Tendulkar averages 26.93 against southafrica!(and 19.53 before the Recent flat track century)
Neha
it out yourself:
in 3rd/4th innings. sachin's average is the worst of all time, check
it out yourself:
or
and before the last test it was 19.53!!!!!!!!!!! YES! thats right!
Nineteen point fifty three! Again, the worst!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
or
Next to Bradman My Foot!!!
Neha
DavidW
> On Dec 26, 11:24 am, Neha <neha.female.cricke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 26, 10:22 pm, Neha <neha.female.cricke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> in 3rd/4th innings. sachin's average is the worst of all time, check
>>> it out yourself:
>>
>>
>>> or
>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/33esbsx
>>
>>> and before the last test it was 19.53!!!!!!!!!!! YES! thats right!
>>> Nineteen point fifty three! Again, the worst!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>
> So I guess you do not like Tendulkar.
Whatever he thinks of him, he's right that the idea that Tendulkar is on a par
with Bradman, or even greater, is ridiculous. That's what some people have been
suggesting lately.
Here, veteran cricket writer Mike Coward embarrasses himself by taking the
debate seriously:
http://tinyurl.com/25o8w2e
Raja, The Great
Bradman played in the 40s, when the bowlers bowled straight. It was
quite easy back then for him. He is no doubt one of the most fabulous
batsman of all time. But he did have to face Wasim Akram's reverse
swingers, Shane Warne's insane spin and Shoaib Akhtar's bullets.
Tendulkar has achieved this in a very tough era. The hate for
Tendulkar is irrational in my opinion. He has broken all sorts of
records in ODI and test cricket.
I like him, but not his biggest fan. He is too perfect for me. I like
upredictable explosive batsman like Kris Srikkanth, Sanath Jayasurya,
Shahid Afridi, Kapil Dev, Chris Cairns etc. None of these were as
successful as Tendulkar, but they were fun to watch.
Raja, The Great
Watch Kris Srikkanth destroy the Aussies in their own land. Those were
the days. India could challenge Aussies on their own ground in Test
Cricket!!!. India has been crap ever since 1987. The best period was
from 1983-86. Gavaskar-Srikkanth was probably the best opening
partnership ever... at least in ODI. The contrast was amazing.
DavidW
I don't hate Tendulkar at all. I like watching him play and he's a modest and
admirable person. But the idea that he's up with Bradman can be knocked on the
head very easily, and that is by comparing each of them with their
contempraries. There is nothing special in modern cricket about averaging in
the 50s over a long career. If Tendulkar is the greatest, then Ponting can't be
far behind, and there are plenty of others who are at least in the same frame.
OTOH, Bradman was streets ahead of his contemporaries. If the bowling was so
pedestrian in the 30s, why didn't anyone else dominate like he did? Tendulkar
is a great player but he's no Bradman. The question should not even be asked.
> I like him, but not his biggest fan. He is too perfect for me. I like
> upredictable explosive batsman like Kris Srikkanth,
Srikkanth is my favourite of all Indian players.
Raja, The Great
Okay point taken. But Tendulkar has excelled in both test cricked and
One Day International. Not many have. How many of his peers have
broken records in both? It is very difficult to compare him to Bradman
really. Can we compare Federer to Bill Tilden or Pancho Gonzales? It
is difficult to go that far back. Things have changed so much.
>
> > I like him, but not his biggest fan. He is too perfect for me. I like
> > upredictable explosive batsman like Kris Srikkanth,
>
> Srikkanth is my favourite of all Indian players.
Cool. We have Steffi Graf and Srikkanth in common now. Did you watch
the clip I posted? Thats a test match. And Srikkanth outscored
Gavaskar (the test cricket Guru) by almost 50 runs.
Raja, The Great
One thing about Tendulkar though... he never won for India the World
Cup. What is the point in being the greatest batsman ever if you
cannot get the cup for your nation? Most great soccer players have.
The other great Indian players like Gavaskar and Kapil Dev have won
world cup for India.
DavidW
I saw him make 86 on the MCG. Fantastic straight driving off the fast bowlers,
including beanpole Bruce Reid.
DavidW
That was Boxing Day Test also, in 1985, though he batted on the second morning.
As part of the crowd, I don't think I've seen a more entertaining innings. It's
too bad he missed out on three figures.
Raja, The Great
I think got out 5 times in the 90s (once on 99!!!) in ODI. He never
seemed to care for three figures. Tendulkar OTOH is very greedy about
getting 100. He slows down a lot in the 90s.
Bruce Reid was quite a good bowler. I think McDermott was very scary
too. I always though Australian batting lineup in the 80s especially
for test cricket was very strong - Boon, Marsh, Jones, Border... West
Indies had a great lineup too... Haynes, Greenidge, Richardson,
Richards, Logie
Isn't the 1985 test series the only series India drew with Aussies in
Australia? They have been thrashed there ever since?
