I know that but i replied to something khalek said which escapes me and even tendy fans can bring up stats to show that hes second only to bradman
Tendulkar v Inzamam TEST CRICKET ONLY
- Thread starter Insomniac
- Start date
- Status
D
Deleted member 9102
Guest
Edit: Chris Gayle
shravi
National Board President
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2005
- Profile Flag
- India
I cannot believe I just read that.
Insomniac
Title Recipient
Yes.
Yes we do answer them, but almost all you come up with is "stats in wins" and that is a pointless and flawed argument, which is idiotic and stupid.
Grow up? You need to mate, you are the one being incredibly obviously biased towards a cricketer because he is from your nation.
I come back to this thread to laugh at your pathetic arguments and to read some interesting posts from the Indian posters, or non-biased people.
I will also change my opinion on some things, but the arguments put forward here don't make me change my mind one bit.
How is it idiotic and stupid? Tell me? 49 Test matches is no mere coincidence.
Every statistic that does not show Sachin in front you guys have said is idiotic and stupid, yet when somebody posts a really stupid stat that shows Sachin in front you all applaud him.
Funny world, isn't it.
Ask yourself though, why is Tendulkar rated so highly even by the neutral?
sohum
Executive member
You know, Inzamam may well be a better match-winner than Sachin. But he is not the better batsman.
zMario, your posts would be better received if you did not go onto make such idiotic claims as "Sachin is not a legend in Test cricket". He's one of the premier batsmen to have ever played the game, and your complete disagreement of that statement shows how most of your views are shrouded in bias.
zMario, your posts would be better received if you did not go onto make such idiotic claims as "Sachin is not a legend in Test cricket". He's one of the premier batsmen to have ever played the game, and your complete disagreement of that statement shows how most of your views are shrouded in bias.
Insomniac
Title Recipient
No, he is NOT one of the premier batsmen to play test cricket.
You are completely wrong there, and your bias shows there.
In ODIs, yes, he is one of the premier batsmen, if not the bets batsman in ODI cricket.
But Test cricket is a completely different story. Rahul Dravid is way ahead of Sachin in tests. Inzamam is way ahead of Sachin in tests. Ponting is way ahead of Sachin in tests. Mohammad Yousuf is way ahead of Sachin in tests. Kallis is way ahead of Sachin in tests. Sangakkara is way ahead of Sachin in tests.
I respect Sachin and admire his brilliance at the one day level. However, he is nowhere near the premier batsmen of the test arena. Prehaps one level under.
sohum
Executive member
See, this is where your lack of cricketing acumen stops you from seeing the clear picture. I guess Don Bradman and the umpteen "respected cricket analysts" that you talk about that according to you love Inzamam, not to mention almost every intelligent viewer of cricket, are biased as I am. To question the man's greatness because he isn't as much of a "match-winner" (and I surround this in quotes because it is clear that Inzy has had the benefit of a bowlers in the supporting role) is to show a lack of application of one's cerebral capabilities.
It is somewhat ironic that all these people who are "way ahead of Sachin in Tests" are at the same time way behind him (with the exception of Ponting). In fact, Tests or ODIs, Ponting is the only one who is going to rack up the achievements (and probably cross it) of Tendulkar.
I will end my visits to this thread to continue to observe your demonstration of unawareness of Tendulkar's achievements. I have conceded that Inzamam is probably a better batsman to have in crunch situations than Tendulkar's in Tests. But if you think Tendulkar isn't one of the greatest Test batsmen to have played the game then you, sir, need some help.
And one final point. It doesn't matter how good a batsman you are, you need bowlers to win games. Which is why your purely hypothetical scenario of a green pitch (which is not all that common in world cricket these days anyway) is really not a valid case to consider on a regular basis. Take a look at the case of Andy Flower, one of the classier batsmen to have played the game. However, how often does he come up in a discussion of cricketing batting ability? Not often. Why? Because he played with Zimbabwe, who really could not win games if the bowlers weren't there to get the wickets.
pal
International Coach
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2004
- Online Cricket Games Owned
I don't know if we just ended up on the same wavelength, Sohum, but interestingly enough, I was just about to post about the case of a certain Mr. Flower. If you want to look at a batsman's average in team victories and being crucial to his team's result as the measuring stick of a batsman's ability, Andy Flower trumps Inzamam (and Tendulkar, Ponting, and Lara).
So be it. You will continue to tout your opinion and I will continue to maintain that Inzi was a sluggish tub of lard who wasn't particularly effective in situations where his team most needed him, not more than Sachin, anyways. You will disagree and I will, inevitably, do so, in return. This obviously isn't something that will be resolved.
