LEGSLIP

Pakistani cricket ki kahani khansahab ki zubani

The points in this thread covers the plot well but, the story or the script is like that of a Hindi movie where you can predict the next scene, next dialogue, next song and the ending too. However, the soap opera continues like Dallas, Bold and Beautiful, Melrose Place etc., and all the characters look like they have a plastic face, no wrinkles, no expressions all cold blooded chipkalees.

Talking of plastic faces, did anyone notice Shane Watson has a face like that, no wrinkles, no crowfeet, no teeth….. he looks like one of the characters of Bold and Beautiful……… excuse me for the diversion and comparison. But, this is what we all do, don’t we? Comparing Raina with TENdulkar, Sohail Tanvir with Wasim Akram etc. etc.

In the previous thread in one of my last comments I raised the point of Salman Butt’s inclusion in the team and while I was writing that comment, it revealed to me why Shoaib Malik disagrees with his captain to open the innings? This is the reason, so that he creates a vacant spot for the Nikki Butt to fill in.

khansahab Malik should not be sacked only on the basis of mediocrity but also in breeding conspiracy and revolt. Didn’t I tell you many years ago that he is a real MEESNA? And, you asked me the meaning of meesna and I had to explain it to you. Now you know how meesna pun is demonstrated.

PCB’s selection of their T20, ODI and Tests squads is beyond anybody’s logical thinking. May be what wanted to keep the ‘surprise element’ and therefore came up with a dubious and the most bizarre team selection.

Seeing Rana Naveed back in our ODI as well as T20 teams is totally unacceptable and unforgivable, this guys single handedly loose us another important match soon, but PCB will never learn their lessons. Salman Butt back in our ODI team is also stupid as at most he ‘may’ have been allowed to play only Tests because of his slow batting style. About Imran Farhat and his selection through his father-in-law, all I can say is that “Allah Aisa Sussar Sab Ko Attaa Farmaaye … Aameen”.

All said and done, we the loyal and diehard Pakistani cricket fans, will always pray for our team’s win no matter what.

Good luck Greens !!

Khansahab,

Imran Farat’s inclusion explained:
http://blog.dawn.com/2009/11/03/an-open-letter-to-imran-farhat/

But Imran Farhat hasn’t lost as many matches as Rana has. His relative must be in the top brass of the govt!

Good to see Khalid Latif got dug in albeit at a very slow strike rate but that was necessary at precarious situation when the score was 2-0.

It seemed like a good eleven bar Salman Butt who failed miserably again. Enough chances have been given to Butt and Farahat. Butt may have a case for further chance to be given in tests but definitely not ODI’s. Do we have anyone like Gambhir and Sehwag to open for us in ODI’s? Perhaps khansahab can shed some light on this?

Good to see mediocre Malik not getting picked. He may be ruing the decision not to open. As I said before when he was dropped against SL series, Malik is not indispensable. Barring injuries to other bowlers, I hope Rana Naveed is there just for a joy ride.

Typical of Yousuf to get run out again.

Good Clean Hitting by Afridi, Kamran and Razzaq. Now the Pak Pace battery should blast the Kiwis and win the first ODI.

Salman Butt should only be played in Tests and Pakistan should look to bring in younger blood for the opening slot.

Mediocre Malik is not in the team that is good but, why BUTT? See what he did to the team? Once again he demoralized the team by opening and getting out on a DUCK, and the one to follow him was Drama Khan. Had it not been for Afridi and Akmal they were all out under 150. Anyways, the total can be defended and batting second in lights in Abu Dhabi is not easy. So, they should win this game.

As regards Tendulkar given out LBW by the Indian umpire, this hue and cry is being made after seeing the Hawk-Eye. But, if you see the replay even in slow motion it does not change the fact that the umpire was right. Because, I have also replayed that shot a few times and it appears that he was out. But, Hawk Eye is Hawk Eye it is not 100% correct, its just a guideline or it predicts a trajectory where the ball could possibly have gone.

So, there is no need to cry about it that it was a BAD decision. No, it wasn’t a bad decision, we have seen worst umpiring decisions against so many other players in the past. The fact remains that he was playing slow to achieve his 17000 personal milestone which they were showing on the giant screen TV on the ground after he scored every single run, now Sachin needs 20 runs, 17 runs, 13 runs, 10 runs…..
And we all know that he gets stuck on 99……so the fact remains he played a slow innings.

Javed,

When Tendulkar got out there was no need to play any faster than they were playing, in fact run rate was never a problem for India at any point in the game, when the last wicket fell India needed 25 off 24 balls to win, if they were only 6 down at that time it’s a cakewalk. So I don’t understand why you keep critisizing Tendulkar for slow rate, he was doing fine. Tendulkar is not an Afridi to go boom boom every ball, or a Sehwag, he tries to focus on building an innings and play percentage cricket to win matches these days, and there is no one better than him who knows how to build an ODI innings, except may be Dhoni in the current Indian lineup.

You keep mentioning he was focused on 17,000 runs, why should that matter? tell me, c’mon we are not talking him overhauling someone else’s record or something, 17,000 runs is an enormous amount of runs and there is no even closer to him that it does not matter. It does not matter to anyone including Tendulkar, just another number he has happened to cross. So what if it is shownn on the board.

Coming to today’s game, I thought Pakistan would fold under 150, but what a turnaround, clean hitting by Afridi, I don’t think he has played such an ODI innings of late, this should give him confidence, or Afridi being Afridi this is just another of those rare innings that comes between his various 20s, 30s. Anyhow, amazing turnaround, good hitting by Kamran too. NZ will not be able to chase this score, so 1 up for Pakistan.

They should however look at top order, and bring one of the younger players up the order, Sulman Butt is wasting space at the top.

Javed Sir it’s not because of Hawk Eye but it was quite evident that the ball was pitching outside the stumps and on any other day the umpire could have very easily given that decision in the batsmen’s favour

Sighscreen showing how many runs he needs to achieve 170000 milestone does not reflect anything about Tendulkar’s mindset infact they would have done the same if there was anyother person nearing such a record and specially if an Indian is nearing such a milestone in India then i see no problems in the authorities doing so after all how many players before him have reached that milestone?

Butt dropped Brendon McCullum in slips, what a waste of a player he is and these idiots keep bringing him back into the team. I would kick his Butt out and not select him in any team, not even in test matches. The dropped catch irked Umar Gul who is not a good ODI bowler these days and he is been bowling wayward after that and getting whacked all over, this happens with Pathan bowlers that they loose their cool and their focus…… Oh, finally he got McCullum…….. bowled him.

Varun, yaar I have a PVR and I have seen Tendulkar’s wicket a few times, the ball did not pitch outside the off stump, please ! It pitched between off and middle and hit him low below the knee roll and just by seeing the replay anyone could say he is OUT.

Robin Jackman was the commentator then and when the replay was shown he said, “I can say the ball was dead straight…..” and suddenly they showed Hawk-Eye which shows the ball pitching on off and middle but going down the leg side by a few inches and he immediately said,….”Oh, I can’t be sure…. Then the next commentator Bruce Yardley came and he tried to explain the same thing that from the umpire’s vision and even the replays confirm that he is out but the Hawk-Eye has other views…. never mind yaar, OUT is OUT khattam.

newguy, here I disagree with you because the tempo and the momentum that Sehwag created was lost because of Tendulkar’s batting, its not that I am seeing everything bad about Tendulkar. NO, this is just the fact that he slowed down the tempo and thats what happens then, the wickets start to fall because you have then allowed the bowlers to dominate.

When Sehwag was playing he was batting he dominated and ruined Johnson’s confidence. If Tendulkar had improved his run rate others would have chipped in too i.e., in the same manner but, because of his slow batting Kohli tried to accelerate and got out and then Tendulkar himself got out then the other bowlers (barring Johnson) regained their confidence especially Bollinger bowled very well. And Australia are a mentally very strong team especially Ricky Ponting, he never lost his composure, batted well, fielded well and he led his side very well.

Vow, Umar Gul got his second wicket now Guptil bowled by Umar Gul…. my word LOL…

New Zealand is caving in now, Taylor gone too and the Pakistanis must not get complacent with these 3 wickets because there is plenty of batting left and Vettori is not just a good bowler but he is a very good batsman and a good captain. Aamir’s spell is very economical, so far in his 6 overs he gave only 11 runs and got this very important wicket of Taylor.

Javed Khan,

I am in your agree, playing Butt doesn’t make sense. Butt, at best, can only play on flat tracks.

On Tendulkar’s lbw, I thought it wasn’t out, but Tendulkar moved towards off-stump right after the shot, which I think made the umpire believe that the ball wasn’t missing leg. All the same, Tendulkar was taking too much pressure unnecessarily, 17000 is just a number, especially for him.

Just looking at NZ’s scorecard, this is what I meant,their batting isn’t good enough to have chased the target. What a difference the absence of Rana makes…why is he even in the squad, it is like wasting Fawad Alam’s place who could have replaced Butt.

Laxman used to be my favorite player in the Indian team before Sehwag. Between Laxman and Tendulkar, I’d say Tendulkar is only the better player because he has done so well in one days. Laxman was a much greater matchwinner (in test matches) and would play knocks when it counted. He didn’t care about statistics, as he himself says, here is his interview on cricinfo:

http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/432566.html

I think in the 2nd ODI Fawad Alam and Khalid Latif should open the innings and Rana should be sent back home. Vettori is the key and if he stays with Jacob Oram they can both do some damage, but Oram is not in form and it would be too much expecting from him even if he does, the target is still too stiff for them, one of them goes and that is the end of NZ innings.

Even if Pakistan wins this series 3-0 and Drama Khan continues to bat like this, his ODI captaincy would be under scrutiny once again. Although Wadee Butt has guaranteed his captaincy till the WC of 2011 but, there could be pressure from the media, fans, supporters and haters. Besides, whatever Ijaz Butt says, the opposite happens.

GONE……… that’s it, SHAHID AFRIDI got 2 wickets in 2 balls and that is the end of NZ and Afridi is Man of the Match now…….. will he take a hatrick in the second over?

“Shahid Afridi to NL McCullum, OUT, Afridi .. whaddaplayaaa .. he did it with the bat and now doing the job with the ball. The slider this time, on the middle, looks to defend and is hit on the pad. The Hawk eye shows it missing leg and it might well be but when it struck him on the pad, it looked pretty ugly. you can understand why the ump gave that out.”

The same happened to Tendulkar yesterday, the reaction of the commentator was instant and it changed after the Hawk-Eye replay. That is the problem with Hawk-Eye that it is not 100% accurate.

Abdul Razzaq not only batted well, but he bowled a million times better than Rana and I don’t understand why can’t these selectors see this difference? He now took Jacob Oram’s wicket and it seems that NZ will fold under 150 and within 40 overs. Good chance for Afridi to take a hat-rick now with Butler and Bond at the stumps.

Javed

Two wickets in a row are often a common feature but Hat-tricks are not that easy to come by.

Good performance by Pakistan. A score of 287 was good especially after 2-0.

I thought Khalid Latif’s was the anchor innings and much needed at the time. Then someone like Afridi Razzaq etc had to play the type of innings that they can in order to get to a good score.

Afridi should be MOM and deserves it.

Without Rana NZ has made 90 runs less than 232. The only thing that remains to be seen is, assuming Rana isn’t played– that demolisher of his own team’s morale– if NZ can cross 232 even once in the three matches.

Javed,

Your argument that Tendulakar slowed down things are not based on facts, here are the facts for you:

1. Sehwag got out in the 7th over, score was 40/1. India needed another 211 runs from 43 overs at 4.90 runs per over. There is no need to take any risk, with 9 wickets all they needed were partnerships.

2. Tendular accelerated scoring after Sehwag left, contrary to what you are suggesting. When Sehwag got out Tendulkar had 8 off 22 balls, by the time Kohli got out Tendulkar added 26 runs from 34 balls, and he hit 5 fours in that. So your argument is wrong.

3. Kohli had no reason to be under pressure, because Tenduklar was doing the job and even Kohli was going well, scoring 10 off 13 balls.

3. Tendulkar and Kohli added 38 runs in 7 overs, Tendulkar and Sehwag added 40 in 7 overs. So partnetship with Sehwag added 2 runs more and a few balls less. No big deal.

4. When Kohli got out India needed 173 runs from 36 over at 4.80 runs per over, so run rate did not go up.

The reason Kohli got out is same reason he always gets out, trying to play too many shots. These youngsters need to know how to pace an innings instead of trying to play cute shots. In fact it was Kohli coming at #3 that derailed India’s chase.

Tendulkar was playing the game to perfection, with Sehwag batting he has no reason to take any risk, so he lets Sehwag has the strike and team scoring going along at a good rate, when Sehwag got out Tendulkar eased the pressure on the team and youngster at other end by hitting a four in each over.

At less than 5 runs an over there was nothing he needed to do, again like I said he scored 26 runs from 31 balls between Sehwag getting out and Kohli getting out, so your argument is wrong.

NewGuy and Varun,

You are defending Tendulkar’s 8 runs from 22 balls, and citing it as the “perfect” innings, but when Mohd Yousof was playing slow in the world cup, you had a different opinion. There wasn’t any batsmen left after Yousof while Tendulkar was there as an opener and had 10 players left after him. In fact after Sehwag got out, Tendulkar capitalized on the full-tosses and wayward bowling– which was there because of Sehwag. Still, the run-rate was dropping, he made 32 runs off 46 balls after that (a strike rate of 69-70), or 3.5 runs per over. His low run-rate stifled the momentum and gave the bowlers time to regroup. He was clearly playing for his 17000 runs, a strike rate of 58 with 10-9 batsmen after him, it is indefensible.

newguy

Omer has already replied to you and gave you some other points like when Sehwag was out, 9 more wickets were remaining and Tendulkar should not have any fear in accelerating the score.

To correct you, Sehwag was out when the score was 40 and the number of overs were 6.5 and Tendulkar’s contribution was only 8 runs. When Kohli was out the score was 78 it was 14.3 overs and 38 runs were added in 7.4 overs and Tendulkar’s own contribution in that partnership was 24 runs as there were 4 extras, one of them was a front foot no-ball from Bollinger which Tendulkar ruined it.

The fact is when Sehwag was out Tendulkar had scored 8 runs in 22 balls, a strike rate of 36.3
When Tendulkar was out he had scored 40 in 68 balls @ a strike rate of 58.8

Do you call it a very good strike rate or a great innings by a great player?

Yaar, Na Sehwag mera dost hai na Tendulkar mera dushman, I only state the facts from an outsider’s perspective, because you guys love him, adore him and blindly worship him. Accept the fact that he is getting old like everyone else and his hand eye coordination is not the same, his running between the wickets is not the same and Omer and I have been saying this throughout that, Sehwag is a more entertaining player than Tendulkar is and he is more consistent than Afridi. And, I don’t understand why you guys can’t accept this fact?

Yaar, how do you get time to watch all the matches! and they are not just being watched but you guys also analyse it in so depth, lol

No one shed light or said anything on Roccoon’s incident reported by myself here.

Arre Bhai Why can’t you let the Little Master play peacfully. Why are you after his neck after each and every match. After all those records do you think he is worried about 17000 runs which is merely a number.

Who is denying that he has not become slow and is not the same Tendulkar we know of 90’s and that is the same reason why it is wrong on Javed’s part to assume that he should have accelrated when Sehwag departed if you have followed his game in the recent years he plays less aggresively and is somewhat like Gambhir when he plays with Sehwag i.e slowly build up his innings. A strike rate of 58.8 in such a chase is perfectly acceptable Why do you want him to hit like Afridi or Sehwag he never was such a player.

I do not blindly worship him infact i was a very vocal critic of him few years ago when he was going through a bad patch and should have been rested for a while but because of his records and the Omnipresent Mumbhai Lobby that never happened and Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman were periodically rested when their forms dipped. But now in the last 1-2 years he is still in the top 10 ICC Batsmen and i see no reason for him to retire right now.

Gaad … enough of that thing call Tendulkar

I have been sick and tired of these zillions of comments on His Highness’s batting, 17,000 runs, comparing him with so-and-so, playing slow, playing fat, ODIs, Tests, and what not.

Javed Khan … What was that Urdu saying, which goes something like … “Hijaroun Key Beta Huwa Aur Choom Choom Key Uss Ko Maar Dalaa”.

Munir

Tumhara kya Tendulkar ko Choom nay ka iraada hai?

Yeh Shoaib kahin Shoaib Akhtar to nahi hai?

Khansahab,

For Godsake, at least don’t say Ghambir would have made Pakistan number 1. On comments like these, I recall poetic verses of love like,

“Kabhi kahin lag jaaye dil tu

Kahin phir dil na lage”

In my honest opinion, Younis Khan and Mohd Yosusof are both much better batsmen than Ghambir. It is true, though, that there is only one Sehwag. However, no team can win all the time because of one player, something you and “consistency” find hard to come to terms with. In this situation, the best strategy is to rid the team of genuine matchlosers (the Ranas), play as many matchwinners as you can, and then arrange the batting order in such a way that you make a “synthetic” Ghambir, but a much more useful one (so in situations where you need total defense, or in situations where you need total aggression, you have the necessary players too). Rather than 2 Ghambir’s, play a defensive specialist, Mohd Yousof, and an aggressor like Afridi or Razzaq, and eventually you have accomplished the task in a much more useful way.

You are criticizing the inclusion of Khalid Latif, I thought before Fawad Alam you were always supporting him?

What we have missed in our conversation is Ponting targeting his nemisis, Sharma (something Dhoni also pointed in his statement). Ponting deliberaltely targeted Sharma to break his confidence and it worked. But Khansahab would see that 50 of Ponting’s as just 10 runs more than Tendulkar, though it was a much more useful innings in terms of quality.

Anyway, I better get back to studying before we enter another lengthy debate.

Omer Admani

I don’t think khansahab was criticising the inclusion of Khalid Latif. He seems to be looking at the inclusion of Khalid Latif and dropping of Malik with a regional tint. Well that may or may not be the case but to me it looked more like they were looking for two “regular” openers and chose Salman Butt (wrongly) and Khalid Latif. That simply meant there was no place for another middle order batsman.

The fact of the matter is that the type of person that Younus is he wouldn’t hold grudge against anyone when he said all misunderstandings have been resolved and he has no complaints with anyone.

PCB unhappy with Younus’ wish

PCB and some former Test players are not happy that Younus Khan is willing to play Twenty20 cricket for the national team.

Younus had announced his retirement from T20 cricket after Pakistan won the Twenty20 World Cup in England in July this year insisting he was too old for the shortest format of the sport.

But in recent days he has shown interest in coming out of retirement to play T20 cricket once again despite the board appointing Shahid Afridi as the captain of the national T20 side until the World Cup in West Indies next year.

“What is Younus trying to do create more discord in the team, what is the necessity of such statements so soon after a major crisis has been averted in Pakistan cricket,” a board official told PTI.

He pointed out that it was a fact that some players still had reservations over Younus’s attitude as captain and for him to keep on saying he wanted to play T20 cricket again was tantamount to creating problems in the team.

“It is no secret that Shahid Afridi, Misbah-ul-Haq, Shoaib Malik and couple of other players had complained about Younus to the PCB Chairman after Champions Trophy but the Chairman pacified them and instead rejected Younus’s resignation and asked him to continue as captain till the 2011 World Cup,” an official said.

Younus said that he was ready to make a comeback to T20 cricket if the nation, selectors and players wanted this to happen.

“I am ready to do anything for my country for my people after the way they supported me in the recent captaincy crisis. I can continue to play even if I am 60 if my nation wants me to play,” he said.

The frequent statements from Younus has prompted the PCB to come out with a statement that even if Younus wants to play T20 cricket again he can’t be considered for the forthcoming T20 matches against New Zealand in Dubai as the selectors have already announced the team for these two matches.

Younus has said his retirement decision was not a word on stone and it could be changed if conditions were right.

A former Test captain, however, advised Younus to concentrate on his batting against New Zealand.

“It is better for him if he just focuses on his own performances which are important for his tenure as captain,” the player said.

A national selector pointed out that it was imperative for the captain to also get runs to retain his place in the side and have the respect of the players he commands.

Younus who managed just 53 runs in the Champions Trophy due to a finger injury was out for a duck in the first one-day match against New Zealand in Abu Dhabi on Tuesday.

Omer/Khansaheb,

To become number one and stay there you need much more than talented batsmen and bowlers, you need mental toughness and a deep desire to win, you need players competing with each other for the spot, you need to have these qualities ingrained from childhood. Only one team in world cricket has it, Australians, they had it in them all along, this is why they were number one for so long and still fights hard to get back there. Australians don’t fight hard just to get to some #1 spot in point table so they can feel good about having reached there, for them getting #1 is all about doing their best every time they take field. They have the culture in every sport they play, they compete hard, even as kids when they play in their backyards they compete hard.

Australians even made it to the Soccor world cup last time, and I think they were one of the non-traditional (not european or south american) teams that were very successful, they reached semi-final I think. This is a huge thing and a testament to their mentality and work ethics in sports. They also did not do shabby in Olympics, both winter and summer games, and they do quite well in field Hocky, a game that Indians and Pakistanis are supposed to rule, as well as Rugby, Baseball.

So, overall Aussies are hard code when it comes to sports, India and Pakistan has nothing but cricket.

“I am ready to do anything for my country for my people after the way they supported me in the recent captaincy crisis. I can continue to play even if I am 60 if my nation wants me to play,” Younus Khan.

The above is a quote from the comment made by Awas. In response to this, all I can say is:

Ch2So4 ha sala! SIXTY ka ho ker bhee khailay ga? Ghaas kha gaya BC. Every day he comes up with a new statement, kya BHUNG tou nai peeta? I think he should simply be sacked from ODI as well, he is OK for test cricket but, he must make room for others. Besides, his captaincy is pretty mediocre, in fact its more negative than mediocre. Before someone stuff an old and smelly pair of socks in Younus Khan’s mouth, he should say, I am done with ODI and I want to play only test cricket. Izzat issi may hai uski.

As regards Khansahab’s sweeping comment that if players like Sehwag and Gambhir were in Pakistan team they would have been number 1. This is really absurd. As if there aren’t any better batsmen than these two in Pakistan. Why is India not number one? Yeah, Yeah, they were number one for 27 hours and not more. Besides, consistency is the key they must maintain this number one status for more than 2-3 years and not even just one year because, there are so many teams like Pakistan and others who don’t get chance to play even 50% of the number of matches which India and Australia plays.

I agree with Khansahab’s comment, regarding Pakistan becoming no. 1, if they had Sehwag & Gambhir in their line-up.

If we had Gambhir or Sehwag, along with our existing strengths in bowling line-up as well as all-rounders, then Pakistan would have definitely become a formidable side and probably be at no. 1.

All these years, our key dilemma has been in our opening department and whatever matches we are winning are by and large due to our bowlers/ all-rounders, because we really could not get any good dependable openers since the time of Saeed Anwer and Aamir Sohail.

As a general rule, Pakistan have been producing more bowling starts, specially fast-bowling, while India have been always better with the batsmen and this is going on for decades now. So technically if any one team has the strengths in both departments along with good all-rounders, it is bounded to be at no. 1.

Javed Sahab:

your favourite quote ‘CH2SO4′ reminds me of my chemistry class 10 years back just chek this out:

NaI reacts with c.H2SO4 also, forming a HI along the way. On reaction of HI with more c.H2SO4, SS and H2S are also formed, demonstrating by virtue of the fact S ends up in compounds with a lower more reduced oxidation state than happened for NaCl or NaBr, that HI is an even stronger reducing agent than HCl or HBr.
You are not expected to be able to recall (i.e. reproduce from memory) the reaction equations for the HI with c.H2SO4

Varun:

naa brav i am not Shoaib Akhtar, neither i have genital warts nor i ever went to india, so never got a chance to get a cheap hooker

Sehwag owning Aus– champion player. India’s best chance is Sehwag, plays a quick 70-100 or more.

Sehwag whacked the bowler so much that he bowled a leg-side lollipop to Tendulkar (which was also a no-ball), and Tendulkar was able to hit two boundaries.

Shoaib,

Atleast he could get a cheap hooker for himself…Pakistan mai to mujra dekhne ke alawa kuch aur nahi kar sakte na!!! tabhi sab US/Europe/UK ja ke gandgi machate hai…tumhari tarah.

khansahab & Munir

Pakistan, when they had Aamir Churail and Saeed Anwar, even then they were not number 1
Pakistan, when they had Wasim and Waqar + Actor, even then they were not number 1
Pakistan had players like, Miandad, Zaheer Abbass, Inzamam and, captain like Imran Khan and even then they were not number 1. So, get out of this dream land and come into the real world, where there are no if’s but too many BUTTS.

Another point is, you cannot take players from different countries and expect them to play well. It NEVER WORKS, you have seen World XI, Asia XI, Rest of the World etc. Even the IPL is a flop in terms of choosing the best players example Deccan Chargers in first IPL they had so many great big hitters. So, this Sehwag and Gambhir myth is just a fishful sinking.

Sehwag whacked the bowler so much that he bowled a leg-side lollipop to Tendulkar (which was also a no-ball), and Tendulkar was able to hit two boundaries. Omer Admani

EXACTLY this is what I was saying that today it is not Johnson so he targetted Bollinger and and Hilfenhouse that leg side full toss was a lolly pop and this time he did not ruin the free ball. BUT, before he scored 17000 he was stuck @ 6 in 16 balls and to make the 7th run to complete 17000 runs he played 5 dot balls.

Varun

Kon kehta hai kay mujray kay siva kuch nahee kertay? Gaya zamana, duniya badal gaye. See, I told you don’t believe in all the media reports.

Javed,

What say you about Tendulkar now, he is on 99 off 79 balls with 10 fours and 3 sixes, the great Shewag got out on 38 from 30 balls, it seems he is stuck on 40, all he wants to do is hit a few fours and sixes then go back and relax. All the Youvis, Gambhirs, and Dhiniyas are gone too for single digit, there is only Tendulkar left. This innings today, regardless of result, shows the class of the man.

India will lose, but that is another story, Aussies once you give them a small opening they will crack that wide open. India had their chance in last game to gain momemtum and have the series firmly in their grasp, they spoiled it, now there is no looking back for Aussies. Once you give them a chance yhey just grab it kill the opposition. This is the reason they were #1 for so long, they just raise their game at the right time.

But Tendulkar today is a classic.

Anyone doubting Tendulkar’s committment to his Game just had to see the way he took the catch of the last ball of Aussie innings when there was no need for him to dive and risk an injury.

Anyways…hope you guys enjoyed his 45th hundred:))

This innings of Tendulkar proves why I think he is the best ODI batsman I have seen. He can be selfish at times in the sense of achieving personal milestones, but as an ODI batsman, this innings, albeit on a very flat pitch, shows that he is indeed the greatest ODI batsman. The difference today was that he played for the team once Sehwag got out. Lets see if he can pull India out of the hole…

Tendulkar is on song, but it’s too much for Raina and Tendulkar to pull off, they are taking risks and they will eventually make a mistake then it’s all over, since no one else to follow. Jadeja is a useless as a bat, Bhajji and Praveen can hit or miss. Dhoni or Youvraj should have stayed today with Tendulkar then India could have pulled off. Aussie bowling is weak and pitch is as flat as it can get.

But, what an innings from Tendulkar.

121 runs of 17 overs. India has a very good chance if they can hold wickets. Anyone else watching?

Omer,

I am. But they need to first get it under 100 without losing wickets, then focus on getting under 60-70 runs without losing wickets, at that point then it’s a few good hits to get closer, once they get to 30-40 runs with even tail enders anything is possible. But still too much, Tendulkar has to stay all the way to end, but they could be out anytime since they have to take risks.

This is how I wanted Tendulkar to play in the last 2 matches, it does make a difference if he scores at a faster strike rate. Yes, he did play a very good innings today but, there were moments of nervousness in achieving his personal milestones.

1. He got stuck before scoring 7 runs to achieve the milestone of 17000
2. He got stuck when in 90’s he was negotiating in singles only.
3. When he reached 170 plus the commentators were saying he could score 200. The message came from the glove boys that he could beat Saeed Anwar’s 194 and his feet were jammed in the ground.

Other than that he scored freely and timed them well. It may be his best innings but considering the fact that despite all that effort INDIA LOST and it is never a good feeling when your team lose the game.

How many times Sachin Tendulkar has won the player of the match award while being on the losing side?

I remember quite a few innings of his like these where he got MoM award when the winning side players also deserve for that award but, it doesn’t happen with other players when they score big and their team lose that match and, Tendulkar gets it because of his reputation.

Javed.A.Khan …Incorrigible is the Word for you..that’s all i have to say!

What a cracker this match was!

Tendulkar deserved MOM by playing a wonderful innings and bringing his team close to just three runs for victory.

Younus Khan gets his way

The PCB has taken off vice-captain Shahid Afridi and team manager Abdul Raquib from the tour selection committee.

Bowing to skipper Younus Khan’s demand, the Pakistan Cricket Board has taken off Afridi and Raquib from the tour selection committee in the ongoing one-day series against New Zealand in Abu Dhabi and Dubai.

Raquib said under the new policy only the captain, coach and the chief selector were selecting the playing eleven for every match.

“In the past the team manager and vice-captain also used to be involved in this process,” he revealed.

PCB sources said one of the conditions that Younus had put forth for taking back his resignation as captain after the Champions Trophy was that the team manager and vice captain be removed from the tour selection committee.

“Younus had made it clear to the PCB Chairman that only the captain and coach should have this responsibility after consultations with the chief selector either in person or on telephone when on tour,” the source said.

“In the past Younus and coach Intikhab faced problems getting their playing eleven because of the interference of the manager, vice-captain and even some senior players but now they have a free hand to pick their playing eleven,” he added.

Khansahab

It was one of the flattest pitches there could be, I saw the first over the match, and I knew 350 would be chaseable. Not only wasn’t there any movement, but the pitch was perfect for batting, neither too slow, nor too fast, it was though it’d hit the sweet spot of the bat 10/10 times (unless the batsman mistimed a slower ball or something similar). In fact India would have won, if it wasn’t for the Australian instinct to perform better and better under pressure. India could have chased it till the last over, but, as a million times before, Australians came back from behind and under pressure to win the match.

Yes, I have always mantained that Tendulkar is the greatest ODI player I have seen, but this innings doesn’t prove anything at test standard. If this were a test match, this match would have been drawn with both teams batting once only, no individual innings would have had much worth. I have shown you the statistics of Tendulkar against great bowlers, and, secondly, he hasn’t won as many matches at test standard that the likes of Laxman, Dravid, and Sehwag have.

You seem to say Australia as if this is Mcgrath bowling, but these Australian bowlers aren’t necessarily much better than Indian bowlers.

You were coming with ridiculous arguments about Indian bowling, Srinath was a good bowler (probably better than Gul) and Prasad was ok too. Mohammad Aamer has just come to the international scene and Asif generally hasn’t played in the last many matches. Where there is Kaneria, there was Kumble, and Kumble has taken more than 500 wickets. On the other hand, Harbajhan has won many matches, too. In fact what you are saying has no basis in fact, all the test matches that India has won against Australia in the last decade or so, have been because of matchwinning innings by Dravid, Laxman..and matchwinning bowling performances by Harbajan, Kumble, and company. You tend to underestimate the rest of the Indian line-up to overate Tendulkar. The likes of Manjrekar, Sidhu, and Azharuddin wer always good batsmen, maybe you have heard too much about that time and haven’t seen much.

Whatdda Match, and Whaddaplaya, Tendulkar there is one and only. Khansaheb thanks for saying this (your post#54), I have nothing to say to Javed if after this innings he keeps saying Tendulkar is there because of past glories, he doesn’t deserve MoM etc.

He almost made the impossible possible with no support from the top, Raina’s contribution was significant however at the lower middle.

Tendulkar is flawed genius however, this is why when 19 needed off 18 balls he went for that shot and undid all that he did, same like Chennai ‘99 all over again. Heartbreaking Tendulkar deserved to be on the winning side, but yet again none of the other idiots could do the very least, all they needed was to run the singles and doubles, that idiot Jadeja what was he doing.

Let’s not speak of anything about Gambhir, Youvi, and Dhoniya, shame on those guys not supporting Tendulkar today.

Chasing 350 in an ODI it almost impossible, not only against Australia, but any team in the world, the pressure is too much even if you get closer and closer. So let’s not even argue about pitch quality and bowling quality. This Aussie attack is not very good, sure, but if they are as good as Indian bowling then 350 is defendable, India would have defended this and would not have let them come this close, because there is only one Tendulkar and he plays for India.

Khansahab

I guess you weight one days more, and I see skill mostly through the lens of test matches. Like I said, Sehwag isn’t as good a one day player as Tendulkar, nor was Lara. Both are better players in test matches though.

At least don’t insult Laxman by saying he was a mediocre player, Laxman was an artist who could create shots that are barely otherwise seen in cricket. You seem to not see that the Australia (with Mcgrath) during Steve Waugh and Ponting’s early days as captain was an invincible team, whereas the current Australian team has lost a test series to SA in Australia (at home), lost in England, and lost in India. This is among the lowest points in Australian cricket history. This team can’t be compared with Australia of yore, and Laxman’s great innings came during a time when our captains like Inzamam would run away playing against them. Winning a test match against that team was probably even harder than winning a world cup.

Generally, I have noticed your opinion is very scientific in that, if you see a bowler who is 6 feet 3 inches tall, well-built, goes through the coaching manual and machinery, no matter what his bowling performances, in your view he is a very good bowler. But that isn’t necessarily the case. Mcgrath was skinny as hell, so is Mohammad Asif, Waqar was probably not more than 5 feet 10, and so on. If a bowler has the ability naturally in him, then he performs well, height and strength, and coaching doesn’t matter that much (almost all the great Pakistani bowlers didn’t go through continuous coaching). Let me explain why I think so: Every person is physically unique, so is his action, and the like. To take the angles with which Wasim Akram would bowl and ask another bowler to emulate them, he wouldn’t bowl like him, as he isn’t built like him and his action is not exactly like him and so on (its just that verious co-incidences of ideal action for that height with that pace, angles, and the like, come together perfectly for great bowlers). In other words, every bowler has ideal angles– movements of the balls– based on his own physique, action, and the like, and he can “find” them more through discovery (by simply bowling and experimenting) rather than going through gym 100 times, trying to bowl at one spot 100 times, and so on. This Australian bowling unit is nothing compared to what it used to be. Tendulkar’s most centuries against Australia have come (in test matches) when Mcgrath wasn’t playing.

