Do you think Sachin Tendulkar was slightly vulnerable under pressure?

[Ted123]

There is no doubt he was the most complete player the world has ever seen. But I believe his vulnerability under pressure was what stopped him from becoming the greatest odi batsmen of all-time as well as the greatest test batsmen of all-time.

This is not some random hamming but there has been quite a few of instances supporting it.

1) His failures in both the WC final and his mediocre record in World Cup knockouts.

2) His poor record in 4th inning in tests.

3) His failure stint as captaincy and not being able to lead his side.

4) His vulnerability while getting into nervous 90s as well as the pressure of records and achievements like 100th ton.

Aside his brilliant ability with the bat, dont you think he had mental weakness in his game or he wasn't the same when heat was absolutely on?

 

[Rahul1]

No.

 

[Hawkeye]

That's like asking, is drinking water made of H2O?

On most of the occasions he did crumble under pressure; he isn't really famous for being a clutch player/good under pressure. That's why Kohli has a huge fan following particularly in this regard.

BUT, he has played some rare iconic knocks as well under pressure, like in 2003 WC.

 

[Peshwa]

How many filters you will use to judge him...

 

[Rahul1]

How many filters you will use to judge him...

No runs on Jupiter. What an Earth track bully.

 

[Hitman]

Try bringing in some statistical figures to make a case. Performance in World Cups, performance in tournament finals, average while chasing, number of centuries while chasing, performance away from home and Asia in Tests, performance in Australia and South Africa in Tests, etc. Those are the challenging and demanding conditions. Try bringing them up and see what are the results.

As for his record in 4th innings, it's better than Brian Lara and Allan Border's average in 4th innings. Also, Steve Waugh averages 25 odd in 4th innings. And kindly have a look at Imran Khan's bowling average and strike rate in 4th innings.

Like I said, try bringing in statistical data to make a case. Opinions might be wrong, numbers and data aren't.

 

[Adijazz1706]

He was ranked #2 by Wisden, so no

 

[Ab Fan]

He is not the best player under pressure but has given enough evidences over the years that we should not question his mental strength.

Making a comeback from that career-threatening tennis- elbow injury and again hitting an unbelievable peak for four years(2007-2011) tells us about his mental strength.

As for captaincy, he just wasnt the leadership material.

He averages 37 in 4th innings in tests. This is not bad by any means.

 

[Hitman]

He was ranked #2 by Wisden, so no

Also makes to the most World XI teams compiled.

 

[Savage]

In one way,He wasn't greatest performer in Underpressure situation(but far from bad).

But in another way,No one dealt with so much pressure of expectations better than him.I have no problem with his performance underpressure overall.

One thing I must say,Tendulkar was not amongst the greatest finishers in ODIs.Although It's not that big of a deal as he was an Opener but still I expected slightly better performance from him in ODI chases.

Had he been better finisher,he would've won more ODI matches.

 

[Junaids]

Sachin Tendulkar was technically excellent by the age of 17.

But he never improved because he wasn't smart enough to identify and rectify his mental weakness.

His appalling fourth innings record speaks volumes. It probably took until the 2-1 home defeat to Pakistan in the 98-99 Tests before the pattern was obvious. That was when I realised that he was not somebody to be feared or even respected in the 4th innings.

The Chennai defeat was highly significant. India required 271 to win, and Tendulkar's masterly 136 got them to 254-6. But with victory just 17 runs away he got out and the last 4 wickets fell for 4 runs.

Three weeks later at Calcutta it happened again. India only needed 279 to win, and Tendulkar got himself run out cheaply.

I can't emphasise strongly enough that he was a brilliant technician. It's just that he didn't have the mental toughness that the very greatest players have by which they simply refuse to get out when the chips are down.

 

[shaz619]

Sachin Tendulkar was technically excellent by the age of 17.

But he never improved because he wasn't smart enough to identify and rectify his mental weakness.

His appalling fourth innings record speaks volumes. It probably took until the 2-1 home defeat to Pakistan in the 98-99 Tests before the pattern was obvious. That was when I realised that he was not somebody to be feared or even respected in the 4th innings.

The Chennai defeat was highly significant. India required 271 to win, and Tendulkar's masterly 136 got them to 254-6. But with victory just 17 runs away he got out and the last 4 wickets fell for 4 runs.

Three weeks later at Calcutta it happened again. India only needed 279 to win, and Tendulkar got himself run out cheaply.

I can't emphasise strongly enough that he was a brilliant technician. It's just that he didn't have the mental toughness that the very greatest players have by which they simply refuse to get out when the chips are down.

Maybe you're right but on top of all the pressure he had to deal with on the cricket pitch he had unrealistic expectations to meet from the people of his country who thought he was a god. Very few have to deal with that pressure every day in addition to the tough circumstances during a Test, so it all was just too much to handle but despite that he did ok

 

[par]

The only time he was not under pressure was when he was bowling.