So be it. You will continue to tout your opinion and I will continue to maintain that Inzi was a sluggish tub of lard who wasn't particularly effective in situations where his team most needed him, not more than Sachin, anyways. You will disagree and I will, inevitably, do so, in return. This obviously isn't something that will be resolved.
Dude you have gone way too far ahead with this one i guess accepted that inzaman is the better one in pressure situations but tendulkar is one of the greats and always will be if inzamam was so great why didnt he have a better average,runs than tendulkar has??And we maybe wrong but are also other great cricketing legends like Ian botham,Viv richards,Garfield sobers(havent mentioned indian names because then u may say they are biased)even rameez raja AND CONCLUDING TENDULKAR WAS AND ALWAYS WILL BE THE BETTER OF THE TWO IN TEST CRICKET AND ALWAYS WILL BE(unless again u bring those winning matches and stuff like a kid which i have accepted)
Insomniac
Title Recipient
See, this is where your lack of cricketing acumen stops you from seeing the clear picture. I guess Don Bradman and the umpteen "respected cricket analysts" that you talk about that according to you love Inzamam, not to mention almost every intelligent viewer of cricket, are biased as I am. To question the man's greatness because he isn't as much of a "match-winner" (and I surround this in quotes because it is clear that Inzy has had the benefit of a bowlers in the supporting role) is to show a lack of application of one's cerebral capabilities.
Why is it that every analyst marks Inzamam as a match-winner first? You are biased, and you know it
Since 2002, when Wasim and Waqar were on the decline, Inzamam has had no match-winning bowlers other than Shoaib Akhtar. And you once again, undermine the Indian bowling attack, and have decided to manipulate Kumble, and say he is crap, yet he averages 24 from 1990-1996.
There is very little credibility in your posts due to these "uncovered facts" There are probably more that you have made up on the go, which I haven't had the time to actually analyze
It is somewhat ironic that all these people who are "way ahead of Sachin in Tests" are at the same time way behind him (with the exception of Ponting). In fact, Tests or ODIs, Ponting is the only one who is going to rack up the achievements (and probably cross it) of Tendulkar.
How is Dravid behind Sachin? How is Yousuf behind Sachin? How is Kallis behind Sachin? How is Kallis behind Sachin? You are seriously showing some big bias here now.
I will end my visits to this thread to continue to observe your demonstration of unawareness of Tendulkar's achievements. I have conceded that Inzamam is probably a better batsman to have in crunch situations than Tendulkar's in Tests. But if you think Tendulkar isn't one of the greatest Test batsmen to have played the game then you, sir, need some help.
How big is the list of greatest Test batsmen of the modern era? 5? 10? 20?
Let me put it this way - I've limited my list to 10. Of course, your definition could be more, could be less. There is no doubt Sachin is a great batsman in the test arena, but the top 5 or 10? He'd be fighting hard for the top 10, but nowhere near the top 5.
And one final point. It doesn't matter how good a batsman you are, you need bowlers to win games. Which is why your purely hypothetical scenario of a green pitch (which is not all that common in world cricket these days anyway) is really not a valid case to consider on a regular basis. Take a look at the case of Andy Flower, one of the classier batsmen to have played the game. However, how often does he come up in a discussion of cricketing batting ability? Not often. Why? Because he played with Zimbabwe, who really could not win games if the bowlers weren't there to get the wickets.
I hear a green pitch is being prepared for India in Lahore for the ICC Champions Trophy. Stay tuned for more information on that
Regarding Andy Flower, you are correct. However, did you know that when Zimbabwe did win a game, he averaged more than Inzamam? He could possibly one of the greatest batsmen ever, but was unfortunate enough to be born in Zimbabwe.
I believe last time I checked, he averaged 80+ from 10 test wins.
Pal, I'm not going to bother to answer your post, as I think it will be deleted soon enough
All of you would be calling for my head if I called Sachin a sluggish tub of lard, and asking for me to be banned and infracted.
I hope justice will prevail on that, as this is not the first time pal has insulted me or Inzamam with such words.
Rameez Raja was part of a discussion, which I posted so many pages back.
He said Inzamam was better
Besides, I don't think I have ever heard Rameez saying Sachin is better than Inzamam, especially in a pressure situation.
Are you sure it wasn't the other way around?
Last edited by a moderator:
metallics2006
International Coach
- Joined
- May 15, 2005
- Location
- Chennai
IF we accept that Inzi is better only in pressure situations, will this thread be allowed to move on and discuss about CLASS, TECHNIQUE and the other TECHNICAL aspects which are equally important to a batsman?
- Status
