Re: Nothin is enuf
by Just Curious on Mar 20, 2012 02:26 AM
Again, this is not my posting but thought will share it with you all. I am not a Sachin fan nor do I dislike him.
Re: This is the real benchmark set by him..........
by Manoj Menon on Mar 20, 2012 02:50 AM
I am not a die hard Sachin fan. But these stats are really useless and doesnt tell anything about a batsman. Matches cannot be won just by a centurion. In the 90's (even few yrs back too) we could see that after Sachin is out, indias remaining tail use to go back to the pavillion together (51 centuries until 2000). Wherever he has got it 100 centuries is a great achievement together with 90 half centuries( Nothing much to celebrate the number though). Everyone know that India didnt win too many tests abroad due to incapability to take 20 wickets. U cannot tell that centuries in a losing cause / draw is less important.
Re: This is the real benchmark set by him..........
by Desi on Mar 20, 2012 03:01 AM
What nonsense are you talking. At least Sachin was there to score centuries and put a fighting total for India. Without his centuries in each and every match, India's total would have been at least 70-80- runs less presuming a 'selfless player' contributed at least 20-30 runs!
Why are you picking on Sachin??? Pick on Richard Hadlee who took 431 wickets and see how many tests he won! Pick on Allan Donald and see how many tests he won. Pick on Inzamam and Michael Atherton and see how many tests they won.
First learn to appreciate the man before putting these staistics which basically do not tell you anything of the STATE of the match!!!
Re: This is the real benchmark set by him..........
by Tatabbai Boodida on Mar 20, 2012 05:40 AM
If you are commenting on Sachin then you are commenting on Game of Cricket and not an Individual. Times where only he was playing and there is nobody to support him. Not just he made 100th 100 but it need lot of stamina and dedication. Can you pls show any other f'n player who is close to Sachin doesnt matter for me if he is great in his soil or similar soil of his home ground?? He is called Cricket and have to be PROUD to have cricketer like him as INDIAN. No one has so much style, invention, placement, etc...name it whatever you have in cricket as SRT has. No makes use of most when they play minows as Sachin. He has the first ODI Double Hundred in the Planet at the age of 36 against an oopsition known for its tight bowling. Never shown emotions after he reached 100 even for the Double Hundred.
Re: This is the real benchmark set by him..........
by Rajaji on Mar 20, 2012 07:12 AM
By ur point LARA is most useless batsman in history of TEST cricket since his team won only 8 test with his century !! what use of 365 or 400 * scores !!!
Stop this media hype about 100th century non- sense atleast now. We all know Sachin can't play under pressure. You guys have pressured him in such a way that he had to wait more than year for a century.
Lets not pressure him more. Let him play his natural game till he retires.
Re: what is the use of a century if it does not result in victory
by sudsuj on Mar 20, 2012 01:14 AM
moreover, ponting did not gracefully accept and retire. he was kicked out
Re: Re: what is the use of a century if it does not result in vic
by Rajaji on Mar 20, 2012 07:26 AM
WAKE UP >>TEE BUNE ponting was humiliated and dropped in mid series not even given chance to play last one day on his home ground Hobart just before retiring.
Re: what is the use of a century if it does not result in victory
by Mr Infinity on Mar 20, 2012 12:14 AM
Ponting was part of the pack that dominated cricket for more than a decade. All his mastery fell apart when his class colleagues left. Surprising how you missed this. :)
Look at the name at bottom for that matter.
And it really depends on how better your team is, otherwise all the performance an individual gave goes in vein. If you can't believe this then just check Lara and Dravid's record in same table.
Re: what is the use of a century if it does not result in victory
by Just Curious on Mar 20, 2012 12:38 AM
If Sachin has played for Australia, SA, PAK or England which have good bowling attach he would have better average than Ponting. If he had played for teams like West Indies, Bangladesh he would probably have less than 10 % wins too. Got it?
Re: Re: what is the use of a century if it does not result in vic
by Just Curious on Mar 20, 2012 12:43 AM
Conversely if Ponting was playing for India which could produce only 1 or 2 international quality bowler in last 20 years, he would have less than 40% wins. While Austalia has produced 8 to 10 top ranked bowlers who can defend even low scores.
Re: Re: Re: what is the use of a century if it does not result in
by TEE BONE on Mar 20, 2012 01:00 AM
do u remember any of his century when India was chasing or badly needed a good knock from him????