In a similar vein, you seem to view Ghambir as god (because he does everything exactly as the textbook says, even steal singles) and, in your opinion, Laxman was a mediocre player. Laxman was a much better player than Ghambir and 5-7 runs of difference in average doesn’t mean much, espcially considering the bowling standard of today. When Laxman played shots, he would create space which isn’t available to average batsmen and, when rightly motivated and when it counted the most, he has performed against the best. 10 years from now, nobody will find a book and see, which country won 64 percent of the matches and which won 60 percent, what will remain in the memory are the great innings that they played against the best oppositions and when it counted, the statistics (mostly) will go in the dustbin of history.

Khsahab,

Again you are bringing the bowling argument, Srinath was a very good bowler, Kumble was one of the greats, Harbajan has won many, many matches by bowling spells like 6 wickets for 25 runs, and so on. India has had good bowling, not great pacemen, but good pacemen, much better than Gul.

Khansahab

I have never compared Inzamam with Tendulkar, in fact I put Mohd Yousof above Inzamam in the top 11 list. Inzamam was a very good ODI player, he played under pressure, and won many matches. But at test level Mohd Yousof is much better, and surely Tendulkar is, too.

Twelve shot dead at US army base

The shooter was killed by police, the base’s commander said
Twelve people have been killed and 31 injured in a shooting at the Fort Hood military base in Texas, the commander there has said.

Lt Gen Bob Cone said one shooter had been killed in the incident and two suspects arrested. All were American soldiers. The base is locked down.

The motivation for the shooting is not known, he said. One of the dead was a policeman but the others were soldiers.

President Barack Obama described it as “a horrific outburst of violence”.

Speaking at a press conference in Washington, he said: “It is difficult enough when we lose these brave men and women abroad, but it is horrifying that they should come under fire at an army base on US soil.”

FORT HOOD
Largest US base in the world
Home to about 40,000 personnel
Built in 1942
Focus for anti-war protesters
Includes two museums and a lake
He extended his condolences to the families of the victims, adding: “We will make sure that we get answers to every single question about this horrible incident.”

Mr Obama said the White House was working with the Pentagon, FBI and Department of Homeland Security to make sure Fort Hood was secure.

Fort Hood, near the town of Killeen, is the largest US base in the world.

Home to about 40,000 US troops, the base lies between Austin and Waco, about 60 miles (97 km) from each city.

Army spokesman Lt Col Nathan Banks at the Pentagon earlier told the Associated Press news agency the shootings had begun at about 1330 (1930 GMT) on Thursday at a personnel and medical processing centre at Fort Hood.

A serviceman stationed at Fort Hood who asked to remain anonymous told the BBC: “I heard the emergency announcement over the speakers outside and saw people rushing to get indoors.

“In our office we’re okay but we’re hearing about the deaths. It’s horrible and very shocking.

“We are still on lockdown. I am hearing that at least nine people may be dead. This is so terrible and frightening.”

The BBC’s Adam Brookes in Washington says units at Fort Hood are among those deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and some will have returned from there.

The base has a centre that deals with combat stress, our correspondent adds.

Hilary Shine, of the Killeen Fire Department told the BBC’s News Channel Fort Hood was like a small city.

“It has schools, a hospital, a convenience store even. And it has a large daytime population – including civilians working on the base – with as many as 80,000 in this area during the daytime.”

Local congressman John Carter, speaking to NBC News, said gunfire had erupted half an hour before a graduation ceremony was due to begin.

Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson said in a statement: “I am shocked and saddened by today’s outburst of violence at Fort Hood that has cost seven of our brave service members their lives and has gravely injured others.

“My heart goes out to their loved ones.”

Varun

The word Incorrigible is used for people who are incapable of being corrected or reformed. And mostly it is referred, or used for an incorrigible criminal. So, you call me a criminal who cannot be corrected or reformed for criticizing Tendulkar? How ABSURD this can be.

Awas

You can say Tendulkar deserves the MoM award for his 175 and bringing his team close to victory. There is always a thin line between Victory and Defeat and a defeat is a defeat. Generally the MoM awards are given to the player from the winning side, but whenever Tendulkar has scored 100 and even India has lost and whenever the match is in India the people who decide to give the MoM award, always give it to Tendulkar. I am not saying his 175 was not a wonderful innings but it was in vain. And, the sympathies are always with Tendulkar for his vain efforts.

khansahab

Yes, that Australian team you are referring to has one of the worst set of bowlers they have in their team in the last 50 years. Did you know that Mike Hussey bowled today after a gap of 66 ODI’s?

If Ricky Ponting had a choice he would have never used Mike Hussey to bowl. So, you and those who adore and worship Tendulkar can brag about his performance and his class against mediocre bowling.

Varun

The word Incorrigible is used for people who are incapable of being corrected or reformed. And mostly it is referred, or used for an incorrigible criminal. So, you call me a criminal who cannot be corrected or reformed for criticizing Tendulkar? How ABSURD this can be.

Awas

You can say Tendulkar deserves the MoM award for his 175 and bringing his team close to victory. There is always a thin line between Victory and Defeat and a defeat is a defeat. Generally the MoM awards are given to the player from the winning side, but whenever Tendulkar has scored 100 and even India has lost and whenever the match is in India the people who decide to give the MoM award, always give it to Tendulkar. I am not saying his 175 was not a wonderful innings but it was in vain. And, the sympathies are always with Tendulkar for his vain efforts.

khansahab

Yes, that Australian team you are referring to has one of the worst set of bowlers they have in their team in the last 50 years. Did you know that Mike Hussey bowled today after a gap of 66 ODI’s?

If Ricky Ponting had a choice he would have never used Mike Hussey to bowl. So, you and those who adore and worship Tendulkar can brag about his performance and his class.

khansahab & newguy

You both are using the word “almost” there is a big difference between almost happened and actually happened. The reality that actually happened is, India lost. Tendulkar’s 175 were all in vain.

“I am probably the only one in this discussion who is speaking without any bias.” khansahab

Oh, come on khansahab I don’t have a bias against anyone, this is just an observation based on facts. You aren’t saying anything about Gambhir today whereas the other day you wrote, “you will see the difference in the next match when Gambhir will play.”

I knew that in one match Tendulkar will play big and I wrote it would be Mohali, but I was wrong he played it in Hyderabad.

I hadn’t seen the match after the intial 15 overs, but when I just came back I got to know that Tendulkar and Raina were there when the score was 330.

What does Ponting do, black magic or what, Australia come back from matchlosing position and keep on winning. Even when Pak/Aus played that series in Abu Dhabi, the final scoreline was 3-2 Australia, but in one of the matches, Pakistan needed 30-40 runs to win with 8 wickets in hand and Aus stole the match from there– that match decided the outcome of the series. Recently in the Champion Trophy, again Pakistan had come perilously close to winning from Australia, and the tail-enders saw them through. They would have been disqualified had they lost– and they went on to win the trophy. And now against India.

The secret, obviously, to winning from the Aussies is to beat them comprehensively, because they almost never lose in matches that are closely fought.

Omer Admani;

The talk that Tendulkar made it possible by bringing his team so close to victory is being hailed and no one is talking about how Ponting snatched that victory from the jaws of India. I mentioned about the worst Australian bowling attack in 50 years and also the point about Mike Hussey bowling in a ODI, the last time he bowled in any ODI was 66 ODI’s before, so you can imagine how desperate Ponting was that he had to use Hussey and even Voges. And you are right the wicket was so flat that Australia made 350 and India could have won if they had not panicked.

Btw, when Raina was out, the score was not 330 but 299 and he got carried away after hitting a big six and Harbhajjan the Hero appeared over confident and was out on a duck the second ball he faced. The best catch of the match was taken by Voges to dismiss Dhoni, his reaction time was 0.70 seconds and that was amazingly fast.

Btw, Raina was dropped by Cameron White in slips – a simple regulation catch over his head and at that time Raina was either on 1 or he had not opened his account and the score was 164 for 4 then. If White had held that catch then, there was no competition at all, India would have folded under 250 max.

Newguy,

You are right, there is only one Tendulkar and, unlike Ghambir, you can’t make a synthetic Tendulkar. He played a very good innings, but lets not forget that SA have chased 448, NZ have chased in the 340s, 350s range against Australia once or twice (I believe it was in the same series, when prior to the worldcup Aus had visited NZ). They were flat pitches, Aus had rested Glenn Mcgrath for that series, and Hussey was captaining the side. It was an unbelievable series, and not to undermine Tendulkar’s innings, I think this probably isn’t the best ODI innings that Tendulkar himself has played (because not only Aus’s bowling is weak now and the pitch was very flat, but also because, even now, half the Australian side is injured and they are playing there reserve bowlers). That said, it was a really good innings in terms of run-rate, length, and under pressure.. and like I have mantained, it shows that Tendulkar is the greatest ODI player (that I have seen, obviously I have been seeing since the 90s, I can’t say before that, but there were players like Zaheer Abbas, Viv Richards who people say were really good in ODI’s, too).

The news from Abu Dhabi is, SALMAN BUTT is getting another chance to prove his worth or to regain his form. This is really very stupid. Why can’t they play Fawad Alam in his place? To be honest, even Malik is better than Butt as an opener. But, Malik is paying a price for making room for his buddy butt, he thought by refusing to open the innings he will get away after scoring that 100 against India. But, he is wrong and now he should get back to his old self of “Yours Obediently” like a HMV puppy and say, “I will play were my captain want me to play, if my captain ask me to open I will open, I am happy.” That is exactly what he used to during Inzi days.

This is the series I was talking about, the top 3 matches on the link:

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;opposition=2;team=5;template=results;type=team;view=innings

Interestingly, Hayden’s 189 was in vain, too! (in the first match that appears on the link).

Mcmillan and Mcculum almost alone won the match. Maybe this was the difference, Tendulkar couldn’t find a support player along with him.

I thought on such a flat pitch they could have opened with Yuvraj. On his day Yuvraj can play a very fast 100 too. Dhoni has won one match, Sehwag has played his bit– short of one matchwinning innings (which could be the next match). However, Yuvraj hasn’t played his part.

All bets on Yuvraj and Sehwag in the next match, one of them is going to play a matchwinning innings, and the series will be alive in the 7th match (just my gut feeling).

Javed Khan,

They haven’t kept Fawad Alam in the one day squad. They have space for Rana, but not Fawad Alam.

Yes Omer, I know Fawad Alam is not in the ODI squad. But, this is just a silly reason.

As regards India / Aus. series its not just you but, many people are saying that India will win the next ODI to keep the 7 ODI series interest alive hence, some are calling it a NOORA KUSHTI.

I was reading Saad Shafqat’s article on cricinfo titled “why Yusuf never learns from his mistakes?” And, highlighted the stats that out of 222 ODI, Yusuf ran himself out 38 times or 17% of his innings in other words every sixth match is a run out for him. Whereas, Tendulkar from his 430 plus innings gets run out after every 12th match. So, that is the difference.

The author suggested that Yusuf’s vocabulary should be limited to “Yes,” “No” and “Wait”. I can bet Yusuf will still get run out and this reminds me of a DB (dumb blonde) joke.

A DB comes back home and tells her mom that Tom laid her. Mom was very angry and said, “don’t you remember, I told you if he touches your boobs you should say “Don’t” and if he touches you below there…. you should tell him to “STOP.” and DB replied, yes Mom I told him and then it happened. Mom was a bit surprised and asked what happened? DB replied, he put one hand on my boobs and the other….. down there and I told him “Don’t Stop.”

The thing is MoYo at least runs now, if his partner would say Yes, No and Wait, MoYo would stop in the middle of the pitch.

Javed Khan,

If India win, though, the series wil become interesting. As neutrals, we would love to see it go to the wire. The series has so much allure because of the star power of the Indian team (talented batsmen, characters like Harbajhan) and Australian determination to win at any cost.

On the other hand, Butt is opening the batting for Pakistan. When I think of it, I don’t even feel like watching (should I wake up early morning or skip classes to watch Butt bat?). They should move Afridi up the order (number 3) and start with one or two attacking openers. I’d understand if Butt were Saeed Anwar, but apart from flat tracks and mediocre bowling, when does he ever perform? Needless to say that he is awfully boring to watch, too. There is a bit of Ghambir in him.
What happened to Shehzaib Hassan, he seemed like an all right attacking opener. How can they judge an attacking opener in two matches, as such players tend to have good days less often but they win the matches when they do.

Besides this, I think the batting order is still very off. Just because it worked in one match, it wouldn’t work in every match. Afridi should be utilized in the power plays and without the pressure that comes lower down the order, if he plays 10-15 overs, the match would be as good as over. Put one more power player like that in the opening slot, defense in the middle order, and late order hitting with Razzaq and Akmal.

What do you think?

Hi Guys,

I was just watching the recorded match again, I did not see the match when it was played, just followed the ball by ball, so here is something I could not figure out..

After 47 overs India was 332 for 6, Jadeja just hit two 4’s, and Tendulkar also was scoring freely, neither looked tense or tired, only tense look was on Ricky Pointing’s face and Aussie bowlers and fielders. At this point, commentators were saying match is in India’s hand, with 19 needed from 18 balls and two set batsman and no devil in the pitch, you would expect batting side to go through easily, in fact if it was Dhoni on one end they would have easily gone through because Dhoni is the only Indian player who is mentally tough not to do stupid things in this situation.

But .. 1st ball of 48th over, McKay bowled a lollypop slow ball on leg stump which Tendulkar scooped to short fine leg, exact same shot that Misbah played in the T20WC, exact same shot and exact same result. I could see why he was doing that, he played the same shot couple of times early in the innings and scored boundaries, so he thought a boundary off 1st ball would bring match under further control.

There was no need though, it was a risky shot and earlier they needed to take risks chasing a huge total, but 19 runs off 18 balls, no risk needed, just play proper cricket shots, instead of the cute paddle sweep. This was his undoing, and he fell short again when he could have went all the way.

This is why I called Tendulkar flawed genius, he just could not finish it, but he should have, because it looked so easy. Even in the last over, all they needed was 8 runs, c’mon in the days of 20/20 these T20 specialist cannot score 8 runs in 6 balls. This was pathetic, Dhoni said after the match about India’s lack of mental toughness caused them the match. This is true, there is only Dhoni in Indian batting lineup who can finish a match.

So, India gave up 2 matches so far, 3 if you count Vadodara where Bhajji and Praveen came so close, yet gave up in the end.

Omer,

The NZ/Aus series you are talking was played on smaller grounds in NZ. I recall this series, all 3 matches went to 300/350 range and NZ chased twice and won, in one match from dire situation. Some of the grounds in NZ the boundary is only 40 yards on the side, it’s so easy to score sixes and fours, normally 30 yards is the inner circle in a large ground, and these grounds are just 10 more yards on the side, but this ground in Hyderabad is quite large, so it’s quite different. But, anyhow, like I said India should have won easily today.

For the record, I don’t think this was Tendulkar’s greatest knock, this was very good, but he just did not do enough to go over finish line, he was in control and should have, but instead played the Misbah shot

Javed,

Why is Fawad Alam not in the team? He was playing well whenever he got the opportunity, why did they not pick him in the squad? Is it another one of the political thingies.

Omer,

I have seen Viv Richards play and let me tell you, there was no better ODI batsman than him at the time he played, I won’t compare Tendulkar to Richards, these are two different batsmen, but if I were to rate them for sheer effect, I would rate Richards higher.

He was something, the way he walked into the field, the way he chewed the gum, how he would stare down the bowler (usually it’s the other way around), his swagger at the crease, and then the pull shots, drives, and cuts, man he was powerful and menacing.

He would pick a bowler for punishment, especially if that bowler had hurt WI in any one of the games, and would destroy him, hitting sixes after sixes and fours after fours.

And, think of this, he never wore a helmet in his life, he will wear that Maroon cap and stay there, then hit the bowler powerfully back over his head, no fast bowler ever dared stare Viv Richards down let alone sledge him.

So no question there, that man was the master.

I have not seen Zaheer Abbas play, he retired by the time I started watching, Miandad of course was very good, but he never dominated bowling and he wasn’t stylish. Among the Pakistanis, I liked Saeed Anwar best, he was stylish, dominating, and would score fast.

But Viv Richards was the very best. Among fast bowlers, Malcolm Marshal was the very best, these Australians like McGrath etc would not hold a candle to Marshal, he had such mastery and control over the ball and he bowled super fast.

Varun

I wasn’t talking about the cheap hookers of India. I was chatting about the qualities of Mr Shoaib Akhtar. I think you took it the other way round. Now if you believe so then let me say that cheap hookers may possibly available in any country in the world but not just in India.

Now let’s talk about your ending words. The words you said in the end were cheaper than any cheap hooker. Excuse me, do you know me? I believe the people who love to predict other people’s character are not different from the next door Maasii of bollywood movies, full of masala and full of shit. I wanted to say a little bit more what you are getting on your screen right now.

Let me say one thing that people living in abroad don’t live there to do ‘’gendegi’’ (in your words). That’s another next door bollywood Maasi’s mental design. People like you from far Asia when they talk about Western world the first thing cross their mind is ‘’gendegi’’ or ‘’sex’’. Perhaps this mind set is the result of watching too many western porn movies.

That reminds me an older Indian guy who told me a funny story……..He goes people in Asia, they think as soon as your plane would hit the ground in any western country, airplane stairs would not touch the plane but women’s down parts would be wedged with the plane first, so you can start doing ‘’gendegi’’ immediately without wasting further time which has been wasted in 10 hours of flight. It’s not like that my friend.

Please do not cough up on my character again, I tried to keep myself calm which I as a rule don’t do with the people of such words .

Peace out

Shoaib beta,

…..nor i ever went to india, so never got a chance to get a cheap hooker

I do not know how this statement is reflectin on Shoaib Akhtar’s character. Like a patriot Indian i am i would obviously defend it by a personal attack on you.

For your kind information I am not sittin here in far asia i have been in Netherlands and before that in UK for almost a decade so i know exactly what Indian and Pakistanis sitting in their homes think and feel about the West and i also know what many of them do when they first land up in west. I am sorry if my statements hurt you but this is what i learnt since i started writing on this Blog.. specially from Javed Sir!i.e… TIT for TAT.

As far as Bollywood is concerned I am agree with you. I am totally disgusted by todays actors and movies but 70’s and 80’s was a different time and like all Indians i grew up on the Bollywood diet and I like the actors and singers of the older generation and that is the reason i don’t even remember the last time i saw a recently released Hindi movie in a Cinema Theatre .

Dear Javed,

The word Incorrigible is used for people who are incapable of being corrected or reformed. And mostly it is referred, or used for an incorrigible criminal.

Well i did intend to use this word as you’ve described in the first sentence. Excuse my English but i did not want to use it in the Criminal Sense.

It is just that ever since i am writing on this Blog i have admitted any wrong thing or apologised for anything negative i must have said to hurt anyone’s feelings but maybe your ego is too much for me to expect the same from you. Even after such a knock by the li’l master you can only find ways to criticize him and just for my curiosity did the Glove men SMS’ed you what message he is taking for Sachin?

Does he not know himself what his score is or how many runs he needs to cross 17000 or Saeed Anwar’s record. You are the first person to mention about Saeed Anwar’s record and it was you who was shit-scared when he was unbeaten on 175 that he’d take the only ODI Batting Record a Pakistani holds but as it turned out it wasn’t meant to be.

Yesterday’s match explains the Tendulkar story so many times he has performed exceptionally well when all others around him have failed. He cannot be hold responsible for not crossing the line and taking India home if the other guys cannot even score 18 of 18 balls. Like newguy said and like i have said before he is not a GOD and that’s why he will have his weaknesses and faults.

Like Omer you are reminded of flat-pitches and weak-bowling only when he scores big when Dear Omer very easily overlooks the fact that both of Sehwag’s 300’s came on a flat pitch especially the dustbowl of Multan.

Why don’t you openly accept the fact that as a Pakistani you just can’t stand Tendulkar and would love to see the back of him the day he retires. As an Indian i never felt that way for Waqar or Wasim when we had no bowlers of their capability. But is it too much to ask the same from you?

Excusez Moi Monsieur Javed, ofcourse Afridi’s records are unforgettable so i must correct myself by saying that Saeed Anwar’s record is not the only ODI Batting Record by a Pakistani

Just to put things in perspective the following comment on one of the Blogs accurately describes the usual Pakistani attitude towards Tendulkar:-

karachikhatmal • Nov 6, 2009 @06:46

i wonder how ponting feels – lost the ashes with a superior side, winning in india with a vastly inferior side…

Varun

”I am not Shoaib Akhtar, neither i have genital warts nor i ever went to india, so never got a chance……..” I was talking about Shoaib Akhtar, dont be so xxxxxxxx that you couldnt understand a simple sentence.

I dont care where you live, but better mind your language. I can see your mentality level that first thing you do is attack on someones character now does’nt matter whether if you misunderstand the other person but that’s what you do…right? attack on someones character. So you said as a patriotic Indian you will defend your country like this….so you are representing the general mentality of an Indian? or is it just your sickness? and no one attacked on India, YET!!

Tit for tat? what tit for tat, so you are another idiot who does Tat with someones else’s Tit. I dont know what Javed said to you but there is no way you can just start pissing on other people cuz Javed said something to you…….although i never read Javed comments but i think whatever he said to you justifies. I guess Javed should take one step further and give you a slap too.

Shoaib,

Without going any further I would end this futile discussion with you right now!

You talk about my mentality and impoliteness but the way you write you are no different than me, after all genetically we are quite similar arent we?

Before commenting on my language atleast first see the kind of words you have used and then you will know who has been more polite and respectful between both of us.

If you get so pissed by any random person writing anything to you i can only imagine what will happen if we ever were to talk face to face.

Goodbye…Alvida for now.

Varun;

It is wrong to assume that I don’t apologize or say sorry if I am corrected. You may scroll up or check in the previous thread or, ask newguy that very recently when he corrected me, I apologized for the oversight and misunderstanding also, in quoting Ravi Shastri’s comment. newguy - did I or, did I not?

So, Varun my ego is not like a hot air balloon if that is what you think and you are not the only generous and righteous person here to say “I apologize”. We all make mistakes and some of us don’t feel ashamed in admitting our mistakes and I never felt ashamed in admitting my mistake. In the corporate world (i.e., when I used to work) my colleagues and my sub-ordinates used to love me more than my bosses because, not only that I used to apologize but always encouraged them to correct me if I am wrong. So, I have no problem of ego as such. Here it is not a matter of mistake but of opinions and that too about players. And, I wrote before that “Na Sehwag mera Dost hai, na Tendulkar mera Dushman.” Perhaps you didn’t read that.

If Pakistanis like to see the back of Tendulkar, the Indians also love to see the back of Shahid Afridi, but such is the game of cricket. In Pakistan whenever and wherever Tendulkar played he got standing ovation and got cheered by Pakistanis they even displayed banners, play cards and posters in praising him. On the streets of Lahore, in the shops and restaurants people refused to accept money from him for the goods he bought and the food he ate. You may not believe this but, it actually happened. And, Tendulkar himself admitted the food as amazing and the people very hospitable.

As regards Saeed Anwar’s record, to be very honest with you I don’t give any shit, one day someone will break it, records are meant to be broken and may be someone will make even 200. May be any of the aggressive openers like Gayle, Brendon McCullum, Sehwag etc., could break it and who knows? And, that will be a treat to watch, however I can guarantee that Tendulkar will not break that record. NEVER.

Your quote from a different blog also means nothing to me because, there are hundreds of other Indians who write on various other blogs and vent their anti-Pakistani feelings and unlike you and me they use fictitious names.

PS.

Since you are saying that your intention in using the word incorrigible was not meant in the criminal sense, I believe you.

Varun & Shoaib

Please take a chill pill. Its not worth exchanging such comments. Varun has confirmed that he doesn’t want to discuss anything on this subject, so Shoaib you simply ignore this and get back to cricket.

New Zealand’s partnership of 126 between Guptil and McCullum was going great and now suddenly 3 wickets have fallen within 13 runs. Abdul Razzaq is a bit more expensive. The sad part of Pakistan is the rear part or the BUTT. I don’t understand why they have to play him?

newguy - yes there is politics and that too big time politics in keeping Fawad Alam out of the squad.

Javed,

I did read all of your comments and like always believe you that you don’t have an inflated ego but it is just that the way you try to criticize and find faults in Tendulkar it gave me that impression. As far as Afridi is concerned I might or might not like to see his back depending on whether he is playing against India or not but i never look for different ways to criticise him or belittle any of his acheivements.

Regarding Saeed Anwar’s record ofcourse it’s easy to guarantee now but I am not so sure if you felt the same way when he was on 175 yesterday. You are wrong in assuming that he was playing for Anwar’s record otherwise he would not have Misbah-ed himself. If you observe carefully there was a period of 7-10 balls when Jadeja was on strike and he hit 2 fours and then few dots so due to the pressure Tendulkar was looking for the boundry so that match is over before the powerplay finishes in 49 over and that’s how he got out. It is just that Do you seriously believe that person who has been playing for 20 long years would care for such trivial numbers like 17000 or 194 or whatever?

Anyhow what has happened has happened, on a different subject Why no comments on Pak-NZ match is anybody watching or not?

Vettori coming ahead of Broom and Jacob Oram is a good move, he is such a wonderful player and a very motivating captain that he has once again boosted McCullum’s confidence in striking the ball at a faster rate which slowed down after the fall of Guptil’s wicket. They are doing fine and can score 330 plus and McCullum is sure to get his 100 here. The Pakistani fast bowling attack is pretty ineffective on this pitch their only chance was to get wickets through spin bowling. Afridi managed one and Ajmal none and they both have a few overs left. Therefore, it is important for McCullum to keep cool and attack the fast bowlers in the later stage of the game and avail the batting power play advantage to his best.

Varun,

Relax. It wouldn’t be cricket if we didn’t play a bit of sport here, too

Lets watch this match, looks like Pakistan is going to get an opportunity to chase 300+ today.

Varun

It never came to my mind about SA’s record ONLY when the commentator (either Gavaskar or, Siva Rama Laxman) said, “he could very well make 200 here today and break records.” And, that was when he was on 172 and was hitting good shots. And, right then before the completion of the over, the glove boys ran up to him and were soon sent back by the umpire, but they had a word with Tendulkar. And the same commentator was saying, “may be the boys were bringing a message for him to keep his cool and go for the records.” After that it took long time for Tendulkar to add 3 more runs before getting out. So, they create the pressure and he is known for getting stuck in the 90’s, even his son suggested him something funny.

My point was and it is still the same that, whenever Indian batsmen are playing be it Tendulkar, Sehwag, Yuvraj or Dhoni, (and the same for bowlers after Kumble’s 10 wickets haul) the Indian commentators, the media, the fans and the supporters they all suddenly start talking about personal records and milestones rather than team winning the game.

Btw, you are too impatient, I did write about Pak – NZ game even before you asked and even after that and now I have to go, I have an appointment and by the time I will be back the match will be over. Its a shame that I won’t be able to watch the exciting last 15 overs of NZ batting.

Vettori gone and then Afridi gets a second one for a duck. What an amazing bowler he has turned out to be of late. If only he would have realised his complete potential he could well have been an all-rounder comparable to Imran Khan or Ian Botham!!

Arre yaar Javed I am not impatient, we both wrote at the same time and just when i submitted i saw your comment.

Omer, i get your point but kya karen jawani mai kabhi kabhi hosh ko baithhe hai!

Afridi gone for a first ball duck trying to hit over short mid wicket, second ball if you consider the wide that he faced as a ball. There was no need to send in Afridi now, either they should have opened with him or let him play at #7 to finish things off. Bad move. Pakistan need a partnership here, a major one, run rate has climbed to 8 an over, but if they keep wickets they can do it, one of MoYo, Malik, or Akmal has to score big, Butt is playing the anchor role, he should stay around for some more time.

The pitch is flat and the NZ bowlers are not a great threat, but as I said yesterday, it’s never easy chasing 300 or 350 against any team, the pressure will just get to the batsmen, then a couple of wickets fall the run rate will mount and you have to try and take risks. That is why it’s easy to bat first and score 300+ than chase it.

The whole batting order has been messed up. From the decision to play Salman Butt to the arrangement of the batting order.

Salman Butt can never be a good batsman because he doesn’t know where the gaps are and always hits the fielders. He has done similar to the team’s chances that Tendulkar had somewhat done in the match prior to hiw wonderful innings. Sehwag at least had made 30-40 quick runs then to compensate but here everyone is folding under pressure as no attacking batsman had opened.

Everyone’s folding under pressure because of Butt.

1-down is not Younis Khan’s place, he should come 3-down.

Afridi should have been sent 1-down, not 2-down with 8.40 runs needed from 20 overs with Butt on the other end.

Khansahab

Butt is the equivalent of Rana when it comes to matchlosing in that, on his day and when in the mood, he can play a long innings that can leave most targets unchaseabe.

Javed,

I also saw the towel boys coming to Tendulkar and Jadeja in the middle of innings, and the commentator said something, but I don’t see how you interpret it as a message to go for the record, and it’s not Anwar’s record alone anymore is it, that guy from Zimbabwe is tied with Anwar now, right, so it’s their record

Anyhow, I don’t see 194 as a big thing, if anyone can break 200 then I would consider it as a great deal, after so many years and so many great players, no one has broken the 200, it shows how hard it is, it is not even worth bothering, but may be someday someone will do it, but it won’t be Sehwag, I guarantee you Sehwag will not get there, he will get out before that. He may be able to get to another 300 in test cricket who knows, but in ODI no way.

As for Indian commentators praising Sachin, I agree partially, but it was Robin Jackman I think who said about 200 runs record, not Siva or Gavaskar, but .. Gavaskar is so annoying when he is commentating on Tendulkar’s batting, he just keep praising him so much that I feel like going inside a shell and hiding, he is like a petting father praising his son, when Tendulkar got out Gavaskar was the other commentator, he was shocked and he went silent for a moment, then he started saying all kinds of things to support that shot.

He was saying, “that shot was on, you see the bowler bowled a slower delivery that is why he chipped it to fielder, he had to hit it harder instead of just helping along the way, you see it was on..” so on .. someone should have told Gavaskar that bowler bowled slower ball trying to deceit the batsman and he fell for it, there is no defending that shot, in fact no need to, he tried his best, it was a great effort, but in the end fielding team held on, batting team just could not put together a few runs needed to finish, end of story, like I said MS Dhoni would have finished the match.

That said, I still see no evidence he was more worried about another record at that time. I will admit that the nervousness around records is there for Tendulkar, may be it is the crowd pressure, if you noticed when he was going to complete that 17,000 runs crowd was roaring every ball, that kinds of puts anyone under pressure, agreed some players don’t care. Tendulkar does, but you cannot say because of this he is not a team player.

Look at Cricinfo stats, 32 of his hundreds have resulted in an India win, he has more hundreds in team wins than any other player, and his percentage of runs in wins is much higher than in losses, again more than any other player, his average in India’s losses are 33, where was in wins it is 48, so clearly when he has performed well India has won more often than not. As for his scoring rate and avg, in 2009 he has scored at a rate of 94 with an average of 48, anyone asking Tendulkar to retire should check whether they are looking at facts or simply biased.

But I don’t think you are totally biased, he have your way of looking at achievements and you are partially right on certain things, about Indian crowd, and commantators praising him too much, his getting stuck on records so on, but I think you are wrong about him not playing for the team, he does and along the way if he gets some personal records what is wrong with it?

Needing 10 runs per over from the last 15 overs or so, with 6 wickets down, they haven’t taken the powerplay. I don’t understand why don’t they ever make use of it?

Like I said, by the time I will be back the match will be over also before checking the result, I knew what the result must have been and I am not disappointed. In fact I am disappointed why NZ did not score 330 plus and only 303?

Afridi’s first ball duck is not new either. He is such an idiot who gets carried away when some fellow Pathans are cheering him with “Chacka, Chacka, Chacka” and he thinks he can hit the first ball for a six each time he comes to the crease. Idiot hai sala.

The sad thing is, Salman but has cemented his place for the next ODI by scoring 59 wo bhee reng, reng kay. And, Drama Khan should rethink about his retirement plans and say ” I quit 50 overs and 20 overs game once for all.”

Btw, what was Shoaib Malik’s role in this match? What exactly did he do?

newguy

I think Gavaskar is actually re-living his own new life in Tendulkar’s body and soul. Things that he could not achieve, he wants Tendulkar to do that. But, Robin Jackman is a big time asshole he sucks up to everyone, he has no opinion of his own. When he was commentating for a match between SA and PK he was so biased, so biased that he was literally criticizing everything and anything that is even positive and good about Pakistan and he was turning everything into negative. Ravi Shastri and Manjrekar are better than most Indian and Pakistani commentators. Ramiz was OK as long as he was impartial and his English is also better than all other Pakistani commentators but, now he has become very biased and have deep rooted jingoistic feelings even against his own team members. So, I don’t like this approach from him. A commentator needs to be fair and impartial.

Omer Admani

If the players, while they are in the middle and playing may be they can’t remember about the power play but, what about the captain, coach, manager? WTF are they doing? Talat Malik, Intekhab Alam, Yawar Saeed they all used to sleep in the player’s balcony or dug out, wearing dark glasses. They should advise the players to ask for batting power play. There is no point if you ask for a batting PP after the 45th over because, generally those are considered as the slog overs and the fielding side is prepared for it. It also does not affect the fielding side bowling plan. If you take it before that, then they have to amend their bowling plan, laikin inn gadhaon ki aqal ho tou kuch kerenge.

Two of Tendulkar’s great test innings, see below:

This hundred made against Australia in Australia in a lightning fast WACA pitch in Perth is considered one of the very best played in that ground by many experts:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63567.html

Look at Indian 1st innings score and the next highest score is 34. This is his early days.

Second one here saved this test for India:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63535.html

Indian bowlers and batsmen around that time was more than mediocre, especially in places like Australia and England. Those days when India went abroad the question is whether or not any player can win matches, whether they can draw matches, or at least can someone score a decent hundred. This is the background Tendulkar started off.

It is now that he is enjoying the support of batsmen like Sehwag, Youvraj, Dhoni, and Gambhir in ODIs, Tendulkar himself said after the CB series victory in Australia that he helped win BTW, that this is the strongest Indian team he has ever played with, in other words he always longed for some support and some wins, but never could get it until now, of course in Tests he got Dravid, Ganguly, Laxman, but that was in 2000s, there was the whole 90s where Tendulkar carried India alone, with no support in bat or ball.

