General Cricket Discussion

[Markkkkk]

@Markkkkk Who is that guy in the picture.

I was also wondering where your Sachin Tendulkar boner comes from. Is it from when he made your SA attack look ridiculous and flayed your "world class" bowling around to reach the first ever score of 200 in ODIs? Or does it come from the fact that in the 2003 WC hosted by SA, SA tripped over themselves to do an early choke, and exit in the first round, while Tendulkar then went on to have a great tournament and finish as the top scorer and the player of the tournament. Most Pakistani guys get their Tendulkar boner from his 98 he scored against them in the same tournament, in the process making the attack of Akram, Waqar and Shoaib looking like clowns, so if your boner for him comes from the same tournament it would kinda make sense at some level. Or is it a more general boner?

Is it because Sachin has consistently scored runs at WCs (being the highest ever run scorer ever in WCs), while your SA team, supposedly full of better batsmen than SRT turns up and then chokes and ends up as failures. SRT has won a world cup, while SA, again supposedly full of better batsmen than Sachin has won let me see - Zero, thats right NADA !! Forget winning, you guys barely get to any Knock Out stages in WCs, this latest one clearly being an exception. Alright, lets make it easy forget winning, how many WC finals has SA played in ... NADA again. So do you hate SRT because your team supposedly full of Better Batsmen than SRT, has never even reached a WC final let alone winning it, while Sachin has played in two.

Or perhaps I am wrong in taking this approach, perhaps good batsmen to you are those who fail to score any runs at all. So its no wonder then that the guy who has scored more runs that anyone ever in the history of the game, with more 100s than anyone else in the history of the game, with an average of over 50 in both home and away tests, would naturally seem not that impressive to you.

Which is it, I really want to know.

That guy is Chris Martin. Also I don't have a SRT boner, I don't even know what that means. I just hate the fact that every Indian cricket fan is willing to sacrifice himself for Tendulkar and everyone treats him like some kid of cricket god when people like Kallis had a higher average and would of scored more runs then him. Honestly, people like you annoy me. SRT destroyed SA, SRT this SRT that SRT is so great SRT SRT SRT. It's the same with me and AB, he's my least favourite SA cricketer because everyone rams it up his arse because of how great he is and how saved cancer donated 12 kidneys and created Hagen Das. Everyone must get off the Tendulkar train and understand that he was a very good batsmen, but there were a lot who were better and there will be a lot who are better.

 

[PokerAce]

That guy is Chris Martin. Also I don't have a SRT boner, I don't even know what that means. I just hate the fact that every Indian cricket fan is willing to sacrifice himself for Tendulkar and everyone treats him like some kid of cricket god when people like Kallis had a higher average and would of scored more runs then him. Honestly, people like you annoy me. SRT destroyed SA, SRT this SRT that SRT is so great SRT SRT SRT. It's the same with me and AB, he's my least favourite SA cricketer because everyone rams it up his arse because of how great he is and how saved cancer donated 12 kidneys and created Hagen Das. Everyone must get off the Tendulkar train and understand that he was a very good batsmen, but there were a lot who were better and there will be a lot who are better.

Okay first of all would have and could have don't matter. SRT had a far longer career than Kallis, and maintained his avg of 50+ both in subcontinent and outside subcontinent (the real test for any subcontinent batsman). While Kallis averages slightly better than SRT (55.37 vs 53.78), is a good 2600+ runs short of Tendulkar. Those runs is often 3 years work (1000 test runs a calender year being a big thing). So to say Kallis would have scored more than Tendulkar, I am not so sure. Perhaps he could have perhaps he wouldn't have, and in anycase, ifs and buts don't really feature much in stats. Tendulkar did score more runs than Kallis or indeed anyone.

However in getting into this Kallis vs Tendulkar debate, I am doing what many others wrongly do. If you feel Kallis was the best batsman, go right ahead, I have no issues. Kallis was a hell of a batsman and if u think he was better than Tendulkar then go ahead.

I have no desire that everyone must hail SRT as the greatest ever or whatever. Regardless of where you place him, he was a fine batsman, just like Kallis, then after that, whether you rank him as the greatest or 2nd greatest or 10th greatest whatever is irrelevant. There can never be a definitive ranking of batsmen. Especially in the past 20 years or so.

