Who is better- Lara or Tendulkar?

[sledger]

Originally Posted by marc71178

Currently Lara.
Overall nothing to split them IMO.

true that, not worth comparing them if you ask me.

[Pratters]

Lara but I will wait on a final judgement before both their careers are over.

[aussie]

Originally Posted by sledger

give us a good reason to say that hes not.

one good reason is that Lara has the ability to play match-winning innings (in test matches), where has Tendulkar has chocked when he has had the oppurtunity to to do so. Chennai 99 is a perfect example of this.

Secondly even though both are among the most consistent batsmen of all time, when Lara gets a hundred he really hurts the opposition with some massive scores, where has Sachin may get a hundred and not really destroy the opposition...

[sledger]

how can you say he wont destroy the opposition, how many times has lara choked ? probs about the same as sach, to suggest that tendulkar cant play a match winning innings is ridiculous.

[aussie]

Originally Posted by sledger

how can you say he wont destroy the opposition, how many times has lara choked ? probs about the same as sach, to suggest that tendulkar cant play a match winning innings is ridiculous.

i never said he cant but he in his career he never has, and with reference to the fact that he wont destroy, Tendulkar would get a century and wont really go and and really hurt an opposition has Lara does, but he is super consistent but not as destructive has Lara.

[sledger]

er, yes he is, perhaps not at the moment, but in the condition he is in very few people could compete at that level. Tendulkar has played many a match winning innings aussie, ask any of the indians on here.

[aussie]

i'm not talking about innings that may have been the standout performance in an indian victory, i am more refering to an innings similar to Lara's 153 not out, he has none of those...

[kendall]

of course Tendulkar can hurt the opposition!!!! the mere fact he scores so many runs shows tha he is a very atacking player and if you dont think he strikes fear into the hearts of opoisition you really dont have a clue

[aussie]

Originally Posted by kendall

of course Tendulkar can hurt the opposition!!!! the mere fact he scores so many runs shows tha he is a very atacking player and if you dont think he strikes fear into the hearts of opoisition you really dont have a clue

oh yes i do, when Lara broke the world record last year and during the last Australian home season Ian Chappel said that one of the main reasons he rates Lara ahead of Tendulkar is because when oppositon bowlers bowls to Tendulkar (in test matches) during his hay days you knew that he was going to make runs & probably get to a hundred but he would give you a chance as soon has he gets to a hundred so the probability of Sachin really carrying on a destroying the opposition is erased.

With Lara now when he gets to a Hundred he just goes on and on and scores big which is showed by his 7 doble hundreds (i think), so that fear factor would be more evident in oppostion bowlers when they bowl to Lara.
Copy right Ian Chappel

[sledger]

right.....so because ian chappel says lara is better surely cant mean that anything other than that can possibly be right, how is the probability if sachin getting hundreds erased? he nearly got one against pakistan in the first test.

[Hanuma]

Originally Posted by aussie

one good reason is that Lara has the ability to play match-winning innings (in test matches), where has Tendulkar has chocked when he has had the oppurtunity to to do so. Chennai 99 is a perfect example of this.

Secondly even though both are among the most consistent batsmen of all time, when Lara gets a hundred he really hurts the opposition with some massive scores, where has Sachin may get a hundred and not really destroy the opposition...

which is exactly why lara is superior.

+ anyone that could actually force west indians into a debate about viv richards must be special.

[kendall]

Surley if a batsman has got too a hundred then a lot of damage has already been done?

[aussie]

Originally Posted by sledger

right.....so because ian chappel says lara is better surely cant mean that anything other than that can possibly be right, how is the probability if sachin getting hundreds erased? he nearly got one against pakistan in the first test.

i'm not stating my argument on just what Chappel said, he has made much sense... & i think u missed the point their sledger, i didn't say the probability of Sachin getting a hundred is erased i am saying (or ian chappell is saying ) that when sachin gets to a hundred he doesn't always carry on to make big hundreds like Lara does.

Btw since we have been arguing over this, who do you think is better

[Hanuma]

not if the batsman is in a kp situation.

[aussie]

Originally Posted by kendall

Surley if a batsman has got too a hundred then a lot of damage has already been done?

yes. but if his fellow batsmen dont score heavily it wont do much damage to the opposition has was the case with Slater at the SCG 6 years ago or Lara in Antigua 6 years ago as well....