Would you swap Imran Khan for Sachin Tendulkar?

[testcricketisbest]

Wow this thing is going on still, is this even a topic, this is like kohli vs umar akmal times 1000.

IK I like him but he is nothing in comparison with Sachin.

 

[Singham]

As I said before, sachin is once in a hundred years cricketer. We are not going to see such a cricketer for the next 100 years. We can't say the same about imran , can we? I can understand Pakistani fans rooting for imran as he is their world cup team winner and a fantastic all-rounder. But sachin is incomparable with any cricketer right now. Maybe in future, but you have to wait another 100 years for it to see a player like sachin.

 

[Bilal7]

As I said before, sachin is once in a hundred years cricketer. We are not going to see such a cricketer for the next 100 years. We can't say the same about imran , can we? I can understand Pakistani fans rooting for imran as he is their world cup team winner and a fantastic all-rounder. But sachin is incomparable with any cricketer right now. Maybe in future, but you have to wait another 100 years for it to see a player like sachin.

So when do you see the next Imran coming?

Wow this thing is going on still, is this even a topic, this is like kohli vs umar akmal times 1000.

IK I like him but he is nothing in comparison with Sachin.

The reverse is true for the majority of people on this site.

 

[Bilal7]

The fact is sachin started playing from 16 and he was able to play 24 years and still say at the top speaks volumes about his quality. No other cricketer even in future can do what sachin has done for world cricket. You can't say the same about imran though. Imran like cricketers are once in a 25 years but sachin like cricketers are once in a 100 years. I don't think we would be able to see another sachin for another 100 years. I was listening to a selector who picked sachin for India . He said they would have picked at 15, but they were scared that sachin would not be able stay away from his mom and dad and get home sick. He was that good. No cricketer in the world can get that sort of admiration.

Lol! Proves nothing about quality but does prove his fitness levels and the fact that he did not get injured during his career.

So we'll get another Imran in 25 years, eh? Its been around 16-17 years since Imran retired, lets see if this is true.

The only thing that will be irreplaceable about Sachin will be his longevity. His quality is already being matched by current players like Amla, Kohli, Cook and ABD.

 

[Hitman]

So when do you see the next Imran coming?



The reverse is true for the majority of people on this site.

Of course, did anyone expect Pak fans to rate Sachin ahead of Imran Khan?

 

[pungi]

Lol! Proves nothing about quality but does prove his fitness levels and the fact that he did not get injured during his career.

So we'll get another Imran in 25 years, eh? Its been around 16-17 years since Imran retired, lets see if this is true.

The only thing that will be irreplaceable about Sachin will be his longevity. His quality is already being matched by current players like Amla, Kohli, Cook and ABD.

Imran retired 20 years back, and since then we had a lot of better all rounders - Shaun Pollock (more runs and wickets than Imran), Kallis, flintoff to name a few

 

[Buffet]

Quite true, but then we have seen similar opinions even when discussed amongst neutrals outside India. I think the reason for that is the status he has both in India and Australia. Even in England he has been outstanding. This unfortunately forms the bulk of cricketing media opinion.

If perhaps a panel from S Africa, Pak, Nz discuss him at a neutral venue we would see something different being discussed.

Panel in 2001 had many from outside Aus/Eng/Ind.

---------------
Wasim Akram, Sunil Gavaskar, Richie Benaud, Sir Richard Hadlee, Dickie Bird, Michael Holding, Allan Border, John Knowles, Ian Botham, Robin Marlar, Ian Chappell, Christopher Martin-Jenkins, Tony Cozier, Mike Procter and Martin Crowe.
-------------

His admiration in India can't be matched because in SC has only one sport with a massive fan base but you are right about Aus. I don't recall anyone else visiting Aus getting that kind of respect/admiration.

Imran retired 20 years back, and since then we had a lot of better all rounders - Shaun Pollock (more runs and wickets than Imran), Kallis, flintoff to name a few

Flintoff doesn't belong in such lists. I will put IK above Pollock as well. Kallis Vs IK gets tough but one was a bowling all rounder and another is a batting all rounder.

 

[Singham]

So when do you see the next Imran coming?



.

Lol when do you see a next sachin or bradman coming?

 

[akheR]

As I said before, sachin is once in a hundred years cricketer. We are not going to see such a cricketer for the next 100 years. We can't say the same about imran , can we? I can understand Pakistani fans rooting for imran as he is their world cup team winner and a fantastic all-rounder. But sachin is incomparable with any cricketer right now. Maybe in future, but you have to wait another 100 years for it to see a player like sachin.

Yes, SRT is so so "once in a hundred years", that a dozen of batsmen in the modern era averaged like/more than him, and one contemporary, Jacque Kallis may overtake him with Test runs aggregate/centuries, in less innings, at a better average.

As for Imran Khan, I don't see a fast bowler of his quality coming up in the upcoming years - surely not from India -, let alone one who was one of the best statistical batsman of his era, so let's peoples decide who's the "once in a hundred years" cricketer (the Don, Garry Sobers and even Sir Viv Richards have more weight for that claim.)

 

[Singham]

Lol! Proves nothing about quality but does prove his fitness levels and the fact that he did not get injured during his career.

So we'll get another Imran in 25 years, eh? Its been around 16-17 years since Imran retired, lets see if this is true.

The only thing that will be irreplaceable about Sachin will be his longevity. His quality is already being matched by current players like Amla, Kohli, Cook and ABD.

Lol, sachin did not get injured? Ok. I leave it as an ignorant fan talking. You gotta understand sachin was unbelievable even as a 16 year old boy. He was scoring centuries even as a 16 year old boy. He was a natural cricketer. Whereas imran wasn't effective for many years and he added pace by changing his action and injured himself due to that unnatural action and became a trundler in his remaining part of career. Batting came natural to sachin even as a 16 year old boy. That makes him natural and special than any cricketer who played this game. Bradman admitted that he resembles his style when he was 18 . Who can get that sort of admiration? None. Absolutely no one comes close to sachin . Imran like players come and go, sachin was pure genius. I can't put things more clearer to Pakistan fans like you.

 

[Buffet]

Lol, sachin did not get injured? Ok. I leave it as an ignorant fan talking. You gotta understand sachin was unbelievable even as a 16 year old boy. He was scoring centuries even as a 16 year old boy. He was a natural cricketer. Whereas imran wasn't effective for many years and he added pace by changing his action and injured himself due to that unnatural action and became a trundler in his remaining part of career. Batting came natural to sachin even as a 16 year old boy. That makes him natural and special than any cricketer who played this game. Bradman admitted that he resembles his style when he was 18 . Who can get that sort of admiration? None. Absolutely no one comes close to sachin . Imran like players come and go, sachin was pure genius. I can't put things more clearer to Pakistan fans like you.