Dravid, Tendulkar, Cook, Clarke, Ponting, Sangakarra, Kallis, Lara, Inzi, were all great batsmen to have played in the past 20 years. There is no way to definitely point one out and say he is definitely the best. I may feel SRT was the best of them, you may feel Kallis was the best, it doesn't matter. What matters is that there is a top level reserved for batsmen, and SRT and Kallis and all those I named belong there.

If however I make a post saying that Chris Martin was a better bat than Kallis, then surely I think you will agree that I am loosing track of logic. The same applied to your post, hence the response.

The point is not that you must hail Tendulkar as the greatest ever, or that I must hail Kallis as the greatest ever. The point is they were both fine batsmen, as were many others during the past 20 years.

However the thing with SRT haters is that they never want to give him a fair due. Often the argument turns into SRT was crap and didn;t know how to bat, and that is effectively what you were implying when you said Martin was a better bat than Sachin. So I wanted to know just exactly where this drop in logic comes form.

 

[Markkkkk]

Okay first of all would have and could have don't matter. SRT had a far longer career than Kallis, and maintained his avg of 50+ both in subcontinent and outside subcontinent (the real test for any subcontinent batsman). While Kallis averages slightly better than SRT (55.37 vs 53.78), is a good 2600+ runs short of Tendulkar. Those runs is often 3 years work (1000 test runs a calender year being a big thing). So to say Kallis would have scored more than Tendulkar, I am not so sure. Perhaps he could have perhaps he wouldn't have, and in anycase, ifs and buts don't really feature much in stats. Tendulkar did score more runs than Kallis or indeed anyone.

However in getting into this Kallis vs Tendulkar debate, I am doing what many others wrongly do. If you feel Kallis was the best batsman, go right ahead, I have no issues. Kallis was a hell of a batsman and if u think he was better than Tendulkar then go ahead.

I have no desire that everyone must hail SRT as the greatest ever or whatever. Regardless of where you place him, he was a fine batsman, just like Kallis, then after that, whether you rank him as the greatest or 2nd greatest or 10th greatest whatever is irrelevant. There can never be a definitive ranking of batsmen. Especially in the past 20 years or so.

Dravid, Tendulkar, Cook, Clarke, Ponting, Sangakarra, Kallis, Lara, Inzi, were all great batsmen to have played in the past 20 years. There is no way to definitely point one out and say he is definitely the best. I may feel SRT was the best of them, you may feel Kallis was the best, it doesn't matter. What matters is that there is a top level reserved for batsmen, and SRT and Kallis and all those I named belong there.

If however I make a post saying that Chris Martin was a better bat than Kallis, then surely I think you will agree that I am loosing track of logic. The same applied to your post, hence the response.

The point is not that you must hail Tendulkar as the greatest ever, or that I must hail Kallis as the greatest ever. The point is they were both fine batsmen, as were many others during the past 20 years.

However the thing with SRT haters is that they never want to give him a fair due. Often the argument turns into SRT was crap and didn;t know how to bat, and that is effectively what you were implying when you said Martin was a better bat than Sachin. So I wanted to know just exactly where this drop in logic comes form.

I know what youre saying but I never said Kallis was better, just that he was as good as Tendulkar. The best part of Tendulkar was how long he managed to play at the top level. And when someone plays 6 years more then someone else then its hard to compare runs and what not.

This is getting off topic, my post was a joke, as is everything affiliated with Chris Martin, your response was asking about my Sachin Tendulkar boner, which I stated he is overhyped. Was he better then Kallis? I dont know, and I dont care. I dont care about who is rated above who because I would have Kallis in a team with his extra bowling option, but I'd Tendulkar if they were at the start of their careers. Tendulkar isnt crap, what I said was a joke (obviously), and with rights come responsibilities. If people dont want Tendulkar to be hated and called bad outside the subcontinent, then Indian fans shouldnt have rose tinted glasses and ignore the equally good if not better batsmen.

My final quote which somes everything up:

Its a joke not a dick, dont take it so hard.

