What's new

Waqar Younis vs Sachin Tendulkar debut battle

saeed-sohail

saeed-sohail

Senior T20I Player
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Runs
18,662
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6IazpoQfD1Q?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6IazpoQfD1Q?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>


Great memories.Watched it live and it was birth of two great careers.
 
Who would have ever thought that this little kid would go on to become one of the biggest names in history of cricket? Legendary :sachin
 
Waqar for a time attained heights, most fast bowlers can dream, injury and other issues didn't prolong his career and that is a big tragedy
 
shahrukh619 said:
but Waqar won and Tendulkar lost.......
Click to expand...

Waqar won, and Tendulkar lost? How exactly? If you're talking about thier careers, we all know who is the better winner. If you're mentioning that particular series, Waqar averaged 40 odd with the ball, while the 16 year old Tendulkar averaged 36 odd with the bat.
 
madhurjyaadhikary said:
Waqar won, and Tendulkar lost? How exactly? If you're talking about thier careers, we all know who is the better winner. If you're mentioning that particular series, Waqar averaged 40 odd with the ball, while the 16 year old Tendulkar averaged 36 odd with the bat.
Click to expand...

Waqar took 4 wickets in that innings, and Tendulkar scored something like 18:usman
 
IIRC there were a number of debutants on both the sides during the series.

For India, we had 4 debutants in that series Sachin, Salil Ankola, Atul Wassan, Vivek Razdan.

For Pakistan, Waqar, Shahid Saeed, Nadeem Abbasi, and Zaakir Khan also made their debuts.
 
Both went on to become legends, its bad to see that People underestimate Waqar as a bowler. He had a great strike rate, even better than Wasim in ODI.
 
The launch of two geniuses in their respective specializations.

Fitting, I suppose.
 
The only other match which saw two future greats make a debut together was the 1996 Lord's test with Ganguly and Dravid starting their careers.

Can't quite recollect any other instances of a similar thing happening in the same test.
 
Last edited:
Ganguly was good in tests and very good in ODIs, but not a great.

Dravid was good in ODIs and great in tests.
 
I started watching cricket in 91 so will definitely check the video out, when home.
 
Amazing video. Its a pity both Wasim and Waqar and Tendulkar never faced each other when all of them were at their peaks.
 
Justcrazy said:
Both went on to become legends, its bad to see that People underestimate Waqar as a bowler. He had a great strike rate, even better than Wasim in ODI.
Click to expand...

It all depends on what attributes you cherish...

brilliance over a short period of time or longevety....

Tendulkar has never been GREAT over any particular short length of time... his strength has been that he has been consitent from the age of 16 to 38 now..... that is GREAT but in a different context...

for example when he and Lara batted together... Lara was greater... when he and Ponting batted together... Ponting was better..... when he and Dravid batted together Dravid was better...

Waqar on the other hand.... when he was bowling in early 90s.... no one came close.... no one has ever come close to that quality since... (maybe Malcolm Marshall)

The only reason that Tendu gets more plaudits from the layman is cos of the stats that are considered mainstream...

ie longevity type stats....

BUT in REALITY...

Whilst longevity is great... I value the quality you had at your PEAK to be a million times more VALUABLE....

yes there is a question mark over length of period do you use to measure PEAK... but I think we are all sensible enough to choose an apprpriate length of time...

Other reason why Waqar doesn't get right amount of credit is cos at the time when he reverse swung it was considered cheating... now its considered an art from.

look at the praise Umar gul and Malinga get now... Waqar was a MILION times better than them.....

Sachins greatness = longevity. he ahs sustained being excellent over a period that no one else has come close to.

Waqars greatness =when he was at his best, no one was as good... or has been before or since....

Sachin is like... frankie fredericks or Roger Black.... the guy that was second best.... but was second best for a long time.....

Waqar is like Usain Bolt.... the greatest at his peak...

Its no wonder... Usain Bolts childhood hero was Waqar
 
Last edited:
MR__KHAN__JI said:
It all depends on what attributes you cherish...

brilliance over a short period of time or longevety....