This is the reason why he wants to play one last ODI WC, he believes he now has a chance with this team to be part of that success he never had.

Khansahab

People have a tendency to get overexcited after a good innings, but this innings changes nothing in terms of Tendulkar’s greatness. That he is the greatest ODI player of the last 2 decades would have remained true regardless of the innings. As for the weight this innings in itself carries, you are getting a bit over-enthusiastic, this was an innings against a very ordinary bowling line-up on a flat pitch. Even if Australia is the opposition, it doesn’t change the fact that the bowling was very ordinary. If Michael Hussey was bowling, that is a good indication of where the bowling stands. The Indian team has good spinners and, thus, better bowling than Australia (at least after Jhonson and Brett Lee got injured). Brett Lee might not be the best test bowler, but in one days he has done all right. Jhonson, on the other hand, along with Ponting, is the reason why Australia are what they still are. You keep on mentioning that Kumble and other Indian bowlers weren’t supportive of Tendulkar’s innings amd that Kaneria was the reason of Inzamam’s success– as though fortune has found her nemisis in Tendulkar over a period of last two decades, that the innings that Laxman, Dravid, and Sehwag have played were flukes aggrandized by similar flukes of Kumble and Harbajhan coming along together, but have you considered that, the reason that the bowlers were unsuccessful during some of those matches (when Tendulkar played big) was that the pitches were totally flat?

Laxman, at his very best, was a much better player than Tendulkar in test matches. If you can distinguish between test matches and one days, then you might not find the necessity of me reading your posts 5 times. Why should I read a post 5 times, when it digresses from facts and makes petty arguments which aren’t simply true. To say that bowlers didn’t support Tendulkar in a period of last two decades is pretty shallow, considering that Kumble has taken around 600 wickets, Harbajhan has bowled many matchwinning spells, Srinath was a good bowler who was underated because of the presence of other great bowlers during his time, and Prasad was at the least as good as Gul. During the latter period of Inzamam as captain, and when Asif hasn’t played, Gul has been Pakistan’s lead bowler– a player who is a specialist 20/20 bowler and otherwise finds smaller teams such as West Indies and New Zealand to improve his averages in test matches. In fact Inzamam has played with one other great player in the team, Mohd Yousof. Brian Lara probably didn’t have another great batsmen in the team to support him (for the better part of his career). Tendulkar has played with Dravid, Ganguly, Sehwag, Laxman, Dhoni, and the like (India, along with Australia, has had the best batting line-up in the world in the last decade or so). What you are saying just distorts facts, you are doing the same as many Indians do, undermining others for the sake of overating Tendulkar.

When did Mcgrath say Tendulkar is the best batsman he bowled to?
Again you have created an illusory world and you are just “finding” facts in that world.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Brian-Lara-the-best-McGrath/articleshow/910780.cms

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKL2732297520070427

Newguy,

The first 100 had no bearing on the outcome of the match, 4 players made 100 in that match, Tendulkar had the likes of Kapil Dev with him in the team, and though a good innings, I don’t see how it can be classified as a great innings.

The second one was probbaly a flat pitch, although the innings stands out among Indians, but the pitch was full of runs, and everyone made merry in that draw.

If these are his best, then I am inclined to put Laxman above him

Just look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._V._S._Laxman

You can scroll beneath and see how many 100s and 200s Laxman has made against Australian. Mind you, they have been when Mcgrath was playing, and India ended up winning the test matches.

Just look at this 167:
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63867.html

This is when Mcgrath is running through the side. True it is not in a winning cause, but consider this:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63920.html

Just look at the match situation. India has folded against Mcgrath in the first innings, lost quick wickets in the third innings, are trailing by 300-400 runs, this is the second match of the series (India are one-down in the series), and Laxman pulls this. India ends up winning the match. India also end up winning the series.

This again, winning the test match, because of Dravid and Tendulkar:
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64060.html

Mind you, around this period, Australia doesn’t know what losing test matches mean, for a decade or so they havent lost a test series

Not because of Dravid and Tendulkar, but because of Dravid and Laxman* (in post 106)

Khansahab

How can Ghambir be great, he has played 25 test matches..?

No, I never pointed to what Mcgrath was saying, you kept on saying that, according to Mcgrath, Tendulkar is the best, I just pointed that is just not true.

What you are doing is finding innings in which Tendulkar played a good knock and India didn’t win. That is a self-fulfilling prophesy and circular reasoning. It is like me finding good innings in which Manjrekar, Azharuddin, Laxman, Dravid, or others played a good knock and India didn’t end up winning to show how India’s bowling caused the team not to win or how other batsmen didn’t perform to help Indian win, contributing with either of those batsmen. That is pointless and not the question, there would be many such innings that such people played and no-one else contributed, and bowlers didn’t perform, and India ended up losing. However, the right question is, where was Tendulkar in all of these India’s famous wins? When Dravid supported Laxman and India ended up winning, where was Tendulkar?

The way you are reasoning is totally flawed, its like me finding Lara’s centuries in which West Indies didn’t end up winning, and arguing that he is better than Tendulkar because of that. That, Khansahab, is pointless and is a self-fulffing prophesy in that you are finding matches in which India lost and Tendulkar made a score, and then saying where were others..

Khansahab,

Imran Khan was a great player. There was a period of 7,8 years where he averaged more around 58 with the bat and bowled with an average of less than 20 with the bowl. A batting average more than Tendulkar and a bowling average less than Mcgrath. His stats aren’t as good “as they could be” because a young Imran Khan was erratic. Imran Khan deserves all the respect as a player. Politics is such a thing that it doesn’t draw a unified opinion from anyone, why bring that in betweem?

Inzamam is overated in Pakistan, like Sachin in India. Inzamam wasn’t certainly a better player than Tendulkar, and though a good player, not as good as people think in Pakistan.

Omer,

Laxman is a very good test player, and he has played some wonderful knocks on winning causes especially against Australia the #1 test team in this decade, none more famous than his 281 to turn the Kolkata test around and win from behind.

Sure, this is great, and he will be remembered for that for ever, but, this is what he will be remembered for mostly, he has not attained consistency, look at his 14 hundreds, most of them have come at good time and in good causes, but he is not consistent.

I think you are still using the wrong parameter, and this is what Javed Khan is also doing, that you are using winning matches or contributing to winnings causes as a measure of batting greatness. Tendulkar has not done that compared to Laxman and Dravid, but that is not the sign of batting greatness.

This is what Khansaheb is trying to tell you, but you keep going back to McGrath said this, flat pitches, winning matches, and so on.. none of that matters just look at his consistency, his bating records, and how he makes those runs. Just tell me one thing, is there an ugly thing in Tendulkar’s batting or not?

So, in the end, Tendulkar is only marginally ahead of his peers, namely Lara and Ponting in Test batsmanship, but he is miles ahead of them in terms of consistency, longevity, ability to play most kinds of bowlers, so on.

Newguy,

In our view this is the more important benchmark of batting greatness (consistency is somewhat important and so is logevity, but being consistent to a certain extent (45+ average, and having played long enough (60-70 test matches), the only thing that matters, in our view, is the calibre and the quality of the various innings). Yes, playing amazing innings against great bowlers like Mcgrath, Akram, and others, and in tough conditions…not feeding on second string bowling attacks in non-consequential matches should be one of the major criterion. Not to say that this is what always Tendulkar has done, he is, hands down, the greatest ODI player, but when it comes to test matches, it is a different story.

Newguy,

To be honest I don’t see anything extraordinary in Tendulkar’s batsmanship. Maybe that is your point, that his technique is complete. But what players like Lara and Sehwag do is, they make you watch them. You never know what sort of innings against whatever great opposition they are going to pull. This is what captures the neutral viewer’s imagination, I can understand that if I were Indian, I might have followed his statistics with more enthusiasm and more closely, hoping that he accomplishes yet another record for himself. But, on the art of batsmanship, I would still rate Lara and Sehwag above Tendulkar. They are probably both flawed in their own right, but it is this unpredictability, knowing that the unknown can be expected, is what makes us watch them. Even if pakistan is playing, I tend to follow Sehwag’s innings more enthusiastically as he simply destroys bowlers on his day, regardless of how good they are. I rate Ponting higher than Tendulkar because he is more consistent, he plays when it counts, and he is mentally a very tough player. Ponting hates losing and he translates this mentality among his peers. It seems to me that Ponting doesn’t care about personal records at all, all he is really concerned about is winning.

Omer Farooq Khan

ISLAMABAD: Peshawar-based Mustafa Kamal has had enough: he has just got his12-year-old son freed from a band of criminals in the lawless tribal area of Khyber agency by paying a ransom. He has left a lucrative job with Pakistan’s telecommunication department and now has the immigartion papers for Canada ready for his entire family.

“I’m lucky to have found my son alive. But I won’t take any more risk. Life has become extremely dangerous — it’s not worth living here. Enough’senough,” says Kamal.

For a country badly bloodied by a wave of suicide attacks (at least eight this month alone), the next tragedy appears to be collapse of governance. The Pakistani state is pitted against a wide array of militant groups across the country in a situation teetering on the brink of a civil war. And the chasm between the government and the people seems to be growing by the day.

The popular perception is that Pakistan is fighting the US war against terror. Many people in the lawless North West Frontier Province say Pakistan has been sold to the US piece by piece. Under coercion, they argue, Pakistan has started a war that has consumed its economy, national security, and has torn apart its social fabric.

“Our national integrity is at risk. I wish not to see the end of Pakistan in my lifetime. It is not yet too late for Pakistan to return from the precipice of national suicide. Pakistan must take a u-turn and preempt the civil war. Pakistan must say an emphatic no to the US,” says Rabnawaz Khan, a former Pakistani diplomat, stressing that an internally torn Pakistan does not weaken but strengthens militants.

The civil unrest has spilled into many parts, giving rise to fear psychosis among citizens. So much so that when twin blasts rocked Islamabad’s Islamic University on October 20, many did not believe that it was militants’ handiwork. Instead, they blamed “indistinct forces out to discredit Islam or weaken Pakistan”.

That attack led the authorities to take an unprecedented step of closing down all schools, colleges and other training institutions in the country. “The law and order situation has only worsened since the military operations against the Taliban started. How can we believe that things will normalize by carrying out a big operation in Waziristan? I think the repercussions are going to be more blasts and suicide attacks,” said Palwasha Zia, a third year student of Home Economics in Peshawar.

“People are very scared. Every time I go to market, I worry about blasts. We are being targeted and our life has become very difficult. We are hoping the situation will get better. What else can we do?” says Shaheen Akhtar, a deputy provost of Peshawar University.

October has been the cruelest month. Militants have struck UN offices, police buildings, army headquarters in Rawalpindi and ambushed security forces. The government response has been on expected lines: it swiftly sent troops to battle the entrenched militants in trouble-torn South Waziristan and beefed up security in all major cities. Reportedly, there were at least 72 check posts at entry and exit points around sensitive installations in Islamabad before these attacks. Now, the check points have been increased up to 300 in the federal capital.

Has it helped? Margalla Road, the most expensive and posh area of Islamabad, has almost been turned into a fortress, with concrete barricades, security pickets and barbed wires installed in most of the places. The residents say driving inside the capital has become extremely difficult as they are checked several times a day during routine work. “Establishing security pickets in residential areas and check points have not resolved the issue of law and order; rather the situation has further deteriorated,” said a traffic police official in Islamabad’s Blue area, wishing not to be named.

Just two days after the attack on Islamic university that killed seven people, suspected militants shot dead a senior Pakistani army officer of brigadier rank and a soldier in Islamabad on Wednesday, suggesting militants are shifting tactics in the face of a sweeping army drive in their South Waziristan stronghold.

“First, it was Peshawar. Then Islamabad and Karachi, and now Lahore and Rawalpindi. When you live in a place which is under threat of continuous attacks, you’ll have to think twice before you step out of your house. The scare among people is visible — there are fewer people out on streets,” says Mujeeb-ur Rehman, a news anchor in Islamabad-based TV station.

The frequent terror attacks have greatly damaged the business climate. Nasir Dawood, who ran a boutique shop in Rawalpindi’s Raja Bazaar till last week has finally shut shop. “My business was badly damaged in the last one year. Scared customers don’t come for shopping. To avoid any further losses, I had no option,” Nasir said.

Habibullah Zahid, another businessman who owns four restaurants in Peshawar, has shifted his family to Islamabad to escape the constant threats of militants. “Though my business was affected, I left Peshawar due to threats to my life. A group of militants or criminals in the Khyber tribal area has made it a habit to make threatening calls, demanding money in millions. I could no more give in to their demands,” says Zahid.

newguy;

you may hate me for saying this, I tend to agree with Omer’s views because, I feel the same way he does. But, this doesn’t mean I hate Tendulkar which most of you think I do. We are only comparing the players, their technique and their style of batting. We are not Gavaskar to be praising him to the extent of adoring and worshiping him. If he plays well, we say yes he did play well.

There is a total contrast between Tendulkar and Sehwag when it comes to taking pressure. Tendulkar gets stuck in the nineties and in achieving personal milestones whereas, Sehwag hits a six to complete his century or his double hundred or, triple hundred. Tendulkar is unlucky in tests not to have scored a triple century YET despite all his batting prowess, his genius, his ability to dominate the bowlers under every circumstances, YET he has not scored a triple century but Sehwag has done it twice. Lara has done it twice.

Theek hai Yaaron ab bas bhi karo….

End this debate now as it’s not leading us anywhere..As far as this topic is concerned it will always be Omer/Javed V/S khansahab&myself with newguy being the neutral one…neither side has moved an inch since the time we started debating on this topic. Let’s find a new topic now.

Varun,

It is true that this debate has lasted pretty long, but isn’t the conclusion pretty obvious?

I think we’ve got to the bottom of the debate. And the winners can be categorized analogous to the calibre of the players we’ve been discussing: Javed Khan has made bold statements, thrown punches without giving a damn ayota about the feelings of Indians, just like Sehwag. You have been pretty reselient and concerned about the goal, just like Sachin’s primary concern is milestones: to somehow put Sachin at the top. Khansahab has been pretty flat and expressionless just like Ghambir: If Khansahab is to be believed, we, like poets, ought to see heaven in a grain of sand. I have pulled a Lara’s masterclass, the 501, and there is a natural symmetry here with the number in that I am a Mathematician

Khansahab,

That is circular reasoning. Of course India lost– as so happens in test matches– when only one contribution came as opposed to 2,3 or more. It is circular reasoning f you find the matches that India lost and then look at Tendulkar’s innings one by one, because had someone played along with him, then India wouldn’t have lost in the first place. That is besides the point, if you pick out matches that India has lost, you will find many 100s that Dravid has made, that Azharuddin has made, and so on. A similar question could be asked in their cases then. However, the right question is, where Dravid joined the party with Laxman, it could have been Tendulkar. When Laxman joined the party with Dravid, it could be Tendulkar (in difficult situations that is). However, he wasn’t able to do that. You can find many 100s that Dravid made, India lost the match without the bowlers contributing or Tendulkar performing. This is a self-fullfilling prophecy, you are finding something that is obvious in the first place, for the sake of self-fullfilment. The right question is, why didn’t Tendulkar join the party with someone (some match in which India went on to lose even though Dravid or Laxman or Azharuddin made a 100) like Dravid and Laxman did against great team in the unlikeliest of situations against a great bowler like Mcgrath.

Khansahab

I used Imran Khan as an indication, not as a comparison. I think you still can’t distinguish by what I mean about statistics and their limitations.

What I mean is, based on a difference of 5-6 runs in average, you can’t argue which player is better. But, at the same time, a player that averages around 50 is great regardless. I never said Tendulkar isn’t great, I put him at 4. In fact it is I who don’t understand your problem, why can’t you realize that I am putting him at 4, and based on his innings in test matches, that is a lot more generous than another person might be, looking at the calibre of the innings and the matches against tough oppositions/bowling opponents he has won.

I used Imran Khan’s statistics as an indication*

In other words, I didn’t compare him with other great all rounders. In fact I haven’t seen Imran Khan play. What I meant was, his greatness is indubtible.

Khansahab

When we are discussing great players, why do you keep bringing Ghambir up then?

I don’t know in what philosophical, metaphysical way you associated the meaning of great with Ghambir, but arguing about him is totally unnecessary. Your arguments get petty in this sense, because Ghambir has just played 25 matches and isn’t worth debating for.

Again you are bringing one year in which Tendulkar averaged in the 90s, wow that is a nice argument. Well, Mohd Yousof averaged 99, by that logic he is better, no? And Ponting averaged in the 70s, 80s, 90s three years on the trot, he is much better than any other player by that logic. In fact why don’t you come up with something more creative? And please don’t reply with a 1000-word essay on Ghambir, he is not worth debating for when he has only played 25 matches, only time will tell about his greatness.

“So you reward inconsistency and unpredictability because you say Lara and Sehwag are more attractive to watch than Tendulkar. I would rather watch Sehwag play than Tendulkar, but the question is not about who is better to watch. Afridi is the best batsman to watch when he is on song. But, that does not make him a good batsman. The question essentially is who is more skilled, complete, perfect. ”

Khansahab,

A concept is apparently impossible to explain to you. What I mean is, a person who is averaging around 50 is great regardless, he is consistent regardless, his stature in the hostory of the game is stamped regardless. But when comparing two players, you can’t say, oh he averaged 2 more he was better. Of course a player who averages 50+ and is unpredictable in the sense that you don’t know in what way he will demolish the opposition, you don’t know whether he will not just make a 100, but maybe a 400, you don’t know from what position he will win a test match…of course he makes for a better viewing and in that sense he is a better player. Kallis, for instance, is much more consistent then Tendulkar, Kallis averages 50+ and has never made a double hundred after making 10000 runs or so. Kallis is much more consistent, he reaches his average of 50, just because of the above fact, more often than Tendulkar. But is Tendulkar better than him? Of course, Tendulkar has more possibility than him in that sense, and is more unpredictable. But the comparison yeilds because bother are undoubtedly great players and have performed with a high average over a span of many years. Once this is the case, then why look at consistency?

I hope I have gotten what I mean about statistics and their limitations across to you. If you still keep on bringing the same ar

Kallis is more consistent, he reaches his average much more often as a proportion of the overall innings he has played* (just a correction in the last post).

But Tendulkar is a better player because he can pull better innings than Kallis.

Khansahab,

Let me try to clarify further, and then I’ll go sleep as I have to wake up 8 and go somewhere (its 5 already here!).

When I say unpredictable, I don’t mean it an Afridi sense. What I mean is that, in terms of possibility, you don’t know what dort of fantastic innings the batsman will pull…as if, if Sehwag were playing against the best bowler in the world today, that’d be a sight to see, because maybe Sehwag will just destroy his confidence completely, dominate him to utter submission on his part. That is a sight to behold.

Now as far as statistics are concerned– I use them as an indicator. Someone with an average of 20 isn’t obviously good and someone with an average of 50 obviously is a great player. However, my point is, in choosing the better player, it would be futile to choose based on a difference of 2-3 runs in average or a difference of 4-5 number of 100s. Once both player are great, that is unnecessary. In fact then you pick out the players innings’, the quality of his performances, the possibilities he had, the way he could dominate, how much he could score, in what sort of pressure he could play, and so on.

I hope I have made what I have been saying since time immemorial more tractable. If you still don’t see what I am saying, then just believe whatver you believe…

Khansahab

One last thing, I found something very funny in your comment, the baap ka baap thing. Again you are saying what xyz said…this is why I have compared you with Ghambir above if you haven’t noticed. Because you keep on saying that he says this and who says what… Proverbial comments like these have made Sachin and Inzamam better than they actually were. As everyone over goes like, he said this, he said that, who said what….and they all start believing the same thing.

In any case, just look at the question, what would Sehwag, or for that matter, anyone would have said? No, he should retire?! Wow, that is intelligent Khansahab, seriously

In any case I don’t even think he should retire. He is playing well. That doesn’t change the fact that he is not better than Sehwag, Lara, or Ponting though.

Omer,

I see no point in continuing this discussion as it is very clear you have your mind set on something that is immovable, and it is not based on facts alone as you claim, because I can show facts that prove my side, yet it will not budge you.

Like I have said a few times before, to me it does not matter whether Tendulkar is greater than Lara or not, they are both greats and if Lara is greater so be it, but I am only objecting because you and Javed Khan both are incorrect in many of your arguments, in fact Javed makes better points to which I agree like how Tendulkar gets stuck on 90s and so on, but you seem to be now comparing people like Laxman to Tendulkar. As for Ponting he is mentally strong, all Australians are, it is in their genes and their upbringing, sub-continental people are not mentally that tough. But as a player, he hasn’t succeeded in India in Test, and this is a flaw, he hasn’t played enough cricket in Pakistan and Sri Lanka to rate him there, so he is a limited player who hasn’t succeeded in a wide variety of conditions, hence he cannot be compared to these two greats.

Lastly, Ponting do care about records, he wants to win because he wants to be known as the best Australian captain, he is competing with Steve Waugh for a legacy, and it is a well known fact that Ponting wants to be the highest test run getter, he is hoping he can outlast Tendulkar since he is younger and go on to overtake him in runs and centuries. This is one motivation for him.

Arre bhaiya Omer,

I really admire the passion,enthusiasm and energy by which you are defending your points. But alas! It has been a futile exercise and I wish you all the best in convincing One Billion Indians and many others like khansahab about Sehwag being a better Test Batsmen than Tendulkar, amongst other wonderful observations.

The good thing about today’s match is its timing i.e., from my perspective. Because, it is a day match and Gauhati is in the east and the match will start early, probably 8:30 IST. So, it will start at 9:00 p.m. EST and that is fine because tomorrow is Sunday and there is no hurry.

A few of my friends have invited me tomorrow for a brunch party at a Pakistani restaurant. On Sundays they make nihari, so it will be nihari, naan, paratha, omelet, cholay and halva puri plus doodh patti chai.

Weather wise it is still OK here. The forecast for the next whole week is good i.e., through out plus, plus temperatures and no rain. Min 6C and Max. 15C so considering it is Nov. its great. But, this season we already had the first snow on October 22nd and minimum at night went as low as -7C.

Javed Khan,

That is how life ought to be. Over here, in NYC, everyone’s so tense that sometimes you start feeling tense wondering why aren’t you so tense. But we’ve got restaurants here at every corner of the street, and we can get parathas, doodh patti within minutes even at 3 am. Generally, the timing of the matches is very awkard, and most times when there are matches, I end up messing my schedule completely. But then, generally, I am also pulling all-nighters to study for exams, so it actually helps in terms of the habbit of keeping awake all night during exam periods. And, believe me, the exams are just crazy where I am studying now, this habbit helps me a lot.

Newguy,

I agree with you that Javed Khan makes very solid points. In fact if you notice, I have compared him with the way Sehwag plays, in that, every now and then he comes up with an innings that dominates the opposition, no matter who the opposition is…he throws punches left, right, and center to his opposition…haymakers rather than jabs that Khansahab and Ghambir are used to. So, what you are saying about Javed Khan’s strong arguments is very true.

Khansahab

Why would I twist and turn your words, it seems to me that most of the time you are yourself really confused about what you are trying to say or what you mean. You jump from Tendulkar to Ghambir, you post a couple of innings of someone, and then when your arguments don’t stand up to careful scrutiny, you end up posting someone like Peter Roebuck’s article or assuming that Mcgrath said a certain thing or generally digress to what someone else said. Anyway, you may compare me with whomever you like, I know where my masterclass stands in the anals of LS history, and I don’t need to pump myself up, or motivate myself, by belittling the oppostion, unlike Ghambir

Anyway, there is this subject, Principles of Mathematical Analysis, and it requires so much concentration that whenever I open the book, I end up on LS. I better get some work done. Besides, it is probably just about your bedtime, too.

Omer,

Using your parameter of batting greatness, almost all authorities on cricket acknowledges that Tendulakar is closest to batting perfection. Now, you and Javed says they are influenced by Indian money, I don’t think that’s a rational argument, some of them for sure suck up and you can make out who those are, but not everyone bows to BCCI and IPL money.

Authorities opinion does matter, especially those who have played test cricket, I don’t know about you, but I haven’t played anything beyond school cricket, so I surely rate the opinion of ex-batting greats over that of any media person or the hard core follower (such as you, me and Javed).

Even the late Don Bradman whom everyone considers as the best batsman ever said Tendulkar is the closest to him in batting, so that to me settles the issue. I know you would argue their opinion does not matter, but I have to tell you their opinion matters more than yours and Javed Khan.

Also Khansaheb posted something very important about Lara’s batting, I always thought he shuffled around a lot in the crease, and this is a technical flaw, he had to use his feet and get into position to play some of the strokes he played, but Tendulkar is perfect, he stands still until he is about to play the shot, and then his body and his hands, his head everything is in perfect position, this is why when he is batting commentators and ranting and raving, especially those who know something about these shots. Again, some of them like Gavaskar are not neutral, but almost everyone has the same opinion that they all cannot be paid by BCCI. That argument does not hold well.

So using your parameter Tendulkar is above Lara, and Lara himself said this, why would Lara say Tendulkar is better than him, he is not known to be an extremely modest person, and is not paid by IPL or BCCI, what was his motivation?

Khansahab

If I am not mistaken, and without any disrespect to Peter Roebuck, is he the same person who wrote a flattering article of the Indian team when they were visiting Australia (or he severely criticized Australia)?

If he is the same person, then, the sky sports team (or was it star sports?) made Roebuck their “own” after that article. In their view the media in Australia was very biased and here was person who was taking India’s side, and he was the one speaking the truth. After that, he was given the VIP treatment to write for cricinfo (I don’t think he wrote for cricinfo before that) and ever since, he keeps on saying what a population, and a market, of 1 billion would love to hear.

In any case, his opinion is not the final judgement on who is the greatest player, and though I have my utmost respect for such intellectuals, Roebuck is more of a poet than a cricket analyst.

Ultimately, he was wrong, Symonds had done the right thing by not walking. Does Tendulkar walk? (Tendulkar once made up his mind to walk to get the respect that Ghilcrist used to get, and he did walk in one innings, but when he found out in hindsight that he himself had got it wrong and he wasn’t out, he stopped walking after that match). In fact, apart from Ghilcrist, there is no-one else who has consistently walked when he gets out. It is the right thing to do, the onus of the decision is on the umpire. The problem wasn’t Symonds or Australia in that series, the problem was that there was no technology to correct the umpire’s obvious mistakes. However, after India lost to Sri Lanka because technology rectified incorrect decisions and those decisions went against them, the notion of using more technology has been dead and buried under. Basically, it was very hypocrictical on India’s part, the criticism of technology, after they lost to Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka. But right is might, and, eventually, India, in cricket, is might.

Result of today’s game between India and Australia is already clear with just 8 overs bowled, series is gone to Australia 4-2 with one more game to be played. I predicted after they won the first game that this series will go in their favor 4-3 or 5-2, so looks like it’s going to be 4 up anyway for Aussies. Like I said after Mohali ODI once you give Aussies a small crack they will rip it open and create huge opening. India had their chance in Mohali to go 3 up and shut them out, they lost it, and now Aussies are on top.

Shewag hit one six and then bowled, so much for his match winning abilities, 6 games and still waiting for his unpredictable match winning innings

Jhonson has demolished India. Aus has finally realized that the best bowler should be bowling upfront and attacking.

However, if I were to take a little risk for a lot of reward, I’d bet for India to win, even though the score is 39-5.

If Dhoni can take India to 200, then I guess it is anybody’s game. The pitch has turn and India can well make a game around 200.

The most dissapointing thing is that you can bet from all over the world, but from the Us, they don’t allow you.

Betting on India and getting it right is giving 6 for 1 dollar. It is pretty good, India has a much better chance than that.

The pitch is so difficult to bat on, that I think 170 will also be competitive. Dhoni, being a mentally tough player, can get them there.

Unbelievable decision– Dhoni was clearly not out. This is why the game needs technology, this might have spoiled what would otherwise have been a perfectly competitive game. The umpire shouldn’t be able to decide the outcome of the match, the players should be able to decide the outcome of the match. Tendulkar got a wrong one too in the second match and this is a constant problem, it keeps on happening again and again. Umpires might be totally neutral, but they make mistakes, and the technology can correct those mistakes.

Amazing performance by Parveen Kumar and Jadeja.

A lot will depend on Harbajhan today, and if he has to flight the ball for his life some day, then it has got to be today.

Is anyone else watching this match?

It is innings break at the moment and from the way the pitch behaved so far it seems there is no life in it. AND, I think Gavaskar mislead Dhoni with his pitch report. He said, team winning the toss must bat first as the wicket will crumble like an apple pie and batting second would be very difficult. Also, talked about the bad light in Gauhati and the D/L method could apply. Hence Dhoni immediately chose to bat after winning the toss. But, right from the first over (although Sehwag hit a six) Johnson took 2 wickets and both were classy. Sehwag couldn’t move, although he never moves his feet but the ball was so close to his body that he could do nothing and it went through. But, the one he took Gambhir’s wicket on the last ball of his first over was amazing, the ball pitched inside middle and off and then went past Gambhir’s bat and the off-stump went flying and cartwheeling.

Omer Admani

Dhoni was not out from the hawk-eye perspective but, that is not what the umpire sees. AND, Dhoni was out on a duck when he nicked it to the keeper, the nick was so faint that not only the umpire but, the bowler also couldn’t hear, the wicketkeeper joined the slips fielder later. The slip fielders were able to see it because they were in the right position. However, as a batsman you will always know when you nick it, even if it is the faintest of faint nick, you still know and Dhoni knew he nicked he, but he didn’t walk.

Whereas, Siva Rama Krishna said, “Dhoni would walk if he nicks.” The snico or snicker meter confirmed the faint nick. Therefore, it is immaterial to discuss whether the umpire was right or wrong when Dhoni was given out.

“In fact, apart from Ghilcrist, there is no-one else who has consistently walked when he gets out.”newguy

This is just a myth that Gilchrist used to walk. I remember in one of the matches against NZ he did not and the snicko meter confirmed the nick. So, no one is saint and secondly there is no need to walk because the umpire is there.

Gavaskar, when he made century in each innings against Pakistan in Karachi test was out in both innings and he did not walk, upon asking he said, “Why is the umpire there for? If he is not giving me out, why should I go?” So, I guess you need to respect the umpire’s decision, sometimes you get in your favour sometimes against you.

“Even the late Don Bradman whom everyone considers as the best batsman ever said Tendulkar is the closest to him in batting.” newguy

newguy

Don Bradman’s average is 99.94
Tendulkar’s average is 54.58

I guess Don Bradman failed in maths when he was in high school

Omer

I was watching the match at a friend’s place and after the innings break, I am back to my place and probably watch the Australian innings if it is interested and if it is one sided then I will hit the sack.

When Sehwag and Gambhir got out, almost everyone was saying that today Tendulkar will not score more than 10 and it happened – whatever the reason may be but, it was based on the fact that he had scored 175 in the previous match and a big innings was not expected from him. Secondly, when wickets start falling he goes into his shell and plays very slow. Thirdly, the wicket was not flat and it was favouring swing bowling so, based on all this, it was an educated guess that he will not score much.

Yuvraj was unlucky and Raina played that shot too early, you don’t flick in covers when you are new at the crease. Dhoni was lucky to survive there in a partnership of 48 and scored 24, he was out on a duck. So, there should be no regret that he was given out when the ball was going out. That’s hawk-eye and not umpire’s eye.

Apart from Jadeja who played a very gritty innings, Praveen Kumar did most of the damage to the Australians and woke up the sleeping crowd. When India were 24/5 there was pin drop silence in the stadium and people have long faces, some were hiding their face behind their hands.

I don’t think Harbhajan can do that much damage to the Australians, they have seen how the wicket is behaving and the target is not big, they don’t have to be aggressive, they need to score under 3.5 runs an over and that is very easy. BUT, cricket is a funny game you never know. It appeared that India will be out under 60 runs but they managed to score 170. So, lets see the rest of the game.

Khansahab,

Let me add more on Lara. You think he hasn’t made 100s and lost matches? Just look at these innings (innings against Australia, to lose matches– I have only picked out the ones in which mcgrath was playing). In all of them Mcgrath is playing (Tendulkar has 2 100s all in all (whether matchwinning or matchlosing with Mcgrath playing, with a highest score of 112):

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63909.html

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/226348.html

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63909.html

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63840.html

Just see the calibre of the innings’, in that he is playing a lone hand in many innings and no-one’s there to support him.

Here you can find more of his 100s in a matchlosing cause against australia (so that you can also see the ones in which Mcgrath wasn’t playing).
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52337.html?class=1;opposition=2;result=2;template=results;type=allround;view=innings

His average jumps from 40 to 68.27 in matches won.

Here are his matchwinning 100s against Aus (when Mcgrath was playing):

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63733.html

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63838.html (again just look at how fast the first 5 wickets have fallen when he joins the crease!)

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63839.html

Here is 100s against Australia when Mcgrath was playing in drawn matches:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63733.html

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63838.html (This match West Indies should have won at the back of his double hundred, unlucky not to have won it)

This one is a true matchsaving one, with the 9th wicket!:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63839.html

Here for his other big 100s against Australia when Mcgrath wasn’t playing:
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52337.html?class=1;opposition=2;result=1;result=4;template=results;type=allround;view=innings

Now I’d like to ask you, what is Tendulkar’s highest score against Australia when Mcgrath was playing?

This is why I have mentioned, there is no comparison between him and Tendulkar in test matches, and it is an exercise in futility.

Javed Khan,

It is my observation that the ball swings a lot more if its seam is not hurt. In other words, this was the value of a Sehwag’s quick 40, in the sense that it demolished the bowler’s confidence, it made the ball older, and thus it removed the possibility of a complete top order collapse. Jhonson got Sehwag out and there was no counter-attack, hence he kept on swinging the ball and, because of the pressure, the batsmen kept on folding. When India came to bowl, it is for this reason that Shane Watson has attacked a bit, to throw the bowlers off and make the ball older uickly, and the ball hasn’t swung at all.

The match is turning out to be very one-sided and part of the reason is India’s pace bowlers didn’t exert any pressure. However, this pitch is tailor-made for spinners, and one wicket can change things quickly. What India just probably needed was that the pace bowlers take a wicket or two, so that the batsmen go in a shell and spinners come and attack. However, as it is, it is turning out very smooth for Australia.

Javed Khan,

In Khansahab’s opinion Sehwag had only spoilt Jhonson’s statistic in that match. What else had he accomplished?

I think seeing the match today, it is quite clear what a dominating 40 can accomplish and what spoiling a bowler’s statistics and denting his confidence can accomplish.