 

[pakistani pride]

Sachin Tendulkar was technically excellent by the age of 17.

But he never improved because he wasn't smart enough to identify and rectify his mental weakness.

His appalling fourth innings record speaks volumes. It probably took until the 2-1 home defeat to Pakistan in the 98-99 Tests before the pattern was obvious. That was when I realised that he was not somebody to be feared or even respected in the 4th innings.

The Chennai defeat was highly significant. India required 271 to win, and Tendulkar's masterly 136 got them to 254-6. But with victory just 17 runs away he got out and the last 4 wickets fell for 4 runs.

Three weeks later at Calcutta it happened again. India only needed 279 to win, and Tendulkar got himself run out cheaply.

I can't emphasise strongly enough that he was a brilliant technician. It's just that he didn't have the mental toughness that the very greatest players have by which they simply refuse to get out when the chips are down.

Could all be true but unlike all other cricketers he had to carry the burden of a billion people every time he went out to bat. In his case all his innings in india must have felt like 4th innings all the time. Just listen to the roar when an INDIAN batsmen got out during and Tendulker came to the wicket.

 

[Smudger]

Everyone has a weakness unless you are AB de villiers

 

[Hawkeye]

Carrying the burden of expectations of 1 billion people.

Is that the excuse for his not so good show under pressure?

 

[Corridor of Uncertainty]

Time to move on from Sachin bashing.

Pakistanis are becoming increasingly great at trashing heroes - not least their own. There is in fact no hero left - they didn't even spare Edhi.

 

[Hasan123]

Carried his country for 20 years . Not the best under pressure but not as bad as OP is making out.

 

[Chrish]

SRT usually played at least one quality inning per series when India had a chance to win/ draw the series at least on paper.

 

[coy0607]

every person in the world is 'slightly vulnerable' under pressure

thats why its pressure ��

 

[rhony]

I always thought this is the difference between him and Lara. Both equally talented but Lara was more clutch.

 

[ManFan]

The record proves it.

He has more runs than anybody in the WC but his centuries are against minnows and I believe only one helped his team win against a non-minnow.

He failed in the 03' Final and 11' Final.

Lara and Waugh are the toughest mentally of that era.

But than again, there's a reason why we are STILL talking about Tendulkar and not them so often.

 

[RainMan_]

That's like asking, is drinking water made of H2O?

On most of the occasions he did crumble under pressure; he isn't really famous for being a clutch player/good under pressure. That's why Kohli has a huge fan following particularly in this regard.

BUT, he has played some rare iconic knocks as well under pressure, like in 2003 WC.

Wrong. Sachin is one of the greatest pressure players of all time. It's sad to see that u r calling him someone who crumbles under pressure based on ur feelz only...... not facts.

He has always thrived under pressure like most of the ATGs. Nothing can be compared with the pressure of a world cup match against arch rival Pakistan. If he was indeed a lesser pressure player, he wouldn't have had such an astonishing record against Pakistan in every world cup tournament he played against them.

 

[RainMan_]

The record proves it.

He has more runs than anybody in the WC but his centuries are against minnows and I believe only one helped his team win against a non-minnow.

He failed in the 03' Final and 11' Final.

Lara and Waugh are the toughest mentally of that era.

But than again, there's a reason why we are STILL talking about Tendulkar and not them so often.

His records prove nothing.

Look at his tournament final average. If he was a poor big match player who didn't have the mental the mental strength to perform in big matches, then he wouldn't have had the second highest accumulated average in tournament finals only behind the Great viv.

Fact is, he was always great at handling pressure. The way he handled the huge expectations of 1 billion people and still continuesly performed speaks a lot about his ability of handling pressure.

 

[Send1983]

Wrong. Sachin is one of the greatest pressure players of all time. It's sad to see that u r calling him someone who crumbles under pressure based on ur feelz only...... not facts.

He has always thrived under pressure like most of the ATGs. Nothing can be compared with the pressure of a world cup match against arch rival Pakistan. If he was indeed a lesser pressure player, he wouldn't have had such an astonishing record against Pakistan in every world cup tournament he played against them.

That 90 odd he scored against Pak is still hurting them.

 

[Rightarmfast]

Sachin Tendulkar was technically excellent by the age of 17.

But he never improved because he wasn't smart enough to identify and rectify his mental weakness.

His appalling fourth innings record speaks volumes. It probably took until the 2-1 home defeat to Pakistan in the 98-99 Tests before the pattern was obvious. That was when I realised that he was not somebody to be feared or even respected in the 4th innings.

