Sachin Ranaway Tendulkar
rkus...@rogers.com
me. I am only the messenger.
RK-
========================================
Me thinks that SRT should be renamed to Sachin "Ran Away" Tendulkar
:-))
I mean, its 13 years since his debut and we are still waiting for him to
prove to be a TRUE match winner.
On top of that, he hasn't really performed like a "Great" in 4/5 test
series. (which consistent performance in a Long series)
SMG had 774 in 4 tests and 732 in 6.
Lara has 798 in 5 tests, 784 in 6, 540 in 4, 688 in 3!!!
IVAR had 829 in a 5 test series!!
Mark Taylor had 839 in 6 while The DON had Many such productive
series.....
What does SRT have???
vs Pak 4 tests - 215 runs
vs Aus 5 tests - 368 runs
vs SA 4 tests - 202 runs
vs WI 5 tests - 283 runs
vs WI 5 tests - 341 runs
BTW, the general perception nowadays is that SRT = SMG
(i.e. a great batsman who scores 100s but Does not win Test
matches)
At one time SRT was GOD but the lack of abroad wins and resultant
media hype has brought down SRT's image :-((.
And Kapil >> SRT and SMG (since Kapil won us 83 WC and was true match
winner)
( I know, RK , this is very irritating :-)))))
regards,
Abhay
~ThankGod SRT > Beckham
Nikhil Deo
<rkus...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:afd57l$dgoqh$1...@ID-75254.news.dfncis.de...
<flames are for Abhay Pandey. Please do not mind>
I fail to understand the excessive use of the > or < nowadays. What is the
big point? :)))))))
Different people have different criteria and to top it all nowadays people
are comparing players from two different sports ;)))))))
Considering Beckham played in the cup in spite of getting badly injured just
before might make me say beckham >= kumble :D)))))))
People who make these comparisons first should state exactly what they want
from a player. e.g. A century in the final of a major tournament when the
side was almost losing.. then try to imagine for themselves who is on which
side of >>> :((((((
Considering the performance of SRT in both forms of cricket against that of
SMG, SRT >>> SMG
I will never say that Sachin is the best player around 'cause I think it is
impossible to say someone is the 'Best' when there is so much of talent in
every part of the world. The farthest I am willing to go is 'Sachin was best
in 1998 ' and likes of that. When we do not even have a consensus on the
accuracy of a speedgun and have a debate on who is fastest (something that
can be measured).. how can you compare career performances? .. comparing
head to head performace in a series is what we can do ..but moment you
extrpolate to the whole career lots of things come into the picture that
makes it sound unreasonable.
And again, if you yourself think that it is irritating why subject others to
the same?
Sick of >>> and <<<,
Nikhil
BTW, who do you think was greater, Sivaramakrishnan or Arshad Ayub?
Gafoor
> me. I am only the messenger.
>
> RK-
test
> series. (which consistent performance in a Long series)
> SMG had 774 in 4 tests and 732 in 6.
> Lara has 798 in 5 tests, 784 in 6, 540 in 4, 688 in 3!!!
> IVAR had 829 in a 5 test series!!
