Tendulkar v Inzamam TEST CRICKET ONLY

[pal]

I haven't read through this thread. I've been reluctant in reading the thread though, considering most of these threads end up in the way of dick-measuring contests between Indians and Pakistanis. But, there must be something to this, since it has grown to 18 pages.

This is a reasonable comparison. Both these players were the cornerstones of their batting lineups. They've both played some memorable innings, but looking at the statistics (which are a good starting point), you would have to say that Sachin Tendulkar, alongside Brian Lara and Ricky Ponting, ranks in a tier above Inzamam-Ul-Haq.

Tests:

Inzamam:
Avg.: 49.60
Runs: 8830
Centuries: 25

Tendulkar:
Avg.: 54.23
Runs: 11877
Centuries: 39

ODIs:

Inzamam:
Avg.: 39.52
Runs: 11739
Centuries: 10

Tendulkar:
Avg.: 44.33
Runs: 16361
Centuries: 42

Now, from a purely statistical standpoint, Sachin Tendulkar comes away clearly as the better batsman. Statistics don't always paint the full picture, but I believe that even if you look at the other measures of a cricketer, Sachin equals or ranks above Inzamam. The Pakistani posters will disagree with that assessment and I'm willing to debate the point. Holdenator has credited zMario with presenting good arguments. If it's possible, would you reiterate those points, so that we can pursue the discussion in a logical and step-by-step manner?

 

[Insomniac]

Certainly pal (finally, I don't have to step down several intelligence levels to make others understand). One thing aobut this thread is that we're only comparing them at the test match level, so forget the ODI stats (that could be a different thread, and I'm not very likely to visit it )

Inzamam-ul-Haq in games Pakistan have won averages a huge 78.16 in 49 tests.

Sachin Tendulkar averages 62.11 in test matches India have won, which is also quite impressive.

Big gap there. The reason I use matches won is because it tells quite a bit of how much do the batsmen play in helping and taking their team to victory (or close to victory, as reflected by the averages)

Tendulkar in my opinion also tends to attempt to make the umpire feel he did not edge a ball or vice versa, so he gets a not out decision. I also was not happy about Tendulkar giving a batsman out from the dressing room (ok, the decision may have been wrong, but he can't do that). Its ironic because Indian fans also were attacking Ponting for doing it as well.

When Inzamam scores a 100, Pakistan tend to win the games. Out of 25 100s, 17 have been match-winning. Add to that 100s that came from draws from Inzamam (6), and out of Inzamam's 25 100s, 23 100s have come in a draw or a win.

Thats a 92% chance of a win or a draw, and 68% chance of a win.

When Sachin scores a 100, India tend to not win (well as much compared to Inzamam's stats) - He has 13 100s that have led to India winning out of 39 100s

And he has 17 100s out of 39 100s which have led to draws.

So if Sachin scores a 100, theres a 76.9% chance of an Indian win or draw, and 33% chance of an Indian win. Very low compared to Inzamam.

Also, I have a little joke for everyone

==================================
India vs England, Mumbai, March 22, 2006

India have to bat out two complete sessions on the final day to draw
the match and win the series. The score is 75/3, with the most
over-hyped batsman of our generation not out at 34. Predictably, as he
has done throughout his test career, he gets out. India lose the match
and the series.

Pakistan vs England, Lord's, July 17, 2006

Pakistan have to bat out one and a half sessions on the final day to
draw the match. Inzamam arrives at the crease with the scoreboard
reading 116/3. One and a half sessions later, he is still not out at
56. As he has done many times in his career, he has saved a test match
for his country.
__________________________________________________ __
Tendulkar
Pronounced: Ten-dul-kar
Definition: The act of failing a team when your team needs you most and
padding one's statistics with high scores in meaningless matches.

Those matches are true by the way, not made up.

Sachin's test match average vs Pakistan before Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis retired was 32.91.

Sachin's CAREER average vs Pakistan: 42.28.