The Chennai defeat was highly significant. India required 271 to win, and Tendulkar's masterly 136 got them to 254-6. But with victory just 17 runs away he got out and the last 4 wickets fell for 4 runs.

Three weeks later at Calcutta it happened again. India only needed 279 to win, and Tendulkar got himself run out cheaply.

I can't emphasise strongly enough that he was a brilliant technician. It's just that he didn't have the mental toughness that the very greatest players have by which they simply refuse to get out when the chips are down.

Did you really watch the matches? Do you remember that Sachin was playing with an injury and still scored a century against Wasim, Saqlain? He was barely able to stand straight in that match and scored a century.
In the next match, it was obvious that the Pakistani player obstructed him and thus ran him out. Any other person with a better sportsman spirit would have asked the umpire to reverse the decision. Yet Sachin did not raise any issue!

Be honest to yourself and be honest with your comments. Don't push your agenda with half baked and fake statements.

 

[ManFan]

His records prove nothing.

Look at his tournament final average. If he was a poor big match player who didn't have the mental the mental strength to perform in big matches, then he wouldn't have had the second highest accumulated average in tournament finals only behind the Great viv.

Fact is, he was always great at handling pressure. The way he handled the huge expectations of 1 billion people and still continuesly performed speaks a lot about his ability of handling pressure.

Yes it does.

Let’s take a closer look at his WC centuries.

The opposition was: Kenya (2x), Namibia, Sri Lanka, England, and South Africa.

He won against Kenya and Namibia but lost and drew against the three non-minnows.

His single most significant innings in a WC was his 98 against PAK in the 03’ WC. That effort should be applauded but it is not as if it was a knockout game but still hats off to him.

Tendulkar has many heroics with the bat but batting under pressure was not one of them.

There are exceptions to the rule like in Chennai in 08’ (may have been Mumbai) but they are not the norm.

 

[ManFan]

Did you really watch the matches? Do you remember that Sachin was playing with an injury and still scored a century against Wasim, Saqlain? He was barely able to stand straight in that match and scored a century.
In the next match, it was obvious that the Pakistani player obstructed him and thus ran him out. Any other person with a better sportsman spirit would have asked the umpire to reverse the decision. Yet Sachin did not raise any issue!

Be honest to yourself and be honest with your comments. Don't push your agenda with half baked and fake statements.

You’re the only one pushing an agenda.

The poster you quoted posted numbers and facts.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

When was Sachin not in pressure? Fans used to expect a century from him every inning and win every match for India. That's not possible in this part of the world.

OP remembers Sachin couldn't perform in the final of the world cup but knows nothing about who took india to final. In the 1996 World Cup when we had so many lallu panju players in our line up sachin alone took india to semi final. Apart from 2007 World Cup he performed in every world cup. Its not his fault that our bowlers always choked in the knockouts that we had to chase difficult targets.

Sachin played innings like Sharjhah where again he first took india to final by scoring the required runs to maintain higher net run rate and then won the final. He played a similar inning against Zimbabwe in 1997 tour of Soutj Africa I think(in Benoni) where he alone helped india to score those runs in required overs to throw Zimbabwe out of the tri angular series.

By just looking at stats alone you will never understand what sachin was and how indian fans always had their heart in their mouth whenever he got out. You can't compare the kind of expectations people had with Sachin with any other cricketer on planet.

 

[ManFan]

When was Sachin not in pressure? Fans used to expect a century from him every inning and win every match for India. That's not possible in this part of the world.

OP remembers Sachin couldn't perform in the final of the world cup but knows nothing about who took india to final. In the 1996 World Cup when we had so many lallu panju players in our line up sachin alone took india to semi final. Apart from 2007 World Cup he performed in every world cup. Its not his fault that our bowlers always choked in the knockouts that we had to chase difficult targets.

Sachin played innings like Sharjhah where again he first took india to final by scoring the required runs to maintain higher net run rate and then won the final. He played a similar inning against Zimbabwe in 1997 tour of Soutj Africa I think(in Benoni) where he alone helped india to score those runs in required overs to throw Zimbabwe out of the tri angular series.

By just looking at stats alone you will never understand what sachin was and how indian fans always had their heart in their mouth whenever he got out. You can't compare the kind of expectations people had with Sachin with any other cricketer on planet.

That’s true. All of it.

But it doesn’t change the fact that he was not a supreme player under pressure like Waugh or Lara.

 

[RainMan_]

Yes it does.

Let’s take a closer look at his WC centuries.

The opposition was: Kenya (2x), Namibia, Sri Lanka, England, and South Africa.

He won against Kenya and Namibia but lost and drew against the three non-minnows.

And it still doesn't prove anything. Let me tell u why.