 

[Aalay]

Its a joke not a dick, dont take it so hard.

Oh shut up you bloody basket.

 

[Markkkkk]

Found this somewhere on some website, thought it was interesting:

is okay to call him (Sachin) anything in a democratic society. But, a good cricket historian would tell you that his records are not spectacular compared to his own contemporaries. Although Sachin is probably the best in ODI (pardon Sir Viv), the format itself is just as old as a generation (the format came only a decade before Sachin debuted) and probably on its way out. Thus, I will only go through Test records.

For instance, let us take one South African bloke.
Jacques Kallis - Started 6 years after Sachin. Has a significantly better batting average (56.92 vs. 54.32 of Sachin) and has got 282 wickets bowling medium pace. He has also taken 80 more catches in 36 fewer matches. Even if we assume that Sachin is equal to him in batting (despite the lower average and advantage of playing in subcontinental flat beds), Kallis' bowling & catching superiority alone should make him a better player. But, he has no advantage of 1.2 billion mad fan population.

Or let us take Sir Garfield Sobers. Has an average of 57.78 (3 more than Sachin) in an era of uncovered pitches & no helmets when his contemporaries struggled to make more than 40 in average. He was also a legendary bowler with 235 wickets at an average of 34 a piece.

1. Unlike Don Bradman, who scored thrice above 298, Sachin has never reached triple century even in an era where everybody is getting it (Sehwag and Gayle got two).
2. He has not scored a century in the fast bowling pitches of Wanderers or WACA since 1992. No centuries in fast tracks of Kingston, Barbados or Kensington Oval at Bridgetown either. Maybe someone could point out the list of centuries he scored in truly fast bowling pitches since 1992. My results earned 0. The 1999 century at MCG stands out, although that pitch was not really pacy, just more bouncy.
3. Again, when tested in extreme swing conditions like the 2002 NZ tour 0r 2011 England tour, Sachin had faltered.
4. Sachin had a remarkable advantage that Lara or Kallis don't have. In the batting order, he was preceded by legends like Sehwag and Dravid (who would whittle most bowling attacks) and was followed by guys like Laxman (who can be really trusted). Thus, he was surrounded by great guys who gave him the partnerships. Lara had none and bowlers could really hound him.
5. Most of his records are of the aggregate records (career runs and centuries) that merely depend on how long he has played. However, when it comes to records that matter slightly more to the winnings - such as batting averages, highest scores in a match/innings, fastest centuries, most runs in a calendar year, most runs in a series, etc. he doesn't hold the records.
6. Speed and Impact. Players like Don Bradman could change the match in a matter of a session. Don has scored centuries Even Sehwag and Lara could push their rate so much that match is turned in a session. However, in about 300 innings I have rarely seen Sachin turning the game in a session or more.

 

[PokerAce]

This is getting off topic, my post was a joke, as is everything affiliated with Chris Martin, your response was asking about my Sachin Tendulkar boner, which I stated he is overhyped. Was he better then Kallis? I dont know, and I dont care. I dont care about who is rated above who because I would have Kallis in a team with his extra bowling option, but I'd Tendulkar if they were at the start of their careers. Tendulkar isnt crap, what I said was a joke (obviously), and with rights come responsibilities. If people dont want Tendulkar to be hated and called bad outside the subcontinent, then Indian fans shouldnt have rose tinted glasses and ignore the equally good if not better batsmen.

My final quote which somes everything up:

Its a joke not a dick, dont take it so hard.

Yeah the response was not per se about the Martin post. We have had a few discussion on Tedulkar earlier, and it was a culmination of all of them.

First of all I don't get the hate. Kallis is not hated, Sangakarra is not hated, and frankly Sachin never did anything on the cricket field to deserve the hate. However for some reason SRT has few neutrals and while he has a bucketful of fans, the haters are out there too and where they come from I will never understand.