It rose quite a bit from facing Sami, Rana Naveed, and Mohammad Khalil, although I think the times are changing, and its going back down with the return of Akhtar in the previous series and whenever Umar Gul returns.

Sachin Tendulkar in his last 50 tests averages 47.36

Inzamam-ul-Haq in his last 50 test matches averages 54.36

Inzamam's average in games Pakistan have won in his last 50 tests is a BRILLIANT 86.03.

Sachin's average in games India have won in his last 50 tests is 57.88

I understand that Sachin was definitely not in his best in his last 50, so I've gone to a new time-period.

1997 to 2002 which was arguably his best time of his career - he averaged 65.17 in India wins.

Inzamam's best time was probably 2001 to 2005 - he averaged 93.00 in Pakistan wins

Sachin's average in the last 2 years is 42.00

Inzamam's average in his last 2 years is 46.50. They're quite close, because I think both only played around 17 tests, but he is ahead on that front. I wouldn't worry much or argue about that statistic, because thats just too close.

Now I think the next statistic is the most damning ever.

Sachin Tendulkar has only received TWO man of the match awards in Test Cricket in his entire career in India wins. And both came in India.

However, he has NOT received a Man of the Match in an indian win since 1998. Its been 10 years since he received a man of the match.

Compared to Inzamam, who has 5 man of the match awards, and 2 man of the series.

The above statistic does NOT include series or matches vs Bangladesh or Zimbabwe.

I have some other issues with Sachin, which were pointed out by Sanjay Manjrekar.

I have found the scenes prior to his recent, long absences from the game quite strange.

After the series in Bangladesh in December 2004, in which he scored a double century, he followed that up with another innings of 36 and immediately ruled himself out of cricket for nearly three months with no warning signs of even discomfort during that series.

Even in the last instance, when he ruled himself unfit with the shoulder injury I found the timing of the announcement during that Mumbai Test quite strange.

Why would you want to make that declaration on the eve of your own and the team's very critical innings, when the Test match was at such a delicate stage?

There was another moment too: Tendulkar deciding to give the 2005 Super Series Test a miss. I thought that was a great opportunity not to be missed at any cost for someone like him. What a great stage that was to show off your individual brilliance.

Tendulkar said he had not fully recovered from the elbow injury. But just eight days later he was running down the pitch hitting Murali out of the ground in that knock of 93 against Sri Lanka in the ODI at Nagpur.

That Super Series actually was another evidence of how the two great men think. There was Lara, in Australia, hopelessly short of match practice, yet looking at every chance as an opportunity to play another memorable innings. Working on the principle that the more chances you give yourself, the more the chances of success. Tendulkar is not willing to take that chance.

The Tendulkar of today gives me the impression that his main focus is not to fail! And he wants to give himself the best shot at that. By competing only when he feel he is in his prime, physically and mentally.

In comparison, Lara's success has a lot to do with his failures. Lara is not in fear of failure. Lara knows that with advancing years, failures will mount. So while Lara is staying realistic, Tendulkar seems to be chasing a ghost.

The full article is here - http://www.ndtv.com/sports/cricket/showstory.asp?id=29372

While I am not exactly the best person to say this, but possibly Sachin knew he would fail (for whatever reason - lack of form or otherwise, and decided to bring up an excuse early - again speculation, please don't attack me)

On May 16
Sachin says "The rehabilitation and preparation have been good. The doctor and the phsyio have been quite happy with my progress.. That is the reason I am in Chennai, training at the MRF[Pace Foundation]. I always wanted to be there [West Indies] and I am looking forward to the tour."

On May 18
he says "I am very happy about the workouts and batting practice,....Things are looking to be falling in place."

On May 19
he agrees to a fitness test. "I have been progressing well since May 15. Ramji Srinivasan and Andrew Leipus have really worked hard with me,"
----------------------------------------

On May 23
he says" There is weakness in my arm. I am not still ready to compete at the international level. I will be going to London for further treatment."

