Overall who was a better cricketer? Sachin Tendulkar or Imran Khan?

[Buffet]

If you see the records accumulated by Tendulkar, he is at the top of run getters in Test Matches, 51 centuries, that is an insane number of centuries whichever way you look at it. He is no.1 on his list, Khan is no.20. That is the point I am trying to raise.

Well, that's not a hidden fact. Anyway, SRT's reputation is not due to 51 test tons. He was rated among the top 3 batsman half way in his career by many. Most people focus on that. Also, a genuine pacer is not going to play long enough to top wicket takers list. It's just the nature of job here. I already admit that SRT was superior to IK in his primary skill, but when you add secondary skill, it's not so easy to say that SRT was ahead. You can put him ahead and that's fine, but it's not a clear cut case for me.

 

[ManFan]

Yes, we look at other players from the same ignorant spectacles that others look at our players. Half the people don't even know what Imran was to Pakistan cricket, likewise we can't say the same what Marshall or Hadlee were for their countries. Imran's impact remained till the 80s-90s. But then others topped him off. Sachin won't be topped until someone actually surpasses him in runs or centuries for that matter.

But what was Sachin's impact besides scoring mountains of runs to no memorable victory? Lara was able to beat an ATG AUS team with a much inferior team all by himself. Sachin only made Indians want to bat, that's his impact. Ganguly and Dhoni rather had a greater impact on Indian cricket. Tendulkar sold tickets while the latter two won matches.

 

[Buffet]

Yes, we look at other players from the same ignorant spectacles that others look at our players. Half the people don't even know what Imran was to Pakistan cricket, likewise we can't say the same what Marshall or Hadlee were for their countries. Imran's impact remained till the 80s-90s. But then others topped him off. Sachin won't be topped until someone actually surpasses him in runs or centuries for that matter.

SRT's having an impact on future generation or IK having an impact on future generation shouldn't be compared. You can talk about their impact when inside the field and that can be compared.

I do agree that most Pakistanis won't understand what impact a non-Pakistani had on future generation the same way they will understand this point about IK, but I don't think we should get into that kind of argument when comparing players. Comparison should be limited to how they performed and how long they performed for any two players.

 

[Bilal7]

I'd rather have Imran Khan bat for me in a World Cup final than Sachin Tendulker any day of the week.

 

[Teshi98]

I'd rather have Imran Khan bat for me in a World Cup final than Sachin Tendulker any day of the week.

Only you would be the one doing it. Imran played a good innings in final but his innings in sf against nz would have been rated among the worst if not for inzamam's great knock.
On the topic imran is ahead of sachin but only due to big difference in imran test batting and sachin's test bowling.
Not as straightforward you make it out to be.

 

[Buffet]

But what was Sachin's impact besides scoring mountains of runs to no memorable victory?

It's a ridiculous statement to make for someone who has 50+ tons in wins. 5-fers and tons are compared often. To put it in perspective, IK has 11 5-fers in entire career in win.

50+ tons in win by SRT vs 11 5-fers in win by IK. . Now I will not say that SRT had 5 times the impact here due to these numbers, but putting it here because I see many PPers saying that no impact by SRT. Clearly, SRT had a huge impact. Most batsmen don't even have 50+ tons in career.

As far far as memorable goes, it will vary for person to person but SRT's tons took his team over the line 50+ times. If that's not an impact then I am not sure. Anyway, impact of players can't be compared one to one because there are lots of different factors which leads to win and number of tons/5-fers.

Lara and impact shouldn't be used as an example to prove others didn't have impact. He has a grand total of 4-5 tons in wins against non-minnows in the test format despite having ATG bowlers playing alongside him.

 

[Buffet]

I'd rather have Imran Khan bat for me in a World Cup final than Sachin Tendulker any day of the week.

And many will have SRT over IK to take their team to final

 

[Chrish]

Neither can hold a candle to sobers.

 

[Buffet]

Neither can hold a candle to sobers.

That's an exaggeration.

 

[Chrish]

That's an exaggeration.

Nah. Sobers is better cricketer than both. The view is unanimous among fans and pundits alike who saw these players in action

 

[ManFan]

It's a ridiculous statement to make for someone who has 50+ tons in wins. 5-fers and tons are compared often. To put it in perspective, IK has 11 5-fers in entire career in win.

50+ tons in win by SRT vs 11 5-fers in win by IK. . Now I will not say that SRT had 5 times the impact here due to these numbers, but putting it here because I see many PPers saying that no impact by SRT. Clearly, SRT had a huge impact. Most batsmen don't even have 50+ tons in career.

Walsh is not an ATG for the same reason Anderson is not. Having 500 wickets in mostly favorable conditions is not impressive. Ambrose was an ATG but you can't expect a team to win with one performing bowler and batsman. Sachin did not have any MEMORABLE runs scored. His 175 against AUS, Chennai innings, WC Centuries against non-minnows, all ended in losses or ties. His only noteworthy performances are his 200 against SA and twin centuries in the Desert against AUS, one in which he lost. Imran has had unforgettable performances, 7-fer in WI, 7-fer in England that gave PAK 1-0 win, 7-fer against India, 40 wickets on dead flat tracks, match winnings 67 from 41 balls against Benjamin, Marshall, Ambrose, Bishop. IK made Pakistanis believe in aggressive fast bowling and contributed to the art of reverse-swing. What did SRT do? Make Indians want to become batsman? Never taught them how to win, how to be aggressive, how to be fitter, or any innovative shot either. IK's 11 5-fer's are better than SRT's 50 tons especially if you consider the occasions and opposition they came against. >

 

[Buffet]

Nah. Sobers is better cricketer than both. The view is unanimous among fans and pundits alike who saw these players in action

Pundits, who have seen across generations, always hype players they saw earlier. Players always hype players who played with them in their 20s and 30s. Same is true for all pundits.

I won't discount their view totally, but I will not simply take their views as gospel.

 

[ManFan]

Nah. Sobers is better cricketer than both. The view is unanimous among fans and pundits alike who saw these players in action

Sobers as a batsman:
Better than IK
Inferior to Sachin
Sobers as a bowler:
Better than Sachin
Inferior to IK

 

[Chrish]

Pundits, who have seen across generations, always hype players they saw earlier. Players always hype players who played with them in their 20s and 30s. Same is true for all pundits.

I won't discount their view totally, but I will not simply take their views as gospel.

Not necessarily when it's as unanimous as the case with the Sobers. And in his case, all the players who played with/ against him say the same thing. Some players played with/ against him at the very beginning of his career (Miller) and many toward the end of his career (Lillie). So, they weren't glorifying the Cricketer from "their" era.

So, you can filter out which view is genuine and which is hogwash after careful examination.

 

[Chrish]

Sobers as a batsman:
Better than IK
Inferior to Sachin
Sobers as a bowler:
Better than Sachin
Inferior to IK

Not necessarily. I rate Sachin as a batsman higher but tat's my personal preference. There isn't any argument that proves that Sobers wasn't as good or even better than Sachin.

And you forgot fielding where Sobers was light years ahead of both.

 

[ManFan]

Not necessarily. I rate Sachin as a batsman higher but tat's my personal preference. There isn't any argument that proves that Sobers wasn't as good or even better than Sachin.

And you forgot fielding where Sobers was light years ahead of both.

Yes, in fielding Sobers was better than both.

 

[Buffet]

Sachin did not have any MEMORABLE runs scored.

If I recall it right then 194 in Pakistan in first series win for India in Pakistan and legendary kncok of 98 in centurion in WC against Pakistan. Just these two knocks should be enough to prove above statement false.

But let's say that for obvioius reasons you don't rememebr those knocks

Then you can look up 2-0 win against Australia in the best-of-three finals in Aus - SRT in those two finals - 117
Or you can simply stick to knocks against ATG Aus team or Steyn and Co in the test format. Or you can look up why he is one of the most successful batsman in WC history. If I am right then 3 times he got MOM against Pakistan and I thought that may be memorable to you, but let's move on.

Point is simple. Due to playing at very high standard for such a long time, SRT is bound to have lots of runs/tons in carrying his team over the line. Every single one of those tons will be memorable to some fans. IK had relatively a much shorter career across formats. He will obviously have far less occasions to make difference. Still, he surely stepped up and made a huge difference in many occasion and that's why we are even comparing these players.

Having said that it's clear that some performances won't be memorable to you and some won't be memorable to other fans, but SRT does have plenty of memorable knocks.