Newguy,

God has provided human beings a brain and anyone can use it to think and reason. It is the quality of reasoning that counts, not who says what. If you look at Lara’s innings above, then I suppose you might realize that Tendulkar and Lara actually have no comparison in test cricket. One has fed off ordinary bowling, in particular Lee, and not won any matches, and the other has not just made 100s, but big 200s, not only to save matches against the best quality attacks, but also to win them, in very, very difficult situations. You have to really look at it from a perspective of test cricket, not one day cricket. Apart from that he has also made 300s, 400s, and the masterclass, 500. Here is a player who creates epics. It would be very unjustified to say Tendulkar is better than Lara in test matches and it is the original sin of cricket when committed. But, it is the case, because commentators are inclined to appease 1 billion people, knowing that every word the say will have a lot of meaning to those people, whereas, on the other hand, Lara doesn’t come from a richly populated country or that which constitutes a very big market for cricket, right?

After awhile it just becomes a tradition and everyone repeats it. Since you are so keen on what xyz said, then this is what Barry Richards, a great player in his own right, said:
”
Barry Richards:
“Lara is a better batsman than Sachin simply because he tends to score big whenever he plays against teams like Australia and South Africa and the stats actually support it. Lara has scored three 200’s against the Aussies 2 of which have come in Australia and apart from that he has a test record of 375 as well whereas Sachin has a couple of 200’s against New Zealand and Zimbabwe and that too in India.”

Harbajhan has opened opportunity for India. He has bowled really, really well today, and the best part is, he has flighted the ball today. Ponting and Watson both gone.

Just one correction in post 151.

The innings which I said, West Indies should have won on the back of Lara’s double century, West Indies actually won that match. For some reason, it appeared in Matches Drawn or at least I thought so.

Omer Admani

Yes, “I am agree” avec toi that in the earlier matches Sehwag’s 30 and 40 made the difference and the fall of Sehwag’s wicket on the third ball of the match gave Johnson the impetus to bowl well and he got Gambhir in the same over on the last ball, that actually put the Indians on the defensive.

When the main strike bowler get wickets and bowl well, the other bowler also bowls well in tandem with him and that is what we saw in Bollinger in this match. His earlier figures were fantastic where he bowled 6 overs 4 maidens 6 runs and 4 wickets. It was only later that Praveen Kumar and Jadeja spoiled his stats.

Australia did not field well in this match, they dropped 3 catches and missed a couple of run outs but, their fast bowlers bowled very well. All the wickets were shared between Johnson, Bollinger and Watson. Whereas, Indian fast bowlers couldn’t do much.

Among the spinners, Harbhajn and Jadeja bowled well, in fact Jadeja bowled better than Harbhajan and was unlucky not to get wickets. At one time Jadeja nailed Ponting and Shane Watson and it appeared that they both might get out on his bowling. But, Harbhajan got both of them.

Its a shame that India lost the series at home against such a weak Australian team. Ponting admitted that “at times he had problem in fielding XI players on the ground” (was referring to injuries and lack of players) and with such a team they won the series.

I wonder if anyone saw the second four that Ponting scored? The first ball he faced in the innings was from Munaf Patel and, he played straight for a 4. But, the second four was amazing, he simply opened the face of the bat and blocked the ball, did not even push it, but it was timed so well that it raced for a four between point and cover.

Omer,

I will say just one last thing on this Tendulkar vs. Lara discussion and then I’ll move on from this discussion for good.

Like I have said so many times before there is very little to chose between Tendulkar and Lara. They have different styles of batting, but in terms of achievements and batting greatness there is very little. I do not want to insult Lara by keep on harping about how much better Tendulkar is, to me Lara has done more than enough to not be insulted like that, same goes for Tendulkar, I do not want to insult him either. Ian Chappel wrote this about these two yesterday:

There will be nit-pickers who say, “There he goes again. Tendulkar succeeds but India fails to claim victory. That’s the difference between him and Lara.” The difference appears to be that Lara had a ruthless streak when it came to winning the match, while for Tendulkar one more risk is never too many.

That summarizes my thoughts on these two as well, there is always an element of risk in Tendulkar’s batting, a vulnerability that you could sense, that he could be out any time. In fact this element is there with all Indian batsmen, baring Gavaskar and Dravid. While for Lara he had a ruthless streak to him, when he is set and determined he will go on to meet his goal, whether it is breaking the world record, or winning a match.

This is the difference between the two, case in point, two matches, Tendulkar took the risky paddle shot with India needing only 19 runs off 18 balls in Hyderabad, he need to take that and instead play a less risky shot, singles and get closer, but chose to play a risky shot. Second instance, Chennai ‘99 against Pakistan, Tendulkar is playing so well and India need only 22 runs, but he chose a risky shot against Saqlain, he wanted to impose himself and finish the match in style, there was no need, he should have played percentage cricket and made sure match is won, but he took risk instead and India lost. So this is how he plays and that is why he could not achieve the impossible things that are well within his grasp.

If he had played percentage cricket, he would have won these matches, and the nit pickers would have to admit his greatness, but his game is different from Lara’s, we just have to accept as it is. I have been disappointed in the early years with Tendulkar for this, but I have now accepted his game, and I have moved on.

Javed,

Surely you and Omer are better than Bradman in maths, but he must be greater than you in cricket, that is why he is Bradman and you are who you are Of course you understood what I meant, in case you need explanation Bradman meant Tendulkar’s batting style reminds him of himself. If you do want to compare stats then of course Tendulkar’s are better than Lara’s, so he is not as great as Bradman but surely greater than Lara, right? Don’t need an answer for that

Result of yesterday’s game was clear within first 30 mins, I posted this in #142, even after they made 170 my opinion was not going to change, but I slept much before that and I knew the outcome. If they had my some mircle innings from Dhoni or Jadeja, impossible, but if they did get to 230 odd then may be there was a chance. But I have seen enough of India’s games to know what will happen even at this point. Like Javed Khan says there were too many BUTTS and very less if’s

Johnson is a swing bowler, and he needs help from conditions, yesterday first 30 mins were perfect for him, this is why he destroyed India’s top, and this is why Johnson was ICC player of year last year, when there is swing in the air he can be lethal, none of the other games had similar conditions and this is why Sehwag could go after Johnson, there was no way Sehwag was going to do that yesterday.

Indian players are notorious for falling like pins when there is something in the pitch for bowlers and they did that yesterday again, in fact Dhoni did a foolish thing to bat first, had they bowled Praveen and Nehra would have found swing and put Australia under pressure, they could have been looking at 200 odd to chase, but with Indian batting the way it is they still would have lost, one day they will threaten to chase 300 another day they will crumble. Either way they lose

So, this series puts in perspective this Indian teams true standing, they are no where near #1, they are possibly not even #2, may be 2.5

Omer,

I am going to break my decision not to reply anything on this Lara/Tendulkar topic just one last time because I just looked at the matches you linked.

On the innings that Lara played on winning causes against Australia, look who is bowling, a certain CEL Ambrose and CA Walsh, two of the very best fast bowlers of all time. In fact I consider Ambrose second best to Malcom Marshal as finest of all fast bowlers that I have ever seen in the last 25 years of my following cricket.

The matches that you say Lara won are as much won by Ambrose and Walsh, all of those matches one of them have a five for in either of the opposition innings.

India never had a bowler with half the capability of Ambrose or Walsh, in fact even Wasim and Waqar were not as lethal as these two, the W’s had reverse swing to their kit so they were close, but Ambrose could scare the best of them with his bounce, pace and accuracy, he could just run through the best batting line ups in an hour. So, Lara’s wins were backed up these bowlers.

Anyhow, this discussion is moot, Lara sure is great, he had a huge ego and he played big. Tendulkar looks more mortal in Test cricket by that standard.

So taking stock of India/Australia series we can see that why Australia won it, they performed as a team collectively and did not depend on one individual, they had some key performers in each game, but it was mostly more than one key performer instead of the one star performer. India, on the other hand, had one or two star performers in some of the games, and as a team no collective contribution, except the one game in Delhi that they won. Even in that game their top order batting wobbled. Australia was more consistent in batting without having super strong performances.

For instance, Watson, Ponting, and Hussey contributed consistently with the bat, it is interesting to note that Australia had only one century in the series, that of Marsh and that too not a big hundred, they have a series of 50s and 40s. White, Marsh, Voges all chipped in in key matches. India, on the other hand had one big performance from Dhoni and Tendulkar, couple of half centuries from Gambhir, one fifty from Youvraj, and a couple of 30s and 40s from Sehwag. Collectively the batting did not click.

In fact, what Dhoni is hiding is Youvraj’s failure in the middle order in all matches except one in Delhi where he and Dhoni won the match. Youvraj being Dhoni’s friend is getting a free pass in the team, he will perform in one game and get Dhoni’s praise then rest of the games he will go along for the ride. Bowling was ok in most matches except one were they gave away 350. Fielding of course was the greatest difference between the two teams.

Overall, India has too many free loaders and superstars who are not pushed for their place if they don’t perform consistently, where as Australia is a team where players are waiting outside looking for opportunity to perform, if one player does not perform consistently then he knows he is a goner in the next series. This is why players like Watson, Marsh, White, Hussey etc are constantly on their toes, same goes for bowlers too, even Mitchel Johnson and Brett Lee cannot be guaranteed of their places, they have to come in and perform well, if not they are gone.

This is why Australia is still #1 team to beat, and why teams like India will never get there. Once a player gets some stature he will not be fired unless he goes on a run of 3-4 series without runs. Even then he can play one game big in a series and retain his place. Imagine player like Hussey is Indian, he will never be threatened for his place, and all he needs is a big hundred every now and then.

Selection policy has to be that every player regardless of who they are will be out of next series if they do not perform consistently. Every player should be given a chance of only 3 matches to perform well, if he doesn’t then drop him and chose another player, if he doesn’t perform then drop him and chose another, this is what Australia does. The results are there to be seen.

But, Indians are happy with their heros personal records, soon Sri Lanka will be here and most likely our flat pitch heros will belt Sri Lankans out to Colombo for sixes. Sri Lankans not being as good as Australians in grabbing catches and throwing down stumps will let them escape with a few wins, enough to win the series. Everything will be forgotten. Then IPL will start next season and everyone will forget everything else.

Such is the fickle nature of Indian cricket. It’s pathetic that in a country where Cricket is the only professional sport that they are seriously in contention for something, they cannot still win anything major. Problem lies within themselves though, so long as public is happy with their heroes for their marginal performances and not demanding best in class, they will continue to be like this.

Same can be said of Pakistan cricket, but at least in Pakistan’s case, one can find so many other excuses like political instability at home, not having enough funds, not having any international cricket in the country, nor having played with major teams at home for long periods, and the usual regional politics in cricket administration and selection policy. India has none of the other things to complain about except regional politics.

NewGuy,

This three match policy will be a utter failure. Many players have dips and high in forms, such as, in any 3-4 matches they might not do anything, but then win 2 or 3 out of the next 3,4 matches. If you want 6 Ghambirs in the team, then that policy will be successful.

India didn’t play as a team, in fact Ghambir wasn’t good either thru the tournament. The reason being that, out of all, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Sehwag, and Tendulkar…Ghambir is the most defensive player and his role, many times, was to hold an end for some other player, but he didn’t. The problem is, too little thought has gone about how to go about it, all the batsmen start attacking when they feel like, and all start defending when they feel like….there are no general roles and a sort of systematic way to about bussiness as a team. This is why they played as individuals, there isn’t much systematic thought in that no player seems to know his role, they all attacked or defended when they felt like.

And this is where Aus play as a team. They fully realize there will be dips of players in forms (MIchael Hussey had an extended dip), but its the way that they collectively think is different. If Watson is set and he needs someone to support him, even if it is Ponting, he will be only supporting him. In South Asian countries, it becomes hard for individual egos to bear, to play a supporting role for a batsman and play for the team, they all want to be regarded heroes in their own right each and every match.

Newguy,

What you are saying is what Khansahab was saying, and it doesn’t make sense for a very simple reason…on a broken pitch in India, on the third, 4th, and 5th day ..against the Australian batting…Harbjhan and Kumble are better bowlers than Ambrose and Walsh…and India plays in India, not West Indies. Likewise, Kumble would take 5,6 wickets many times in matches. And, in matches that India has won, even in Australia, Kumble and Harbajhan have given fine performances. Perhaps the question you should be asking is, where was Tendulkar when the matches were won or not won and some bowler took 5,6 wickets?

Khansahab,

You have just countered yourself above, what you have been arguing for the past one week has been weakened from your own post. Indian bowlers have won many matches, Tendulkar hasn’t been unfortunate over a period of the last two decades, he just hasn’t performed against the best oppositions or under difficult circumstances or very good bowlers. But I guess, performing against NZ, Bangladesh, and Zimbabwe is your barometer, because the batsman is more consistent if he can perform against them (I realize you’d rather take a 150 against bangladesh along with a 110 against Aus without Mcgrath rather than just a 220 against Mcgrath and Australia). Every now and then, when you don’t have a response, you dissapear by saying, it is futile to debate with you….and then you research and come up with a totally new, random argument, often times contradicting your earlier one…by this sequence I can predict just about right what your next response would be: What some cricket commentator said.

I accept they are both great, I have been trying to explain this to you, that Tendulkar is a great player regardless. I mean how can I make it more clear to you?
You keep on saying, admit Tendulkar is great…when have I denied that? All I am saying is that he isn’t better than Sehwag, Ponting, or Lara.

newguy

If Tendulkar’s batting style is reminds Bradman of himself then Bradman’s average should have been 50% less of what he possess. Anyways, lets not bring Bradman in this discussion.

After India losing the series, it is Pakistan’s turn. The way they played the second ODI, I don’t see they will win the series especially if NZ wins the toss again they are going to dominate. Besides, this Pakistan team has not won any series so far in the past few years except for winning the T20 WC in England and that too mainly because of Afridi, otherwise Younus Khan is simply lucky to be the captain of that team. And, the team is very unlucky that he is still captain for the ODI as well as for the test matches.

He said, he will play even at the age of 60, right now he is 30 and he can’t play @ the age of 60 he would be in some mental asylum.

I am repeating what I wrote earlier:

“I wonder if anyone saw the second four that Ponting scored? The first ball he faced in the innings was from Munaf Patel and, he played straight for a 4. But, the second four was amazing, he simply opened the face of the bat and blocked the ball, did not even push it, but it was timed so well that it raced for a four between point and cover.”

Javed,

You said:
If Tendulkar’s batting style is reminds Bradman of himself then Bradman’s average should have been 50% less of what he possess. Anyways, lets not bring Bradman in this discussion.

Why? batting style is one thing but averages can be impacted by other factors. So Bradman felt Tendulkar’s style is like his own, but you think Bradman should not have felt like that, I am amused by that Anyhow, let’s leave this where it is.

I saw the shot played by Ponting, it was a good shot, good timing.

“batting style is one thing but averages can be impacted by other factors”

Newguy,

By saying this, you are also saying that Bradman’s batting style hadn’t much to do with his average. Regardless, it was a pleasure to watch Lara, not only because he has fought hard against the best, shown concentration, and determination…but also that Lara saw space and created space better than anyone else. His movement around the crease, along with his eye, allowed him to get in positions and create space that no other batsman as been able to do. For me, the thing that seperates Lara is also the fact that, when he set his mind to something, he could improve his game even further and further. When he went into his zone, and got set, not only would he dominate, but also keep on producing the big 200s, and 300s, and 400s.

Imagine if you are an Indian, and this great Australian team is visiting…or India is visiting them. The battle is between Mcgrath and Tendulkar, and each and everytime that Tendulkar fails, India actually fight or win because of Dravid and Laxman. Would it be fair, as many Indians say, that Tendulkar was th eonly player that carried the team, there was no-one else wit him?

Just look at India’s batting, whom did Lara have with him, West Indies for the major part of the last 6,7 years have spent their test ranking at number 7, 8.

Khansahab,

Firstly, this is just a debate and there is no point getting emotional on a debate. I don’t see why you are getting personal. When I compared you with Ghambir, it was just a joke, relax, I just meant to imply that the winners of the debate can be held analogous to the players, nothing personal. Anyway, if you did feel offended at any point, then my apologies. We are just debating, it is nothing personal.

I have posted Lara’s innings of great calibre above. If you can cite more evidence on Tendulkar being such a force in winning matches or creating epics, then go ahead and please post (a little help from cricinfo will go a long way).

You just keep on saying about Ambrose and Walsh. Their prime, more or less, coincided with Akram’s and Waqar’s (in the early to mid-90s). Besides that, it is just a fact that in India, spinners can be more useful on slower pitches. In fact in the subcontinent pace bowlers aren’t as effective as other places. Pakistan and India played a 5-match drawn test series in the late 1980s with bowlers like Imran Khan, Waqar Younis, and Wasim Akram in the same team. It shows two things: India’s batting was always good, and, however, good a pace bowler, pitches in the subcontinent can be a great obstacle for them.

India has traditionally made pitches which are very slow and conducive to spin bowling. That is why Steve Waugh called India the final frontier, because it is awfully hard to win from India in India. Why would that be the case, if India didn’t have great batsmen or very good bowlers on their pitches?

India had Dravid, Ganguly, Laxman, Tendulkar, Sehwag, Dhoni, and Azharuddin variously as their batsmen in the 90s and 2000s. I just don’t see it when you say Tendulkar was alone. In fact when Richie Richardson retired, Lara was probably the only great batsmen in the team. India has disparately had various other good batsman as well, and West Indies, for awhile had good batsmen like Hooper, but after that…its only Chenderpaul and Sarawan who were good and along with Lara in the team. In fact the rest aver very, very average players and the reason why West Indies has sunk in rankings. India wasn’t only blessed with a lot of good batsmen, but with great batsmen in Dravid, Ganguly, Laxman, Sehwag, and so on…I just don’t see it when you keep on saying Tendulkar was the only one.

I didn’t try to rubbish you, all I said was that, at one point you go like, there is no point debating further, 20 minutes later when you find some new information, you are back in the debate.

To be honest if you really want the points that you are making to carry a lot of weight, then you should start pointing the various innings of Tendulkar where he won matches or played epic innings, by citing cricinfo as a resource.

Khansahab,

Where you see so many contradictions, I see a consistency and a uniformity in my logic. I have said many times that averages are an indicator of a player’s greatness..but once greatness has been assumed, they can’t decide which player is better. For that you have to look at the innings, the quality of bowling, the conditions, matchwinning efforts, and so on. There has been nothing incosistent about this. All this in itself is contained within the “quality” of runs. But there has to be a cetain notion of statistics on which that quality is based.

Between Tendulkar’s 50 and Sehwag’s 40, Sehwag’s 40 was much, much better because it was an innings of higher quality. Yet between Sehwag’s 40 and Tendulkar’s 170-odd, Tendulkar’s 170-odd was much, much better, considering the pressure, the length of the innings, the pace with which he played, and the match situation. If you find anything inconsistent about this– whether where statistics can be useful and where quality can be useful– then I can’t help it. Eventually, like I said, just believe whatver you want to believe.

Omer,

Khansaheb replied to you on who Lara had for support as well as the issue of bowling quality in numerous posts, so I don’t think I need to post separately. I will just say one thing though, there is a huge difference between a fast bowler capable of running through a top order lineup and a first rate spinner capable of doing that, batsmen actually fear such fast bowlers, fear about bodily injury, no batsman however great is comfortable facing the great fast bowler, where as a spinner however great he is may make you look silly as you fumble around, but they won’t make you uncomfortable like the fast bowler. Also a fast bowler can run through a batting line up much faster than a spinner when he is on a rampage. Just watch Ambrose’s spell of 7/1 against Australia in Perth test. You know what I mean.

So in this regard, even though Lara did not have batting support, all he needed was put up a decent score on board, and the fast bowlers will defend anything. After Walsh and Ambrose retired this is different story, I don’t think Lara won many matches too after that, I may be wrong, if so I would like to see the stats.

You keep bringing up the 400 not out, it was made on a flat pitch and against a mediocre English attack. Lara was also a very selfish player, to boost his ego and his pursuit of world record he would put teams interest apart. Have you seen how he celebrates after reclaiming the world record and then on reaching 400, it’s all about him. The match ended up in a dull draw after that, so kept on batting until he reached 400 putting team interest aide. Also Lara was captain of WI and he did whatever pleased him, so if he wanted 400 he went on without declaring. There was at least one match where Tendulkar was denied a double hundred when Dravid who was captain declared the innings, I think he was on 195 or so, and Tendulkar could have made the 200 and still it would not have affected the match, imagine Lara is on 195 and someone else is captain what would have been the scene. So, there are obvious flaws with Lara, like you said he was single minded in pursuit of big innings and he wanted to win all by himself, for him team came second, you say these are good qualities, I would say these are flaws, that is where the difference in opinion is.

Omer,

I would prefer a score of 250 in test if I have two fast bowlers capable of running through opposition and getting them out cheaper than that, as opposed to a score of 400 with two spinners capable of doing same. The difference is with fast bowling if two of them get into a rhythm they can get opposition out in real quick time, watch what Ambrose and Walsh did to England in Barbados when all they needed to win in 4th innings was 150 odd, they were all out for 40 or 50 runs, Ambrose and Walsh just ripped them apart. There are several test matches likes this when Marshal, Ambrose, Walsh, would run through teams even with small scores to defend. Now, imagine defending a score of 150 in 4th innings with Kumble, and Harbhajan, even on a spin friendly pitch, it’s really not the same.

But, sure in 2000s Dravid, Laxman, Ganguly came to support Tendular in batting, but also Kumble, Harbhajan, and of late Zaheer Khan performed with the ball. If you look at some of the famous victories India had overseas like test win in South Africa, and West Indies, it was fast bowlers who did that, Sreesanth won test in SA with a 5 wicket haul, he ran through the SA batting line up in first innings. Same in WI too. Rahul Dravid was key performer with bat in some of those matches. So, yes, you cannot overlook the contribution of Dravid and Laxman. But you cannot also overlook the contribution of fast bowlers in some of those victories. Zaheer Khan won the test in England in 2007 with a 5 wicket haul.

Overall India became a good test team in 2000s while WI became a mediocre team, not because of batsmen, but because their long line of fast bowlers dried out after the retirement of Walsh and Ambrose. In batting Shivnaraine Chanderpaul has been excellent in the last few years of Lara’s career, so he had support, but his batting could not win many matches after the great fast bowlers retired.

So, in the end, Test matches are won by bowlers, batsmen merely set them up with a defendable score, for the great bowlers any score above 150 is defendable though.

WI became a mediocre team

Khansahab,

The debate never got personal from my side. You said yourself that there was no point debating with me as, in your view, I didn’t read your posts completely. And then you yourself entered the debate after 20, 30 minutes. Anyway, lets keep this aside, there is nothing personal in this, we have debated many times before…we have debated on whether Shoaib Malik should be in the team, whether Arafat should be in the team, and on and on, so this is just another debate. If I were to see from your perspective, then there is admissably a certain uniformity in the way you think as well. For you domestic performances mean a lot, for you consistency means a lot, for you being committed always means a lot. In that sense, I can understand why you’d think Tendulkar was a better player, consistent with that mind-set. You have, likewise, also argued that better coaches, more strength training with the coaches, and so on, can produce better bowlers. So, you have a certain mind-set, and from that perspective, I can understand why you see some players better than others.

However, in my view, players should be selected not because of what they have done in domestic cricket, but because of the potential and what they can do in international cricket. In my my view coacches can spoil bowlers (for me there is no greater example of this than England and their obsession with coaches). For me, the batsmen doesn’t have to be always commited, but he has to be commited when it counts, against the best. So, coming from this perspective, my view is consistent.

The difference between the lawyer and the cricketer is that you are selecting 11 cricketers from a nation whereas anyone who wants to be a lawyer, provided he puts in the effort, should be able to become a lawyer, as with a mathematician.
But in international cricket teams we are selecting 11 players and we have to see the upside potential of players and who can compete with other teams which are very professional in their approach. We have to, in other words, select players based on talent, because our domestic system isn’t as professional and strong, and as has been repeatedly seen, a player perfectly groomed in domestic cricket can utterly fail at international cricket, whereas picking players based on only talent from the streets and nets, such as Akram, have gone on to become great players. This is why I appreciate Imran Khan for this approach. Imran Khan didn’t hesitate to play players based on talent, and not only was he able to create a very good team, but also left behind a very good team. There would be many who say that he was ethnocentric, left out players on purpose, consistent domestic performers, and so on, but the way I see it, Imran Khan found many great players to play for Pakistan and I assume he saw the potential and the talent. Now what Younis Khan, on the other hand, has done is that….from what I can grasp from whats happening lately, that he has selected the whole domestic circuit for various intenrational teams, whether test, one day, or 20/20. I suppose in his view this is going to create competition for the spots in the team, all the domestic players will get a chance to play, and so on. In my view this is a very flawed approach, its going to breed insecurity among players, and undermine the very values of the team. Needless to say that rarely would the best 11 players be playing out in the middle (as with him leaving out Umar Akmal). Younis Khan is inspired by the Australian system, but what he fails to see is that, Australians create competition in the domestic circuit, not the international team. For a decade when they ruled world cricket, only their best 11 players were their most preferred team.

Again on Tendulkar, in your above post, you fail to mention his special innings so we can compare them with Lara. Like I said, consistent with my mind-set, it is that which holds the ultimate importance. But at the same time, I can understand the way you see thing, and in that case, just believe whatever you believe.

“Newguy

You know they say cricket is a batsman’s game, which is why batsman kind of steal the show when matches are won. Even though there is another saying that matches are won by bowlers. Look at how the feats of Kaneria, Shoaib Akhtar, Sami etc helped Inzamam when the latter was at his peak and they were also at THEIR peak. Yet, they got little credit compared to Inzamam.

Similarly, Lara has received undeniable assistance from Walsh and Ambrose, but you don’t tend to think of it that way. In fact, Dravid and Laxman have received a lot of assistance from Harbhajan and Kumble being at their peak.

1 man out of 11 can rarely ever win a match single handedly- only someone like Sehwag is capable of doing that, and that also once every 75 matches or something.
”

Khansahab,

This is circular reasoning. It could have been Tendulkar where it was Laxman. You are arguing the other way around. This is a flawed way of seeing things. Sorry, I appreciate your point of view when it is based on sound logic, as above, but this is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Folks

It is sad to see India lose the last all-so-important game. They just blew it away. I believe it isn’t easy being an Indian supporter, you never know when these fools will let you down and big time too.

Losing against a third-rate Australian team is such a shame for the millionaires. It was almost like a David vs. Goliath match. Anyways, good that the bets side won the series. India didn’t deserve to win. Period.

Omer,

You should look at this series between India and Australia to find answers to some of your questions. I don’t think you can find a more stronger Australian side than this, this is Steve Waugh’s all conquering Australians on a run of 16 test match wins. McGrath, Warne, Gillespie, Ponting, Langer, Waugh, Hayden, Gilchrist, the whole kitchen sink thrown in.

This is the famous Kolkata test that everyone known Laxman is famous for turning around. But to further the point that Khansaheb and I have been making about bowlers winning matches, let’s look at Australia second innings.

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63920.html

Australia is chasing 384 to win in 4th innings, Harbhajan took 6/73, and Tendulkar took 3/31 to win the test. Harbhajan took 7 wickets in first innings too, for a match haul of 13 wickets. But let’s come back to Tendulkar’s 3/31 in the second innings, he did not contribute with bat in this match, but look how he contributed to team cause with this 3 wickets, that too of Mathew Hayden, Adam Gilchrist, and Shane Warne. This aspect of Tendulkar as a cricketer is often overlooked, he finds a way to contribute to the team cause.

Coming back to Laxman, this test is considered his test, but it’s unfair to Harbhajan after taking 13 wickets in the match and leading team to win to call it Laxman’s match.

Now let’s look at the series decider, this match in Chennai:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63921.html

Once again Tendulkar did not contribute with bat very much, others did, but let’s look at Harbhajan, he had 15 wickets in this test, 7 in first innings and 8 in second. So it’s again Harbhajan winning the test.

This is what you need to look at in Lara’s innings, there is a bowler who deserves equal praise.

Let’s now look at first test that India lost:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63919.html

Who is the top scorer in both innings? Tendulkar, there is no one with another half century in either innings, Tendulkar top score in both innings by a wide margin. So, India lose this test, Tendulkar scored, others did not, and bowlers did not do enough. People find fault is on Tendulkar, is that his fault? He has done everything by being top scorer when everyone else failed, yet he gets the blame. This is totally unfair.

Omer,

Correction, in the series decider in Chennai on the 2001 test series against Australia, Tendulkar scored 126 in the first innings, so using the parameter you are using Tendulkar won this test, that too against McGrath and Warne, and the most toughest Australian team in this decade. But is it fair to Harbhajan, after taking 15 wickets, it was very much his match too.

So, the point is, using the match winning or losing criteria is the wrong criteria for batting greatness, you have to look at Khansahab’s criteria, of the quality of shots, technique, so on.

Khansahab and Newguy,

Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yI00NBhBRS4

In fact to really appreciate Lara and cricket, we should watch these innings in totality and all people, from all walks of life, can take inspiration from Lara’s many, many great innings.

newguy

If Tendulkar’s batting style was like Don Bradman’s then Tendulkar’s average would have and should have been 99.98 and more. That’s my only observation. Whatever the old man may have said, and when and why is best known to him but, his word cannot be taken for granted when there is such a disparity in the strike rate.

Newguy,

You are just showing that Indian bowlers have also contributed in matches. That has been my point all along. Harbajhan would have taken many wickets many times, so would have Kumble. Where Laxman contributed, why wasn’t it Tendulkar?

If Tendulkar’s batting style was like Don Bradman’s then Tendulkar’s average would have and should have been 99.98 and more. That’s my only observation….

Well, now the ol’ man is dead already so we cannot cross question him and verify that did he really believe that Tendulkar’s batting style is closest to him but still i do not see the connection between Strike Rate and Batting Style ?

Your argument sounds a bit amateurish when you forget to consider/bring in so many of the other factors when you want to compare Bradman with Tendulkar like the pitches, the amount of matches, the opposition for e.g. Bradman played most of his matches against England, and most importantly the kind of pressure someone like Tendulkar is when he’s out in the middle. It’s quite easy to type on the keyboard at home but neither you nor me can ever find out the kind of pressure Sachin is who has been playing since when he was 16 Years old.

I was reading an article and a student suggested that perhaps allowing unlimited overs in one day cricket for any bowler would be a good idea.

The more that I think of it, the more it makes sense. Batsmen can play throughout the innings, why can’t bowlers bowl as much as they want, like test cricket?

Not only would it allow for better bowling and contests between bowlers and batsmen, it would also leave a lot more for strategy in ODIs– how many batsmen/bowlers does a captain play, how many bowlers, how to use his bowlers, and so on. It would bring an element of uncertainty in the ODI game, which is badly needed. It would also allow fans to watch their favorite bowlers for longer periods. It would, ultimately, make for more attacking cricket.

Likewise, the other thing the ICC can do differently is that, rather than have three power plays of 5 overs, have five power plays of three overs (three such at the discretion of the batting side, two at the discretion of the bowling side). Right now, power plays follow a rythmic pattern because the bowling captain fears that if he takes the 5 over powerplay, it might completely tun the match against him. The batting team feels that there is only one 5 over powerplay for them to take, and the best time to take it is towards the end.

Newguy,

In this link,

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63919.html

you are showing a 70 and a 60! Yaar Lara hota toh we might have been seeing a 200 or a 300..

If you notice in the link, India has bowled australia out for only 300-odd in the first innings, which is a pretty good performance, again Harbajhan has bowled well. But if it were a 200 rather than a 70, India could have won!

And, if Laxman didn’t make the score in that match, and turned it around, then Harbajhan wouldn’t have the oppotunity to bowl! Bowlers can only win a match when the batsmen can set it up.

Newguy,

I believe this is the innings that you were talking about in Chennai:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63921.html

Harbajhan has taken 7 wickets in the first innings and 8 wickets in the second innings (15 for the match)! This is, incidentally, one of two hundreds that Tendulkar has made against Australia with Mcgrath playing.

But in this innings, Laxman has played the most major part in the second innings, India would have lost, not for his 66. Laxman was an amazing player.

You are right, Tendulkar has made 126, it is a very good innings, but Das has also made 86, Ramesh 66, Laxman 65, Dravid 81. It is a good innings, though, by Tendulkar, but it certainly pales in comparison with many of Lara’s better efforts. In this match, the real man of the match really is Harbajhan, but contrary to your belief, all the other great batsmen of the Indian team have taken part in it. In fact Tendulkar has made 126+17= 143 for the match, whereas Laxman himself has made 65+66= 131 for the match.

But again this shows two things: The quality of other great batsmen in the Indian team. And you don’t need an Ambrose against Australia to win on slow and broken Indian pitches, you need Harbajhan.

Khansahab,

If we take out Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, then Tendulkar’s averge is:

((159*54.58)- (9*76.5)-(5*139))/ ((159-14)= 50.3
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround

Similarly, Lara for West Indies averages:

(130*53.17)-(2*86.5)-(2*55.5)/ (126)= 52.603
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/52337.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround

In other words, if you exclude Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, then Tendulkar’s overall average dips from 54.58 to 50.3. If you exclude Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, Lara’s average dips from 53.17 to 52.603.

I don’t intend these averages to show who is a better player, but to show that a lot of weight of Tendulkar’s average comes against minnows. Certainly, the 2 runs of difference in average is nothing to dwell upon, it is only the niings that should matter, which brings us to the main point:

Tendulkar’s career 4 double centuries are reduced to 2 without Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

Lara has 7 double centuries in his career (without Bangladesh and Zimbabwe). Lara also has a 375. Lara also has a 400 not out.

To get those 2 double centuries, Tendulkar has played 130/159*100= 81.76 percent of the matches Tendulkar has played so far, about 4 matches for every 5 that Tendulkar has played.

Interestingly, Sehwag’s average jumps from 50 to 51 if you exclude the minnows.

Sehwag has scored 3 double centuries so far (without the minnows). Moreover, Sehwag also has scored 2 triple centuries.

Sehwag has played 69/130= 53 percent of the matches that Lara has played and 43 percent of the matches that the par dada has played.

Sehwag, if he carries on at this rate, might make 6,7 double centuries overall in his career plus maybe add 1 or 2 triple centuries or maybe even a 400. Sehwag should add a lot of matchwinnings to his tally (just the nature of his play). He has got 15 100s, so if he plays about as much as Lara, at this rate, he might end up with 29-30 100s.