India lost 2 or 3 ODIs in that time between the 19th and 23rd - again speculation, I cannot decide, but it is suspicious

Now heres I think the most destructive point I have:

Sachin Tendulkar has a BIG tendency to... choke.

There have been so many occasions where Sachin is in great form, and he just throws it away. Sachin Tendulkar does not deal with pressure as well as Inzamam, which is why I'd rather have Inzamam rather than Tendulkar in my team.

Choking incidents:

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

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.

Another SPLENDID performance under pressure by Sachin Tendulkar

By the way, this photo goes with that performance.

Now heres another story.

Asian Test Championship, Dravid bowled by Akhtar.

In comes Tendulkar. The crowd goes BESERK at Eden Gardens.

In comes Akhtar. GONE, YORKED. Another FANTASTIC Under-Pressure innings by Sachin Tendulkar.

Crowd is stunned. Tendulkar walks back, since he could not handle the pressure. India were under pressure because of all the hype around him because of Akhtar. And Akhtar blasted his middle stump out.

A video is available on youtube.

A second story. First test between India and Pakistan in 1999, taking place in Chennai.

Pakistan struggle along to 240 odd in the first innings.

India make 260 in reply.

In the second innings Afridi scores 141 and the rest of the Pakistani batsmen play around him. Pakistan 290 (?) all out, India require 271 to win.

The chase begins badly, with Ramesh and Laxman out, India 6-2.

Dravid and the rest fall, with Sachin surviving a few LBW shouts and caught behinds.

Sachin survives to 218-6.

Sachin starts playing Saqlain nicely, and is about to take India home.

Till Sachin chokes. He decides to hit Saqlain over everyone's head. He's caught easily at mid-off.

He could have easily taken India home, had he played sensibly, and nudged the ones and twos and all.

But no, I have to hit a big shot, I'm Sachin Tendulkar.

India lost the test match and the series by 12 runs.

What a game of test match cricket. And what could have been, for India, had Sachin not choked.

Anyway pal, I hope you now see why I believe Inzamam to be a better cricketer than Sachin Tendulkar.

Both are legends of the game, but Inzamam was ahead when it came to playing and helping the team win.

 

[SaiSrini]

I have to say while reading through this zMario seems to be winning this arguement hands down! He has offered up so many different arguements with back ups! Where as the Indians mainly from what I can see sai just has nothing really to say back!

See the thing is, he devalues many of Sachin's innings because they didnt help India win. He takes only those extremely heavy pressure situations where Inzamam has scored, and uses it to say that he is a BETTER CRICKETER than Tendulkar, which is completely false.

Merely on statistics if we go, Inzamam wins on his contribution to Pak wins. But this thread is abt the overall cricketer. As said before, both cricketers have played a lot and so, going by their averages, their centuries, their runs, Sachin wins hands down. And he is the better cricketer. I dont think I can contribute to this discussion anymore apart from this. Let someone else (pal or someone) take over.

 

[Insomniac]

See the thing is, he devalues many of Sachin's innings because they didnt help India win. He takes only those extremely heavy pressure situations where Inzamam has scored, and uses it to say that he is a BETTER CRICKETER than Tendulkar, which is completely false.

Merely on statistics if we go, Inzamam wins on his contribution to Pak wins. But this thread is abt the overall cricketer. As said before, both cricketers have played a lot and so, going by their averages, their centuries, their runs, Sachin wins hands down. And he is the better cricketer. I dont think I can contribute to this discussion anymore apart from this. Let someone else (pal or someone) take over.

It took you from 5:21 AM to 5:36 AM to spout out that?

Anyway, stop being upset about holdenator saying you've had nothing to say back.

ANY innings is devalued if it does not help the team win. If you support Sachin scoring, but India losing, thats just sad.

A cricketer's job is to help his country, no? Inzamam has done his "job" better than Tendulkar's. Of course you could not contribute to this discussion anymore because you have very few points that support Tendulkar (against mine anyway)

Happy days

 

[SaiSrini]

It took you from 5:21 AM to 5:36 AM to spout out that?