 

[Ab Fan]

If I recall it right then 194 in Pakistan in first series win for India in Pakistan and legendary kncok of 98 in centurion in WC against Pakistan. Just these two knocks should be enough to prove above statement false.

But let's say that for obvioius reasons you don't rememebr those knocks

Then you can look up 2-0 win against Australia in the best-of-three finals in Aus - SRT in those two finals - 117
Or you can simply stick to knocks against ATG Aus team or Steyn and Co in the test format. Or you can look up why he is one of the most successful batsman in WC history. If I am right then 3 times he got MOM against Pakistan and I thought that may be memorable to you, but let's move on.

Point is simple. Due to playing at very high standard for such a long time, SRT is bound to have lots of runs/tons in carrying his team over the line. Every single one of those tons will be memorable to some fans. IK had relatively a much shorter career across formats. He will obviously have far less occasions to make difference. Still, he surely stepped up and made a huge difference in many occasion and that's why we are even comparing these players.

Having said that it's clear that some performances won't be memorable to you and some won't be memorable to other fans, but SRT does have plenty of memorable knocks.

LOL..also add dismantling Shane Warne to that.And I think he got a 100 Vs McGrath in 96 WC too although McGrath won the battle in WC final 2003 while defending a never heard 359 at that time.

There is no doubt that he has been phenomenal against top quality bowling attack.

There are some players superior to him under pressure but in every other aspect of the game, Sachin takes this.

 

[Tusker]

You seriously might be the only guy in the world who would take Kohli over Ashwin in Tests in India lol. Take Pujara instead of Kohli and we have a very serious conversation here. Kohli is not even half the player Ashwin is in Asian conditions.

Try understand what is said before jumping to conclusions. I never said Kohli > Ashwin. What I said is Ashwin cannot replace Kohli because his batting is nowhere remotely close to Kohli's batting which is what you alluded to claiming Imran cold replzce SRT. And I am not even bringing his fielding and Captaincy.

 

[Proactive_]

Try understand what is said before jumping to conclusions. I never said Kohli > Ashwin. What I said is Ashwin cannot replace Kohli because his batting is nowhere remotely close to Kohli's batting which is what you alluded to claiming Imran cold replzce SRT. And I am not even bringing his fielding and Captaincy.

Except the fact that I never claimed that Imran the batsman could replace Sachin the batsman. The debate is on who the better cricketer is. There is no talk about who should replace who in the team.

 

[Tusker]

Except the fact that I never claimed that Imran the batsman could replace Sachin the batsman. The debate is on who the better cricketer is. There is no talk about who should replace who in the team.

See your quote in post#24 aND my response. You said "I would take IK over SRT in the IND team" what does that mean other than replacing SRT ?

 

[Proactive_]

See your quote in post#24 aND my response. You said "I would take IK over SRT in the IND team" what does that mean other than replacing SRT ?

This is your exact reply:

BTW Ashwin has comparable bowling stats to Imran in Test Cricket at this stage and is a better batsman than Imran ... so according to your logic Ashwin is prefered over Kohli who does not even bowl part time unlike Tendulkar?

You said that by my logic Ashwin is preferred over Kohli - which is obviously true in case of Asian conditions. Ashwin is a much better and valuable player than Kohli in Asia. If I had to choose one between these two in Asia, I'd choose Ashwin any day of the week.

Similarly, Indian batting line up in the 2000s was already strong. If as in hypothetically, there was someone like Imran in the Indian team in place of Tendulkar, India would have performed much better, especially overseas because their achilles heel which was fast bowling would have been more than addressed by a bowler of the caliber of Imran in the team who would have also been a stable bat in the lower middle order.

 

[Bilal7]

And many will have SRT over IK to take their team to final

Yes, both Sachin and Imran have done superbly in WC matches but only one of them delivered with the bat in a WC final and ironically, it wasn't the specialist batsman.

Only you would be the one doing it. Imran played a good innings in final but his innings in sf against nz would have been rated among the worst if not for inzamam's great knock.
On the topic imran is ahead of sachin but only due to big difference in imran test batting and sachin's test bowling.
Not as straightforward you make it out to be.

Ifs and buts again. Sachin would have been known as the biggest choker in history if his second WC final failure would have lost India a second WC final.

Imran picked Inzamam in the team when most wanted him dropped. That is yet another indication of Imran's genius captaincy.

 

[Bilal7]

This is your exact reply:



You said that by my logic Ashwin is preferred over Kohli - which is obviously true in case of Asian conditions. Ashwin is a much better and valuable player than Kohli in Asia. If I had to choose one between these two in Asia, I'd choose Ashwin any day of the week.

Similarly, Indian batting line up in the 2000s was already strong. If as in hypothetically, there was someone like Imran in the Indian team in place of Tendulkar, India would have performed much better, especially overseas because their achilles heel which was fast bowling would have been more than addressed by a bowler of the caliber of Imran in the team who would have also been a stable bat in the lower middle order.

I would pick Ashwi over Kohli in Asian conditions too. Anyone would.

You're also right about picking Imran over Sachin. Bowlers win test matches, not batsmen and Imran was one of the greatest match-winners of all time. Then, you add the average of 40 and the fact that he's a better captain than any Indian ever and you have someone that would be literally worshipped in that country.

 

[Tusker]

This is your exact reply:



You said that by my logic Ashwin is preferred over Kohli - which is obviously true in case of Asian conditions. Ashwin is a much better and valuable player than Kohli in Asia. If I had to choose one between these two in Asia, I'd choose Ashwin any day of the week.

Similarly, Indian batting line up in the 2000s was already strong. If as in hypothetically, there was someone like Imran in the Indian team in place of Tendulkar, India would have performed much better, especially overseas because their achilles heel which was fast bowling would have been more than addressed by a bowler of the caliber of Imran in the team who would have also been a stable bat in the lower middle order.

So you did talk about replacing SRT with Imran then . Just want to make sure before I waste time arguing with you. If not now is the time to take the exit. And keep in mind that this includes ODI'S too.

 

[Proactive_]

So you did talk about replacing SRT with Imran then . Just want to make sure before I waste time arguing with you. If not now is the time to take the exit. And keep in mind that this includes ODI'S too.

So you concede that Imran would have been a great replacement for Tendulkar in the Indian Test team? If yes, then of course we can move on to ODIs.

 

[Sachin136]

Nah. Sobers is better cricketer than both. The view is unanimous among fans and pundits alike who saw these players in action

That is if you aren't capable of making conclusions of your own and have to rely on others' biased opinions. Imran was much better as an allrounder and Sachin as a batsman than Sobers.

 

[waleed88]

See what you make of this, India has moved on from Gavaskar and Kapil.

Tendulkar is their present day ATG, and Kohli is their future legend...

Us Pakistanis are still stuck in the 80s trying to big up Imran Khan's achievements

Shows how far both cricket teams have come from ogling about the past..

 

[zn426]

See what you make of this, India has moved on from Gavaskar and Kapil.

Tendulkar is their present day ATG, and Kohli is their future legend...

Us Pakistanis are still stuck in the 80s trying to big up Imran Khan's achievements

Shows how far both cricket teams have come from ogling about the past..

Sarfraz is already close to Imran's achievements as an LOI captain and quite frankly the run the team is having under him is as good as anything the 90s teams achieved. I'm looking forward to seeing us play better teams home and away.

 

[Buffet]

See what you make of this, India has moved on from Gavaskar and Kapil.

Tendulkar is their present day ATG, and Kohli is their future legend...

Us Pakistanis are still stuck in the 80s trying to big up Imran Khan's achievements

Shows how far both cricket teams have come from ogling about the past..

Well, thread is about comparing IK and SRT. PPers can't compare these two without trying to big up IK's achievements.

 

[waleed88]

Well, thread is about comparing IK and SRT. PPers can't compare these two without trying to big up IK's achievements.

Yes because he was the biggest thing to come in Pakistan's cricket. But he's from the 80s and we are in 2017

 

[Hasan123]

Sachin Tendulkar

 

[Tusker]

So you concede that Imran would have been a great replacement for Tendulkar in the Indian Test team? If yes, then of course we can move on to ODIs.

Absolutely not. Please enlighten us how this replacement business works given that SRT played more than twice( 2.27 ) as much as IK and 2.6 times in ODI'S.

 

[Mamoon]

Repectfully disagree ... I have found many errors and logical problems with his long winded threads that many people don't bother to scrutinize ... once you do it he wont even talk to you after that. Did you seriously read the whole OP in this thread ?