Tendulkar has never been GREAT over any particular short length of time... his strength has been that he has been consitent from the age of 16 to 38 now..... that is GREAT but in a different context...

for example when he and Lara batted together... Lara was greater... when he and Ponting batted together... Ponting was better..... when he and Dravid batted together Dravid was better...

Waqar on the other hand.... when he was bowling in early 90s.... no one came close.... no one has ever come close to that quality since... (maybe Malcolm Marshall)

The only reason that Tendu gets more plaudits from the layman is cos of the stats that are considered mainstream...

ie longevity type stats....

BUT in REALITY...

Whilst longevity is great... I value the quality you had at your PEAK to be a million times more VALUABLE....

yes there is a question mark over length of period do you use to measure PEAK... but I think we are all sensible enough to choose an apprpriate length of time...

Other reason why Waqar doesn't get right amount of credit is cos at the time when he reverse swung it was considered cheating... now its considered an art from.

look at the praise Umar gul and Malinga get now... Waqar was a MILION times better than them.....

Sachins greatness = longevity. he ahs sustained being excellent over a period that no one else has come close to.

Waqars greatness =when he was at his best, no one was as good... or has been before or since....
Click to expand...

I know everyone is entitled to their opinions, but how do you judge that?
 
LKJ couldn't have been more wrong.

So Tendulkar didn't have any peaks? He has never been a great? Says a lot about your cricketing knowledge. And just because you say Lara and Dravid and Ponting were greater than him doesn't make that a fact.

I must say what a senseless comment.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
It all depends on what attributes you cherish...

brilliance over a short period of time or longevety....

Tendulkar has never been GREAT over any particular short length of time... his strength has been that he has been consitent from the age of 16 to 38 now..... that is GREAT but in a different context...

for example when he and Lara batted together... Lara was greater... when he and Ponting batted together... Ponting was better..... when he and Dravid batted together Dravid was better...

Waqar on the other hand.... when he was bowling in early 90s.... no one came close.... no one has ever come close to that quality since... (maybe Malcolm Marshall)

The only reason that Tendu gets more plaudits from the layman is cos of the stats that are considered mainstream...

ie longevity type stats....

BUT in REALITY...

Whilst longevity is great... I value the quality you had at your PEAK to be a million times more VALUABLE....

yes there is a question mark over length of period do you use to measure PEAK... but I think we are all sensible enough to choose an apprpriate length of time...

Other reason why Waqar doesn't get right amount of credit is cos at the time when he reverse swung it was considered cheating... now its considered an art from.

look at the praise Umar gul and Malinga get now... Waqar was a MILION times better than them.....

Sachins greatness = longevity. he ahs sustained being excellent over a period that no one else has come close to.

Waqars greatness =when he was at his best, no one was as good... or has been before or since....

Sachin is like... frankie fredericks or Roger Black.... the guy that was second best.... but was second best for a long time.....

Waqar is like Usain Bolt.... the greatest at his peak...

Its no wonder... Usain Bolts childhood hero was Waqar
Click to expand...

Khaan sa'ab you watch the same sport na? :yk
 
video from same tour

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5Z9KzQEpMZ0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

...haha look @ Qadir's response to host on 3 sixes of his own bowling ....

"agle over mein Mushtaq ko bhi to 4 chakke pade the ...."....lolz Qadir bhai wanna say Mushtaq wale chakke to koi yaad nahi karta ...haha....:D
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
It all depends on what attributes you cherish...

brilliance over a short period of time or longevety....

Tendulkar has never been GREAT over any particular short length of time... his strength has been that he has been consitent from the age of 16 to 38 now..... that is GREAT but in a different context...

for example when he and Lara batted together... Lara was greater... when he and Ponting batted together... Ponting was better..... when he and Dravid batted together Dravid was better...

Waqar on the other hand.... when he was bowling in early 90s.... no one came close.... no one has ever come close to that quality since... (maybe Malcolm Marshall)

The only reason that Tendu gets more plaudits from the layman is cos of the stats that are considered mainstream...

ie longevity type stats....