Anyway, stop being upset about holdenator saying you've had nothing to say back.

ANY innings is devalued if it does not help the team win. If you support Sachin scoring, but India losing, thats just sad.

A cricketer's job is to help his country, no? Inzamam has done his "job" better than Tendulkar's. Of course you could not contribute to this discussion anymore because you have very few points that support Tendulkar (against mine anyway)

Happy days

Doesnt mean I lost to you. Stop the heck ordering me what to do (I was replying to holdenator's post to which you were not obligated to reply and I was not upset with it). I dont have my points stacked up like you did because I am not interested in working on stacking them up like you do. But I have mentioned my various points in seperate ways, and you have refuted them all and we still go on pressing about your own points, for which I cant do anything.

5:21AM to 5:36AM? You know we all post from different countries? And the last post of mine came after almost 3hrs (I am posting from class in between boring lecture!).

Anyways, good luck showing your argument to others and trying to fight for Inzamam being better than Tendulkar, which he isnt.

 

[Insomniac]

Doesnt mean I lost to you. Stop the heck ordering me what to do (I was replying to holdenator's post to which you were not obligated to reply and I was not upset with it). I dont have my points stacked up like you did because I am not interested in working on stacking them up like you do. But I have mentioned my various points in seperate ways, and you have refuted them all and we still go on pressing about your own points, for which I cant do anything.

5:21AM to 5:36AM? You know we all post from different countries? And the last post of mine came after almost 3hrs (I am posting from class in between boring lecture!).

Anyways, good luck showing your argument to others and trying to fight for Inzamam being better than Tendulkar, which he isnt.

Yes, it basically does mean you lost to me, unless you want to debate what I've said above.

You have not given any meaningful reply to any of my points, as holdenator noted.

If you are not interested in stacking them up, then why are you here? Why even bother posting in this thread? Getting your post count up?

I have responded to your points about how Tendulkar has a better batting average so hes better quite diligently. It is just that you are yet to post a sufficient response.

We press on my points because it is very difficult to dispute them, so of course you can't do anything.

And as my points show and prove, you're wrong (unless pal comes and delivers something unbelievable )

 

[lightbulb]

It took you from 5:21 AM to 5:36 AM to spout out that?

Anyway, stop being upset about holdenator saying you've had nothing to say back.

ANY innings is devalued if it does not help the team win. If you support Sachin scoring, but India losing, thats just sad.

A cricketer's job is to help his country, no? Inzamam has done his "job" better than Tendulkar's. Of course you could not contribute to this discussion anymore because you have very few points that support Tendulkar (against mine anyway)

Happy days

If India were losing very badly and then Sachin scores a hundred, that's the opposite of 'sad.' When wickets are tumbling, he's under pressure to stay in and score runs, so technically, we should be looking at averages in matches India/Pakistan have lost.

 

[Deleted member 11215]

Lara is better then both of them. ps. posted through PSP.

 

[lightbulb]

zMario-nobody, except Holdenator, thinks that you're winning this argument at the moment, the poll speaks for itself. And can you tell me why ODI stats don't count?

 

[Insomniac]

zMario-nobody, except Holdenator, thinks that you're winning this argument at the moment, the poll speaks for itself. And can you tell me why ODI stats don't count?

Because manee said that this discussion is for TEST CRICKT ONLY

His post is located on page 1.

Also lightbulb, I don't get your theory? Whats the point of looking at matches lost.

We need to be looking at matches WON, to see what the batsman's effect is on the outcome of the game. When Inzamam scores, he takes Pakistan to victory, as the stats above show.

When Sachin scores, he can also take India to victory, but not as often as Inzamam.

Add to that NO man of the match awards since 1998 for Sachin Tendulkar.

 

[Insomniac]

Just a fun stat for all, no need for debate as this is an ODI thing.

However, it is quite interesting.

