Tendulkar v Inzamam TEST CRICKET ONLY

[Pak_cricketer]

Inzi has single-handedly saved Pakistan far more than Tendulkar has saved India. Inzamam's average is way higher in games Pakistan have won than Sachin's in games India have won. You can trust Inzamam more to be at the crease than Sachin in almost ANY situation, if both were set in a hypothetical situation.

 

[manee]

Yet manee is giving the excuse that India's batting line up is so strong that they scored more runs and didn't give Sachin a chance to score the runs.

Geez, talk about conflicting statements.

Sorry, are all Indian fans the same person?! Are we on some sort of wild tyrade against Inzamam. No, that is you and your tyrade against Tendulkar.

 

[Insomniac]

Sorry, are all Indian fans the same person?! Are we on some sort of wild tyrade against Inzamam. No, that is you and your tyrade against Tendulkar.

Well it just shows that you guys are not agreeable as to why Sachin's average is lower than Inzamam's in games their respective nations have won.

Theres no definitive answer except Inzamam has played better for Pakistan than Sachin has played for India in test match cricket.

 

[manee]

Well it just shows that you guys are not agreeable as to why Sachin's average is lower than Inzamam's in games their respective nations have won.

Theres no definitive answer except Inzamam has played better for Pakistan than Sachin has played for India in test match cricket.

'Agreeable'?! We haven't been contacting each other and assembling arguments. Not being arrogant, but ignoring all other arguments, it is a perfectly reasonable argument to say that Tendulkar has had some of the best support of the recent history in the middle order and so is not likely to score a match winning hundred because his teammates would have knocked off most of the other runs.

 

[pal]

Pal, I think you're missing the definition of choking.

The games I've picked of Sachin choking are when he is IN and set.

The games you've chosen, in NONE of them is Inzamam set. He doesn't even go past 20.

For example, on over 130+ in 1999 in Chennai, he has to work the ball around to get 12 runs, and has about 15 overs to do it in. He tries to hit Saqlain for 6.

Thats choking.

Understand?

This is the point where I have to stand back and laugh at the ridiculousness of your posts. If this is the quality of your arguments, I have had enough. You have apparently been afforded the luxury of defining the word 'choking' to mean where a batsman is 'set'. Choking means failing to perform under pressure. Inzamam consistently showed himself to be weak under pressure. He was so weak that he couldn't even get himself set when his team needed him. He averaged 35 when his team was placed in difficult situations of losses/draws. You've provided one arbitrary match, where Sachin courageously scores a century, with his team crumbling around him and you call that failing under pressure. You have not provided one reasonable response to Inzamam's consistent failings in matches where Pakistan needed him to get a decent score to win and where he choked.

Here is my arbitrary match in response: Pakistan vs. South Africa (http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/63768.html)

Pakistan needs just 146 to win the match. Inzamam chokes under pressure and scores 5 runs. Pakistan crumbles to 92.

That's choking.

Understand?

 

[Insomniac]

'Agreeable'?! We haven't been contacting each other and assembling arguments. Not being arrogant, but ignoring all other arguments, it is a perfectly reasonable argument to say that Tendulkar has had some of the best support of the recent history in the middle order and so is not likely to score a match winning hundred because his teammates would have knocked off most of the other runs.

Yet the combination of Mohammad Yousuf, Younus Khan, and Saeed Anwar have higher averages (when added together) than that of Dravid, Ganguly, and Laxman (when added together)

I speak of win averages.

 

[Karachi Xpress]

'Agreeable'?! We haven't been contacting each other and assembling arguments. Not being arrogant, but ignoring all other arguments, it is a perfectly reasonable argument to say that Tendulkar has had some of the best support of the recent history in the middle order and so is not likely to score a match winning hundred because his teammates would have knocked off most of the other runs.

If he stays not out then his average improves??

 

[Harrypotter_fan]

Pal, I think you're missing the definition of choking.

The games I've picked of Sachin choking are when he is IN and set.

The games you've chosen, in NONE of them is Inzamam set. He doesn't even go past 20.

For example, on over 130+ in 1999 in Chennai, he has to work the ball around to get 12 runs, and has about 15 overs to do it in. He tries to hit Saqlain for 6.

Thats choking.

Understand?

So atleast Sachin got set, Inzy couldn't even do that.

 

[Insomniac]

This is the point where I have to stand back and laugh at the ridiculousness of your posts. If this is the quality of your arguments, I have had enough. You have apparently been afforded the luxury of defining the word 'choking' to mean where a batsman is 'set'. Choking means failing to perform under pressure. Inzamam consistently showed himself to be weak under pressure. He was so weak that he couldn't even get himself set when his team needed him. He averaged 35 when his team was placed in difficult situations of losses/draws. You've provided one arbitrary match, where Sachin courageously scores a century, with his team crumbling around him and you call that failing under pressure. You have not provided one reasonable response to Inzamam's consistent failings in matches where Pakistan needed him to get a decent score to win and where he choked.

Here is my arbitrary match in response: Pakistan vs. South Africa (http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/match/63768.html)

Pakistan needs just 146 to win the match. Inzamam chokes under pressure and scores 5 runs. Pakistan crumbles to 92.

That's choking.

Understand?

Fair enough, very fair enough pal.

However, Sachin Tendulkar has choked MORE times than Inzamam-ul-Haq.

Inzamam-ul-Haq is the second man behind Steve Waugh in terms of the ability to handle pressure, as discussed and stated by Sanjay Manjrekar, Imran Khan, Ramiz Raja, Chris Cairns, and Geoffrey Boycott.

zMario added 0 Minutes and 46 Seconds later...

If he stays not out then his average improves??

Excellent point.

If the other batsmen knock off the runs, then Sachin should be remaining not out.

He usually is never not out.

 

[manee]

Yet the combination of Mohammad Yousuf, Younus Khan, and Saeed Anwar have higher averages (when added together) than that of Dravid, Ganguly, and Laxman (when added together)

I speak of win averages.

But India have also had Sehwag and Azhar. Also, keep in mind that Yousuf's average would have been boosted massively by 2005 and Anwar hasn't played Test cricket since 2001.

 

[Harrypotter_fan]

And what about a bunch of quotes that I posted?

 

[metallics2006]

Keep posting guys we will make him accept in his own post that Sachin is better.If zMario proves that Inzy is better in a poll where Indians and Pakistanis are not allowed to vote, I will give away all of my vcash to him. This is a bet.

 

[pal]

Fair enough, very fair enough pal.

However, Sachin Tendulkar has choked MORE times than Inzamam-ul-Haq.

I will disagree with that. Inzamam scores 35 in matches where Pakistan loses/draws. Sachin scores 51 in matches where India loses/draws. Those are a fairer indication of how a batsman under pressure, when he doesn't have the support of his team mates, when he is facing a daunting task alone. If you want to point out arbitrary matches where Inzamam has succeeded/Sachin has failed, we can continue to play the game where I respond with arbitrary matches were Inzamam has failed/Sachin has succeeded. But, that would be pretty meaningless.

 

[Insomniac]

But India have also had Sehwag and Azhar. Also, keep in mind that Yousuf's average would have been boosted massively by 2005 and Anwar hasn't played Test cricket since 2001.

Yousuf didn't play in many winning games that year

And metallics, I believe you said that if I could produce some things where Inzamam is rated over Tendulkar, then you'd concede.

I believe Wisden is a company made of over 50 people, and the Ten Sports thing was 5 very well respected people in this cricket analyzing world.

 

[metallics2006]

Read post #447. I meant a neutral poll conducted in PC.net.