imran exposes sachin as a hyped / overrated batsman
Tera Baap
Flames to /imran/pakistan/null.
People are now comparing Sachin with Sir Don Bradman. In your playing days,
you had always said that Sunil Gavaskar was the most difficult batsman to
bowl at. Do you still hold the same view now?
Obviously. Basically, Sachin is a stroke player. But Sunil was totally
different, he had a rock-solid defence, could change gears when he wanted .
And I still believe Viv was more killing than Sachin Tendulkar. On his day,
Viv could simply destroy any attack. Let Sachin face those real fast bowlers
on fast, bouncy tracks. Then you can say something. And Sir Don is beyond
comparison. Please don't compare anyone with him.
**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****
Ram Tekumalla
clinically destroyed the well deserved reputation? What is quoted below is just
Imran's opinion and if one took it as the holy grail, then how are you any better than
a morbid fanatic, TB?
-Ram Tekumalla
Tera Baap wrote:
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some days you win. Some days you lose. And somedays it rains
- Crash Davis, Bull Durham
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ram Tekumalla
Ram Tekumalla wrote:
> Exposes? Did Imran Khan build a case against Sachin Tendulkar's credentials and
> clinically destroyed the well deserved reputation? What is quoted below is just
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Before the grammar fuzz jumps on me, that should read "clinically destroy".
-Ram
Karthik Sankaran
realize that comapring SRT
with the Don is ridiculous. As good as he is and as crazy as Indian fans
(including yours truly) are about SRT
let us not get carried away and start comparing him with Don.
As for comparing SMG and SRT, Imran has the right to his opinion. Can I go
further and say as someone who has bowled to SMG and possibly more than once
realized that he is in fact bowling to a wall, Imran would know how good SMG
is.
Viv vs. SRT. All one can say is both are attacking batsmen. Viv has a
lifetime of outstanding batting achievement. SRT is on his way. Let's wait
and see.
- Karthik
Ram Tekumalla wrote in message <374DA534...@yahoo.com>...
>Exposes? Did Imran Khan build a case against Sachin Tendulkar's credentials
and
>clinically destroyed the well deserved reputation? What is quoted below is
just
RoshanCat
How????? Has Imran bowled to Sachin (except when he was 16 years)?
Do you know that Michael Holding thinks Sunny Gavaskar is a flat wicket bully &
Sachin a great batsman, so what does that mean?
Sunil G'skar has failed us innumerable times when we really needed him, He was
a crap ODI player. He never helped India in any ODI cause. What good is a
cricketer if he cant adjust to requirements of the game?
>Viv vs. SRT. All one can say is both are attacking batsmen. Viv has a
>lifetime of outstanding batting achievement
Viv's lifetime achievement is already matched by Sachin, why do we have to
wait? Even If Sachin retires today, he has matched Viv's achievments for the
entire life
>any objective cricket follower will
>realize that comapring SRT
>with the Don is ridiculous.
Why, Is that a blasphemy? If there's a batsman who has come close to Sir Don in
terms of stroke production, allround batting, consistency, domination of
opposition, reversing match fortunes, success, technique then it has to be
Sachin than any other batsman in the world
Cheers,
Roshan
Aneesh Patel
> >As for comparing SMG and SRT, Imran has the right to his opinion
>
> How????? Has Imran bowled to Sachin (except when he was 16 years)?
>
> Do you know that Michael Holding thinks Sunny Gavaskar is a flat wicket bully &
> Sachin a great batsman, so what does that mean?
>
> Sunil G'skar has failed us innumerable times when we really needed him, He was
> a crap ODI player. He never helped India in any ODI cause. What good is a
> cricketer if he cant adjust to requirements of the game?
IIRC, SMG's captaincy in the '85 WSC most definitely helped India. Or would you try
to deny that?
>
> >Viv vs. SRT. All one can say is both are attacking batsmen. Viv has a
> >lifetime of outstanding batting achievement
>
> Viv's lifetime achievement is already matched by Sachin, why do we have to
> wait? Even If Sachin retires today, he has matched Viv's achievments for the
> entire life
>
> >any objective cricket follower will
> >realize that comapring SRT
> >with the Don is ridiculous.
>
> Why, Is that a blasphemy? If there's a batsman who has come close to Sir Don in
> terms of stroke production, allround batting, consistency, domination of
> opposition, reversing match fortunes, success, technique then it has to be
> Sachin than any other batsman in the world
>
In terms of success, there is no comparison. The Don averaged 99, SRT averages 54
in Tests.
>
> Cheers,
> Roshan
John Smith
> How????? Has Imran bowled to Sachin (except when he was 16
> years)?
>Do you know that Michael Holding thinks Sunny Gavaskar is a
>flat wicket bully & Sachin a great batsman, so what does
>that mean?
Excuse me, using your own argument, since Holding never
bowled to Sachin, his views on Sachin is considered
totally worthless.
At least Imran has bowled to both Sachin and SMG.
With warm regards.
John Smith.
Razi C.
>
> >any objective cricket follower will
> >realize that comapring SRT
> >with the Don is ridiculous.
>
> Why, Is that a blasphemy? If there's a batsman who has come close to Sir Don in
> terms of stroke production, allround batting, consistency, domination of
> opposition, reversing match fortunes, success, technique then it has to be
> Sachin than any other batsman in the world
>
> Cheers,
> Roshan
I agree, he was just a human and there is nothing stopping the comparison or
debate.
Unforetunately we can't compare Don's skill on ODI. But if some can score at 99+
in a test match, what would he do in a ODI. And imagine Don Bradman comming in as
a "Pinch Hitter" with circle rule.