%     In   NO
48.21   56   27  A Ranatunga (SL)
[B]48.15   54   26  SR Waugh (Aus)[/B]
[B]42.11   76   32  Inzamam-ul-Haq (Pak)[/B]
41.18   51   21  Mohammad Yousuf (Pak)
37.50   80   30  M Azharuddin (Ind)
36.54   52   19  Salim Malik (Pak)
[B]34.62   78   27  BC Lara (WI)[/B]
34.48   58   20  IVA Richards (WI)
34.48   58   20  MS Atapattu (SL)
33.33   51   17  S Chanderpaul (WI)
32.88   73   24  RB Richardson (WI)
[B]32.56   86   28  JH Kallis (SAf)[/B]
[B]32.14   84   27  RT Ponting (Aus)[/B]
30.30   66   20  PA de Silva (SL)
29.03   62   18  SP Fleming (NZ)
26.23   61   16  ME Waugh (Aus)
25.76   66   17  RS Dravid (Ind)
24.14   58   14  Saeed Anwar (Pak)
21.98   91   20  DL Haynes (WI)
[B]21.62  111   24  SR Tendulkar (Ind)[/B]
21.59   51   11  CG Greenidge (WI)
20.55   73   15  SC Ganguly (Ind)
16.95   59   10  G Kirsten (SAf)
14.55   55    8  Shahid Afridi (Pak)
12.50   72    9  HH Gibbs (SAf)
12.00  100   12  ST Jayasuriya (SL)
11.11   90   10  AC Gilchrist (Aus)

I know Tendulkar opens the innings in ODIs, but it is an interesting statistic because Tendulkar has played at 4 and 5 as well as opening. Anyway, please no responses to that, its just a fun statistic I found on another forum.

 

[Harrypotter_fan]

India lost 2 or 3 ODIs in that time between the 19th and 23rd - again speculation, I cannot decide, but it is suspicious

How do ODIs come into the picture?

And you (zMario) are contradicting yourself. Because:

[Note: The '≈' sign stands for proportionality.]

'Pressure ≈ Losing;'            -(1)

'Tendulkar does not score when India wins';     ...{said by zMario}
i.e. 'Tendulkar scores when India loses';        -(2) ...{Since, he has scored 10000+ runs}

Therefore, 'Tendulkar scores under pressure';   -(3) ...{From (1) and (2)}

'Tendulkar does not score under pressure';       ...{said by zMario}
i.e. 'Tendulkar scores when not under pressure'; -(4) ...{Since, he has scored 10000+ runs}

Statement (3) contradicts statement (4);
Hence the Proof;

 

[pal]

Point 1:

Inzamam-ul-Haq in games Pakistan have won averages a huge 78.16 in 49 tests.

Sachin Tendulkar averages 62.11 in test matches India have won, which is also quite impressive.

Big gap there. The reason I use matches won is because it tells quite a bit of how much do the batsmen play in helping and taking their team to victory (or close to victory, as reflected by the averages)

Response 1:

That does seem like a point of contention, doesn't it? What you have unfortunately missed is the fact that the Indian batting line up, for most of the last two decades, has also contained the batting behemoths of Dravid, Ganguly, and Laxman. Dravid, in particular, has scored over 10,246 runs. Ganguly and Laxman have chipped in with 6888 and 6000, respectively. Now, it should be easy enough to understand that when setting a score, Sachin has to compete with those three batsmen (Dravid in particular) in scoring the required runs. Now, take a look at the Pakistani batting line up. Among all of Inzamam's peers, only Mohammad Yousuf has scored above 6000 runs in tests.

I hope that response is made clear, because it answers your point. Take a look at the statistics. In test matches India have won, Dravid averages 71.54. If you want to look at the 'lesser' two batsmen of the three, Laxman and Ganguly average 51 and 46 respectively. So, if India is chasing some score to win, Sachin competes with those three to score the runs and consequently, he can't score as much. I will say that Inzamam has certainly performed admirably to average 78.16 in tests Pakistan has won. That only re-iterates his importance to the Pakistani team and his ranking as one of the greatest Pakistani batsmen.