I try to read most of it if I have the time, but I like his threads because they offer a different and refreshing perspective. I respect his outlook on the game.

 

[Mamoon]

Imran had 6 centuries while Kallis only had 5 five-wicket-hauls ( 2 were against BD and the horrendous WI team ). Imran's batting is far superior to Kallis' bowling in Test cricket. I agree he is not an ATG batsman and #6 where he generally batted, required him to face both the old and new ball. Test cricket is all about discipline with the ability to score runs at a consistent rate. When Imran batted, a run rate of 3 was standard and 4 was splendid. Nowadays, a run rate of 4+ is generally expected from top teams. Imran executed his role to perfection as far as batting is concerned. Imran's ability with the ball is unquestioned as evident by his 23 wickets in the 87 tour of the WI team at the fag end of his career. Although Sachin broke every record for a batsman, he is not remembered as a match-winner. In fact, if you wanted someone to bat and chase 300+ on Day 5, most people would choose Lara over Sachin. Sachin failed when it mattered the most ( 03' Final, 11 Final, 09' CT ) and most of his centuries in WC's were against weak teams like Kenya, Namibia. His only noteworthy centuries came against SL, ENG, and SA which were all lost or tied. IK meanwhile averaged 35 with the bat and 19 with the ball making 1 century against SL which won the match for his team. Despite not having a 5-wicket-hual in the WC, the two teams he did have 4-wickets against ( WI and ENG ), his team won the match. Not only is Imran a greater match-winner and cricketer in Test but also in the World Cup which is the benchmark for ODI cricket.

It is difficult to juxtapose a century and a 5 wicket haul because a direct comparison is complicated to establish. The reason why I compared these two is because fans of both players overhype their secondary skills. Neither Imran's batting nor Kallis' bowling were up to the standards of specialists.

No player in history has ticked all the boxes, and neither has Tendulkar. However, there is not a single batsman who ticks more boxes than Tendulkar. No player has achieved more over the course of his career, but yes the failures in World Cup finals count against him. Had he scored in either of the two finals, I think he would have finished his career as the number one ODI batsman of all time ahead of Viv, but that did not happen. I would probably put at him number 3 after Viv and Kohli.

Nonetheless, Tendulkar was an excellent World Cup player overall who played some clutch innings, and his contribution as a player in the 2011 World Cup was more significant than the contribution of Imran in the 1992 World Cup. He was the second highest scorer and had scored almost 100 runs more than the next Indian, while Imran was finished as a bowler by that time and played only one meaningful innings (the final), and his innings in the semifinal was no better than Misbah's Mohali, but Inzamam and Miandad saved the day for him.

Still, performance in a World Cup final counts a lot which is why Imran's contribution in the 1992 World Cup is remembered fondly not only as a captain but also as a player. Nonetheless, over the course of their ODI careers, Tendulkar is well ahead of Imran.

For pretty much 80% of his career, Tendulkar was the best ODI batsman in the world, while Imran was below Kapil in ODIs almost his entire career who won India a World Cup 9 years before Imran could, with a weaker team against arguably the strongest team of all time. In addition, Imran couldn't match his explosive batting.

Furthermore, all this talk of Tendulkar not being a match-winner is largely a PP myth. Yes he was not a match-winner in the same mould as someone like Viv or Kohli, but he has won India many games and is greatly regarded for carrying India on his back for years before the likes of Dravid, Ganguly etc. emerged and shouldered the burden.

Lara was better on day 5 pitches, but he also better at going for selfish big scores at the expense of the team and he was also a tail-ender in India, while Sachin has excelled in every country he has played in. Speaking of day 5 performances, his hundred against England in Chennai 2008 to chase down 380 is one of the best fourth innings performances of the last 20 years.

Scoring on day 5 to win or save a match is good, but if you can consistently score in the first or second innings then you will probably not need to play stonewall innings on day 5. I would rather have a batsman who can consistently score in the first or second innings rather than a fourth innings specialist.

Tendulkar is a much greater player than Imran in ODIs and in Tests it is very close. However, overall, Sachin is ahead of Imran. Imran is certainly the greatest Test all-rounder from Asia, but as I said earlier, a comparison between a specialist batsman or bowler and a specialist all-rounder is illogical to begin with, but Tendulkar has achieved more as a batsman than Imran has as an all-rounder, is why he makes more all-time XIs than Imran, who rarely makes an all-time XI because he was inferior to Sobers.

 

[Tusker]

I try to read most of it if I have the time, but I like his threads because they offer a different and refreshing perspective. I respect his outlook on the game.

His "Outlook" is the same old ghisa pita bakwas that you will hear from any of the nostalgia influenced old ERA brigade i.e OLD >> NEW. If you hear them its like as though Real cricket died back in the 80s and they have gathered here to mourn the sad demise.

No depth no critical analysis no logic no consistency , accuracy and definitely not based on any real footage because it just wont stand even a basic scrutiny. The less said the better about formatting and the tired old cliche's.

 

[Mamoon]

Not all of the top ten cricketers will be all-rounders because apart from Imran, Kallis and Sobers, no other all-rounder reached the level of an ATG all-rounder. Miller was the prototype Imran so he can be included in this as well.

Kapil, Botham and Pollock, etc were not better players than Marshall, Bradman, Sachin or Wasim because their secondary skill could not make up for the huge gap that existed between their primary skills and the primary skills of ATG specialists.

Whereas Imran, Sobers and Kallis were ATGs in their primary skills and their secondary skills were add-ons. All three would make thr top ten cricketers list.

Imran does not make many ATG XIs because he's competing for the lone all-rounder's spot. Most people have five batsmen, four bowlers, a keeper and an all-rounder which makes it tough for Imran to get into the team. Sachin would not make it either if he were competing for a sole batting spot.

You can make a thousand excuses for why his 50+ average does not make him a good batsman but the fact is that he did average 50+ with the bat and he played a match-winning innings in a World Cup final, something that Sachin never could. That makes him a pretty good batsman. Not-outs are the reason why Dhoni averages 50+ in ODIs but given your hypocritical tendencies, you've never had an issue with that. Imran being so good that he was often not dismisssed is a positive for him, not a negative.

He is a much more valuable player than Tendulker because he just doesn't give you an ATG bowler, he gives you much more than that. Not only will Imran be the best player in your side and win you several games with his amazing bowling, he'll also be a solid #6 batsman who rarely gets dismissed for cheap and can increase the run-rate when needed. Imran will also captain your side and make your average players punch above their weight ensuring that your team stands toe to toe with the very best.

Sachin will give you a lot of runs and look like a million bucks while doing it but he probably won't win you a lot of games and your team will implode if he is given the armband.

I don't need to step outside PP because there is no better place to discuss cricket. You are welcome to leave if you find this to he untrue.

Botham and Kapil are ATG all-rounders as well, so that makes the top 5-6 greatest cricketers of all time all-rounders, which is simply not right. All-rounders should be compared to all-rounders and specialists should be compared to specialists. This is analogous to how FIFA excludes goalkeepers and defenders from Ballon d'Ors because they are less versatile than forwards and midfielders. The greatest goalkeeper of all time is not inferior to the greatest midfielder of all time just because the midfielder is great and multiple aspects.

Kapil and Botham are ATG all-rounders and it is a fact. As I said, if PP is your only source of information then you will end up considering Inzamam a bigger match-winner than Tendulkar and Amir the greatest bowling talent since Wasim Akram.

Imran doesn't make most all-time XIs because he is inferior than Tendulkar in his role. Tendulkar the batsman is better than Imran the all-rounder. Even if we give Tendulkar one slot only, he will make more all-time XIs than Imran because the percentage of people around the world who consider Tendulkar the greatest batsman of all time is higher than the percentage of people who consider Imran the best all-rounder of all time.

Majority of the world - right or wrong - consider Bradman as the greatest batsman ever, and majority of the world - right or wrong - consider Sobers as the greatest all-rounder ever. However, the percentage of people who consider Imran as the greatest all-rounder ever is minuscule compared to the percentage of people who consider Tendulkar as the greatest all-rounder ever.

I don't have to make any excuses. Imran simply did not score enough runs as other batsmen with 50+ average. Secondly, as I explained in a previous post, inflating your average by remaining not out in ODIs is not the same as inflating your average by remaining not out in Tests, especially when you bat at 6 or 7 most of the time.

