What's new

Would Sachin Tendulkar have surpassed Don Bradman and Viv Richards if not for tennis elbow?

Suleiman

Suleiman

Test Debutant
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Runs
16,878
Post of the Week
2
Sachin of the 90s was according to some as aggressive and explosive as Viv with his range of shots, but come around the turn of the century he may have had to curb his killer instinct due to injury.

In a perfect world where he wouldn't get this injury and Amir's catches would've been taken, would Sachin have matched or surpassed Viv as the best ODI bat ever and Bradman overall?

How much did the injury affect the rest of his career?

In some ways some of Viv's records are lucky to be still standing.
 
From a different perspective, had Viv played longer (he played 40% as compared to SRTs games) he'd have been easily left behind by SRT (if not anyway).

His career in the latter part was a steady decline. He averaged 33 in the last ~5 years of his career (56 games). SRT on the other hand kept on playing with excellent returns for 20+ years.
 
Statsman said:
From a different perspective, had Viv played longer (he played 40% as compared to SRTs games) he'd have been easily left behind by SRT (if not anyway).

His career in the latter part was a steady decline. He averaged 33 in the last ~5 years of his career (56 games). SRT on the other hand kept on playing with excellent returns for 20+ years.
Click to expand...

Playing more (which is very difficult since you have to maintain the same standards over a longer period of time) is very different from a hypothetical situation where a player didn't have some injury.
 
Statsman said:
From a different perspective, had Viv played longer (he played 40% as compared to SRTs games) he'd have been easily left behind by SRT (if not anyway).

His career in the latter part was a steady decline. He averaged 33 in the last ~5 years of his career (56 games). SRT on the other hand kept on playing with excellent returns for 20+ years.
Click to expand...

Says more about Viv that he overshadows Sachin despite only playing 40% of the matches that he did. Quality over quantity every single time.

As for the OP, the answer is no.
 
People talking about Sachin better than Viv have certainly not seen Viv playing or they they are too biased toward Sachin. NO comparison, Viv was miles ahead, as a batsman, as a match winner. not for stats only.
 
He could have had five elbows and he still wouldn't have averaged 100, so, no, he could not have passed Bradman. Viv, maybe. I don't know because I never saw him play. Although averaging 47 at 90 SR in that era is like 50 at 100 SR for Sachin's era.
 
Last edited:
Pantani said:
He could have had five elbows and he still wouldn't have averaged 100, so, no, he could not have passed Bradman. Viv, maybe. I don't know because I never saw him play.
Click to expand...

He would have maybe scored 5000 more runs in both formats but the sheer impact that Viv had was simply not within Sachin's ability.
 
moghul said:
People talking about Sachin better than Viv have certainly not seen Viv playing or they they are too biased toward Sachin. NO comparison, Viv was miles ahead, as a batsman, as a match winner. not for stats only.
Click to expand...

Lol. Does that include Martin Crowe, John Woodcock, Richie Benuad and Viv himself?
 
Tendulkar certianly has a claim to be better than any batsman barring Bradman.. I have Viv as 2nd batsman of my choice but there is no bona fide argument for him to be better than Sachin in test format
 
Suleiman said:
Sachin of the 90s was according to some as aggressive and explosive as Viv with his range of shots, but come around the turn of the century he may have had to curb his killer instinct due to injury.

In a perfect world where he wouldn't get this injury and Amir's catches would've been taken, would Sachin have matched or surpassed Viv as the best ODI bat ever and Bradman overall?

How much did the injury affect the rest of his career?

In some ways some of Viv's records are lucky to be still standing.
Click to expand...

Naughty, naughty - better watch the Test match.
 
I don't know one could have been better than the other or vice versa but to me Viv is the man I would go and watch.
 
Umm...Sachin already has an argument or two in his favor to being a superior tests batsman to Viv.

In ODI's though, Viv is untouchable.
 
Except the problem with this is that Tendulkar isn't the only player to have had injury or health issues.
 
Convict said:
Viv is not humble. He's flamboyant and very entertaining but he's not humble.

Nor does he need to be
Click to expand...

That's surprising. Viv comes across as a very humble down to earth guy to me. It's almost as if his on field character is different from his off field one.
 