Point 2:

When Inzamam scores a 100, Pakistan tend to win the games. Out of 25 100s, 17 have been match-winning. Add to that 100s that came from draws from Inzamam (6), and out of Inzamam's 25 100s, 23 100s have come in a draw or a win.

Thats a 92% chance of a win or a draw, and 68% chance of a win.

When Sachin scores a 100, India tend to not win (well as much compared to Inzamam's stats) - He has 13 100s that have led to India winning out of 39 100s

And he has 17 100s out of 39 100s which have led to draws.

So if Sachin scores a 100, theres a 76.9% chance of an Indian win or draw, and 33% chance of an Indian win. Very low compared to Inzamam.

Response 2:

That's illogical. Cricket is played by teams of eleven. You can't fault Sachin for scoring 100s when the other ten players don't perform. Sachin has scored 30 hundreds when India has won/drawn. Inzamam has scored 23 hundreds when Pakistan has won/drawn. I could also use your statistics to frame the argument this way. Sachin scoring more hundreds in lost matches only defeats your point about him failing under pressure. When the team crumbles around him and when India fails an insurmountable task, he still manages to score 100s.

Also, I have a little joke for everyone

Tendulkar
Pronounced: Ten-dul-kar
Definition: The act of failing a team when your team needs you most and
padding one's statistics with high scores in meaningless matches.

A little joke I've heard, if you don't mind:

Inzamam
Pronounced: Inz-a-mam
Definition: A fat tub of immovable lard.

Point 4:

Sachin Tendulkar in his last 50 tests averages 47.36

Inzamam-ul-Haq in his last 50 test matches averages 54.36

Inzamam's average in games Pakistan have won in his last 50 tests is a BRILLIANT 86.03.

Sachin's average in games India have won in his last 50 tests is 57.88

I understand that Sachin was definitely not in his best in his last 50, so I've gone to a new time-period.

1997 to 2002 which was arguably his best time of his career - he averaged 65.17 in India wins.

Inzamam's best time was probably 2001 to 2005 - he averaged 93.00 in Pakistan wins

Response 4:

How convenient. We'll simply ignore the fact that Sachin has been plagued by his tennis elbow problem since 2004 (which once again has sidelined him from the ODIs). We'll also ignore the fact that Sachin averaged 60.38 in his last 50 tests matches before his elbow injury appeared. And why not, let's also ignore the fact that it is quite meaningless to arbitrarily pick an interval of 50 matches to compare the two batsmen's averages, instead of comparing them over their entire careers.

Why does it seem to me that you have done nothing up to this point except harp on the point that Inzamam has averaged a higher number of runs in matches Pakistan have won than Sachin has averaged in matches India have won. I have already answered that argument with my first point. I would think that it is quite simple. In the same 5-year interval that you have taken the luxury of choosing (and assuming for everybody to be the 'best time of his career'), Dravid averaged 69.30 in the matches India won. Laxman averaged 63.46 and Ganguly averaged 52. In any successful run chase for India, Sachin had to compete with those three batsmen in scoring the required amount of runs. Once again, Inzamam's average in the arbitrary interval that you have taken the luxury of choosing indicates his importance to successful Pakistani run chases.

Now, I wish to propose something that, apparently, might seem revolutionary to you, considering you haven't addressed it. Why not look at their averages in matches their teams have drawn or lost? Isn't that a fairer indication of mettle under pressure, when your team is crumbling around you, when you are facing a daunting task?

In the tests India have drawn/lost, Sachin has averaged 51.05.

In the tests Pakistan have drawn/lost, Inzamam has averaged 35.

Talk about performing (or not performing) in difficult situations.

Point 5:

Now I think the next statistic is the most damning ever.

Sachin Tendulkar has only received TWO man of the match awards in Test Cricket in his entire career. And both came in India.