The only reason I point to the numbers is, for those who think in numbers he is any lesser and way behind. That is not true.

So, when I say Sehwag is second to Lara, there is good reason for it. Because remember he does it by demolishing the opposing team, the haymakers. Any fighter, if he could hit as many haymakers as jabs, would choose haymakers. But the problem is that it takes only 2 haymakers for a person 2 get tired, but that is not Sehwag though! He keeps on churning those centuries and demolition jobs up again and again. Raw talent, a freak of nature!

Another 300 plus is expected from New Zealand
Another futile run chase is expected from Pakistan

For Pakistan, Bredon McCullum is unstoppable and, if Taylor stays till the 45th over he is definitely going to destroy the bowling attack. With openers like Salman Butt & Khalid Latif and one down Drama Khan, Pakistan is not likely to win this match and the series is lost for sure, unless miracle happens.

Omer,

It is very clear that we are talking past each other at this point, you have disregarded many of my comments, such as:

1. Lara made 400 not out on a flat pitch against a weak bowling attack
2. He was selfish about making these big scores
3. Being the captain he could do whatever he pleased without worrying about team interests
4. WI being a team not under the media radar like India is so Lara can do these things and not get criticized.
5. Lara hasn’t won many matches after Ambrose and Walsh retired.

But you haven’t responded to any of it, instead you are re-posting the Lara 400, I have see the highlights, like I said it was made on a flat pitch against a weak bowling attack and the match ended in a dull draw. Lara was captain and all he cared for is his individual record.

Anyhow, let’s just agree to disagree and move on.

NZ will not get to 300 today, McCullum gone and Ross Taylor is the only batsman left who can play an aggressive innings, it is unlikely that Taylor would make a huge score, he usually disappoints after promising a big score.

If they get around 250 then Pakistan surely has chance of chasing this down, there is nothing in the pitch for bowlers and if one or two batsmen apply themselves 270-280 is gettable.

Just as I finished typing, Taylor is out, just like I said he did not score big. NZ has a long tail, it is unlikely they will get anywhere near 270-280, if they manage to play the remaining 11 overs they may get to 250, even that is difficult, I predict a score of 230-240 at the most.

Hold on newguy

You are calling Lara a selfish player an authoritarian captain who could do anything to please himself without about the team interest?

At least Lara never bothered about his own game and took the mantle to lead his team, whereas Tendulkar couldn’t take the pressure of captaincy and declined it whenever it was offered and he did backseat mothering with Ganguly and Dravid and he does the same with Dhoni now i.e., because he is regarded so high, no one can say anything to him.

If the wicket was flat and the match was not likely to end with a result, what is wrong for Lara to go for his record? If Tendulkar had the same opportunity he would have done that even more, remember when Dravid declared in Multan, Tendulkar was very, very upset with that decision and we read so many stories about Sachin Bhai getting angry and did not talk to any player for 2 days and no one had the courage to go near him.

New Zealand is suddenly collapsing, we see a slide here 190/6. Still there is Vettori and Oram and ten more overs to go, anything can happen and a score under 250 can be chased successfully, unless Pakistan caves in.

Vettori gone, THREE lbw’s in a row? In each over there is an lbw, who is the umpire? There is one Pakistani and one Australian and one of them gave 2 lbws. Or, were they really out?

Very tight, accurate and economical bowling by Ajmal and Afridi. Ajmal got yet another lbw of Oram now, whats happening? Are they really playing cricket or soccer? How come 4 lbws in a row?

It seems like New Zealand are in a hurry to leave Abu Dhabi and go to Dubai for shopping and to relax on the beaches of Jumeirah where they will have a more at home sort of feeling……. bikinis.

Jacob Oram was such a good & aggressive sort of player who could destroy the opposition with his big hitting and good bowling, but something happened to him and he is no more the same person. He looks very subdued and demoralized and very mediocre. It this is his form, he needs rest. I reckon bowlers used to dread bowling at him when he used to smash every single ball out of the ground.

199 for 9 now in 44 overs, will they make 200? It is Ajmal’s last over and a chance to take his first 5 wickets haul in ODI.

Javed,

We are not comparing Tendulkar as a captain vs. Lara, let’s not go into it. I only brought Lara’s stature as captain to point out he could do things like that, especially the 400 not out where he went about that test for the record, he wanted to take the record back from Mathew Hayden who broke his previous record, so he set his mind and went about. It is you who bring up the playing to team argument against Tendulkar, how can you then say it is OK when Lara does it. Every time Tendulkar gets stuck on 90s you criticize him for playing for records, same way you should criticize Lara for playing for the record and not trying to win the test in this instance.

It is very strange to see Umar Gul’s ineffectiveness in the ODI format, he just gave away 9 runs bowling to the tail-enders i.e., the last pair of NZ batting line up Bond and Southee!

I don’t understand how a bowler like him who could prove to be so effective with his deadly yorkers in T20 format could be a mediocre bowler in a 50 over format?

Finally it is over NZ all out for 210 and Aamer took the final wicket.

It is innings break and I am going to take a break too.

LOL @ newguy

When you compare a player with someone don’t compare him in bits and bobs but, as a whole person, a complete player and that also includes captaincy. It was you who raised Lara’s captaincy as selfish and authoritarian hence, I reminded you that Tendulkar was offered captaincy umpteenth time and he, after experiencing that he is not a captain’s material decided not to take that job and preferred backseat mothering.

You say if Lara set his mind to achieve 400 he made it, so who stopped Sachin from setting his mind? Why did he not score a single 3 hundred? At least half a dozen or more players may have scored 300 plus in test cricket. It means Tendulkar cannot set his mind for achieving a big target in one game. That is because his each milestone i.e., 50, 100, 150 and 200 exhausts him and he could not go beyond that to make 300. So, who is mentally more strong?

take care

Javed,

Tendulkar was never captain material, his batting suffered, and team failed, you will not get a debate from me on this, we are not discussing a whole here, we are discussing who is the best batsman.

I still did not get an answer from you on why it is OK for Lara to play for records, as he did for his 400 while Tendulkar cannot, instead you go into Tendulkar’s lack of ability to do so.

Like I said to Omer we are simply talking past each other, we simply have to agree to disagree on this topic and move on.

Javed,

One more thing, if you want to compare them in whole, then Tendulkar has 44 Test wickets, and 154 ODI wickets, along with 17,000 ODI runs, and 87 international hundreds, while Lara has 53 international hundreds.

Besides, it is Omer and you who are taking bits and bogs by comparing who is a better Test player vs. who is a better ODI player. So if you compare them both as whole then Tendulkar clearly stads heads and shoulders above Lara.

newguy

first of all I never said that Lara played for a record, I only responded to your claim that Lara played on a flat wicket where the match was destined to be draw and he went for a record to make 400. I said, why does it bother you if Lara plays for a record? I may have said it in different words but, this is exactly want I want to say. Secondly, you were nailing Lara down for being the captain and using authority to do things at will. A captain has always more responsibility than others because he is the one who gets the flak and Tendulkar by any means was not interested in getting flak for not being a good leader, he knew that he can fire his guns from someone else’s shoulder and that suits him so he decided not to be a captain.

When India loses 5 out of 10 times or draw 4 out of 10 times it is the captain who gets the criticism because, Tendulkar as a batsman has done his job but, the captain (whoever he may be) did not use his resources well. You (newguy) just did that by saying the match in which Lara scored 400 was a dull boring draw. A draw is always dull and boring. Dig out the records and see how many times India has drawn test matches and how many times West Indies have drawn matches. Not, today’s West Indies, but The Mighty West Indies.

Salman Butt’s negativity is highly contagious, he is scoring at a strike rate of 52, whereas, Khalid Latif’s strike rate is 145 and now Butt is facing more and blocking the balls, not even taking singles to give Latif a chance to score fast, as Latif after a difficult chance let down by McCullum struck 3 consecutive fours and he faced only 11 balls whereas Butt has faced 25 balls. After Butt playing a maiden over Latif will be under pressure. Because, whenever there is a maiden over it is a moral victory for the bowler and the momentum is effected. If Butt cannot play fast, he should be kicked out of the team.

Javed

It looks like Butt is digging his heels and playing a test match or more correctly playing selfishly for himself. How difficult can it be to keep rotating the strike with ones and twos? If a couple of batsmen like him go into a shell then this modest target can also become difficult to achieve.

Latif is out now. Looks like it’s a day of LBW decisions.

On Tendulkar v. Lara debate it’s becoming a bit pointless now. They are both great players in their own right. At the end of it all it boils down to who is your favourite. We all have our favourites as mine all time favourite is Viv Richards. It would be pertinent to remind our Indian friends that Tendulkar is admired by many all over Pakistan including many in Pak team just as the likes of Akram and Imran are admired in India. So let’s leave it to that.

Javed,

“first of all I never said that Lara played for a record, I only responded to your claim that Lara played on a flat wicket where the match was destined to be draw and he went for a record to make 400. I said, why does it bother you if Lara plays for a record? I may have said it in different words but, this is exactly want I want to say.

You said math was destined for a draw, and what is wrong in going for the record. It is clear from this comment that you have not followed that match and the series. Here is the scorecard from that match:

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64080.html

How can you say the match is destined for a draw if you are batting first, as WI did in this test? No match is ever destined for a draw, unless you are talking day 5 and 4th innings is still not on, or whether is not permitting. It is all up to the teams to make it out into a winning position.

Here WI is batting first, and Lara in one down, is comes to bat in the 14th over of Day 1, ends the day on 86 not out, that is all he could manage. WI is 208/2 end of Day 1. On Day 2 WI is 595/5 and Lara is on 313 not out, he made 227 on Day 2, far better than his first day.

In this series WI is already lost, now it is up to them to make up for it and win at least one match. Most teams will look to declare at 595 on day 2, and push for a win. If you continue batting into 3rd day in a 1st innings then that is sure recipe for draw, but this is what Lara did, he saw he now has an opportunity to go for record, he also had an opportunity to go for a win and salvage some prestige for his team, but he does not, instead he went to get the record after lunch on 3rd day and then declare at 700 plus.

2 and half days gone, finishing 3 innings in remaining 2 and half days is nearly impossible, all because Lara batted slowly on Day 1, then he went for record on Day 3 instead of pushing for a win.

Engald out for 285 in first innnigs and follow on, so the argument WI had weak bowling is out of question, second innings England make 422 and manage draw, there is not enough time left, and WI gave up already knowing that.

Now, tell me, ask yourself honestly if Tendulkar did that will you not skewer him for that? I have been honest in all these discussions, I have admitted on things that I have agree with my full conscious. I am only asking you do the same.

Awas,

There is no ill feeling between any of us here, I am proud of the fact that we are able to have a civil discsussion for so long while vehementaly disagreeing with each other. The fact that we are Indians and Pakistanins makes it ever more impressive. For the record, I don’t think Javed or Omer are biased from being Pakistanis and I am trying to be neutral as well. I think Lara is a great player, but I don’t think he is the greatest, I don’t think Tendulkar is greatest either, but I feel overall as a batsman he edges out Lara, notwithstanding the highest individual score.

To me this discussion is best left with Javed, Omer on one side, and Kahsahab, Varun and myself on another side simply agreeing to disagree with each other respectfully.

But for some reason, I keep getting sucked into making just one more reply

Pardon my language, I have been typing too fast and made spelling/grammer mistake.

As I said above “If a couple of batsmen like him go into a shell then this modest target can also become difficult to achieve.” It seems to have happened.

Only Pakistan are capable of collapsing like that.

What a turnaround from Aamer and Ajmal, only to fall short in last over. Pakistan lost the match much before when they lost 3 or 4 quick wickets in the middle overs. When Afridi was out I stopped following, knowing the match would be over. Top and middle order did really bad, chasing a target they should have. Pakistan lost a series they should have won, especially in the conditions more suited for them.

Anyways, my prediction about Pakistan team losing the series came true, I knew it they will lose if they lose the toss and the way Brendon McCullum batted, it was all over till the 30th over i.e., when the score was 163 for 3 and then there was a slide and some hope. Still I was not convinced that Pakistan will make 210. When Butt was playing selfishly and not rotating the strike, I wrote that Khalid Latif will be under pressure and Butt kept him away from facing the bowlers for nearly 3-4 overs and Latif was out as expected.

Younus Khan Gadha did a good thing to get Butt run out but, himself got out the next ball, what an asshole of a captain he is. There was no need to select Salman Butt in the team why can’t he put his foot down and get someone else in his place? Why did Yousuf not play in this match? I am not sure if he is unfit or sick or was not considered because of poor form? Younus ka konsa form accha hai? It is time that Younus Khan is asked to quit from ODI and no one should talk about him coming out of his retirement from T20 till he is 60 years old.

If Aamer and Ajmal can put on a partnership of 103 runs also, Harbhajan and Praveen can put on a partnership of 80 runs whats wrong with these recognized batsmen? They are taking their selection for granted and play like novices. Not a single Pakistani batsmen played well except for these two and they are bowlers and, you don’t expect them to score more than 10 runs. One may call it an exciting finish but, it is good that Pakistan has lost because Younus Khan’s case will be much weaker and the selectors will have to think twice before playing Younus for another series ………. going to NZ and Australia. He should only captain the test side c’est ca.

Javed Khan,

I agree with you, Younis Khan is fast becoming ghada khan. His decision-making is utterly lacking in judgment. I don’t think Younis Khan welcomes criticism as much (like most of us!) but, to call a spade a spade, Younis Khan is showing consistent lack of tactical nous, as well as judgment.

If he is going to keep changing players match by match, he will only win matches when he is lucky. He will still win a few matches, but the team will never improve.

He has to identify his best 11-12 players and persist with them. If there are mediocre players like Butt, Rana, Malik, he should be ready to throw the axe and play players like Shehzaib Hassan and Fawad Alam. He also needs to think clearly about Gul. He has to ask the question, that Gul has been a part of the team for ages, but he is right now worse than where he started. He hasn’t shown the capacity to improve as was expected from him. Cricket, after all, is also a thinking man’s game. Gul can be a good support bowler in one days, but he isn’t good enough to lead the bowling attack. Gul shouldn’t be in the test team, because he can’t bowl balls that get batsmen out. He gets batsmen out when they have to hit and make quick runs, as in 20/20 or in the death overs in one day cricket (sometimes).

By playing players for one match and then dropping them, he is going to breed insecurity in the team, they will not feel comfortable, and play for themselves. This will undermine the values of the team. It is a team-game, not one-man game. It will also not allow players to identify and gel in their roles. It will not allow Younis Khan to build a team with systematic thought, in that, build a consistent strategy…as an example, 2-3 attacking players at the top, defense in the middle, attack down the order. How can he do it when he himself is constantly chopping the batting order, the players in the team, and on and on. He didn’t play Mohd Yousof today! As though it was Mohd Yousof’s fault that he sent him with 8-9 runs per over needed in the previous match. And 8-9 runs per over were needed because of his persistence to play Butt in the top rather than an attacking player. An haphazard approach will yeild inconsistent results and the team will play much below potential.

Not to belabor the Tendulkar/Lara discussion further, but just ran some numbers to see how much each have contributed to wins and losses, along with some of their peers. Here is the result:

First number is average followed by number of hundreds.

Wins for team:
—————
Tendulkar 65 16
Lara 61 8
Ponting 62 27
Inzamam 78 17
Dravid 66 10

Number of hundreds has to be looked at in the context of innings played, so Ponting has many more innings than others since Australia has many more wins, Lara has less since WI has less wins than both Australia and India, as a percentage though none of them are as good as Inzamam, both in run per innings and centuries in winning causes as a percentage.

Now, let’s see the numbers for losses:

Loss for team
————–
Tendulkar 36 9
Lara 42 14
Ponting 36 4
Inzamam 28 2
Dravid 26 1

In losses, Tendulkar and Dravid both has less runs per innings than Lara, meaning team suffered more when they did not perform, but Inzamam again is way ahead here.

Using this criteria Inzamam is best and Dravid is second best, in fact whenever Inzamam and Dravid made a hundred their team either won or drew the match, Dravid has only 1 hundred in losing cause, while Inzamam has 2, Lara has 14 hundreds by comparison in losing causes.

So if winning matches is the criteria then Inzamam is better than anyone else, baring Don Bradman and Gary Sobers.

Makes this whole discussion kind of moot, isn’t it?

Since I haven’t analyzed Ponting’s statistics, and I consider him the third best player I have seen, I should also add his to complete the top 4.

Ponting has an overall average of 55.88.

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/7133.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround

Without Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, that average is: ((136*55.88)-(4*65)-(3*96.66))/(136-7)= 54.6488.

I can’t see any particular weaknesses of Ponting’s here:
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/7133.html?class=1;template=results;type=allround
Against the best two pace bowling teams, apart from Australia, Pakistan and SA, he is averaging 91 and 56 respectively. Pace bowling hasn’t troubled Ponting much.

Even though Ponting averages 47 against India overall, his average in India decreases to 20.85. He has played 12 matches in India so it carries a decent amount of weight.

Ponting has hit three double centuries, 2 against India and one against Pakistan. Ponting also averages 50 against Sri Lanka. The fact that he averages well against Sri Lanka, as well as he has hit 2 double centuries in Australia against Indian spinners, shows that Ponting has no particular weakness against spin bowling.

However, the 4th, 5th day pitches of India, low and slow pitches, and Harbajhan in particular, have troubled him.

Ultimately, averages alone don’t decide which is the better player, but they act as indicators, to delve into something further, therefore I have posted them. Anyway, averages don’t tell how Ponting performed against various good bowling attacks with great bowlers….and who outstrips who on the basis of consistency, whether Kallis, Tendulkar, or Ponting is something I’ll analyse later…

My hunch is that Ponting and Kallis are the most consistent (minus against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh). If despite being more consistent than Tendulkar, he still has more double centuries than Tendulkar (minus Zimbabwe and Bangladesh)and more matchwinning innings than Tendulkar against great bowlers, then he should be considered a better batsman. Anyway, I’ll do this later…if he has been more consistent, but Tendulkar has played better innings, of greater quality, then Tendulkar should be considered better (considering that, minus Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, the difference of 4-5 runs between Ponting and Tendulkar isn’t that humongous).

But Lara, clearly, stands tall and above all, in terms of the quality of innings so far.

the difference of 4-5 runs in average between Ponting and Tendulkar isn’t that humongous).*

Khansahab,

Lets agree on one thing. Obviously, we can’t reconcile our perspectives, because our basis of judging players is totally different. So, rather than using 1,2, and 3 we can just use words which describe each best:

Tendulkar is the greatest technician of his time. He also is an example of longevity in sport, coming at a very young age in the team, and capturing the hearts of people around the world with that 50 he made against the likes of Waqar Younis and Wasim Akram (an innings usually cited when talking about his greatness). He has also consistently made 50s and 100s, and achieved many milestones in terms of the number of matches he has played and the runs he has scored. Unfortunately, after not being succesfful in his efforts to win any significant matches, Tendulkar stopped caring about winning matches and set about a personal journey to achieve the most amount of milestones in the world. This continued untill Dhoni and Sehwag came, and instilled self-belief in the team, which is when Tendulkar jumped on the bandwagon to join the party after a slumber of many years and participated vehemently in a few of India’s glorious wins. Apart from this, he is also credited, by some, to have created a shot, which no-one knows whether he himself can hit consistently or not, without the edge of the bat or not.

Lara was the best artist of his time. He created epics, never shied away from the best oppositions and against the best bowling attacks, and dominated bowlers at his fancy when he set his mind to the task.

Ponting is the most consistent player among these three, a complete player, a mentally tough player, a player who hates to lose, and someone has lost a lot less than most others.

Newguy,

Nice points

I say show the innings! Bring it on, from cricinfo…why hide behind the veil, why make passing remarks on matches rather than showing the whole picture? (as in the Chennai match case, where you just referred to the innings rather than show it).

Making a 100 and the team winning the match are two different things. You can make a 100 and yet it may not be a matchwinning innings. Consider three hypothetical teams who have won a match, and the score of there three greatest contributors is a sequence like:

100 200 180

50 150 300

20 30 225

That 225 is clearly a matchwinning innings (in fact it is an epic innings). For that 300, we will have to look at the match, but there is a good chance that it is a matchwinning innings (without even being matchwinning, it stands out anyway, it is a rarity). The 100 in the first match clearly is not a matchwinning innings.

So, enough of Tendulkar’s 100s and matches won against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh because of those 100s, if you want the points to hold water, show us the innings and against whom.

We already know that 10 of his 100s against Australia are reduced to two without Mcrath and include the ones against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, and we’ve already covered about half of his career more of 100s and milestones.

Lets see what the other half has to offer, though I understand that he hasn’t been a lot successful against Donald, Pollock, Wasim, or Waqar.

newguy

The debate on Lara’s 400 is pointless because, like Tendulkar’s 17000 runs, 45 centuries have gone into record books and records don’t always reveal the total picture until those who have seen the match and remember or recall the events and then analyze the records, then they are able to tell some truth.

In that match the intention of WI going for a draw was never there because it was the first innings. The way Gayle plays his innings is like Sehwag, Afridi, Gilchrist, McCullum etc., he never plays a slow innings. In that match too he scored a quick fire 89 @ a strike rate (86) it remains the highest and Lara’s strike rate at 69 is the second highest in that match. Scoring 400 runs at that strike rate is fine especially where the pitch was slow and playing in first innings to build a huge total is the priority of every team.

Therefore, to say it was Lara’s intention or authoritarian captaincy decision to continue to score 700 plus runs in first innings is not correct. There are so many teams who’ve scored that many runs in first innings, if I am not mistaken a few years ago Sri Lanka scored 750 odd runs against SA in their first innings when Sangakara and Jayawardene scored a record partnership and they won it because they were batting second.

To criticize Lara that he made 400 is nothing but defending the argument for Tendulkar’s sake and the poor fellow despite all these records could not make 300 runs in test cricket while in test cricket, so fa 22 triple centuries have been scored, Lara and Sehwag are among those who achieved it twice and Lara is the only one who scored a 400 not out.

Omer Admani

Drama Khan, Gadha Khan whatever one may call him, the first thing to do is to put a duct tape on his mouth because, he talks too much nonsense and he has no mind of his own. Although he boasted earlier that he doesn’t want to be a dummy captain but, time has proved that he is a dummy.

And, this policy of dropping players on one or two bad performances is a “purani reet aur rawayet” of Pakistan cricket selectors. There are a few chosen ones like Butt, Malik until recently Misbah their place is guaranteed and they never get dropped. And then there are others, where the axe is dangling over their head all the time and a pressure to perform or get out. And, you are right this way you may win one or two matches but you can never build a team because you keep shattering their confidence.

The selectors must rethink about their decision and drop Salman Butt from the Aus and NZ tour and also axe Younus Khan from captaining the ODI matches. Otherwise, they will lose the test series in NZ and the whole series in Australia and I can guarantee you it will happen. After that it will be like crying over the split milk. There will be no time to build a team for the 2011 WC.

Omer,

Regarding your #223, I am not hiding, but I simply don’t have enough time to go into each match detail.

But as I said in #219, if you are really going to use winning match as a criteria then you should not look beyond your own, Inzamam. Inzi has the best stats in match winning causes, baring Bradman and Gary Sobers, take a look.

I remember Javed Khan used to say this a lot about Inzi, but I never paid too much attention until I looked at the stats myself when comparing Lara and Tendulkar, rather accidentally, this is the issue, sometimes we have our biases so deep that we refuse to look at evidence even when it is starting in our face.

This is called cognitive dissonance, even when we are presented with evidence that proves our theories wrong we do not want to accept it.

So in fact Inzi is the best in match winning scenarios, followed by Dravid, further proof is that neither Pakistan nor India has lost a test match when these two have scored a hundred, except in 2 situations for Inzi and 1 for Dravid, and they both have similar percentage of hundreds as others in winning causes. So the quality of innings these two play are much better and more valuable to the team.

Coming to Ponting, how can you honestly rate him anywhere with Lara and Tendulkar, his average is 20 in India as you say, is this a sign of a great player, and look at the disparity of his stats home and away, this is huge, he is an excellent player of fast bowling as you would expect him to be, just like Ind/Pak/SL players are of spin bowling.

We rate South Asian players against fast bowling and quality of innings played away, but then we do not rate Australians against spin and innings played away, what kind of injustice is that.

As for Ponting in Pakistan, he has played only one series there, and the fast bowling attack is no where near the best Pakistan has had, these tests were played on flat pitches and Shoaib Akhtar is the only fast bowler, for Gods sake Aamer Sohail and Saleem Malik bowled 85 overs between them in Peshawar, and they bowled plenty in other tests, Ponting made some not outs to boost his average.

Please do not rate Ponting along with the greats, I have nothing against him, he is a great batsman against pace bowling, and he can cut and pull better than any player, but he is not a great all round batsman, he hasn’t mastered spin. Michal Clark and Mathew Hayden has done much better than Ponting in India, in spin friendly wickets, so until Ponting has achieved success in India at the test level he will always be held to a lesser standard.

Once again, I have no bias against Ponting, I am being really objective here, I only as you do the same.

The Indian batting side of today and in the recent past has been great on paper and yet they don’t win all the matches or the series home and abroad. They are just like the Pakistani side when there were players like:

Majid Khan
Sadiq Mohammad
Mushtaq Mohammad
Zaheer Abbass
Javed Miandad
Imran Khan
Sarfaraz Nawaz
Wasim Raja
Wasim Bari
Asif Iqbal
Intikhab Alam etc.

But, they never won any world cup or were able to win any series abroad. Whereas, Imran Khan’s team which had won the 1992 WC was weaker than the past teams because, Waqar Younus and Saeed Anwar were not in the team due to Injuries and, Inzamam made his debut and was not known.

In that team the most recognized and established players were Imran himself and Miandad. Wasim Akram stamped his authority in the final as one of the best fast bowlers of the world but, before that he was known as a good bowler. But, the team won the cup because of leadership and also because they peaked up at the right time and won the crucial matches.

Winning the 92 WC could be considered as a fluke because there was no consistency in the team.

Once again the team was great on papers when they played the ICC WC in SA in 2003 with players like:

* Saeed Anwar
* Taufeeq Umar
* Saleem Elahi
* Younis Khan
* Yousuf Youhana
* Inzamam-ul-Haq
* Shahid Afridi
* Abdur Razzaq
* Azhar Mahmood
* Wasim Akram
* Rashid Latif
* Waqar Younis
* Mohammad Sami
* Shoaib Akhtar
* Saqlain Mushtaq

What else do you want on paper? But, they lost badly.

So, the point made by khansahab earlier that having two Indian players like Sehwag and Gambhir in Pakistan team they could be number one in the ICC rankings has no meaning at all. Because, even with the best players it is not a guarantee to win, you can win one or two matches but, not a series or a tournament.

Newguy,

I agree with you, Dravid was a much better test player than Tendulkar. Even Laxman was probably even better if you don’t make longevity a necessity.

The reason why I didn’t put Dravid or Laxman in the top 10 list is that, had I put Tendulkar below 4 and Dravid in Tendulkar’s place, you guys wouldn’t have appreciated me.

If you ask me honestly what I feel, Dravid was a better payer than Tendulkar. I also think Laxman was a better player than Tendulkar when it comes to Test cricket. What Tendulkar has done is that, after Mcgrath’s retirement, feasted on the inexperienced Australian bowling attack.

There is a certain trend when it comes to Tendulkar’s batsmanship:
1) His average takes a bit dip without Bangladesh and Zimbabwe
2) His average takes a big dip with the inclusion off great bowlers in the team…Against Australia with Mcgrath, he averages 32-33 whereas against Australia overall he averages in the 50s. In other words, he would have averaged in the 60, 70s against the Australia without Mcgrath. In other wrods, there is a clear trend here, of decreasing bowling quality and Tendulkar’s number getting better
3) Against Pakistan, with Wasim and Waqar playing in the matches, his average dips to around 31– with an overall average against Pakistan around the 40-region. In other words, without Wasim and Waqar in the team, he must be averaging in the 50s against Pakistan. Again decrease the quality of bowling and his numbers improve.

4)He hasn’t done much against Donald and Pollock from what I gather. I think his average is again in the low-30s or even 20s when they were playing. It would be worth double-checking this though.

5)His double-centuries are reduced from 4 to 2 if you leave out the minnows– Zimbabwe and Bangladesh

6) Despite such longevity in his career, it is hard to pick innings against top quality bowling and say, here Tendulkar dominated and won the match.

This comparison only yeilds for test matches though. He was a different player in ODIs.

But the point, in a nutshell, if you carefully analyze Tendulkar’s career…it is obvious that there is a “trend” of decreasing opposition quality and increasing averages, that he tended to much more favor the weaker opposition and the weaker bowler.

Javed,

Agree that any team that looks good on paper is not necessarily a great team. Teams need to come together with a purpose and determination under strong leadership, then they can achieve anything. The current Australian victory is a good example of this.

‘92 WC victory of Pakistan was achieved with team work and great leadership, not only inspirational but Imran contributed with bat in the final while his bowling took a dip.

Similarly India’s WC victory in ‘83 is also the result of team work. Indian team of ‘83 WC did not look good on paper, most of the players were unknown, except Kapil Dev, still hey managed the impossible all because they played as a team and had great inspirational leadership.

That said, teams can look good on paper as well as on the field, so long as they play as team and leave individual ego aside, Australian teams that won 3 consecutive WCs are good example.

The ICC cheif also thinks along the lines of what I mentioned a few days ago:

He said,
“Lorgat was quick to pitch new ideas: “The middle overs in an ODI is an area where we could experiment with something like the Powerplay component. At the moment the fielding side takes it immediately after the ten-over mark; perhaps that could be changed. Also, the batting side should take the Powerplay before the 40-over mark because the last ten overs are always a dash for runs. Maybe we need to consider lifting the limitations on bowlers: should they be restricted to ten overs? Typically the bits-and-pieces bowlers come into play during the middle overs where nothing much is happening, but if there is a penetrative bowler things could be different.” ”

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci-icc/content/current/story/433913.html

And, here is the solution to the middle over play,

If powerplays are made of three overs, then the ICC could set the conditions such that:

In every 10 over period, a 3-over powerplay is mandatory.

In other words, from 10-20 overs, there ought to be one powerplay of 3 overs. If it is not taken in the first 7-overs, between 11 and 17, then by default 18-20 will be a power play. The sequence can repeat between 10 and 20 overs, 20 and 30 overs, and so on.

In any two of these 10-over priods, the choice could be left to the batting captain, and any two to the fielding captain.

This would bring a lot more meaning to the whole 50-0ver game, by spreading the powerplays over the course of the innings.

Khansahab

Not playing Umar Ukmal and Mohd Yousof doesn’t make sense. Not having Fawad Alam in the squad doesn’t make sense. Playing Butt or keeping him in the squad doesn’t make sense.

But to criticize because of not playing Malik is unfair. Malik shouldn’t be in the squad in the first place.

The reason why Younis Khan’s decision-making is faltering is that his own form has depreciated considerably. If Younis Khan can score some runs, then he can command more respect from the team, and then it will not come to this. But, you can see, he is leaving out players and players on a match by match basis to further his philosophy of creating competition between players in the team. For this reason, he has selected the whole of Pakistan in the test and one day squads. If Younis Khan exercises his authority in a mindful way, by picking his best 11 players, and persisting with them, then there will be no room for such criticism.

Omer,

I am not actually saying Dravid is better than Tendulkar, he is not in many respects, inspite of contributing to many wins, but I am simply saying there is flaw in the reasoning that looks for contributions in wins as a barometer of quality batting. So, what I am saying is that, if you are using that parameter then Inzamam has the best record among modern players, followed by Dravid. But you wouldn’t say Inzamam is better than Lara would you.

I will accept your quality of opposition as a criteria, but this will require a detailed analysis of match by match where we have to find all matches Tendulkar played with McGrath in team, Donald in team, Wasim and Waqar in team etc, then compare the same stats of Lara. I don’t have the time or tools for that, there is a guy on cricinfo who does that, but I cannot follow many things he says, so I don’t find much value.

Bottomline, Tendulkar has been vulnerable against great bowlers, in fact all great players were at some point or other, but what you should know is that Tendulkar eventually overcomes those and invariably ends up dominating the bowler, be it McGrath, Warne, or Donald. He works on his game, his weakness against a bowler, and comes up with a way to dominate that bowler. To say that he has feasted on weaker bowling attacks without presenting evidence will not give any credibility to your argument. If you think this is the case then you should present a comprehensive study with data to back it up. Otherwise it’s just opinion, yours vs. mine.

Khansahab,

Just to clarify, I didn’t mean your criticism in the last post, I meant Inzamam’s criticism of him.

In the current team, we agree on almost every thing: Fawad Alam should be playing, Umar Akmal should be playing, Malik and Butt shouldn’t be playing. I don’t know what your opinion is on Umar Gul though.

Younus Khan has been very stubborn in experimenting his rotation policy and in doing so he is not only damaging the team spirit but, also losing his respect from the juniors as well as seniors.

There was no sense in:

Playing Salman Butt
Dropping Shoaib Malik
Dropping Umar Akmal
Dropping Mohammad Yousuf

I think he also dropped Mohammad Aamir in one of the games, did he?

This is really very stupid of him, his own form is pathetic he is averaging 7 or 8 runs in this series.

The batting order needs to be reconsidered and must be stable rather than shuffling like cards.

All these things combined with his verbosity and stupidities leads to one thing and that is his own EXIT from the ODI’s.

He should stop playing this “AWAMI CARD” and national support and what not, this is all bullshit. He needs to swallow a bitter pill.

Under his leadership he lost both the series played in the UAE i.e., against Australia and NZ and also lost the series in Sri Lanka very badly.

The only feather in his cap is the T20 world cup which was single handedly won by Shahid Afridi, who won the last three matches for Pakistan and he should have been the player of the tournament.

newguy

Believe it or NOT ! when I wrote that previous comment, I was sure that you would be writing about India winning the WC under Kapil Dev in 1983. But I don’t agree with you that the Indian team of 83 did not look good on paper, they had some very good and well known players:

Gavaskar
Srikkanth
Amarnath
SM Patil
Yashpal Sharma
Kapil Dev
Roger Binny
Ravi Shastri
Madan Lal
Kirmani

Actually, it was Kapil Dev’s heroics in that match against Zimbabwe where he hammered 175* and, India were 17 for 5 and people were thinking that India will get all out under 42. Their lowest test score in the early seventies against England in England was 42. But, then Kapil Dev lead from the front and shattered the Zimbabwean dream and then by winning the Prudential cup India stunned the world.