Call Centre
Without even getting into how tough things were for Bradman and
discussing all those aspects about uncovered pitches or not wearing
helmets. I wonder how today's batsmen would fare facing even these
bowlers bowling around 135 to 140 kph without helmets (forget about
150 plus kph). But lets forget about that debate and just discuss the
points about Sachin. I believe he faced Wasim Akram in only 2 test
series. Once as a young 16 year old when Akram was just starting to
get into his groove as a fast bowler. It wasn't until a couple of
years later in 1991 that he matured and became much more dangerous.
Sachin never faced him till another 10 years had passed in 1999 when
he really wasn't at his peak. Still a very good bowler but far from
the terror he was in those 10 years between 1989 and 1999 when Sachin
never faced him in test match cricket. Also, he faced Shane Warne only
twice in a series in Australia. In 1992 when Warne first started out
and got clobbered by the Indians and then in 1999. But Sachin's
mastery over Warne was something great so lets just say Sachin did end
up having the better of Warne. Regarding Shoaib Akhtar. He was fast
but I would rate Wasim and Waqar better when they were at their peak.
BTW Sachin also never faced in test match cricket one of the all time
great fast bowlers in the history of the game inspite of playing for
almost a decade while that bowler was still bowling. Curtly Ambrose.
So although Sachin is a great batsman. One of the greatest to have
ever played the game of cricket I would have to say that he wasn't
tested by some of the best while they were still bowling at thier
best. Other Indian batsmen also benefitted by this largesse during
those years. However, our current Indian batting line is the best
India has ever produced and Sachin is still an important cog in that
machine. :)
>
> I like him, but not his biggest fan. He is too perfect for me. I like
> upredictable explosive batsman like Kris Srikkanth, Sanath Jayasurya,
> Shahid Afridi, Kapil Dev, Chris Cairns etc. None of these were as
> successful as Tendulkar, but they were fun to watch.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Call Centre
>
> - Show quoted text -
While I admire your praise of those past greats I must honestly say
that the current Indian batting line is easily the best India has ever
produced. We have 3 all time great batsmen who could play in an all
time Indian test eleven. (something no past Indian team ever had). In
fact the fourth Laxman could also lay claim to being at least in a
squad of 15 for the all time Indian test team. He would compete with
the likes of Amarnath, Vishwanath and a few others for a place in the
15 member squad. :)
Call Centre
Viv Richards has. In fact Viv's 47 average in one dayers is awesome
and when you take into account his phenomenal strike rate of 90 to go
with that (especially at a time when even very good one day batsmen
averaging in the 40's had strike rates of about 70 to 75 at best) you
get some idea of the dominance and class of that batsman who was miles
ahead of his peers in those days. He also has a very impressive test
record to go alongside his phenomenal one day record. :)
How many of his peers have
> broken records in both? It is very difficult to compare him to Bradman
> really. Can we compare Federer to Bill Tilden or Pancho Gonzales? It
> is difficult to go that far back. Things have changed so much.
>
>
>
> > > I like him, but not his biggest fan. He is too perfect for me. I like
> > > upredictable explosive batsman like Kris Srikkanth,
>
> > Srikkanth is my favourite of all Indian players.
>
> Cool. We have Steffi Graf and Srikkanth in common now. Did you watch
> the clip I posted? Thats a test match. And Srikkanth outscored
> Gavaskar (the test cricket Guru) by almost 50 runs.- Hide quoted text -
DavidW
I don't remember. I only know that we can almost never beat India in India.
Southpaw
Drew 1-1 in 2003-4, and also previously also drawn 1-1 in 1980-1.
You seem to have a lot of pleasant memories of the 1985-6 tour. OTOH
some of us think the tour went terribly because Aus were at an all
time low, and we couldn't win a single test against their worst team
of all time. NZ also toured Aus that season and won the series.
As reigning world champions, we also underperformed in not winning the
Benson & Hedges limited overs competition. In fact, we didn't even
stretch it to 3 finals.
Samir Chopra summarized the nadir of the forgettable tour in this
article: http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/diffstrokes/archives/2010/12/indias_great_misses_exhibit_no.php
-Samarth.
Raja, The Great
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> While I admire your praise of those past greats I must honestly say
> that the current Indian batting line is easily the best India has ever
And yet they can't win squat. Indian batting line up is supposed to be
the best, ever since the mid 90s. And they continue to fail in major
tournaments. OTOH the so called weak batting line up of 1983-86 did a
lot of wonderful things.
