Brian Lara or Sachin Tendulkar as Test match batter?

[Technics 1210]

Lara smashed the highest Test run score, twice, AND all time Test run scorer record, twice.

Tendulkar bailed on his career until Lara announced his retirement.

Tendulkar got lucky.

Lara was the real deal.

 

[Amjid Javed]

Lara was Flat Track bully like Zaheer Abbas.

SRT was an all conditions all format batsman with unmatched longevity and consistent performance vs all kind of bowling attack in all conditions.

lara an FTB, a guy that won a test series in Aus, massacred murali in turning conditions.

Go get your eyes tested

 

[Technics 1210]

The Wisden 100 has 3 Lara Test centuries, but ZERO Tendulkar Test centuries.

rediff.com: cricket channel: Top 100 Batsmen of all time

 

[Ab Fan]

lara an FTB, a guy that won a test series in Aus, massacred murali in turning conditions.

Go get your eyes tested

lol, he was a proper FTB. You guys are really so stupid to think that he scored those double tons and triple tons on seaming and swinging pitches lol?

When did he won a test series in Australia?

A proper FTB just like Zaheer Abbas. Hahahaha! Westerners have made you guys completely fool by their propaganda.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

The Wisden 100 has 3 Lara Test centuries, but ZERO Tendulkar Test centuries.

rediff.com: cricket channel: Top 100 Batsmen of all time

has perception of being quite an impact less player for a long time in his career.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

lol, he was a proper FTB. You guys are really so stupid to think that he scored those double tons and triple tons on seaming and swinging pitches lol?

When did he won a test series in Australia?

A proper FTB just like Zaheer Abbas. Hahahaha! Westerners have made you guys completely fool by their propaganda.

Windies won in Australia 92/93

 

[jnaveen1980]

Wisden list is a stupid list. Azharuddins 152 vs SL 1993/94 in that list lol That is a joke. Dravid's 180, 233 at adelaide oval Laxman's 167 at SCG, TEndulkar's 136 at chennai, 117 at old trafford, 169 at Newlands, 155 on day 4 pitch against warne are way better than those knocks. 375 at antigua? seriously.

 

[Technics 1210]

has perception of being quite an impact less player for a long time in his career.

You'd think the 'god' of batting would have at least one Test century from the 90s in the list but no.

Tendulkar had minimal impact in wins, but had maximum impact in loses.

 

[RexRex]

has perception of being quite an impact less player for a long time in his career.

Impact of a batsman's innings is directly proportional to the quality aka collective strength of his team.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Impact of a batsman's innings is directly proportional to the quality aka collective strength of his team.

They probably had some formula. Still it makes no sense having a random Joe Darling from 1897 in that list.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Impact of a batsman's innings is directly proportional to the quality aka collective strength of his team.

It may be true for batsmen but we should have higher standards for gods of cricket.

 

[Marooned]

The problem for Sachin is that he never had a really big test series. Not a single really dominant test series in his entire career of 200 matches.

Lara, Smith, and even Kohli had multiple daddy atg series where they piled massive runs northward of even 700 runs.

Even Rahul Dravid had 2 massive away series where he scored 600 plus while

Tendulkar never even touched 500 runs. EVER. Neither home or away.
His highest runs in a series was 493 . That kinda sums up Tendulkar for me. He was never really dominant.

Test matches | Batting records | Most runs in a series | ESPNcricinfo

Find records of Most runs in a series in Test matches only on ESPNcricinfo.

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[Amjid Javed]

lol, he was a proper FTB. You guys are really so stupid to think that he scored those double tons and triple tons on seaming and swinging pitches lol?

When did he won a test series in Australia?

A proper FTB just like Zaheer Abbas. Hahahaha! Westerners have made you guys completely fool by their propaganda.

He won a series in 1992/93 - 2-1 in Australia

Do everyone a favour and stop with nonsense

 

[jnaveen1980]

He won a series in 1992/93 - 2-1 in Australia

Do everyone a favour and stop with nonsense

That is a dishonest observation lol That Ambrose series. He picked 33 wickets won MOS. Lara made in that drawn test where both teams scored 500 plus. He made 277 there. IN all the other innings he averaged 27.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

That is a dishonest observation lol That Ambrose series. He picked 33 wickets won MOS. Lara made in that drawn test where both teams scored 500 plus. He made 277 there. IN all the other innings he averaged 27.

Double century and 3 50s is a good return in 8 innings no?

 

[jnaveen1980]

Double century and 3 50s is a good return in 8 innings no?

He was not the key in that series. If anythign Ambrose and Bishop architected that series win. Remember they won one of the test by 1 run. THat was completely due to bowling. If we are going to focus "match winning runs". Then Lara has the most runs in history by a country mile in losses followed by Chanderpaul. I am not going to blame him. Bowlers wins matches. Batsmen just contribute. Tendulkar's 136 is definitely one of the ATG knock. But due to back spasm he wanted to finish the game early when India needed 16. DIdn't pan out the way he wanted. But it was still a terrific innings.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

He was not the key in that series. If anythign Ambrose and Bishop architected that series win. Remember they won one of the test by 1 run. THat was completely due to bowling. If we are going to focus "match winning runs". Then Lara has the most runs in history by a country mile in losses followed by Chanderpaul. I am not going to blame him. Bowlers wins matches. Batsmen just contribute. Tendulkar's 136 is definitely one of the ATG knock. But due to back spasm he wanted to finish the game early when India needed 16. DIdn't pan out the way he wanted. But it was still a terrific innings.

PP narrative is usually to focus on a way series.

But you have given a home knock that too in a lost match.

My own personal view is that home knocks shouldn't be discounted completely. If we take home knocks too then Lara has some exceptional ones.

 

[jnaveen1980]

PP narrative is usually to focus on a way series.

But you have given a home knock that too in a lost match.

My own personal view is that home knocks shouldn't be discounted completely. If we take home knocks too then Lara has some exceptional ones.