Bilal7 said:
He would have maybe scored 5000 more runs in both formats but the sheer impact that Viv had was simply not within Sachin's ability.
Click to expand...

Yeah, contextually Viv was peerless while Sachin had a few guys of around the same ability rivalling him.

I looked up on statsguru the records of ODI batsmen between 1975-90 and :viv is head and shoulders ahead of everyone. With a 1000 runs scored qualification, only four guys came near him.

Kapil had an SR of 100, 10 better than Viv but averaged only 26, 21 runs poorer than Viv. That makes me think he was sort of like a proto-Afridi who could hit big scores but was inconsistent.

Salim Malik averaged 33 at 86 SR. I'll think of him as a Jayasuriya type player, could be highly destructive on his day and more consistent than Kapil/Afridi but not in the same league as Viv.

Then it was Zaheer Abbas who came close to Viv, averaging 45 at 85 SR. The only reason I won't rate him alongside Viv is that he played less than half the matches, though as his record shows he was obviously an outstanding batsman.

Lastly Dean Jones had a superb average of 50 but an SR of only 75, far inferior to Viv. He would be the Mark Waugh of his time, a fine player but not as destructive as others could be.

There were definitely no equivalents to Lara, Ponting, Inzamam, de Silva, Anwar; who matched Tendulkar at points in his career.
 
Injury happens to many cricketers, nothing specific to SRT here.
 
Hitman said:
Viv himself says that Sachin is the best ever he has ever seen -

Of all the batsmen I’ve seen, Tendulkar is greatest: Richards

Link: http://www.thehindu.com/sport/crick...ulkar-is-greatest-richards/article2073292.ece
Click to expand...

Yup - Viv should have said:

"Of all the batsmen I've seen, I'm the best one"

:afridi

Back to the OP.

Tendiulkar was a phenomenal batsmen and his record reflects that. Definitely one of the greatest batsmen to have played the game.

However - the impact that Viv had is unmatched by any other batsmen in my opinion.

As for The Don. Well I doubt many on this forum saw him bat live, and it's very difficult to base judgement purely on stats - however, an average of 99.94....it's hard to argue with that.
 
Last edited:
Tendulkar is better than Richards if you consider both Tests and ODIs, which you should.

Richards however, is the greatest ODI batsman of all time for now.
 
TalhaSyed said:
Yup - Viv should have said:

"Of all the batsmen I've seen, I'm the best one"

:afridi

Back to the OP.

Tendiulkar was a phenomenal batsmen and his record reflects that. Definitely one of the greatest batsmen to have played the game.

However - the impact that Viv had is unmatched by any other batsmen in my opinion.

As for The Don. Well I doubt many on this forum saw him bat live, and it's very difficult to base judgement purely on stats - however, an average of 99.94....it's hard to argue with that.
Click to expand...

But it does speak volumes when Viv says that if there is a better batsman than Sachin, then he hasn't arrived it :)
 
Hitman said:
But it does speak volumes when Viv says that if there is a better batsman than Sachin, then he hasn't arrived it :)
Click to expand...

Absolutely - it's a massive compliment to Sachin (and very deservedly so) for someone as great as Viv to rate him so highly.

There is no arguing that Sachin is one of the greatest batsmen to play the game. Easily within the Top 5 & possibly even within the Top 3 in my opinion.

However, when it comes to comparing anyone to Viv and/or The Don - it's hard to beat that really IMO :)
 
Pantani said:
Yeah, contextually Viv was peerless while Sachin had a few guys of around the same ability rivalling him.

I looked up on statsguru the records of ODI batsmen between 1975-90 and :viv is head and shoulders ahead of everyone. With a 1000 runs scored qualification, only four guys came near him.

Kapil had an SR of 100, 10 better than Viv but averaged only 26, 21 runs poorer than Viv. That makes me think he was sort of like a proto-Afridi who could hit big scores but was inconsistent.

Salim Malik averaged 33 at 86 SR. I'll think of him as a Jayasuriya type player, could be highly destructive on his day and more consistent than Kapil/Afridi but not in the same league as Viv.