Don Bradman scored at an avg. of 99+ in his 60 test matches. If we knew his Strike
Rate, it would've helped. Here is a comparison:
Sachin Tandulkar:
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Test Batting 68 105 10 5177 179 54.49 19 21 48 -
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St
ODI Batting 214 207 21 7971 143 42.85 - 22 43 72 -
Sir Don Bradman:
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Test Batting 52 80 10 6996 334 99.94 29 13 32 -
I-Class Batting M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
New South Wales 41 69 10 5813 452* 98.52 21 17 17 0
South Australia 44 63 8 5752 369 104.60 25 12 36 1
All first-class 234 338 43 28067 452* 95.14 117 69 131 1
Sir Don Bradman has scored his 6996 runs in 80 innings. 29 centuries and 13
fifties.
Sachin has scored his 5177 runs in 105 innings. 19 centuries and 21 fifties.
> not as bad for SRT. If he had converted his 50s into 100s, he is surely close.
But in all honesty, SRT is way off here.
Just for the sake of comparison, I will bring "Lara" in:
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Test Batting 63 108 4 5406 375 51.98 13 27 86 -
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St
ODI Batting 144 142 14 5701 169 44.53 - 12 37 69 -
Here, Lara has also scored 5406 runs in 108 innges, with 13 centuries and 27
fifties. Very similar to SRT.
Therefore, we can safely say SRT's records certainly looks similar to BL, but
still way off from DB. And then SRT is not the only player today to have that kind
of record.
As much as i love SRT's game, he is damn good. He must be close to what *DB* was,
but the fact remains that he is not superior to him in any way.
Regards
Razi Chaudhry [SRT Fan]
RoshanCat
>still way off from DB
Agreed, I'm not saying Sachin > Don or even Sachin == Don, But if you match
characterstics of Sachin & Don they run pretty close.
Many argue with 99.94 > 54.21, but we should also consider that Sachin plays
day-in & day-out, has to cope with varying pitch/weather conditions, plays
against 11 different countries, constant switch between ODI's & tests, he is
also scrutinized by all opposition on video tapes, fielding standards have
vastly improved (can you imagine how many half-chances Don would have offered
which would have been gobbled up by most of the present day fielders),
increased professionalism & discipline
In short, there is a high possibilty that if Don had played now he would have
averaged more in the 60's than the 99.94 he managed in that era
Cheers,
Roshan
Razi C.
> >Viv vs. SRT. All one can say is both are attacking batsmen. Viv has a
> >lifetime of outstanding batting achievement
>
> Viv's lifetime achievement is already matched by Sachin, why do we have to
> wait? Even If Sachin retires today, he has matched Viv's achievments for the
> entire life
>
>
> Cheers,
> Roshan
Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Test Battiing 121 182 12 8540 291 50.23 24 45 122 -
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
ODI Batting 187 167 24 6721 189* 47.00 11 45 101 -
Sachin Tandulkar:
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Test Batting 68 105 10 5177 179 54.49 19 21 48 -
M I NO Runs HS Ave SR 100 50 Ct St
ODI Batting 214 207 21 7971 143 42.85 - 22 43 72 -
Regards
Razi Chaudhry
[all time IVAR's Fan]
Razi C.
>
> In short, there is a high possibilty that if Don had played now he would have
> averaged more in the 60's than the 99.94 he managed in that era
>
> Cheers,
> Roshan
I say certainly he would have very hard time in maintaining his avg, especially
when he has to switch between ODI and Test. He also has to cope with spinner and
googlies :) in sub-continent.
But then, what he could have done in ODI in pinch hitter scenario? He would've
been banned by ICC or may be we would've heard a new ICC rule, not more than 4
boundries in an over (like that stupid bouncer rule).
There are lots of ifs and buts. They belong to two different era and both are
best in their time.
Cheers
Razi
K. Muralidharan
: lifetime of outstanding batting achievement. SRT is on his way. Let's wait
: and see.
: - Karthik
Is "Karthik" now the most common first name on RSC??? (I've been a lurker for long
enough - three years - to think this might be true).
-Karthik
raj...@my-deja.com
You guys are missing out on the "winning" factor.
DOn has scored numerous Winning knocks, whereas Sachin has
not done that.. Remember WestIndies, Remember ZImbabwe?? Remember
Pakistan?? (even though the Madras knock was truly his best).
Please don't quote his innings in the home series against Australia.
Most of the Indian batsmen were in top form in that series and
Sidhu paved the way for the latter batsmen to attack a
beleagured Aussie attack.
-raj
In article <19990527182510...@ng-fi1.aol.com>,
rosh...@aol.com (RoshanCat) wrote:
> >Therefore, we can safely say SRT's records certainly looks similar
to BL, but
> >still way off from DB
>
> Agreed, I'm not saying Sachin > Don or even Sachin == Don, But if you
match
> characterstics of Sachin & Don they run pretty close.
>
> Many argue with 99.94 > 54.21, but we should also consider that
Sachin plays
> day-in & day-out, has to cope with varying pitch/weather conditions,
plays
> against 11 different countries, constant switch between ODI's &
tests, he is
> also scrutinized by all opposition on video tapes, fielding standards
have
> vastly improved (can you imagine how many half-chances Don would have
offered
> which would have been gobbled up by most of the present day fielders),
> increased professionalism & discipline
>
> In short, there is a high possibilty that if Don had played now he
would have
> averaged more in the 60's than the 99.94 he managed in that era
>
> Cheers,
> Roshan
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Ramakrishnan G
>
> Before the grammar fuzz jumps on me, that should read "clinically
destroy".
>
> -Ram
>
>
Ramakrishnan G
Here is a cut & paste of an article from rediff...
-----------------------------------------------------------
(some generous snips )
Namely, that comparisons across generations are odious -- and they can
never be conclusive, one way or the other. Who is to say Tendulkar
would have made runs against the Bodyline attack? Who is to say that
Bradman would have been as prolific in these days of reverse swing?
Could Bradman, who as pointed out above, muffed it against Verity, have
coped with the wiles of Warne and Mushtaq Ahmed and Saqlain Mushtaq?
How do you ever prove, or disprove, these things? And if you can't,
then why bother trying?