Tendulkar infact started his career away from home. Nothing at home. First Pakistan, Then NZ, just one match against Lanka at home. Then Australia, THen England, Then zimbabwe, Then SA. only after that full series in India. He got better and better each tour. Made century at Perth, SCG, Old trafford (century that helped INdia save the test), Wanderers where hie made 111 next best was 20. Almost made a 100 at NZ. GOt out at 88. This all happened before he turned 20. At the age of 19 he was the best batsman of the side. Ganguly also started his career in Australia 1992 tour. But he looked petrified and terrified on AUstrlaian pitches. He was one year older than Sachin. Discarded immediately. It took 4 more years for him to come back.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Tendulkar to me is the epitome of batsmanship. I have not seen a more complete batsman and that level of batting class than Tendulkar ever in any batsman I have seen.

I have heard Gavaskar was unbelievably good and he looks absolutely phenomenal whenever I see old footage. I think Tendulkar was a modified version of Gavaskar with more batting punch compromising a bit in defensive technique compared to Gavaskar but definitely more explosive.

Lara is exceptional and I consider him an equal to Sachin and together they’re both comfortably by far the two best batters of their era. I pick Tendulkar over Lara simply because whereas Lara was a freak genius, you can never teach a kid to bat like him. His batting defied coaching at times. Whereas Tendulkar would literally be the cover boy for a batting book. Everything about his batting was perfection and what you can and should teach young batters. He’s the only batter ever who came to cricket looking like a million dollars at the age of 16 and retired looking still like almost a million dollars at the of 40. The greatest of all time.

 

[Mamoon]

The problem for Sachin is that he never had a really big test series. Not a single really dominant test series in his entire career of 200 matches.

Lara, Smith, and even Kohli had multiple daddy atg series where they piled massive runs northward of even 700 runs.

Even Rahul Dravid had 2 massive away series where he scored 600 plus while

Tendulkar never even touched 500 runs. EVER. Neither home or away.
His highest runs in a series was 493 . That kinda sums up Tendulkar for me. He was never really dominant.

Test matches | Batting records | Most runs in a series | ESPNcricinfo

Find records of Most runs in a series in Test matches only on ESPNcricinfo.

www.espncricinfo.com

One of the many stats that badly expose the Tendulkar myth.

 

[Fanboy375]

Windies won in Australia 92/93

Yeah when they were strong

 

[Fanboy375]

Kohli has batting average of 37 in icc knock out stage.So he isn't in top 5 ODI greats.Lol.Not everyone can play big game in most valuable situation.That doesn't make them less great.Lara was too inconsistent and he can get away some big games but Sachin can score more centuries but he can't manipulation series result

 

[mominsaigol]

This comparison is silly.

Sachin is the epitome of consistency. He's the batter who is consistent against any team which is he is a vital assest to have in your lineup.

Lara is an impact test player. If he kicks off its game over, he has more atg innings then Sachin could ever dream off but consistency wise he's below Sachin.

Both are atg top 5 quality test players of all time.

My only issue is Indian posters being hypocritical.

Longetivity is the only metric for Sachin but is not applicable to bumrah for some reason?

Similarly Impact is used to determine Dhoni, Laxman or rohit as atg batters however for Travis head, Warner that goes out the window.

Indian posters are more hypocritical then 16 year old teenage girls.

 

[Mamoon]

Tendulkar is the bowling version of Anderson. A world class exponent of his skill, but all his achievements are linked to number of matches played.

Other batsmen/bowlers have soared to greater heights in spite of playing less matches.

 

[mominsaigol]

This comparison is silly.

Sachin is the epitome of consistency. He's the batter who is consistent against any team which is he is a vital assest to have in your lineup.

Lara is an impact test player. If he kicks off its game over, he has more atg innings then Sachin could ever dream off but consistency wise he's below Sachin.

Both are atg top 5 quality test players of all time.

My only issue is Indian posters being hypocritical.

Longetivity is the only metric for Sachin but is not applicable to bumrah for some reason?

Similarly Impact is used to determine Dhoni, Laxman or rohit as atg batters however for Travis head, Warner that goes out the window.

Indian posters are more hypocritical then 16 year old teenage girls.

The greatest test player of all time excluding Bradman has to be Steve smith who's next level in his prime.

The greatest odi player is kohli 100%, I have no issues with putting a guy with a 58 avg + 50 centuries and a track record of chasing down 350 to 370 scores at no 1. Even if it is a 2 new ball era, 58 avg and 50 centuries + atg knocks stand out.

Sachin isn't no 1 in any metric. He's good, he's defo top 5 or top 10 but it's an insult to many great batters to objectively shove him at no 1.

Indian need to seek validation from abu's is hilarious

 

[Hitman]

Two most prestigeous records that Brian Lara held when he retired -

1. Most Test runs scored in loses.

2. Most Test centuries scored in loses.

The number one record has since been broken by Shiv Chanderpaul. The number two record still hands supreme.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Tendulkar is the bowling version of Anderson. A world class exponent of his skill, but all his achievements are linked to number of matches played.

Other batsmen/bowlers have soared to greater heights in spite of playing less matches.

There is no shame in achievements being linked to number of matches. A player should be appreciated for being able to keep going mentally and physically at a decent level for all those years. Yet for some reason Indian's get shy about this and take it as criticism.

I admire Sachin's tenacity a lot. To play for so long and to keep going year after year in a team sport to chase a personal goal is a real triumph and shows dedication to a level that is way beyond and the average sportsman.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Outrageously ignorant posts are visible here. Sachin Tendulkar entered ATG XI even in 1998 roughly 10 years after his debut. He was a legend not because of longevity. Don Bradman included him in his ATG XI even in the 90s before Don passed away. Anything he did after 2000s is a bonus. He was averaging 57 by end of 1999

At the age of 25 he was in this position. Many made debuts. NOt surprising where it is coming from lol

 

[Fanboy375]

Outrageously ignorant posts are visible here. Sachin Tendulkar entered ATG XI even in 1998 roughly 10 years after his debut. He was a legend not because of longevity. Don Bradman included him in his ATG XI even in the 90s before Don passed away. Anything he did after 2000s is a bonus. He was averaging 57 by end of 1999

At the age of 25 he was in this position. Many made debuts. NOt surprising where it is coming from lol

Yeah but also Sachin in 90s Was 4 years younger than Lara.Which make sense he will have lower performance than Lara at that time.Yet in runs/innings both were equal.Some Ponting fans argue that Ponting was young and that's why he didn't do well in 90s so why can't other use that same reasoning

 

[jnaveen1980]

Yeah but also Sachin in 90s Was 4 years younger than Lara.Which make sense he will have lower performance than Lara at that time.Yet in runs/innings both were equal.Some Ponting fans argue that Ponting was young and that's why he didn't do well in 90s so why can't other use that same reasoning

Despite surrounded by fixers he managed to keep the Indian audience happy through the 90s. Probably the worst impacted player in the pre-DRS era.