Then it was Zaheer Abbas who came close to Viv, averaging 45 at 85 SR. The only reason I won't rate him alongside Viv is that he played less than half the matches, though as his record shows he was obviously an outstanding batsman.

Lastly Dean Jones had a superb average of 50 but an SR of only 75, far inferior to Viv. He would be the Mark Waugh of his time, a fine player but not as destructive as others could be.

There were definitely no equivalents to Lara, Ponting, Inzamam, de Silva, Anwar; who matched Tendulkar at points in his career.
Click to expand...

That isn't Sachin's fault. If Ponting, Lara etc were born 20 years earlier, and led to Sachin having no competition, that shouldn't change how you rate him.
 
Sachin136 said:
That isn't Sachin's fault. If Ponting, Lara etc were born 20 years earlier, and led to Sachin having no competition, that shouldn't change how you rate him.
Click to expand...

For once I agree with you. Viv was peerless in OdI format (OdI was still developing at that time remember) not so much in test

And he was flamboyant on the field, but away from it shy and pretty reserved
 
Mamoon said:
Tendulkar is better than Richards if you consider both Tests and ODIs, which you should.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.. reckon it's pretty even for mine. Some days I give edge to Viv for being attacking player (scored at SR of 70 in test) while other days I give it to Tendulkar for being a more complete player (averaged 40 in each country)

And longevity matters. Number of title Roger Federer won matters. Number of World Cup team has won matters. The number of runs scored by a player also matters. It shows how good player was for that many years
 
Last edited:
Chrish said:
Not necessarily.. reckon it's pretty even for mine. Some days I give edge to Viv for being attacking player (scored at SR of 70 in test) while other days I give it to Tendulkar for being a more complete player (averaged 40 in each country)

And longevity matters. Number of title Roger Federer won matters. Number of World Cup team has won matters. The number of runs scored by a player also matters. It shows how good player was for that many years
Click to expand...

Another interesting point to consider is that Richards had the fortune of not facing his own bowling attack, while Tendulkar had the misfortune of not facing his own bowling attack.
 
Tendulkar is already a better batsman than both Bradman and Viv if we consider both tests and ODIs.

However, injuries happen to everybody. Even without tennis elbow, I think his performance would have been about the same.
 
People here tend to forget that Viv had a great team cushioning for him. Tendulkar never had the luxury. By the way, sustaining quality over a period of time is tougher than having a peak for a short period of time.

Nobody can match Sachin in that.
 
Mamoon said:
Another interesting point to consider is that Richards had the fortune of not facing his own bowling attack, while Tendulkar had the misfortune of not facing his own bowling attack.
Click to expand...

That's true but I don't believe in penalizing player for that
 
Rightarmfast said:
People here tend to forget that Viv had a great team cushioning for him. Tendulkar never had the luxury. By the way, sustaining quality over a period of time is tougher than having a peak for a short period of time.

Nobody can match Sachin in that.
Click to expand...

For more than half of his career, Sachin had the same great cushioning. From 1998 to 2012, India was one of the strongest batting units.
 
Take out 'home' bias (ie exclude Indians from commenting upon Sachin and West Indians commenting upon Viv), it's not even a contest. Sachin striding to the crease does not invoke the same kind of trepidation in opposing bowlers and captains compared to Viv striding out to bat.

Malcolm Marshall took 376 Test wickets.
Glenn McGrath took 563 Test wickets.
Courtney Walsh took 519 Test wickets.

Were Glenn McGrath and Courtney Walsh better bowlers than Malcolm Marshall?
If you could only choose one, would you choose Malcolm Marshall, Courtney Walsh or Glenn McGrath in your playing XI?

Enough said.
 
Has Sachin surpassed others from his era though?

Let's ask this question, first. Let's not jump too high.
 
Yossarian said:
Take out 'home' bias (ie exclude Indians from commenting upon Sachin and West Indians commenting upon Viv), it's not even a contest. Sachin striding to the crease does not invoke the same kind of trepidation in opposing bowlers and captains compared to Viv striding out to bat.

Malcolm Marshall took 376 Test wickets.
Glenn McGrath took 563 Test wickets.
Courtney Walsh took 519 Test wickets.