> Mark Taylor had 839 in 6 while The DON had Many such productive
OTOH, SRT also hasn't had series like these
---------------------------------------------------
Gavaskar
India in England, 1971 [Series]
Ind 3 6 0 144 57 53 24 24.00 0 2
1
England in India, 1972/73 [Series]
Ind 5 10 1 224 69 67 24 24.88 0 2
0
India in Australia, 1980/81 [Series]
- 3 6 0 118 70 23 10 19.66 0 1
1
India in New Zealand, 1980/81 [Series]
NZ 3 5 0 126 53 33 23 25.20 0 1
0
India in England, 1982 [Series]
Eng 3 3 0 74 48 24 2 24.66 0 0
0
England in India, 1984/85 [Series]
Eng 5 8 0 140 65 27 17 17.50 0 1
0
---------------------------------------------------
Lara
West Indies in Pakistan, 1997/98 [Series]
Pak 3 6 0 129 37 37 36 21.50 0 0
0
The Wisden Trophy (Eng/WI) in England, 2000 [Series]
Eng 5 9 0 239 112 50 47 26.55 1 1
1
---------------------------------------------------
IVAR
The Frank Worrell Trophy (Aus/WI) in Australia, 1981/82 [Series]
- 3 6 0 160 50 44 42 26.66 0 1
1
West Indies in New Zealand, 1986/87 [Series]
- 3 4 0 77 38 24 14 19.25 0 0
0
India in West Indies, 1988/89 [Series]
WI 4 5 0 135 110 19 5 27.00 1 0
1
The Frank Worrell Trophy (Aus/WI) in West Indies, 1990/91 [Series]
WI 5 8 1 174 52* 50 32 24.85 0 2
1
---------------------------------------------------
Taylor
The Ashes (Aus/Eng) in Australia, 1990/91 [Series]
Aus 5 10 1 213 67* 61 19 23.66 0 2
0
Australia in Sri Lanka, 1992/93 [Series]
Aus 3 6 0 148 43 42 26 24.66 0 0
0
The Frank Worrell Trophy (Aus/WI) in Australia, 1992/93 [Series]
WI 4 8 1 170 46* 42 34 24.28 0 0
0
Australia in Pakistan, 1994/95 [Series]
Pak 3 5 1 106 69 32 5* 26.50 0 1
2
The Frank Worrell Trophy (Aus/WI) in West Indies, 1994/95 [Series]
Aus 4 7 1 153 55 37 30 25.50 0 1
0
The Frank Worrell Trophy (Aus/WI) in Australia, 1996/97 [Series]
Aus 5 9 0 153 43 36 27 17.00 0 0
0
Australia in South Africa, 1996/97 [Series]
Aus 3 5 0 80 38 16 13 16.00 0 0
0
The Ashes (Aus/Eng) in Australia, 1998/99 [Series]
Aus 5 10 0 228 61 59 46 22.80 0 2
1
---------------------------------------------------
rkus...@rogers.com
"Gafoor" <rro...@bigfoot.com> wrote
> OTOH, SRT also hasn't had series like these
oh great...
when it comes to support Kapil u point his achivements
while ignoring his failures.
when it comes to SRT u point out the failures of SMG/IVAR/Lara.
Can't have both ways. Decide whether or not peak decides achievement.
rk-
Gafoor
<rkus...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:afdfjq$db4id$1...@ID-75254.news.dfncis.de...
Don't you do the same thing ?
All the time, you are talking about SRT not having a big series.
The first time, he got 2-3 0's, you said no other good batsmen has
scored 7 runs or whatever in 4 innings (or something like that), till
I proved otherwise.
Colin Kynoch
Gafoor <rro...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:afdchp$cetrb$1...@ID-27262.news.dfncis.de...
>
> <rkus...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:afd57l$dgoqh$1...@ID-75254.news.dfncis.de...
> > I am posting this on behalf of Abhay Pandey. Pls don't flame
> > me. I am only the messenger.
> >
> > RK-
> > On top of that, he hasn't really performed like a "Great" in 4/5
> test
> > series. (which consistent performance in a Long series)
> > SMG had 774 in 4 tests and 732 in 6.
> > Lara has 798 in 5 tests, 784 in 6, 540 in 4, 688 in 3!!!
> > IVAR had 829 in a 5 test series!!
> > Mark Taylor had 839 in 6 while The DON had Many such productive
>
> OTOH, SRT also hasn't had series like these
What no Bradman list?
Colin Kynoch
Gafoor
news:3d1a4...@news.iprimus.com.au...
No. Bradman is obviously in a different class these players (all of
whom
in the same class - except Taylor, who is even lower)
Colin Kynoch
Depends as a high scorer his is in the same class as Bradman and a higher
class than any of the aforementioned batsmen.
Colin Kynoch
Ken Higgs
Colin Kynoch wrote:
Taylor is a higher class than SMG, IVAR, SRT & Lara?
Oh, I see, you meant he is in a higher class when it comes to high scoring,
having equalled DGB's 334.
Which, as everyone knows, is higher than the 375 of Lara.......
You are Nomen, aren't you?
Higgsy
Gafoor
>>
> Depends as a high scorer his is in the same class as Bradman and a
higher
> class than any of the aforementioned batsmen.
And Jayasuriya is of a higher class than both Bradman & Taylor, right
?
Colin Kynoch
In high score yes.
And Lara would be top of the pile.
Remind me again what is Tendulkar's top score.
Tendulkar doesn't even have the highest average of current batsmen.