1983 - Won the World Cup
1985 - Won the World Championship (not losing a single match
destroying Pakistan twice, Australia once, England once, New Zealand
once)
1985/86 - Drew the three test match series in Australia 0-0 never
coming close to losing and almost winning one of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Championship_of_Cricket
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=6;type=team
> produced. We have 3 all time great batsmen who could play in an all
> time Indian test eleven. (something no past Indian team ever had). In
> fact the fourth Laxman could also lay claim to being at least in a
> squad of 15 for the all time Indian test team. He would compete with
> the likes of Amarnath, Vishwanath and a few others for a place in the
> 15 member squad. :)
None of this matters when you cannot win significant test series
abroad against tough nations like Australia or important ODI cups.
Don't you agree?
Raja, The Great
Call Centre
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > While I admire your praise of those past greats I must honestly say
> > that the current Indian batting line is easily the best India has ever
>
> And yet they can't win squat. Indian batting line up is supposed to be
> the best, ever since the mid 90s. And they continue to fail in major
> tournaments. OTOH the so called weak batting line up of 1983-86 did a
> lot of wonderful things.
>
> 1983 - Won the World Cup
> 1985 - Won the World Championship (not losing a single match
> destroying Pakistan twice, Australia once, England once, New Zealand
> once)
> 1985/86 - Drew the three test match series in Australia 0-0 never
> coming close to losing and almost winning one of them.
>
>
> > produced. We have 3 all time great batsmen who could play in an all
> > time Indian test eleven. (something no past Indian team ever had). In
> > fact the fourth Laxman could also lay claim to being at least in a
> > squad of 15 for the all time Indian test team. He would compete with
> > the likes of Amarnath, Vishwanath and a few others for a place in the
> > 15 member squad. :)
>
> None of this matters when you cannot win significant test series
> abroad against tough nations like Australia or important ODI cups.
>
> - Show quoted text -
Actually this Indian team has its best chance ever of beating
Australia in Australia in a test series next year when they go there
at the end of the year 2011. The harder task for this team is to win a
test match against South Africa in South Africa. Forget the series
lets at least win a test match against SA. :)
Call Centre
>
> - Show quoted text -
Very difficult to put 10 batsmen. The first 3 or 4 are much easier to
write in. After that it actually gets much harder because there are
many great names. But Bradman stands apart from all in test match
cricket. My personal favourite I would put after Bradman is Brian
Lara. After that I guess I would put down Vivian Richards and Sachin
Tendulkar. I have also immensely enjoyed watching Adam Gilchrist
batting. He is a genuine matchwinner as a batsman. Also being an
excellent wicketkeeper makes him a very valuable allrounder for any
team to have. Of course Sehwag too is a delight to watch and is
actually more fun to watch in test match cricket than even Sachin.
Even when Sachin was young and more aggressive, Sehwag is still more
fun to watch than Sachin in his youth in test match cricket. :)
DavidW
> On Dec 27, 12:28 am, "Raja, The Great" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Okay point taken. But Tendulkar has excelled in both test cricked and
>> One Day International. Not many have.
>
> Viv Richards has. In fact Viv's 47 average in one dayers is awesome
> and when you take into account his phenomenal strike rate of 90 to go
> with that (especially at a time when even very good one day batsmen
> averaging in the 40's had strike rates of about 70 to 75 at best) you
> get some idea of the dominance and class of that batsman who was miles
> ahead of his peers in those days. He also has a very impressive test
> record to go alongside his phenomenal one day record. :)
In fact, Richards averaged over 50 in ODIs for most of his career. He dropped
below 50 only towards the end.
DavidW
Hadlee absolutely murdered us, and not only because we were a poor team. That
was the best quality bowling over a series that I have seen. He was making the
ball dance at will when all the other bowlers on both sides could only bowl a
straight ball.
Lawrence Logic
"Raja, The Great" <zepf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:39259593-e291-4739...@t35g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> Who are your top 10 test cricket batsman of all time?
>
It only took you 1 hour and 17 minutes to get around to a list.
Tell me about this "greatness" that you have. Is it great incompetence
(Bradman played less than 30% of his Tests in the 1940's, and Srikkanth was
only dismissed once in the 90's (94 against NZ))? Is it great annoyance
(crossposted a cricket thread to a tennis newsgroup)?
I'm looking forward to the day when you're under a great load of soil. That
will truly be a great day!
--
Lawrence
"I got such a raging clue that I almost shot clue goo all over Joe." - Frank
Hardly - 11 October 2006
Southpaw
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > While I admire your praise of those past greats I must honestly say
> > that the current Indian batting line is easily the best India has ever
>
> And yet they can't win squat. Indian batting line up is supposed to be
> the best, ever since the mid 90s. And they continue to fail in major
> tournaments. OTOH the so called weak batting line up of 1983-86 did a
> lot of wonderful things.