While it's true that SRT was one of the rare cases of child prodigy who went on to become an ATG and IK was a very average cricketer for the first 7-8 years of his career but IK was also special. IK was very determined player and worked hard to change his game. There are not many players who became so great after after an average start of their career. I rate him as the best bowling all rounder in cricket. SRT is surely genius but players like IK don't come and go.

 

[Singham]

Yes, SRT is so so "once in a hundred years", that a dozen of batsmen in the modern era averaged like/more than him, and one contemporary, Jacque Kallis may overtake him with Test runs aggregate/centuries, in less innings, at a better average.

As for Imran Khan, I don't see a fast bowler of his quality coming up in the upcoming years - surely not from India -, let alone one who was one of the best statistical batsman of his era, so let's peoples decide who's the "once in a hundred years" cricketer (the Don, Garry Sobers and even Sir Viv Richards have more weight for that claim.)

What? Who started playing from the age of 16 and still performed and remained a top cricketer for 24 years? No other cricketer had to weigh 125 crore people 's expectations like he did. We are not gonna see his records being broken for the next 100 years at least. Imran's records were broken a long time back. I admire him for captaining Pakistan and grooming youngsters as a 40 year old man. But he simply can't be compared with sachin. Sachin was pure genius. Imran wasn't.

 

[akheR]

Lol, sachin did not get injured? Ok. I leave it as an ignorant fan talking. You gotta understand sachin was unbelievable even as a 16 year old boy. He was scoring centuries even as a 16 year old boy. He was a natural cricketer. Whereas imran wasn't effective for many years and he added pace by changing his action and injured himself due to that unnatural action and became a trundler in his remaining part of career. Batting came natural to sachin even as a 16 year old boy. That makes him natural and special than any cricketer who played this game. Bradman admitted that he resembles his style when he was 18 . Who can get that sort of admiration? None. Absolutely no one comes close to sachin . Imran like players come and go, sachin was pure genius. I can't put things more clearer to Pakistan fans like you.

So what ? If Punter (for instance) was given chances at young age, who knows he couldn't have scored a ton ? Mushtaq Mohammad too had a 200-minutes long century to draw the match against India in India at 17, resisting Vaman Kumar's leg-spin while all the rest minus Javed Burki fell, without being the most talented player, even if he scored centuries/took wickets as a 14-15 years old in Pak domestic. And in ODIs, SRT got his first century at 21, there are +30 batsmen to do it before him, incl. a few number of bat from Bangladesh.
Longevity and the fact of throwing young batsmen (or bowlers) in just has to do with the sporting cultures of the nations who're involved in it, doesn't take anything out of SRT's talent, but to present it as if it was some miracle is pushing it too far.

And about the Don's batting style

Melbourne : Australian great Sir Don Bradman himself declared that Sachin Tendulkar reminded him of his own batting style but former English cricketer Tony Shillinglaw chooses to disagree. He has argued through a study that technique wise both the players are as different as chalk and cheese.

Shillinglaw, who is a coach now, has conducted an extensive biomechanical study of Bradman's technique and claims that actually it is Pakistan's Inzamam-ul Haq, who comes close to Bradman's batting style.

"It's almost become a myth that if you're watching Tendulkar, you're watching Bradman. Well, there is very little comparison when you do so. Tendulkar is basically textbook, whereas Bradman used a rotary method in preparing to hit the ball," Shillinglaw was quoted as saying in 'Sydney Morning Herald'.

"What you get with that is it becomes just a human instinct to react to the ball, and in the end that's the basis of Bradman's method. It's a circular motion. He didn't learn to bat, he learned to control the ball."

Bradman had said in an interview in 1996 that after being struck by Tendulkar's technique, he had asked his wife to look at the Indian's batting style and she also agreed that there were similarities.

Shillinglaw, who analysed Bradman at length and had scientists at Liverpool's John Moores University recreate his strokes, accepts there are some facets of Bradman's batting that resonate in Tendulkar. But, technically, he says, they are very different. He argues that the only striking similarity between Bradman and Tendulkar is that both the players are good watchers of the ball but the Indian is actually confined by orthodoxy.

"It does make sense to a degree. They were both small men, and Tendulkar wasn't taught to bat in a traditional way. Of course, being small and compact, he developed in his own way the skill of judging the ball and reacting to the ball", Shillinglaw said.

"The similarity is that they were both expert at viewing the ball and playing it, but Tendulkar, I feel he is restricted by the confines of orthodoxy", he said.

"It amazes me that with all modern technology nobody has really looked in-depth at [Bradman's] method and compared it with the likes of Tendulkar in particular because of his reputation, and Jacques Kallis, whose average is very similar.

"They're both very highly skilled, technical players, and comparing Bradman with those two, I feel, is a way to establishing Bradman's differences."

Asked if not Tendulkar then who is closest to the batting style of Bradman, Shillinglaw came up with a surprise choice.

"Funnily enough, the nearest I've seen of all people is Inzamam-ul-Haq, even though he was a big bull of a man. His batting movements were the nearest I've seen to Bradman, and amazingly his timing and his foot movement for a big man - they were very quick," says Shillinglaw, who penned the book Bradman Revisited.

http://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/sach...n-tendulkar-close-to-don-bradmans-style-study

 

[Untouchables_666]

Not in a million years, Imran is a once in a lifetime player, the way he inspired the 92 team to the cup is legendary, you can always find better batsmen than Tendulkar anyday!

 

[Bilal7]

Of course, did anyone expect Pak fans to rate Sachin ahead of Imran Khan?

Or Indian fans to put Imran ahead of Sachin?

Imran retired 20 years back, and since then we had a lot of better all rounders - Shaun Pollock (more runs and wickets than Imran), Kallis, flintoff to name a few

Imran is much better than Pollock. You might as well add Afridi to the list if you're going to mention Flintoff. Kallis is a totally different player to Imran.

What? Who started playing from the age of 16 and still performed and remained a top cricketer for 24 years? No other cricketer had to weigh 125 crore people 's expectations like he did. We are not gonna see his records being broken for the next 100 years at least. Imran's records were broken a long time back. I admire him for captaining Pakistan and grooming youngsters as a 40 year old man. But he simply can't be compared with sachin. Sachin was pure genius. Imran wasn't.

Yawn. Like I said, his longevity only proves his fitness and his run-making records will not be broken only because no other cricketer will play the same amount of games that he will.

Even Afridi has 7000 ODI runs. Will you put him over the many great batsmen who had a lesser amount of runs?

 

[Hitman]

So what ? If Punter (for instance) was given chances at young age, who knows he couldn't have scored a ton ? Mushtaq Mohammad too had a 200-minutes long century to draw the match against India in India at 17, resisting Vaman Kumar's leg-spin while all the rest minus Javed Burki fell, without being the most talented player, even if he scored centuries/took wickets as a 14-15 years old in Pak domestic. And in ODIs, SRT got his first century at 21, there are +30 batsmen to do it before him, incl. a few number of bat from Bangladesh.
Longevity and the fact of throwing young batsmen (or bowlers) in just has to do with the sporting cultures of the nations who're involved in it, doesn't take anything out of SRT's talent, but to present it as if it was some miracle is pushing it too far.