Remaining not out in ODIs takes great skill and ability because you have to hit out in the death overs and many batsmen lose their wicket at that stage. This is why Dhoni and Bevan are legendary finishers because it is a very difficult job. However, remaining not out in Tests when you come in to bat at 6 or 7 is nothing extraordinary. Yes Imran has played some good, clutch innings in Tests but he was not the 50+ averaging top class Test batsman that PPers portray him to be.

Purely as a batsman, he does not many any top side in any era, but Dhoni would make into most ODI teams in history.

Again, there is no point in comparing value of an all-rounder and a specialist batsman. It is comparing apples to oranges. Besides, a team that has strong bowling would go for Tendulkar and a team that has strong batting would go for Imran. However, this is in Tests only. In ODIs, there are several bowlers ahead of Imran who wasn't even the best ODI all-rounder of his era. On the contrary, Tendulkar is top 3 material in ODIs as well and apart from 2-3 ODI batsmen, no one can make a case of being better than him. Of course on PP, every tom, dick and harry is a better batsman and a better "match-winner" than Tendulkar, but PP does not represent the global audience.

There is no better place to discuss cricket because PP is the best cricket forum around. However, it is not a reliably source of knowledge because of the fact that 70% users are green-tinted Pakistani fans, and PP is the only place where Inzamam can be considered a better match-winner than Tendulkar.

 

[Chrish]

That is if you aren't capable of making conclusions of your own and have to rely on others' biased opinions. Imran was much better as an allrounder and Sachin as a batsman than Sobers.

Pretty convenient argument, isn't it? Calling others' opinions biased when it suites you to glorify your heroes.

 

[Monsee]

What I find funny, and this is generally for all Indian fans and other closet Indian ones as well, they will always pick the Indian player in a Pak player vs Indian player comparison/debate. This is on display here as well!

Pak fans on other hand are more balanced and there are always 25% or more (sometimes close to 40-50%) who will be arguing in favor of the Indian player instead of blindly thumbing up the Pak player.

Worst part is that in a Pak vs An Alien player (could be from another team or from any part of the galaxy)...you can reply on 99% of the Indian fans to go for the Alien players as well

 

[ManFan]

Imran's cricketing achievements and performances far outweigh Tendulkar on the field in impact and influence. Heck, Tendulkar is not even the best in his country. Gavaskar outperforms Tendulkar by some margin in Test cricket. His record against the ATG WI attack is mouth-watering.

 

[Monsee]

You take away the sheer mountain of runs (a lot of them useless as well), a huge chunk scored on the Indian Patta roads or on pitches 'Made Easy' for staying in the good books of the Indian board, so that they continue to tour in future as well and hence allowing for the host country's board to keep making good profits...you are looking at a batsman who just had to go and score some buffet type runs while conditions (pitch, bounce, grass etc.) were custom made and delivered for his style of play!

Not taking away from the fact that he was an excellent run scoring machine but there is more to his career than just his contributions, other people have a lot of credit in it as well.

Don't wanna take my word for it, just watch for the matches where conditions were absolutely unplayable or there was a lot of pressure to perform and watch Tendulkar end up being almost invisible while Dravid, Sehwag, Laxman etc. rising to the occassion!

P.S. I am not your or Teenda's servent, so do dig up the stats/exmaples yolurself, I have said my piece of mind.

 

[Tusker]

What I find funny, and this is generally for all Indian fans and other closet Indian ones as well, they will always pick the Indian player in a Pak player vs Indian player comparison/debate. This is on display here as well!

I suppose it has nothing to do with facts at all ehh ? Or perhaps you are frustrated that you cant back your hero with proper facts and stats ?

 

[shane]

I didn't watch cricket in the days of Imran Khan, but I can say I found Sachin to be overrated and generally unimpressive.

 

[Bilal7]

Botham and Kapil are ATG all-rounders as well, so that makes the top 5-6 greatest cricketers of all time all-rounders, which is simply not right. All-rounders should be compared to all-rounders and specialists should be compared to specialists. This is analogous to how FIFA excludes goalkeepers and defenders from Ballon d'Ors because they are less versatile than forwards and midfielders. The greatest goalkeeper of all time is not inferior to the greatest midfielder of all time just because the midfielder is great and multiple aspects.

Kapil and Botham are ATG all-rounders and it is a fact. As I said, if PP is your only source of information then you will end up considering Inzamam a bigger match-winner than Tendulkar and Amir the greatest bowling talent since Wasim Akram.

Imran doesn't make most all-time XIs because he is inferior than Tendulkar in his role. Tendulkar the batsman is better than Imran the all-rounder. Even if we give Tendulkar one slot only, he will make more all-time XIs than Imran because the percentage of people around the world who consider Tendulkar the greatest batsman of all time is higher than the percentage of people who consider Imran the best all-rounder of all time.

Majority of the world - right or wrong - consider Bradman as the greatest batsman ever, and majority of the world - right or wrong - consider Sobers as the greatest all-rounder ever. However, the percentage of people who consider Imran as the greatest all-rounder ever is minuscule compared to the percentage of people who consider Tendulkar as the greatest all-rounder ever.

I don't have to make any excuses. Imran simply did not score enough runs as other batsmen with 50+ average. Secondly, as I explained in a previous post, inflating your average by remaining not out in ODIs is not the same as inflating your average by remaining not out in Tests, especially when you bat at 6 or 7 most of the time.

Remaining not out in ODIs takes great skill and ability because you have to hit out in the death overs and many batsmen lose their wicket at that stage. This is why Dhoni and Bevan are legendary finishers because it is a very difficult job. However, remaining not out in Tests when you come in to bat at 6 or 7 is nothing extraordinary. Yes Imran has played some good, clutch innings in Tests but he was not the 50+ averaging top class Test batsman that PPers portray him to be.

Purely as a batsman, he does not many any top side in any era, but Dhoni would make into most ODI teams in history.

Again, there is no point in comparing value of an all-rounder and a specialist batsman. It is comparing apples to oranges. Besides, a team that has strong bowling would go for Tendulkar and a team that has strong batting would go for Imran. However, this is in Tests only. In ODIs, there are several bowlers ahead of Imran who wasn't even the best ODI all-rounder of his era. On the contrary, Tendulkar is top 3 material in ODIs as well and apart from 2-3 ODI batsmen, no one can make a case of being better than him. Of course on PP, every tom, dick and harry is a better batsman and a better "match-winner" than Tendulkar, but PP does not represent the global audience.

There is no better place to discuss cricket because PP is the best cricket forum around. However, it is not a reliably source of knowledge because of the fact that 70% users are green-tinted Pakistani fans, and PP is the only place where Inzamam can be considered a better match-winner than Tendulkar.

I personally do not consider either Kapil or Botham as ATG all-rounders. They do not average below 25 with the ball or above 50 with the bat to garner that sort of high status. They are not even close. I rate them as great all-rounders instead and they are certainly nowhere close to Imran or Sobers.

No one will argue for Kapil being a better player than Sachin. It simply does not happen because Kapil was not outstanding with either of his skills to warrant such a comparison. So once again, the top ten players will not all be all-rounders and specialists like Bradman, Marshall, Viv, Wasim, Murali and yes, Sachin will all feature in the top 10-15 alongside Imran, Sobers and Kallis.

If we ask any non-Indian to pick the best batsman of all time, the names Bradman, Viv and Lara will be picked far more frequently than Sachin. When you are only competing for one spot, the competition is fierce and Sachin, like Imran, would find it hard to be the number one pick of most people.

Imran is actually the best all-rounder of all time in many people's opinion. The only ones that unreservedly pick Sobers are those that grew up watching him and as both you and I know, we tend to rate players we grew up watching higher than we do players we watched as adults due to the nostalgia factor.

Please do provide some references for your claim that the number of people that pick Imran as the #1 all-rounder is miniscule compared to the people that pick Sachin as the #1 batsman. Please do keep in mind that Sachin-worshippers from India do not count and neither do Imran fans from Pakistan. [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] [MENTION=132373]Convict[/MENTION] will be able to provide some insight on this matter given that both reside in neutral countries.

Remaining not-out in tests, where you can potentially face 450 overs in a match, theoretically speaking, requires an equal if not greater level of skill than doing the same in an ODI. Imran's not-outs were analyzed in a previous thread and almost every single one was a fighting knock that rescued Pakistan from a perilous position.

It is not apples to oranges. It is comparing two apples to one apple or two oranges to one orange. Three, if you take Imran's captaincy into account. A team with a weak bowling attack would pick Imran, a team with a poor captain would pick Imran and a team that is stacked in all departments will also pick Imran because having a gun all-rounder turns a team from great to legendary. Only a team with a weak batting lineup would pick Sachin. This is compounded by the fact that bowlers win matches in test cricket, not batsmen and Imran was a legendary bowler.