Colin Kynoch
yeskay
>
> <rkus...@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:afd57l$dgoqh$1...@ID-75254.news.dfncis.de...
> > I am posting this on behalf of Abhay Pandey. Pls don't flame
> > me. I am only the messenger.
> >
> > RK-
> > On top of that, he hasn't really performed like a "Great" in 4/5
> test
> > series. (which consistent performance in a Long series)
> > SMG had 774 in 4 tests and 732 in 6.
> > Lara has 798 in 5 tests, 784 in 6, 540 in 4, 688 in 3!!!
> > IVAR had 829 in a 5 test series!!
> > Mark Taylor had 839 in 6 while The DON had Many such productive
>
> OTOH, SRT also hasn't had series like these
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
So are you saying the SRT is a consistently average player with no flashes
of brilliance? I would take the latter anyday as we can see some glorious
performances to write home about instead of a "say, we lost but SRT
performed good in most matches except in the ones we lost"!
[as per his recent interview even SRT accepts that he hasn't "finished"
jobs successfully]
rkus...@rogers.com
> So are you saying the SRT is a consistently average player with no flashes
> of brilliance? I would take the latter anyday as we can see some glorious
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
why u only.
BTW SRT is not consistent avg player. That is too harsh. He is
consistently good player against good attack, and consistently (*)
v.good against sub standard attack. But against both he has never
been devastating.
rk-
(*) the recent WI series an exception though.
Gafoor
>
> Gafoor <rro...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:3d1aa898$1...@news5.nntpserver.com...
> >
> > "Colin Kynoch" <kyn...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3d1a6e47$1...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > >>
> > > Depends as a high scorer his is in the same class as Bradman and
a
> > higher
> > > class than any of the aforementioned batsmen.
> >
> > And Jayasuriya is of a higher class than both Bradman & Taylor,
right
>
>
> In high score yes.
>
> And Lara would be top of the pile.
>
> Remind me again what is Tendulkar's top score.
Is that a measure of how good a batsman is ?
> Tendulkar doesn't even have the highest average of current batsmen.
The others who have a better average than him, how long have they
substained that average.
If
Amol Cricketwallah
> "yeskay" <new_...@NOSPAM.yahoo.com> wrote
>
> > So are you saying the SRT is a consistently average player with no flashes
> > of brilliance? I would take the latter anyday as we can see some glorious
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
No! Really? :-)
> consistently good player against good attack, and consistently (*)
> v.good against sub standard attack. But against both he has never
> been devastating.
>
Heh ok :-)
Frankly, to me this whole idea of SRT not doing well in "long series" as
opposed to how well SMG/Viv etc did is amusing - how do you compare them,
unless there is decent sample size? I mean, can one say that Viv and SMG
sucked in short series compared to SRT since SRT does much better than them
in short series - and this obviously proves that SRT is a much greater
batsman, since he can adjust quicker than they ever did? :-)
The world has changed. The world today (and especially India) does not play
"long series" anymore very much - especially India, because the Indian
administration believes in playing 3-test series (and sometimes even
2-test series), and adding on a lot of ODIs. Since it is ODIs that people
actually watch, and thus it is ODIs that actually pay the bills.
Viv Richards played 121 tests in his time. He played *TWELVE* 5-test
series, and 2 6-test series.
SMG played 125 tests in his time. He played seven 5-test series, and
*SIX* 6-test series!
SRT has played 96 tests to date. He has played a grand total of three
5-test series in his life. And *zero* 6-test series. And this aint gonna
change much anytime soon either - India will keep playing 3-test and
2-test series, and loading up on ODIs (if anyone is paying attention,
Dalmiya has already asked for the NZ series to be reduced from 3-tests
to 2-tests, and ODIs to be added - since there is a WC coming up, you
see :-)
And as for "domination" of series, having "devastating" series etc...
Viv Richards' greatest ever series was when he averaged 118.50. His
2nd best series was when he averaged 96.50. His 3rd best series was
when he averaged 92.50. Those were the 3 times in his career that he
averaged more than 90 in a series - BTW, it might be interesting to note
that all 3 series were actually not a 5 or 6 test series, but rather
4-test and 3-test series.