And about the Don's batting style



http://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/sach...n-tendulkar-close-to-don-bradmans-style-study

Here's Don himself -

[utube]YbgYwluUkZE[/utube]

 

[Bilal7]

"Funnily enough, the nearest I've seen of all people is Inzamam-ul-Haq, even though he was a big bull of a man. His batting movements were the nearest I've seen to Bradman, and amazingly his timing and his foot movement for a big man - they were very quick," says Shillinglaw, who penned the book Bradman Revisited.

Lol! And this is not an opinion but the result of a study that was carried out by an expert. Ouch!

 

[Bilal7]

Here's Don himself -

[utube]YbgYwluUkZE[/utube]

Don's opinions can be biased like any other human's. Imran said that Inzi was a better match-winner than Sachin.

 

[Hitman]

Don's opinions can be biased like any other human's. Imran said that Inzi was a better match-winner than Sachin.

LOL, both Imran and Inzamam are Pakistanis. Does it ring a bell? Even Gavaskar once said that Sachin is a better batsman than Bradman.

It's when a player makes legends from other nations take notice and lavish praise on them, that matters. One would certainly pay attention on what Don himself has to say, over what a no-named nobody has to say.

 

[Singham]

So what ? If Punter (for instance) was given chances at young age, who knows he couldn't have scored a ton ? Mushtaq Mohammad too had a 200-minutes long century to draw the match against India in India at 17, resisting Vaman Kumar's leg-spin while all the rest minus Javed Burki fell, without being the most talented player, even if he scored centuries/took wickets as a 14-15 years old in Pak domestic. And in ODIs, SRT got his first century at 21, there are +30 batsmen to do it before him, incl. a few number of bat from Bangladesh.
Longevity and the fact of throwing young batsmen (or bowlers) in just has to do with the sporting cultures of the nations who're involved in it, doesn't take anything out of SRT's talent, but to present it as if it was some miracle is pushing it too far.

And about the Don's batting style



http://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/sach...n-tendulkar-close-to-don-bradmans-style-study

Lol. Punter wasn't selected because he wasn't good enough as a 16 year old boy. I remember a selector who selected sachin when he was 16. He said they would have selected him as a 15 year old boy, but they were scared that he would not be able to stay away from his mom and dad and get home sick. Lol. As far as the article you have mentioned, I would take what bradman himself said about sachin that he resembles him. Thanks.

 

[akheR]

Here's Don himself -

Did you even read the article ? How does that contradict lol ? SRT was head and shoulders above Inzi, but that was just to respond to a pretty irrelevant remark on how SRT "bats like the Don", as if it was to make some equivalence between both, when the batting average doesn't help.
Don't care about Inzi batting style, just to answer it (on a non-serious note).

 

[Bilal7]

LOL, both Imran and Inzamam are Pakistanis. Does it ring a bell? Even Gavaskar once said that Sachin is a better batsman than Bradman.

It's when a player makes legends from other nations take notice and lavish praise on them, that matters. One would certainly pay attention on what Don himself has to say, over what a no-named nobody has to say.

Like how Wasim used to hype up some of the Indian bowlers to increase his popularity?

 

[akheR]

Lol. Punter wasn't selected because he wasn't good enough as a 16 year old boy. I remember a selector who selected sachin when he was 16. He said they would have selected him as a 15 year old boy, but they were scared that he would not be able to stay away from his mom and dad and get home sick. Lol. As far as the article you have mentioned, I would take what bradman himself said about sachin that he resembles him. Thanks.

Punter was good enough to be sponsored by Kookaburra at U16 level (I think 12 ?), and cricket in Australia is more competitive than in India, so what if he made a Test debut at 16 (like SRT) instead of 21 ?
Also, SRT was fast tracked because the Indian team had no batting depth, after Gavaskar-Viswanath retired and Vengsarkar was in horrible form, only Azharuddin was somehow good, so the management wasn't spoiled by choices.

But of course for some SRT the embryo >

 

[Hitman]

Like how Wasim used to hype up some of the Indian bowlers to increase his popularity?

Bradman never had any gains from speaking what he felt. He wasn't a commentator. He spoke his heart out. He never missed an innings of Sachin since 1996. Here, read it -

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/story/96323.html

Akram, as we all know from the match fixing scandal, is a sell out. He'd do anything for money.

 

[Hitman]

Punter was good enough to be sponsored by Kookaburra at U16 level (I think 12 ?), and cricket in Australia is more competitive than in India, so what if he made a Test debut at 16 (like SRT) instead of 21 ?
Also, SRT was fast tracked because the Indian team had no batting depth, after Gavaskar-Viswanath retired and Vengsarkar was in horrible form, only Azharuddin was somehow good, so the management wasn't spoiled by choices.

But of course for some SRT the embryo >

No, he isn't. Bradman will always remain the greatest batsman ever. Apart from Bradman, I'll name a few more batsmen whom I believe were greater than Sachin -

1. Garry Sobers
2. Jack Hobbs
3. Viv Rivhards.


There's Graeme Pollock and Barry Richards who could have matched Sachin, but unfortunately their careers were cut short. Then there's Wally Hammond who can claim to be as good as Sachin, if not better.

 

[Bilal7]

Bradman never had any gains from speaking what he felt. He wasn't a commentator. He spoke his heart out. He never missed an innings of Sachin since 1996. Here, read it -

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india/content/story/96323.html

Akram, as we all know from the match fixing scandal, is a sell out. He'd do anything for money.

Since you'll keep on making excuses as to why the opinions of some ATG's are valid but not of others, there is no point in continuing this.

I will say this though, There were a few batsmen that were better than Sachin but Imran was the best bowling all-rounder to ever play the game.

 

[Hitman]

Since you'll keep on making excuses as to why the opinions of some ATG's are valid but not of others, there is no point in continuing this.

I will say this though, There were a few batsmen that were better than Sachin but Imran was the best bowling all-rounder to ever play the game.

Of course, I admitted it in my above post.

I have lots of respect for Imran, he was and will always be a legend. In my books, among the top 10 cricketers ever (which is a huge, huge honor). A great, great, great ........ cricketer. We Indians would do anything to have a player like him. It's when some idiots (i.e 'Monsee') insult Sachin when I lose my cool, that too in such an emotional time for us Indians. Don't you think it's the moral duty of any fan in any sphere of the world to at least not disrespect Sachin (if not lavish him with praises) at this final moment?

Peace, bro! No hard feelings.

 

[Singham]

Punter was good enough to be sponsored by Kookaburra at U16 level (I think 12 ?), and cricket in Australia is more competitive than in India, so what if he made a Test debut at 16 (like SRT) instead of 21 ?
Also, SRT was fast tracked because the Indian team had no batting depth, after Gavaskar-Viswanath retired and Vengsarkar was in horrible form, only Azharuddin was somehow good, so the management wasn't spoiled by choices.