(snip of more stuff alluding to the match in Sharjah against Australia )
Think back to that innings, and to what it meant to you and me and all
of us -- pride. Pride, that we have amidst us one man who, no matter
what the odds, could fight -- and brilliantly at that -- and never give
up. One man who could fly in the face of fate, who could defy
circumstance, who could single-handedly take on one of the best ODI
sides in the world and bring it to its knees (in case it needs
reminding, he was to do that yet again, two days later -- to single-
handedly win the final against Australia).
Pride -- of the kind Tendulkar gave us that day -- is not something you
will find in a book of statistics. It is not something you can
calculate by cold numbers. Rather, it is something you have to look
deep within your heart to find -- and if you can find it there today,
it was because Tendulkar put it there, on April 22, 1998.
That is why, when I got to the end of your piece, I thought to myself:
it doesn't matter whether Tendulkar is > or < than Bradman, Gavaskar et
al. All that matters is that this young man, just 26 years of age, has
given us back our passion, our pride.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
End of article...
Moral of the story:
Why debate over it any more???
Just sit back & enjoy the cricket...
In article <19990527182510...@ng-fi1.aol.com>,
>
> Agreed, I'm not saying Sachin > Don or even Sachin == Don, But if you
match
> characterstics of Sachin & Don they run pretty close.
>
> Many argue with 99.94 > 54.21, but we should also consider that
Sachin plays
> day-in & day-out, has to cope with varying pitch/weather conditions,
plays
> against 11 different countries, constant switch between ODI's &
tests, he is
> also scrutinized by all opposition on video tapes, fielding standards
have
> vastly improved (can you imagine how many half-chances Don would have
offered
> which would have been gobbled up by most of the present day fielders),
> increased professionalism & discipline
>
> In short, there is a high possibilty that if Don had played now he
would have
> averaged more in the 60's than the 99.94 he managed in that era
>
> Cheers,
> Roshan
>
Mad Hamish
>>Therefore, we can safely say SRT's records certainly looks similar to BL, but
>>still way off from DB
>
>Agreed, I'm not saying Sachin > Don or even Sachin == Don, But if you match
>characterstics of Sachin & Don they run pretty close.
Well, they're both fairly short and according to Sir and Lady Bradman
Tendulkar's style of batting is fairly similar to that of The Don.
>
>Many argue with 99.94 > 54.21, but we should also consider that Sachin plays
>day-in & day-out,
against this we can look at the fact that in a _20_year_ career Bradman played
52 tests and thus a bad patch would have had more impact on his record than a
patch of the same length on Tendulkar's record.
We can also look at the fact that Bradman lost 8 years of test cricket when he
may well have been at his peak due to WWII.
Or we can argue that Bradman was not a full time cricketer and had to work for a
living as opposed to being able to dedicate himself completely to training.
> has to cope with varying pitch/weather conditions,
Bradman played on uncovered wickets. I think this makes comments on pitch
conditions to be rather strange.
> plays against 11 different countries,
Well, plays against 8 different countries in tests. Bradman played against 4,
could have played NZ as well but was ill. In any case quantity does not imply
quality.
>constant switch between ODI's & tests,
true, but then again Bradman went from 4 day to timeless to 5 day tests...
> he is
>also scrutinized by all opposition on video tapes,
and has the opportunity of studying them as well...
> fielding standards have
>vastly improved (can you imagine how many half-chances Don would have offered
>which would have been gobbled up by most of the present day fielders),
unknown. Hammond is still considered to be in the top couple of slips fieldsmen
of all time. Chapman was meant to have been extroardinary.
Catching is probably not _massively_ improved. Ground fielding is more of a
case.
>increased professionalism & discipline
Yep, the fitness of all of the cricketers around the world shows how much
discipline and professionalism there is in cricket now. Merv Hughes, Arjuna
Ranatunga, Shane Warne, Mark Taylor and Imziman Ul Haq are all poster boys for
fitness & Discipline.
>
>In short, there is a high possibilty that if Don had played now he would have
>averaged more in the 60's than the 99.94 he managed in that era
Unjustified assertion.
Put simply there is no way of judging how well he'd have gone. Differences which
work in favour of an increased average for him include
covered vs uncovered pitches
lower quality of spin bowlers
bowling restrictions on bouncers
improved safety gear (looked at the gloves from 1930?)
****************************************************************************
The Politician's Slogan
'You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all
of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Fortunately only a simple majority is required.'
****************************************************************************
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@postoffice.utas.edu.au
h_l...@tassie.net.au
Mike Price
>Why, Is that a blasphemy? If there's a batsman who has come close to Sir Don in
>terms of stroke production, allround batting, consistency, domination of
>opposition, reversing match fortunes, success, technique then it has to be
>Sachin than any other batsman in the world
>
>Cheers,
>Roshan
Brian Lara?
tus...@my-deja.com
doesn't have the guts and is a coward.
Second, Imran Khan would say that because he is busy praising all manner
of things the Pakistani team does. I wouldn't be surprised if he praised
them in judging the bets very well as well. He is after all in politics
in Pakistan and wants to be associated in any win that come Pakistan
teams' way.
For those of you who say the Indian, Australian, British commentators do
the same, I say at least their motives are not political and are
(probably) more patriotic.
This is clear as , for a man whose career was brought into some
disrepute at the end by ball tampering and of partisan accusations in
the Karachi-Rawalpindi internal battle Imran has shown none of his
controversial attributes after retiring from cricket.
There is also a tendency of 'it was better in our days' comments from
ex-cricketers. These are best taken with a pinch of salt. Compare
head-to-head the current playing players and be done with it.
If Bradman was playing on uncovered pitches and against bodyline, so is
Sachin against fast bowlers and in front of third umpires who no longer
give the 'benefit of doubt' to the batsman which would have definitely
affected Bradman's average to some extent in close runouts, stumpings,
catches, boundary decisions etc..
SO THE MORAL I THINK IS JUST LET IT BE AND JUST ENJOY A SACHIN OR A LARA
TEARING THE OPPOSITION APART..
