silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
honestbharani said:
Who cares about batting lineups? Though WI had a good batting lineup, its the bowling lineup that matters. And WI could win with bowling, India couldn't.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
****OFFICIAL**** Lara vs Tendulkar Debate Thread
- Thread starter aussie
- Start date
Who cares about batting lineups? Though WI had a good batting lineup, its the bowling lineup that matters. And WI could win with bowling, India couldn't.
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Benny2k1 said:
In the primes of their careers, he has had it MUCH better.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
who said Lara's prime was in the mid 90s. He has done just as well if not better since 99.silentstriker said:
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Nope, India had a bowling line up with which they could win at home almost throughout Sachin's career. Lara had a bowling line up that could win them the match only till 97. AFter that, while Ambit and Walsh were still very good, they weren't great and the occassions they were seen off were far more frequent after that.silentstriker said:
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
honestbharani said:
Yes and how many times did India lose a series at home in the 90's?
bagapath
International Captain
when you cant separate lara and sachin with stats (runs agains various opposition, ave in 2nd innings, 100s in winning matches, strike rate, number of match saving knocks etc ) or with style (stroke production, dominance over best of bowlers, grace and balance) its better to simply accept the obvious fact that both are geniuses and 10 years down the line we will be nostalgic about two masters competing at the international level at the same time. same goes for warne and murali.
its like imran and botham. both were awesome. both won matches single handed. after long careers, one person - usually the one who plays more matches/innings - ends up with more runs/ more wickets but suffers a bit in averages. that shouldnt cover the fact that they were absolute equals for the bulk of their careers. this holds true for botham - imran. will hold true for lara - sachin and warne - murali once they all become commentators. (though i am sure not if i would want to listen to sachin and murali speak)
after that point it is just your personal choice. like i would go for imran, warne and lara from these distinguished pairs.
its like imran and botham. both were awesome. both won matches single handed. after long careers, one person - usually the one who plays more matches/innings - ends up with more runs/ more wickets but suffers a bit in averages. that shouldnt cover the fact that they were absolute equals for the bulk of their careers. this holds true for botham - imran. will hold true for lara - sachin and warne - murali once they all become commentators. (though i am sure not if i would want to listen to sachin and murali speak)
after that point it is just your personal choice. like i would go for imran, warne and lara from these distinguished pairs.
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
If you look at Ambit and Walsh, Jono, yes they were better than the Indian pacers but as an overall attack, I still thought Prasad, Srinath, Kumble posed more threat on a flat track than Ambit, Walsh and a couple of other come and goers. Just my opinion though. And after 97, it never was as difficult to play out Ambit and Walsh's overs than it was earlier. Just my two cents.
bagapath
International Captain
Well. Sachin averages 55 and Lara averages 52.adharcric said:Imran averages 38 and 23, Botham averages 34 and 28.
Imran made the CW All-Time XI, Botham didn't.
That's enough. Imran > Botham.
Imran-Botham really doesn't compare to Lara-Sachin or Murali-Warne, IMO.
Murali averages 23 and Warne averages 26.
Sachin made it to Bradman's XI and Benaud's XI. Wisden named Murali the best bowler ever.
Is that enough to say Sachin and Murali are the hands down winners over Lara and Warne respectively?
Anyways, this is where Botham - Imran stand after 88 matches.
Batting
Botham 88 140 4 4809 208 35.36 14 21
Imran 88 125 25 3807 136 38.07 6 18
Bowling
Botham 88 19838 9900 366 8/34 27.04 27 4
Imran 88 19458 8258 362 8/58 22.81 23 6
If Imran had superior averages, success against west indies and a world cup medal as skipper, Botham had better aggregates in both runs and wickets. He can also boast of being the only cricketer in history to have scored more than 10 centuries (14) and taken more than 10 fivefers (27). Lets leave his 100 + catches alone! And, how many test victories did Imran fashion in comparision to Botham?
Imran can be preferred to Botham. But Botham has an equally strong case to be called the best all-runder of 1970s - 1980s.
Maybe, we should start a Botham - Imran thread.
My original intention was to say that once the thin line between the very good and the great is crossed, then it is anyone's call. Lara/Sachin. Warne/Murali and Imran/Botham are in that genius league. It will be a never ending argument!
Anil
Hall of Fame Member
sorry no way was that true, ambrose(all-time great) and walsh(below the top rung but wonderfully consistent throughout his career and definitely far, far above either srinath or prasad...) and two extras(you have to take into account that quite a few of these extras were definitely better than prasad...franklyn rose for example) were more potent than prasad(notoriously inconsistent, mostly mediocre), srinath(again very inconsistent) and kumble(brilliant at home, average abroad till this century) on most tracks....and not just pre-97...why draw a line in '97?...and on another note, why do you call him ambit? never heard him referred to as that before?honestbharani said: