique of the logic being used.

 

[Indiafan]

Probably, it will be impossible to prove Tendulkar as undisputedly greatest of his era. To be that, you have to be some distance ahead of your nearest competitor in every area of batsmanship. Doing that to a player of Lara's class is extremely difficult. At best you can have comparative studies of their career and separate them by some margin here and there. Following are the things I feel Lara was clearly better than Tendulkar.

1. Playing long innings (There is no comparison here, Tendulkar didn't have the temperament to play long innings)
2. Playing off spin or usually spin (It's also closer but I feel Lara played Murali much better)
3. Having the flair (it's closer, but Lara was better)
4. Higher peaks.

There are other things Tendulkar was much better:

1. Having a balance in ODI and Test performances.
2. Having the reputation of being a team man
3. Having better contours and more consistent performances.

About playing off spin, both Sachin and Lara played better on spin going away from them than coming towards them, Lara dominated Murali, Sachin Warne

As for flair, clear you missed Sachin in the 90s

 

[tempus123]

I'm not disputing any of those points nor have I expressed who I think is better. It was merely a critique of the logic being used.

Yes, I am not saying you did. I know you are talking about a few of his innings only. I was presenting a comprehensive comparison and why it will be difficult to prove one better than the other conclusively.

 

[miandadrules]

You were the one talking about destiny being in his hand but clearly a bad back means you have a handicap. Still no comment about the unbeaten 100 in the chase of 387. What was the excuse, Sehwag played great?

So were the knocks of Yuvi, Sehwag and Gambir also iconic? Was it a devastating attack?

What a laughable excuse. Destiny was in his hands and he failed. I'm sorry about his back but hey if Waqar didn't have a bad back who's to say India would even have got close. But that would such an absurd statement to make most would be too embarrassed to say it and right fully so.

May be if you beg long enough we can change history due to Tendulkar's back.

 

[tempus123]

About playing off spin, both Sachin and Lara played better on spin going away from them than coming towards them, Lara dominated Murali, Sachin Warne

As for flair, clear you missed Sachin in the 90s

Arre bhai, when did I say Sachin didn't have flair ?

Also comparing Lara and Tendulkar against Murali and Warne, I would say Tendulkar owned Warne and tackled Murali ok, but got dismissed to him quite a few times later in SL.

Lara had a wood over Murali, played him better than anyone else, while was never at sea against Warne.

 

[TestMatch]

Tendulkar has taken Donald to the cleaners (which Lara has never).

Lara averages more than Tendulkar vs Donald, and actually counter-attacked Donald like crazy. If you actually watched Lara batting vs Donald, you would see that it was Lara who actively attempted to "take the best to the cleaners". He would go berzerk against guys like Warne and Donald and try to put the pressure on them. Only Mcgrath did Lara bide his time with.

 

[Stallion__]

Proof ? never heard this before

http://www.sporttaco.com/rec.sport.cricket/Ponting_is_a_cheat_and_a_disgrace_to_the_game_5145 .html

Ganguly unsuccessfully appealing off a clear bump catch against Pakistan, and just the Test before the Moin Khan had caught Ganguly out off a ball that bounced at least once.

 

[miandadrules]

Yes, I am not saying you did. I know you are talking about a few of his innings only. I was presenting a comprehensive comparison and why it will be difficult to prove one better than the other conclusively.

This my personal view on the two.

Tendulkar is the guy you can rely to be great day in and day out, whereas Lara did things that left you astounded at times.

To me they are equally great but in different ways. Ideally you'd want both in your line up.

 

[tempus123]

Probably, it will be impossible to prove Tendulkar as undisputedly greatest of his era. To be that, you have to be some distance ahead of your nearest competitor in every area of batsmanship. Doing that to a player of Lara's class is extremely difficult. At best you can have comparative studies of their career and separate them by some margin here and there. Following are the things I feel Lara was clearly better than Tendulkar.

1. Playing long innings (There is no comparison here, Tendulkar didn't have the temperament to play long innings)
2. Playing off spin or usually spin (It's also closer but I feel Lara played Murali much better)
3. Having the flair (it's closer, but Lara was better)
4. Higher peaks.

There are other things Tendulkar was much better:

1. Having a balance in ODI and Test performances.
2. Having the reputation of being a team man
3. Having better contours and more consistent performances.

Add to that, Tendulkar was probably a bit tighter in technique, was harder to dismiss.

 

[tempus123]

Probably, it will be impossible to prove Tendulkar as undisputedly greatest of his era. To be that, you have to be some distance ahead of your nearest competitor in every area of batsmanship. Doing that to a player of Lara's class is extremely difficult. At best you can have comparative studies of their career and separate them by some margin here and there. Following are the things I feel Lara was clearly better than Tendulkar.