BUT in REALITY...

Whilst longevity is great... I value the quality you had at your PEAK to be a million times more VALUABLE....

yes there is a question mark over length of period do you use to measure PEAK... but I think we are all sensible enough to choose an apprpriate length of time...

Other reason why Waqar doesn't get right amount of credit is cos at the time when he reverse swung it was considered cheating... now its considered an art from.

look at the praise Umar gul and Malinga get now... Waqar was a MILION times better than them.....

Sachins greatness = longevity. he ahs sustained being excellent over a period that no one else has come close to.

Waqars greatness =when he was at his best, no one was as good... or has been before or since....

Sachin is like... frankie fredericks or Roger Black.... the guy that was second best.... but was second best for a long time.....

Waqar is like Usain Bolt.... the greatest at his peak...

Its no wonder... Usain Bolts childhood hero was Waqar
Click to expand...


Agree with your comments on Waqar. But the comparison on Sachin vs Lara or Sachin vs Ponting is wrong IMO.

Sachin outscored Lara all through the 90s, Ponting's peak (and Lara's too ) coincided with Sachin's trough , so not a fair comparison. It's like taking Sachin's record of last 4 years , comparing that to Ponting's record of these 4 years and saying Ponting doesn't come anywhere close which is again unjust.
 
The truth when it dawns.... sometimes hurts.

Dont get me wrong... I think Tendu's great... just not as great as he is sometimes made out to be.
 
Last edited:
MR__KHAN__JI said:
BUT in REALITY...

Whilst longevity is great... I value the quality you had at your PEAK to be a million times more VALUABLE....
Click to expand...

Ofcourse you would .. Waqar outside his peak was nothing extra ordinary, as for SRT well we all know he is Indian so that settles that..
 
If Sachin is second best then I don't even know what Inzamam/Saeed anwar are.......
 
Romali_rotti said:
Ofcourse you would .. Waqar outside his peak was nothing extra ordinary, as for SRT well we all know he is Indian so that settles that..
Click to expand...


You think like this because Indians in general don't rate Waqar highly since the Indian batsmen played him very well, and owned him totally in tests. Otherwise, he was good against other teams.

Against India
:waqar Test Bowling Average: 48.75, SR: 80.2
:wasim Test Bowling Average: 28.86, SR: 40.4

So one can know who performed better.
 
Last edited:
Not only against India, Waqar didn't do too well against Aus too.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
The truth when it dawns.... sometimes hurts.

Dont get me wrong... I think Tendu's great... just not as great as he is sometimes made out to be.
Click to expand...

By the same token, what would you say about Imran then? His captaincy record doesn't have too many achievements aside a WC win. Pak didn't win too many tests under him despite having one of the all time best attacks.

Applying the same logic, don't you think he isn't as great as he is made out to be?
 
Sachin outscored Lara all through the 90s
Click to expand...
To say Lara was better than Tendulkar in '90s is a blatantly wrong thing to say. In fact, Tendulkar as a batsman was head & shoulders above everyone else in '90s.
 
Tendulkar was at his best in late 90's.... 97,98,99.

That was the only time he was ahead of his competitors.....

(He has been good recently too - but I dont value that as much as the bowlers (and other batsmen) round the world are so rubbish right now!)
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
Tendulkar has never been GREAT over any particular short length of time...
Click to expand...

MR__KHAN__JI said:
Tendulkar was at his best in late 90's.... 97,98,99.

That was the only time he was ahead of his competitors.....

(He has been good recently too - but I dont value that as much as the bowlers (and other batsmen) round the world are so rubbish right now!)
Click to expand...

Contradictions... :ibutt
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
Tendulkar was at his best in late 90's.... 97,98,99.

That was the only time he was ahead of his competitors.....

(He has been good recently too - but I dont value that as much as the bowlers (and other batsmen) round the world are so rubbish right now!)
Click to expand...