In article <9278349...@www2.remarq.com>,
Tera Baap <anon...@web.remarq.com> wrote:
> Imran Khan on Sachin:-
>
> Flames to /imran/pakistan/null.
>
> People are now comparing Sachin with Sir Don Bradman. In your playing
days,
> you had always said that Sunil Gavaskar was the most difficult batsman
to
> bowl at. Do you still hold the same view now?
>
> Obviously. Basically, Sachin is a stroke player. But Sunil was totally
> different, he had a rock-solid defence, could change gears when he
wanted .
> And I still believe Viv was more killing than Sachin Tendulkar. On his
day,
> Viv could simply destroy any attack. Let Sachin face those real fast
bowlers
> on fast, bouncy tracks. Then you can say something. And Sir Don is
beyond
> comparison. Please don't compare anyone with him.
>
> **** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start
Here (tm) ****
>
S Jagadish
> In short, there is a high possibilty that if Don had played now he
> would have averaged more in the 60's than the 99.94 he managed in that
> era
how many batsmen of the 1920s-40s period had averages > 50 ? bradman
was *so* much better than them ! this is a bloody silly thread :)
jagadish
--
[still thinking of a new .sig]
ardos
the same imran khan ,in another interview said when asked about
tendulkar-
i think inzamam is a better batsman than tendulkar THOUGH I HAVE
HARDLY SEEN HIM BAT (ROFL).but i think tendulkar has a better
cricketting brain than inzamam.
and just how is he making these observations about x > y and having a
better brain when he has hardly seen him bat?
also he says that bradman is beyond comparision .was he bradmans
childhood chum that he saw him play cricket.?
whenever people think of bradman all they think of is his 99 average
thats the way imran was thinking.He probably didnt know that bradman
had himself said that sachin's batting style was similar to his.
im not saying that sachin = don or any of that rubbish.what im just
trying to say is that sachin has been likened to the don in terms of
batting style .WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO SWALLOW??
> In article <9278349...@www2.remarq.com>,
> Tera Baap <anon...@web.remarq.com> wrote:
> > Imran Khan on Sachin:-
> >
> > Flames to /imran/pakistan/null.
> >
> > People are now comparing Sachin with Sir Don Bradman. In your playing
> days,
> > you had always said that Sunil Gavaskar was the most difficult batsman
> to
> > bowl at. Do you still hold the same view now?
> >
> > Obviously. Basically, Sachin is a stroke player. But Sunil was totally
> > different, he had a rock-solid defence, could change gears when he
> wanted .
> > And I still believe Viv was more killing than Sachin Tendulkar. On his
> day,
> > Viv could simply destroy any attack. Let Sachin face those real fast
> bowlers
> > on fast, bouncy tracks. Then you can say something. And Sir Don is
> beyond
> > comparison. Please don't compare anyone with him.
> >
> > **** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start
> Here (tm) ****
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
--
Posted via Talkway - http://www.talkway.com
Exchange ideas on practically anything (tm).
David Smyth
All very good points below. I'd like to add that if we compare
Bradman to his peers he is still a standout. However there are many
contemporary batsmen with stats very close to SRT.
>>In short, there is a high possibilty that if Don had played now he would have
>>averaged more in the 60's than the 99.94 he managed in that era
>
who...@my-deja.com
Ram Tekumalla <rptek...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Exposes? Did Imran Khan build a case against Sachin Tendulkar's
credentials and
> clinically destroyed the well deserved reputation?
That's right. Ask Siachin if he remembers what happened when he
faced Shoaib. To play Shoaib he needs to lighten up his bat.
What is quoted
below is just
> Imran's opinion and if one took it as the holy grail, then how are you
any better than
> a morbid fanatic, TB?
>
> -Ram Tekumalla
>
> Tera Baap wrote:
>
> > Imran Khan on Sachin:-
> >
> > Flames to /imran/pakistan/null.
> >
> > People are now comparing Sachin with Sir Don Bradman. In your
playing days,
> > you had always said that Sunil Gavaskar was the most difficult
batsman to
> > bowl at. Do you still hold the same view now?
> >
> > Obviously. Basically, Sachin is a stroke player. But Sunil was
totally
> > different, he had a rock-solid defence, could change gears when he
wanted .
> > And I still believe Viv was more killing than Sachin Tendulkar. On
his day,
> > Viv could simply destroy any attack. Let Sachin face those real fast
bowlers
> > on fast, bouncy tracks. Then you can say something. And Sir Don is
beyond
> > comparison. Please don't compare anyone with him.
> >
> > **** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start
Here (tm) ****
>
> --
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> Some days you win. Some days you lose. And somedays it rains
> - Crash Davis, Bull Durham
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
>
tus...@my-deja.com
Have your parents not named you? Or have you not got the guts to name
yourself?
Is't it an amazing coincidence that Pakistani posts are anonymous? hmm..
I could comment here, but this is a general forum and I will leave
everyone to draw their conclusions..
After all, I wouldn't want to put my foot in it the way Warne and
Ranatunga did :-)
If one contest (say, between Sachin and Shoaib) decided things, there
wouldn't be any more cricket or world cup matches..
Try and remember Olonga and Sachin.. and what happened there..
T
In article <7im7k3$inm$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Poseidon
seems to be a myopic and pigheaded attempt by TB to undermine Sachin since
theor own batting prowress is far from commendable. Let us recall two
important things
1. It was Sir Don himself who said that Sachin resembles him the most when
he was in his prime demolishing the Englishmen.
2. A long time back ( 4-5 yrs. ago) when Imran was asked who was the better
batsman Inzamam or Sachin .. Imran mentioned that it was Inzamam since he is
better able to adjust to the wicket ( duh !!! ), can hit harder ( maybe) and
has a better array of strokes ( double duh !!!) .
Where is Inzamam now ?? Where is Sachin ... the statistics are there for
all to see ...
BOTTOMLINE: Comments made by Imran should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Since it is very hard for a Pakistani to acknowledge that an Indian is good
.