1. Playing long innings (There is no comparison here, Tendulkar didn't have the temperament to play long innings)
2. Playing off spin or usually spin (It's also closer but I feel Lara played Murali much better)
3. Having the flair (it's closer, but Lara was better)
4. Higher peaks.

There are other things Tendulkar was much better:

1. Having a balance in ODI and Test performances.
2. Having the reputation of being a team man
3. Having better contours and more consistent performances.

Add to that, Tendulkar was probably a bit tighter in technique, was harder to dismiss.

 

[Stallion__]

His point probably was not to take anything away from the knock, but to point out that winning a match was pure luck.

Its not pure luck, luck is one of the factors.

Combination of skill, temperament, ability to handle pressure and luck.

 

[Romali_rotti]

http://www.sporttaco.com/rec.sport.cricket/Ponting_is_a_cheat_and_a_disgrace_to_the_game_5145 .html

Again I indicated to show me proof where Ganguly took a bumped catch in the Pakistan match ? Moin Khan's video is there for the whole world to see..

 

[tempus123]

Its not pure luck, luck is one of the factors.

Combination of skill, temperament, ability to handle pressure and luck.

When someone drops your catch, it's luck. Rest of the factors no one denies.

 

[Stallion__]

Again I indicated to show me proof where Ganguly took a bumped catch in the Pakistan match ? Moin Khan's video is there for the whole world to see..

So if no youtube video exist, and event never happened?

The ones given out remained in the memories since they create impact on match result while the ones not given may not get high profile attention.

 

[miandadrules]

We come back to the same tired excuses to put Sachin down. Somehow only crossing the actual line constitutes iconic knocks even considering that only a handful of players have done it even once in their career. And somehow the same knock because bad when last 3-4 players throw their wickets away as compared to someone else whose team members don't throw their wickets away

And the best part. An unbeaten 100, chasing the highest 4th inning score in India of 387 is not considered iconic. Why? No idea.

The century against Pakistan was a tour de force, whereas the knock against England was a collective of 4/5 batsmen.

It was in Tendulkar's hands to take his team over the line but he succumbed to the pressure and people don't exalt those who fail under such circumstances. Had India won it would have it would have been a memorable knock but had he remained not out and took the team over the line, it would have elevated him and the knock to iconic status.

Had Lara got out in his 153 but they still won it still would have been a great knock but the fact that he ensured that he carried his team over the line and didn't usurp his responsibility made it iconic. Had they lost it would have been seen as a valiant effort against the odds.

 

[tempus123]

This my personal view on the two.

Tendulkar is the guy you can rely to be great day in and day out, whereas Lara did things that left you astounded at times.

To me they are equally great but in different ways. Ideally you'd want both in your line up.

Not too far off the mark.

 

[Romali_rotti]

So if no youtube video exist, and event never happened?

The ones given out remained in the memories since they create impact on match result while the ones not given may not get high profile attention.

So you have no proof....... No commentary no articles, no pics ? forget youtube.......

 

[tempus123]

Lara averages more than Tendulkar vs Donald, and actually counter-attacked Donald like crazy. If you actually watched Lara batting vs Donald, you would see that it was Lara who actively attempted to "take the best to the cleaners". He would go berzerk against guys like Warne and Donald and try to put the pressure on them. Only Mcgrath did Lara bide his time with.

Superb batting.. treat to watch this man play.

 

[miandadrules]

Greatest BUMPED catch of all time and appealing for it, he shouldve been banned for just blant cheating..

Cheaters gonna cheat....... Greatest bumped catch of all time..................

Well Kumble appealed to the umpire and that is cheating... Some Pakistanis,,, Sighhhhh

http://www.sporttaco.com/rec.sport.cricket/Ponting_is_a_cheat_and_a_disgrace_to_the_game_5145 .html

Again I indicated to show me proof where Ganguly took a bumped catch in the Pakistan match ? Moin Khan's video is there for the whole world to see..

So where does Ganguly BUMPED catch rank in your all time list?

 

[Buffet]

Unfortunately, his failure to take the team over the line meant a potentially iconic knock is relegated to a great knock. Fine lines I agree but that is the harsh reality of sport and life.

It was in Tendulkar's hands to take his team over the line but he succumbed to the pressure and people don't exalt those who fail under such circumstances.

This all talk about Lara and iconic 3-4 knocks is fine but do you know that's the only thing he has in his entire career? Lara has scored around 4-5 centuries in wins against non-minnows in his entire career. He had weaker batting unit but had a far stronger bowling unit with him.