Were Glenn McGrath and Courtney Walsh better bowlers than Malcolm Marshall?
If you could only choose one, would you choose Malcolm Marshall, Courtney Walsh or Glenn McGrath in your playing XI?

Enough said.
Click to expand...

Mcgrath has a very good claim to be greatest bowler ever.. not a personal opinion but it's certainly justified
 
Yossarian said:
Take out 'home' bias (ie exclude Indians from commenting upon Sachin and West Indians commenting upon Viv), it's not even a contest. Sachin striding to the crease does not invoke the same kind of trepidation in opposing bowlers and captains compared to Viv striding out to bat.

Malcolm Marshall took 376 Test wickets.
Glenn McGrath took 563 Test wickets.
Courtney Walsh took 519 Test wickets.

Were Glenn McGrath and Courtney Walsh better bowlers than Malcolm Marshall?
If you could only choose one, would you choose Malcolm Marshall, Courtney Walsh or Glenn McGrath in your playing XI?

Enough said.
Click to expand...

Marshall was not in the same league as McGrath in ODI's. Probably two or three levels below. Whereas McGrath would be very close to Marshall in tests.

In both formats, and that's very important to consider in the modern era, i would take McGrath with my eyes closed.

Wow, IVA seems to be rated higher than i expected in tests..

As a few posters pointed out before, SRT wasn't the only sportsman to deal with injuries.
 
The_Odd_One said:
For more than half of his career, Sachin had the same great cushioning. From 1998 to 2012, India was one of the strongest batting units.
Click to expand...

It is bowlers who take wickets not batsmen. You can put up a team with 5 Bradmans' in it but they would win nothing if the bowling attack of that team is utterly mediocre.

A team with average batting line up and world class bowling attack will win lot more matches all over the world compared to a team with world class batting line up supported by average line up.

That's a fact.
 
Yossarian said:
Take out 'home' bias (ie exclude Indians from commenting upon Sachin and West Indians commenting upon Viv), it's not even a contest. Sachin striding to the crease does not invoke the same kind of trepidation in opposing bowlers and captains compared to Viv striding out to bat.

Malcolm Marshall took 376 Test wickets.
Glenn McGrath took 563 Test wickets.
Courtney Walsh took 519 Test wickets.

Were Glenn McGrath and Courtney Walsh better bowlers than Malcolm Marshall?
If you could only choose one, would you choose Malcolm Marshall, Courtney Walsh or Glenn McGrath in your playing XI?

Enough said.
Click to expand...

McGrath is comfortably THE greatest bowler of all time in my opinion.
 
It changes every time but I would go for Marshall as of now.. His FC record is out of this world.

1650 wickets @19!! Freak!
 
Thivagar said:
Please tell me why every player that played with him keep saying Lara was the best they've seen ? Why is that ?
Click to expand...

Andy Flower, Allan Donald, Shane Warne, Adam Gilchrist, Richie Benaud, Martin Crowe among others have played or watched both and preferred SRT. I would say its even stevens between both. Although SRT has a superior away test record and ODI record which work in his favor if you scrutinize both their careers.
 
The difference between ATG batsmen is far more substantial than the difference between ATG pacers. Interesting to note.
 
Yossarian said:
Take out 'home' bias (ie exclude Indians from commenting upon Sachin and West Indians commenting upon Viv), it's not even a contest. Sachin striding to the crease does not invoke the same kind of trepidation in opposing bowlers and captains compared to Viv striding out to bat.

Malcolm Marshall took 376 Test wickets.
Glenn McGrath took 563 Test wickets.
Courtney Walsh took 519 Test wickets.

Were Glenn McGrath and Courtney Walsh better bowlers than Malcolm Marshall?
If you could only choose one, would you choose Malcolm Marshall, Courtney Walsh or Glenn McGrath in your playing XI?

Enough said.
Click to expand...

Taking account of both formats, McGrath will be comfortably ahead of Marshall.
 
People keep saying that all neutral viewers rate Viv ahead of Sachin without providing any reasons. Can we get past the hand-waving and talk about some objective reasons as to why one is ahead of the other?

Sehwag and Gayle probably invoke more trepidation in opposition bowlers than Sachin or Viv. What matters is how many runs they score, where they score those runs and against which bowlers.
 