But of course for some SRT the embryo >

Oh . He was sponsored by kookaburra, hence he was as good as sachin even as a 16 year old boy. Good logic. However saqqchin scored his first century in English conditions as a 16 year old boy. Renowned commentator Barry Richards rates it as the best century he has ever seen in his life. I mean whatever you say dude, you can't deny he was pure genius and he just can't be compared with unnatural cricketer like imran who twisted his bowling style and got injured.

 

[Buffet]

Punter was good enough to be sponsored by Kookaburra at U16 level (I think 12 ?), and cricket in Australia is more competitive than in India, so what if he made a Test debut at 16 (like SRT) instead of 21 ?
Also, SRT was fast tracked because the Indian team had no batting depth, after Gavaskar-Viswanath retired and Vengsarkar was in horrible form, only Azharuddin was somehow good, so the management wasn't spoiled by choices.

Punter came much more polished in international cricket and as you said after getting benefit of competitive cricket in Aus but both played in 90s when we had many ATG bowlers.

In 90s:

• Sachin was averaging 58 with twenty two 100s and in total 69 matches.
• Ponting was averaging 44 with six 100s in total 33 matches.

There was a huge gap in their performance back then. There is no evidence to suggest that bit less polished Ponting would have done even better in same period. Off course it's all conjecture but based on their performance. Fast tracked Ponting, starting at an age of 16, would have done even worse than matured Ponting in my opinion.

 

[Bilal7]

Of course, I admitted it in my above post.

I have lots of respect for Imran, he was and will always be a legend. In my books, among the top 10 cricketers ever (which is a huge, huge honor). A great, great, great ........ cricketer. We Indians would do anything to have a player like him. It's when some idiots (i.e 'Monsee') insult Sachin when I lose my cool, that too in such an emotional time for us Indians.

Peace, bro! No hard feelings.

I have the same feelings for Sachin and most other Pakistanis do too. Peace.

 

[akheR]

Oh . He was sponsored by kookaburra, hence he was as good as sachin even as a 16 year old boy. Good logic. However saqqchin scored his first century in English conditions as a 16 year old boy. Renowned commentator Barry Richards rates the century he has ever seen in his life. I mean whatever you say dude, you can't deny he was pure genius and he just can't be compared with unnatural cricketer like imran who twisted his bowling style and got injured.

He also said

"In my book, Graham Pollock (left-handed) and Viv Richards (right-handed) were the best batsmen ever"

http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2001/jan/24sachin.htm

Enjoy, as it seems that only "experts opinions" roll here.

Punter came much more polished in international cricket and as you said after getting benefit of competitive cricket in Aus but both played in 90s when we had many ATG bowlers.

In 90s:

• Sachin was averaging 58 with twenty two 100s and in total 69 matches.
• Ponting was averaging 44 with six 100s in total 33 matches.

There was a huge gap in their performance back then. There is no evidence to suggest that bit less polished Ponting would have done even better in same period. Off course it's all conjecture but based on their performance. Fast tracked Ponting, starting at an age of 16, would have done even worse than matured Ponting in my opinion.

No, I think that he would have more runs and nearly the same average, as some show Sachin debuting at 16 as some miracle when in fact India had no batsman of note (minus Azharuddin, who was more good than WC.)
SRT is, from a distance, the best post-90s batsman, as Ponting (or Lara, Inzi, MoYo, Ganguly, Dravid, Sehwag, ...) are batsmen who really fired in the 2000s, when the overall bowling class was falling down drastically.
I wasn't rating Punter higher, just saying that he would have more runs/centuries had he debuted five years earlier, with an average only slightly lower, so the "longevity" and "debuting at 16" is not an argument for me.

But I think that the best all rounder of the 80s simply takes over the best batsman since the 90s. Considering Imran Khan as a specialist bowler would be different, but some forget that he was a bowling all rounder in an era plagued with top class all rounders and overall competitive cricket, both in batting and bowling.

 

[Buffet]

No, I think that he would have more runs and nearly the same average, as some show Sachin debuting at 16 as some miracle when in fact India had no batsman of note (minus Azharuddin, who was more good than WC.)
SRT is, from a distance, the best post-90s batsman, as Ponting (or Lara, Inzi, MoYo, Ganguly, Dravid, Sehwag, ...) are batsmen who really fired in the 2000s, when the overall bowling class was falling down drastically (apart from AUS and SA, in more recent years).
I wasn't rating Punter higher, just saying that he would have more runs/centuries had he debuted five years earlier, with an average only slightly lower, so the "longevity" and "debuting at 16" is not an argument for me.

There is no doubt that Punter would have had more runs/centuries if he had debuted earlier and managed to hold his place in eleven while debuting at 16. It's not as easy as you are making out to be where we can take lot of other ATG's and say that they would have performed in similar range if they had debuted at very young age. For batsmen , peak comes around 27-32 for most. Debuting at 16 is surely not miracle. Anyone can debut at 16. Point to note is how they performed when they were still very young. That's something special.

In recent times, I recall SRT, Minadad & Waqar who debuted early and went on to become all time great. I surely find it special. Different opinions here.

But I think that the best all rounder of the 80s simply takes over the best batsman since the 90s. Considering Imran Khan as a specialist bowler would be different, but some forget that he was a bowling all rounder in an era plagued with top class all rounders and overall competitive cricket, both in batting and bowling.

I personally don't have any firm opinion one way or another in this matter mainly due to not watching IK's career myself.

 

[Singham]

He also said



http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2001/jan/24sachin.htm

Enjoy, as it seems that only "experts opinions" roll here.



No, I think that he would have more runs and nearly the same average, as some show Sachin debuting at 16 as some miracle when in fact India had no batsman of note (minus Azharuddin, who was more good than WC.)
SRT an.

It was Richie benaud. Not Barry Richards. I got confused. Here it is..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vthfSPF_LCw

 

[akheR]

There is no doubt that Punter would have had more runs/centuries if he had debuted earlier and managed to hold his place in eleven while debuting at 16.

Because India didn't have Test batsmen. There were Vengsarkar and Azharuddin, but both more WCs than ATGs, and then, the next best ones were Manjrekar/Kapil Dev/Srikkanth/Shastri, that says a lot.
Being introduced at 16 wasn't a miracle, nor was cementing its place in such batting line-up, that's my point - it was a feat in itself, but to put it all as "achievement" for SRT is exaggerating. It said more about India's Test team than SRT's talent actually, *WITHOUT* undermining him.