Lara has failed to contribute too frequently when his team needed. He did step up 4-5 times in his entire career with centuries to help his team win and those knocks were really iconic. But it ends there because that is his entire career when it comes to contributing with centuries to help his team win matches.

As far as 400 kind of knocks goes, many can call it iconic but i call it extremely useless knock. It's matter of having different perspective. It's not useless because match ended in draw. It's useless because action of Lara left no scope of WI winning the match.

Having said all this, gap between SRT and Lara wasn't huge. More of their peers do rate SRT higher but it's not one sided. If some one says Lara was a better test batsman then that's perfectly fine as well.

I will personally happily take SRT over Lara for 100 test matches played across the world in some hypothetical situation.

 

[Romali_rotti]

So where does Ganguly BUMPED catch rank in your all time list?

Precedent was already set by a noble champion Pakistani cheater, it seems Ganguly learned a thing or 2 however; atleast his team didnt benefit from it so it didn't thieve the opposing team....

 

[Stallion__]

So you have no proof....... No commentary no articles, no pics ? forget youtube.......

Or maybe you didn't read post 357 properly.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Or maybe you didn't read post 357 properly.

Ok so no proof..... Cheers...


lol @ sportaco...............

 

[#GreenRoars]

So you have no proof....... No commentary no articles, no pics ? forget youtube.......

Don't get too much excited. Take that please )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoc_RqY6yws

 

[Stallion__]

Ok so no proof..... Cheers...

Have fun with the straw clutching, cheers..... :Angel_ani

 

[miandadrules]

Precedent was already set by a noble champion Pakistani cheater, it seems Ganguly learned a thing or 2 however; atleast his team didnt benefit from it so it didn't thieve the opposing team....

Convenient logic.

At least have the decency to be consistent.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Don't get too much excited. Take that please )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoc_RqY6yws

So you have no proof for the below, I only asked repeatedly

Ganguly did the same thing in the very next Dehli match. Claimed a bumped catch but that wasn't given.

...............

 

[Romali_rotti]

Have fun with the straw clutching, cheers..... :Angel_ani

All good,, you are forgiven since you cant back up your words in regards to the Pakistan India match...

 

[Stallion__]

All good,, you are forgiven since you cant back up your words in regards to the Pakistan India match...

If that makes you sleep better..... :dalmiya

 

[Romali_rotti]

If that makes you sleep better..... :dalmiya

I am gonna sleep well brother, you are the one who cant back up your words....... All good

 

[miandadrules]

This all talk about Lara and iconic 3-4 knocks is fine but do you know that's the only thing he has in his entire career? Lara has scored around 4-5 centuries in wins against non-minnows in his entire career. He had weaker batting unit but had a far stronger bowling unit with him.

Lara has failed to contribute too frequently when his team needed. He did step up 4-5 times in his entire career with centuries to help his team win and those knocks were really iconic. But it ends there because that is his entire career when it comes to contributing with centuries to help his team win matches.

As far as 400 kind of knocks goes, many can call it iconic but i call it extremely useless knock. It's matter of having different perspective. It's not useless because match ended in draw. It's useless because action of Lara left no scope of WI winning the match.

Having said all this, gap between SRT and Lara wasn't huge. More of their peers do rate SRT higher but it's not one sided. If some one says Lara was a better test batsman then that's perfectly fine as well.

I will personally happily take SRT over Lara for 100 test matches played across the world in some hypothetical situation.

My views on the two are expressed in post 358.

Unfortunately. my gripe here was that the Tendulkar fans seem to be diminishing Lara's achievements yet hailing Tendulkars but using very different criteria. No consistency what so ever.

I mean we have one poster repeating Tendulkar's great performances against Donald over and over again despite the fact he only averaged 32 and less than Lara.

 

[#GreenRoars]

All good,, you are forgiven since you cant back up your words in regards to the Pakistan India match...

You asked for article :

Ganguly unsuccessfully appealing off a clear

bump catch against Pakistan, and just the Test before the Moin Khan

had caught Ganguly out off a ball that bounced at least once). This

too may well be part of the game.

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.sport.cricket/2012-12/msg00005.html

you yourself asked for article, and i hope now you will cry for video evidence

 

[#GreenRoars]

I am gonna sleep well brother, you are the one who cant back up your words....... All good

And you are changing your stance after every post

 

[Romali_rotti]

Anyway back to the topic, I am quite curious to see what Lara avgs vs Donald in SA in test matches... We know Lara plays well at home but how about in SA vs Donald ? should be averaging about 40 I think ? can someone confirm...

 

[Romali_rotti]

You asked for article :
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.sport.cricket/2012-12/msg00005.html

you yourself asked for article, and i hope now you will cry for video evidence

Thats not proof that's a message board , show me some reliable sources Cricinfo, Espn, etc.... Ill be here if you can show it then ill believe it ..