Gavaskar's greatest series was his debut series - he averaged 154 in
the WI in 4 tests. His 2nd best series was 117.33 (in 3 tests). His
3rd best series was 91.50 at home vs the Packerless WI - that was
a 6 test series. Those are the only 3 times SMG has crossed an average
of 90 in a series.
Tendulkar's best series was 181.00 - that was only a 2-test series at
home. His 2nd best series is 111.50 against Australia - a 3-test series.
His 3rd best series is 108.75 against NZ - a 3-test series. His 4th best
series is 101.50 - a 3-test series agaist SL. His 4th best series is
100.66 - a 3-test series against England. His 5th best series is 96.66
against SL - another 2-test series.
Thus, there are 4 series in which SRT has averaged over 100 in the
series, and 5 series in which he has exceeded 90 (note that Viv and
SMG both passed 90 on 3 occasions).
It is one of those strange things, though - despite averaging 100 in
a series no less than 4 times, SRT has *still* never apparently managed
to be "devastating" in a series, no matter how poor the opposition :-)
Sadiq [ amused ] Yusuf
> rk-
rkus...@rogers.com
> SRT has played 96 tests to date. He has played a grand total of three
> 5-test series in his life. And *zero* 6-test series. And this aint gonna
> change much anytime soon either - India will keep playing 3-test and
> 2-test series, and loading up on ODIs (if anyone is paying attention,
> Dalmiya has already asked for the NZ series to be reduced from 3-tests
> to 2-tests, and ODIs to be added - since there is a WC coming up, you
> see :-)
ok fair enuf.
now if u could recall I never said he should score 500 runs in
a 3 test series. all I want him is to have consistency in a series
against good attack. for starters at least once.
OK LET ME PUT IT BLUNTLY. He is yet to have a series against good
attack like Laxman had against Aus; IVAR had against Aus in
1979; SMG vs Pak in 1978; SMG vs Eng in 1979; SVM against Pak in 1989.
(none of the above a 5 test series).
>Tendulkar's best series was 181.00 - that was only a 2-test series at
>home. His 2nd best series is 111.50 against Australia - a 3-test series.
>His 3rd best series is 108.75 against NZ - a 3-test series. His 4th best
>series is 101.50 - a 3-test series agaist SL. His 4th best series is
>100.66 - a 3-test series against England. His 5th best series is 96.66
>against SL - another 2-test series.
the above paragraph, far from being in his praise, is actually an insult.
Look at the attack. The one against aus was against a raddi attack and
that too at home.
rk-
Amol Cricketwallah
>
> On top of that, he hasn't really performed like a "Great" in 4/5 test
> series. (which consistent performance in a Long series)
Said it elsewhere, and am saying it again here - India doesnt play many
"long series" anymore. Thus SRT has played 3 series that are 5-tests or
longer, in a career of 91 tests to date (while SMG played in 13 series
that were 5-tests or longer in his career of 125 tests, and Viv Richards
played 14 series that were 5-tests or longer in his career of 121 tests).
> SMG had 774 in 4 tests and 732 in 6.
> Lara has 798 in 5 tests, 784 in 6, 540 in 4, 688 in 3!!!
> IVAR had 829 in a 5 test series!!
Even Lara, BTW, has gotten to play lots of 5-test series - his board isnt
quite as insistent on playing shorter tests series and more ODIs :-) Thus
Lara has played 89 tests to Tendulkar's 96. And Lara has played 9 5-test
series, and 2 6-test series (as opposed to Tendulkar's 3 5-test series,
and 0 6-test series).
BTW, Lara's best series is 114.66 - a 3-test series in SL. Other than
that, he has a series of 99.75, and a series of 91.00. He too has crossed
an average of 90 in a series 3 times in his life. Tendulkar, as I pointed
out elsewhere, has crossed an average of 100 no less than 5 times to
date, and 90 one other time - thus he has crossed 90 6 times so far.
To a large extent, the above stats are a result of opportunity to bat,
and how many times one gets to bat.
This is even true in short series, of course. A perfect example would
be Lara's trip to SL - he did amazingly well, scored 688 runs, averaged
114.66 in only 3 tests played in Sri Lanka, in 6 complete innings.
Amazing - something Sachin has never equalled, right?