 

[Buffet]

Because India didn't have Test batsmen. There were Vengsarkar and Azharuddin, but both more WCs than ATGs, and then, the next best ones were Manjrekar/Kapil Dev/Srikkanth/Shastri, that says a lot.
Being introduced at 16 wasn't a miracle, nor was cementing its place in such batting line-up, that's my point - it was a feat in itself, but to put it all as "achievement" for SRT is exaggerating. It said more about India's Test team than SRT's talent actually, *WITHOUT* undermining him.

You missed the point of my post completely.

Debuting at 16 - Nothing special
SRT cementing his place in pathetic batting line up - Nothing special

Special is what he did in next 5-10 years after debuting at 16. That kind of performance is not shown by even polished cricketers who debut with lot more maturity, experience & advantage of having played competitive cricket. That's what makes it special for me. Anyway, we are going in circles here and have different opinion about it.

 

[Scrolln]

Because India didn't have Test batsmen. There were Vengsarkar and Azharuddin, but both more WCs than ATGs, and then, the next best ones were Manjrekar/Kapil Dev/Srikkanth/Shastri, that says a lot.
Being introduced at 16 wasn't a miracle, nor was cementing its place in such batting line-up, that's my point - it was a feat in itself, but to put it all as "achievement" for SRT is exaggerating. It said more about India's Test team than SRT's talent actually, *WITHOUT* undermining him.

Tendulkar hit test hundreds in Manchester, Perth and Johannesburg when he was a teen.

Forget that he played for a useless batting line up earlier in his career for a while, how many times have we seen this happen in test history?

 

[Singham]

You missed the point of my post completely.

Debuting at 16 - Nothing special
SRT cementing his place in pathetic batting line up - Nothing special

Special is what he did in next 5-10 years after debuting at 16. That kind of performance is not shown by even polished cricketers who debut with lot more maturity, experience & advantage of having played competitive cricket. That's what makes it special for me. Anyway, we are going in circles here and have different opinion about it.

As I said he was compared to don at the age of 18 by don himself. It was extraordinary for a teenager. He was so natural and talented that Indian selectors thought of picking him at the age of 15 and they were scared that he would get home sick. No batsman had such talent at that age. Imran stands no chance in front of sachin.

 

[Scrolln]

As I said he was compared to don at the age of 18 by don himself. It was extraordinary for a teenager. He was so natural and talented that Indian selectors thought of picking him at the age of 15 and they were scared that he would get home sick. No batsman had such talent at that age. Imran stands no chance in front of sachin.

That would be taking it a bit too far.

Imran is arguably the greatest test all rounder of all time (the best in my book) while he would rank among the top 10 ODI all rounders of all time too.

Sachin Tendulkar is arguably the greatest ODI batsman of all time (the best in my book) and among the top 5 test batsmen of all time.

I would attach more weightage to test exploits over ODI's.

Its a lot closer than you suggest.

 

[Singham]

That would be taking it a bit too far.

Imran is arguably the greatest test all rounder of all time (the best in my book) while he would rank among the top 10 ODI all rounders of all time too.

Sachin Tendulkar is arguably the greatest ODI batsman of all time (the best in my book) and among the top 5 test batsmen of all time.

I would attach more weightage to test exploits over ODI's.

Its a lot closer than you suggest.

Most Matches in Test :198
Most runs in Test :15837 runs
Most runs in ODI :18426 runs
Most Fours in ODI :2016 fours
Most Fours in Test :2044 Fours
Most 150+ scores in ODI :5
Most 150+ scores in test :20
Most hundreds by a batsman in Test: 51 Hundreds
Most Hundreds by a batsman in ODI :49 Hundreds
Most Ninties in ODI : 18
Most Ninties in Test :10
Most fifties by a batsman in Test : 67
Most fifties by a batsman in ODI : 96
Most Man of Match in ODI :62
Most Man of series in ODI :15
Most Balls Faced in ODI :21367
Most ODI runs in a calendar year :1,894 ODI runs in 1998.
Most Centuries in a calendar year : 9 ODI Centuries in 1998.
Most runs scored by a batsman in ODI tournament Finals: Tendulkar 1851,
Most centuries hit by a batsman in ODI tournament Finals: Tendulkar (6 ton)
Most Runs in world cup : 2278
Most Runs in single world cup : 673 Runs in 2003 world cup
Most Hundreds in world cup :6
Most fifties in world cup :15
Most successful batsman in Wins (11157 runs in 234 matches)
Most successful batsman in chases - 5490 runs in 127 matches)

Yes it is one and only SACHIN TENDULKAR

Not only imran, entire Pakistan can be swapped for such a record. Good night.

 

[Scrolln]

^ you have to look beyond numbers man.

Anyways, as i've said before i'd have both in my world XI in a heartbeat.

 

[akheR]

lol @ the records where 90% have to do with longevity , why not most +200 for instance ?
Anyway, I'm out of this thread, Sachinazis are a stubborn bunch, let just say that is a better batsman, better bowler, better fielder, taller and more handsome than Imran Khan.

/thread

 

[Singham]

lol @ the records where 90% have to do with longevity , why not most +200 for instance ?
Anyway, I'm out of this thread, Sachinazis are a stubborn bunch, let just say that is a better batsman, better bowler, better fielder, taller and more handsome than Imran Khan.

/thread

Longevity because he was good. Had he sucked, he would not have had longevity and he would have a shorter career like imran.
No most 200 because he didn't score most 200s..lol
His records are fairer, taller, more handsome than any Pakistani cricketer.
Lol at insecure people. I'm outta here.

 

[Poison]

Imran's legacy was Wasim/Waqar/Akhtar and the entire fleet of fast bowlers from Pakistan since his career started. Wouldn't trade that for anything tbh.

 

[jeetu]

I would traded Sachin for another Kapil.

 

[Aman]

It's all preference, personally I would put a greater value on an all rounder than pure batsmen.


Stay on topic and stop insulting each other or I will give out infractions

 

[gsivak]

If the test for true greatness depended on the number of threads created about the person in this forum....we know who will win hands down

 

[Bhaijaan]

ESPN, Wisden put Tendulkar comfortably ahead of Imran like 10-12 years ago.

 

[Haroon786]

Viv was better than Tendu.

 

[Maaya]

srt, simple!

question is, he is been such a role model for the youngsters, an icon a decent man off the field. as a parent, anyone would want his child to idolize a man who´s without controversies, scandals, page 3 appearances etc.

before this thread, a thread should´ve been whether indians would ever trade their god-like statused player who they´ve considered a hero for more than 20.

 

[Haroon786]

Ridiculous to even think of this, yes he was a ATG batsman, but there are others like Sobers who are arguably better etc.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Viv was better than Tendu.

At what? Chewing gums or looking beastly. None of them is a cricketing trait, Tendulkar beats him down at consistency, productivity, reliability.


Sobers as well who averages 0 in ODIs. Tendulkar is double the cricketer with the bat alone.

 

[Pak_Lover]

I would still make this deal.

Look what Sachin gave to India. They used to be below mediocre team and now they are world beater and best part of Sachin is his durability. How mnay players you have seen playing game for this long with same amount of consistency and hunger?