Now apply those same standards to the wickets Waqar took at his peak in the early 90s. Till 1994, Waqar had 184 wickets in 31 tests, 113 of which came against Sri Lanka, New Zealand and Zimbabwe in 15 tests. Now, I would love to know your opinion about the batsmen playing for those 3 nations during the early 90s :)
 
but I dont value that as much as the bowlers (and other batsmen) round the world are so rubbish right now!)
Click to expand...
Which has been the case since whole of last decade, I mean rubbish bowlers. Does that mean you don't value Lara, Dravid and Ponting's (more so) achievements much as they really blossomed during '00s only.
 
cricketindiafan said:
Now apply those same standards to the wickets Waqar took at his peak in the early 90s. Till 1994, Waqar had 184 wickets in 31 tests, 113 of which came against Sri Lanka, New Zealand and Zimbabwe in 15 tests. Now, I would love to know your opinion about the batsmen playing for those 3 nations during the early 90s :)
Click to expand...
Revealing stats these. Shows who filled his boots at minnows' expense.
 
In fact, some of Lara's best years came in '00s.

He averaged 50+ in 4/6 years of this decade.
 
cricketindiafan said:
Now apply those same standards to the wickets Waqar took at his peak in the early 90s. Till 1994, Waqar had 184 wickets in 31 tests, 113 of which came against Sri Lanka, New Zealand and Zimbabwe in 15 tests. Now, I would love to know your opinion about the batsmen playing for those 3 nations during the early 90s :)
Click to expand...

Seems like Waqar peaked against teams which didnt have good batsmen.

Average
Against India : 48.75
South Africa : 28.75
Australia : 33.80

Compare with Akram

Average
Against India: 28.86
South Africa: 29.76
Australia: 25.76

So the whole concept by Mr Khan that

Waqar on the other hand.... when he was bowling in early 90s(stats for early 90s show the same picture - 1990 to 95 Akram averaged lower than Waqar).... no one came close.... no one has ever come close to that quality since... (maybe Malcolm Marshall)

has been proved wrong by Waqar's own teammate. Waqar was never the bowler whom no one could come close to. And someone must now accept that.
 
Last edited:
MR__KHAN__JI said:
And Lara at his peak was better than Tendulkar in the late 90's...
Click to expand...

Ok, Tendulkar at his peak in 97, 98 ,99 (as you said)

27 tests, 45 innings, 2735 runs@68 , 12 100s, 8 50s

Lara at his peak in 2003, 04, 05

31 tests, 57 innings, 3622 runs@66, 13 100s, 8 50s

Now tell me who was better than whom at the respective "peaks". And , please do tell me when were the bowling attacks better? in late 90s or in mid 2000s :)
 
Statsman said:
Seems like Waqar peaked against teams which didnt have good batsmen.

Average
Against India : 48.75
South Africa : 28.75
Australia : 33.80

Compare with Akram

Average
Against India: 28.86
South Africa: 29.76
Australia: 25.76

So the whole concept by Mr Khan that

Waqar on the other hand.... when he was bowling in early 90s(stats for early 90s show the same picture).... no one came close.... no one has ever come close to that quality since... (maybe Malcolm Marshall)

has been proved wrong by Waqar's own teammate. Waqar was never the bowler whom no one could come close to. And someone must now accept that.
Click to expand...

Nope, I am not biased to put down Waqar. What Waqar did in the early 90s was easily one of the best ever prolonged peaks in cricket history. The purpose of showing those stats was only to show the double standard in MKJ's posts.
 
I dont understand why such threads end up becoming an X Vs Y comparison. Both played great, one still is. Only a few cricketers have had such memorable and magnificent debuts (/debut series).
 
There were plans to unleash young Sachin against West Indies but they had a meeting about it and decided not to do it but Sachin was playing superb in first class and in nets against our best bowlers. Ultimately they had to give him a go.
Just to have survived infront of those lethal bowlers is a terrific achievement to me but the way he got those runs after being hit on helmet by Waqar and then his treatment of Qadir in the unofficial game is legendary stuff
 
IIRC Tendulkar was hit on his nose by a Waqar delivery and bled profusely but he vowed to continue. That was the moment of the birth of an all time great.
 