It is very strange that in the same WC semifinals, when Pakistan scored something like 180 odd runs, WI managed to score it easily and won by 8 wickets. Whereas in the finals, India also scored similar number of runs as Pakistan did but, India managed to bowl out WI for 140 or something and WI lost by 43 runs. Those days the ODI’s were of 60 overs.

A team scoring 250 or so in 60 overs were like today’s 350 plus in 50 overs. The T20 has changed the batting style and also the flat pitches.

“Bottomline, Tendulkar has been vulnerable against great bowlers”, newguy

He is not vulnerable against great bowlers only, he is more vulnerable against a new bowler also and I can cite many examples.

Javed,

How could you possibly know what I was going to write, are you mind reading Anyhow, I wrote this because there are some parallels but not many, but the one word that prompted me though was “fluke”, in fact India’s ‘83 WC final victory can be called a fluke, more than Pakistan’s ‘92 final win. But it wouldn’t be fair to the group of people who pulled off that victory, they were simply good on that day and WI being as might as they were just could not handle pressure very well.

But in terms of quality of opposition, WI of 83 under Clive Lloyd was a super strong team, much more stronger than the great Australian team under Steve Waugh. But if you want to talk about the line up, then Gavaskar we all know what kind of ODI player he was, he scored 36 not batting for 60 overs, but Gavaskar did not play in final I believe and also he did not had any major contributions, Srikanth was a less known player back then, India did it with bits and pieces players like Amarnath, Binny, Madal Lal, Yashpal Sharma, etc, these guys could bat and bowl as well as field well by those days standards.

If you want to compare these guys to some of the good Indian teams on paper then the 1987 team and 1996 teams were better, yet they lost both semi-finals. That is what I meant. In terms of match up between Ind and WI back then they had no chance, the odds were very much against them as opposed to Pak vs Eng. WI came to India after that and crushed them in a home series. Marshal and Richards were particularly severe on Indian team.

Newguy,

I have done a detailed analysis of Tendulkar against Mcgrath. You should see it in the previous posts. He averages in the low-30s when Mcgrath was playing for Australia. His overall average against Australia is in the 50s, which means that when Mcgrath wasn’t playing, he averaged in the late 60s/early 70s against Australia, assuming he has played roughly the same number of matches against Australia with mcgrath and without Mcgrath. If he has played more matches against Australia with Mcgrath playing (more than 60 percent), then his average would jump even more against Australia without Mcgrath. I haave posted the links before and I believe, he has roudhly played the same amount of matches against Australia with Mcgrath and without Mcgrath. The fact that there is such a big dip in his average without Mcgraht (from about late 60s to early 30s) shows my point. This pattern can similarly be seen against Pakistan (I posted the links before). Against SA his average is in the 30s anyway, and I suspect it will dip in the 20s with Pollock and Donald both playing in the South African team. 5 runs of his career average (from about 50 to 55) are coming because of Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

If he had played outstanding innings when Mcgrath was playing, something like the double hundred of Lara, then the dip in his average could perhaps be ignored. But he hasn’t been quite the force against great bowling attacks.

He has played 14 out of 159 matches against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. That is about 8-9 percent of his career. His performances go significantly up against these teams, in a manner that his overall career average jumps by 5 from 50 to 55– a 10 percent increase. In other words, 8 percent of weight moves 92 percent of the weight by a whole 10 percent, such is the force with which he has performed against the minnows. Again he has relished against weaker oppositions.

Again, this would be fairly compensated if he had played innings like Lara has played against Superior oppositions. But, unfortunately, he hasn’t quite been quite the force. I’d honestly like to think he has done better than this, because by looking at him bat, just the feel that I get is that he is better than this. But, with evidence, it seems that Sachin has tended to fold against quality oppositions.

The way I hypothesize this is that, despite his perfect technique, great bowlers will bowl balls which get batsmen out regardless of how compact the technique. As such, his biggest strength, his technique hasn’t helped much against great bowling attacks, and his inability to perform under pressure has got the better of him. Besides this, Sachin is not the type of player who would make big 200s, 300s, 400s…that is, once he gets set, he is no Lara, who could dominate and play epics. So, the times that Lara has got set, he has got better of great bowlers and dominated them. Sachin’s compact technique, meanwhile, hasn’t been a deterrent for great bowlers, and Sachin’s inability to make big substantially big and matchwinning scores, mean that that his averages converge much lower…as he hasn’t been as consistent as against inferior bowling attacks, as good bowls would get him out anyway, and without that consistency, he has lacked the ability to make epics which can make his averages converge to a decent number. So, his consistency, naturally becomes his weakness against great bowling attacks, in that, where he would make 80, 90, or 100, he got a good bowl and got out much before…whereas where Lara initially got a good bowl he got out as well, but because of the brilliant innings he could play, many times and once set, he has also been able to get the better of the bowlers by making big 200s and playing match-defining knocks.

I don’t know what good is changing Younis Khan from captaincy is going to do at this point. A tour of New Zealand and Australia is about the toughest assignments that a sub-continental team can get, this is not the time to experiment.

khansahab

Pakistan lost the 2 matches with ALL OTHER PLAYERS in the team. My point is Malik is better than Butt, that’s it. Since he was in the squad he should have been in place of Butt. We are not talking of Fawad Alam because he was not in the ODI squad.

Khansahab,

I am in your agree on Malik. He doesn’t deserve to be in the team.

On Tendulkar, people have their opinion, which is fine. You can fill the whole LS blog with opinions, but that isn’t going to be convincing. For every opinion that says Sachin was the best, there is another opinion which says he wasn’t (Richie Benaud versus Mcgrath– I’d rather hold Mcgrath’s opinion, who has bowled at both, more valuable, but that is besides the point). Australians have a tendency to rate Tendulkar higher than many English, South Africans, or Pakistanis.

South Africa is also, incidentally, consistently the most ignored team in international cricket. Their players barely get mentioned. Where Greg Chappel would be mentioned, Barry Richards and Graham Pollock are conveniently ignored. Smith, Pollock, Kallis, and Donald are barely given as much respect as they deserve.

Anyway, the thing I am trying to get is that, Australians have a tendency to overate Warne (who was a great matchwinner btw) and, by doing that, and by seeing Tendulkar through that lens, they view Tendulkar as better than Sehwag, Ponting, or Lara. Bradman’s comments have also helped Tendulkar a lot. In any case, in my view, there was no greater matchwinner from Australia–as a bowler– then Mcgrath. Warne was a magician, but he wasn’t able to accomplish much against the team that plays spin best, and his record against players who play spin best, Lara, Tendulkar, Laxman, and so on, isn’t flattering either. There is also a distortion of fact here in that he revived the art of legspin bowling, unless Abdul Qadir was an offspinner. Warne reserved his best against England, which didn’t have the best batsmen of the world during his time (apart from one or two good ones). In any case, so in this sense, they have a tendency to exagerrate here, the real test of Tendulkar was never against Warne…it was always against Mcgrath.

So, Indians overate Warne in return, while Australians overate Tendulkar, and it becomes a sort of spiral. Anyway, Mcgrath was good against the best, in fact Mcgrath was a much better matchwinner, and he was much more feared than Warne when he would bowl against Pakistan (at least from our perspective).

Khansahab,

Yes, our point of view comes from totally different perspectives. That we can’t reconcile. Maybe a lot of people’s opinion differs because of this reason, but…Ponting is a more complete batsman than Tendulkar and so are Dravid and Kallis.

If consistency is the most major barometer, then Kallis and Ponting stand out.

Anyway, check this out:
http://www.claymath.org/millennium/

If a mathematician can solve this problem, in my view he is much better than an otherwise much more accomplished mathematician, maybe a PHD from MIT, who has consistently solved many problems of lesser difficulty. In your view, the latter would be better.

Einstein, being a high school or a college drop-out, is considered a genius because of one major discovery, theory of relativity. If you delve beneath, he discovered it based on one very simple observation that escapes most of us. There’d be many physicists who would have gone on to do tremendous research in physics, but Einstein, from our century, is considered a genius primarily because of this (although he has some other discoveries to his credit, too).

In the same vein, if there is a genius, it is Lara, and Tendulkar is a great technician. The 400 and the 375 alone just make him better for me, and then the 200s are just an icing on the cake.

Just see this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richie_Benaud’s_Greatest_XI

There isn’t one south african or sri lankan here. Of course, it is his opinion, but I am just saying, that no matter however unbiased a person, people have their natural inclination and vision through which they see things (which is where analysis above can be useful, which dissects the batsmen’s career as thoroughly as possible).

Murali is more consistent than Warne. Warne was a magician, but if Murali is much more consistent than Warne, shouldn’t Murali be the better bowler?
Murali has performed much better against India than Warne. But here is where personal biases come in…because, if consistency is the barometer, then Murali is better than Warne.

I have read many opinions of people, and most believe Malcom Marshall to be the greated bowler ever, and better than Dennis Lillee. Anyway, ultimately, it is Richie Benaud’s opinion and not to undermine him, but you can see how personal biases can play in judgments?

There are two Indians in the team and two West Indians, which is sort of unbelievable ( I am not saying it is wrong, he only knows the hows and whys), but West Indians have produced many, many great cricketers, especially fast bowlers, and not one bowler makes it to the top 11).

khansahab

There is no change in my psyche after Malik scored that century against India, not at all. He is still the same Meesna and a selfish mediocre player but, he is better than BUTT. I know he flatly refused to open the innings and probably that is the reason he was dropped and I have also mentioned earlier that this must be a deliberate ruse from Malik to refuse to open the innings so that Butt gets in, after all they are buddies.

When I back a player or insist on his inclusion it is based on his over all utility in the team and I don’t see him as “just an opener” or “just a middle order” player. Malik can open the innings but that is another matter he did not or he refused, but he is better than Butt in batting, bowling and fielding.

As regards Fawad Alam, I was not being sarcastic towards you and neither it was a taunt, I just mentioned that because that poor chap is not even in the squad, if he was in the ODI squad and if they had left him out, like they always did, I would have said, OK why not try Fawad Alam to open the innings?

I also agree with you that Farhat, Nazir and especially Taufeeq Omar is useless and so is Butt. Therefore, he should have been dropped why did they drop Malik in the first game? And, Malik got sympathy votes for that century against India and even though he failed in the next two ODI’s he escapes unnoticed because all the focus is on Younus Khan.

khansahab

The quotes and opinions of former players that you have mentioned are just their views like, yours, mine and Omer’s, just because they are former players their opinions suddenly doesn’t come from above the sky or from another world. I don’t know the academic background of these players you mentioned but, just for a second think if Inzamam, Wasim, Waqar and Zaheer Abbass express their opinions about players while commentating, does it make any difference in your thinking or my thinking or our views about x, y, z players? Because, we know the background of these players. We simply laugh and ridicule their comments.

If I am not an ex-cricketer of international repute that means I cannot comment on a certain player? Do I have to be an ex-great to comment?

If you see a table or a chair is crooked or, one leg is smaller than the other, do you have to be a carpenter to comment on it? Unless otherwise you are not a carpenter than you do not qualify to comment.

The critics of art are not great painters like, Vincent Vangoh, Michael Angelo, Leonardo Da Vinci they are not even artists and painters but they comment and their comments are valued by many. Each critics opinion is different from the other.

May be you are short of superlatives in describing Tendulkar’s qualities, that may reflect your inability and your inadequacy of vocabulary and language. So, if you are stuck there with your limited vocabulary that doesn’t mean Tendulkar is the best or the greatest of greats.

Whereas, “Lara on the other hand is like Dostoevsky, weaving together a story of beauty and force, using both sledgehammer and razor blade to equal effect. Dangerous yet compulsive, with a level of artistry that brings viewers to the verge of tears. Even his opponents say: I can’t watch, yet I MUST watch.” He has the poise, the grace, the elegance, the charm and charisma and his style is unmatchable.

Omer Admani

I agree with you that McGrath was more feared than Warne because the sub-continent players are more used to playing spin bowling. McGrath used to bowl good length rising balls which used to come to Tendulkar’s chest level and very close to the bat (without giving him “a” room …. ) and McGrath also discovered Sehwag’s weakness and tied him down. There was a time when Sehwag couldn’t play against the Australians. Tendulkar scored in Australia when McGrath was not in the team. Whereas Lara, he played a magnificent double hundred in Australia when McGrath and Warne both were in the Australian side.

As regards Murali, I don’t rate him as a bowler, he is a chucker ! Period.

Omer,

I cannot continue to respond to you because you keep having these biases and I am very much convinced your are not being objective here. When I say bias I don’t mean it based on nationalities, but your bias that you favor one player over another and that colors your view, and it prevents you from having objectivity. For instance, I pointed out correctly that Ponting does not have good record in India, you still rate him above Tendulkar, even though Ponting averages only 20 in India, but you use the low average Tendulkar has in South Africa against him, but Tendulkar averages 36 in SA while Lara averages in the 40s, and he has 3 hundreds there while Lara has only 2 hundreds. Ponting has no hundreds in India, yet you have this bias, so you are not being objective.

You said Tendulkar do not average as much as Lara against Australia when McGrath was playing, but again you have to look at the whole picture, Tendulkar averages in the 50s in Australia, where as Lara averages in the 40s, Lara’s average goes up based on his home record against them, which is in the 60s, and Tendulkar’s home record is in the 50s. Naturally more credit should be given to runs made away, especially in Australia. There is at least one hundred Tendulkar made against McGrath at the MCG where all of the other Indian batsmen failed.

But you have to look at these by leaving your biases aside, you are holding a position and trying to defend it, instead I ask you to look at it from a neutral position.

Anyhow, like I said, so long as you keep ignoring these facts, I am not going to be able to respond further.

Javed,

It is clear that you are also not looking at facts, take a look at this match to see whether Tendulkar scored against McGrath or not, look at the rest of the batting. This is made at the MCG where the ball rises to the chest typically

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63866.html

No bowler could ever call Sachin Tendulkar his bunny, but Glenn McGrath believes he might have come as close as possible. However, statistics suggest McGrath should be Australia’s best weapon against Tendulkar. It is true that Tendulkar has averaged 57 against Australia overall BUT, only 42 from the matches involving McGrath, having dismissed him early in three Test innings for a 10 and two ducks and that is some achievement.

And, among others who feared McGrath most is England’s Mike Atherton who was dismissed 19 times by McGrath.

newguy

Array yaar take a chill pill, by mentioning the chest level rising ball I did not mean to say that Tendulkar never scored against McGrath? Or, he never hit him for a four or a six? In Kenya during that ICC tournament he attacked McGrath from the outset and was fully pumped up hitting for a few fours and two straight sixes over McGrath’s head and according McGrath himself, he never saw Tendulkar that pumped up and even a little verbal with taunts to which McGrath did not reply because he was then on the receiving end.

Javed Khan

Are you sure it is 42 against matches involving Mcgrath?

My calculation was around 33-35. Maybe I missed some innings, but are you sure the average you have quoted is right?

Newguy,

Tendulkar’s average against Australia is inflated, because after Mcgrath retired, and Inida visited Australia, he was able to play good knocks.

I consider his average against Australia when Mcgrath was playing. Australia’s bowling attack after Mcgrath can’t really be compared with Donald, Pollock…Wasim, Waqar…and the like?

Lara has played those double hundreds against Australia when Mcgrath was playing.

What makes you feel I am biased?

Tendulkar’s weakness against quality bowling is something consistent throughout the world.

Ponting has no weakness against spin bowling, there is no consistent weakness against great bowlers or teams. Ponting has done well against Sri Lanka with Murali, Ponting has done well against Indian spinners in Australia. Hence, quality spin bowling isn’t Ponting weakness.

However, there is an aberration on slow and low pitches of India, much akin to Tendulkar’s weakness in SA. You can say that it is an aberration because it is associated more with the place rather than any great bowlers and on a particular type of pitch. However, there is no great bowler that has consistently bothered Ponting, or it is not as though, when great bowlers are playing, Ponting’s average dips dramatically.

There is a certain consistency in Tendulkar’s averaging receding dramatically as quality of the opposition bowling increases. This is what I mean.

That’s right, that is, I believe, Tendulkar’s second of 2 hunreds against Australia with Mcgrath playing.

Newguy,

You are right, that is a fantastic knock by Tendulkar, and it is right up there with a few of lara’s innings. But this is the only one that stands out, and being a smaller 100, it doesn’t carry as muc weight. I mean, if you notice the links i had posted of Lara, he has done it repeatedly.

Just think about it this way:

Barring, New Zealand and India, Lara has almost a perfect set of double centuries against the top teams.

He has got double centuries against Australia (3 against Australia), Sri Lanka ( 2 against Sri Lanka), Pakistan, South Africa, and England (375 and 400 not out against England).

His double century against SA is in SA and double century against Sri Lanka is both home and away each. Against SA, he also has a 196 and 176, he came pretty close twice to register another double century (at home).

Javed Khan,

Ye kab hua tha, Tendulkar ko gussa kab aaya tha?

What I feel is that, Australians can be a bit biased against Lara, because he wasn’t the one to sit back and take it, Lara made no secrets of the fact that he didn’t like to lose against Australia, and he was more in the face against Australia. By being that, he has also won many matches against Australia.

Tendulkar, on the other hand, has portrayed himself as quite distinct from the team’s cause in Australia, for the sake of getting praise from Australians. It is almost to the point of submitting before your highness, that here is the ultimate form of applause. In that, and Tendulkar not being able to win many matches against them, Australians are naturally more inclined to like him.

Just like the natural reaction of an average Pakistani would favor the player out of opposing teams who hasn’t performed much against Pakistan or won many matches against Pakistan, or been in the face of Pakistan team. However, some Australians are very sporting and would still rather appreciate a player who challenges them and is in their face. There is this distinctly sporting quality that you see in players like Jeff Thompson, Mcgrath, and the like.

Lara has made 2000 runs in 42 complete innings in tests where Mcgrath has played with an average of 47.16.

It is confirmed that Tendulkar averages 36.8 in matches that Mcgrath is played.

And, Tendulkar’s overall average against Australia is 56.08. Tendulkar has played 29 matches against Australia, out of which in 26 innings he did not bat. That leaves us with 32 innings. Out of these 32 innings, he has played 18 innings against Australia when Mcgrath was playing. That leaves us with 14 innings that he played against Australia without Mcgrath. In other words, he roughly averaged 80 against Australia when Mcgrath wasn’t playing.

IN OTHER WORDS, his average against Australia without Mcgrath jumps to around 80 from 36 with Mcgrath.

Lara, on the other hand, has a pretty decent average of 47.16 when Mcgrath was playing, and his overall average of 51 against Australia suggests that he hasn’t found the need to feed on lesser bowlers when Mcgrath was playing.

India’s hope to salvage some pride has drowned in a pool of water at the DY Patil stadium in Mumbai. I don’t think play will resume because of the cyclone and continuous rain. Dhoni must be cursing himself for losing the Guwahati match and the series, had it been 3-3 so far, then this series would have been a draw.

Omer Admani

I am not sure about that average of 42 because it is not from cricinfo but, I remember reading it on the Internet, which was written by some Indian sports journalist. As regards Tendulkar ko ghussa ana, that too was on the same page. I thought it was authentic but, cannot be verified.

PCB is a Bunch of Jokers !!

Here … it is one new joke after another.

Mohammad Yousuf appointed Pakistan captain…

http://www.cricinfo.com/pakistan/content/current/story/433991.html

Allah Hee Hafiz Cricket Ka…………

Younus lets everyone down again by taking a break from cricket after the recent series loss. There is more to it than meets the eye. It’s not just a break.

When every player starts getting a hump for not being selected in a match and not speaking to Younus then one can see why he made such a drastic decision.

This constant inconsistency, uncertainty and chopping and changing is simply detrimental to Pakistan cricket.

Omer,

As I said your reasoning does not make any sense regarding Pointing, this is why I said you have taken a position with a notion you had in your mind without seeking factual results, and now you are simply repeating the same thing.

Your argument is that Ponting played well against spinners in Australia so he cannot be bad, and you brush aide the inability to play on low, slow, crumbling wickets in India. Problem with these statements are very basic, first Australia is not a place where spinners get a lot of assistance, unless you are a Shane Warne you are not getting a lot of turn, and the pitches are not slow and low. Second, Murli has not been successful in Australia in general, period. Not just against Ponting but most Australians. So you cannot use that argument. Third, you ignore the fact Ponting hasn’t played Test cricket in Sri Lanka, one of the most difficult places to play Test cricket for touring teams.

A great player should have the ability to play and succeed on any pitch, period. Ponting hasn’t done that. But your elevation of him is purely based on the fact that you put more emphasis on playing fast bowlers, this is just the type of analysis made to make sub-continental players looks weak, not Tendulkar, he has not weakness against quality bowling unlike you say, it is proven, but sub-continental players in general. But then if you do not apply the opposite to Ponting then it makes your argument very weak. Other Australians, specifically Mathew Hayden, and Michal Clark has been successful in India and they played in the same period as Ponting. Therefore it is very evident he could not master the pitches in India and that is a strike against him. Finally, Ponting has never played Donald, Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose, or Walsh, he hasn’t played McGrath. The same bowlers you rate Tendulkar against. Tell me one great bowler, pace or spin, that Ponting dominated. He was made to look silly by Ishant Sharma on his first tour of Australia, and Ishant was just a rookie, grated he bowled well, but still he was no great, imagine how Ponting would have fared against those I mentioned.

This is why he will never be in the same league as Lara and Tendulkar. If you want to really show the person who feasted on weak bowling and made a lot of runs then it is Ponting.

Anyhow, a discussion on Ponting vs. Tendulkar or Lara is not something I will get into, it’s not worth it. I have said everything I needed to say on this topic in this post. If you want to have the last word on it, you can have it.

Omer,

On Lara’s success in Australia, I see only one double hundred he made against McGrath, and Tendulkar has one hundred. Lara’s other double was made in West Indies against McGrath, and he has another double in Australia but McGrath did not play. So, the difference in average against McGrath is because of the big hundreds that Lara makes, where as Tendulkar has more hundreds in Australia, six vs. four for Lara.

This is the major difference between these two, Lara makes big hundreds, while Tendulkar makes smaller hundreds, but more of them. In my opinion they wash each other out. Tendulkar also has hundreds against McDermott and Merv Hughes, these are not run of the mill bowlers, they were pretty quick too, and you somehow make Brett Lee a mediocre bowler, he bowl at around 150 kmph, while McGrath was never that quick. McGrath was very accurate and he had variations, he was intelligent as a bowler, so definitely he was the best that Australia produced with the exception of Dennis Lillie.

Your whole argument surrounds on McGrath, where as there were a number of quality bowlers that Tendulkar played in his career. This is why I said you already have a position and now you are looking at all kinds of reasons to back it up.

Finally, the reason why Australians like Sachin better is because he has performed well in Australia, simple as that. He has made more hundreds and he has more average than Lara in Australia. Lara may have played well against them in West Indies, but Australians obviously give more weight to an innings played there rather than at your home country. Besides Tendulkar has always been a gentleman, and your comment that he was trying to get good comments from them is out of place. It just makes your argument weaker. Let’s just stick to facts and things that we know, instead of inferring why people behave the way did. Lara went “maaki” and “behan ki” with McGrath and gang once or twice, now if you are justifying that by saying Lara spoke his mind, then Harbhajan should be your favorite.

Javed,

India salvaged their pride today when the rain washed out play

It’s always easier to say if rain did not come down we would have won and salvaged our pride, too bad rain came down. Dhoni will now say we were unlucky to have lost two close games, by 4 runs in Vadodara and 3 runs in Hyderabad, otherwise we would have won. But had they played today and they lost, there is always 50/50 chance of anytime you play, they would not have had any excuse.

This latest on captaincy from Younus is plain stupid, I don’t understand why this is being tolerated, he should not be allowed to make a mockery out of the captaincy like this. First he rejects it, then he accepts it, then he threatens to resign, then he takes back his resignation, then he quits.. If he is the type of person who cannot make up his mind then he should not be captain in the first place.

Making Mohd Yousuf captain does not make sense either, but I guess PCB do not have another choice. Perhaps they could have brought in Afridi into test team and make him captain, try something bold, anyhow it cannot be worse than this, either he will succeed or fall flat. But with Afridi you know he will not go down wondering what would have happened.

Omer,

Your arguments to support your position is getting not only weak but also ridiculous to a certain extent. i think newguy has very strongly given reasons to defend whatever you’ve said and it remains to be seen if you prove khansahab wrong by reading them properly and changing your attitude towards Tendulkar and Lara.

As they say in rustic hindi subah ka bhula hua sam ghar lout aye use bhula nahin kehte

Javed&Omer,

I don’t know how Lara playing Mcgrath better and making huge hundreds in boring draws makes him a better player than Tendulkar and also how Javed.A.Khan does not see Lara as a selfish player when he is always looking for some selfishness in Tendulkar!!

If you admire Dravid for gentlemanliness and softspokenness than the sme should apply to Tendulkar as rarely as anyone seen him losing his temper or express his dis-satisfaction when given a wrong decision something which has happened so many times in his career alongwith giving away his wicket to debutant bowlers the latest case being one Mckay.

Omer, Why are you only using Mcgrath as a criterion against Tendulkar what about the other great bowlers in their era? It would be great if you could do some more research and provide some numbers when the bowlers involved are Wasim, Waqar, Donald,Warne amongst others…

The current decision taken by Younus Khan shows that he has applied some lipstick on his forehead to make up his mind to say, he needs a “Niswar Break”.

He is such a fickle minded person that in a way it is good for the team that he stepped down from captaincy. It would have been better if he had said, I will play the test series but, I would like my senior Yousuf to lead the team and I will be his deputy.

Afridi made an irrational decision to exclude himself from test cricket otherwise he would have been the captain straightaway, since he is not available they are stuck and, cannot reappoint or reinstate Malik as captain of the team also, Misbah is not in any squad, hence they decided to pick up the senior most person to lead the team and a clown to be his deputy. To me, this will mark the end of Mohammad Yousuf’s career i.e., if he too fails in the batting department.

With this team, winning in NZ or Australia is an impossible task, the only way Yousuf can retain his position in the playing XI in the future is by scoring heavily, which is also not very likely because he is not in the best of his batting form. Therefore, like Munir says: Iss Team Ka Allah hee Hafiz hai.

Omer,

Let’s look at you argument in detail using McGrath as the criteria. I am ready to go into your turf and refute those with data. Since you refuse to provide a detailed analysis and only taking bits and pieces, I went ahead and found the data from Cricinfo (statsguru query).

See results:

Overall with McGrath
——————–
Lara 2041 Runs in 41 Innings with 46.38 average and 226 highest score
Tendulkar 662 Runs in 18 Innings with 36.77 average and 126 highest score

This figure is consistent with your argument, but with data the devil is always in the details, so let’s break this down further and see where those runs were made. One major criteria on the quality of runs made is by looking at whether it was made at home or away. More weight should be given to runs made away.

Let’s see how these two fared in Austalia with McGrath playing.

In Australia with McGrath
————————-
Lara 1003 Runs in 27 Innings at 37.14 average and 226 highest score
Tendulkar 278 Runs in 6 Innings at 46.33 average and 116 highest score

Looking at the above tells us different story. Tendular averaged 9 runs more than Lara with McGrath playing in Australia. Based on that alone Tendulkar is a better player of McGrath in McGrath’s own backyard. While Lara does not do well against McGrath when in McGrath’s own backyard.

To further this thesis, let’s see how these two fared against McGrath at home.

At Home with McGrath
———————
Lara 1038 Runs in 19 Innings at 61.05 average and 213 highest score
Tendulkar 384 Runs in 12 Innings at 32.00 average and 126 highest score

Here the picture becomes more clear. Lara scored heavily at home when McGrath was playing, while he was not very good against McGrath in Australia. Where as Tendulkar did not play well at home with McGrath, but he was good against him in Australia.

But, let’s see if this is because McGrath dismissed him cheaply always in India. I took at look at the matches. Tendulkar was dismissed 4 times by McGrath in those 12 innings. That’s just a normal probability given McGrath is a strike bowler he had to dismiss Tendulkar at least 1 out of 4 times he played. Tendulkar got out to Jason Gillespie as many times, and couple of times he lost his wicket to Mark Waugh and Hauritz, hardly threatening bowlers.

There is no weakness against McGrath.

But we are not done without inspecting your argument that Tendulkar feasted on weak Australian bowling (weak Australian bowling may be an oxymoron?), while Lara did not.

Let’s see how they did without McGrath.

Overall Without McGrath
———————–
Lara 815 Runs in 12 Innings at 67.91 average
Tendulkar 2086 Runs in 37 Innings at 67.29 average

Now, that’s interesting. Both Lara and Tendulkar did equally well without McGrath, in fact Lara did slightly better, or should I say he feasted more

Once again, we need to see how they did home & away without McGrath.

Without McGrath In Australia
—————————-
Lara 466 Runs in 8 Innings at 58.25 average
Tendulkar 1244 Runs in 24 Innings at 62.20 average

Without McGrath At Home
———————–
Lara 349 Runs in 4 Innings at 87.25 average
Tendulkar 842 Runs in 13 Innings at 76.54 average

Wow, this is really eye opening. Here again Lara averages more without McGrath.

In fact Tendulkar does well in Australia consistently with and without McGrath compared to Lara. He has went on to play after McGrath retired while Lara did not, that is a problem Lara has, not Tendulkar.

But there is no evidence whatsoever that Tendulkar did not play well against McGrath while Lara did.

Lara’s runs were made at home, he scored heavily at home with and without McGrath, while he did not do as well in Australia, with and without McGrath. Tendulkar did poorly at home with McGrath, but as I showed it was not McGrath who dismissed him. So this argument is now completely discredited.

This is the reason why Tendulkar is regarded as a better player by Australians, he has done consistently better in Australia with and without McGrath, Lara has also done well, but not as good as Tendulkar in Australia, with and without McGrath.

The only other argument that you looked like winning is that Lara has made double hundreds against Australia, that is true he has made one in Australia when McGrath was playing, but his average has not been helped even with that, he still lags Tendulkar in Australia against McGrath.

There you have it, I have refuted everything that you have said with evidence.

So what I have done with my previous post showing details on how Tendulkar and Lara performed against Australia with and without McGrath, both home and away, is that I took Omer’s argument and turned it on him. The details show that Lara was weak against McGrath, in fact both of them did not do so well with McGrath playing, but Lara more so. The opposite is also true, that without McGrath Lara does even better on an overall basis.

The only time Lara does better than Tendulkar with McGrath is at home, where as Tendulkar had a couple of poor series, but as I showed this had nothing to do with McGrath, he just had couple of poor seasons, end of story.

Going by Omer’s thesis, what I have found is Lara is a home pitch bully, while Tendulkar does better against the best opponents in the last two decades in their own backyard, both with and without McGrath compared to Lara.

Now, Omer may accuse Tendulkar of not being a home pitch bully against McGrath, to that I say Indians in general are very hospitable to visitors

Newguy,

Ponting’s average in Sri Lanka is 54.45. They have had the best spinners in the world in the past decade. It is for this reason, that I think that Ponting doesn’t have a weakness against spin, just that a particular bowler Harbajhan Singh, perhaps on a particular type of pitch, got the better of him. It is the same as Ishant Sharma getting under his skin in Australia. But this doesn’t mean that Ponting can’t play well against fast bowlers?

This is the reason why I said he hasn’t got weakness against spin bowling.

The difference between Lee and Mcgrath is that of a great bowler and an average good bowler. And great bowlers bowl balls that get batsmen out. Lee’s average, in test matches, shows that, despite the pace, he has underperformed. It is because Lee lacks that magic delivery that gets a batsman out regardless of who the batsman is. Lee doesn’t bowl balls like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h446pVsEr3M

And, as great batsmen can hit fours on good balls, great bowlers can bowl balls which get batsmen out. Lee doesn’t have that type of delivery (or at least he can’t bowl it fairly consistently).

In any case, with Tendulkar, I don’t say this because of a particular bowler or a pitch. I see it as a “trend” in that, as the quality of the bowling decreases, his average increases exponentially, and vice versa.

Lara has made 2 double centuries against Australia with Mcgraht home or away. Has Tendulkar come even fairly close to that (Lara has many centuries when Mcgrath was playing, overall he has got about 7,8– but two doubles…and you say that is it?..what do you think, Lara is a double-century printer like the federal reserve)?

Anyway, I am done with the debate, I have had my biggest nightmare today because of wasting time exponentially. And, when I start coming on LS and if there is a debate going, I can’t resist to give my input, especially when I strongly believe something (Lara was a much better player than Tendulkar)…and this habbit is going to cause me a disaster.

Anyway, Tendulkar is, without doubt, a great batsman, I just gave my view on who I think is better among his peers and why I think so.

To further prove that my hypothesis about Tendulkar being better than Lara against quality bowling, I went ahead and inspected the allegations Omer had about Tendulkar being weaker against other quality fast bowlers of his time, namely Allen Donald, Wasim Akram, and Waqar Younis. What do we find?

Against Donald
————–
Lara 681 Runs in 20 Innings at 34.05 Average and 83 highest score
Tendulkar 658 Runs in 20 Innings at 32.90 Average and 169 highest score

Without Donald
—————
Lara 1034 Runs in 15 Innings at 68.93 average and 202 highest score
Tendulkar 541 Runs in 16 Innings at 38.85 average and 155 highest score

Wow, Lara really feasted on SA bowling when Donald was not playing, and he averages higher at home. While Tendulkar made a quality 169 against Donald at his peak. Khansahab mentioned Donald himself writing about this in his biography.

How about Wasim and Waqar, Omer keeps bringing up that Tendulkar is weak against them. Let’s compare.

Against Wasim & Waqar
———————
Lara 394 runs in 13 innings at 30.30 average and 96 highest score
Tendulkar 395 runs in 12 innings at 32.91 average 136 highest score

Without Wasim & Waqar
———————-
Lara 779 runs in 9 innings at 86.55 average and 216 highest score
Tendulkar 662 runs in 15 innings at 50.92 average and 194 highest score

Once again, the numbers are startling, Lara feasted on Pakistani attack without Wasim & Waqar.

Lara has not scored a hundred against either Donald, or Wasim & Waqar.