Against Srilanka he scored a century at a strike rate of 100 while batting first and allowed India to put a big total on the board. Against England, India again choose to bat first and Tendulkar scored a blistering century with a strike rate of well over 100( again) and helped india to put a mammoth score on the board. Same thing happened against SA too.


R u seeing a pattern here? As a batsman he has done his job under tremendous pressure and against all adversaries. U cant blame him for the failure of the Indian Bowlers, Can u? Cricket is team sport. U can only play ur part as a member, but the rest of the team will have to complement ur performance in order to bring a positive result from the match.

His single most significant innings in a WC was his 98 against PAK in the 03’ WC. That effort should be applauded but it is not as if it was a knockout game but still hats off to him.

Tendulkar has many heroics with the bat but batting under pressure was not one of them.

Yes,Tendulkar has always Brought up his A game whenever the stakes were high, especially against arch rival Pakistan. U know the pressure of IND-PAK match in WC, don't u?

It almost feels like a war. But surprisingly tendulkar has an avg of 78 against pak in WC and has won 3 man of the match award out of the 5 times he played against pak in WC. But if u still consider him as someone who crumbles under pressure, then i have nothing more to say.

There are exceptions to the rule like in Chennai in 08’ (may have been Mumbai) but they are not the norm.

As i said bud, Tendulkar has always played Exceptionally well in Big matches. He averages 55 in all tournament finals. Now pls go and compare it with players like Ponting, Wagh or Lara. U will be able to see the difference by yourself.

 

[Savage]

He averages 55 in tournament finals as compared to 44 overall.So question of him being average player in underpressure situation can't be raised.

But Indian fans did have extremely high expectations of Sachin in big matches.For ex-Everyone talked about how he failed to score 100th century in WC 2011 final but hardly anyone cared that he also failed to score 100 before that Final match ie against WI,Aus and Pak or against BAN,IRE and Ned in that WC.

 

[Rahul1]

That’s true. All of it.

But it doesn’t change the fact that he was not a supreme player under pressure like Waugh or Lara.

So that's why both of them average less than Sachin in 4th innings. [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

 

[ManFan]

So that's why both of them average less than Sachin in 4th innings. [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

He beats Lara by 1.82 runs. And still doesn’t have a performance that equals Lara’s 150 in Barbados.

It’s funny. Both Lara and Tendulkar chased a 4th innings total in 1999. Guess which one helped his team to win with inferior batsmen?

Can’t see Waugh’s record though.

 

[PakLFC]

Of course not! Teenda has proved himself under immense pressure. Stop trying to discredit him with these sill threads. He nearly always performed against Pak, no greater pressure match then that.

 

[Prince of Pakistan]

No shame in that as he is not the only one. But yea it did make some respect Dravid more than him.

Pakistan also had a similar situation. The stylist M Yousuf always choked under pressure while YK (the hard worker) got Pak through in especially the fourth innings.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Great batsman but I will be very nervous if he bats for my life. He will score a hundred and then get out to lose his team the match.

 

[RainMan_]

Mighty lara has a tailenderish average of 28 in tournament finals, has an average of 40 in WC with only 2 centuries but based on the feelz of our esteemed experts he's still a pressure player but Tendulkar isn't

 

[giri26]

Mighty lara has a tailenderish average of 28 in tournament finals, has an average of 40 in WC with only 2 centuries but based on the feelz of our esteemed experts he's still a pressure player but Tendulkar isn't

Brian Lara has been always judged by that one innings of 153 no he played against Australia chasing a 350+ total. I agree it was a fantastic knock under pressure but again, one innings alone cannot tell one player better from the other. Lara played a lots of brilliant knocks in his career but his side won only 32 times of the 131 tests he played for West Indies, which is only 24%. It takes a team to win matches an individual cannot win tests unless he is a bowler. People like Michael Slater, Damien Martyn, Justin Langer et all have better win percentage in the games they played to Lara and probably have more match winning hundreds as well, can we consider them as better players than Lara?

 

[Sadevdesai]

What kind of question is that ????? Who is not nervous when under pressure ????

 

[Srtfan]

Lara was goat test batsman ,but in odi he is overrated. And Steve Waugh was the worst batsman after afridi who played 300 odi

 

[Send1983]

Brian Lara has been always judged by that one innings of 153 no he played against Australia chasing a 350+ total. I agree it was a fantastic knock under pressure but again, one innings alone cannot tell one player better from the other. Lara played a lots of brilliant knocks in his career but his side won only 32 times of the 131 tests he played for West Indies, which is only 24%. It takes a team to win matches an individual cannot win tests unless he is a bowler. People like Michael Slater, Damien Martyn, Justin Langer et all have better win percentage in the games they played to Lara and probably have more match winning hundreds as well, can we consider them as better players than Lara?