As for ODIs, Imran was surely not as great in this format as he was in tests but even then, he is easily the best ODI all-rounder of all time. On the other hand, there are several batsmen who will be picked ahead of Sachin Tendulker in this format, like Viv, ABD and Ponting.

Given all that, Imran is undoubtedly the superior player.

What does Inzamam have to do with this?

 

[waleed88]

You take away the sheer mountain of runs (a lot of them useless as well), a huge chunk scored on the Indian Patta roads or on pitches 'Made Easy' for staying in the good books of the Indian board, so that they continue to tour in future as well and hence allowing for the host country's board to keep making good profits...you are looking at a batsman who just had to go and score some buffet type runs while conditions (pitch, bounce, grass etc.) were custom made and delivered for his style of play!

Not taking away from the fact that he was an excellent run scoring machine but there is more to his career than just his contributions, other people have a lot of credit in it as well.

Don't wanna take my word for it, just watch for the matches where conditions were absolutely unplayable or there was a lot of pressure to perform and watch Tendulkar end up being almost invisible while Dravid, Sehwag, Laxman etc. rising to the occassion!

P.S. I am not your or Teenda's servent, so do dig up the stats/exmaples yolurself, I have said my piece of mind.

Point is a reputation is built up in the 1990s, he carried on that reputation of being the best for 20 years after that. That deserves alot of credit for being consistently up there. Once you become a brand there is nothing stopping you. Tendulkar was a brand and he maintained his name. Others couldn't/retire early whatever you wanna call it. People associate a Hollywood story with life size caricatures and it ended up being almost a perfect scrpt written for Tendulkar.

 

[AlizeeFan]

Not really. Yousuf had a purple patch, not a peak. A peak is a sustained run of form over a few years while a purple patch lasts for just a few matches. Yousuf was amazing for a single year but Imran was amazing for multiple years.

Averaged 13 with the ball during his absolute best and over the last ten years of his career, he averaged 19 with the ball and 50+ with the bat. All while being the best Asian captain ever.

What are you talking about?

That average of 13 was published in a cricinfo article where they were trying to find batsmen and bowlers with similar averages to Bradman and Lohmann respectively.

In that list they mentioned Imran having average of 13 or 14 during a periond of 18 matches. In the same article they list batsmen who had highest averages for 52 tests.

MoYo with average of 66 had higher peak than Richards, Lara, SRT, Sanga and Miandad. I think Ponting, Kallis and Dravid were ahead with Ponting averaging 75 during 2002-06.

So 52 tests are few matches and purple patch for you and average of 13 for some 20 tests is peak? That contradicts your definition only.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/539728.html

 

[Hitman]

I suppose it has nothing to do with facts at all ehh ? Or perhaps you are frustrated that you cant back your hero with proper facts and stats ?

So Sachin scored at home because they were easy batting tracks. Sachin scored away from home because they were tailor made tracks prepared on the BCCI's demand, even back in the 90's when the BCCI had no influence. And the only tracks that were difficult to bat on by default were the particular matches/innings where he failed away from home.

)

 

[Tusker]

So you concede that Imran would have been a great replacement for Tendulkar in the Indian Test team? If yes, then of course we can move on to ODIs.

Absolutely not. Please enlighten us how this replacement business works given that SRT played more than twice( 2.27 ) as much as IK and 2.6 times in ODI'S.

ahhh that sweet sound of silence

 

[Proactive_]

ahhh that sweet sound of silence

What? I was waiting for your earth shattering post about how Sachin was more valuable to the Indian team than what someone like Imran would have been in the 2000s. If longevity is your starting argument then I must admit I woefully overestimated your incoming reply

 

[Tusker]

What? I was waiting for your earth shattering post about how Sachin was more valuable to the Indian team than what someone like Imran would have been in the 2000s. If longevity is your starting argument then I must admit I woefully overestimated your incoming reply

huh ? you expected me to just simply accept your statement ? Dont you see the sentence in there asking enlightenment? I made that post to ensure you are clearly aware of the criteria and that you dont twist and turn and shift goal posts down the line.

So with that said go ahead tell us all how Imran achieved more than Tendulkar despite playing about only 40% as much cricket as Tendulkar. The point is EVEN if you did some how magically come up with stats and facts to make a case ... Imran would have had to performed miracles on a regular basis to overcome such obstacles.

 

[Tusker]

It is not apples to oranges. It is comparing two apples to one apple or two oranges to one orange. Three, if you take Imran's captaincy into account. A team with a weak bowling attack would pick Imran, a team with a poor captain would pick Imran and a team that is stacked in all departments will also pick Imran because having a gun all-rounder turns a team from great to legendary. Only a team with a weak batting lineup would pick Sachin. This is compounded by the fact that bowlers win matches in test cricket, not batsmen and Imran was a legendary bowler.

MSD Won more matches than Imran with modest bowling resources and Gun batsmen.

As for ODIs, Imran was surely not as great in this format as he was in tests but even then, he is easily the best ODI all-rounder of all time. On the other hand, there are several batsmen who will be picked ahead of Sachin Tendulker in this format, like Viv, ABD and Ponting.

Given all that, Imran is undoubtedly the superior player.

What does Inzamam have to do with this?

This is not true at all ... Kapil Dev consistently out ranked Imran in ODI's. And can you list some ODI World XI's that are missing Tendulkar as the opener ?

 

[Proactive_]

huh ? you expected me to just simply accept your statement ? Dont you see the sentence in there asking enlightenment? I made that post to ensure you are clearly aware of the criteria and that you dont twist and turn and shift goal posts down the line.

So with that said go ahead tell us all how Imran achieved more than Tendulkar despite playing about only 40% as much cricket as Tendulkar. The point is EVEN if you did some how magically come up with stats and facts to make a case ... Imran would have had to performed miracles on a regular basis to overcome such obstacles.

And how are you planning to equate the longevity of a batsman to a front line bowling all rounder?

For perspective:

Imran Khan bowled on an average 137 balls (22.5 overs) every innings in Test match cricket, and although the batting strike rate data isn't precisely available, assuming his strike rate to have been between 40-45 makes the number of balls faced by him on average in an innings to be 67-75. That's a hell of a lot of work for an innings of cricket, not to mention the captaincy. So your figures of 2.6 and 2.27 don't hold much weight tbh.

 

[Tusker]

And how are you planning to equate the longevity of a batsman to a front line bowling all rounder?

For perspective:

Imran Khan bowled on an average 137 balls (22.5 overs) every innings in Test match cricket, and although the batting strike rate data isn't precisely available, assuming his strike rate to have been between 40-45 makes the number of balls faced by him on average in an innings to be 67-75. That's a hell of a lot of work for an innings of cricket, not to mention the captaincy. So your figures of 2.6 and 2.27 don't hold much weight tbh.

Batting strike Rate and balls faced ? Seriously ?? He could have batted for 100 balls / inngs but without runs to go with it it has very little value in Test Cricket of his time. Infact Kapil is more valuable as a batsman due to his stunning Strike rate that could take the game away quickly. Just that he wasnt consistent enough.

And don't forget Tendulkar bowled too. Infact his ODI Wkts tally is just 28 Wkts shy of Imrans ODI Wkt tally despite being a part timer. Hypothetically speaking this is like say Imran making 50% of Tendulkars ODI runs (Which he did not) at even half the avg and at at a reasonable strike rate .

Only the most blind Tendulkar hater would pretend that this did not exist and continue to argue ( which you most certainly will )

 

[Proactive_]

Batting strike Rate and balls faced ? Seriously ?? He could have batted for 100 balls / inngs but without runs to go with it it has very little value in Test Cricket of his time. Infact Kapil is more valuable as a batsman due to his stunning Strike rate that could take the game away quickly. Just that he wasnt consistent enough.

And don't forget Tendulkar bowled too. Infact his ODI Wkts tally is just 28 Wkts shy of Imrans ODI Wkt tally despite being a part timer. Hypothetically speaking this is like say Imran making 50% of Tendulkars ODI runs (Which he did not) at even half the avg and at at a reasonable strike rate .

Only the most blind Tendulkar hater would pretend that this did not exist and continue to argue ( which you most certainly will )

I'm talking about how are you planning to equate the longevity, because the work load of a front line fast bowling all rounder who also captained for the majority of his carrier obviously differs from a batsman who happened to bowl part time. Your figures of 2.6 and 2.27 are redundant and prove nothing.