 

[Fanboy375]

Lara ave 51.6 and Sachin 56.7 in 90s.Lara benefited from facing Eng as he faced them 17/65 times while Sachin 9/73 times.Both ave high vs them.Lara also faced NZ and Ind.Like Sachin he did succeed vs NZ but he didn't show much vs Ind.Also vs Aus and SA Sachin had higher ave than Lara.Sachin did faced early 90s weak SL bowling but unfortunately Lara failed against them

 

[Fanboy375]

Also in 2000s Sachin vs Lara,Lara didn't faced peak SA bowling in that period.Early and mid SA bowling was weaker than late 90s SA bowling.But it is late 2000s when SA bowling improved.Same goes to Eng it is during 2005 ashes when Eng bowling became respectable.Sachin faced peak Eng bowling more than Lara.One can argue Sachin has a disadvantage that is he didn't faced Ind bowling which was better than WI bowling.Lara had another advantage that is his 2001 and 2003 SL series.But Lara in 2000s vs Pak never faced Shoiab nor Sami unlike Sachin.Lara also only ave 17 vs Shane Bond while Sachin ave 33 when both faced NZ.

 

[Bhaijaan]

This comparison is silly.

Sachin is the epitome of consistency. He's the batter who is consistent against any team which is he is a vital assest to have in your lineup.

Lara is an impact test player. If he kicks off its game over, he has more atg innings then Sachin could ever dream off but consistency wise he's below Sachin.

Both are atg top 5 quality test players of all time.

My only issue is Indian posters being hypocritical.

Longetivity is the only metric for Sachin but is not applicable to bumrah for some reason?

Similarly Impact is used to determine Dhoni, Laxman or rohit as atg batters however for Travis head, Warner that goes out the window.

Indian posters are more hypocritical then 16 year old teenage girls.

What is an impact test batsman?

 

[mominsaigol]

What is an impact test batsman?

One that can score over 500 runs in a series lol. Jokes aside one that can win games. Lara's one wicket win over Pakistan is > Sachin's entire career same with smith 211 innings that he played.

 

[Fanboy375]

One that can score over 500 runs in a series lol. Jokes aside one that can win games. Lara's one wicket win over Pakistan is > Sachin's entire career same with smith 211 innings that he played.

But rarely a batsman can win match.Bowler can get 5 or 6 wickets in an innings or 10 wickets in a match.Team more likely to not lose also in ODI batsman tend to be more match winner than test

 

[atreus]

Sachin

not that hard

 

[Bhaijaan]

Lara's one wicket win over Pakistan is > Sachin's entire career same with smith 211 innings that he played.

You just a made subjective comment there. I can also say that some of Sachin’s test knocks were higher quality. There’s no general consensus to anyone of those statements.

But you didn’t answer the original question. What is an impact test batsman? And how is Lara an impact batsman according to you and Sachin isn’t? What is your methodology.

If anything even those known analysts and ex cricketers who rate Lara ahead, generally having Sachin right beside him.

I can understand the admiration for Lara. He’s one of the greatest of all time and for some the best ever. But to say that and then Sachin isn’t anywhere near, that’s just some BS trolling going on. Nobody who makes such statements about one of the legit greats of the game can ever be taken seriously as a cricket fan.

 

[mominsaigol]

You just a made subjective comment there. I can also say that some of Sachin’s test knocks were higher quality. There’s no general consensus to anyone of those statements.

But you didn’t answer the original question. What is an impact test batsman? And how is Lara an impact batsman according to you and Sachin isn’t? What is your methodology.

If anything even those known analysts and ex cricketers who rate Lara ahead, generally having Sachin right beside him.

I can understand the admiration for Lara. He’s one of the greatest of all time and for some the best ever. But to say that and then Sachin isn’t anywhere near, that’s just some BS trolling going on. Nobody who makes such statements about one of the legit greats of the game can ever be taken seriously as a cricket fan.

You just a made subjective comment there. I can also say that some of Sachin’s test knocks were higher quality. There’s no general consensus to anyone of those statements.

Name them or list them.

 

[mominsaigol]

But rarely a batsman can win match.Bowler can get 5 or 6 wickets in an innings or 10 wickets in a match.Team more likely to not lose also in ODI batsman tend to be more match winner than test

It's a collective effort but to play 200 tests and not have a single match defining innings is comical?

What's funny is that even laxman who i constantly bash on and is bang medicore, the ones who Indians falsely glorify as crises man to cover up his inconsistencies has played more match saving/winning knocks then Sachin has in test cricket.

Sachin is the one of the best batters of all time but Indians constantly overglorfying him cause their obsessed with putting him as an objective no 1.

They can't stand the fact that unlike Bradman who was >>>>>>> Everyone in his era, Sachin had batters either = to him or > him in his era and Sachin simply pulled a James Anderson and outlasted them due to his 16 age debut.

 

[Bhaijaan]

You just a made subjective comment there. I can also say that some of Sachin’s test knocks were higher quality. There’s no general consensus to anyone of those statements.

Name them or list them.

One of the greatest cricketers ever and a legit GOAT contender as a batsman does not need anyone’s approval so I can not be fooled into getting into that sort of a useless discussion.

You are mocking yourself as a cricket fan by indulging in troll behaviour like this. No one asked you to pick Tendulkar over Lara but don’t expect not to be questioned when you start making ridiculous comments to put down a great cricketer. Some of us are way too passionate about cricket and these are our heroes.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

One of the greatest cricketers ever and a legit GOAT contender as a batsman does not need anyone’s approval so I can not be fooled into getting into that sort of a useless discussion.