Only person with zero cricket knowledge would call Slater, Martin, Lehman better than Lara or praise slater/Martin and mock Lara’s matchwinn8ng ability.

 

[giri26]

Only person with zero cricket knowledge would call Slater, Martin, Lehman better than Lara or praise slater/Martin and mock Lara’s matchwinn8ng ability.

Please read the entire post. I wasn't mocking Lara's ability. I am just stating that one batsman cannot win you games, you need a good team to do that. Lara might have done that once against Australia but the reason he has so many great innings in losing cause is because WI were such a poor team for second half of his career. He scored more than 600 runs in SL but WI lost 3-0. While good players like Slater, Langer et all have great record in wins as they played for an ATG side who most often than not converted their runs to victory. Sachin and Lara both suffered from playing for a poor team for most part of their careers.

 

[Ab Fan]

Lara's match winning ability is wayy overstated.

If someone has to say Lara was better then they can say because of Lara's ability to score daddy hundreds at will against best bowling attacks(McGrath, Warne, Murali, Gillispie/Lee) puts him ahead of SRT.

Hard to understand the match winning non-sense because most people have to fail to explain that part clearly. It is not like many of Lara's innings have come in wins either.

Personally, I will pick SRT. He was as complete as anyone the world has seen.

 

[Rightarmfast]

You’re the only one pushing an agenda.

The poster you quoted posted numbers and facts.

which no and which fact? Please show me the nos he has posted in that post. Waiting!

 

[OmaIR1]

Post 2005/6 Tendulkar was no longer a potent force in Cricket. Team India carried Tendulkar until the day he retired after that. It could have been the pressure but I think he just lost his touch and became second to the likes of Yuvraj, Dhoni, Ghambir and Raina.

 

[TQ89]

He was somewhat suspect under pressure especially in his last decade of cricket. In this aspect, Kohli & viv richards surpass him in ODI's.

But i would not hold it against him, he had truck load of injuries after 2003, which is why he was not aggressive like he was in the 1990's where every run he scored had come under pressure. Do read his book where we get to hear a lot about his injuries post 2003 with lot of details & pictures of him being under treatment/surgeries.

 

[Hitman]

Post 2005/6 Tendulkar was no longer a potent force in Cricket. Team India carried Tendulkar until the day he retired after that. It could have been the pressure but I think he just lost his touch and became second to the likes of Yuvraj, Dhoni, Ghambir and Raina.

Team India carried Sachin between 2007 and 2011 World Cup?

 

[Hitman]

Team India carried Sachin between 2007 and 2011 World Cup?

from 2007 till the end of the SA tour in early 2011, here are Sachin's numbers -

Innings - 75; Runs - 4102; Ave - 63.10; 100's - 16; 50's - 17


Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...7;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

 

[Princejain191]

Who isn't?

He was the best batsman in the most cricket-crazy nation. And as a batsman, only one mistake is enough. Of course he was susceptible to pressure, he was human after all.

 

[Hitman]

Team India carried Sachin between 2007 and 2011 World Cup?

In that period, here are his numbers in ODI cricket -

Innings - 77; Runs - 3574; Ave - 50.33, SR - 89.88; 100's - 8; 50's - 21


Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...7;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

 

[Hawkeye]

Who isn't?

He was the best batsman in the most cricket-crazy nation. And as a batsman, only one mistake is enough. Of course he was susceptible to pressure, he was human after all.

Umm, yes everyone is susceptible, but if you use that logic then how on Earth would you rate one sports person better than the other for a particular skill or ability? Can't use that excuse.

Why do some people rate one person as highly capable of handling pressure but the other not as much? It's because there's a difference in ability in that aspect.

Nobody would choose SRT over Kohli when the scenario you put them in is when chips are down or a high pressure match situation.

You have the answer.

 

[OmaIR1]

Team India carried Sachin between 2007 and 2011 World Cup?

As in, he was not the head of the pack when it came to batting. I wasn't afraid to see Tendulkar at the crease while the others around him were the real threats. When you're batting with a bunch of players who can carry you in the team you will look great. I remember watching India vs Pakistan games (such as Mohali 2011) and I was happy to see Tendulkar there batting @ a 70 SR. Had he got out earlier who knows the damage the others would have caused.

Sure, pre 2005, Tendulkar was team India's batting but after that his batting deteriorated and he was no longer a threat in my opinion.

 

[Hitman]

As in, he was not the head of the pack when it came to batting. I wasn't afraid to see Tendulkar at the crease while the others around him were the real threats. When you're batting with a bunch of players who can carry you in the team you will look great. I remember watching India vs Pakistan games (such as Mohali 2011) and I was happy to see Tendulkar there batting @ a 70 SR. Had he got out earlier who knows the damage the others would have caused.

Sure, pre 2005, Tendulkar was team India's batting but after that his batting deteriorated and he was no longer a threat in my opinion.