Credit goes to Ganguly for the uplift in their performance, No one is denying Tendulkar's contributions, Sachin was also scoring Bulk of runs in 90's but his team was ending up on losing side more often. It was Ganguly who taught them how to win abroad. Some fans just go over the top in praising and associate the achievements of one man with another.

 

[Haroon786]

At what? Chewing gums or looking beastly. None of them is a cricketing trait, Tendulkar beats him down at consistency, productivity, reliability.


Sobers as well who averages 0 in ODIs. Tendulkar is double the cricketer with the bat alone.

Would still have both over him, dont get me wrong here, I also rate Sachin as one of the greatest but it's necessary to give credit where credit is due

 

[srh]

In my Test team I will pick Imran Khan over Tendulkar.
In my ODI team I will pick Tendulkar over Imran Khan.

 

[Pak_Lover]

Reading some of the comments in this thread from Sachin fans give me the impression that they think Tendulkar is the greatest batsman to have played cricket.I agree that he is one of the Legends but to say that he was betther than for instance Richards or Sobers is just absurd. Another problem is that they impose their opinion on others. Take a life guys... Every one has his own favourites, Mine was Rahul Dravid but I also agree that Sachin is one of the greats.
Back to the topic, I will happily swap Sachin with any Pakistani Bowler except Imran, Wasim and Waqar.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Tendulkar's ability to turn it on in big tourneys also puts him way ahead. Imran even falls below Kapil in that regard actually.

 

[amax]

Viv was clearly ahead of his peers for most of his career same cannot be said about sachin. (both are from different eras and have different peers but these charts are relevant as both have competition from many ATGs). Viv hardly fell below top 10 rankings. Both true greats

http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/playerdisplay/test/batting/?id=1682&graph=ranking
http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/playerdisplay/test/batting/?id=1905&graph=ranking
http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/playerdisplay/test/batting/?id=1782&graph=ranking

 

[WebGuru]

^ Proof of Imran's failure?

Let me show you some of Imran failures in big tournaments where 5 or more teams were involved:


4/37 vs West Indies in 1987 WC (Dismissed Viv when he was playing at 51 with a SR of 98), Pakistan won the match
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65099.html


4/37 vs England in 1987 WC, Pakistan won the match
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65103.html


3/36 and scored 58 runs in same match vs Australia in 1987, WC Semi Final
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65115.html


3/47 and scored unbeaten 55* vs West Indies in Nehru Cup, Final, (Dismissed Viv), Pakistan won the Cup
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65932.html


3/13 vs Australia in Nehru Cup, Pakian won the match and defended a total of 205
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65921.html


Scored 72 runs in final of 1992 WC and the final wicket vs England, Pakistan won the WC
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65156.html


Scored unbeaten 47* with a SR of 120 vs India in Nehru Cup, Pakistan won the match
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65929.html


3/15 vs Sri lanka in 1975 WC, Pakistan won the match
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65046.html


Scored Unbeaten 56* in 33 balls with a SR of 170 vs Lanka in 1983 WC, Pakistan won the match
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65065.html


Scored unbeaten 102* vs Lanka in 1983 WC, Pakistan won the match
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65078.html


Unbeaten 84* vs Lanka in Nehru Cup, Pakistan won the match
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65928.html


Unbeaten 79* with a SR of 100+ vs New Zealand in WC 1983, Pakistan won the match
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/65085.html


Now let's see his failed bowling in big tournaments. He only got 51 wickets in 35 innings with a very pathetic average of less thn 21.

And here is his failed batting in big tournaments. 40 innings 1000+ runs average of 36 including 1 century and 6 fifties.

 

[Pak_Lover]

the reason most people call it fluke was bcoz Pakistan lost to more teams than it won against in that cup, certainly not the stuff of champions. India defeated WI twice in 83 WC, so guess that seals the matter who the real champions were.

On Imran's insecurity about Kapil, whatever helps you sleep better in the night.

Whatever it makes u to assume, I take it as a cornered tiger attitude that they delivered when it mattered the most and when no one was expecting them to win. weather u accept it or not but India was not good enough to win the world cup, they were just lucky to pull it off.
Lol at sleeping at night comment, let alone Imran, i rate even botham and Headlee above kapil.

 

[Munna]

I had to delete a lot of unnecessary and some rubbish comments from above which add nothing to the discussion and only derail the thread.

 

[Statistics375]

The insecurity point sounds lame, they were too great to be insecure of stupid stuff like that. Just acknowledge the facts, Imran was better overall and Kapil was better against WI/Aus in tests and overall in ODIs. End off.

And Tendu is miles ahead of both.

No Imran as a cricketer is much better than Tendulkar.

ATG Bowler, great captain and a very good Batsman down the order.

Tendulkar was an ATG batsman and that is about it.

 

[Statistics375]

Most Matches in Test :198
Most runs in Test :15837 runs
Most runs in ODI :18426 runs
Most Fours in ODI :2016 fours
Most Fours in Test :2044 Fours
Most 150+ scores in ODI :5
Most 150+ scores in test :20
Most hundreds by a batsman in Test: 51 Hundreds
Most Hundreds by a batsman in ODI :49 Hundreds
Most Ninties in ODI : 18
Most Ninties in Test :10
Most fifties by a batsman in Test : 67
Most fifties by a batsman in ODI : 96
Most Man of Match in ODI :62
Most Man of series in ODI :15
Most Balls Faced in ODI :21367
Most ODI runs in a calendar year :1,894 ODI runs in 1998.
Most Centuries in a calendar year : 9 ODI Centuries in 1998.
Most runs scored by a batsman in ODI tournament Finals: Tendulkar 1851,
Most centuries hit by a batsman in ODI tournament Finals: Tendulkar (6 ton)
Most Runs in world cup : 2278
Most Runs in single world cup : 673 Runs in 2003 world cup
Most Hundreds in world cup :6
Most fifties in world cup :15
Most successful batsman in Wins (11157 runs in 234 matches)
Most successful batsman in chases - 5490 runs in 127 matches)

Yes it is one and only SACHIN TENDULKAR

Not only imran, entire Pakistan can be swapped for such a record. Good night.

Most of those record owe to the fact that he played for 24 years.

His batting average 53 in Tests and 44 in ODI is great but not unbelievable.

 

[Hitman]

Most of those record owe to the fact that he played for 24 years.

His batting average 53 in Tests and 44 in ODI is great but not unbelievable.

54 in Tests and 45 in ODI's.

Neither is Viv's average of 50 in Tests some sort of unbelievable.

 

[Singham]

Most of those record owe to the fact that he played for 24 years.

His batting average 53 in Tests and 44 in ODI is great but not unbelievable.

He played for so long because he was that good for 24 years. Had he not performed, he would not have played that many years.
No cricketer is gonna play that many years and still stay top class for next 100 years and it makes him so so special.