This is b.s. This batting line-up has carried India from #8 or
something in
the world in 2000 to #1, 10 years down the line. We are also #2 in
the
world in ODO cricket. We didn't win an ODO world cup, but there were
a
few significant limited-overs achievements along the way. Runner-up
in
2003 World Cup, an ICCKO victory or two (similar to the World
Championship of Cricket win), a Twenty20 World Cup win.
Respect where respect is due. In the 1980s we never got anywhere near
#1 in the world in tests. OK, West Indies in those days were an ATG
team. Still, we likely never got to #2 in the world even. Both
England
and Australia sucked in those days, and RSA weren't even around. In
this 'glorious' 1983-1986 period that you speak of, we lost a home
series
to England (thankfully not happened in 25 years since), lost a test
series to *Sri Lanka* (minnows... like losing a test series to
Bangladesh
today), and couldn't beat Pakistan minus Imran in our own den.
Not to mention ignominious 1985-6 tour of Aus.
Yes there were some successes also, like 1983 WC, 1985 WCC,
Rothmans Cup, 1986 series win in England. But India are better off
now, overall, then we were then.
Go learn some history.
-Samarth.
>
> 1983 - Won the World Cup
> 1985 - Won the World Championship (not losing a single match
> destroying Pakistan twice, Australia once, England once, New Zealand
> once)
> 1985/86 - Drew the three test match series in Australia 0-0 never
> coming close to losing and almost winning one of them.
>
>
> > produced. We have 3 all time great batsmen who could play in an all
> > time Indian test eleven. (something no past Indian team ever had). In
> > fact the fourth Laxman could also lay claim to being at least in a
> > squad of 15 for the all time Indian test team. He would compete with
> > the likes of Amarnath, Vishwanath and a few others for a place in the
> > 15 member squad. :)
>
> None of this matters when you cannot win significant test series
> abroad against tough nations like Australia or important ODI cups.
> Don't you agree?- Hide quoted text -
Raja, The Great
I always like Viv. Fun to watch and very dangerous.
Raja, The Great
The pitches are doctored for spin bowling. Its safe to ignore test
cricket in India ;-)
Raja, The Great
Well we did win 2 major ODI championships in 3 years - World Cup -83
and World Championships -85
>
> Samir Chopra summarized the nadir of the forgettable tour in this
> article:http://blogs.espncricinfo.com/diffstrokes/archives/2010/12/indias_gre...
>
> -Samarth.
Raja, The Great
p.com> wrote:
> "Raja, The Great" <zepflo...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:39259593-e291-4739...@t35g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Who are your top 10 test cricket batsman of all time?
>
> It only took you 1 hour and 17 minutes to get around to a list.
>
> Tell me about this "greatness" that you have. Is it great incompetence
> (Bradman played less than 30% of his Tests in the 1940's, and Srikkanth was
> only dismissed once in the 90's (94 against NZ))? Is it great annoyance
> (crossposted a cricket thread to a tennis newsgroup)?
I am talking about Srikkanth in ODI. Not test.
>
> I'm looking forward to the day when you're under a great load of soil. That
> will truly be a great day!
Fuck off, this was uncalled for.
Raja, The Great
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > While I admire your praise of those past greats I must honestly say
> > > that the current Indian batting line is easily the best India has ever
>
> > And yet they can't win squat. Indian batting line up is supposed to be
> > the best, ever since the mid 90s. And they continue to fail in major
> > tournaments. OTOH the so called weak batting line up of 1983-86 did a
> > lot of wonderful things.
>
> This is b.s. This batting line-up has carried India from #8 or
> something in
> the world in 2000 to #1, 10 years down the line. We are also #2 in
> the
> world in ODO cricket. We didn't win an ODO world cup, but there were
> a
> few significant limited-overs achievements along the way. Runner-up
> in
> 2003 World Cup,
Yeah right... that was truly horrific to remember - the final.
>an ICCKO victory or two (similar to the World
> Championship of Cricket win), a Twenty20 World Cup win.
Twenty20 is a joke.
>
> Respect where respect is due. In the 1980s we never got anywhere near
> #1 in the world in tests.
Who cares about this shitty rankings?
> OK, West Indies in those days were an ATG
> team. Still, we likely never got to #2 in the world even. Both
> England
> and Australia sucked in those days,
Yet they won 1987 World Cup?
> and RSA weren't even around. In
> this 'glorious' 1983-1986 period that you speak of, we lost a home
> series
> to England (thankfully not happened in 25 years since), lost a test
> series to *Sri Lanka* (minnows... like losing a test series to
> Bangladesh
> today), and couldn't beat Pakistan minus Imran in our own den.