 

[Tusker]

I'm talking about how are you planning to equate the longevity, because the work load of a front line fast bowling all rounder who also captained for the majority of his carrier obviously differs from a batsman who happened to bowl part time. Your figures of 2.6 and 2.27 are redundant and prove nothing.

You were the one trying to replace Tendulkar with Imran not me ... it is for you to answer these questions. But simple mathematics tells us that someone who played only 40% of another will naturally not be able to achieve anywhere close to the other player.

 

[CricVet]

A true Pakistani like me would never pick an Indian player over a Pakistani counterpart however this is apple vs orange comparison. They Both have been impact players for their countries in different style of cricket.

Imran developed himself from a mediocre fast medium bowler and a mare slogger to a great fast bowler and a very patient sound batsman. I grew up idolizing Imran's aesthetic bowling action trying to mimic his leap at the crease. It was a sight seeing him charging in to the crease during the evening time of Karachi when the easterly breeze would make his indipping swinging yorkers a mennace to the batsmen. No other Pakistani player Pakistani player in sports matured like him. From a crude and arrogant looking persona, this man turned into a greatest leader since Jinah in my opinion.

Tendulkar however has been always a great batsman. I consider him the MODERN batsman and would not compare tonthe past hero. However great he may be, however much I believe Miandad would be my pick over him him, I just can not deny that he has been The most prolific modern batsman. My humble option.

 

[Bilal7]

What are you talking about?

That average of 13 was published in a cricinfo article where they were trying to find batsmen and bowlers with similar averages to Bradman and Lohmann respectively.

In that list they mentioned Imran having average of 13 or 14 during a periond of 18 matches. In the same article they list batsmen who had highest averages for 52 tests.

MoYo with average of 66 had higher peak than Richards, Lara, SRT, Sanga and Miandad. I think Ponting, Kallis and Dravid were ahead with Ponting averaging 75 during 2002-06.

So 52 tests are few matches and purple patch for you and average of 13 for some 20 tests is peak? That contradicts your definition only.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/539728.html

I was not talking about number matches but number of years. There is a difference between a batting average of 65 and a bowling average of 13. Like you said yourself, several players have better that mid-60s average while there is no modern-day bowler who had a better bowling average than Imran at his peak which was over the course of four years. The closest is Marshall and he averaged two points higher.

Amla, de Villiers, Sanga, Younis, Ponting and a few others have had similar peaks to Yousuf over a period of years. However, the purple patch that Yousuf had during 2006/7 is pretty unmatched.

MSD Won more matches than Imran with modest bowling resources and Gun batsmen.



This is not true at all ... Kapil Dev consistently out ranked Imran in ODI's. And can you list some ODI World XI's that are missing Tendulkar as the opener ?

MSD won those matches because of his spinners, not his batsmen. Kapil was ranked higher but rankings are one aspect of rating a player's performance and several others should also be taken into account...

... Unless you want to discuss why Sachin's highest all-time rating places him in the midcard of the batting hierarchy?

 

[Monsee]

I suppose it has nothing to do with facts at all ehh ? Or perhaps you are frustrated that you cant back your hero with proper facts and stats ?

If you open your eyes, it was not being said only about this thread alone, get it?

Now sit, drink some water and relax as Sachin is not your family 'Izzat' that you must protect with your life or somnething

 

[Tusker]

MSD won those matches because of his spinners, not his batsmen.

The point is none of his bowlers were as legendary as Imran, Wasim, Waqar (Unless you meant something else)

Kapil was ranked higher but rankings are one aspect of rating a player's performance and several others should also be taken into account...

Go ahead

... Unless you want to discuss why Sachin's highest all-time rating places him in the midcard of the batting hierarchy?

Tendulkar is known for consistency ... it takes a completely different level of Cricketer to be in the top 10 after 20 yrs of Cricket playing more than twice as much Cricket as Imran.

 

[Bilal7]

The point is none of his bowlers were as legendary as Imran, Wasim, Waqar (Unless you meant something else)



Go ahead



Tendulkar is known for consistency ... it takes a completely different level of Cricketer to be in the top 10 after 20 yrs of Cricket playing more than twice as much Cricket as Imran.

Just because a bowler is not as great as Wasim or Waqar does not mean that he will not win you test matches. Kumble, Bhajjan, Ashwin, Zaheer, etc were pretty good in India and were Dhoni's biggest match-winners.

World Cup performances being one major aspect. While Imran averaged 35 with the bat and 19 with the ball, along with a match-winning WC final innings in his account, Kapil averaged a mere 25 with the bat and 32 with the ball.

World Cup choker or simply not good enough on the biggest stage? I'll let you decide.

So Sachin at his best was not as good as the 20 batsmen who have higher all-time ratings than him? Understood.

 

[Bilal7]

The point is none of his bowlers were as legendary as Imran, Wasim, Waqar (Unless you meant something else)



Go ahead



Tendulkar is known for consistency ... it takes a completely different level of Cricketer to be in the top 10 after 20 yrs of Cricket playing more than twice as much Cricket as Imran.

Just because a bowler is not as great as Wasim or Waqar does not mean that he will not win you test matches. Kumble, Bhajjan, Ashwin, Zaheer, etc were pretty good in India and were Dhoni's biggest match-winners.

World Cup performances being one major aspect. While Imran averaged 35 with the bat and 19 with the ball, along with a match-winning WC final innings in his account, Kapil averaged a mere 25 with the bat and 32 with the ball.

World Cup choker or simply not good enough on the biggest stage? I'll let you decide.

So Sachin at his best was not as good as the 20 batsmen who have higher all-time ratings than him? Understood.

 

[Tusker]

Just because a bowler is not as great as Wasim or Waqar does not mean that he will not win you test matches. Kumble, Bhajjan, Ashwin, Zaheer, etc were pretty good in India and were Dhoni's biggest match-winners.

Kumble never played a single test under MSD ... Harbhajan and Zack were past their best. Ashwin only played a handfull of tests under MSD. He had to make do with the likes of Ojha , Sreeshanth, RP Singh , Praveen Kumar and an over the hill mostly injured Zack. This is why MSD gets a lot of respect.

World Cup performances being one major aspect. While Imran averaged 35 with the bat and 19 with the ball, along with a match-winning WC final innings in his account, Kapil averaged a mere 25 with the bat and 32 with the ball.

World Cup choker or simply not good enough on the biggest stage? I'll let you decide.

Kapil Single handedly pulled India out of an exit unlike Imran who was lucky to be saved by rain. That 175 is rated as an alltime great inngs and Imran can only dream about playing an inngs like that when the score was 9/4. BTW go take a look at the WC Match between India and Pak in the 1992 WC guess who made a 0(1).

So Sachin at his best was not as good as the 20 batsmen who have higher all-time ratings than him? Understood.

Yeah if only things work like that ... then you could claim Yousuf > Tendulkar You very well know it doesn't work like that.

 

[AlizeeFan]

I was not talking about number matches but number of years. There is a difference between a batting average of 65 and a bowling average of 13. Like you said yourself, several players have better that mid-60s average while there is no modern-day bowler who had a better bowling average than Imran at his peak which was over the course of four years. The closest is Marshall and he averaged two points higher.

Amla, de Villiers, Sanga, Younis, Ponting and a few others have had similar peaks to Yousuf over a period of years. However, the purple patch that Yousuf had during 2006/7 is pretty unmatched.

Ponting himself has peak not matched by anyone and not for period of 18 matches, but rather for 52 matches and no one comes close to that average of 75.

About peaks, Tendulkar averaged close to 60 for 18 years, from 1993-11 and for 13500 runs.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

His "Outlook" is the same old ghisa pita bakwas that you will hear from any of the nostalgia influenced old ERA brigade i.e OLD >> NEW. If you hear them its like as though Real cricket died back in the 80s and they have gathered here to mourn the sad demise.

No depth no critical analysis no logic no consistency , accuracy and definitely not based on any real footage because it just wont stand even a basic scrutiny. The less said the better about formatting and the tired old cliche's.

Please justify your bashing me in such manner.You may have your own opinion but is it is not in the correct spirit to run down someone's writings which even if repetitive or unclear are a great effort at presenting a topic.You often go out of the way to ridicule what I right without properly substantiating.Have your own opinion but atleast have respect for another blogger's persistence and effort.Baseless stating 'It will stand no scrutiny' when so many fans have acknowledged my presentations.So many have participated in the debates in positive spirit with some even appreciating .MMHS,Mamoon,Junaid,Robert,Cherish are such names.Inspite of differences there are instances when they express agreement or consent .