You never said that Sachin was no longer the main threat for the opposition since 2005/06, you clearly said that Team India carried Sachin since 2005/06, which means that he wasn't good enough to be in the team but was carried as a passenger. What does those numbers I posted tell you? He by himself scored those runs and centuries, his team mates didn't score it for him to make him look good.

 

[Send1983]

Please read the entire post. I wasn't mocking Lara's ability. I am just stating that one batsman cannot win you games, you need a good team to do that. Lara might have done that once against Australia but the reason he has so many great innings in losing cause is because WI were such a poor team for second half of his career. He scored more than 600 runs in SL but WI lost 3-0. While good players like Slater, Langer et all have great record in wins as they played for an ATG side who most often than not converted their runs to victory. Sachin and Lara both suffered from playing for a poor team for most part of their careers.

I was talking in general here.

 

[OmaIR1]

You never said that Sachin was no longer the main threat for the opposition since 2005/06, you clearly said that Team India carried Sachin since 2005/06, which means that he wasn't good enough to be in the team but was carried as a passenger. What does those numbers I posted tell you? He by himself scored those runs and centuries, his team mates didn't score it for him to make him look good.

He was not the main threat + I don't think he was good enough to be in the team. His name, past achievements and "god" like status in India allowed him to retain his place. In the last 5 years of his career he was easily carried by the team. There were many players sitting in the bench that could take his spot.

 

[Hitman]

He was not the main threat + I don't think he was good enough to be in the team. His name, past achievements and "god" like status in India allowed him to retain his place. In the last 5 years of his career he was easily carried by the team. There were many players sitting in the bench that could take his spot.

And those numbers I posted suggest what you just said?

 

[Ab Fan]

And it still doesn't prove anything. Let me tell u why.

Against Srilanka he scored a century at a strike rate of 100 while batting first and allowed India to put a big total on the board. Against England, India again choose to bat first and Tendulkar scored a blistering century with a strike rate of well over 100( again) and helped india to put a mammoth score on the board. Same thing happened against SA too.


R u seeing a pattern here? As a batsman he has done his job under tremendous pressure and against all adversaries. U cant blame him for the failure of the Indian Bowlers, Can u? Cricket is team sport. U can only play ur part as a member, but the rest of the team will have to complement ur performance in order to bring a positive result from the match.



Yes,Tendulkar has always Brought up his A game whenever the stakes were high, especially against arch rival Pakistan. U know the pressure of IND-PAK match in WC, don't u?

It almost feels like a war. But surprisingly tendulkar has an avg of 78 against pak in WC and has won 3 man of the match award out of the 5 times he played against pak in WC. But if u still consider him as someone who crumbles under pressure, then i have nothing more to say.



As i said bud, Tendulkar has always played Exceptionally well in Big matches. He averages 55 in all tournament finals. Now pls go and compare it with players like Ponting, Wagh or Lara. U will be able to see the difference by yourself.

Excellent post!

India lost matches against Sri Lanka, England and South Africa in World Cup because of their bowling. Tendulkar is the last one to be put into question for that.

Will we question Ricky Ponting for the loss against India in quarter final 2011 where he scored a hundred in losing cause?

Or does it make any sense to blame Mahela Jayawardene for the WC final inning he played against India 2011 in losing cause? It was actually his best knock and he is the last person to be criticised for that WC final loss.

 

[Ab Fan]

He was not the main threat + I don't think he was good enough to be in the team. His name, past achievements and "god" like status in India allowed him to retain his place. <B>In the last 5 years of his career he was easily carried by the team.</B> There were many players sitting in the bench that could take his spot.

SRT was suffering from tennis elbow which delted his career between 2003-2006 when he was going through a rough patch and there was a time when he felt of retiring after WC 2007. However, he recovered back from that very strongly and had a great phase between 2007-2011 where he was averaging 60+ and also became the no.1 batsmen in ICC rankings in 2010.

I recall he was awarded player of the year in 2010 . It was after 2011 World Cup that he was past his career and then hanged on a year more.

Saying last 5 years is ridiculous because he was no.1 ranked test batsmen in 2010. Recall the series against South Africa away.

 

[Hitman]

SRT was suffering from tennis elbow which delted his career between 2003-2006 when he was going through a rough patch and there was a time when he felt of retiring after WC 2007. However, he recovered back from that very strongly and had a great phase between 2007-2011 where he was averaging 60+ and also became the no.1 batsmen in ICC rankings in 2010.

I recall he was awarded player of the year in 2010 . It was after 2011 World Cup that he was past his career and then hanged on a year more.

Saying last 5 years is ridiculous because he was no.1 ranked test batsmen in 2010. Recall the series against South Africa away.