>
> Not to mention ignominious 1985-6 tour of Aus.
>
> Yes there were some successes also, like 1983 WC, 1985 WCC,
> Rothmans Cup, 1986 series win in England. But India are better off
> now, overall, then we were then.
>
> Go learn some history.
>
> -Samarth.
mid 80s ODI team was the best ever. Test cricket, India were never
really good, especially abroad.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > 1983 - Won the World Cup
> > 1985 - Won the World Championship (not losing a single match
> > destroying Pakistan twice, Australia once, England once, New Zealand
> > once)
> > 1985/86 - Drew the three test match series in Australia 0-0 never
> > coming close to losing and almost winning one of them.
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Championship_of_Crickethttp://stat......
jzfredricks
> But Tendulkar has excelled in both test cricked and
> One Day International.
And Bradman excelled in Test and FC (the two main forms of the game in
Bradman's time). How does SRT fair in FC?
Raja, The Great
I never said Tendulkar is better than Bradman. So piss off
Lawrence Logic
jz never suggested that you'd said that Tendulkar is better than Bradman.
He merely asked you a reasonable question about Tendulkar's performance in
first class cricket. You've responded by spitting poison at him, which is
what you've always done when you've outlived your welcome.
As a wise yet confused man once said, the leopard never falls far from the
tree.
--
Lawrence
"You can just hang outside in the sun all day tossing a ball around, or you
can sit at your computer and do something that matters." - Eric Cartman - 4
October 2006
Shakes
He is better than all the batsmen you highlighted in your original
post. Anybody who can face Lillee and Thomson at their ferocious best
on the bounciest pitches (without a helmet, to boot) and come out with
a very respectable average is a tremendous batsman. Richards, in fact,
never wore a helmet in his life. That's just amazing.
Since the 1970's there's no batsman to compare with Richards.
DavidW
Agreed. Forget Bradman. For brutal brilliance give me Richards.
Raja, The Great
I think you are right.
Whisper
>>>>>> admirable person. But the idea that he's up with Bradman can be knocked on the
>>>>>> head very easily, and that is by comparing each of them with their
>>>>>> contempraries. There is nothing special in modern cricket about averaging in
>>>>>> the 50s over a long career. If Tendulkar is the greatest, then Ponting can't be
>>>>>> far behind, and there are plenty of others who are at least in the same frame.
>>>>>> OTOH, Bradman was streets ahead of his contemporaries. If the bowling was so
>>>>>> pedestrian in the 30s, why didn't anyone else dominate like he did? Tendulkar
>>>>>> is a great player but he's no Bradman. The question should not even be asked.
>>
>>>>> Okay point taken. But Tendulkar has excelled in both test cricked and
>>>>> One Day International. Not many have.
>>
>>>> Viv Richards has.
>>
>>> I always like Viv. Fun to watch and very dangerous.
>>
>> He is better than all the batsmen you highlighted in your original
>> post. Anybody who can face Lillee and Thomson at their ferocious best
>> on the bounciest pitches (without a helmet, to boot) and come out with
>> a very respectable average is a tremendous batsman. Richards, in fact,
>> never wore a helmet in his life. That's just amazing.
>>
>> Since the 1970's there's no batsman to compare with Richards.
>
> I think you are right.
Viv was great to watch, but a bit of a loose cannon (Safin?). You got
the feeling he could get out any time.
Bradman & Tendulkar were far more reliable (Laver & Federer?) - top
quality batsmen.
krquet
Good grief, I didn't realise or forgot that Raja the grandmother of
all things asinine lists frequented this ng as well. Well, there goes
this neighbourhood. Anyway, if any of you are somehow curious, and I
can't imagine why, check out Raja's mug posted on the alt.fan.pink-
floyd last week I believe.
aA...
hl@yM..
Whisper
No thanks. Too much xmas cake etc & bound to chuck it up.
Raja, The Great
I liked loose cannons a lot better. The more the undpredictability,
the more fun to watch. I remember he liked to open his account with a
four. He was a master of disguise. He will reach his 50 with anyone
noticing it.
>
> Bradman & Tendulkar were far more reliable (Laver & Federer?) - top
> quality batsmen.
Bradman was reliable? How the fuck do you know? When did you see
Bradman? What are you? 90?
Mad Hamish
1928-1948
so while he played in the 40s it was far from his entire career
>when the bowlers bowled straight.
read up on Maurice Tate, Alec Bedsar, Verity, Laker, Grimmett,
O'Reilly, Tim Wall, Harold Larwood.
also read up on uncovered wickets
> It was
>quite easy back then for him. He is no doubt one of the most fabulous
>batsman of all time. But he did have to face Wasim Akram's reverse
>swingers,
no, but he did have to face bowlers who swung the ball, in first class
cricket Clarie Grimmett and Bill O'Reilly.