You are mocking yourself as a cricket fan by indulging in troll behaviour like this. No one asked you to pick Tendulkar over Lara but don’t expect not to be questioned when you start making ridiculous comments to put down a great cricketer. Some of us are way too passionate about cricket and these are our heroes.

This is a very good point. Lara fans don't have the same passion as Tendulkar. Lara may have impacted more test matches but impacted the hearts, mind and souls of a billion people who were seeking meaning in the nineties.

Many of the common Indians sufferings were alleviated by Sachin. Lara didn't have the same impact in the Caribbean. The fire in babylon generation paved the way for him.

Now this doesn't mean that I think is better than Lara. But if 1 billion of my neighbours think I do then I got to respect their opinion or there will be trouble in the neighbourhood.

 

[Fanboy375]

Sachin has 14 and Lara 12 man of the match while they have 5 and 4 man of the series respectively
@mominsaigol

 

[Bhaijaan]

This is a very good point. Lara fans don't have the same passion as Tendulkar. Lara may have impacted more test matches but impacted the hearts, mind and souls of a billion people who were seeking meaning in the nineties.

Many of the common Indians sufferings were alleviated by Sachin. Lara didn't have the same impact in the Caribbean. The fire in babylon generation paved the way for him.

Now this doesn't mean that I think is better than Lara. But if 1 billion of my neighbours think I do then I got to respect their opinion or there will be trouble in the neighbourhood.

Brian Lara is loved and admired in Bharat as much if not more than anywhere else in the world. Phenomenal batter. If anyone starts making BS statements about Lara just to say Sachin was better, I would also point him out the same way. I hope I do that.

 

[mominsaigol]

Sachin has 14 and Lara 12 man of the match while they have 5 and 4 man of the series respectively
@mominsaigol

Man of the match is irrelevant. You can get man of the match by scoring a 200 in a drawn test match if no one else bats. I believe lara got mom in that 400 score match as well.

I'm asking for match winning performances. Laxman has Eden gardens and other aussie games.

Lara has that Pakistan win and a few others which I'll list.

Steve smith has his ashes moments + that iconic 211.

Kallis had multiple which i can list.

List Sachin's for me? It's simple he has none.

Indian fans can't comprehend the fact that bradman in his era was >>>>> everyone while sachin wasn't. Sachin is essentially the Anderson of his era.

For example bradman is so far > the no 2 of his era that we can't even name him without searching who that no 2 was.

In sachin's case that isn't to be, Since no one with a straight face can say he's so far above lara, Kallis or any of these guys deapite being dubbed the God of cricket.

He has zero 250 scores in international or fc cricket, zero match wins or memorable innings, and zero impacts in tests.

He's basically a very very consistent batsmen who via consistency is the top 10 best test batters of all time mainly cause he consistently performed in every conditons.

But if team India sucked, he sucked case in point 1997, and if team India was dominant he was dominant. This was the case in both odi and test.

Indian fans can dangle sachin into my bhoota all they want but they don't actually have any arguments.

Nothing wrong with a consistent batsmen. I would love to have one in my atg 11. But hilarious to argue that said consistent batter is no 1 solely due to longetivity when even horrible and medicore test batters like laxman have a few atg innings which have elevated him to crises man.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Stay on topic please instead of getting personal.

 

[mominsaigol]

Relevance? I asked for a list which you said you'll provide? Not for a sob story. With all due respect, i do respect Sachin but if I present points please address only them.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Relevance? I asked for a list which you said you'll provide? Not for a sob story. With all due respect, i do respect Sachin but if I present points please address only them.

See bro, if you feel Sachin hasn’t ever played a great knock, even if I mention dozens here you won’t agree. So why indulge in arguements? My humble request to you is just to be a bit more respectful to great cricketers at least. There are plenty of other players out there that maybe it’s funny to ridicule. Sachin, Waqar etc a lot of people shtpost about them here I think which isn’t cool. It’s my personal opinion and I don’t expect anyone to agree with me.

 

[mominsaigol]

See bro, if you feel Sachin hasn’t ever played a great knock, even if I mention dozens here you won’t agree. So why indulge in arguements? My humble request to you is just to be a bit more respectful to great cricketers at least. There are plenty of other players out there that maybe it’s funny to ridicule. Sachin, Waqar etc a lot of people shtpost about them here I think which isn’t cool. It’s my personal opinion and I don’t expect anyone to agree with me. I think a lot of people find your posts interesting and expect better from you.

I asked for a list. Omg.

First of theirs a big difference between not playing a great knock vs not playing a single impact knock.

A great knock can even be Labu's 58 of 101 in the final since it ensured Travis could get the job done and not lose wickets at the other end.

Lots of sachin's knocks have resulted in wins. By impact knocks you know full well what I am asking for.

Sachin isn't the God that you believe him to be which is nothing new as Indians overglorfiy everything.

Indians have the view of

1) Sachin = No 1 of all time when inreality he's top 5 to 10 round about.

2) Laxman = Crises man, whereas in reality he's an inconsistent hot mess of a test batter with a few atg knocks, basically falhar zaman of test cricket.

3) Ashwin = Spin atg, when in reality while he's very good, he's mostly a htb with a medicore overseas record barring a few good games vs eng and aus.

the list goes on and on and on.

Indian and pakistani posters are very guilty of this whereas England fans, Nz fans, Aus fans don't overglorofy their players cause cricket isn't their main priority nor is it the only sports they watch which is a huge shame since England still have cricket as their national sport but like hockey for pakistan the interest isn't their that much anymore.

 

[Vikram1989]

This is a very good point. Lara fans don't have the same passion as Tendulkar. Lara may have impacted more test matches but impacted the hearts, mind and souls of a billion people who were seeking meaning in the nineties.

Many of the common Indians sufferings were alleviated by Sachin. Lara didn't have the same impact in the Caribbean. The fire in babylon generation paved the way for him.

