Tendulkar v Inzamam TEST CRICKET ONLY

[iZeeshan]

Nice try I'd like to see some sourcing to that, rather than pulling said material out of thin air. Also add to the Sachin camp, Richie Benaud, Don Bradman, Shane Warne, and the best of all Inzamam himself. That's just off the top of my head. I can go on for days, if you'd really like a list of players that rate Tendulkar (and the class of Tendulkar Ponting and Lara in their own league.)

Notice on cricinfo they had a panel of judges judging the performance of the best modern bastmen. They concluded Lara to be the best, but Inzamam was rarely mentioned. They took the batsmen's carrer into record hollistically and came up with the answer that only the above three deserve to be called modern legends.

No amount of your screaming, typing with CAPSLOCKS, and chopping and screwing around views and statistics will change this fact that Inzamam is not in this league.

Here's a transcript of the discussion:

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/talk/content/multimedia/268727.html?view=transcript

Now overwhelmingly the argument comes to the three said batsmen. Only Sanjay Manjrekar brings up Inzamam, and it is pretty rare infact. I believe it is rightfully concluded that the three best of this day and age are Ponting, Tendulkar, and Lara.

You have been royally owned.

You have been royally owned. Here we are talking about two players whose careers began way back in the 90s, and you bring up something from 2006. Why? Why should you do such a thing?

 

[Insomniac]

You have been royally owned. Here we are talking about two players whose careers began way back in the 90s, and you bring up something from 2006. Why? Why should you do such a thing?

Prehaps its to make Sachin look like he can handle pressure and is part of the top.

If you can't handle pressure you don't deserve to be there

 

[prarara]

Nice of you to bring up something from 2006 to support your argument, real nice.

Tendulkar became a BIG choker from 06 to 08. He was already a choker, but he started even choking some more.

Did you know, that Lara is another one of those "players" who don't play to the team requirement.

The difference between Lara and Tendulkar is Lara almost NEVER had a team to put him in a winning position.

If only he played in the era of the 1980s, WI would be unbeatable.

Lara played for his 400* when he could have declared earlier and gave his bowlers a chance to beat England. That was possibly his biggest mistake, yes it had to be done to get 400, but he should have declared so the team could stand a chance of winning.


Anyway, you can believe what you want. Tendulkar CANNOT possibly handle any pressure whatsoever.

Inzamam has the higher average in games their respective teams have won than Sachin.

Inzamam can handle pressure far better than Sachin

Sachin likes to come up with excuses as to why he failed before he even starts his innings.

Sachin chokes when his team needs him to step up to the plate.

Sachin can only score runs for India on most occasions when runs aren't required from him.

When runs are required from him, he decides to get out in a silly way.

Hence, CHOKING.

I've been royally owned? You've shot yourself in the damn foot by bringing up something from 2 years ago! You honestly think Sachin is in that category now? With his head-shaking antics and his dramas?

I'm not surprised he's not in the match referee's office after all these antics. But that doesn't matter, Sachin just can't perform in pressure situations.

He HAS NOT GOT a man of the match award for TEN YEARS. Prehaps in the ONE DAY game Sachin may be with Ponting and Lara, but IN TEST CRICKET, he is NOWHERE NEAR.

Blah blah blah blah blah. You might as well just put in a tape recorder and just play back whatever you say. When I refute your arguments you have to resort to pathetic chopped and screwed arguments.


http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru...6;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Tendulkar still averaged better in the last two years (so called nadir of his career) than Inzi. The point of discussion still then goes back to the fact that Inzi is not in this league. The judges have said so, it's been revewed extensively, and despite the fact that you may bring up specific instances of how Inzi is better it does not change the overall argument.

Yes maybe Inzi is a better Pressure absorber, but as a pure batsmen, hollistically or in the test arena (which is the topic of this thread) the panel rings Tendulkar Ponting and Lara at the highest level. The fact that it's from 2006 is still irrelavent-given Inzi's average to Tendulkar's after this point, bringing up this point does not help your argument.

As such I'd like to see some quoted proof for your opinions if you'd like me to believe them. If you can provide some sources I'd gladly concede my point.

But please, continue with stinging both fingers your ears and shouting at the top of your lungs "INZI IS BETTER INZI IS BETTER nAH NAH NAH NAH!" I'm sure there is someone listening.

 

[Insomniac]

Blah blah blah blah blah. You might as well just put in a tape recorder and just play back whatever you say. When I refute your arguments you have to resort to pathetic chopped and screwed arguments.


http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru...6;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Tendulkar still averaged better in the last two years (so called nadir of his career) than Inzi. The point of discussion still then goes back to the fact that Inzi is not in this league. The judges have said so, it's been revewed extensively, and despite the fact that you may bring up specific instances of how Inzi is better it does not change the overall argument.

Yes maybe Inzi is a better Pressure absorber, but as a pure batsmen, hollistically or in the test arena (which is the topic of this thread) the panel rings Tendulkar Ponting and Lara at the highest level. The fact that it's from 2006 is still irrelavent-given Inzi's average to Tendulkar's after this point, bringing up this point does not help your argument.

As such I'd like to see some quoted proof for your opinions if you'd like me to believe them. If you can provide some sources I'd gladly concede my point.

But please, continue with stinging both fingers your ears and shouting at the top of your lungs "INZI IS BETTER INZI IS BETTER nAH NAH NAH NAH!" I'm sure there is someone listening.

Nice of you to play around with Statsguru.