 

[ChachaCricket]

Having said all this, gap between SRT and Lara wasn't huge. More of their peers do rate SRT higher but it's not one sided. If some one says Lara was a better test batsman then that's perfectly fine as well.

Who're these peers exactly? As far as I've heard the Aussies, Pakistanis and the English seem to be in awe of Lara.

 

[miandadrules]

I wonder what Tendulkar's averaged against Donald is at home?

 

[Romali_rotti]

I wonder what Tendulkar's averaged against Donald is at home?

On a few occasions SRT plays better away on hard bouncy tracks when compared to playing in India while Lara liked the less bouncier tracks at home..... But would like to know how SRT fared vs Donald in SA (test matches)

 

[Romali_rotti]

I wonder what Tendulkar's averaged against Donald is at home?

I am predicting Lara to have a better record at home when compared to SRT vs Donald... Lara I think only avgd 37 vs Mcgrath in Aus while in WI he avgd in the 60s, he sure loved his own habitat more thats for sure....

 

[Buffet]

Who're these peers exactly? As far as I've heard the Aussies, Pakistanis and the English seem to be in awe of Lara.

You can start making a list of peers and their comments about simply who was the best of generation. Try to find for both rather simply putting for one and then you can see. Just my general impression here.

 

[Buffet]

My views on the two are expressed in post 358.

Unfortunately. my gripe here was that the Tendulkar fans seem to be diminishing Lara's achievements yet hailing Tendulkars but using very different criteria. No consistency what so ever.

I mean we have one poster repeating Tendulkar's great performances against Donald over and over again despite the fact he only averaged 32 and less than Lara.

Not using a consistent logic is often used because then you can have your cake and eat it too

 

[miandadrules]

On a few occasions SRT plays better away on hard bouncy tracks when compared to playing in India while Lara liked the less bouncier tracks at home..... But would like to know how SRT fared vs Donald in SA (test matches)

I am predicting Lara to have a better record at home when compared to SRT vs Donald... Lara I think only avgd 37 vs Mcgrath in Aus while in WI he avgd in the 60s....

Why don't you find out and let us all know.

You seem like a fair and balanced individual who has a "consistency" in his views.

 

[ChachaCricket]

You can start making a list of peers and their comments about simply who was the best of generation. Try to find for both rather simply putting for one and then you can see. Just my general impression here.

Yes, I've heard from both sides. From peer ratings Lara definitely has the edge. Note here that I'm specifically talking about peers not ex-cricketers before or after them or cricket panelists.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Why don't you find out and let us all know.

You seem like a fair and balanced individual who has a "consistency" in his views.

I asked the question first so you can do the honors

 

[navitrk]

After 25 years if you ask some cricket fans about sachin they will tell you his biography (most). But if you ask about Lara they will open cricinfo

An Indian and a SACHINIST

 

[ChachaCricket]

After 25 years if you ask some cricket fans in India about sachin they will tell you his biography (most). But if you ask about Lara they will open cricinfo

An Indian and a SACHINIST

Fixed.

 

[miandadrules]

I asked the question first so you can do the honors

Surely, you're not trying to avoid presenting the stats are you?

 

[miandadrules]

After 25 years if you ask some cricket fans about sachin they will tell you his biography (most). But if you ask about Lara they will open cricinfo

An Indian and a SACHINIST

Keep telling yourself that.

 

[Stallion__]

What a rubbish argument, its like saying Lara never faced Ambrose and Walsh while Tendulkar had to face other great bowlers like Donald, Steyn, Ambrose, Walsh, McGrath, Warne, Murali as well as Wasim and Waqur and scored hundreds in Australia and South Africa. The 90s had the best bowlers between the 2 era's and Tendulkar averaging an astounding 58 in that era and Bangladesh did not even play test cricket!

Thats got to be the most over-used logic in PP's history.

The whole premise Sachin being the best batsman or averaging 58 in 90s is that it is the decade when we have most number of great bowlers.

Then better filter the record for those 'bowling greats' to get a better picture and then see who average greater against them.


Sachin against bowling greats of 90s

Lara against bowling greats of 90s

 

[Chrish]

Thats got to be the most over-used logic in PP's history.

The whole premise Sachin being the best batsman or averaging 58 in 90s is that it is the decade when we have most number of great bowlers.

Then better filter the record for those 'bowling greats' to get a better picture and then see who average greater against them.


Sachin against bowling greats of 90s

Lara against bowling greats of 90s

It's quite illogical and faulty to include two Ws here.. They played one series against each other where SRT wasn't dismissed even once by either of these bowlers