 

[Monsee]

Imran played in an era of Giant bowlers and excellent batsmen who were very good against such attacks...yet he reigned supreme as the leading all rounder!

Teendu mostly played in era of flat pitches and barely decent attacks with a few exceptional bowlers; just look at his record in Test and ODI's in the first few years to see the difference in his batting...yet, deluded fans think Teendu with his choking unlimited qualities is a match to the 3 dimensional Imran i.e. Gun bowler, Good batsman, and one of the all time great captains!

Teendu's record as captain...blah!

 

[Hitman]

Imran played in an era of Giant bowlers and excellent batsmen who were very good against such attacks...yet he reigned supreme as the leading all rounder!

Teendu mostly played in era of flat pitches and barely decent attacks with a few exceptional bowlers; just look at his record in Test and ODI's in the first few years to see the difference in his batting...yet, deluded fans think Teendu with his choking unlimited qualities is a match to the 3 dimensional Imran i.e. Gun bowler, Good batsman, and one of the all time great captains!

Teendu's record as captain...blah!

What's the fault of Indian fans that that Imran was voted below Sachin when Sachin was just halfway through his career back in 2001. If at all that list does tell us how highly those 15 judges rates Imran i.e below Sachin. That's what those former greats and pundits perceive. Too bad the retired Imran with his entire career behind him couldn't make it ahead of Sachin even when Sachin was just halfway through his career, that's hilarious ...... Half of Sachin's career > Complete career of Imran (according to those 15 men) -

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/16644-espn-s-legends-cricket.html

List of judges - Wasim Akram, Sunil Gavaskar, Richie Benaud, Sir Richard Hadlee, Dickie Bird, Michael Holding, Allan Border, John Knowles, Ian Botham, Robin Marlar, Ian Chappell, Christopher Martin-Jenkins, Tony Cozier, Mike Procter and Martin Crowe.

Enjoy!

 

[Statistics375]

54 in Tests and 45 in ODI's.

Neither is Viv's average of 50 in Tests some sort of unbelievable.

53 and 44.

And Viv Richards played and dominated a much better quality of attacks.

He played for so long because he was that good for 24 years. Had he not performed, he would not have played that many years.
No cricketer is gonna play that many years and still stay top class for next 100 years and it makes him so so special.

He had many lean patches in between, but he never left(most would have).

He started at the age of 16 and retired at 40.

Most cricketers do retire around that age (Misbah is 41 and is still in top form) but with Tendulkar he started early, unlike others who usually start playing FC Cricket at a later age.

 

[Hitman]

53 and 44.

And Viv Richards played and dominated a much better quality of attacks.

53.86 and 44.83


So you mention Sachin's averages saying they aren't extraordinary. Yet when I mention Viv's average then you suddenly change track?

 

[Buffet]

And Viv Richards played and dominated a much better quality of attacks.

Did Richards face more ATG bowlers or SRT? I would think that SRT faced more ATG bowlers but Richards dominated more.

 

[Singham]

.




He had many lean patches in between, but he never left(most would have).

He started at the age of 16 and retired at 40.

Most cricketers do retire around that age (Misbah is 41 and is still in top form) but with Tendulkar he started early, unlike others who usually start playing FC Cricket at a later age.

LOL. The fact is he didn't had many lean patches, he had very few lean patches. Even during the so called lean patches, he was outscoring many batsmen around the world.
So, now its his fault that he started at a very early when most of the cricketers were picked after they prove at domestic level. That makes him so so special...

 

[Snow]

A bowling all rounder is more useful to the team. But Tendulkar has been better batsman out of all batsmen those have come. Whereas, Imran wasn't the best that has come out where there were few others better than him.

 

[Haroon786]

Are the mods even seeing whhich direction this thread is veering ?

 

[akheR]

Did Richards face more ATG bowlers or SRT? I would think that SRT faced more ATG bowlers but Richards dominated more.

Viv was 's bunny in ODIs, don't think has been bullied that much in the shorter format

In fact 's overall ODI career against Pak reads like a sad obituary

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?t=185817

In his Eleven: The Greatest Eleven of the 20th Century, legendary Aussie offie Ashley Mallett said that Viv could have been in the 's class had he learned to play leg-spin, and he particularly gives the name of Abdul Qadir, saying that he made him look "ordinary".

A bowling all rounder is more useful to the team. But Tendulkar has been better batsman out of all batsmen those have come. Whereas, Imran wasn't the best that has come out where there were few others better than him.

Few others better bowling all rounders ? Waiting for names. In fact, even about "better fast bowlers", there wouldn't be many names.

 

[WebGuru]

In fact 's overall ODI career against Pak reads like a sad obituary

Check this one http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showthread.php?t=184039

 

[Buffet]

What's the fault of Indian fans that that Imran was voted below Sachin when Sachin was just halfway through his career back in 2001. If at all that list does tell us how highly those 15 judges rates Imran i.e below Sachin. That's what those former greats and pundits perceive. Too bad the retired Imran with his entire career behind him couldn't make it ahead of Sachin even when Sachin was just halfway through his career, that's hilarious ...... Half of Sachin's career > Complete career of Imran (according to those 15 men) -

After his career, I suspect SRT will be rated bit higher by ex-cricketers and experts collectively while some may differ but all of us can have our own opinions. Also, you are making it sound as if they were rated far apart. They were rated one after another.

Viv was 's bunny in ODIs, don't think has been bullied that much in the shorter format

In fact 's overall ODI career against Pak reads like a sad obituary

I am aware of Viv not doing so well in ODI against Pakistan and in his time Pakistan had a strong bowling unit. Most other ATGs were in WI so Richards didn't face them in international matches. In fact in 90's, I think we saw wider variety of ATG's -- covering off spin, leg spin, fast bowling and so on... SRT did play every single ATG bowler in 90s.

I still think that Richards dominated the bowling more. One team can be a bogey team for anyone.

Some people actually claimed here that Kapil was better than Imran .

Kapil was a better ODI all rounder and IK was a better Test all rounder. Over all, IK was a better all rounder due to his bowling being much better than Kapil. I haven't seen that claim( Kapil being better over all ) by too many fans except some hardcore supporters of Kapil.


On Topic: Many posts in this thread are about comparing IK and SRT but thread was not about that. Question was - will you swap IK for SRT and if yes then why? Couple of Pakistani fans argued about merit of doing so but as expected almost all fans have said no.

I really doubt that too many fans will like to swap some of their best cricketers.

Pakistani won't swap IK
Indians won't swap SRT
WI won't swap Marshall
SA won't swap Kallis
Aus won't swap Warne
NZ won't swap Hadlee
....
....

One being slightly better rated than other doesn't change the fact that all of them have given wonderful memories to their respective fans. If gap is substantial then it may overcome pride etc but when gap is not too much it's not going to cut it. In some cases, even if gap is a big one, fans won't swap them.