Mamoon said:
Another interesting point to consider is that Richards had the fortune of not facing his own bowling attack, while Tendulkar had the misfortune of not facing his own bowling attack.
Click to expand...

Or the South African Bowling attack or the much improved SL attack in Tendulkar's time. Also during the 80s the Aussie bowling attack was not exactly their best.
 
Thivagar said:
Please tell me why every player that played with him keep saying Lara was the best they've seen ? Why is that ?
Click to expand...

This is definitely not the case. Many players who were alongside Lara and Sachin rate Sachin as the best. Just take a look at some of the threads by [MENTION=133315]Hitman[/MENTION] to see those quotes.

Also, a retired player who watched Sachin and Lara from the stands is probably as good a judge as someone who played alongside them.
 
Suleiman said:
Sachin of the 90s was according to some as aggressive and explosive as Viv with his range of shots, but come around the turn of the century he may have had to curb his killer instinct due to injury.

In a perfect world where he wouldn't get this injury and Amir's catches would've been taken, would Sachin have matched or surpassed Viv as the best ODI bat ever and Bradman overall?

How much did the injury affect the rest of his career?

In some ways some of Viv's records are lucky to be still standing.
Click to expand...

He already is rated as a better player than the 2 despite the injury.

PS: Inb4 the 99.94 = 2x brigade takes umbrage and all hell breaks lose :))
 
Cricfan123 said:
It is bowlers who take wickets not batsmen. You can put up a team with 5 Bradmans' in it but they would win nothing if the bowling attack of that team is utterly mediocre.

A team with average batting line up and world class bowling attack will win lot more matches all over the world compared to a team with world class batting line up supported by average line up.

That's a fact.
Click to expand...

You win ODIs and draw tests by batting. Are you saying that batting in a strong batting unit is not easier than batting in a light batting unit?
 
Mamoon said:
Another interesting point to consider is that Richards had the fortune of not facing his own bowling attack, while Tendulkar had the misfortune of not facing his own bowling attack.
Click to expand...

Viv vs teams that had the Best WI Fast bowlers of his times in one-day matches.

Code: 
For Leeward Islands vs Other WI Domestic Teams
Matches	Inns	NO	Runs	HS  	Ave	50	100
20	18	0	552	77  	30.66	5	0

vs Hampshire
Matches	Inns	NO	Runs	HS  	Ave	50	100
14	14	1	347	93  	26.69	2	0

vs Barbados
Matches	Inns	NO	Runs	HS  	Ave	50	100
8	7	0	198	77  	28.28	1	0
 
Tusker said:
Viv vs teams that had the Best WI Fast bowlers of his times in one-day matches.

Code: 
For Leeward Islands vs Other WI Domestic Teams
Matches	Inns	NO	Runs	HS  	Ave	50	100
20	18	0	552	77  	30.66	5	0

vs Hampshire
Matches	Inns	NO	Runs	HS  	Ave	50	100
14	14	1	347	93  	26.69	2	0

vs Barbados
Matches	Inns	NO	Runs	HS  	Ave	50	100
8	7	0	198	77  	28.28	1	0
Click to expand...

Interesting. Thanks.
 
Sachin136 said:
This is definitely not the case. Many players who were alongside Lara and Sachin rate Sachin as the best. Just take a look at some of the threads by [MENTION=133315]Hitman[/MENTION] to see those quotes.

Also, a retired player who watched Sachin and Lara from the stands is probably as good a judge as someone who played alongside them.
Click to expand...

Maybe because retired folks don't like Laras' unorthodox batting style ? Those who played with rarely rate him over Lara. Weird.
 
Sachin136 said:
People keep saying that all neutral viewers rate Viv ahead of Sachin without providing any reasons. Can we get past the hand-waving and talk about some objective reasons as to why one is ahead of the other?

Sehwag and Gayle probably invoke more trepidation in opposition bowlers than Sachin or Viv. What matters is how many runs they score, where they score those runs and against which bowlers.
Click to expand...

No. Sehwag and Gayle did not have 10% of the intimidation factor that Viv Richards did. The reason he is rated higher than Sachin is pretty obvious; he was a bigger match-winner.
 