Well, Sachin has played in Sri Lanka more often - but hasnt ever gotten
to play 6 complete innings in a series there :-) This is at least partly
because the Indian batting in SL conditions is a damn sight better than
WI's batting is, and so India doesnt often lose 3-0 in SL with Sachin
around (heck, even without him around, India loses only 2-1 :-)
So how *has* Sachin gone in SL? Well, he has made 3 separate trips to
SL so far. And the results have been as follows...
1993 TI : washed out
T2 : 28 & 104*
T3 : 71
1997 T1 : 143
T2 : 139 & 8
1999 T1 : 53 & 124*
So Sachin has actually played 5 tests in SL - but only been out 6 times
in SL in his entire life, exactly the same as Lara this past series.
And he has scored 670 runs for those 6 dismissals, giving him a career
average in SL of 111.66!
In fact, if you look at careers in SL, Tendulkar actually turns out higher
than Lara - because Lara also went there for 1 test in 1994, and scored
18 in his only innings. Thus Lara's career average (in 4 tests) in SL
is 100.7, while Tendulkar's career average (in 5 tests) in SL is 111.7!
Sadiq [ BTW, Lara has five 5-test series with avg under 35 each ] Yusuf
Colin Kynoch
>
> "Colin Kynoch" <kyn...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3d1af472$1...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> >
> > Gafoor <rro...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> > news:3d1aa898$1...@news5.nntpserver.com...
> > >
> > > "Colin Kynoch" <kyn...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:3d1a6e47$1...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > > >>
> > > > Depends as a high scorer his is in the same class as Bradman and
> a
> > > higher
> > > > class than any of the aforementioned batsmen.
> > >
> > > And Jayasuriya is of a higher class than both Bradman & Taylor,
> right
> >
> >
> > In high score yes.
> >
> > And Lara would be top of the pile.
> >
> > Remind me again what is Tendulkar's top score.
>
> Is that a measure of how good a batsman is ?
It is one of them.
> > Tendulkar doesn't even have the highest average of current batsmen.
>
> The others who have a better average than him, how long have they
> substained that average.
An average at about that level most of hs career.
Colin Kynoch
Gafoor
> > Is that a measure of how good a batsman is ?
>
> It is one of them.
And SRT falls short in comparison to Mark Taylor, just Don Bradman
falls
short in comparison to Jayasuriya.
So what does that prove ?
>
> > > Tendulkar doesn't even have the highest average of current
batsmen.
> >
> > The others who have a better average than him, how long have they
> > substained that average.
>
> An average at about that level most of hs career.
Who are they & how many years have their career spanned ?
Ken Higgs
Colin Kynoch wrote:
> Gafoor <rro...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:3d1aa898$1...@news5.nntpserver.com...
> >
> > "Colin Kynoch" <kyn...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3d1a6e47$1...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > >>
> > > Depends as a high scorer his is in the same class as Bradman and a
> > higher
> > > class than any of the aforementioned batsmen.
> >
> > And Jayasuriya is of a higher class than both Bradman & Taylor, right
>
> In high score yes.
>
> And Lara would be top of the pile.
>
> Remind me again what is Tendulkar's top score.
>
It's easy to check on crickinfo, Col.
As is Lara's.
Lara has a higher top score than Taylor, or didn't you realise that?
Higgsy
Colin Kynoch
> "Colin Kynoch" <kyn...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3d1b8...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > > Is that a measure of how good a batsman is ?
> >
> > It is one of them.
>
> And SRT falls short in comparison to Mark Taylor, just Don Bradman
> falls
> short in comparison to Jayasuriya.
> So what does that prove ?
Thing is Bradman is the only batsman to appear twice in the 300+ list and he
also has the best score below 300, 299*.
> > > > Tendulkar doesn't even have the highest average of current
> batsmen.
> > >
> > > The others who have a better average than him, how long have they
> > > substained that average.
> >
> > An average at about that level most of hs career.
>
> Who are they & how many years have their career spanned ?
Look up PWC Rankings the batsman is #12 in the Test rankings.
Colin Kynoch
Gafoor
>
> Gafoor <rro...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:afg37c$e687e$1...@ID-27262.news.dfncis.de...
> > "Colin Kynoch" <kyn...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3d1b8...@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > > > Is that a measure of how good a batsman is ?
> > >
> > > It is one of them.
> >
> > And SRT falls short in comparison to Mark Taylor, just Don Bradman
> > falls
> > short in comparison to Jayasuriya.
> > So what does that prove ?
