Re: Re: Re: ....
by Against Pseudos on Jan 07, 2011 07:34 AM
For that you'll have to write directly to Brian Lara and Matt Hayden; who coined the particular term you so dislike.. :)
My Dad tells me Don was the greatest, perhaps bcoz his dad told him so, i thought and thought twice and each time i arrived at the same conclusion, SACHIN IS GOD and God is always incomparable
Re: .
by vijay on Jan 07, 2011 02:12 AM
Its obiviously very clear that Sachin is way ahead of others and the stats definetly prove he is the best batsman to have played the game ever.Compared to DON , sachin is again on the lead ,Don just played 59 tests , who knows what would have happened if he had played over 100 tests , will he be able to sustain the pressure or the longevity as Tendulkar ?.So there is always a sense of doubt ! Sachin now nearly two decades of proving his critics wrong , time and again is definetly the greatest batsman ever.
Re: Re: .
by Ambuj on Jan 07, 2011 11:41 AM
what abt 234 FC matches with 95 average? Second best FC average is around60ies Iguess.... Statistically: "no other athlete dominates an international sport to the extent that Bradman does cricket"
i would put sachin slightly ahead of brian charles lara as the greatest batsmen ever lived. conditions bradman faced was no wasnt very tough cos it was as author said against unfit, upper class opponents with beer bellys...not anyone in the same class as magrath, ambrose,walsh or wasim or warne or muraly...so accept it...lil master is the greatest batsmen of all time..
When you talk about players from the past era including Mr. bradman then you must take into account the most important thing which, for sure, is the LEVEL OF COMPETITIVENESS in the sport in that particular era, or decade, or period. I cannot help myself but laugh at the fact that there are people with some weird imagination who bring up a list of top 20 or top 10 batsmen from the mere details that he was able to seek by surfing internet or reading. Or may be giving it the cover of a scientific analysis. With time cricket has seen drastic and better changes which makes the game more difficult, more competitive. How many teams did Bradman’s side played against? What was the fastest delivery in his time? Who were his competitors? Did the fielders in his time ever made that extra effort to do something electric apart from just being a mere onlooker. Therefore his average of 99.94 does not impress me. People talked about Ponting as the best batsman for three glorious years. But what about Ponting now. I guess he is all nuts and crazy cursing himself to have hoped that he could equal Tendulkar. Mike Hussey emerged as if he was going to beat Bradman in terms of test batting average however it seems that he has resigned to the fact that it is quite an easy task to sparkle in the early years but not not quite so to sustain the sparkles within. The same is true for Mr Bradman. After 50 odd test he averaged
Re: .
by vijay on Jan 07, 2011 02:01 AM
Mike Hussey emerged as if he was going to beat Bradman in terms of test batting average however it seems that he has resigned to the fact that it is quite an easy task to sparkle in the early years but not not quite so to sustain the sparkles within. The same is true for Mr Bradman. After 50 odd test he averaged 9.something, after 50 more it would have been 40.nothing. I beleive that you cannot compare those undemanding runs scored against amateurs in the 30's and 40's to Sachin's, scored against the modern era fast bowlers and real sinners. The Don scored most of his runs against bumbling, clumsy, inept, limited, unfit, sometimes ageing upper class twits with speed on a par with today's club cricketers. There was no Marshall, Ambrose or Walsh. There was no Hadlee, McGrath or Lillee. There was no Akram or Waqar and there certainly was no Warne or Muralitharan to face so how can you
measure his runs reasonably? You cannot! Look at Graeme 'flat pitch bully' Hick's record in county cricket compared to Test cricket and you will understand what I mean. Watching videos of The Don I was struck by the amount of runs scored by the horizontal bat and Wisden noted that he never never truly mastered batting on sticky wickets. Wisden commented, "if there really is a blemish on his amazing record it is the absence of a significant innings on one of those 'sticky dogs' of old" We all have a common belief a
Re: Re: .