Thivagar said:
Maybe because retired folks don't like Laras' unorthodox batting style ? Those who played with rarely rate him over Lara. Weird.
Click to expand...

Opinions can change by many depending on when they give it, but to say that his peers rarely rated him above Lara is 100% wrong. I just pulled quotes by mostly ATG's who happen to play with him because listing every player will be too many.

-----------

"Sachin Tendulkar is the greatest batsman I ever played with or against" -- Ponting

"Among his contemporaries, Steve Waugh, Brian Lara and Inzamam-ul Haq are often compared to the little maestro. Each has his trademark, but Tendulkar combines all of their qualities to make him the best of the lot. " - McGrath

"Sachin Tendulkar is, in my time, the best player without a doubt" -- Warne

"He is No. 1 in my book - the best player I have ever had the privilege of bowling to. There's Steve Waugh and there's Brian Lara, who was wonderful in 1995, but Tendulkar is a class above, consistently special." - Donald

"Brian Lara and Sachin Tendulkar were two of the greatest batsmen of their generation, but it is difficult to compare them because both were so different." -- Ambrose

"You take Don Bradman away and he's next up, I reckon." - Steve Waugh

"There are two kinds of batsmen in the world. One, Sachin Tendulkar. Two, all the others" -- Andy Flower

"There is no doubt he is the greatest batsman" - Inzzy

"I have no doubt in my mind that he was the greatest batsman of the modern era and I don`t see another like him coming soon. It was a privilege to play against him." -- Wasim Akram

"Certainly the best I’ve seen... People talk of (Sir Don) Bradman, but our generation and the ones immediately before us didn’t get to see him... Sure, he has an astounding average (99.94), but of the cricketers I’ve watched, Sachin’s the best.." - Waqar
 
You can't have ifs and buts in cricket. Injury is part of career and every cricketer goes through it. Also, fans may start extrapolating unrealistic performances just because some one performed great in certain years before injury. Cricket doesn't work that way.
 
Bradman suffered massive health issues that almost cost him his life apart from loosing 8 years to war
 
Most of pundits Xis have already been made before Mcg came into prominence. Have read numerous accounts of viewers who saw both players and I have yet to read a sensible non-pakistani cricket fan account proclaiming Marshall was in different league compared to Mcgrath.
 
Few people are blinded by bias. Created this thread as a charity to clear misconceptions but you can't always win.
 
Yossarian said:
Yeah :))
And yet he doesn't make it into most pundits greatest all time Test XI
Click to expand...

Imran Khan doesn't make it to any all time test XI either over Sobers but you guys won't stop saying that he is the greatest all rounder ever and the greatest Asian cricketer ever.
 
The_Odd_One said:
You win ODIs and draw tests by batting. Are you saying that batting in a strong batting unit is not easier than batting in a light batting unit?
Click to expand...

You didn't get my point. Consider this scenario.

A team with batting line up of Imran Farhat, Salman Butt , Mohammad Ashraful , Mahela Jayawardene supported by bowlers like Steyn, Warne, McGrath and Gillespie and another team with

Batting line up of Hayden, Sehwag, Ponting , Sachin supported by bowlers like Venkatesh Prasad, Abby Kuruvilla etc.

Which team will win more matches?
 
Cricfan123 said:
Wasim better test bowler than McGrath? That's like saying Ahmed Shehzad is better than Kohli.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about Wasim, not some Indian trundler like Kapil or Srinath. He was better than McGrath.
 
Bilal7 said:
I'm talking about Wasim, not some Indian trundler like Kapil or Srinath. He was better than McGrath.
Click to expand...

McGrath - 563 wickets; Ave - 21.64; SR - 51.9



Akram - 414 wickets; Ave - 23.62; SR - 54.6



McGrath was not just better, but way better than Akram in every department of bowling in Tests.
 
People are so disrespectful of McGrath here.

McGrath wipes the floor with Wasim as a test bowler.

McGrath is ATG bowler. I would only rate Marshall as having a chance against McGrath. Even then the latter is so consistently special.
 