Tera Baap wrote in message <9278349...@www2.remarq.com>...
Raza Rahman
Bevan is the best ODI bat today in my opinion (and the opinion of many). SRT is up
there but he's not the standout best. Some people seem to have a hard time
accepting he's not a god. Viv Richards and Brian Lara inspire(d) a great deal more
anxiety in the opposition, I wonder why. It's more difficult to draw a parallel to
ODIs since the Don did not play any. He was no slouch on run rate but let's not
dwell on fielding circles, bouncers etc.
Let's consider Tests: the bowlers were as fast in Bradman's day as they are now.
Equipment was much poorer, travelling conditions, pitches, etc. were all inferior to
what Cricketers have today. There were a few advantages in the old days: a more
leisurely pace to the game, fewer games, the application of the lbw law, less rabid
fans. But all of these can be considered to cancel each other out. All one really
has to consider is that no one in the Don's era came close to touching what he did.
Is that true of SRT? No. Steve Waugh has batted well against almost every Test
side (after his rebirth), at least as well as SRT has done as a whole. To say that
SRT comes even close to the Don is laughable. Is he the best today? There's a case
for it, but I don't think so. That could change with time, SRT may get even
better. However, unless a miracle happens, the Don will remain in a different
league.
cricke...@my-deja.com
"Poseidon" <bpr...@ittc.ukans.edu> wrote:
> 2. A long time back ( 4-5 yrs. ago) when Imran was asked who was the
better
> batsman Inzamam or Sachin .. Imran mentioned that it was Inzamam
since he is
> better able to adjust to the wicket ( duh !!! ), can hit harder (
maybe) and
> has a better array of strokes ( double duh !!!) .
> Where is Inzamam now ?? Where is Sachin ... the statistics are there
for
> all to see ...
>
> BOTTOMLINE: Comments made by Imran should be taken with a pinch of
salt.
> Since it is very hard for a Pakistani to acknowledge that an Indian
is good
> .
>
Iam not even sure it has all that much to do with Sachin being Indian.
Imran just has problems judging players to be good or bad - especially
ones he likes or dislikes. And he makes snap judgements, and sticks to
them, even if he hasnt seen much cricket in the meantime (he said in
Sharjah a month ago, for example, that that was the first cricket match
he had seen in almost 4 years, since the India/Pakistan WC quarter-
final in Bangalore - that must *surely* now rank as one of the greatest
games of all time, if it actually managed to drive Imran out of cricket
for a 4 year period :-)
But, this tendency is not particularly new. Remember, this is the man
who once made the statement that Manzoor Elahi would be as good a test
allrounder as Ian Botham! Manzoor ended up taking all of 7 wickets over
his test match career, compared to Botham's 383 (which also means, BTW,
that the total test wickets taken by Manzoor and Imran combined dont
quite add up to Botham's total :-)
Iam not sure how many people take Imran's pronouncements about player's
abilities seriously anymore - I dont think many do (apart from RK, of
course :-)
Sadiq [ who now rarely watched the World Cup Report either ] Yusuf
Razi C.
> 2. A long time back ( 4-5 yrs. ago) when Imran was asked who was the better
> batsman Inzamam or Sachin .. Imran mentioned that it was Inzamam since he is
> better able to adjust to the wicket ( duh !!! ), can hit harder ( maybe) and
> has a better array of strokes ( double duh !!!) .
> Where is Inzamam now ?? Where is Sachin ... the statistics are there for
> all to see ...
That is very debatable. Sachin's statistics reflects weakness in Indian batting
and reliance on Sachin. His case is same as Sir Hadlee, since no one else was
there to share the responsibility he got most of it.
Razi
anti...@my-deja.com
rosh...@aol.com (RoshanCat) wrote:
> >As for comparing SMG and SRT, Imran has the right to his opinion
>
>
> Do you know that Michael Holding thinks Sunny Gavaskar is a flat
wicket bully &
> Sachin a great batsman, so what does that mean?
>
him, He was
> a crap ODI player. He never helped India in any ODI cause. What good
is a
> cricketer if he cant adjust to requirements of the game?
>
a
> >lifetime of outstanding batting achievement
>
> Viv's lifetime achievement is already matched by Sachin, why do we
have to
> wait? Even If Sachin retires today, he has matched Viv's achievments
for the
> entire life
>
> >realize that comapring SRT
> >with the Don is ridiculous.
>
bowlers had no restrictions. Has Sachin scored over 1700 runs in a
calender year ? I' don't think so. Has Sachin help India win a World Cup
? I don't think so. You should be looking at who is the number 1 rated
batman in the world (Brian Lara). Don't get me wrong, Sachin is good but
he can't be compared to Viv while these bowlers have to bowl with
restrictions.
samarth harish shah
> Poseidon wrote:
>
> > 2. A long time back ( 4-5 yrs. ago) when Imran was asked who was the better
> > batsman Inzamam or Sachin .. Imran mentioned that it was Inzamam since he is
> > better able to adjust to the wicket ( duh !!! ), can hit harder ( maybe) and
> > has a better array of strokes ( double duh !!!) .
> > Where is Inzamam now ?? Where is Sachin ... the statistics are there for
> > all to see ...
>
> That is very debatable. Sachin's statistics reflects weakness in Indian batting
We're comparing Sachin and Inzi, here, right? Now, if *ever* the Indian
batting appears strong, it is in comparison with the Pakistani batting.
In other words, the Indian batting is no weaker than the Pakistani
batting.
> and reliance on Sachin. His case is same as Sir Hadlee, since no one else was
> there to share the responsibility he got most of it.
At present there's Ganguly, Dravid and Ramesh to share the responsibility.
In the past, Azhar, Shastri and Sidhu have all shared it to a reasonable
extent. Even Kambli, Amre, Prabhakar... OTOH, at present, Inzi only has
Anwar to support him. Ijaz is extremely shaky - comparable to Azhar at
present, if you really want to know *how* shaky.