I suggest you read the writings of even modern historians and cricketers on the giants you are critical of who you feel cannot compare with modern greats.I also feel you have not done justice to me by stating I reject post-1980 or 1990 players.Reed my posts on Wasim,Tendulkar,Lara Dravid,Kalis etc.

I dont want to create a tussle but I wish a few readers could refute some of your allegations as I don't want to judge my own work.Hope other readers could express their viewpoint.

 

[Bilal7]

Kumble never played a single test under MSD ... Harbhajan and Zack were past their best. Ashwin only played a handfull of tests under MSD. He had to make do with the likes of Ojha , Sreeshanth, RP Singh , Praveen Kumar and an over the hill mostly injured Zack. This is why MSD gets a lot of respect.



Kapil Single handedly pulled India out of an exit unlike Imran who was lucky to be saved by rain. That 175 is rated as an alltime great inngs and Imran can only dream about playing an inngs like that when the score was 9/4. BTW go take a look at the WC Match between India and Pak in the 1992 WC guess who made a 0(1).



Yeah if only things work like that ... then you could claim Yousuf > Tendulkar You very well know it doesn't work like that.

Yes, I'm not too familiar of which bowlers did well for Dhoni but the point is that someone had to, in order for India to win test matches.

Yes, we are all familiar of Kapil's epic minnow-bashing of the legendary Zimbabwean team. Unfortunately, he was unable to do much else in World Cup matches, thus a batting average of under 20 and bowling average of above 30, excluding Zimbabwe.

Forget Kapil, even Sachin could not play the innings that Imran played in the final of the World Cup.

Yes, rankings and ratings are not everything, which is what I was saying. If you use rankings and ratings to determine Kapil > Imran then I can do the same to determine Yousuf > Bunch of others > Sachin.

 

[Bilal7]

Ponting himself has peak not matched by anyone and not for period of 18 matches, but rather for 52 matches and no one comes close to that average of 75.

About peaks, Tendulkar averaged close to 60 for 18 years, from 1993-11 and for 13500 runs.

So what's your point? We're discussing Imran and Sachin. Sachin's peak was good but not as good as some of the others out there. No one can beat him in longevity, however.

 

[Sidilicious]

Yes, I'm not too familiar of which bowlers did well for Dhoni but the point is that someone had to, in order for India to win test matches.

Yes, we are all familiar of Kapil's epic minnow-bashing of the legendary Zimbabwean team. Unfortunately, he was unable to do much else in World Cup matches, thus a batting average of under 20 and bowling average of above 30, excluding Zimbabwe.

Forget Kapil, even Sachin could not play the innings that Imran played in the final of the World Cup.

Yes, rankings and ratings are not everything, which is what I was saying. If you use rankings and ratings to determine Kapil > Imran then I can do the same to determine Yousuf > Bunch of others > Sachin.

On the rankings front, the best ever rankings are very different from overall rankings.

Best Ever rankings generally signify a peak, whereas the overall rankings signify consistency.

The rankings are also dependent upon the ranking of the opposition team and their bowlers. So scoring runs against a higher ranked bowler, will fetch you more points than against a lower one. The only thing not take into account is away games. So, if a player is consistently ranked higher than another player, that indicates that the higher ranked performed better than the lower ranked one.

Also, if a player has a much higher best ever rankings, that indicates the better peak the player has had. A peak does not signify whether a cricketer is better or not.

This is the correct way actually suing this data and not just use the data to justify whatever suits your agenda.

 

[big_gamer007]

Tough question but as an Indian you have to go with Sachin..

 

[Tusker]

Yes, I'm not too familiar of which bowlers did well for Dhoni but the point is that someone had to, in order for India to win test matches.

huh ? So a half fit limping Zack is as good as a Wasim or Waqar then ?

Yes, we are all familiar of Kapil's epic minnow-bashing of the legendary Zimbabwean team. Unfortunately, he was unable to do much else in World Cup matches, thus a batting average of under 20 and bowling average of above 30, excluding Zimbabwe.

you are probably looking at someone elses stats ... Kapils WC stats are outstanding especially batting

KD: 37 @ 117 S/R
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...e=results;trophy=12;type=batting;view=innings

IK: 35@ 65
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...e=results;trophy=12;type=batting;view=innings

Forget Kapil, even Sachin could not play the innings that Imran played in the final of the World Cup.

Saved by Inzi and Wasim otherwise it would go on par with Misbah's inngs. 72(110) Seriously ? Compare that to Kapils 21 runs of 11 overs against WI in 1983 WC Final defending a hopeless score of 183. On the other hand Imran conceeded 43 of 6.2 overs in the WC final. Kapil easily outshines Imran in WC any way you look at it.

Yes, rankings and ratings are not everything, which is what I was saying. If you use rankings and ratings to determine Kapil > Imran then I can do the same to determine Yousuf > Bunch of others > Sachin.

you need to understand the difference between peak ranking and overall ranking.

 

[Bilal7]

On the rankings front, the best ever rankings are very different from overall rankings.

Best Ever rankings generally signify a peak, whereas the overall rankings signify consistency.

The rankings are also dependent upon the ranking of the opposition team and their bowlers. So scoring runs against a higher ranked bowler, will fetch you more points than against a lower one. The only thing not take into account is away games. So, if a player is consistently ranked higher than another player, that indicates that the higher ranked performed better than the lower ranked one.

Also, if a player has a much higher best ever rankings, that indicates the better peak the player has had. A peak does not signify whether a cricketer is better or not.

This is the correct way actually suing this data and not just use the data to justify whatever suits your agenda.

I am well versed in the usage of data. Like you said, a player's best ever ratings signifies his peak, therefore is it correct for me to say that Mohammad Yousuf at his best was a far better batsman than Sachin Tendulker at his best?

huh ? So a half fit limping Zack is as good as a Wasim or Waqar then ?



you are probably looking at someone elses stats ... Kapils WC stats are outstanding especially batting

KD: 37 @ 117 S/R
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...e=results;trophy=12;type=batting;view=innings

IK: 35@ 65
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...e=results;trophy=12;type=batting;view=innings



Saved by Inzi and Wasim otherwise it would go on par with Misbah's inngs. 72(110) Seriously ? Compare that to Kapils 21 runs of 11 overs against WI in 1983 WC Final defending a hopeless score of 183. On the other hand Imran conceeded 43 of 6.2 overs in the WC final. Kapil easily outshines Imran in WC any way you look at it.



you need to understand the difference between peak ranking and overall ranking.

No, even two Zaheer Khans are not as good as Wasim, even though Zaheer is the best ever Indian pacer. My point is that bowlers win test matches, not batsmen.

)

Imram averages 19 in WCs with the ball, Kapil averages 30+. In the batting department, that one minnow-bashing fest is all that makes Kapil's figures a little respectable.

Saved by Wasim and Inzi? Imran and Miandad stiched together the most crucial partnership of that match and Imran 72 runs is better than anything Sachin has ever done in a WC final. Let's not even talk about Kapil anymore who is clearlt outmatched in a comparison with Imran.

 

[Hasan123]

Please justify your bashing me in such manner.You may have your own opinion but is it is not in the correct spirit to run down someone's writings which even if repetitive or unclear are a great effort at presenting a topic.You often go out of the way to ridicule what I right without properly substantiating.Have your own opinion but atleast have respect for another blogger's persistence and effort.Baseless stating 'It will stand no scrutiny' when so many fans have acknowledged my presentations.So many have participated in the debates in positive spirit with some even appreciating .MMHS,Mamoon,Junaid,Robert,Cherish are such names.Inspite of differences there are instances when they express agreement or consent .

I suggest you read the writings of even modern historians and cricketers on the giants you are critical of who you feel cannot compare with modern greats.I also feel you have not done justice to me by stating I reject post-1980 or 1990 players.Reed my posts on Wasim,Tendulkar,Lara Dravid,Kalis etc.

I dont want to create a tussle but I wish a few readers could refute some of your allegations as I don't want to judge my own work.Hope other readers could express their viewpoint.

Your a good poster bhai. Keep it up.

 

[Tusker]

No, even two Zaheer Khans are not as good as Wasim, even though Zaheer is the best ever Indian pacer. My point is that bowlers win test matches, not batsmen.