So the one who won the ICC Player of the Year award in 2010, and was the #1 ranked Test batsman in the world was being carried by his team based on his past reputation )

 

[OmaIR1]

SRT was suffering from tennis elbow which delted his career between 2003-2006 when he was going through a rough patch and there was a time when he felt of retiring after WC 2007. However, he recovered back from that very strongly and had a great phase between 2007-2011 where he was averaging 60+ and also became the no.1 batsmen in ICC rankings in 2010.

I recall he was awarded player of the year in 2010 . It was after 2011 World Cup that he was past his career and then hanged on a year more.

Saying last 5 years is ridiculous because he was no.1 ranked test batsmen in 2010. Recall the series against South Africa away.

It's possible the tennis elbow had something to do with it but I still don't believe he was the best choice in the later stages of his career. By being carried by the team I mean he was given preference over other Indian players who were more destructive and potent than him because of his "god" like status. He was allowed to play the way he did because of the others in the team as well.

 

[Ab Fan]

So the one who won the ICC Player of the Year award in 2010, and was the #1 ranked Test batsman in the world was being carried by his team based on his past reputation )

He stood up against Dale Steyn at that age in South Africa.

It was after 2011 WC that he was past it and I felt he should have call it off in 2012 in one of the home series against either Australia or England. He carried on till 2013 but it is acceptable. Many players have done this over their career.

 

[Ab Fan]

It's possible the tennis elbow had something to do with it but I still don't believe he was the best choice in the later stages of his career. By being carried by the team I mean he was given preference over other Indian players who were more destructive and potent than him because of his "god" like status. He was allowed to play the way he did because of the others in the team as well.

He was one of the best batsmen going around between 2007-2010 and averaged over 60 in test cricket during that time. That was the time India was no.1 in test format and yes, it is true that he had luxury of a legendary batting lineup at that time but averaging over 60 was no mean feat.It is absurd to say that he was carried by his team at that time.

He was past after 2011 WC only and felt was carried by the team from then till 2013. Should have called it off in 2012 in one of the home season against Australia or England.

 

[sshakir411]

Slightly? I'd say he wad under severe pressure starting from 2002....I think he would have achieved more had Indian fans given him some space to fail and under perform.

 

[Buffet]

That’s true. All of it.

But it doesn’t change the fact that he was not a supreme player under pressure like Waugh or Lara.

Lara in ODI:

Finals - avg 28

Semi + Finals - Avg 34

SRT in ODI:

Finals - avg 54

Finals + Semi - Avg 51
.
.

Lara/SRT in Test:

Lara has total 4-5 tons in wins against non-minnows. Yes, he had weaker batting line up, but he had luxury to play with ATG bowlers and yet just 4-5 wins against non-minnows. I am going by memory here and not even going to look SRT's tons in wins.

I am not going to argue SRT being the best player under pressure, but seriously, what's with Lara here? Lara is hardly even close to the best batsman under pressure. Yah, I know he played few gun knocks, but many player have played few gun knocks and they don't deserve to be called as best pressure player.

 

[Third_Umpire]

A statistician's delight, but don't count on him to finish games.

 

[Ab Fan]

Lara in ODI:

Finals - avg 28

Semi + Finals - Avg 34

SRT in ODI:

Finals - avg 54

Finals + Semi - Avg 51
.
.

Lara/SRT in Test:

Lara has total 4-5 tons in wins against non-minnows. Yes, he had weaker batting line up, but he had luxury to play with ATG bowlers and yet just 4-5 wins against non-minnows. I am going by memory here and not even going to look SRT's tons in wins.

I am not going to argue SRT being the best player under pressure, but seriously, what's with Lara here? Lara is hardly even close to the best batsman under pressure. Yah, I know he played few gun knocks, but many player have played few gun knocks and they don't deserve to be called as best pressure player.

Ponting once said:-

"Sachin was the best batsmen but Lara was the most feared one and would won more matches".

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...Sachin-best-but-Lara-won-more-matches-Ponting

I felt this along with Wisden not placing any SRT inning in Top 100 knocks(Lara's inning was put no.1) was the reason this perception has come up.

I can understand Ponting's point here. What he want to say is that Lara once set will score a daddy hundred(200 at times) and that will be enough to impact the game while Tendulkar's fluent hundreds on consistent basis didnt changed the course of the game much.

 

[Buffet]

Ponting once said:-

"Sachin was the best batsmen but Lara was the most feared one and would won more matches".

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...Sachin-best-but-Lara-won-more-matches-Ponting

I felt this along with Wisden not placing any SRT inning in Top 100 knocks(Lara's inning was put no.1) was the reason this perception has come up.

I can understand Ponting's point here. What he want to say is that Lara once set will score a daddy hundred(200 at times) and that will be enough to impact the game while Tendulkar's fluent hundreds on consistent basis didnt changed the course of the game much.