In the past, too, Inzi has had nobody to support him. Sohail averaged next
to nothing. Miandad was past his prime when he played alongside Inzi.
Malik, maybe in a couple of home series did well, but was hardly
shouldering Inzi's burden even then.
Of course, if you compare the support SRT got with (say) the support Steve
Waugh gets or even the support Brian Lara got until 1996, then you're
right - SRT is a lone ranger.
So, basically, *both* SRT and Inzi *are* surrounded by mediocre batting.
And only one of the two of them hasn't contributed to that mediocrity.
Only one of the two of them has outshone the other mediocre players.
-Samarth [ no prizes for guessing who ].
Poseidon
Razi C. wrote in message <374EE188...@americasm01.nt.com>...
>Poseidon wrote:
>
>> 2. A long time back ( 4-5 yrs. ago) when Imran was asked who was the
better
>> batsman Inzamam or Sachin .. Imran mentioned that it was Inzamam since he
is
>> better able to adjust to the wicket ( duh !!! ), can hit harder ( maybe)
and
>> has a better array of strokes ( double duh !!!) .
>> Where is Inzamam now ?? Where is Sachin ... the statistics are there for
>> all to see ...
>
>That is very debatable. Sachin's statistics reflects weakness in Indian
batting
Again, true that when Sachin plays well, india wins the match. but that does
not undermine the other players calibre. Recent evidence of this can be seen
in the India-Kenya and India-SL matches
His case is same as Sir Hadlee, since no one else was
>there to share the responsibility he got most of it.
oh puhleeze !!! comparing Sachin / India with the erstwhile Hadlee / NZ is
not proper.
Its true that Sachin is the top star in the indian line up. But this very
same line up also boasts of stars like Dravid, Azhar and now Ganguly. Not to
mention Srinath and kumble. name a single NZ line-up that boasts of such
talent and depth
Kumanan Nesiah
using averages, don't use overall average, but rather compare averages
against top teams. Bradman averaged less than 90 against England
(although his average before his illness was probably a little higher).
Sachin's average is greatly inflated by his matches against Sri Lanka.
While Vaas is a fine bowler, he is no Alan Donald. I would suggest that
Donald is a good approximation of Larwood, and his support bowlers,
Pollock, Kluesner, Kallis, are reflections of the English team of Bradmans
time in terms of ability, if not bowling style. I think the fact that
pitches were not nearly so well protected in Bradman's day more than makes
up for the improvements in fielding.
Therefore, Sachin vs Donald and South African's can be compared with
Bradman vs Larwood and the English. To simplify an arduous task at the
cost of accuraccy, you can even compare Sachin's overall average against
the South Africans with Bradman's overall oaverage against the English.
If memory serves, Bradman's overall average against similar opposition is
double that is Sachin Tendulkar.
My own opinion is that Sachin is a very good player who has mastered the
art of consistency, ie., he will always perform near his theoretical
potential. However, I am inclined to agree with Imran, that he has never
succeeded against real pace and therefore, does not even compare
favourably with Gavaskar. And Sachin has never dominated a good attack.
He has had the occasional explosive innings against medoicre bowling
sides, but never against a good side. Even Azzar has dominated good
attacks on occasion. He has the fifth fastest test century, and that was
scored against South Africa, the best bowling attack around!
samarth harish shah
> attacks on occasion. He has the fifth fastest test century, and that was
> scored against South Africa, the best bowling attack around!
Even without Donald and Pollock?
-Samarth.
samarth harish shah
Oops! Sorry! Donald *did* play the Calcutta test! He didn't play the
next test at Kanpur - where Azhar got another hundred - a match-winning
one... Pollock, of course, missed the entire series.
-Samarth [ still maintaining that the 109 at Calcutta was Azhar's best
knock ever ].
onextr...@my-deja.com
>
> Flames to /imran/pakistan/null.
>
> People are now comparing Sachin with Sir Don Bradman. In your playing
days,
> you had always said that Sunil Gavaskar was the most difficult batsman
to
> bowl at. Do you still hold the same view now?
>
> Obviously. Basically, Sachin is a stroke player. But Sunil was totally
> different, he had a rock-solid defence, could change gears when he
wanted .
> And I still believe Viv was more killing than Sachin Tendulkar. On his
day,
> Viv could simply destroy any attack. Let Sachin face those real fast
bowlers
> on fast, bouncy tracks. Then you can say something. And Sir Don is
beyond
> comparison. Please don't compare anyone with him.
>
> **** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start
Here (tm) ****
>
I won't take imran comments very seriously. He has tendency to make
some foolish comments. I am surprised that he did not mention anything
about inzumam. In the past imran had made some funny comments, including
the famous one. Inzumam is better batsman than tendulkar and lara.
Apart from serving the ego of one person in this ng ( all know, who is
that one), this imran ramblings, did not serve anything.
Ragish
onextr...@my-deja.com
Mit Shah
it provides him with a rare criticism, which he shall refute, with his
bat doing the talking. WI, Pak - watch out in the Super-6 :)
-Mit
On Fri, 28 May 1999, Kumanan Nesiah wrote:
Dilip K Pai
I wonder if cricket is in the genes. (Viv Richards allegedly sired an
illegitimate son with an Indian TV star). Would be cool if his son was as good
a batsman - and playing for India! Does Rohan (Sunil) Gavaskar play cricket?
-D
:
:
:
Sundarraman Subramanian
> about inzumam. In the past imran had made some funny comments, including
> the famous one. Inzumam is better batsman than tendulkar and lara.
> Apart from serving the ego of one person in this ng ( all know, who is
> that one), this imran ramblings, did not serve anything.
>
IMO, Inzi is a very good player. He is not better than Tendulkar
or Lara, but is comparable to them.
Sundar
Razi C.
> OTOH, at present, Inzi only has
> Anwar to support him. Ijaz is extremely shaky - comparable to Azhar at
> present, if you really want to know *how* shaky.
>
> In the past, too, Inzi has had nobody to support him. Sohail averaged next
> to nothing. Miandad was past his prime when he played alongside Inzi.