Now this doesn't mean that I think is better than Lara. But if 1 billion of my neighbours think I do then I got to respect their opinion or there will be trouble in the neighbourhood.

I will add one perspective during the dark era of matchfixing saga from 98 to 00 in subcontinent, Fans/People trusted Sachin that he is not a match fixer . sachin repaid their faith by not including jadeja, azhar even though bcci pressured him while India is getting hammered in aus tour. He came out in public and stamped to the left over squad requesting trust from them . Thereafter team got respect.Ganguly cleaned the junk and got all new guys with integrity. Lara took 6 months break before iconic lanka 2001 series.Bcci broke Sachin's back with out resting him.

 

[Buffet]

Lara may have impacted more test matches

But did he?

Lara has 5-6 tons in win against non-minnows in all venues combined. To put that 5-6 tons in context, it does not show up in top 50 lists if you start looking. His match changing tons were so infrequent.

You can say that batsmen can draw tests and they can't win. No one else in history has more tons in losses than Lara.

You can say that Lara played with a weak team - Sure weaker than past, how many teams can be seens as that weak to have Lara's frequencies of tons in wins/loss when Wi had 3 bonafide ATGs(Ambrose, Walsh, Lara) and some very good players.

From WI itself, Shiv started playing later than Lara and he has same the number of tons in wins as Lara against non-minnows. He did not have Ambrose and Walsh playing with him for the large part of his career. No shiv was never in Lara's class, gap wa big. Simply trying to show impact in changing the results by contribution by batsmen in entire career.


---------------

I think this Lara having some great impact is based on couple of knocks in such a long career when the same batsman has most ton in loss and very few tons in wins in entire career. A great great batsman, but not sure I will call him very impactful in changing result of tests over his career. Results do not support that conclusion.

 

[Fanboy375]

But did he?

Lara has 5-6 tons in win against non-minnows in all venues combined. To put that 5-6 tons in context, it does not show up in top 50 lists if you start looking. His match changing tons were so infrequent.

You can say that batsmen can draw tests and they can't win. No one else in history has more tons in losses than Lara.

You can say that Lara played with a weak team - Sure weaker than past, how many teams can be seens as that weak to have Lara's frequencies of tons in wins/loss when Wi had 3 bonafide ATGs(Ambrose, Walsh, Lara) and some very good players.

From WI itself, Shiv started playing later than Lara and he has same the number of tons in wins as Lara against non-minnows. He did not have Ambrose and Walsh playing with him for the large part of his career. No shiv was never in Lara's class, gap wa big. Simply trying to show impact in changing the results by contribution by batsmen in entire career.


---------------

I think this Lara having some great impact is based on couple of knocks in such a long career when the same batsman has most ton in loss and very few tons in wins in entire career. A great great batsman, but not sure I will call him very impactful in changing result of tests over his career. Results do not support that conclusion.

what about 90s Lara vs Sachin.WI had slide better win/lose than Ind.It is the perfect place to compare

 

[DeadlyVenom]

But did he?

Lara has 5-6 tons in win against non-minnows in all venues combined. To put that 5-6 tons in context, it does not show up in top 50 lists if you start looking. His match changing tons were so infrequent.

You can say that batsmen can draw tests and they can't win. No one else in history has more tons in losses than Lara.

You can say that Lara played with a weak team - Sure weaker than past, how many teams can be seens as that weak to have Lara's frequencies of tons in wins/loss when Wi had 3 bonafide ATGs(Ambrose, Walsh, Lara) and some very good players.

From WI itself, Shiv started playing later than Lara and he has same the number of tons in wins as Lara against non-minnows. He did not have Ambrose and Walsh playing with him for the large part of his career. No shiv was never in Lara's class, gap wa big. Simply trying to show impact in changing the results by contribution by batsmen in entire career.


---------------

I think this Lara having some great impact is based on couple of knocks in such a long career when the same batsman has most ton in loss and very few tons in wins in entire career. A great great batsman, but not sure I will call him very impactful in changing result of tests over his career. Results do not support that conclusion.

You have changed your criteria again when it comes to winning knocks by batsmen.

If bowlers are the primary reasons for teams winning matches then why didn't they step up to win those matches where Lara scored tons?

Lara impactful knocks come up in most lists that measure impact. There is writer on cricinfo who also takes into account bowling attack quantity and pitch quality. I think it is the best article i have read on impact.


I dont think the links are allowed to be shared here but the author produces some very good statistical analysis ( of course based on his own criteria) that is worthwhile reading across several articles.

 

[Devadwal]

Without looking at this thread i know that certain sections of fans would have said Lara is better than SRT.

 

[Buffet]

what about 90s Lara vs Sachin.WI had slide better win/lose than Ind.It is the perfect place to compare

If you want to limit it to 90s, then perferct place will be looking at their home.

Only place both teams had good bowling good record was at home. Ind had W/L of 0.06 in 90s away due to no pacers and WI had couple fo ATG pacers. That's two contrasting situation and way way worse than difference between WI and India in 00s.


Lara has 1 ton in win at home in 90s and appear way down the list in impact.

I wasn't even comapring Lara and SRT in impact in above post. I was making a point that Lara is not some high impact player in test cricket with only 5-6 tons in wins and most number of tons in loss. Taken together his imapct wasn't that great to cite his impact when comparing with anyone. I will remember him as a great great batsman, just below SRT and Steven Smith in the last 35 years who could really go big and far better to watch than other two when on song.

 

[Bhaijaan]

I dont think the links are allowed to be shared here but the author produces some very good statistical analysis ( of course based on his own criteria) that is worthwhile reading across several articles.
View attachment 149435

These kind of lists are often fascinating. I often go back to what i once heard from Ian Chappell during commentary that if you’ve watched a good amount of cricket you don’t need to read a lot of stats to call a great player and often that holds truer than such lists. Another such fascinating list is ICC All time Test ranking list where Tendulkar and Wasim I believe both feature a lot lower.

What you just posted, tell me seriously as a cricket fan and after having watched all that cricket how much do you agree with that Top 25 assessment and how near would that be to your Top 25 if you had to make one? I don’t know your Top 25 but i can bet it will be a lot more believable than this one.