> Shane Warne's insane spin and Shoaib Akhtar's bullets.
he had to face Larwood backed with the bodyline field.
>Tendulkar has achieved this in a very tough era. The hate for
>Tendulkar is irrational in my opinion.
There's a singificant difference between hating Tendulkar and not
believing that he's better than Bradman.
And then there's some of his more rabid fans who poison the well a
bit...
> He has broken all sorts of records in ODI and test cricket.
He's mostly broken aggregate records and number of 100s (& probably
#50s) in tests. Which don't really mean a lot because they largely
come down to playing a hell of a lot of matches.
Bradman had a 20 year career, 6 years lost to WWII so call it 14
years.
He played 52 tests in that period and missed 8 tests (dropped for 1,
missed 1 for illess, missed a tour of SA due to illness, didn't play a
1 off test in NZ) so he could have played 60 tests in 14 years.
In 21 years Tendulkar has played 176 tests...
In one dayers his records are mostly aggregate (and max # of) records
plus the 200. Again largely down to the number of matches.
>
>I like him, but not his biggest fan. He is too perfect for me. I like
>upredictable explosive batsman like Kris Srikkanth, Sanath Jayasurya,
>Shahid Afridi, Kapil Dev, Chris Cairns etc. None of these were as
>successful as Tendulkar, but they were fun to watch.
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
newsunsp...@iinet.unspamme.net.au
Mad Hamish
<zepf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 26, 2:11 pm, Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> While I admire your praise of those past greats I must honestly say
>> that the current Indian batting line is easily the best India has ever
>
>And yet they can't win squat. Indian batting line up is supposed to be
>the best, ever since the mid 90s. And they continue to fail in major
>tournaments. OTOH the so called weak batting line up of 1983-86 did a
>lot of wonderful things.
>
>1983 - Won the World Cup
yeah
>1985 - Won the World Championship (not losing a single match
>destroying Pakistan twice, Australia once, England once, New Zealand
>once)
for all the name it had I'm not sure how seriously teams were taking
it.
Certainly the Windies were hurt when Ratnayke threw some bouncers and
hurt a couple of them.
>1985/86 - Drew the three test match series in Australia 0-0 never
>coming close to losing and almost winning one of them.
in all honesty if you look at the Australian squad
http://www.earthsci.unimelb.edu.au/~chris/cgi-bin/sid.cgi?aus.ind+13121985
failing to win a test against that lot is a sign that the Indian team
of the time was a poor traveller rather than a good effort.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Championship_of_Cricket
>http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=6;type=team
>
>> produced. We have 3 all time great batsmen who could play in an all
>> time Indian test eleven. (something no past Indian team ever had). In
>> fact the fourth Laxman could also lay claim to being at least in a
>> squad of 15 for the all time Indian test team. He would compete with
>> the likes of Amarnath, Vishwanath and a few others for a place in the
>> 15 member squad. :)
>
>None of this matters when you cannot win significant test series
>abroad against tough nations like Australia or important ODI cups.
>Don't you agree?
>
you need a bowling attack to win. India hasn't had one that can be
relied upon to win outside of India.
Mad Hamish
If you want to actually want to discuss things with people I recommend
keeping it civil.
Raja, The Great
I think you made a convincing case. I agree Bradman was indeed
greater.
>
> In 21 years Tendulkar has played 176 tests...
>
> In one dayers his records are mostly aggregate (and max # of) records
> plus the 200. Again largely down to the number of matches.
>
>
>
> >I like him, but not his biggest fan. He is too perfect for me. I like
> >upredictable explosive batsman like Kris Srikkanth, Sanath Jayasurya,
> >Shahid Afridi, Kapil Dev, Chris Cairns etc. None of these were as
> >successful as Tendulkar, but they were fun to watch.
>
> --
> "Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
> Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
>
> Mad Hamish
> Hamish Laws
Raja, The Great
<newsunspammel...@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 12:23:51 -0800 (PST), "Raja, The Great"
>
> >On Dec 26, 2:11 pm, Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> While I admire your praise of those past greats I must honestly say
> >> that the current Indian batting line is easily the best India has ever
>
> >And yet they can't win squat. Indian batting line up is supposed to be
> >the best, ever since the mid 90s. And they continue to fail in major
> >tournaments. OTOH the so called weak batting line up of 1983-86 did a
> >lot of wonderful things.
>
> >1983 - Won the World Cup
>
> yeah
>
> >1985 - Won the World Championship (not losing a single match
> >destroying Pakistan twice, Australia once, England once, New Zealand
> >once)
>
> for all the name it had I'm not sure how seriously teams were taking
> it.