However, he has NOT received a Man of the Match in an indian win since 1998. Its been 10 years since he received a man of the match.

Compared to Inzamam, who has 5 man of the match awards, and 2 man of the series.

Response 5:

Thank goodness, then, that your 'most daming ever' statistic is a false one. Sachin Tendulkar has received, not 'TWO', but ELEVEN man of the match awards. Inzamam has received nine.

Point 6:

Sachin Tendulkar has a BIG tendency to... choke.

There have been so many occasions where Sachin is in great form, and he just throws it away. Sachin Tendulkar does not deal with pressure as well as Inzamam, which is why I'd rather have Inzamam rather than Tendulkar in my team.

Response 6:

I disagree. You have provided 3 matches as examples where Sachin has failed under pressure. He has played 150 matches. It is only natural for all batsmen to fail in some matches. Not all of us are built like Pakistanis, apparently. Ricky Ponting has failed under pressure in matches, Brian Lara has failed under pressure in matches, why even the great Donald Bradman failed under pressure in his final match. Pointing out such arbitrary matches, while ignoring the bigger picture, means nothing. Why not look at matches where he has thrived under pressure?

Here are a few matches that immediately come to mind:

India vs. England (http://content-www.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/63535.html)

India needs 408 runs to win. India falls to 183/6, when Sachin Tendulkar rescues them with a 119* and takes them safely to 343/6.

India vs. Australia (http://usa.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1997-98/AUS_IN_IND/AUS_IND_T1_06-10MAR1998.html)

India falls behind after Australia posts 328 to India's 257. In India's crucial second innings, Sachin scores 155* to set a fighting lead for his bowlers to defend. Australia is all out for 168.

There is, of course, the memorable Sharjah final against Australia, where Sachin singlehandedly won the match for India scoring 134. In fact, Shane Warne actually made his famous comment about seeing Sachin hitting him for sixes in his nightmares after this match. Why not take a look at that unbelievable Champions Trophy match where Sachin scored 141 from 128 balls and then took 4 wickets for 38 runs when Australia were poised well at 172/3?

We can also take a look at matches were Inzamam has failed miserably. In fact, I pointed this out before, but I will do so again for emphasis. In matches Pakistan have drawn/lost (which are a better representative of how a batsman performs under pressure, with his team crumbling around him while facing an imposing task), Inzamam averages a paltry 35. Sachin averages 51. I'm not going to take the time to post scorecards of matches where Inzamam has failed his team. If you would like to see them, I'm sure the Indian members here will be more than happy to do so. As for me, it is 2 am here. I am pretty sleepy, but I have presented reasonable arguments to your points. I'm also sure that you will feel the need to respond to some of my more emotive comments, but if you do so, just remember that we deal with facts alone and not unsupported opinions or speculations. I respect Inzamam. He has been one of the greatest Pakistani batsmen and a great international player. It's important to note that I don't detract from that fact in any way when I say that Sachin (along with Ponting and Lara) have simply been better (perhaps by a small margin) over their careers.

 

[Pranav]

100s in India don't mean anything with your flat pitches

Besides, that shows absolutely nothing.

Yes, Sachin did average 5 more runs per innings. But most of Sachin's "top" innings came when it wasn't required.

When the team required a big innings, he almost always failed to deliver. That is the difference between Sachin and Inzamam.

You know Tendulkar is better than Inzamam and the the statistics also show that.We are comparing batsmen according to their over all stats.

First, you limited this conversation to only Test matches.
Now, when you are still losing, you say when has he scored in pressure situations.

Using this way, I can prove many batsmen are better than Sachin.
for example: I can say that Masakadza (from Zimbave) is better than Tendulkar as he scored a century in his Test debut but Sachin didn't.

If you better talk about the overall situation & not "pressure" or "tests" etc. etc. you'll get only one answer. Sachin is a better batsman than Inzimam.

 

[Deleted member 9102]

Edit: Chris Gayle