No one is ignoring the other great batsmen, but frankly you will never know the experience of being an Indian and watching Tendulkar go bat, especially in the 90s when India were a sh!t side with a bunch of mediocre batsmen at best (besides Tendulkar) and no bowling attack worth mentioning, and score all those runs for India. Frankly it was never India vs Another Country, it was always Tendulkar vs another country. I have lived in the times, especially all through the 90s, when Tendulkar got out, people would switch off the TVs knowing India had lost, and as long as Tendulkar batted, there was still hope. It is an experience no nation can associate with any single cricketer, and yes Indians for that matter love SRT more than any sportsman will ever be loved anywhere in the world. TEndulkar was our team, the others were to use a gaming term, Bots.

 

[_Sam_]

Yeah the response was not per se about the Martin post. We have had a few discussion on Tedulkar earlier, and it was a culmination of all of them.

First of all I don't get the hate. Kallis is not hated, Sangakarra is not hated, and frankly Sachin never did anything on the cricket field to deserve the hate. However for some reason SRT has few neutrals and while he has a bucketful of fans, the haters are out there too and where they come from I will never understand.

No one is ignoring the other great batsmen, but frankly you will never know the experience of being an Indian and watching Tendulkar go bat, especially in the 90s when India were a sh!t side with a bunch of mediocre batsmen at best (besides Tendulkar) and no bowling attack worth mentioning, and score all those runs for India. Frankly it was never India vs Another Country, it was always Tendulkar vs another country. I have lived in the times, especially all through the 90s, when Tendulkar got out, people would switch off the TVs knowing India had lost, and as long as Tendulkar batted, there was still hope. It is an experience no nation can associate with any single cricketer, and yes Indians for that matter love SRT more than any sportsman will ever be loved anywhere in the world. TEndulkar was our team, the others were to use a gaming term, Bots.

I think many outside of India get irritated when a select few obsessed people just keep going on and on about Sachin being the 'best of all time', being 'a God' etc. and it starts to get on their nerves as these people attemp to force their 'clearly true', and to be honest slightly ignorant, opinion onto others therefore just state the complete opposite in order to get a reaction from these obsessive characters, which clearly works most of the time.

 

[PokerAce]

Found this somewhere on some website, thought it was interesting:

I don;t know who wrote that article, but some of things he says there are completely wrong or half truths of paint the wrong picture -

1. Even if we assume that Sachin is equal to him in batting (despite the lower average and advantage of playing in subcontinental flat beds)

This flat bed argument makes no sense. First of all Tendulkar averages 50+ outside the subcontient too. So its not like he was scoring runs in India and failing on the faster tracks.

1. He has not scored a century in the fast bowling pitches of Wanderers or WACA since 1992. No centuries in fast tracks of Kingston, Barbados or Kensington Oval at Bridgetown either. Maybe someone could point out the list of centuries he scored in truly fast bowling pitches since 1992. My results earned 0. The 1999 century at MCG stands out, although that pitch was not really pacy, just more bouncy.
2. Again, when tested in extreme swing conditions like the 2002 NZ tour 0r 2011 England tour, Sachin had faltered.

Both these points are examples of senseless nitpicking of the highest order. The guy has randomly chosen some grounds as the fastest ever, and said Tendulkar should perform there. Also point no. 2 is just sense, is Tendulkar meant to score in every series and not allowed one bad tour.

Look at the over all picture, Tendulkar averages 54.31 in tests in England, this is after the 2011 tour where a near 40 yr old guy struggled. However even after this he average 54.31 in England. So was the 2011 series in England the only one where the ball was swinging, what about the other tours to England before 2011, where they subcontinent pitches, with no swing or seam movement. Point no. 2 is just laughable nitpicking. Similarly in NZ Tendulkar averages 49.52. So what was it, did the ball stop swining in NZ after 2002 tour.

I dont know what the guy is going on about. IN the four toughest tours on the calender (Aus, Eng, SA and NZ) Tendulkar averages great.