>
> Thing is Bradman is the only batsman to appear twice in the 300+
list and he
> also has the best score below 300, 299*.
And what does that prove ?
That by some arbitrary rules you lay down, highest score is valid
only for comparing SRT with Taylor but not Bradman/Waugh with
Jayasuriya because he has the highest score lower than 300.
If you add a criteria that his highest score is the only prime number
which is also a square root of two other prime numbers which are
also your favourite numbers, you can prove that any batsman you
like is better than any other batsman you don't like.
>
> > > > > Tendulkar doesn't even have the highest average of current
> > batsmen.
> > > >
> > > > The others who have a better average than him, how long have
they
> > > > substained that average.
> > >
> > > An average at about that level most of hs career.
> >
> > Who are they & how many years have their career spanned ?
>
> Look up PWC Rankings the batsman is #12 in the Test rankings.
Steve Waugh averages less than SRT ?? In some strange parallel
Sri Lankan universe ? (we all know by now that you are Sri Lankan).
Why don't you make your point directly instead of dropping tiny clues
& making me follow-up with a question. Then you drop one more tiny
clue & then I follow-up again. Is this a way to increase hard disk
sales ? Once is OK, but doing it 3-4 times, is too irritating.
Why not say exactly what you mean - how do you think Waugh averages
more than tendulkar.
Ken Higgs
Gafoor wrote:
Well,
I'm getting confused here.
I thought the 'tiny clue' referred to Gilclang, as in 'Tendulkar doesn't
even have the highest average of current batsmen.'. I must confess this
became slightly distorted by the comment ' An average at about that level
most of hs career.', which seemed to rule him out.
Now it seems that we are looking at a Gilchrist/Waugh amalgam, in that
Gilly averages more than SRT and Waugh has been at that average for most
of his career (though I'm not even sure about that, Waugh has averaged @50
for quite a while, but he also averaged well below that for quite a while.
He's had a long career)
Higgsy
Vishal
> me. I am only the messenger.
>
> RK-
> ========================================
>
> Me thinks that SRT should be renamed to Sachin "Ran Away" Tendulkar
> :-))
>
> I mean, its 13 years since his debut and we are still waiting for him to
> prove to be a TRUE match winner.
Let me put things in the right perspective. to win matches, not only do you
need to score, but you need to get 20 wickets. SRT has never had any
adequate support from the bowlers.
And about his performance here is what cricinfo has to say
Record
Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
unfiltered 96 8004 217 57.58 29 32 27 3/10 42.66 0 64
0
away 54 4116 177 52.76 15 18 14 2/7 43.85 0 31 0
52 doesn't seem a bad average anywhere, not just away....
Against South Africa
14 948 169 37.92 3 3 5 3/10 27.60 0 10 0
All three centuries have been on SA grounds...
Against Australia
15 1406 177 54.07 6 5 8 3/31 42.25 0 8 0
Of these 6 centuries 3 have been in Australia.
Against WI
13 1022 179 53.78 2 7 2 2/107 83.50 0 12 0
Against England
12 1282 177 80.12 5 6 1 1/27 88.00 0 13 0
Against Srilanka
13 1124 148 80.28 6 3 0 - - 0 8 0
Against Pakistan
7 395 136 32.91 1 2 4 2/35 22.00 0 1 0
Pakistan is the only country against which tendulkar has a dismal record.
And that is because of the 7 tests that he played against them, 4 were in
the absolute beginning of his career.
He has scored more than half of his centuries (15 of 29) abroad.
As I said... you need 20 wickets to win a test match which is why India
doesn't win test matches.
Vishal
go ahead and
>Now it seems that we are looking at a Gilchrist/Waugh amalgam, in that
>Gilly averages more than SRT and Waugh has been at that average for most
>of his career (though I'm not even sure about that, Waugh has averaged @50
>for quite a while, but he also averaged well below that for quite a while.
>He's had a long career)
>
>Higgsy
St. Waugh's average moved as follows (excluding spikes):
avg 30 -> 40th innings
avg 40 -> 90th innings
avg 50 -> 125th innings
maintained 50 from 125th to 233rd innings.
- Gussie
Larry de Silva
If Colin is a Sri Lankan, I'm an Indian Tamil hindu.........................
Larikin
Brother Arawak advised me against saying that I'm a white West
Indian.............!!