 

[Buffet]

You have changed your criteria again when it comes to winning knocks by batsmen.

If bowlers are the primary reasons for teams winning matches then why didn't they step up to win those matches where Lara scored tons?

Bowlers actually had a far far higher impact than Lara in result of tests.

Ambrose has 13 5-fers in wins
Walsh had 10 5-fers in wins.

Lara has 6 tons in wins.

This simply reconfirms what I have been saying. Bowlers are going to have far more impact than batsmen when it comes to winning the test. Batsmen can draw the test but Lara has most number of tons in losses as well.


In long career, youa re going to have Lara, Ambrose, Walsh collectively stepping up to win tests. Above ration shold make it clear who was primarily winning tests for WI then. It was Ambrose and Walsh. Not Lara.

 

[Ab Fan]

Lara is just a Flat track bully. Remove his 375 and 400 on a highway vs a nothing England side in a drawn cause and his average drops below 50. Doesn’t even have longevity of Sachin or all format greatness of him either.

It’s like comparing Ambrose to McGrath. Atleast Ambrose played a role in winning a series in Aus. I would say it’s like comparing Donald to McGrath. Just people have the tendency to rate exciting player more.

 

[Ab Fan]

All format greatness - check
Longevity - check
More runs, better average, more tons - check
World Cup win, player of series, leading run scorer- check

This should not even be a debate anymore. Hope common sense prevails.

 

[Buffet]

Lara is just a Flat track bully. Remove his 375 and 490 on a highway vs a nothing England side in a drawn cause and his average drops below 50. Doesn’t even have longevity of Sachin or all format greatness of him either.

It’s like comparing Ambrose to McGrath.

Nah, just because he went big on flat track, you can't say that he was not good on non-flat tracks. He has some good knocks in Aus on spicy tracks. No one can forget him scoring lots of runs in SL against Murali.

Cashing on on good batting tracks does not make you a FTB. Not doing anything outside of flat flat tracks makes you a one.

Yes, I never liked those non-sense batting record which came at team expense. Many others would have gone for those high indivual records, but opted to not go for it to win tests.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

These kind of lists are often fascinating. I often go back to what i once heard from Ian Chappell during commentary that if you’ve watched a good amount of cricket you don’t need to read a lot of stats to call a great player and often that holds truer than such lists. Another such fascinating list is ICC All time Test ranking list where Tendulkar and Wasim I believe both feature a lot lower.

What you just posted, tell me seriously as a cricket fan and after having watched all that cricket how much do you agree with that Top 25 assessment and how near would that be to your Top 25 if you had to make one? I don’t know your Top 25 but i can bet it will be a lot more believable than this one.

I agree with some of the list. I haven't watched enough of those matches to see it all. I am always open to my viewpoint being changed and such types of analysis are good to challenge your own thinking

From a fan perspective one of the most impactful innings on me personally is when Sehwag hit 300 against us lol that would be top of my impact list.I do remember Lara 153 and the aftermath of it quite well though.

I will struggle to make list of 25 most impactful knocks but will try it as an exercise when I have some time free.

However my conclusion about Tendulkar ( from what I have seen) is that he usually scored when others scored big to win matches or scored in draws losses a lot when nothing was at stake. I have seen this in England quite a bit where I watch most of cricket and in test series against Pakistan.

 

[Fanboy375]

You have changed your criteria again when it comes to winning knocks by batsmen.

If bowlers are the primary reasons for teams winning matches then why didn't they step up to win those matches where Lara scored tons?

Lara impactful knocks come up in most lists that measure impact. There is writer on cricinfo who also takes into account bowling attack quantity and pitch quality. I think it is the best article i have read on impact.


I dont think the links are allowed to be shared here but the author produces some very good statistical analysis ( of course based on his own criteria) that is worthwhile reading across several articles.
View attachment 149435

But Courtney Walsh took 5 wickets in 2nd innings to all out Aus 146 otherwise they would lose.Both Lara and Walsh deserve equal credit

 

[Buffet]

From a fan perspective one of the most impactful innings on me personally is when Sehwag hit 300 against us lol that would be top of my impact list.I do remember Lara 153 and the aftermath of it quite well though.

I think most of us remember such knocks.

But there is difference between having a high impact career vs having a high impact 2-3 knocks without having much impact in rest of the match. As fans, we mix those two.

 

[Ab Fan]

Nah, just because he went big on flat track, you can't say that he was not good on non-flat tracks. He has some good knocks in Aus on spicy tracks. No one can forget him scoring lots of runs in SL against Murali.

Cashing on on good batting tracks does not make you a FTB. Not doing anything outside of flat flat tracks makes you a one.

Yes, I never liked those non-sense batting record which came at team expense. Many others would have gone for those high indivual records, but opted to not go for it to win tests.

You can do it like Steve Smith. He doesn’t have a triple century, he doesn’t need to. But he has hit hundreds and big hundreds on a consistent basis and dominated opposition in different conditions and different situations. This is a guy averaging 56 with bat. No soft runs all valuable runs. Yes some of them maybe on flat deck but scoring 300 and inflating your average there is useless. You should do just about enough to win the game on flat deck and that’s what Smith would do, obviously the condition being bowlers picking 20 wickets.

 

[Fanboy375]

However my conclusion about Tendulkar ( from what I have seen) is that he usually scored when others scored big to win matches or scored in draws losses a lot when nothing was at stake. I have seen this in England quite a bit where I watch most of cricket and in test series against Pakistan.

Yeah but I personally think impact factor is misleading.It is about luck when you hit something big in proper situation.Like Kohli 183 vs Pak.Kohli hasn't scored similar.Sometimes a specific situation allow a specific player to outperform but we shouldn't judge them like that.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

But Courtney Walsh took 5 wickets in 2nd innings to all out Aus 146 otherwise they would lose.Both Lara and Walsh deserve equal credit

There are very few knocks in history where only one suit wins the match single handedly. It is usually a combination of both batting and bowling.