And before anyone comes in and says, I am sucking up to Indians, I am not talking about Wasim the ODI bowler, who has a chance to get in front of McGrath (it's a touch and go, and you can't be wrong with either choice).

But to take an underachiever like Wasim in tests, and leave out McGrath is blasphemous.


That's saying you would take Inzi to Australia instead of Sachin Tendulkar.
 
Haven't we all grown out of the Sachin debates? We have been debating these same old tired topics from 2013.

I could understand if newbie posters do it.....:))
 
Dr_Bassim said:
And before anyone comes in and says, I am sucking up to Indians, I am not talking about Wasim the ODI bowler, who has a chance to get in front of McGrath (it's a touch and go, and you can't be wrong with either choice).

But to take an underachiever like Wasim in tests, and leave out McGrath is blasphemous.


That's saying you would take Inzi to Australia instead of Sachin Tendulkar.
Click to expand...

A lot of Pak fans would. After all, Imran Khan (the greatest authority in cricket) said that Inzamam was the best player of fast bowling. Who cares about numbers and facts when Imran Khan says something.
 
Sachin136 said:
That isn't Sachin's fault. If Ponting, Lara etc were born 20 years earlier, and led to Sachin having no competition, that shouldn't change how you rate him.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. My point was though that Viv really stood out whereas Sachin was only marginally better than his competition. Suppose in 20 years time someone comes along who challenges Kohli in T20? I personally would rate Kohli higher still because Kohli is so far ahead of everyone in his generation.
 
Suleiman said:
Sachin is a goat.
Click to expand...

There is no misconception in it ... get over it and accept the reality that what SRT achieved is beyond reach and move on. Unless you think every TDH stands a chance of making 100 centuries !
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
Haven't we all grown out of the Sachin debates? We have been debating these same old tired topics from 2013.

I could understand if newbie posters do it.....:))
Click to expand...

They should make sachin sub forum for people who wish to ignore the topic altogether
 
Cricfan123 said:
You didn't get my point. Consider this scenario.

A team with batting line up of Imran Farhat, Salman Butt , Mohammad Ashraful , Mahela Jayawardene supported by bowlers like Steyn, Warne, McGrath and Gillespie and another team with

Batting line up of Hayden, Sehwag, Ponting , Sachin supported by bowlers like Venkatesh Prasad, Abby Kuruvilla etc.

Which team will win more matches?
Click to expand...

The team with stronger batting will win almost all of the matches. Even the greatest of the bowlers need some runs on the board to defend.
 
Dr_Bassim said:
People are so disrespectful of McGrath here.

McGrath wipes the floor with Wasim as a test bowler.

McGrath is ATG bowler. I would only rate Marshall as having a chance against McGrath. Even then the latter is so consistently special.
Click to expand...

McGrath was a better test bowler but he does not wipe the floor with Wasim. You are just exaggerating. There is a difference of just 2 points between their career averages and strike rates in tests which can be completely ignored considering the difference in conditions in which they mostly bowled and the quality of their respective team's fielding.
 
The_Odd_One said:
McGrath was a better test bowler but he does not wipe the floor with Wasim. You are just exaggerating. There is a difference of just 2 points between their career averages and strike rates in tests which can be completely ignored considering the difference in conditions in which they mostly bowled and the quality of their respective team's fielding.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that point doesn't hold weight when you look at McGrath averages in subcontinent.

Infect it could be argued that Wasim didn't bowl well enough when conditions even suited him for instance Australia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

atreus
  • Article Article
Viv Richards and Sachin Tendulkar — are they really far apart statistically?
Replies
7
Views
614
atreus
atreus
H
Viv Richards – Second Best Batter to Sir Donald Bradman?
Replies
13
Views
647
RidiculousMan
RidiculousMan
mominsaigol
Are Yashasvi Jaiswal and Rishabh Pant the next hype machines for India?
2 3
Replies
209
Views
4K
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
K
Which team would have won at the ICC Champions Trophy 2025 if both India and Australia were at full strength?
Replies
43
Views
1K
kron
K
MenInG
[VIDEO] "Babar Azam is no less than Don Bradman": Ramiz Raja
2
Replies
93
Views
6K
globetrotter
G
Back
Top