Most of his double hundreds and triple hundred and four hundred came against relatively weaker bowling attacks. Lara has only one double hundred against McGrath in Australia and one in WI, he doe not even have a hundred against Wasim & Waqar and Allen Donald, three of the best fast bowlers of his time. While Tendulkar has scored hundreds against all of them. Now, this is not my criteria, but I am using Omer’s criteria. Personally I don’t consider, Shane Warne and Brett Lee as weak bowlers, but Omer does. We don’t even need to look who is better against Warne and Lee, we know the answer

So, in the end, I did not know this myself, I thought Tendulkar and Lara were a toss off, 50/50 if you will, but I thank Omer for making me do this. I have come away with a higher appreciation for Tendulkar’s mastery.

The only thing with which I’d conclude about Lara is an observation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yI00NBhBRS4

Forward to 37-40 seconds– and you will see Lara playing a shot. Notice the grin there. The grin before he even plays the shot. In fact the grin is there even before the ball appears in the video. The grin says it all– he knows where the ball is going, right about the moment it has been bowled the ball, he is in position already for the space that he has seen. Anyway, that grin says it all, he knows he is the best and he is in total command of the bowler’s being.

Omer,Javed,Khansahab,newguy,

I like the way this debate is ending. Poor Omer has finally run out of reasons to prove his point. I think newguy&khansahab has sorted this debate in a very fair and unbiased fashion something which i was incapable of and that’s why i chickened out earlier…Bravo newguy!

Newguy,

One last thing, look at Donald and Pollock both, not only Donald. It will give a better idea. When you take Wasim and Waqar both, take Donald and Pollock both. If you take either of Wasim or Wawar (which will include Waqar or Wasim or both), then, consistent with that, take either of Pollock or Donald.

Don’t try to twist and turn words

As I said before, in this news there is more to it than meets the eye. Osman Sammuidin’s article now says it all. Younus was right to quit if most players are not co-operating with him. I already said above before this article came out “that one can see why he made such a drastic decision”.

If some deliberately underperformed in the third ODI then they should be the ones kicked out with the main culprit Malik. The overhaul needs to start with changes in PCB’s command first as they are proving incompetent more so and are nurturing player-power and discord in the team. Intrigue and revolt like that is utterly disappointing for the fans and needs to stop.

One thing is for sure, captaincy job here is a hot-potato. Anyone, even Afridi, will have a difficult job. Inzamam should never be made a coach as he will end up with most power in his hands.

Omer,

I did not deliberately leave Pollock out, just that Donald was far superior as a fast bowler, but in case of Wasim & Waqar both were equally good in Test marches, if you’d like I’ll post those including Pollock. But I don’t think it’s going to make any difference.

The trend is clear, both Tendulkar and Lara averages less when the great bowlers are in the opposition and their average goes up without them, but Lara more so than Tendulkar. This is understandable of course, the great bowlers would not be great if they are not able to get the wickets of great batsmen.

The only exception is Lara’s home record when McGrath is playing vs. Tendulkar’s home record of the same, but as I said it was not McGrath who got him out on then.

I and not twisting anything here, I am completely open to accepting Lara as a greater batsman against quality bowling, but I don’t see it.

I do understand your point of view though, Lara is such a master batsman capable of making those shots and scoring those huge hundreds, how can he then be inferior? I guess this is where you are coming from and I respect that. But the truth is Tendulkar is a master class and he simply edges out Lara.

The only thing Lara has going for is his penchant for big scores, and Tendulkar misses out here, but imagine if Tendulkar had that too, then he would be God, and we don’t want that, do we?

Just for kicks I checked Shane Warne against these two batsmen.

Lara averages 54.02 while Tendulkar averages 60.45

In Australia against Warne Lara averages 47.39 while Tendulkar averages 56.12

At home against Warne Lara averages 67.90 while Tendulkar averages 63.33

So, again the trend is that Lara averages lower against the top spinner of his era, but at home his record is substantially better than in Australia. Lara averages 20 runs more at home against Warne, this is very similar to his trend against McGrath where he averages 24 runs more at home.

This is going to be my final post on this debate, I mean it this time. I have summarized everything I wanted to say in previous posts, and I have successfully refuted all arguments against Tendulkar, moreover I have proved those arguments are in fact affecting Lara more negatively.

In summary, the difference between these players is their home & away records, and how they have played the great bowlers of their time in those bowlers home turf.

Away record
————
Tendulkar 7165 runs at 54.28 average and 24 hundreds
Lara 5736 runs at 47.80 average and 17 hundreds

Home record
————–
Tendulkar 5608 runs at 54.98 average and 18 hundreds
Lara 6217 runs at 58.65 average and 17 hundreds

Just for fun, here is where Ricky Ponting stands.

Home 6276 runs at 60.93 average and 20 hundreds
Away 4727 runs at 49.23 average and 16 hundreds

I don’t even want to talk about Ricky! If there is ever a home pitch bully he is the one, no actually that is Mathew Hayden, Ricky is second to big Matty Hayden in that.

Look how Tendulkar is towering above Lara and Ponting in his away from home record. Unbelievable stats, while both Lara and Ponting has scored 11 runs more at home to boost their average. Look at the 24 hundreds Tendulkar has made away from home.

This is where Sachin Tendulkar stands heads & shoulders above all, and this is really the reason everyone is calling him the best modern batsman ever.

I don’t want to go on further and sound like another Sachin shill, I am not, but I came away with a better appreciation for him, and I will overlook his small shortcomings.

Awas

I agree with you that captaincy post is a very difficult job to manage, even Afridi would find himself in hot waters if he takes that job for test and ODI. T20 is a different ball game, he has performed well in both the T20 world cups and we all know how he played in both and won single handedly BUT, cricket is a team game and he cannot perform alone and win each time. Still, I believe that managing a T20 team will not be that difficult for him as opposed to the other two formats.

The future captaincy depends on how Mohammad Yousuf performs, as a captain he has no experience and neither is he aggressive. The only way he can command respect is by making big scores, which also is a very difficult scenario considering his form.

I do agree that there is a kinda revolt in the team and it has a regional bias which in any case not going to help the team. Pakistan ranks very low in ODI and test and its rankings will drop further when they lose against NZ and Aus in the next few weeks/ months.

Imran Khan went through an emergency surgery ‘nikass ka rassta band ho gaya thaa… ” his intestine was blocked. poor fellow. He is out of danger now and will remain in the ICU for a few more days.

I agree with Awas that Inzamam should NEVER be made a coach for Pakistan team because he will take all the powers and once again there will be a tableeghi culture in the team. Look at his 13 inch long beard now, he looks more like a Mullah than a coach.

Newyguy,

Pollock was a great bowler, you can see his statistics for yourself. He wasn’t an out-an-out pace bowler, but concentrated more on seam movement, but was Mcgrath-like accurate.

Lara’s scores against SA and Pollock:

11, 7, 4, 39, 51, 79, 4, 33, 68, 14, 47, 45, 12, 0, 83, 8, 19, 91, 81, 14, 202, 5, 72, 11, 115, 86, 34, 4=1239/28= 44.25

Tendulkar against SA and Pollock:

15, 4, 169, 9, 35, 9, 97, 8, 21, 20, 155, 15, 1, 22*, 3, 20, 32*, 44, 14, 63, 0, 64, 14= 790/21= 37.6

If we remove the two not-outs of Tendulkar, it is 34.34

In any case, Lara averages higher against South Africa when either one of Donald or Pollock were playing (refer to your stats for Donald).

Tendulkar made a century when Donald was playing, whereas Lara hadn’t. Tendulkar’s century was nevertheless in vain. Lara has made a double century when Pollock was playing. But Tendulkar averages lower and Tendulkar doesn’t have any 200s, again.
The bottomline is that Lara averages more while Tendulkar has made more centuries. Nothing concrete emerges from this. Against Mcgrath, not only had Lara hit many more 100s and double hundreds, but he also averaged much, much more.

Against Wasim and Waqar, similarly, both are averaging close to each other, whereas Tendulkar has 1 more hundred. I don’t think that shows anything substantial, unless it was a matchwinning 100. Tendulkar got to play more in the subcontinent than Lara, so using Lara’s at home logic against Mcgrath, isn’t this, consistent with that, not important? If you can remove a double hundred at home, surely you can remove a single 100 on the flat tracks of the subcontinent.

Lara has made a 400 against Flintoff playing for England. And, in test matches, where there is not many batsmen to support you in the team as Lara didn’t, making big scores is the most important thing. Remember that a 200 is twice more than a 100, it can also be written as 200=100+100=100(1+1)=100(2)= 2 * 100 or 2 individual 100s.
Lara scored a much higher percentage of runs for his team than Tendulkar. For Tendulkar to break Lara’s record of most runs in the “same number of matches as Lara” he would have had to bat with an average of about 65. Lara was a better team-player and Tendulkar’s not-outs show above (he has many more not-outs than Lara overall) that Tendulkar didn’t take the initiative towards the end of innings, much rather let the teammate get out rather than himself trying to hit and get out.

Thanks for pulling me into the debate back again.

The trend of Tendulkar is more visible from the fact that his average plummets by 5 just by removing Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. His double hundreds are reduced by two to 2. There is a general trend against decreasing average against great bowlers, at least Lara has a discontinuity against Mcgrath and hasn’t feasted on Bangladesh and Zimbabwe as much.

You are misquoting me, I didn’t say Warne wasn’t a good bowler, I said he is overated, considering that he wasn’t able to performa against the best players of spin bowling. He was a great bowler, a magician, but Mcgrath was a much bigger matchwinner and a bowler for all conditions and players.

Ultimately this fact stands out:
7 double hundreds for Lara, 1 375, and 1 400 not out

Tendulkar

2 double hundreds

If you take out Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Maybe Tendulkar would rather his grandchildren see him make a 300.

Khansahab,

It is a fact that Australians overate Tendulkar and Indians overate Warne.

And, all of the above, is, of course, my opinion. I find it redundant to keep repeating that it is my opinion.

Omer,

I cannot believe you still want to argue after all that I have posted above, the data is staring in your face. Now you want to compare against Pollock? what’s next, start looking at how much good Lara is against Henry Oolonga Pollock is not in the same league as McGrath, Donald, Wasim, and Waqar, his strike rate is 58 where as Donald’s strike rate is 47, when you have made the comparison with baap why compare with beta, Donald is Pollock’s baap.

Anyhow, your original argument was all about McGrath, but I cleary refuted it, showed that Lara was a home pitch bully against McGrath, while Tendulkar performed 9 runs better than Lara against McGrath in Australia.

Why are you even in this debate anymore?

Omer,

I really don’t want to say anything gratuitous here, but I have to restrain myself hard after reading your last post. You want to take out the not outs to bring Tendulkar’s average down .. LOL. Do you have anything to say about Lara scoring 11 runs more at home, for gods sake the guy averages under 50 abroad. As for your Bagladesh/Zimbabwe comment, sure great batsmen always tend to score more against minnows, they are just toying with the bowling, what else should they do? Lara is really unlucky here that he played fewer innings against them, still he made it good against them, if he got more opportunity he would have boosted his average, poor guy lost on that, especially if it was at home, that is where he is good at, in his backyard .. LOL.

Newguy,

Of course Tendulkar averages more abroad, just look at his numbers against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

How was Lara a home pitch bully against Mcgrath, he has made 2 200s against Mcgrath in Australia if I am not mistaken.

How can you say Pollock wasn’t in the same league, Pollock was maybe not as good as Mcgrath or Donald, but he was still a great bowler, right there at the top.

Besides that, we can also compare Lara and Tendulkar against Sri Lanka with Murali. Murali is also among the best bowlers of all time, so we shouldn’t leave that out.

Khansahab,

Emperical evidence?
Look at Warne’s average in India! Warne couldn’t dominate any player from India who plays spin well, he couldn’t do much against Lara, and even other great players like Sangkkara haven’t found him too difficult to handle.

The second emperical evidence is that he is credited to have revived the art of legspin bowling, which is again not true…a plain distortion of fact, do you need the emperical evidence for Abdul Qadir’s existence as well, or should we get his birth certificate to prove it?

So, in that sense, he is obviously overated, though exciting to watch, and a magical spinner, but…he is equivalent in fast bowling to Akram, so Akram should also be better than all the fast bowlers in the history of the game by that logic? And, Akram didn’t get dominated by the best batsmen of his time, nor did he have any particular weaknesses against any individual teams?
If we are just going by the magical balls he could bowl, then the queston remains…

Khansahab,

With Younis we got to see the likes of Butt. With Yousof, Misbah comes back in the team, Malik is secured of his place in the team under the umbrealla of Inzamam’s respect-the-senior-player policy which Yousof will naturally subscribe to. What is the difference?

Khansahab,

Right now Inzamam is the spiritual leader of the team or can Mohd Yousof show some teeth and make decisions for himself?

Pakistan have come a full circle now with the captaincy issue.

I would personally think Afridi would be the best choice now (in all forms of the game). Yousof is just damage control untill situation becomes clearer on Younis or he quits it altogether.

Omer,

I don’t want to say anything more and bring in more players like Pollock, Murli, etc etc, that is what averages are for, and they are clearly there to see who has upper hand.

I have refuted your arguments, and there is nothing more you or I can add. But just a few things:

You said:
Of course Tendulkar averages more abroad, just look at his numbers against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.

Why are you responding like this, this doesn’t suit you or me, I have been very fair and unbiased with you, but you make a cheap shot instead. Again, do you have anything to say about Lara’s average below 50 abroad?

Second quote:
How was Lara a home pitch bully against Mcgrath, he has made 2 200s against Mcgrath in Australia if I am not mistaken.

I showed you his average was 37 against McGrath in Australia, and his home average is 61, that is 24 runs disparity, if he is not a home pitch bully why can’t he average at least close to 50, like Tendulkar who average 46 against McGrath in Australia.

Third:
How can you say Pollock wasn’t in the same league, Pollock was maybe not as good as Mcgrath or Donald, but he was still a great bowler, right there at the top.

He is not, he was a good bowler in the absence of great bowlers, same way Brett Lee is. Let’s not even bother with this.

Khansahab,
http://www.cricinfo.com/pakistan/content/current/story/434064.html
This is what is written at cricinfo,

“But the way established batsmen were dismissed – in a rash of pull shots – on a placid pitch has led Younis to conclude that it was done to undermine him. ”

“Younis refused to go into further detail over which players had revolted but it is believed the group is led by Shoaib Malik and includes other seniors such as Shahid Afridi and Kamran Akmal. Sources close to Younis say that he was particularly disappointed in the manner in which some players were dismissed in the last ODI against New Zealand. ”

“The buzz in Pakistan suggests that former captain Inzamam-ul-Haq has also played a hand; in recent days, Inzamam has been publicly vocal about the need to dispose of Younis, openly pushing the candidacy of Shahid Afridi as ODI captain. According to some reports, Yousuf contacted Inzamam – the pair are very close – before accepting the job. Some are even touting Inzamam as the next coach for Pakistan.”

Maulvi Inzamam back. Pakistan going backwards.

I took a look at the figures to see how much truth is there in the allegation that Tendulkar’s average is boosted by innings against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and compared those to Lara’s.

Tendulkar has a combined 1474 runs in 20 innings at 92.12 against them.
Lara has a combined 395 runs in 6 innings at 65.83 against them.

Lara has played fewer innings, had he played more he also would have got more.

Anyhow taking away this from total for both and coming up with average against just the major nations here is what we get.

Tendulkar’s average goes down to 51.83
Lara’s average goes down to 52.53

So, yes, Lara is ahead by .50 difference. How great is that

But, there also no respite for Lara, because Tendulkar is not done yet, by the time he finishes up let’s see how these numbers look again. Since Tendulkar will play more Tests against leading nations going forward and less against minnows this number should become less of an influencing factor.

Tendulkar (away average excluding Bangladesh and Zimbabwe): (90*54.28)-(139*5)-(4*40)/(90-9)

(4888.5-695-160)/81= 49.79

Lara’s close to 48 away.

Not much of a difference.

Lara averages 86.3 against Sri Lanka and Murali.
Sri Lanka’s bowling attack, by no means, is less than any other team’s, especially on their home pitches where Murali is even better. Lara averages 100 in Sri Lanka.

Tendulkar averages

Tendulkar has played 19 innings Sri Lanka.

In matches that Murali has played, his scores read:

71, 142, 96, 6, 143, 139, 8, 23, 15, 22, 109, 16, 23, 19, 27, 12, 5, 31, 6, 14

Note that initially when Murali joined world cricket, he wasn’t as good a bowler as he later became when he peaked. In the above sequence, it is clear that Tendulkar favored the weaker bowling attack of Sri Lanka before. Anyway, his average is:

927/20= 46.35

The fascinating thing is that Tendulkar owned the young Murali but as time went by and Murali got better, Tendulkar’s scores plumetted.

So, basically, you have given punches by showing that Tendulkar averages less than Lara against Pollock or Donald, about equal to Lara against W&W, and much, much less than Lara against Mcgrath and Murali.

On top of this, the main point is:
1) Tendulkar has 2 double-centuries against teams minus Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.
2) Lara has 7 doubles, a tripple, and 4-hundred… against the number 1 and 2 teams in the last 15 years (Aus and SA). Lara’s 400 not out came against England and Flintoff was playing, who is a fairly decent bowler. Lara has got a double hundred against all the teams that could be considered the best bowling teams of the last decade or so: SA, Pakistan, Australia, and Sri Lanka.

Without the minnows, Tendulkar’s average drops from 55 to 50. Lara’s average remains at the trend, from close to 53 to 52.something.

There is no “trend” of Lara’s average decreasing exponentially against great bowlers. He retains his average against Mcgrath and Murali( it shoots up against Murali) whereas his average dips against W&W and Donald or Pollock. However, there is no substantial drop in his average after taking Bangladesh and Zimbabwe out from his averages. He averages 48 away from home without minnows.

With Tendulkar there is a trend of his average going from 55 to 50 against minnows. His average falls substantially against the respective teams, there is a general “trend” against All the great bowlers mentioned above. At times, his average falls more than half, at times much more, at times a bit less. He averages 49.8 away from home without the minnows. If he has got something to his credit, though, he has scored a century against Donald and WW in matchlosing causes.

Newguy,

Buddy that is 16 innings against Zimbabwe and Bangldesh (check again!)

So, when you subtract 16 from his overall innings rather than 20, the number of innings to devide the numerator with increases.

Hence, his average is lower than that with Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. The method I have done somwhere above is right, and he is averaging close to 49 without Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Count the innings here:
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;opposition=9;template=results;type=allround;view=innings

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/35320.html?class=1;opposition=25;template=results;type=allround;view=innings

Remember if you don’t count the not-outs, then you are failing to remove the whole “weight” of the effect of Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in his average.

Omer,

Not so fast. There is a trend in Lara’s average dropping while he plays away and it increases when he plays at home, so he certainly suffers while touring. Tendulkar do not have this problem, even after you take away the average against minnows it stays about the same.

Regarding the average dropping when taking away runs made against minnows, it is expected, great batsmen are expected to score more against them, Lara does too, but I showed that he hasn’t played as many innings to make this a substantial weight, only 6 innings vs. Tendulkar’s 20 innings, even then they are neck and neck in average, with Tendulkar ahead in away record.

About McGrath, I showed that Lara has a huge dip playing McGrath in Australia vs. home conditions.

Finally, we haven’t looked at how Tendulkar and Lara performed against premier bowlers from their teams, namely Kumble/Harbhajan v. Lara and Ambrose/Walsh vs. Tendulkar.

Let’s see how they perform:

Lara vs. Kumble/Harbhajan
1002 runs in 29 innings at 34.55 average and 120 highest score

Tendulkar vs. Ambrose/Walsh
691 runs in 12 innings at 62.81 average and 179 highest score

So, Lara may have outscored Tendulkar against Murali, but he performed poorly against Kumble and Harbhajan. While Tendulkar scores 62.81 against Ambrose and Walsh, two of the best fast bowlers of his time.

Tendulkar has now fared better than Lara against Donald, Wasim, and Waqar, and scores highly against Waslh and Ambrose, while Lara has done better against Murali, and Pollock, and he fares really bad against Kumble/Harbhajan. Tendulkar also did better against McGrath in Australia than Lara.

Anyone who looks at this will have no doubt who is best.

What else if left?

khansahab

“You refuted and said that the team is totally united…”

I understand what you are trying to say here but I wouldn’t put it quite like that. At that time you had mentioned “a source” (as there often is) but on the other hand often I would take what a source says with a pinch of salt as to air sensationalism is what they get paid for. I then say it may or may not be true what they say but lets also see the other side.

I generally give more emphasis on what comes out of the horse’s mouth itself as it’s only fair to air what they have to say for themselves. It won’t be difficult to recall that Younus and PCB at the time were saying there is no discord and the team is united. One cannot completely dismiss that totally especially as we all know Younus is a man of integrity. He then went on to say “the day I see disunity I will resign”. Isn’t that exactly what Younus has done? He may not have seen this happen before and now that he has he has done exactly what he said he would. Perhaps ours is a tussle between “opinion” and “fact” too

On your point of “Unfortunately it seems like a regionalism issue, yet again”. Well, that may be the case but I would sincerely hope not as not only I dislike it (like others here) but that is just one way of looking at it. Its looking more a case of ugly head of player power emerging again than anything else as such revolts have happened in the past too. There is no stopping Osman Sammiudin calling it “regionalism” if it really was as he has addressed everything else quite honestly he would have said so too. Besides, it appears they were all pushing for Afridi to take over. If it was purely a regional issue they wouldn’t be pushing for Afridi. Yousaf is just a stop gap case.

By the way, forget how Kamran Akmal performed in the past and for that matter anyone else. If he ever becomes (and it’s a very big if) the best keeper and the best batsman then why not captain too? Its only fair to have the best.

Omer,

I did calculate the way averages are normally reported for players, i.e., not including not outs, so you reduce 4 not outs from the 27 not outs he had and you reduce 16 innings from total innings, and you don’t include the runs. This is consistent with average reported on Cricinfo. But even if we go by your route it doesn’t change anything.

“Note that initially when Murali joined world cricket, he wasn’t as good a bowler as he later became when he peaked.”

By peaking, you mean when he started chucking Initially he didn’t know how to throw the ball like a javelin later he learned that trick. Just joking of course, but there is some truth in it somewhere.

I am really getting exhausted, but since I had a holiday today I managed to post all this. I won’t be able to follow up much tomorrow.

To summarize what we find is that Tendulkar and Lara are better against the great bowlers of their time in this order.

Lara
—-
1. Murali
2. Pollock
3. McGrath (at home)

Tendulkar
———
1. Donald
2. Wasim
3. Waqar
4. Ambrose
5. Walsh
6. Warne
7. McGrath (Australia)

It’s crystal clear, Tendulkar has performed against who’s who among the bowlers of his time. While Lara has done better only against Murali and Pollock (who’s not in the league as the other fast bowlers).

Who is not yet tired of this yet?

lol@ newguy & Omer

Himmet hey tum logo kee yaar, shabaash hay!! scroll ker ker kay meri ungliyaa toot gai lakin tum logo kee himmet nahi tooti ……..Lage raho munna bhai!

Last night when it was on the news that Younus Khan has asked for a break and Yousuf was appointed as the captain, the question came to our mind who will replace Younus in test matches? One of my friends said, Misbah. I said, I don’t think so because he is not in the squad and how come they suddenly include him in the squad? He said, if you wanna bet, I am ready and mark my words Misbah will be taken in the squad and he will play in test matches in place of Younus Khan.

Now, khansahab has confirmed that Misbah is being considered to replace Younus Khan. How farcical and how predictable these people are and how biased and how selfish and mean these people are!

Newguy,

Home and away, again the same 4-5 runs of difference of average, doesn’t mean much. Lara obviously couldn’t play against Ambrose/Walsh so we can’t say, but Tendulkar hasn’t played a lot against Ambrose against his peak, it is too small a sample….like I have shown against Murali, his averages and numbers recede dramatically as soon as Murali gets better after the first initial few years.

So, basically, what we have seen so far is that Tendulkar averages less than Lara against Donald and averages less than Lara against Pollock. Tendulkar averages much less than Lara against Mcgrath. Tendulkar averages about equal to Lara (a little bit here or there) against WW. Tendulkar averages much less than Lara against Murali (perhaps a whole 30-40 points), and Tendulkar averages 5-10 runs more than Lara against Warne (where both average above 50).

We can’t compare against Harbajhan/Kumble Ambrose/Walsh because one has not played against the other. We simply don’t know what might have happened.

There is a difference of 1-2 runs in average, apparently, if you exclude Bangladesh and Zimbabwe between both’s home and away– a 2-3 run difference perhaps.

Lara has 7 double centuries– such that they span 4 countries which have had the best bowling in the last decade or more. Lara has a 375 and a 400* against England in England.

Tendulkar has 2 double centuries against non-minnows and is regularly cited as being “unlucky” not to have played many special knocks. Lara has not only played matchwinning knocks, but he has made a much larger percentage of his team’s score. If Tendulkar were to play as many matches as Lara (at the time Lara held the record of most runs), it would need him to average 64 to reach Lara’s record in the same number of matches. Tendulkar has much of the dearth in quality bowling roost, after many great bowlers retired between 2003-4 and 2007. As the quality of bowling has decreased, Tendulkar has been able to cover some averages up, which give a boost to his “away” number.

At the end of the day, the answer is pretty simple. And, if you still don’t see it, I suggest watch that video of Lara’s 400 again

This news about Younis Khan taking a break is indeed an unfortunate one. No matter how poor his form or captaincy was, i admired him for the same reasons why Javed A Khan likes Dravid. He might be poor in English but was ever smiling and could have been a good leader if the other players would not have played politics with him. The most unfortunate part in all this Drama is that once again Shoaib Malak has gone unnoticed and he is the one who would be having the last laugh as who knows? if they can get Misbah back they can also reinstate Malik as the Captain if Pak has a poor series in NZ.

What a pity? Apne desho mai sharafat ka zamaana hi nahi hai. Ya fir aapka koi Godfather hona chayihe to protect your back at all times.

Awas,

I agree with you on about every point (as is usually the case). But Kamran Akmal is one of the most irresponsible players, and for him to captain the team, is like asking 123 Kid to captain the Razor Ramons and Shaun Michaels.

Omer Admani

Thank you!

I was just talking in principle that if any player becomes the best in all his disciplines then why not? I agree with you on Kamran Akmal.

Ramiz Raja: A sad situation for Pakistan cricket, once again in the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Stories tell us that Younis Khan is once again not happy with the support that he is getting from his players and as a result he has packed in which is a serious blow to Pakistan cricket because I thought he was doing rather well as captain. The team was in the rebuilding process and after the victory in the Twenty20 World Cup he came out as a strong captain.

We know that Younis is mercurial and is moody at times and he has made a complaint to the authorities that he will not be able to dictate terms and lead the pack if the board cannot help him. What he wants from the cricket board, I guess, is for the players to be reigned in and be disciplined. The situation has turned pretty ugly which is extremely sad because I thought Younis was the perfect captain to take Pakistan to new heights.

I can relate to Younis’ troubles because as a captain I also felt stiff resistance at times from the players. Good captaincy is all about adjustment and managing individuals and I think Younis hasn’t done that all the time. We know he is passionate and means well but it is his style of leadership that hasn’t gone down too well with the players.

There is now a big question mark over Younis’ future. I hope that he keeps himself available for the Pakistan team. A big question for the PCB to answer now, as they need to get Younis on board since he is a fantastic Test-match player. The other part is whether to discipline the players or to announce a brand-new captain for the future. The situation is a tricky one and I hope it gets resolved very quickly.

Varun

Awas has quoted Ramiz Raja and his comments answer most of the questions you posed. Younus may be a gentleman but, that is not what is needed, he needs to lead from the front, by example and also by being strict to discipline the players and not just keep smiling and giggling like Dalai Lama.

The question of appointing a brand-new captain is indeed very difficult because, at the moment there is no one who can lead with authority. Barring MoYo who is not so aggressive and is on the verge of retirement, Afridi is the senior most player but, that UKP has voluntarily retired himself from test cricket.

It would be a catastrophe if Chanda, Moon, Meesna Malik is reconsidered to lead again. Because, he is the one who has destroyed the team spirit and the culture by bringing petty politics in the game. Neither should Misbah be considered because he too is old and out of form. That leads to Akku. It would be “disgustipatingly” pathetic to appoint that screecher as captain.

My suggestion is: Either Younus Khan gets some “aqal kay naqoon” and comes back for the Australian tour and chooses to lead only the test side and leave the other 2 formats for Afridi. Or, the PCB convince Afridi to reconsider his decision to play for test matches and he becomes the captain for all formats of the game. But, for the better interest of the team the first suggestion is more practical and pragmatic.

newguy & Omer

I think it is about time to put an end to this long and meaningless debate on Tendulkar vs Lara, no one will change his stance. In expressing our views and opinions, biases & prejudices will always play their role and no matter how many stats are pulled out and compared with, neither party will accept it. Besides, it was not a matter of stats because we all know the stats, its a matter of quality, style, poise, elegance and blah, blah.

Tendulkar’s fans and supporters may refer him as the shining armour or, the light that beacons and spreads and it is so bright that no one can stand up to him for comparison and they call him a god. And, they highlight Lara’s dark side just for the heck of it. I want to cite this quote to change the perspective of many people: light thinks it travels faster than anything but, it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it.

Javed,

I have put an end to the debate, everything I have to say is said in the previous posts with the example of stats on who is better against quality opposition, and my #316 short lists those, those are not my opinions, but facts pulled out from Cricinfo.

It is clear that arguments used against Tendulkar has no basis, the last straw to clutch on for Lara’s support is his 7 double hundreds and a 400.

I am not a fan of anyone, I enjoy cricket, fans are biased, they get emotional, I don’t treat Tendulkar as God or anywhere close. I have been very fair and unbiased, and try to find evidence for the claims made by Omer and backed by you, such as Tendulkar is weak against McGrath, never made runs against Wasim & Waqar so on, but instead what do I find, it is Lara who is more weakers against these same people, and Lara is weaker against Kumble/Harbhajan, the response to that is I can’t compare Lara against them, because it shows him in poor light and I can’t compare Tendulkar’s record against Ambrose/Walsh because again his record is good there

I am not using any of the personal side to show who is better player, with my concluding posts I simply stuck to countering the arguments against Tendulkar and showed in fact Lara has more problems.

So, it’s clear how this debate ended. If there is still a bias, that is Omer and yourself, now I have no problem in both of you favoring Lara as a matter of personal choice, everyone has there choices, no one can ask everyone to accept Tendulkar as their favorite.

This is not what this debate is all about, it’s about empirical evidence showing Tendulkar as superior batsman of his time using conventional methods.

Finally, Tendulkar is not even my favorite batsman, personally I used to enjoy watching Viv Richards as someone else also said here. But I thought I needed to correct the allegations brought forward by Omer and yourself against him, and I did.

Omer,

One final post and then I’ll be out of here. I know I said this before 3 or 4 times, but I really mean it this time. I just need to clarify a few things on the fundamental disagreement we are having.

I am not debating on whether Lara’s double hundreds or his 400 are not great achievements, they are, I am simply debating your usage of wrong data to project him as more greater than he is, conversely using the same logic project weakness in Tendulkar where none exist.

A few examples of what you may say about Lara based on facts that everyone will agree are:

1. Lara has made many double hundreds, a 300 and 400
2. No one ever made a 400, and only 3 people made two 300+ scores
3. Based on this I consider Lara as a great

The above points have merit, it’s questionable whether that alone can be used as greatness, but it has merit.

A few examples of what you may say about Lara not based on facts but based on your impressions that no one will agree are:

1. Lara was better against McGrath – not true because only at home, Tendulkar has better record against McGrath in Australia.
2. Lara was better against Donald – not true because he only averages 1 run better, and has no hundreds, Tendulkar has one big hundred
3. Lara was better against Wasim & Waqar – not true, he averages less then Tendulkar and has no hundreds again, Tendulkar has a hundred.
4. Lara was better against spin – not true because only against Murali, he was weaker against Kumble/Harbhajan, and Tendulkar was better against Warne.
5. Lara was better against Pollock – correct, but Tendulkar played Ambrose/Walsh well and they are not any lesser than Pollock.
6. Lara has won many matches while Tendulkar has not – not true, match wins are contribution of whole team, and many times bowlers are the one who win matches.

In the end, the fundamental disagreement we are having is your opinions above that are based on your impressions rather than facts. I have no problem with the facts that I have listed above.

Finally, if you say you consider Lara as greatest based on the facts we agree on I have no problem in understanding your point of view and respecting it, but on the contrary if you are upholding the incorrect statements as a basis then I cannot ever agree to them. I wish I could, but I have checked myself and see them as incorrect.

I hope you now understand. I don’t think this discussion was meaningless however, I have a fairly good understanding of the facts and impressions, and I hope I have planted at least a small seed of doubt in your mind which will cause you to do some introspection of your own at some point.

I think whoever followed this discussion also have a fairly good idea of what are facts and what are opinions, and what I have sought to do it plant the seeds to doubt in the naysayers mind, make a small crack in the wall, so to speak, so anytime they bring this up they will think “well what if I am wrong, what if newguy is right”.

If I have achieved that, then I think the time I spent is worth it.

I hope Imran Nazir won’t throw away his wicket, it is very rare that he gets off to a good start and now that he has, he should continue to bat as long as he can. He can be devastating to any bowling attack and today he hammered Butler for two sixes in a row and 2 fours. Pakistan has got a good start and there is no dearth in batting. In the last match even Ajmal has proved that he can bat. So apart from Nazir and Afridi playing now there is Shoaib Malik, Fawad Alam, Abdul Razzaq, Tanvir, Gul, Aamer so they all can bat and score.

Imran Nazir was on 38 when I wrote that comment, he scored 58 in 38 balls with 5 fours and 4 sixes, he has done his job but, he should not have thrown away his wicket like this, especially with Bond bowling with all his experience, he was going after him, he managed 4 on the first ball, but on the second one he was gone. With Afridi and Nazir on the crease, they added 36 in 20 balls. Now Moon has come in to bat with Afridi. Akku brothers didn’t score much today.

Now Afridi has gone too 101/4 in 12.4 overs, what seems to be a big total will just be an ordinary one, because, Malik is not going to play big shots and will try to consolidate his place by remaining not out and adding only 20-30 runs to the max. And, Fawad Alam coming in after a long gap also needs to prove his worth and he may not be taking chances as well. Abdul Razzaq, you cannot tell anything about him, he may be devastating or mediocre. At the moment the score is stuck @ 104/4

Why is Vettori not playing? Anyone knows? (sorry I am not following the news)

Javed

For T20 this is just about the perfect eleven except for Malik. Good to see Fawad Alam in. Perhaps Afridi should be captain for all three formats

Malik was trying to keep his place in the team by his negative batting in T20 six singles from six balls and finally tossed up a simple catch back to the bowler. Redmond who hardly get wickets, got 2, one of Afridi and now Malik. Only 5 overs remaning and Pakistan are 117/5 they may not even make 150 at one stage it appeared that they may reach 170-180 easily.