> Certainly the Windies were hurt when Ratnayke threw some bouncers and
> hurt a couple of them.
>
> >1985/86 - Drew the three test match series in Australia 0-0 never
> >coming close to losing and almost winning one of them.
>
>
> failing to win a test against that lot is a sign that the Indian team
> of the time was a poor traveller rather than a good effort.
>
>
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Championship_of_Cricket
>
> >> produced. We have 3 all time great batsmen who could play in an all
> >> time Indian test eleven. (something no past Indian team ever had). In
> >> fact the fourth Laxman could also lay claim to being at least in a
> >> squad of 15 for the all time Indian test team. He would compete with
> >> the likes of Amarnath, Vishwanath and a few others for a place in the
> >> 15 member squad. :)
>
> >None of this matters when you cannot win significant test series
> >abroad against tough nations like Australia or important ODI cups.
> >Don't you agree?
>
> you need a bowling attack to win. India hasn't had one that can be
> relied upon to win outside of India.
Good point. A balanced team has to be good in bowling and batting and
fielding as well. That way the mid 80s team was better. What is the
point in having the strongest batting line up when your bowlers suck.
Also the mid 80s team could bat well until number 11.
> --
> "Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
> Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
>
> Mad Hamish
> Hamish Laws
Raja, The Great
>
> >On Dec 26, 2:11 pm, Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> While I admire your praise of those past greats I must honestly say
> >> that the current Indian batting line is easily the best India has ever
>
> >And yet they can't win squat. Indian batting line up is supposed to be
> >the best, ever since the mid 90s. And they continue to fail in major
> >tournaments. OTOH the so called weak batting line up of 1983-86 did a
> >lot of wonderful things.
>
> >1983 - Won the World Cup
>
> yeah
>
> >1985 - Won the World Championship (not losing a single match
> >destroying Pakistan twice, Australia once, England once, New Zealand
> >once)
>
> for all the name it had I'm not sure how seriously teams were taking
> it.
Pretty fucking serious. There was a lot of money involved. And a lot
of strong teams participating.
Lawrence Logic
> Lawrence Logic wrote:
>> "Raja, The Great" <zepf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:39259593-e291-4739...@t35g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> Who are your top 10 test cricket batsman of all time?
>>>
>>
>> It only took you 1 hour and 17 minutes to get around to a list.
>>
>> Tell me about this "greatness" that you have. Is it great
>> incompetence (Bradman played less than 30% of his Tests in the
>> 1940's, and Srikkanth was only dismissed once in the 90's (94
>> against NZ))? Is it great annoyance (crossposted a cricket thread
>> to a tennis newsgroup)?
>>
>> I'm looking forward to the day when you're under a great load of
>> soil. That will truly be a great day!
>>
>
> all things asinine lists frequented this ng as well. Well, there goes
> this neighbourhood. Anyway, if any of you are somehow curious, and I
> can't imagine why, check out Raja's mug posted on the alt.fan.pink-
> floyd last week I believe.
>
So I guess that's a picture of Krishna Raja Nadar from Sunnyvale,
California. His photography skills are as great as could be expected, given
his ineptitude for everything else that he turns his hand to.
--
Lawrence
"In the outside world I am a simple geologist, but in here I am Falcor,
Defender of the Alliance." - Randy Marsh - 4 October 2006
Shakes
Actually, Viv is not like Safin. His level of motivation was dependent
on the occasion and the challenge of the opposition. Unlike other
batsmen, he didn't see any need to boost his averages when there was
nothing at stake - like playing against Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe etc. But
put him against Australia, England, and then see him play.
Also, like Sampras, his style is very difficult to play. It requires
superb reflexes and timing, and confidence.
Richards, to me, is a lot like Sampras.
StraightDrive
"Neha" <neha.femal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:da5c315d-5026-4147...@n32g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> in 3rd/4th innings. sachin's average is the worst of all time, check
> it out yourself:
>
> in 3rd/4th innings. sachin's average is the worst of all time, check
> it out yourself:
>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/33esbsx
>
> and before the last test it was 19.53!!!!!!!!!!! YES! thats right!
> Nineteen point fifty three! Again, the worst!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?>
Bradman NEVER played on South African, West Indian, Indian, Srilankan and
Pakistani Pitches.
Sachin is still the BEST BATSMAN EVER......
Whisper
> On Dec 27, 6:12 am, Whisper<beaver...@ozemail.com> wrote:
>> On 28/12/2010 1:03 AM, Raja, The Great wrotatching him play and he's a
>> modest and
>>
>>
>>> I think you are right.
>>
>> Viv was great to watch, but a bit of a loose cannon (Safin?). You got
>> the feeling he could get out any time.
>>
>> quality batsmen.