Then how come those Daddy hundreds helped WI win just 4-5 tests in his entire career against non-minnows? Many of his big scores were utterly useless ones and some were good knocks in losing cause, but I don't see how Lara shaped more games.

 

[Buffet]

Lara shaped 2-3 games better than most, but he hardly shaped more games than most test batsmen let alone SRT.

 

[Ab Fan]

Then how come those Daddy hundreds helped WI win just 4-5 tests in his entire career against non-minnows? Many of his big scores were utterly useless ones and some were good knocks in losing cause, but I don't see how Lara shaped more games.

I would say most of his daddy hundreds (particularly double hundreds) came in drawn cause. When you score double hundreds, it impacts game more often than not.

A fluent hundred might not be enough and your team may still lose matches but when you score double hundreds (Lara has 11 I think and dont know which all against minnows but quite a few against Australia), it does impact a game more often than not. A 200 in a match is always impactful.

<B>However, they didnt win WI matches and hence the match winner logic goes into dust. But it can be said that he was one of the most feared batsmen because of his ability to hit daddy hundreds.</B>

 

[Ab Fan]

Edit:- 9 double hundred, none against minnows.

 

[Buffet]

Edit:- 9 double hundred, none against minnows.

From just memory, some of the double tons were utterly useless. He simply continued batting for record despite draw was secured. I will have to look up details, but just going by what I remember. You can still argue that those useless doubles also shaped the match by making sure that WI didn't lose, but Lara is hardly a great example of pressure player specially when you talk about top few in history.

Fantastic batsman for sure and loved watching him, but his match winner reputation seems to come due to 2-3 knocks in the test formats. That's simply not enough in my opinion.

 

[Ab Fan]

From just memory, some of the double tons were utterly useless. He simply continued batting for record despite draw was secured. I will have to look up details, but just going by what I remember. You can still argue that those useless doubles also shaped the match by making sure that WI didn't lose, but Lara is hardly a great example of pressure player specially when you talk about top few in history.

Fantastic batsman for sure and loved watching him, but his match winner reputation seems to come due to 2-3 knocks in the test formats. That's simply not enough in my opinion.

Hence why I rate SRT higher than Lara.

One or two instances like Tendulkar failed to chase in Chennai 1999 while Lara succeeded the same year(thanks to dropped catch) isn't enough.

 

[KingKhanWC]

He was very vulnerable under pressure. Having a billion people behind him wasn't pressure, as he knew failure made no difference to his selection.

Average in 4th innings and poor in major finals. A top batsmen but when it came to the business end, he bottled it many times.

 

[Abdul]

When was he ever not under pressure?

 

[RainMan_]

When was he ever not under pressure?

These days we call players great and pass our judgements based on our feelz, not facts. Don't get surprised.

Tendulkar has always been solid as a rock under all types of pressure. One of the greatest big match players of all time.

 

[Gubol123]

I think everyone is slightly vulnerable under pressure

 

[Napa]

I don't really care a whole lot for JAMODIs, the games that stick to my mind are the WC games. Apropos Tendulkar, two of the biggest games were the 2003 and 2011 WC games against Pakistan, in which he scored match-winning knocks of 98 and 85 and was MoM both times. Of course you can argue that the 85 was lucky, being dropped by Pakistani fielders no less than 4 times. It is also possible that rather than being "vulnerable under pressure", his greatness created pressure. Imagine the fielder running towards the ball to catch it, the thought must cross his mind "am I really going to catch it and get Tendulkar out?".

 

[Bhaijaan]

He played most of his cricket under the sort of pressure and expectations no other cricketer has had to endure. In that sense he probably has been the finest player under pressure.

 

[Robert]

There is no doubt he was the most complete player the world has ever seen. But I believe his vulnerability under pressure was what stopped him from becoming the greatest odi batsmen of all-time as well as the greatest test batsmen of all-time.

This is not some random hamming but there has been quite a few of instances supporting it.

1) His failures in both the WC final and his mediocre record in World Cup knockouts.

2) His poor record in 4th inning in tests.

3) His failure stint as captaincy and not being able to lead his side.

4) His vulnerability while getting into nervous 90s as well as the pressure of records and achievements like 100th ton.

Aside his brilliant ability with the bat, dont you think he had mental weakness in his game or he wasn't the same when heat was absolutely on?

I felt that now and again he would go AWOL in pressure situations and leave it to his Wall or his VVS. This was why I always rated Lara higher.

But 2 is a red herring, as I would expect a to batter to score the bulk of his runs in the first dig, imposing himself on the game when the match is being shaped, not reading to it later. So this indicator would suggest he was good under pressure. Bat once, bat big.