As for Tendulkar not being sent to tour WI when he wasn't even 15, I read somewhere that Sunny had a lot of say in that decision.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
And Lara at his peak was better than Tendulkar in the late 90's...
Click to expand...

Definitely not Tendulkar of late 90s. Tendulkar in 97-99 was playing so good that it triggered Bradman comparison talks among cricket experts around the world (for the first time). Bradman himself immediately rated Tendulkar above the batsmen he had seen in those days and thus Tendulkar was the only guy from that time to have got a place in Bradman's XI.
I remember during his desert storm against Aussies at Sharjaj, Tony Greig yelling from commentary box that 'This is the closest thing ever to Bradman' and Tony is not a Tendulkar worshiper at all. In 2000s when Sachin changed his game and Lara was doing better for a while , he was always putting Lara ahead.
But for the record, what he said about Sachin in 1998 is something that truly came out from his heart while watching a great great display of batsmanship.

And the 'At his best' thing i believe isn't a thing one can really use to say who's better. What about Afridi at his best? Happens once in 120 matches but he is damn good when he is at his best.

I have seen Inzy at his best, probably during that 184 against us in Bangalore, playing his 100th test. His shot making was superb and highly rate that knock. Was in sublime touch.

Even a KP and Yuvi at their best look untouchables
 
SG said:
As for Tendulkar not being sent to tour WI when he wasn't even 15, I read somewhere that Sunny had a lot of say in that decision.
Click to expand...

I believe it was late Raj Singh Dungarpur who opposed Tendulkar's inclusion , saying he was too young for the Windies
 
Back to the topic, I have heard a lot about Waqar's peak just curious to know what opposition he faced during those peak 2 years ?
 
freelance_cricketer said:
Definitely not Tendulkar of late 90s. Tendulkar in 97-99 was playing so good that it triggered Bradman comparison talks among cricket experts around the world (for the first time). Bradman himself immediately rated Tendulkar above the batsmen he had seen in those days and thus Tendulkar was the only guy from that time to have got a place in Bradman's XI.
I remember during his desert storm against Aussies at Sharjaj, Tony Greig yelling from commentary box that 'This is the closest thing ever to Bradman' and Tony is not a Tendulkar worshiper at all. In 2000s when Sachin changed his game and Lara was doing better for a while , he was always putting Lara ahead.
But for the record, what he said about Sachin in 1998 is something that truly came out from his heart while watching a great great display of batsmanship.

And the 'At his best' thing i believe isn't a thing one can really use to say who's better. What about Afridi at his best? Happens once in 120 matches but he is damn good when he is at his best.

I have seen Inzy at his best, probably during that 184 against us in Bangalore, playing his 100th test. His shot making was superb and highly rate that knock. Was in sublime touch.

Even a KP and Yuvi at their best look untouchables
Click to expand...


Enuff with the whole bringing Bradman theory when talking SRT, you dont need to justify SRT his record over the last 2 decades speaks for itself... Only reason why Lara got a sniff of a chance to get ahead of SRT was when he was down with the tennis elbow and how convenient Glen Mcgrath and Co came to tour right on time to get an out of form, injured SRT......SRT at his peak UNINJURED wouldve smoked every bowler barring Donald who I thought troubled him the most...
 
The one who troubled him most (in tests) was Cronje.:D
 
SG said:
The one who troubled him most (in tests) was Cronje.:D
Click to expand...

Cronje always got him out a lot of times when he looked set but he didnt looked troubled against him, Donald was the main man here...
 
I think some of you guys need to stop with the Diarrhoea and think a little....

I consider Tendulkar to be a great... but in the context of staying consistently excellent... for an extremely long period of time.

There were others that were better for shorter periods of time....

In my mind that is the ultimate... ie how good can good get!

Re Waqar... there was no-one that was better for a short period of time....
 
He still played 2 of his finest innings against him at Jo'burg and Cape Town.
 