)

And my point is exceptional bowlers make it much easier to Win matches especially if there is 2-3 of them. MSD Never had this luxury and he had to come up with other ways to get wkts (Scoreboard pressure , fielding , run outs )

Imram averages 19 in WCs with the ball, Kapil averages 30+. In the batting department, that one minnow-bashing fest is all that makes Kapil's figures a little respectable.

Do you know that Zimbabwe actually beat Aus in that WC ? Minnows

Saved by Wasim and Inzi? Imran and Miandad stiched together the most crucial partnership of that match and Imran 72 runs is better than anything Sachin has ever done in a WC final. Let's not even talk about Kapil anymore who is clearlt outmatched in a comparison with Imran.

It was too slow. Had Inzi and Wasim not played the cameo knocks at the end and Wasim not produced those magical deliveries Imrans efforts would have been hugely criticized.

Kapil on the other hand produced a once in a lifetime spell of accurate bowling conceding just 19 of 11 overs against the overwhelming favorites WI.

 

[Tusker]

Please justify your bashing me in such manner.You may have your own opinion but is it is not in the correct spirit to run down someone's writings which even if repetitive or unclear are a great effort at presenting a topic.You often go out of the way to ridicule what I right without properly substantiating.Have your own opinion but atleast have respect for another blogger's persistence and effort.Baseless stating 'It will stand no scrutiny' when so many fans have acknowledged my presentations.So many have participated in the debates in positive spirit with some even appreciating .MMHS,Mamoon,Junaid,Robert,Cherish are such names.Inspite of differences there are instances when they express agreement or consent .

I suggest you read the writings of even modern historians and cricketers on the giants you are critical of who you feel cannot compare with modern greats.I also feel you have not done justice to me by stating I reject post-1980 or 1990 players.Reed my posts on Wasim,Tendulkar,Lara Dravid,Kalis etc.

I dont want to create a tussle but I wish a few readers could refute some of your allegations as I don't want to judge my own work.Hope other readers could express their viewpoint.

See my response on the other thread about elegant or stylish batsmen in which you rate Ranji amongst top 5. Despite [MENTION=77677]IgnitedMind[/MENTION] posting a video clip which you just simply ignored. If you keep ignoring such obvious pieces of evidence that proves you wrong people will naturally stop taking you seriously.

 

[Bilal7]

And my point is exceptional bowlers make it much easier to Win matches especially if there is 2-3 of them. MSD Never had this luxury and he had to come up with other ways to get wkts (Scoreboard pressure , fielding , run outs )



Do you know that Zimbabwe actually beat Aus in that WC ? Minnows



It was too slow. Had Inzi and Wasim not played the cameo knocks at the end and Wasim not produced those magical deliveries Imrans efforts would have been hugely criticized.

Kapil on the other hand produced a once in a lifetime spell of accurate bowling conceding just 19 of 11 overs against the overwhelming favorites WI.

That is fine, I'm not arguing against Dhoni's captaincy, I'm simply saying that bowlers are the match-winners in test cricket, not batsmen. Therefore, Imran has yet another advantage simply by definition. Glad you agree.

Kenya reached the semi-finals of the 2003 WC, Ireland beat England in 2011 but that still does not make them anything more than minnows. Same goes for Zimbabwe and Kapil's innings was nothing more than an awesome display of minnow-bashing.

Why was he unable to do as well against the better teams?

No, Imran played a perfect innings and the proof is in the pudding because Imran ended up lifting the WC trophy. Even if what you say is true, it was still a million times better than both of Sachin's WC final innings combined.

We can hypothesize all we like, for example what would have happened if Sachin's 2011 WC final choke-job wasn't rescued by Dhoni and Gambhir, etc but that will not accomplish much.

At the end of the day, Imran (bowling, batting, captaincy) > Sachin (batting).

 

[Bilal7]

See my response on the other thread about elegant or stylish batsmen in which you rate Ranji amongst top 5. Despite [MENTION=77677]IgnitedMind[/MENTION] posting a video clip which you just simply ignored. If you keep ignoring such obvious pieces of evidence that proves you wrong people will naturally stop taking you seriously.

Look in the mirror before criticizing [MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]. At least he is somewhat consistent with his pieces and open to new ideas.

 

[Tusker]

That is fine, I'm not arguing against Dhoni's captaincy, I'm simply saying that bowlers are the match-winners in test cricket, not batsmen. Therefore, Imran has yet another advantage simply by definition. Glad you agree.

I would have if he had won a lot lot more than someone who managed to win more matches with far poorer owling resources as compared to Imran ... MSD sets the bar far higher. Glad we agree

Kenya reached the semi-finals of the 2003 WC, Ireland beat England in 2011 but that still does not make them anything more than minnows. Same goes for Zimbabwe and Kapil's innings was nothing more than an awesome display of minnow-bashing.

Why was he unable to do as well against the better teams?

He has done well against many teams and Zimbabwe of the 80s and 90s were a strong team. And dont forget that strike rate which is extraordinary even in this ERA.

No, Imran played a perfect innings and the proof is in the pudding because Imran ended up lifting the WC trophy. Even if what you say is true, it was still a million times better than both of Sachin's WC final innings combined.

We can hypothesize all we like, for example what would have happened if Sachin's 2011 WC final choke-job wasn't rescued by Dhoni and Gambhir, etc but that will not accomplish much.

At the end of the day, Imran (bowling, batting, captaincy) > Sachin (batting).

Without Tendulkar India wouldnt even be in the final. Imran did no such thing. He was lucky to be playing in the WC Final to begin with. In the WC match between Ind and Pak which was a high pressure event ... even Tendulkar Outbowled Imran. Sorry but both KD and SRT . Imran in WC's.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...akistan-16th-Match-benson-&-hedges-world-cup/

 

[Tusker]

Look in the mirror before criticizing [MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]. At least he is somewhat consistent with his pieces and open to new ideas.

He asked for an explanation for my -ve comments and I gave him that with a proper logical explanation and evidence to back it up. The way I see it is the bar must be very high for such articles. Given that Harsh is soo passionate about his work it is better that he gets this perspective which most people simply dont bother with and simply indulge in back slapping and group hugs. It serves no purpose towards improving the content and is not constructive. Now I don't claim to know everything but my way of learning is to go deep into the subject and talking to people. BTW another problem with his is his reluctance to indulge in deep technical conversations with others. All he does is indulge in congratulatory mutual group hugs and move on to making the next list.

 

[Tusker]

Kenya reached the semi-finals of the 2003 WC, Ireland beat England in 2011 but that still does not make them anything more than minnows. Same goes for Zimbabwe and Kapil's innings was nothing more than an awesome display of minnow-bashing.

Why was he unable to do as well against the better teams?

BTW if Zim were minnows in 1983 then so were SL ... and guess what happens to Imrans WC Batting figures if you remove Imrans 2 big inngs vs SL (108* and 56*) ... It comes down to 508 runs at Avg of 26 and a S/R of 59.9 ... So yeah its easy to play this game of statsguru filtering

 

[Tusker]

Another Bump ...

I'm talking about how are you planning to equate the longevity, because the work load of a front line fast bowling all rounder who also captained for the majority of his carrier obviously differs from a batsman who happened to bowl part time. Your figures of 2.6 and 2.27 are redundant and prove nothing.

You were the one trying to replace Tendulkar with Imran not me ... it is for you to answer these questions. But simple mathematics tells us that someone who played only 40% of another will naturally not be able to achieve anywhere close to the other player.

Because you didn't give a reply on how you're planning to equate the longevity of a batsman to a captaining bowling all rounder.

.

as I explained in the quoted post ... I dont owe you an explanation because it was your idea to claim that you would easily replace Tendulkar with Imran and not mine. Not my problem that you dont have facts to answer the obvious problem of longevity.

Its your problem if you did not factor the career length. Ohh wait you thought I would just take your word on this because Imran was a allrounder and in your miind thats 3 Cricketers lol. So explain away your reasoning for preferring Imran over Tendulkar whos overall cricketing achievements are so staggeringly way more than Imran.

 

[Last Monetarist]

From Wisden on the Australian tour of Pakistan in September 1988:

For Pakistan's supporters, still savouring their team's success in the West Indies earlier in the year, there was disappointment at Imran Khan's decision not to play in the series as a protest over the timing of the tour. In his view, the weather in Pakistan at that time of the year was too hot for cricket.

Can't imagine Tendulkar ever pulling a trick like that. For all his greatness, Imran had a sense of entitlement that made a mockery of ordinary people. Not playing a series because it was too hot, it's hilarious. If he was playing today, I reckon he won't have played a single test in the UAE.