> Malik, maybe in a couple of home series did well, but was hardly
> shouldering Inzi's burden even then.
>
> Of course, if you compare the support SRT got with (say) the support Steve
> Waugh gets or even the support Brian Lara got until 1996, then you're
> right - SRT is a lone ranger.
>
> So, basically, *both* SRT and Inzi *are* surrounded by mediocre batting.
> And only one of the two of them hasn't contributed to that mediocrity.
> Only one of the two of them has outshone the other mediocre players.
>
> -Samarth [ no prizes for guessing who ].
Strange comparison. As far as I know, Inzi is never considered as "lone ranger" in
Pakistan side. It used to be Miandad and Pakis are yet to find a replacement for
Miandad. Here are Pak stats, all of them have shared runs, not alone Inzi. And if
"Aslam" can give your Ejaz's statistics for last 2-3 years, you can compare that
too.
Javed Miandad 233 218 41 7381 119* 41.70 8 50 71 2 PAK
Saleem Malik 280 253 38 7150 102 33.25 5 47 80 - PAK
Saeed Anwar 173 171 14 6213 194 39.57 15 30 34 - PAK
Ijaz Ahmed 228 211 28 6024 139* 32.91 10 32 84 - PAK
Inzamam-ul-Haq 185 175 23 5960 137* 39.21 6 42 49 - PAK
Rameez Raja 198 197 15 5841 119* 32.09 9 31 33 - PAK
Aamer Sohail 149 148 5 4651 134 32.52 5 31 49 - PAK
Work yourself out.
Razi
Razi Chaudhry
>Strange comparison. As far as I know, Inzi is never considered as "lone
ranger" in
>Pakistan side. It used to be Miandad and Pakis are yet to find a
replacement for
>Miandad. Here are Pak stats, all of them have shared runs, not alone Inzi.
And if
>"Aslam" can give your Ejaz's statistics for last 2-3 years, you can compare
that
>too.
>
>
>
Ejaz's Stats Jan-1996 - May-1999
M I NO Runs HS Avg 100s 50s 0s
107 104 11 3629 139* 39.02 6 22 7
Razi
Razi Chaudhry
samarth harish shah <shs...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
>-Samarth [ no prizes for guessing who ].
>
Samarth,
I was trying to dig into statistics to pull up facts. hm.. they don't help
do they. Here is stats for 1996-1999
Jan-1996 : May-1999
M I NO Runs HS Avg 100s 50s 0s
Youhana 23 19 3 720 100 45.00 1 6 2
Anwar 91 90 8 3673 194 44.79 7 23 4
Ijaz 107 104 11 3629 139* 39.02 6 22 7
Inzi 89 82 10 2655 116* 36.88 2 18 4
Moin 92 84 23 1708 69* 28.00 - 6 7
Afridi 84 81 2 1930 109 24.43 2 10 7
Malik 66 59 10 1710 73* 34.90 - 12 4
Pakistan line looks ok. Every one is scoring.. So lets look at indian line
up:
M I NO Runs HS Avg 100s 50s 0s
Sachin 112 108 10 4759 143 48.56 18 21 3
Ganguly 102 97 8 3808 183 42.79 7 26 5
Azhar 119 109 18 3593 153* 39.48 4 26 3
Dravid 84 77 6 2682 145 37.77 5 17 3
Jadeja 126 114 26 3259 119 37.03 4 18 5
Mongia 100 73 23 1018 69 20.36 - 2 5
Well, they scoring lot many. Sachin having that 1600+runs and 1800+runs in
1996&1998 calendar year, did awful lot to his stats. But then others are
scoring pretty well too. So then why is india loosing?. Why so much
dependence on Sachin. I digged, 1996 and 1998 records for India, because
those are the years Sachin scored extra runs, here it is:
M I NO Runs HS Avg 100s 50s 0s
SRT-1996 32 32 2 1611 137 53.70 6 9 -
Azhar-1996 32 31 7 931 94 38.79 - 6 1
Gangs-96 10 9 1 269 59 33.62 - 2 -
Dravid-96 20 19 2 475 90 27.94 - 3 1
Jadeja-96 32 30 7 789 71* 34.30 - 4 2
SRT-1998 34 33 4 1894 143 65.31 9 7 -
Jadeja-98 36 34 13 1004 116* 47.81 2 6 1
Azhar-1998 37 33 4 1268 153* 43.72 3 8 2
Gangs-1998 36 35 3 1328 124 41.50 4 7 1
Dravid-98 14 13 - 282 64 21.69 - 1 -
Now what! I seems all of them getting handful of runs. man.. I am running
out of time. will come back on this, until its your turn to think.!
The only thing I can think of India lesser success, is they are making runs
in less demanding situations. Here is India's all time record:
Country Played Won Lost Tie NR % Success
Australia 54 22 29 - 3 43.51
Bangladesh 7 7 - - - 100.00
Canada - - - - - -
East Africa 1 1 - - - 100.00
England 35 15 19 - 1 44.28
Holland - - - - - -
Kenya 5 4 1 - - 80.00
New Zealand 51 27 21 - 3 55.88
Pakistan 77 26 47 - 4 36.36
South Africa 28 8 19 - 1 30.35
Scotland - - - - - -
Sri Lanka 60 33 22 - 5 59.16
UAE 1 1 - - - 100.00
West Indies 57 19 37 1 - 34.21
Zimbabwe 25 18 5 2 - 76.00
Total 401 181 200 3 17 47.63
47% is good indeed. I wish I could find this chart for 1996 and 1998 (years
when Sachin excelled).
Any way gotta go.