 

[Buffet]

But Courtney Walsh took 5 wickets in 2nd innings to all out Aus 146 otherwise they would lose.Both Lara and Walsh deserve equal credit

Off course , its 11 players playing as a team. Some time batsmen tons and bowlers 5-fers will come at the same time. Other times, it will come at different times.

But we can see how many times Ambrose/Walsh had taken 5-fers in wins and how many times Lara has scored tons in wins. There is no comparison at all.

That's why I have always said, you win tests by outbowling opposition by picking 20 wickets cheaply. You win ODI by outbatting opposition and can win without taking a single wicket. You can't win test without picking a single wickets. relative roles of bastmen and bowlers winning test and ODI is opposite.

Bowlers win you tests. Batsmen can help in win but they can draw the tests on their own. Lara falls short in both.

 

[jnaveen1980]

There are very few knocks in history where only one suit wins the match single handedly. It is usually a combination of both batting and bowling.

Bowlers can win single handedly. Batsmen cannot. Sure they can change the course like Laxman's 281 which changed the game on its head. WIth 42 runs behind followin on INdia had just 6 wickets in hand with just 1 specialist batsman. Once they get past that pair then Australia had to take out Mongia, Zaheer, Bhajji, Raju, PRasad. That innings is better than any innings ever.

 

[Fanboy375]

There are very few knocks in history where only one suit wins the match single handedly. It is usually a combination of both batting and bowling.

Yeah but what can Sachin do if others fails.Once he scored 136 vs. Pak in 1999: In the second innings.Ind had 258, accounting for approximately 52.7% of the team's runs belongs to Sachin.It may not be an impact innings but if others were Sachin's place they would say they did best as a batsman but result isn't in their hand

 

[jnaveen1980]

Yeah but what can Sachin do if others fails.Once he scored 136 vs. Pak in 1999: In the second innings.Ind had 258, accounting for approximately 52.7% of the team's runs belongs to Sachin.It may not be an impact innings but if others were Sachin's place they would say they did best as a batsman but result isn't in their hand

Tailenders dropped the ball. Couldn't score 15 runs with one day to go. That was one of the greatest run chase in 4th innings. Mongia gifted and the game was gone once Tendulkar started experiencing severe back pain. He just wanted to get it over with. he should have taken pain killers like Akram did in that match. If i am right Tendulkar did not want to use by runners back in those days even though it was allowed.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Bowlers can win single handedly. Batsmen cannot. Sure they can change the course like Laxman's 281 which changed the game on its head. WIth 42 runs behind followin on INdia had just 6 wickets in hand with just 1 specialist batsman. Once they get past that pair then Australia had to take out Mongia, Zaheer, Bhajji, Raju, PRasad. That innings is better than any innings ever.

Even bowler winning single handledlt is rare of course you can cut it another way and say opposition batsman played worse than winning batsman. It is difficult to guage but in my opinion both are needed ( you can skew that bowlers are more important to win though probably).

Yeah VVS is a top innings for sure one of the best.

 

[Buffet]

Yeah but what can Sachin do if others fails.Once he scored 136 vs. Pak in 1999: In the second innings.Ind had 258, accounting for approximately 52.7% of the team's runs belongs to Sachin.It may not be an impact innings but if others were Sachin's place they would say they did best as a batsman but result isn't in their hand

Yes, we all can see that it was very good knock. But no one can claim that it changed the result.

But if we make a claim of so and so player having a great impact in changing the results in their career then it's easy to see how often they picked 5-fers in win or tons in wins. It will depend on others playign with them for sure, so it's not so easy to compare wihtout going into details for each comparison.

But we already saw that Lara did not have that high impact in his career when it comes to changing the results. Yet, his 2-3 good knocks remain in memory and many of us wrongly think that Lara had huge impact in changing the results in his career. Lara having impact is not a good point to bring when comparing Lara against anyone.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Even bowler winning single handledlt is rare of course you can cut it another way and say opposition batsman played worse than winning batsman. It is difficult to guage but in my opinion both are needed ( you can skew that bowlers are more important to win though probably).

Yeah VVS is a top innings for sure one of the best.

We should look at captaincy/think tank in that match. There is still some doubt on who made that most crucial call in Test match history. John wright or Ganguly or both. That was sending Laxman at no.3 purely based on Laxman's 59 in the first innings batting at 6. Dravid's score at no.3 before that innings was 200*, 70*,162(vs Zimbabwe), 9, 39, 25(vs Australia). You don't really switch batting position for 3 innings. Laxman looked super comfortable compared to Dravid in the first innings. So they made that move.Rest is history. cricket involves batting, bowling, strategy bit of luck as well.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Yeah but what can Sachin do if others fails.Once he scored 136 vs. Pak in 1999: In the second innings.Ind had 258, accounting for approximately 52.7% of the team's runs belongs to Sachin.It may not be an impact innings but if others were Sachin's place they would say they did best as a batsman but result isn't in their hand

Yeah it was a good knock and will live in Indians fans memory. Epic comeback after out for duck in second innings.

Again this is probably due to my own limitations but I haven't seen Sachin stand out performance during my cricket watching time but I caveat this with I watch series mainly in England and Pakistan until recently where due to decline of Pakistan I watch more countries.

Maybe he did have them. But I always remember someone else scoring big and Sachin also cashing in alongside when it came to big games or wins.

 

[Buffet]

It is difficult to guage but in my opinion both are needed ( you can skew that bowlers are more important to win though probably).

Yes, bowler is not going to defend 50 runs, so both will be needed. It's about relative to each other.

Bold part is true.

In tests, bowlers have more chance to win tests relative to batsmen. There will be always exceptional effort by batsmen to change result of tests, but it will be rare.

In shorter formats, it's other way around. There will be always some exceptional effort by bowlers to win ODI/T20, but it will be rare.

Frequencies will look different for bowlers vs batsmen in longer vs shorter formats.

 

[Fanboy375]

Yeah it was a good knock and will live in Indians fans memory. Epic comeback after out for duck in second innings.

Again this is probably due to my own limitations but I haven't seen Sachin stand out performance during my cricket watching time but I caveat this with I watch series mainly in England and Pakistan until recently where due to decline of Pakistan I watch more countries.

