That would only make any sense if all 329 innings of Tendulkar had been against an England team containing James Anderson. Calling him a 'clown' and 'mediocre' is also laughable.
Don't get me wrong, I believe Tendulkar to be the 2nd best batsman ever to play the game, but he didn't like facing Anderson because he had him in his pocket.
Hold on dear sir, again its irrelevant, how highly or low you rate SRT, the logic makes no sense.
Also clown is not in reference to Anderson, more in the context of how some clown would always have dismissed a batsman more times than another. Clown context was carried forward, and I didn't mean Anderson was a clown, just that the clown in SRT's case happens to be Anderson. Also I said Anderson's average of 29.86 is mediocre (mediocre 29.86 averaging Anderson), and if read the post before I have shown why 29.86 is a mediocre avg for Test bowlers. Great bowlers avg closer to 20.
Also the most dismissal part for Tendulkar is accross his entire career, all 329 innings. Hence the proper context is 9 out of 329.
To you the logic is if a bowler gets someone out, the batsman is in the bowler's pocket. The other side of the equation runs, doesn't matter? Hence I said if Braod had gotten Yuvi after he hit him for 6 sixes, your logic implies that Braod would have had Yuvi in his pocket.
At some point someone else would have dismissed TEndulkar most times, so was SRT in his pocket too. Its likely to be that the bowler to have dismissed Tendulkar changed a few times over his career, so would all these bowlers also be said to have Tendulkar in his pocket? Its true of all Batsmen, at some point some one would have dismissed him more than any other, and this may change over the course of his career. SO are all Batsmen in the pocket of those who at the time have dismissed him more than any other. Runs scored doesn't matter to determine who was in whose pocket.
Tendulkar avges 51 vs England and 54 in tests in England, and a batsman who avgs 50 against you att over 20 years is not exactly in your pocket. Hell if he had averaged 30 the in your pocket argument would still not hold. If a team or Bowler has a batsman in their pocket, the he should be averaging around 10 or 12, most definitely no more than 15 against that team. I am not saying Kohli is not a sititng Duck against Anderson this series sure he is. BUt Tendulkar with an avg of 51 overall and 54 in Eng, being in Eng's pocket is just laughable. Thus I don't know about Anderson having Tendulkar in his pocket, Tendulkar sure had the whole of Eng Bowling att, which includes Anderson, In his pocket, because an avg over 50 indicates he was regularly hammering runs against that attack, which includes Anderson.
Also what with him not liking facing Anderson. Given that he was on avg scoring a 50 everytime he faced an Eng att, including those led by Anderson, I am sure he liked facing Anderson and as much as he like facing anyone else, he liked it a lot probably.
Also 9 dismissals over a career is nowhere near the most dismissals of a Batsman by the same Bowler, not even half to be honest. Atherton fell 19 times to McGrath, and 17 times each to Walsh and Ambrose. Gooch 16 times to Marshall, M Waugh 15 times to Ambrose, Lara 15 times to McGrath, Ponting 14 times to Harbhajan. Also all these 19, 17, 16, 15 dismissals are over much fewer innings than SRT's 329, and thus more frequent on an average.
There are a total of 85 Batsman who have been dismissed 10 times or more by the same bowler. Thats right 85 before you even come to 9 dismissals of Tendulkar to Anderson.
You really want to make a mountain of a mere 9 dismissals, and make it seem like that big a deal that it equals the batsman being in the bowler's pocket. 9 is only the 86th most times a batsman has been dismissed to the same bowler, and thus by that stat alone not that frequent to be a big deal. On top of that is that SRT averages over 50 against England.
I bet if Broad had gotten Yuvi, after he smashed Broad for 6 sixes in one over, you would go Broad, had Yuvi in his pocket 