Cheers
Razi [thx to Roshan for Khel.com]
Just one more:
Sachin Tandulkar
Runs /Inn/Avg/100/50/Hi
1989 0 /01/00.00/0/0/0
1990 239 /10/23.90/0/1/53
1991 417 /14/34.75/0/4/62
1992 704 /20/39.11/0/6/84
1993 319 /17/24.54/0/1/82*
1994 1089 /25/47.35/3/9/115
1995 444 /12/40.36/1/1/112*
1996 1611 /32/53.70/6/9/137
1997 1011 /36/30.64/2/5/117
1998 1894 /33/65.31/9/7/143
1999 243 /07/40.50/1/0/140*
Total 7971 /207/42.85/22/43/143
100s 100s 100s
Agnst in India in opp Neutral Hi
AUS 1 0 4 143
ENG 0 0 0
KEN 2 0 1 140*
NZ 2 0 0 117
PAK 0 0 2 118
SA 1 0 0 114
Scot
SL 1 2 1 137
UAE
WI 1 0 0 105
ZIM 0 2 2 127*
Tot: 8 4 10
Region 100s 75-99
Sub-Continent 18 8
& Sharjah
Singapore 1
Canada 2
England 1
Zimbabwae 2 1
NewZealand 2
WestIndies 1
Total: 22 14
He India India
Score Won Lose
=0 3 times 6 times
>=25 65 times 39 times
>=50 43 times 21 times
>=75 25 times 11 times
>=100 18 times 4 times
Tot 102 times 98 times
ManMatch 33 times
anti...@my-deja.com
Tera Baap <anon...@web.remarq.com> wrote:
> Imran Khan on Sachin:-
>
> Flames to /imran/pakistan/null.
>
> People are now comparing Sachin with Sir Don Bradman. In your playing
days,
> you had always said that Sunil Gavaskar was the most difficult batsman
to
> bowl at. Do you still hold the same view now?
>
> Obviously. Basically, Sachin is a stroke player. But Sunil was totally
> different, he had a rock-solid defence, could change gears when he
wanted .
> And I still believe Viv was more killing than Sachin Tendulkar. On his
day,
> Viv could simply destroy any attack. Let Sachin face those real fast
bowlers
> on fast, bouncy tracks. Then you can say something. And Sir Don is
beyond
> comparison. Please don't compare anyone with him.
>
> **** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start
Here (tm) ****
>
Sachin can't be compared to Viv Richards in no way. Has Sachin ever won
a World Cup for India ? I don't think so. Has Sachin ever scored over
1700 runs in a calender year ? I don't think so. Viv made his run when
the bowlers didn't have any restrictions. Sachin should be compared to
the NUMBER 1 batsman in the world. (BRIAN CHARLES LARA.
O'Connors
that Tendulkar is the best batsman they have seen. Inzamam is a fantastic
striker of the ball, but for a top-class batsman may be one of the worst
runners between wickets of all time. In the Pak-Aust one-day game he played
a match-winning innings but at the same time was threatening to take more
Pakistani wickets than the Australian bowlers. His own runout was hilarious.
Lara is as good as anyone - if he's in the mood.
<anti...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7ind5f$eks$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Mad Hamish
>
>> In short, there is a high possibilty that if Don had played now he
>> would have averaged more in the 60's than the 99.94 he managed in that
>> era
>
>how many batsmen of the 1920s-40s period had averages > 50 ? bradman
>was *so* much better than them ! this is a bloody silly thread :)
>
off the top of my head I thought of about 10, checking wisden gives
Ryder, Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Hammond, Compton, Hutton, Paynter, Headley, Sutcliffe,
Barnes, Dempster, Duleepsinji, Russell, GE Tyldsley, AD Nourse, Melville, CF
Walters
but many of these players only just scraped into the 15 innings to qualify. If
the qualification was raised to 20 innings we'd have
Headley, Sutdliffe, Hobbs,, Paynter, Hammond, Hutton, Tyldsley (20 innings),
Nourse, Ryder.
From the 70s to 90s you get
Sobers, Viv Richards, Barry Richards, Pollock, Miandad, Davis, G. Chappell,
Border, S. Waugh, Tendulkar, Lara, Adams, Kambli, (and I'm sure I'm missing a
few)
Peter Brown
Aneesh Patel <pa...@ne.mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:374DB79F...@ne.mediaone.net...
> RoshanCat wrote:
>
> > >As for comparing SMG and SRT, Imran has the right to his opinion
> >
> > How????? Has Imran bowled to Sachin (except when he was 16 years)?
> >
> > Do you know that Michael Holding thinks Sunny Gavaskar is a flat wicket
bully &
> > Sachin a great batsman, so what does that mean?
> >
> > Sunil G'skar has failed us innumerable times when we really needed him,
He was
> > a crap ODI player. He never helped India in any ODI cause. What good is
a
> > cricketer if he cant adjust to requirements of the game?
>
would you try
> to deny that?
>
>
> >
> > >Viv vs. SRT. All one can say is both are attacking batsmen. Viv has a
> > >lifetime of outstanding batting achievement
> >
> > Viv's lifetime achievement is already matched by Sachin, why do we have
to
> > wait? Even If Sachin retires today, he has matched Viv's achievments for
the
> > entire life
> >
> > >any objective cricket follower will
> > >realize that comapring SRT
> > >with the Don is ridiculous.
> >
> > Why, Is that a blasphemy? If there's a batsman who has come close to Sir
Don in
> > terms of stroke production, allround batting, consistency, domination of
> > opposition, reversing match fortunes, success, technique then it has to
be
> > Sachin than any other batsman in the world
> >
>
averages 54
> in Tests.
Mostly on uncovered pitches as well I may add.
tus...@my-deja.com
Lara were asked to pick who they thought was the best batsman in the
world right now, who would they pick?
Obviously, you aren't allowed to pick yourself..
It would be interesting to see the results.. and maybe the scores could
be totted up. Or maybe even the captains of all test-playing nations
could be asked this question. In my mind, Sachin's score would be test
playing nations - 1. Guess that one nation!
T
In article <WvP33.1439$ZI1....@ozemail.com.au>,
va...@capps-edges.com
Later, at a New Zealand game, I saw a New Zealand fan with a similar
with New Zealand's colors. Anyone know what the significance of Aliens
are??
Thanks