Re Waqar... there was no-one that was better for a short period of time....
Click to expand...
And as stats showed even then he filled his boots against the likes of SL, Zim and NZ.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
I think some of you guys need to stop with the Diarrhoea and think a little....

I consider Tendulkar to be a great... but in the context of staying consistently excellent... for an extremely long period of time.

There were others that were better for shorter periods of time....

In my mind that is the ultimate... ie how good can good get!

Re Waqar... there was no-one that was better for a short period of time....
Click to expand...

Now don't run away. Please respond to post # 53. Thanks.

On that point about Waqar, during his peak as per you i.e. early 90s (till 1994), Waqar was definitely a beast, took 184 wickets in 31 tests with 19 5-ers and 4 10 wicket hauls.

Now look at What Lillee did at his peak. Between 1977-1981, 31 tests, 185 wickets, 15 5-ers and 6 10 wickets hauls.

Do the numbers look similar?
 
Romali_rotti said:
Enuff with the whole bringing Bradman theory when talking SRT, you dont need to justify SRT his record over the last 2 decades speaks for itself... Only reason why Lara got a sniff of a chance to get ahead of SRT was when he was down with the tennis elbow and how convenient Glen Mcgrath and Co came to tour right on time to get an out of form, injured SRT......SRT at his peak UNINJURED wouldve smoked every bowler barring Donald who I thought troubled him the most...
Click to expand...

You are right at everything but for some people it becomes a little easier to understand while going with the theory of relativity :don
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
I think some of you guys need to stop with the Diarrhoea and think a little....

I consider Tendulkar to be a great... but in the context of staying consistently excellent... for an extremely long period of time.

There were others that were better for shorter periods of time....

In my mind that is the ultimate... ie how good can good get!

Re Waqar... there was no-one that was better for a short period of time....
Click to expand...

I understand where you're coming from bro. The peak thing is fine but it is confusing. People are always gonna struggle to conclude who's peak was higher. It also depends a bit on personal taste. You may have loved Lara on song more than a Sachin in Sharjah but it may be opposite for someone like me. And then an Aussie may prefer Ponting 2006 over both. And then the Viv Richard fans :inti

Same in bowling, i think Dale Steyn has been terrific in last few years. His numbers are crazy, you had Shoaib who was quite devastating at best too
 
Last edited:
Another peak from a pacer.

Sir Richard Haddlee's 5 best years were from 1983-87.

35 tests, 204 wickets, 19 5-ers, 5-10 wicket hauls.

Again very similar to Waqar's numbers at his peak.
 
cricketindiafan said:
Another peak from a pacer.

Sir Richard Haddlee's 5 best years were from 1983-87.

35 tests, 204 wickets, 19 5-ers, 5-10 wicket hauls.

Again very similar to Waqar's numbers at his peak.
Click to expand...

You can count the whole damn decade , where he was the best bowler averaging just 19
Either 70s or 80s, not sure which one. I was checking decade stats for batsmen and bowlers on cricinfo once and found him at the top
 
Damn Waqar looks so awesome in this video. I went so gaga over Shoaib at his peak, Cant imagine how insanely obsessed i would have been if i had the pleasure to watch Waqar from 1989-1991.
 
cricketindiafan said:
Now don't run away. Please respond to post # 53. Thanks.

On that point about Waqar, during his peak as per you i.e. early 90s (till 1994), Waqar was definitely a beast, took 184 wickets in 31 tests with 19 5-ers and 4 10 wicket hauls.

Now look at What Lillee did at his peak. Between 1977-1981, 31 tests, 185 wickets, 15 5-ers and 6 10 wickets hauls.

Do the numbers look similar?
Click to expand...


Have a look at the strike rates.... ;-)

:waqar
 
Last edited:
freelance_cricketer said:
I understand where you're coming from bro. The peak thing is fine but it is confusing. People are always gonna struggle to conclude who's peak was higher. It also depends a bit on personal taste. You may have loved Lara on song more than a Sachin in Sharjah but it may be opposite for someone like me. And then an Aussie may prefer Ponting 2006 over both. And then the Viv Richard fans :inti

Same in bowling, i think Dale Steyn has been terrific in last few years. His numbers are crazy, you had Shoaib who was quite devastating at best too
Click to expand...