Thread was about - Will you swap and why? We saw some thoughtful replies.

 

[Haroon786]

After his career, I suspect SRT will be rated bit higher by ex-cricketers and experts collectively while some may differ but all of us can have our own opinions. Also, you are making it sound as if they were rated far apart. They were rated one after another.




I am aware of Viv not doing so well in ODI against Pakistan and in his time Pakistan had a strong bowling unit. Most other ATGs were in WI so Richards didn't face them in international matches. In fact in 90's, I think we saw wider variety of ATG's -- covering off spin, leg spin, fast bowling and so on... SRT did play every single ATG bowler in 90s.

I still think that Richards dominated the bowling more. One team can be a bogey team for anyone.



Kapil was a better ODI all rounder and IK was a better Test all rounder. Over all, IK was a better all rounder due to his bowling being much better than Kapil. I haven't seen that claim( Kapil being better over all ) by too many fans except some hardcore supporters of Kapil.


On Topic: Many posts in this thread are about comparing IK and SRT but thread was not about that. Question was - will you swap IK for SRT and if yes then why? Couple of Pakistani fans argued about merit of doing so but as expected almost all fans have said no.

I really doubt that too many fans will like to swap some of their best cricketers.

Pakistani won't swap IK
Indians won't swap SRT
WI won't swap Marshall
SA won't swap Kallis
Aus won't swap Warne
NZ won't swap Hadlee
....
....

One being slightly better rated than other doesn't change the fact that all of them have given wonderful memories to their respective fans. If gap is substantial then it may overcome pride etc but when gap is not too much it's not going to cut it. In some cases, even if gap is a big one, fans won't swap them.

Thread was about - Will you swap and why? We saw some thoughtful replies.

Agree and below is my reason for the choice :

No, because Imran provides the total package, whilst Sachin is one of the greatest ever batsmen, the only batter I would consider swapping for is the Don, but only consider.

 

[Haroon786]

Thanks for the objectivity, Buffet.

 

[Pak_Lover]

After his career, I suspect SRT will be rated bit higher by ex-cricketers and experts collectively while some may differ but all of us can have our own opinions. Also, you are making it sound as if they were rated far apart. They were rated one after another.




I am aware of Viv not doing so well in ODI against Pakistan and in his time Pakistan had a strong bowling unit. Most other ATGs were in WI so Richards didn't face them in international matches. In fact in 90's, I think we saw wider variety of ATG's -- covering off spin, leg spin, fast bowling and so on... SRT did play every single ATG bowler in 90s.

I still think that Richards dominated the bowling more. One team can be a bogey team for anyone.



Kapil was a better ODI all rounder and IK was a better Test all rounder. Over all, IK was a better all rounder due to his bowling being much better than Kapil. I haven't seen that claim( Kapil being better over all ) by too many fans except some hardcore supporters of Kapil.


On Topic: Many posts in this thread are about comparing IK and SRT but thread was not about that. Question was - will you swap IK for SRT and if yes then why? Couple of Pakistani fans argued about merit of doing so but as expected almost all fans have said no.

I really doubt that too many fans will like to swap some of their best cricketers.

Pakistani won't swap IK
Indians won't swap SRT
WI won't swap Marshall
SA won't swap Kallis
Aus won't swap Warne
NZ won't swap Hadlee
....
....

One being slightly better rated than other doesn't change the fact that all of them have given wonderful memories to their respective fans. If gap is substantial then it may overcome pride etc but when gap is not too much it's not going to cut it. In some cases, even if gap is a big one, fans won't swap them.

Thread was about - Will you swap and why? We saw some thoughtful replies.

+1, cant agree more, this is what I call a sensible post.

 

[Scrolln]

After his career, I suspect SRT will be rated bit higher by ex-cricketers and experts collectively while some may differ but all of us can have our own opinions. Also, you are making it sound as if they were rated far apart. They were rated one after another.




I am aware of Viv not doing so well in ODI against Pakistan and in his time Pakistan had a strong bowling unit. Most other ATGs were in WI so Richards didn't face them in international matches. In fact in 90's, I think we saw wider variety of ATG's -- covering off spin, leg spin, fast bowling and so on... SRT did play every single ATG bowler in 90s.

I still think that Richards dominated the bowling more. One team can be a bogey team for anyone.



Kapil was a better ODI all rounder and IK was a better Test all rounder. Over all, IK was a better all rounder due to his bowling being much better than Kapil. I haven't seen that claim( Kapil being better over all ) by too many fans except some hardcore supporters of Kapil.


On Topic: Many posts in this thread are about comparing IK and SRT but thread was not about that. Question was - will you swap IK for SRT and if yes then why? Couple of Pakistani fans argued about merit of doing so but as expected almost all fans have said no.

I really doubt that too many fans will like to swap some of their best cricketers.

Pakistani won't swap IK
Indians won't swap SRT
WI won't swap Marshall
SA won't swap Kallis
Aus won't swap Warne
NZ won't swap Hadlee
....
....

One being slightly better rated than other doesn't change the fact that all of them have given wonderful memories to their respective fans. If gap is substantial then it may overcome pride etc but when gap is not too much it's not going to cut it. In some cases, even if gap is a big one, fans won't swap them.

Thread was about - Will you swap and why? We saw some thoughtful replies.

A rare sensible post on this thread.

Getting back to the Viv vs Sachin debate, Sachin faced way more ATG bowlers in ODI cricket and slightly more ATG bowlers in test cricket.

Here is a list of the 10 greatest ODI bowlers of all time released by Wisden in 2003 -

1 Wasim Akram
2 AA Donald
3 Waqar Younis
4 GD McGrath
5 J Garner
6 Saqlain Mushtaq
7 M Muralitharan
8 SM Pollock
9 SK Warne
10 DK Lillee

Out of these bowlers Viv Richards faced only Lillee and Akram, while Tendulkar faced eight of them apart from Garner and Lillee.

Tendulkar was very successful against Warne, Murali, Saqlain and Waqar.

He did well against McGrath and Wasim, and fared poorly against Donald/Pollock.

Thats not a bad record to have in arguably the most testing era in ODI cricket.

 

[Buffet]

Sachin faced way more ATG bowlers in ODI cricket and slightly more ATG bowlers in test cricket.

Not just the number of ATGs but I think we saw wider variety in 90's. We saw one leg spin, one with off spin, Waqar with best yorkers and then Donald, McGrath, Ambrose, Wasim and so on to match the style of previous greats.

It's clear from batting stats of 90's in Tests [ more than 15% of test cricket in history was played in 90s]

Only 3-4 batsmen had 50+ average in 90's. Some were mid 40s and most batsmen were in 30s.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

In ODIs, story was not too different: [ More than 25% of ODIs in cricket history was played in 90s] Only handful of batsmen were 40+ average and most of them had low SR.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

So lot of cricket was played and variety of bowling was probably much wider than any other time.