Re: Re: Re: Re: what is the use of a century if it does not resul
by Just Curious on Mar 20, 2012 02:03 AM
1. 137 off 137 (Strike rate 100) balls Vs SriLanka at Delhi in 1996 World Cup. India scored 271/3 in 50 overs. The only other 50 score was from Azhar. SL made 272 in 48.4 overs. Manoj Prabhakar had 4-0-47-0. He also opened in the innings and scored 7 of 36 balls.
2. 100 of 111 Balls Vs Pak in Singapore- Apr 96. India 226 all out in 47.1 overs, When Sachin was out score was 186/4 (We cant blame because next 3 are match fixtures). Pak had a reduced target of 187 from 33 overs.
3. 110 of 138 Balls (Slower but...) vs Sri Lanka In Colombo - Aug 96. Again India 226 for 5 in 50 overs, Only other 50 score from Azhar (58 of 99 balls !!!). Sachin has also bowled 6-0-29-1, the second most economical bowler and the only wicket taker (SL were 230/1 in 44.2 ) of the match next to Srinath. Seven bowlers were used by Azhar.
4. 143 of 131 Balls (!!!) Vs Aus at Sharjah, Apr 1998. This was chasing under lights. The qualifying match before the final. The whole world knows about this match. Still one interesting point, when Sachin was out India were 242 at 5 at 43 overs. Target was 276 in 46. Still India finished at 250/5 scoring just 8 of the next 3 overs.
5. 101 of 140 Balls against SL at Sharjah in Oct 2000. Indian score was 224/8 in 50 overs. (No other 50 score). SL got 225/5 in 43.5, Sachin also bowled 5-0-22-0, better economy rate than everyone except Srinath.
6. 146 of 153 Balls against Zimbabwe at Jodhpur - December 2000 India made 283 / 8 in 50 overs. Sachin was the last man to be
Re: Re: Re: Re: what is the use of a century if it does not resul
by Just Curious on Mar 20, 2012 02:09 AM
Thats precisely my point. If bowlers concede 300 runs on a 200 run wicket. We still expect one man to get that for us. But anyway for your question, There are 41 of them while chasing. India won 30 of them.BTW, I am not Sachin fan but do not dislike him either.
Re: Re: Re: Re: what is the use of a century if it does not resul
by Tatabbai Boodida on Mar 20, 2012 05:43 AM
Hello...There are lot of instances where Sachin helped IND for reaching the target in XX overs to reach the next stage in the series...especially, Sharjah, 175 against AUS, no one supported him like we are seeing in the recent games...
All those Sachin bashers should be able to see now. Sachin's centuries won 53% while Dravid's 47%. However, it doesn't tell the story that if your team is not performing well, there is only so much Sachin or Rahul could do! Even Lara has a lower percentage because his team was performing badly. On the other hand, Hayden has a better percentage than these world-class guys because he was playing in a consistently performing team!
Re: Proves Sachin is better than Dravid in winning....
by Ruler on Mar 19, 2012 11:08 PM
correct. Lara is even less... But i think there is no point calculating winning % against a century. Imagine if Messy scores 3, but the opponent score 5.. is it a failure of messy?? The whole team is responsible.
Re: Proves Sachin is better than Dravid in winning....
by sumit on Mar 19, 2012 11:19 PM
% of win would have been higher side, had he not played with bunch of donkkeys in the 90's where is was the only person fighting for indias win
Re: Re: Proves Sachin is better than Dravid in winning....
by Ruler on Mar 19, 2012 11:26 PM
Sumit here you reminded me another point. Check out someone like Andy flower. You can not blame him for his centuries for lossing the match...!! It depends the whole team.
Re: 4Indians in All time top10 ODI innings (underpressure)
by sameer bhagwat on Mar 19, 2012 11:50 PM
STendulkar 114 vs Bangladesh 16 March 2012. Bangladesh under pressure. Sachin won it for them.
Re: Re: 4Indians in All time top10 ODI innings (underpressure)
by Rajesh Potti on Mar 20, 2012 12:03 AM
If sachin did not score his 1ooth century, Bangladesh would have won with a bonus point.
Re: Re: Re: 4Indians in All time top10 ODI innings (underpressure
by Mr Infinity on Mar 20, 2012 12:16 AM
That's an important and interesting point. :)