Fact: Inzamam didn't play a test match since 2007. So for him, how about we do 2005 - 2007? Oh, I'm sorry, if I do that, then Inzamam's average will be higher than Tendulkar, and that just won't be right.

For those of you who are honest, Sachin averages 42 in the last 2 years of his playing career according to the page that he posted.

Inzamam averaged 46.50 in his last 2 years. http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru...al1=span;team=7;template=results;type=batting

Now go back to your hole and play around with statsguru and try to fool all of us

Besides, who are these judges? You decided to pull out some random-ass article from 2006. That shows NOTHING. You just decided to find an article which supported your case.

Do you want to explain why Tendulkar has not received a man of the match since 1998? Maybe he hasn't played a meaningful enough innings for TEN YEARS.

Secondly, your panel never mentioned test cricket, so that already throws it out.

Seriously, grow up. Go find some real stats instead of playing with statsguru to get what you want

I've shown you real statistics, which manee has seen as well. You've decided to deceive us all, but I was smart enough to catch you

 

[Skater]

Will you realise that Sachin is the better player and leave it?

 

[iZeeshan]

Nice of you to play around with Statsguru.

Fact: Inzamam didn't play a test match since 2007. So for him, how about we do 2005 - 2007? Oh, I'm sorry, if I do that, then Inzamam's average will be higher than Tendulkar, and that just won't be right.

For those of you who are honest, Sachin averages 42 in the last 2 years of his playing career according to the page that he posted.

Inzamam averaged 46.50 in his last 2 years. http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru...al1=span;team=7;template=results;type=batting

Now go back to your hole and play around with statsguru and try to fool all of us

Besides, who are these judges? You decided to pull out some random-ass article from 2006. That shows NOTHING. You just decided to find an article which supported your case.

Do you want to explain why Tendulkar has not received a man of the match since 1998? Maybe he hasn't played a meaningful enough innings for TEN YEARS.

Secondly, your panel never mentioned test cricket, so that already throws it out.

Seriously, grow up. Go find some real stats instead of playing with statsguru to get what you want

I've shown you real statistics, which manee has seen as well. You've decided to deceive us all, but I was smart enough to catch you

I am sorry but how can anyone refute those stats!? Not a single MOM since 1998? That's absurd! Great pull up.

 

[Insomniac]

Will you realise that Sachin is the better player and leave it?

Will you realize that you can't spell realize? :

Fact: Sachin chokes.

Do you not get that?

Fact: Inzamam averages more in Pakistan wins than Sachin does in India wins.

Fact: Sachin is not reliable, Inzamam is.

Fact: Sachin has conveniently "been injured" to hide his choking.

Fact: Only 2 Man of the Matches in the last 10 years in India wins. Absolutely Pathetic.

Please explain to me why Sachin has got only 2 MoMs in the last 10 years in Test Match Cricket?

Please, I'm dieing to hear about it?

Is it A)He chokes B)He's not that good C)He fakes injuries or D)He chokes.

 

[iZeeshan]

Will you realise that Sachin is the better player and leave it?

No I will not.

What is the worth of a player who scores great innings and then cracks/chokes when he is needed by his team the most!

In 2000 against South Africa, Sachin scored 97 in the first innings. Great knock, no doubt. In the second innings, India trying to set a target, he completely flops [8(11)] and India only set a target of 164. And jsut to remember, South Africa lost 6 wickets in that chase. Had Sachin stayed around for his team, and controlled his choking instinct, they could have easily set 50-75 more runs, and India would have won the match and SERIES.

 

[Insomniac]

And thats only the start, theres SO MANY more examples.

Right from the top of my head, India and Australia.

I believe, 1997. Tendulkar scores a fanastic 160 odd in the first innings.

India 440 all out

Australia respond with 400

Then, in the 2nd innings, Tendulkar goes cheapily when the team needed him to set Australia a big total. He hits the ball straight up in the air, fielder comes under it (may have been bowler)

He was out for 40 odd, so he had a start.

When India needed Sachin, he decided to try to obliterate the bowler, and got out. India bowled out for 140 or 150.

Australia win quite easily.

When the pressure was on, Sachin did not perform, but if he had, India would have had a very good chance of winning the test.

 

[Skater]

Will you realize that you can't spell realize?

Will you realise I'm not American so there is no 'z' in realise?

 

[Insomniac]

Will you realise I'm not American so there is no 'z' in realise?

Ah, right, very sorry. I didn't know there were more differences between English in UK and US.

Sorry

 

[iZeeshan]

Let's see if this holds any weight.

What about a brand new bowler on to the international scene, completely newbie, completely exploit Sachin and make him duck in more ways then one. Yes, that's right, Mohammad Asif. Not just once, twice, but three times. And not only that, he had complet control over Sachin from the beginning he started bowling to him. Asif made Sachin BOW to him.

This is 2006 btw, right around Asif burst onto the international scene.

 

[Skater]

Let's see if this holds any weight.

What about a brand new bowler on to the international scene, completely newbie, completely exploit Sachin and make him duck in more ways then one. Yes, that's right, Mohammad Asif. Not just once, twice, but three times. And not only that, he had complet control over Sachin from the beginning he started bowling to him. Asif made Sachin BOW to him.

This is 2006 btw, right around Asif burst onto the international scene.

Asif did the same to Pietersen in 2006 but KP is still a class act.

 

[iZeeshan]

Asif did the same to Pietersen in 2006 but KP is still a class act.

How does that say anything about Sachin?

 

[Skater]

How does that say anything about Sachin?

It is saying that being dominated by one bowler doesn't mean you are any less on a batsman.