Agreed...

there is always a bit of judgement.... beauty is always in the eye of the beholder....

But peaks are so much more important than longevity....

We shouldnt ignore whats important... just becasue its more difficult.
 
Last edited:
MR__KHAN__JI said:
Tendulkar has never been GREAT over any particular short length of time... his strength has been that he has been consitent from the age of 16 to 38 now..... that is GREAT but in a different context...

for example when he and Lara batted together... Lara was greater...
Click to expand...

I am interested to know how you determine performance at peak.

I tried two approaches (source: Statsguru):

A) Performance over a Calendar year:
- Lara has never averaged above 80 in any calendar year.
- Sachin has averaged 80+ in 3 years and 90+ in 2 years.

B) Performance over 2 consecutive calendar years:
- Lara has never averaged above 70 in any period. 60+ in 5 periods
- Sachin has averaged 80+ once, 70+ 4 times & 60+ 10 times

Please suggest some other approach & lets see how things stack up.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
One of MANY.....

PS... Strike rate is the most important stat for a fast bowler to have....
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Waqar was clearly more destructive at his peak ..just from memory, his SR was better to the tune of almost 6-7 balls, if not more.

He has an inferior record (vis-a-vis Wasim) against India because he did not play us too many times when he was at his peak.
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
Agreed...

there is always a bit of judgement.... beauty is always in the eye of the beholder....

But peaks are so much more important than longevity....

We shouldnt ignore whats important... just becasue its more difficult.
Click to expand...

I understand your point.
And a peak > Longevity, longevity alone doesn't hold much value.

But when the longevity is a 'Plateau' , its highly rated. Tendulkar has been able to maintain high standards for a very long period. Not only can he boast of being as good as anyone at his own peak , he has outrun everyone else in the race by some distance
 
freelance_cricketer said:
I understand your point.
And a peak > Longevity, longevity alone doesn't hold much value.

But when the longevity is a 'Plateau' , its highly rated. Tendulkar has been able to maintain high standards for a very long period. Not only can he boast of being as good as anyone at his own peak , he has outrun everyone else in the race by some distance
Click to expand...

On longevity basis no-one comes close to Tendu.
 
KIC said:
I am interested to know how you determine performance at peak.

I tried two approaches (source: Statsguru):

A) Performance over a Calendar year:
- Lara has never averaged above 80 in any calendar year.
- Sachin has averaged 80+ in 3 years and 90+ in 2 years.

B) Performance over 2 consecutive calendar years:
- Lara has never averaged above 70 in any period. 60+ in 5 periods
- Sachin has averaged 80+ once, 70+ 4 times & 60+ 10 times

Please suggest some other approach & lets see how things stack up.
Click to expand...

:))) Pure pwnage. I wonder whether he'll have the galls to respond to this post (we all know he has no replies).
 
MR__KHAN__JI said:
The truth when it dawns.... sometimes hurts.

Dont get me wrong... I think Tendu's great... just not as great as he is sometimes made out to be.
Click to expand...

What truth? the truth that Sachin easily outpaced Lara all throughout the 90s. That in the 90s when only 3 batsmen averaged in the 50s, Sachin's average was close to 60?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MenInG
[VIDEO] "I would've banned Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis forever": Ramiz Raja
2
Replies
91
Views
10K
Shoaib Akhtar 100 MPH
S
MenInG
[VIDEO] Irfan Pathan's silver screen debut... Cobra...
Replies
9
Views
2K
Suleiman
Suleiman
M
What knowledge does one need to properly discuss the concepts of God, revelation and creation?
Replies
48
Views
3K
ManFan
ManFan
A
"I hope to replace Misbah or Younis in the Pakistan team" : Usman Salahuddin
2
Replies
114
Views
31K
Firebat
Firebat
MenInG
[VIDEO] "I don't want us to be unpredictable" : Mickey Arthur
Replies
31
Views
5K
Abdullah719
A
Back
Top