by vijay on Jan 07, 2011 02:05 AM
sticky dogs' of old" We all have a common belief and understanding that batting in pressure situation is quite the reverse of just batting alone. I wonder if all the names that I have mentioned before ever had to really bat in pressure against the hopes of billion people expecting you to erform.. He has faced bowlers of the likes of Malcomm Marshall, Curtly mbrose, Courtney Walsh, Shaun Pollock, Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Imran Khan, Abdul Qadir, Shoaib Akhtar, Bret Lee, Glenn Mcgrath, Shane Warne, Muttaih Murlitharan, Dale Steyn, Mkhaya Ntini and endless. He holds the record for most number of runs in both version of the game leading by miles. He already has the number of centuries that cannot be surpassed ever. And he has played the most modern and recent version of the game and is still scoring as heavilly as ever. It is true that Ponting reached his peak when Tendulkar was not doing great and possibly we can see that as his worst phase in his cricketing career. But in a career spreaded in two long long decades that does happen and I hope we understand that. But as great players do, he is back to his way of scoring runs. And if he is to play for the next two years, forget Ponting or anyone else ever fancying chances of coming closer to his staggering record. AND therefore there is only one great batsman, a genius, a legend, and the name is Sachin Tendulkar.
Tendulkar actually scored 2150 runs against England with runs per inning 55.1 in 39 innings (2150 / 39 = 55.1)and Don 79.8 in 63 innings with runs scored 5028. 5028 / 63 = 79.8. So ratio stands .7 : 1, (55.1 : 79.8) but Tendulkar took England one out of nine teams and Bradman almost same team in his entire career. See some assumptions in same manner.
1. If Tendulkar scored 1050 runs against England then Don 1515.
2. If Tendulkar scored 2040 runs against them then Don 2955.
3. If Tendulkar scored 3030 runs against them then Don 4390.
4. If Tendulkar scored 4025 runs against them then Don 5825.
There is no ratio of 1 : 1.75. If Tendulkar played 80% of his cricket against England then he could improve his runs per inning to how much we do not know although I think he could surpass Don. I am saying it in the light of his all achievements. Also give him timeless matches on flat pitches with such a limited cricket against same team. There is no culture difference between England and Australia.
Re: ......
by Zeng on Jan 07, 2011 01:47 AM
Sachin Firt class cricket - avg: 59.86
Against spinners who cant spin and pace bowlers who hardly hit 120 kmph
Now bradman have scored nearly 100 runs avg in international cricket, playing real quickies, including even bodyline series, without any real protection. Dude, you need medical help.
Re: Re: ......
by vijay on Jan 07, 2011 01:54 AM
Why people think that Don Bradman (1928-1948) is best due to average are neglecting the fact that he has played ricket against amateurs, seamless bowling, absence of fast bowlers, fast medium too and then leg break bowlers also. Half career Timeless matches, mat over concrete pitches, all matches in two countries, 52 matches in 20 years, 80% innings against the same team and so may other facts. No proper rule for LBW before 1934.
Re: ......
by vijay on Jan 07, 2011 01:43 AM
Great explanation. I wish I can give 100 kudos for this comment, but this site allows one kudo per user. Sachin is the best. Please click Kudos on the right side of the comment box if you are fan of Sachin.
When you talk about players from the past era including Mr. bradman then you must take into account the most important thing which, for sure, is the LEVEL OF COMPETITIVENESS in the sport in that particular era, or decade, or period. I cannot help myself but laugh at the fact that there are people with some weird imagination who bring up a list of top 20 or top 10 batsmen from the mere details that he was able to seek by surfing internet or reading. Or may be giving it the cover of a scientific analysis. With time cricket has seen drastic and better changes which makes the game more difficult, more competitive. How many teams did Bradman’s side played against? What was the fastest delivery in his time? Who were his competitors? Did the fielders in his time ever made that extra effort to do something electric apart from just being a mere onlooker. Therefore his average of 99.94 does not impress me. People talked about Ponting as the best batsman for three glorious years. But what about Ponting now. I guess he is all nuts and crazy cursing himself to have hoped that he could equal Tendulkar. Mike Hussey emerged as if he was going to beat Bradman in terms of test batting average however it seems that he has resigned to the fact that it is quite an easy task to sparkle in the early years but not not quite so to sustain the sparkles within. The same is true for Mr Bradman. After 50 odd test he averaged 99.something, after 50 more it would have been 40.nothing. I belei
Re: best vs worst
by Happy Friday on Jan 07, 2011 01:30 AM
agreed with your ratings. However i would say dhoni, ishant where ok but dravid and shewag it is a failure