Since we are all going into in depth analysis, and to give these numbers more context, let us analyse how Tendulkar compares to Kallis who finished with a higher than him, on these tough tours.

in NZ = Sachin 49.52 (2 100s), Kallis 59.00 (3 100s). Yes Kallis found NZ more to his liking clearly.

in SA = Sachin 46.44 (5 100s), Kallis 56.73 (Okay Kallis is better than SRT in SA, but that is Kallis home ground).

in Aus = Sachin 53.20 (6 100s), Kallis 48.23 (3 100s). Sachin's and Kallis' record in Aus are not even comparable. Tendulkar way ahead, I think you will agree. Aus by far was the toughest tour there on the calender for the past 20 years.

in Eng = Sachin 54.31 (4 100s), Kallis 35.33 (2 100s). Again Sachin way ahead of Kallis. (That bloke in the article saying Tendulkar struggles in Eng testing conditions. What about Kallis then?)

So you see, for some one who accuses SRT of making easy runs, its blatantly clear that SRT did outscore Kallis and was more consistant on some of the tough tours. Kallis did have better numbers in SA and NZ, but on the toughest tour to Aus, Tendulkar fared better, and in England Tendulkar simply blows Kallis out fo the water. In England remember, where the article says Tendulkar couldn't play in testing conditions.

So you see SRT regardless of what the article may say, did not score all his runs in the subcontinent, and averages 50+ both home and away, 50+ both in the subcontinent and outside it. And on the toughest tour on the calender, Australia, few if any, can claim to have been more consistant.

Again the point is not who is better, but simply to compare and bring out some blatant and gross inaccurate assumptions, some pundits have and spread about Tendulkar's stas, such as he never scored on fast tracks or seaming tracks, and scored all his runs on the flat Indian pitches and what not.


Sachin's stats -
Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Kallis' stats -

stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/45789.html?class=1;temp

 

[PokerAce]

I think many outside of India get irritated when a select few obsessed people just keep going on and on about Sachin being the 'best of all time', being 'a God' etc. and it starts to get on their nerves as these people attemp to force their 'clearly true', and to be honest slightly ignorant, opinion onto others therefore just state the complete opposite in order to get a reaction from these obsessive characters, which clearly works most of the time.

I think you misunderstand the whole 'god' reference to Tendulkar. In India Tendulkar is a god. Its all about the 90s when India only watched Tendulkar. The second he got out, TVs were switched off for everyone knew India would never win once Tendulkar got out. That gave him a god like status in India. When Tendulkar batted, a million people batted with him, when he got out, a whole nation got back to work. There is no comparison I can make to anyone else in any sport that can even come close to telling you what place Tendulkar holds for Indians.

People who don't get this, can totally misunderstand what it means, and then react negatively. Its like Chris Nolan films off - late. The guy is a great director but his fans can often piss people off about how great his films are. I do get that, but on the whole Tendulkar does get a terribly unfair treatment from his haters. Which kinda has the same effect on his fans, who want to annoy the haters in equal measure.

The facts then get messed up. Tendulkar was a great batsman. Whether he was the greatest, or the 2nd greatest or the 10th greatest or the 12th greatest, what does it matter? To each his own.

How what should not be up for debate, is whether someone with the kind of stats that Tendulkar has, was a great batsman or not. Of course he was.

 

[themusketeer]

Bottom line is it shouldn't impact any cricket fans outside the subcontinent what we 1.2 billion mad cricket fans like.
"If cricket is religion then Sachin is god". Simple !

[/Topic]

 

[swacker]

In India Tendulkar is a god

 

[Markkkkk]

So South Africa are playing 6 test matches from now till March with 2 of them being against Bangladesh... Great.

 

[abhi_jacko]

Just a quick addition on Sachin haters thing..this trend only started with the advent of the Internet and social media.
I have cricket fans as friends from all over the world and there is immense respect for guys like Sachin and kallis and sanga all over. Internet was made for trolling and hating and non sensical blogs and open letters, and we shouldn't be surprised regarding the hate Sachin gets on the interweb. Only shows his popularity

 

[War]

I see Bangladesh beating India means according to how the brilliant ICC has set things up in that Champions trophy tournament - they have qualified for the competition, thus meaning that Pakistan & West Indies have to fight for last CT spot.

 

[themusketeer]

I see Bangladesh beating India means according to how the brilliant ICC has set things up in that Champions trophy tournament - they have qualified for the competition, thus meaning that Pakistan & West Indies have to fight for last CT spot.

Aand WI is literally Out because they ain't playing any ODIs till September this year.