Maybe he did have them. But I always remember someone else scoring big and Sachin also cashing in alongside when it came to big games or wins.

Yeah but one can also find some weird stats that shows some ancient great players like Hutton or Barry (in 1st class) had similar situation like Sachin.Does that means Hutton and Barry are not greats.No! i think this impact argument won't be used if it was about Lara vs Viv or Imran vs Hadlee.Some people have agenda against Sachin (same way people do have agenda against famous players).

 

[Rajdeep]

Now looks like we have developed some sort of a pattern here. On the days of live international cricket, we blame Bumrah.

And the days in between two series when there is no cricket match, we go back to Sachin bashing.

Not sure why are we discussing Sachin vs Lara in 2025? It has been unanimously accepted that Sachin is the 2nd greatest batsman of all time. Unless a player comes and break all his record alone and not in instalment's, no one can or will ever surpass him.

This picture still hurting some people I guess

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Yes, we all can see that it was very good knock. But no one can claim that it changed the result.

But if we make a claim of so and so player having a great impact in changing the results in their career then it's easy to see how often they picked 5-fers in win or tons in wins. It will depend on others playign with them for sure, so it's not so easy to compare wihtout going into details for each comparison.

But we already saw that Lara did not have that high impact in his career when it comes to changing the results. Yet, his 2-3 good knocks remain in memory and many of us wrongly think that Lara had huge impact in changing the results in his career. Lara having impact is not a good point to bring when comparing Lara against anyone.

5-fers is better measure of impact for bowler than 100 for batsman.

If bowler takes 5-fer its almost impossible for others in his team to also get 5.

However, if batsman makes century it doesn't stop all other players from also being able to make centuries.

Perhaps MOTM can be used to judge a batter impact more. Of course this isn't perfect either but may give an indication as to what was felt to be game changing at the time.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Yeah it was a good knock and will live in Indians fans memory. Epic comeback after out for duck in second innings.

Again this is probably due to my own limitations but I haven't seen Sachin stand out performance during my cricket watching time but I caveat this with I watch series mainly in England and Pakistan until recently where due to decline of Pakistan I watch more countries.

Maybe he did have them. But I always remember someone else scoring big and Sachin also cashing in alongside when it came to big games or wins.

Sachin's 155 at 4th day pitch at chennai is an under-rated knock. Sachin knocked the stuffing out of SHane warne in a first class tour game prior to actual test series.

Mumbai vs Australia. Look at the bowling figures of Warne and Sachin's innings in that match. 204 in 9192 balls

Mumbai v Australians at Mumbai (Brabourne), 24-26 February 1998

Then the actual test series started. Tendulkar got out to an impetus shot against Shane warne. Shane warne was gloating after that dismissal. Tendulkar remembered. He unleashed carnage against Shane warne on day 4 pitch by playing against the turn which is something you cannot see in these days. Most likely they will hole out. THat was an absolute mater class. Many took sick day started flooding the stadium moment the news got around Sachin was going bonkers. It was one hell of an i nnings

IND vs AUS Cricket Scorecard, 1st Test at Chennai, March 06 - 10, 1998

Get cricket scorecard of 1st Test, IND vs AUS, Australia tour of India 1997/98 at MA Chidambaram Stadium, Chepauk, Chennai dated March 06 - 10, 1998.

www.espncricinfo.com

He did the same again in the lat test with his 177 in 207 balls. Sadly not many stepped up. India lost

IND vs AUS Cricket Scorecard, 3rd Test at Bengaluru, March 25 - 28, 1998

Get cricket scorecard of 3rd Test, IND vs AUS, Australia tour of India 1997/98 at M Chinnaswamy Stadium, Bangalore dated March 25 - 28, 1998.

www.espncricinfo.com

Here is the difference between Lara. Lara was using a lighter bat. His shots were predominantly ground shots unless he wanted to. Tendulkar was playing with a 3 pound bat which was not ideal for a 20 year old guy That really took toll on him. Many suggested using lighter bat. He didn't want that. He was also ultra aggressive back then. So he would get out softly very often. People don't run to stat book to judge him. There was no cricinfo back then. They just judged based on what they saw live. No youtube to watch highlights. Every you have to see live to judge a player. By 1999 he was already an ATG. Too bad he played only half the tests that rOot played in his first half of his career. He was an under-achiever in my book.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Without looking at this thread i know that certain sections of fans would have said Lara is better than SRT.

Is there any doubt that Lara is not better than SRT?

Brian Lara holds the record for the highest individual score in Test cricket, a massive 400 not out. This is something that Sachin, despite his long and successful career, never achieved. Lara’s ability to dominate the game and post such a huge total shows his exceptional skill and ability to take control in a way few others have.

Lara's ability to score big runs against tough opposition and on challenging pitches stands out. For example, his 277 against Australia in 1999 and his 213 against Sri Lanka in 2001 in challenging conditions are prime examples. He often carried his team to crucial victories, especially when batting conditions weren’t always favorable.

Lara had more consistency in scoring big centuries against some of the best bowling attacks in the world, including Australia, South Africa, and India. While Tendulkar certainly has more runs overall, Lara was more consistent in playing match-winning knocks in difficult situations. His ability to perform under pressure against top teams is a major reason he stands out.

 

[Fanboy375]

You can do it like Steve Smith. He doesn’t have a triple century, he doesn’t need to. But he has hit hundreds and big hundreds on a consistent basis and dominated opposition in different conditions and different situations. This is a guy averaging 56 with bat. No soft runs all valuable runs. Yes some of them maybe on flat deck but scoring 300 and inflating your average there is useless. You should do just about enough to win the game on flat deck and that’s what Smith would do, obviously the condition being bowlers picking 20 wickets.

Yeah except few players big scorer tend to be inconsistent.Like Sehwag has 2 300.Hayden 380 was against Zim.Lara 300s were against pre mid 2000s Eng when their bowling wasn't that good.Gyle with 2 333 and yet has below ave to openers like Smith and Gibbs who lacked such innings.Mahel has 374 yet he ave below Dravid etc