If Pakistani bowlers cannot stop Brendon McCullum and Ross Taylor they have had it.

Awas on captaincy, read my comment above with two suggestions.

As regards Malik, it is good that Afridi has not dropped him from the team to prove that he is such a worthless and a selfish guy. His demise should be based on his own performance and not from any other way and that way he won’t be able to come back. But a cat has nine lives !

BOND strikes again. He got Fawad Alam. Only 15 balls left and the total is 134/6 and they have sent Tanvir ahead of Mohammad Aamir, who is in good form, he should have been ahead of Tanvir.

Javed

Yeah I agree.

I have always said Afridi is my second choice after Younus.

Unlike Malik, Fawad Alam did not threw away his wicket, here is a quote from cricinfo commentary:

“17.2 Bond to Fawad Alam, OUT, short, Butler, who’s had a bad day today, ends up taking a sharp catch at third man, it was cut hard towards him but he managed to cup it in front of his face, slipped and crashed on his back but held on.”

So, it shows that it was a very sharp catch unlike Malik who looped it back to the bowler. And, the irony is no one will see or compare the circumstances or even the difference in score of both these players and they will say Fawad Alam didn’t do much whereas, he scored more than both Akkus and Malak. And, Malik will sneak in quietly as always for yet another match.

Now, with Tanvir in balls are being wasted. so far 3 runs in 7 balls. Will Pakistan make 150 from here?

Too late to go for the assault. Abdul Razzaq didn’t get much chance to play in the end, not enough balls, the last two balls of the penultimate over from Butler he played, he hammered for a six and a four to change the equation and that prompted Tanvir to do the same in the final over, But, it is not possible to take it till the end until and unless you have the experience and Tanvir was out after 2 big shots and Abdul Razzaq managed to play only one ball from the last over. Anyways 161 is not a very defendable total, New Zealand without Vettori can manage unless Afridi and Ajmal restricts them. But, before that they need to get Brendon McCullum and Ross Taylor first.

The chase has started and first two balls from Aamer were excellent and the next four balls ended like this:

0.3 Mohammad Aamer to BB McCullum, FOUR, Dropped McCullum swivels and hooks and the ball is in the air for a long time, Tanvir was forward at fine leg and he ran back to take the catch and ended up palming it away towards the rope, one bounce and four.

0.4 Mohammad Aamer to BB McCullum, FOUR, crack! He gives him width outside off and he rolls his wrists and thumps it past backward point

0.5 Mohammad Aamer to BB McCullum, 5 runs, overthrows! McCullum taps it towards cover and sets off for a quick single, Nazir’s throw at the bowler’s end is fast and the fielder at mid-on dives but the ball beats him and runs away.

0.6 Mohammad Aamer to Guptill, FOUR, inside edge! Lucky escape for Guptill as the ball trickles away past the stumps and down to fine leg — 17 runs of the first over

That is not the end Tanvir too is getting whacked and in 4 balls so far he has given away 8 runs. my WORD he just got Guptil’s wicket.

The two most dangerous NZ players are on the ground and Taylor smashed the first ball he faced for a four and what a start for NZ 29/1 in 2 overs. If Pakistan gets these two early, the match is over. Otherwise, it would be a good chase and an interesting one to watch. Tanvir dropped McCullum and will have to pay a price for it.

Newguy30,

Okay, this is what we’ll do: On the weekend I’ll analyze there statistics more thoroughly– the basis would be pretty simple, whose flight from quality is greater. In other words, how a player deviates against quality bowling.

Maybe you find Tendulkar’s hundreds more fufilling than Lara’s doubles, triple, and 4 hundreds, so perhaps we can see, who at average, has done better against quality bowling, and who deviates from a standard and how much against quality bowlers.
Note that I have used “a” standard because if we use each of their standards, then it will not be fair: If Lara averages 40 against quality bowlers and Tendulkar 32, then deviation wouldn’t account for the fact that Lara’s average was much higher against quality bowlers to begin with. So, we will pick a number between 30 and 40 at random to somehow incorporate that and use it as a basis. Similarly, we can use two measures for consistency between Ponting, Kallis, and Tendulkar: Who hits the number 50 more often as a percentage of their overall number of innings. Or, we could again use deviation from a set standard…say 50. This way we can know who was actually more consistent. Because what you have ferociously argued is that consistency is a better measure, and for every 400, 300 that Lara made, he would have made many smaller scores so that his average converges around 52. In that sense, to you Lara’s 200s, 300s, and 400s have not much appeal. If you ask me, to be honest, among two players who average 50+ in test matches, whether a more consistent player is better, or whether someone who deviates more from his standard, I’d much rather pick the latter. Because to win a test match is a big deal and it is big scores that win test matches. Besides this, players who average more than 50, it is much rarer to find someone who deviates more rather han less (like Sehwag, Lara). On the consistency side, you can find many more like Mohd Yousof, Tendulkar, Kallis, Younis Khan, Jayawardena, Michael Hussey, Ponting, and on and on. I’d much rather reward brilliance more than consistency.

Unfortunately, Lara hasn’t played against Walsh and Ambrose, and Tendulkar hasn’t played against Harbajhan or Kumble, so we can’t use them in the comparison. What might have happened, your guess is good is mine. But that would be pointless.

Aamir got McCullum, nice come back from the youngster, just a four in his second over and he kept bowling tight and in the end McCullum gave a catch to Fawad Alam who said THANK YOU to McCullum as he didn’t have to move and took a simple catch.

THAT’S IT !

Aamir got Ross Taylor too and NZ are a gone case from here. They are stuck on the score of 34/3. Even Tanvir bowled his last over very well and gave only one run. The pressure is getting on NZ.

One ball before Taylor was out, this is what happened, read cricinfo comments, because they will not be in the records:

“Mohammad Aamer to Taylor, no run, lousy cricket from both teams and Pakistan will regret this, Taylor taps it to cover and sets off and there’s lot of uncertainty in the running, Styris took a pace out of his crease but wasn’t interested in the single, Taylor was already half way down and and he was sent back, Malik wasn’t sure whether to throw directly at the stumps or relay it to a fielder, there was nobody at the stumps and the throw was way over the stumps.“

LOL

newguy,

Omer Admani will not leave you till you become an “oldguy“

Here comes out of form NISWAR GUL ….. NZ were under pressure and weren’t scoring but Gul has given them ample opportunities to score, 14 runs from his first over. I think Afridi must introduce spin now and keep Gul for the death overs. So far Razzaq is very economical and even got his old mate Styris. Now he even got his second victim in Broom. So, after Razzaq completes the 11th over Afridi and Ajmal should bowl the next 8 overs between him and Ajmal. There is no dearth in bowling department. “I am agree” with Awas, a perfect T20 team except Malik.

Its ALL OVER now, Pakistan has won the match by 49 runs. Redmond did not bat as he pulled his groin while bowling. An easy win for Pakistan, hopefully tomorrow’s match would be a bit more interesting!

Man of the match MUST be Imran Nazir, but Razzaq’s contribution with bat and ball isn’t bad either. But, I would give it to Nazir for his once in a while excellent batting.

LOL to Javed #344, good one.

Omer, there is a guy on Cricinfo who spouts all kinds of statistical nonsense to come up with who is better batsman who is a better bowler so on, I find it all statistical mumbo jumbo, what you are saying now is similar. Are you some sort of Wall Street guy who works on quantitative models to predict financial events? I have no faith in that sort of analysis, primarily because when you twist and massage the data enough, you can make it look any way you want, in other words you can massage the data enough make it look good to prove your point.

Instead we already looked at data in a straight forward way, and it is does not back up the claims you made about Lara’s higher ability against quality, in fact it showed the opposite. I will even be generous and say it’s a toss up.

Omer,

Just want to respond your #341:

OA:
Maybe you find Tendulkar’s hundreds more fufilling than Lara’s doubles, triple, and 4 hundreds, so perhaps we can see, who at average, has done better against quality bowling, and who deviates from a standard and how much against quality bowlers.

NG:
No, I never said Lara’s doubles, triple, and 400 any lesser. These are great individual accomplishments, and those are well documented facts. I said if you wish to use those as a measure of greatness you have merit in your argument. But I objected your inference that since Tendulkar has not done that, he is not as good as Lara. They have different types of skills, Lara made big hundreds, Tendulkar made more hundreds. You may prefer big hundreds, personally I prefer big and more together But Lara is not perfect, he does not have more (hundreds), Tendulkar is not perfect either, he does not have big (hundreds).

OA:
Because what you have ferociously argued is that consistency is a better measure, and for every 400, 300 that Lara made, he would have made many smaller scores so that his average converges around 52. In that sense, to you Lara’s 200s, 300s, and 400s have not much appeal.

NG:
I did not say this. I said Tendulkar is different from Lara, he is more consistent, but Lara makes bigger hundreds. Like I said the greatest batsman would have made bigger hundreds and he would have been consistent. A combination of the two would have been perfect. All I have done is to show that you have used incorrect statements on their capability based on impressions and not on facts. You made many accusations that Tendulkar scored heavily against Lee after McGrath retired, his average went up by 4-5 runs against minnows so on. But I showed that Lara did the same, he scored more without McGrath, and he scored 4-5 runs more at home. While you play down the 4-5 runs Lara made at home as trivial, you bring up Tendulkar’s 4-5 runs against minnows as major fault. To me both are important parameters to judge quality. A lot of players are lions at home, but sheep when touring. Youvraj Singh is a great example. But Tendular is a lion on tour. I am not inferring Lara is a sheep on tour, but he certainly has been a lion at home, and less so on tour.

OA:
Because to win a test match is a big deal and it is big scores that win test matches. Besides this, players who average more than 50, it is much rarer to find someone who deviates more rather han less (like Sehwag, Lara). On the consistency side, you can find many more like Mohd Yousof, Tendulkar, Kallis, Younis Khan, Jayawardena, Michael Hussey, Ponting, and on and on. I’d much rather reward brilliance more than consistency.

NG:
To win a test match is a big deal, but you seem to think a single batsman can do this. A single bowler surely can win a test match by running through the batting line up, but for a single batsman it is so hard. Do you know how many times Australians dropped Lara when he made that 153 in Barbados, the innings that everyone show as classic example of Lara’s match winning capability. What if Ambrose could not hold on for as much as he did, and do you know what kind of a batsman is Walsh, he faced a full over, before Lara could hit the winning runs. So he was surely helped there, I don’t want to take that away from him, but he surely was also lucky that day. And to me, a batsman who plays consistent can help win matches more than a player who cannot be trusted. Besides there are always 5-6 other batsmen to make a huge score, you don’t need one guy blasting 300. In that 300 Sehwag made surely did help India set up a win in Multan, but it was the bowlers, either Kumble or Harbhajan, or both that made it possible. So wins are made by 11 players, and when it is one or two individuals it’s certainly bowlers.

OA:
Unfortunately, Lara hasn’t played against Walsh and Ambrose, and Tendulkar hasn’t played against Harbajhan or Kumble, so we can’t use them in the comparison. What might have happened, your guess is good is mine. But that would be pointless.

NG:
That should not matter. We are looking at quality bowlers in each style. Pace and Spin. In Pace we have Donald, McGrath, Wasim, Waqar, Walsh, and Ambrose, ok Pollock too if you insist. In spin we have Warne, Murali, and Kumble, I’ll throw in Harbhajan too, but optional. You cannot omit Kumble he has taken more than 600 test wickets, and you cannot omit Walsh and Ambrose. These are premier bowlers of their time. It does not matter if Lara did not play Waslsh/Ambrose or Tendulkar did not play Kumble/Harbhajan, you compare them with other bowlers of their type to get good statistical sample. Otherwise you are falling to the fallacy of small statistics. Here is an example, you may say I know 100 people, but none of them are Chinese, so there must be not be very many Chinese in the world. Similarly you may say – look Lara played Murali well and he played Warne almost as well as Sachin, so he must be very good in Spin, but you have to include more spinners to the mix to get a greater sample. Same for pace bowlers.

If you are objective then you should do this, otherwise no point, you are only trying to make you view accepted as the fact.

khansahab

Among the 8 players you ruled out Umar Gul, you better rule out Shahid Afridi also because, even now he is saying that “Afridi said on Wednesday that Younis should have continued to lead the side in the Test series against New Zealand to regain his lost form. “I think he should have stayed because the only way you can regain your form is if you play international cricket.”

Miandad was opposed not once but, twice and he had to step down to keep playing for the country. There is a big difference between him and Wasim Akram. Miandad’s leadership was in question because of regional bias. Whereas, Wasim Akram was pulled down for altogether different reasons. He was openly involved in betting and was using his power, influence and authority over other players and asking them to obey to him and under perform.

Regarding Younus Khan, I can say that he is an idiot but, he is not involved in betting for sure. He is very honest and loyal to his country and a very straightforward person. But, his honesty, loyalty and straightforwardness has no bearing on the captaincy issue.

I think if he accepts only the test captaincy and performs in tests then he is fine and he will be respected and no one can do anything to him. And, I think Afridi must be appointed captain for ODI as well.

Newguy,

1) Lara has 7 double hundreds and that is equal to Donald Bradman’s, and only these two have got 7 double hundreds. And you prefer more?

And, of course, I wish to use that as a measure for greatness, but the question is what do you prefer if not that? Consistency?

That is why I said, we’ll see if Tendulkar is the most consistent. So, that even by your method, we can verify your implication that Tendulkar is the best.

And, if it neither big hundreds nor consistency, then your implication is totally subjective and has no merit. That is why I said to Khansahab that he is right from his perspective if he likes Tendulkar better. But then the question is whether he is more consistent than Ponting and Kallis.

2) Lara was a combination of both, big scores and consistent. He wasn’t as consistent as Tendulkar, but he was consistent. Inconsistency wouldn’t be possible with an average of above 50. He has got 30-odd hundreds and that in cricket is consistent with an average of 50+. The question is, without the minnows, Tendulkar has only 2 200s and that is about one more than Wasim Akram has. If there is anyone who lacks something “on” the balance of the two, then it is Tendulkar

3) There are 11 players in the team, but a single player can make winning the match more possible. In other words, by scoring big hundreds Lara was scoring a larger percentage of the team’s score and by scoring small hundreds, Tendulkar wasn’t scoring as large a percentage of a team’s score as Lara. A larger score, hence, gives the team a better chance– it is a team game, but by scoring larger, Lara was providing the team a better chance than Tendulkar. If you look at his scores against Mcgrath, you will see that many big scores were in matchlosing causes as well, but by providing the team a better chance of winning more often, he was actually able to win the team a few matches. Tendulkar’s 10 hundreds are reduced to 2 against Mcgrath. In one match, one hundred isn’t the most outstanding performance either (I believe). Lara dominated individual scores from either team between West Indies and Australia when Mcgrath was playing. By doing that, he stood out.

4) That is not right, we are looking at quality of the bowlers and comparing the two, and the comparison doesn’t hold when both haven’t played against the same bowlers. If Tendulkar has played against Imran Khan and Lara hasn’t, should we start bringing those statistics up, too? It makes no sense.

Omer,

I know we have beaten this topic to death, but I keep finding contradictions in your statement as I keep looking for truth in them, so I have to post them. Please bear with me.

You said Lara made 375 and 400 against England in England, this is not true, they were both made at home, at St.Johns, Antigua, one of the worst test grounds in the WI in terms of positive test results. Both matches ended in dull draws. In other words, Lara’s 300 and 400 both had no effect on the outcome of the match other than put him in the record books. This is really bad, I keep losing respect for the man.

His record in England is not very good, where as Tendulkar once again trumps him there. England is a place where the ball moves around a lot, and English bowlers are very good in their conditions, it takes a lot of skill to play when there is swing and seam.

Lara averages overall 62.14 against England compared to Tendulkar’s 61.42, but when we break it up as home & away what do we see?

Lara averages 48.76 in England against England, Tendulkar averages 62 against England in England.

Lara averages 77.95 at home against England, Tendulkar averages 60.97 at home against England.

Lara once again fared poorly abroad when the ball is moving around, and he scored heavily at home to boost his average, where as Tendulkar is consistent, he played slightly better in England compared to his own home record, but beat Lara pants down in England.

Similar story in New Zealand, another difficult place to play the moving ball. Tendulkar played Richard Hadlee, the ultimate fast bowler, and made an 88 when he was just 16 years old, Lara never played Hadlee so we never know the outcome. In terms of averages, again Tendulkar way ahead in NZ against NZ compared to Lara.

In India, the final frontier as Steve Waugh said, Lara never made a hundred. His average is in the 30s. Compared this to other West Indian greats, Clive Lloyd made 4 hundreds in India and averaged 75.5, Viv Richards made 3 hundreds in India and averages 45.42. Compared to these men Lara is nothing, leave alone Tendulkar.

Once again when the pitch is difficult he finds it hard. Swing and seam, slow and low, he struggles.

Lara made a double hundred against Pakistan, in Multan, another one of the flattest pitches in the world, and the match ended in … no surprise a dull draw

He has had occasional brilliance, but as I said his 375 and 400 made no difference to the match outcome except record for him, I haven’t checked all of his double hundreds, but a few of them were made in drawn matches. So what is so great about his high scores now? He has played well at home, scored heavily in flat pitches, and struggled on pitches and places that assist swing and seam, spin and bite.

Tendulkar has succeeded on most conditions over 20 years, started with bowlers like Imran and Hadlee, and now playing Mitchel Johnson and Mendis, he has made hundreds against all test playing nations in their own country as well as at home. There is absolutely nothing that makes Lara better than him.

Newguy,

What they do in Finance is something else and much more intricate and complex, this is basic bussiness statistics I am talking about. In Finance, the models they design are so complicated that the people who do that could well be in NASA (seriously! Or, rather, NASA people could be in Finance!). Neither have I the knowledge to be able to do that, nor do I have the intention to that here either.

I wouldn’t tweak the numbers, this is why I am discussing the methodology before with you, whether in the case of consistency or flight from quality, so that if you disagree with part of it, then we can change the methodology. I don’t have the computational skills to back-test many algorithms and find the best one for the situation. If I were to do it, then I’ll do it only once (by hand), and we can discuss the methodology before I do it, so that there is not a doubt after the results. This will eliminate my bias, as well as yours. This is why, I don’t want to begin with assumptions which are only agreeable to me.

The only thing I know is that, as regards to Finance…a financial perspective wouldn’t favor Tendulkar. With similar averages (returns), the stocks of Tendulkar and Lara would be priced about the same, but when an investor seeks a higher reward, he uses stock options. And, Lara would be a much, much higher priced stock option.

The link of the open problems in Mathematics I gave earlier, there is a reward of 1 million for any person who solves one question. But considering that some of the questions are even more than a hundred years old–delivered apparently by Hilbert in a famous speech at the turn of the 20th century– the chance of a person devoting his life and solving a problem, and thus getting a million dollars, is very low. The chance is probably much less than winning a lottery. And the reward is only 1 million. But if I were a gambler since I was a toddler, born a risk-taker, someone extremely irrational, for an all or nothing life, I’d take a chance at one of the questions, related to prime numbers. If I could solvee it, I have no need to get the million, I would be able to break the codes that banks use (and many other types of codes!), and I’d have everything I’d want. However, to devote yourself to the rest of the questions, it doesn’t take an irrational person, it takes an insane person, someone who loves pure math for what it is: A cold subject that lacks the human connection.

Twelve year old boy hits 439!

Sarfraz Khan a 12 year old scored record 439 in cricket tie, Harris Shield is one of the oldest competitions in India, this is the same tournament where Sachin Tendulkar and Vinod Kambli made a record 632 runs partnership more than two decades ago.

One of the oldest cricketing competitions in the country, the Harris Shield, got underway yesterday, as school students from across the city donned their whites and headed over to the maidans. And what a run feast the opening day turned out to be. Eight matches on the opening day yielded four centuries and one double ton, as the hapless fielders were sent leather hunting.

Defending champions Springfield Rizvi set the early pace, amassing 468 runs by close of day’s play, with their batting mainstay Sarfraz Khan making 235. Coach Raju Pathak explained that he was depending on Sarfraz to come up with the goods, as he had rested a few players for this match. “We have a one-day tournament in Baroda next week and I rested four important players in lieu of that. It therefore was imperative that experienced players like Sarfraz play well,” Pathak said.

Sarfraz wants to follow in Sachin Tendulkar’s footsteps and one day hope to play for India.

I think it is about time to put an end to this long and meaningless debate on Tendulkar vs Lara, no one will change……..

Javed: achaaa really meaningless to pichley 2 weeks sey sarey log kia cho2so4 ker rahey they kia? well i havent said anything so yeah……ok

Lara has been in a lean patch every now and then in his career. He has also been in devastating form at times. But when it comes to consistensy, Dravid and Kallis are way ahead in this regard. I should say, the burden of captaincy, has affected the great man in some way. That was the same reason why Sachin backed off from captaincy. Also, with the big players retired in the West Indies team, Lara is getting very little support from his team. And at times, it can be very frustrating since he is also the captain of the team and is answerable in case of loss.

i intentionally used the current form of the grammar so i can feel that Lara is still with us lol Laraa i can feel you around here WTF

As Javed said:

Regarding Younus Khan, He is very honest and loyal to his country and a very straightforward person. But, his honesty, loyalty and straightforwardness has no bearing on the captaincy issue. I agree he would never play ‘’satt-ta” like Pakka Jawaari Akram but let me say that younas is a big ”Khotaa”, when he comments about game on the ground and off the ground he adds 40% of diluted shit in his 60% understandable talk.

Javed Sahab: Afridi didnt drop Malik not to show the world that how useless individual Moon is but he loves Moon so much, they are good friends trust me…….arggg why i am calling him moon, my mum used to call me moon but not anymore. thank God cuz here in UK probably thats girls nick.

newguy

About 12 years old Sarfaraz Khan hitting 439, I heard this news almost about a week ago. The point is not about making 400 or 500 runs at school level but, it is a matter of playing beyond that level and playing consistently. Vinod Kambli and Sachin Tendulkar started together, but Kambli who was more aggressive of the two and used to entertain the crowd with his stroke play lost his focus and disappeared from the scene. Whereas, Tendulkar is still around. Why is he still around and why has he got more runs than anyone else in the world? Has he got more I. Q. than others? NO, its a matter of commitment and dedication such as Tendulkar’s. Therefore, these young players must learn one thing from him that: ‘its not a matter of I.Q. but, I CAN.’

Omer,

I have a fairly good understanding of business stats, I have even done a bit beyond that by performing regression analysis on financial data. But we don’t need to bring that here. BTW, finance is called junk science because it is not based on actual things like physics, I have very low opinion on quants and won’t even compare them with NASA scientists. But that’s a different topic, so I digress.

The trouble is that you are going all over the place now. Since you can’t win the debate using your original argument you want to look for other reasons. I have to tell you it doesn’t work that way. If this were a proper debate your rating is going way down.

Let’s stick to the original argument about quality if bowlers faced. As I have showed in my last 10 or 12 posts, clearly there is no evidence that Lara was better player against quality bowling and under different playing conditions, on the contrary he was weaker than Tendulkar under such conditions.

I laid out numerous examples of this, such as Tendulkar’s higher avrage against McGrath in Australia, Tendulkar’s better record in England where ball moves around, Lara’s weakness in India where the pitches stay low and takes turn, Tendulkar’s better record or equal against Donald, Akram, Waqar.

I also showed Lara was a heavy scorer at home and fared poorly abroad compared to Tendulkar, there is a clear trend whether you take country by country or overall, again you have nothing to counter that, but you try to brush that aside as trivial. It is not a trivial matter if you ask any serious cricket follower. Scoring heavily at home can be done by many batsmen, but it is scoring in alien pitches and conditions that require mastery. Tendulkar is the master here.

In the end, there is really nothing you have got to counter those.

Moreover, you are not fact checking before writing something, this is clear when you said Lara made 375 and 400 against England in England, where as both were made in West Indies, therefore it is very clear you are only going with your impressions, and even after presenting with facts countering that you refuse to let go, why should I even respond to you and this time? There is no good reason, except that I don’t want to leave out the incorrect statements you make stand.

Omer Admani & newguy

In comparing Tendulkar and Lara you guys (including me to a certain extent) have talked about Finance, NASA and what not. I am not saying it is wrong, in Urdu there is an expression: “Zameen, Aasmaan kay Qulabay Milana.”) it means leaving no stone unturned on this earth and even on the sky.

Have we ever thought why NASA’s example is always quoted as the most ultimate example to make comparison with? And, why is it considered as a benchmark in exemplifying the qualities in any field? That is because, it is a fact, in a space programme there are literally thousands of workers, each of whom is the creme de la creme of people in his own field. But, there are only a few Astronauts, why?

The original Astronaut started out to be trained as a pilot. When he become a test pilot he was already at the frontiers of knowledge in his field. So on one could teach him to become an Astronaut. He had to do it himself with his team. The same is true of every designer, engineer, systems analyst or even the cleaner on that team. And, the same is true for every international cricketer when he arrives at the international level to play for his country and, he has to do it himself with his team.

At NASA each of them has a pride in his own job. Each feels ‘ I am important right here where I am. I don’t have to be an Astronaut to prove myself, I have to be a better me. ‘ And that is the key —— no one teaches these people; they teach themselves. No one shows them the light, they are the Light, they are the Source. They show others the way. Likewise, each cricket player at that level must say, I am not Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting or Inzamam, I simply have to be a better me.

Like other pilots went to the same school as they. Others had the same teachers as they. The difference was that after they graduated they didn’t think my education is over, I have nothing more to learn. They only took their graduation as an entry into the realm of self education.

They can take help from others where they need to learn something specific; but on one is directing their every step. They are the PIONEERS. No spoon feeding is possible for no one has ever reached the level they aspire for.

Similarly, Sarfaraz Khan may not have to think that I want to be Sachin Tendulkar or Mohammad Aamir should not say that I want to be Wasim Akram. At Aamir’s level he needs to learn from whatever little experience he has gained. If the media makes:

Sohail Tanvir = Wasim Akram
Suresh Raina = Sachin Tendulkar
Mohd. Asif = Sheikhupura McGrath
Salman Butt = Budding Saeed Anwar
Saeed Ajmal = Saqlain Mushtaq
Mohd Aamir = Wasim Akram

It will all go into their head or, already gone. Some are sick because of that and some went into oblivion and some are on the verge of becoming instinct.

We never see the Australians, English or South Africans comparing their new players as budding so and so but, people from the sub-continent has this tendency to do. In India, everyone wants to be Amitabh Bachan or Fatty Govinda and many of them seriously believe that they look like him and act like him (Govinda) and I don’t blame them

Javed,

Sure, I just posted it here as a news item, there is no guarantee any of these youngsters can come up and fulfill their potential. They need commitment. Moreover in India with IPL destroying young people, I don’t see a great future for test cricket in India. IPL money is obscene and rewards plenty for even mediocre performance, they lose the motivation to play for the country and excel internationally.

Test cricket is dying in India, in fact it always were, they say India is where the market is, but 80% to 90% of this market really do not understand the game of Cricket. They are just there thinking India is the best team in the world or will be the best team, people like Youvraj and Dhoni can do anything, so on. They have no appreciation for the nuances of the game, I am sure most of them won’t even know the difference between a deep square leg and point, let alone the variations a bowler can bowl.

So the average Indian fan loves sixes and fours and want their team to win, this is why they cannot appreciate when the other team wins. I find this very shameful. This is not how the fans in the early 70s and 80s used to be, Indian’s appreciated cricket much more back then and they appreciated other teams, even today people in South are much more appreciate of the game than in North.

I don’t know how it is in Pakistan, I am sure a many of them don’t know the game there as well.

The followers in Australia and England by contrast know the game much better, and this is why Test cricket still draws a bigger crowd and gets celebrated there.

Omer,

You said:
The only thing I know is that, as regards to Finance…a financial perspective wouldn’t favor Tendulkar. With similar averages (returns), the stocks of Tendulkar and Lara would be priced about the same, but when an investor seeks a higher reward, he uses stock options. And, Lara would be a much, much higher priced stock option.

NG:
That is your opinion again. I guess what you meant to say is that Lara is a higher risk stock so the investor would demand a higher return, therefore his stock price would be lower, not higher in order to compensate for the extra risk that investor is taking on. But if you really meant Lara would be higher priced stock, then his returns would be much lower, good companies make bad stocks and bad companies make good stocks, this is how it works, contrary to popular belief that given Microsoft and a small business called Bill’s Software Shop, Microsoft would be priced higher by investors because it is a better company, but it’s returns will be lower since Microsoft is a safer bet and hence investors are paying a premium for it. OTOH, Bill’s Software Shop is a risky business, investor would lose all his money, so they drive the price lower in order to get a better return from it, they can buy cheaply and make excellent rewards when it goes up.

So question is, who is a blue chip, Tendulkar or Lara, or are they both Blue Chips, but one of them misses earnings more than the other Investors don’t like companies that miss their earnings, even if they make huge earnings once in a while

Omer,

On the contributions Lara made to winning causes, this is another fallacy based on one or two innings, like I said he received support from other batsmen, either in holding one end up, or from bowlers running though opposition.

Let’s look at stats again – centuries when team won matches:
Lara 1253 runs in 8 innings at 179 average
Tendulkar 2345 runs in 16 innings at 234.50

Lara is placed #32 in this list, Tendulkar is #7, and Don Bradman leads the runs again here at #1, in terms of average though Steve Waugh placed #4 has highest at 317.90 in winning innings.

So, again Tendulkar averages higher in winning matches.

Lara has one double hundred in a winning cause, just one, against Australia in Kingston against McGrath. I guess this is what you are talking, but he received support from wicketkeeper Jimmy Adams who made 94, and Australia’s second innings they got bowled out for 177 with Perry, Walsh, and Ambrose taking 9 wickets. WI just needed 3 runs in second innings, let’s say Lara only scored hundred less, then WI would need 103 in second innings, still gettable.

Therefore, bowlers won the match here, or you can say Lara contributed to the match win. But to say he won the match with his sheer brilliance will be insulting the others who contributed, in this case Jimmy Adams with his 94 and Perry with 5 wicket haul in second innings.

Newguy,

You are saying, I can’t win the debate, while I have won the debate. I have told you, by what I consider important, the big 200s, 300s, 400, the quality of runs, matchwinning innings, and the like, Lara was a much better player than Tendulkar. Those aren’t matchwinning 100s, those are 100s in matches won– the figures you have quoted above. If they are matchwinning 100s, show them.

The only reason why I said we could measure consistency is because, if your basis is consistency, then we can find out the truth, whether he was the most consistent or not. By my standards Lara is the best, but even by your standards, is Tendulkar the best?

On the Finance thing, theoretically, both have an equal value based on the present value of expected return. The risk should not be a factor, because the average returns are the same, and because both are high-rated players, 50+ average, their returns just follow a different profile. Think of it this way: Stocks without bankruptcy risk, fraud risk, and all other forms of risk, but just that the returns of the companies follow a different path. Or just go the casino. Rolling a die and getting a payoff equal 6 for getting the number 6 means, the fair price is 1/6*6=1. In fact this is how they price products theoretically in Finance, not by using the standard deviation.

Newguy,

Forget home and away!

If Tendulkar won a match against Mcgrath’s Australia at home or away, it would be equally good. His 10 hundreds are reduced to two without Mcgrath. Lara averages much more than Tendulkar against Murali, Mcgrath, and Pollock. Lara averages more than Tendulkar against Donald, as much as Tendulkar averages more than Lara against W&W. Tendulkar averages more than Lara against Warne.

Lara has 7 test double centuries, Tenddulkar has 2 without the minnows. Lara has a 375 and a 400*.

Lara has scored a much larger percentage of his team’s score, he has been a much major force for his team.

Lara has won many matches. Lara has played epic innings, like that 153* above. Tendulkar has disparately hit centuries here or there, one or two against the top bowlers-, be it Mcgrath, Donald, WW- and we can all suspect that, after being unsuccessful in many attempts against them, he just threw the bat around here and there out of frustration, and, as so often it happens, it came along. In any case, neither of them is a significant innings in terms of the context, except maybe one or two.

I was watching England vs SA live on TV whereas, the Pak NZ match on the internet.

England, especially Allan Morgan played a beautiful innings of 85 in 45 balls and he remained not out. He was hitting sixes and fours at will. I think one of the sixes he hit was perhaps the longest ever (don’t know how many meters but, it went out of the stadium) and the bowler was Dale Styen. He also hit Albie Morkel and Langevitt for a few sixes. I think 202 is a very good score and England must win this match.

Pakistan on the other hand could not capitalize and ended up 153/5, only Umar Akmal surviving till the end. What an innings MOON Shoaib Malik played. He calls himself as the best all-rounder of Pakistan. His score in the 2 ODI’s he played and the 2 T20 he played is really pathetic. He needs to be dropped. With Afridi and Ajmal taking control of the spin department, Aamir, Gul and Razzaq are the fast bowlers, there is no need of Malik in the T20 team either. He is such a spent force and a dirty politician who is messing around with politics and revolting, ruining team spirit.

LOL at You are saying, I can’t win the debate, while I have won the debate…

Omer,

While it might not be clear that who won the debate, but one thing is clear and again confirmed by your digressive responses that debating with you is like as they say in rustic hindi bhains ke aage been bajana!! that’s the reason I stopped arguing with you and most probably khansahab backed out as well but kudos to newguy to take it so far and if you still can’t see reason in his crystal-clear ir-refutable arguments then it’s really pointless to even talk on this subject with you.

P.S before anybody gets offended I am not comparing you with a bhains but it simple means that no matter what reasons or justifications one might give you are nor prepared to move an inch from your faulty and biased position now what kind of ircorrigible behaviour is that?

Just look at the biased commentary of cricinfo:

“Umar Akmal paced his innings well and at one stage, when he was going strong with Afridi, it seemed Pakistan would post a total higher than they did yesterday. But New Zealand fought back well at the death, 34 coming off the last five overs, to keep Pakistan down to what is still a pretty competitive score. The ‘hosts’ have a strong seam attack, which did the bulk of the damage yesterday so New Zealand are up against a challenge. Join us in about five minutes for the chase. “

The match is being played in Dubai, which is a neutral country and how come Pakistan are “the hosts?”