>
> Actually, Viv is not like Safin. His level of motivation was dependent
> on the occasion and the challenge of the opposition. Unlike other
> batsmen, he didn't see any need to boost his averages when there was
> nothing at stake - like playing against Sri Lanka, Zimbabwe etc. But
> put him against Australia, England, and then see him play.
>
> Also, like Sampras, his style is very difficult to play. It requires
> superb reflexes and timing, and confidence.
>
> Richards, to me, is a lot like Sampras.
Fair enough.
I felt he fell a little short of Sampras equivalent overall. Maybe
halfway between Safin/Sampras?
tendulkar.com
A: When she obsessively hates him
Wotawonderfulworld
news:ifb3ps$te2$1...@speranza.aioe.org:
> /
> "Neha" <neha.femal...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:da5c315d-5026-4147-84b5-
5bfb3f...@n32g2000pre.googlegroups.com.
> ..
>> in 3rd/4th innings. sachin's average is the worst of all time, check
>> it out yourself:
>>
>> in 3rd/4th innings. sachin's average is the worst of all time, check
>> it out yourself:
>>
>> http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=
1;filte
>> r=advanced;innings_number=3;innings_number=4;> or
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/33esbsx
>>
>> and before the last test it was 19.53!!!!!!!!!!! YES! thats right!
>> Nineteen point fifty three! Again, the worst!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?>
>> or
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/38p26fs
>>
>> Next to Bradman My Foot!!!
>>
>> Neha
>
>
>
> Bradman NEVER played on South African, West Indian, Indian, Srilankan
> and Pakistani Pitches.
>
> Sachin is still the BEST BATSMAN EVER......
>
>
>
>
Maybe you should ask Mr Tendulkar who HE thinks is the best batsman the
world has seen.
I'd lay odds on he doesn't say himself
R. Spanditt
> Whatever he thinks of him, he's right that the idea that Tendulkar is on a par
> with Bradman, or even greater, is ridiculous. That's what some people have been
> suggesting lately.
I assume each time people are simply having a laugh or bored. No
rational person would suggest such nonsense in the face of the
numbers.
Howzzat
Are you suggesting Nirvanam is irrational? The joke is on you, since
it is he who decides which numbers are important. And anyway, there
aren't too many numbers in cricket that are greater than a billion.
And the pressure of a billion people > a measly 43 point difference in
batting average.
PG
wrote:
> /"Neha" <neha.female.cricke...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:da5c315d-5026-4147...@n32g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > in 3rd/4th innings. sachin's average is the worst of all time, check
> > it out yourself:
>
> > in 3rd/4th innings. sachin's average is the worst of all time, check
> > it out yourself:
>
> > or
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/33esbsx
>
> > and before the last test it was 19.53!!!!!!!!!!! YES! thats right!
> > Nineteen point fifty three! Again, the worst!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> >http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?>
> > or
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/38p26fs
>
> > Next to Bradman My Foot!!!
>
> > Neha
>
> Bradman NEVER played on South African, West Indian, Indian, Srilankan and
> Pakistani Pitches.
>
> Sachin is still the BEST BATSMAN EVER......
You are either being a goose or you are deliberately stirring up this
group for the fun of it. Unfortunately if you persist these
objectives will no longer be mutually exclusive.
Nirvanam
29g2000prb.googlegroups.com>, shgu...@yahoo.com says...
>
>On Dec 27, 6:46 pm, "R. Spanditt" <dnarmstr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Whatever he thinks of him, he's right that the idea that Tendulkar is on a par
>> > with Bradman, or even greater, is ridiculous. That's what some people have been
>> > suggesting lately.
>>
>> I assume each time people are simply having a laugh or bored. No
>> rational person would suggest such nonsense in the face of the
>> numbers.
>
>Are you suggesting Nirvanam is irrational? The joke is on you, since
>it is he who decides which numbers are important.
No you idiot, Nirvanam never said his numbers are THE numbers. He said
Don's numbers, without info on context of those numbers, are the only
reason he can be considered as a virtuoso.
And anyway, there
>aren't too many numbers in cricket that are greater than a billion.
>And the pressure of a billion people > a measly 43 point difference in
>batting average.
No, you idiot. The pressure of a billion people > an average of 93 aided
by half the fortune of Bradman's context > an average of 100 aided by full
fortune of Bradman's context
If you wanna drag me in unnecessarily, I'll shove it up yours...remember
this is a public ng not a pseudo-public forum where you behave like
Pawning...mommy, mommy he is arguing with me so I'll abuse my Mod powers.
Idiot!
alvey
* Points and laughs *
Nirvanam
itdoesn...@who.com says...
Harbhajan is the answer...as for his favorites, they are Gavaskar and Viv