****OFFICIAL**** Lara vs Tendulkar Debate Thread

[silentstriker]

I dont think we can discount the tall scores. I would rather have a batsman who is capable of scoring a 150 in every 5th inning than a player who will give me a 50 in every inning. It's not as if scoring huge scores is a bad thing.

IMO, thats not a good way to build a winning team. When someone comes out to bat, and they are hit and miss, they might be fun to watch but if the team can't count on you....you're no good.

 

[Matt79]

I dont think we can discount the tall scores. I would rather have a batsman who is capable of scoring a 150 in every 5th inning than a player who will give me a 50 in every inning. It's not as if scoring huge scores is a bad thing.

The truth of that probably depends what the 150 guy scores in the other four innings - if he's get twenty-thirty per innings on average between big scores, that's different to if he's going for single figures on average.

 

[aussie]

IMO, thats not a good way to build a winning team. When someone comes out to bat, and they are hit and miss, they might be fun to watch but if the team can't count on you....you're no good.

if you refering to Lara here that would not be a fair thing to say, since the West Indies have been able to count on him over the last 15 years.

 

[honestbharani]

The truth of that probably depends what the 150 guy scores in the other four innings - if he's get twenty-thirty per innings on average between big scores, that's different to if he's going for single figures on average.

Agree. A guy who scores 50 every time but fails to kick on is doing the team a HUGE disservice because NO ONE will be able to score 50s all the time, and he is simply wasting his good form.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Yeah, as I said in the best batsman thread, that article places way too much value on consistency. What good is consistency if you never make matchwinning scores? I'd take a guy making a series of low scores and then a big 150+ and averaging 40 over a guy who scores 40 every single time he bats. The 150 might well win you a test, while the 40 almost certainly won't.

 

[Ikki]

I rate them both equally legendary. It's pretty hard for me to split them. I like reading the thread and opposing opinions being shared. It's a nice read.

 

[Anil]

Agree. A guy who scores 50 every time but fails to kick on is doing the team a HUGE disservice because NO ONE will be able to score 50s all the time, and he is simply wasting his good form.

Yeah, as I said in the best batsman thread, that article places way too much value on consistency. What good is consistency if you never make matchwinning scores? I'd take a guy making a series of low scores and then a big 150+ and averaging 40 over a guy who scores 40 every single time he bats. The 150 might well win you a test, while the 40 almost certainly won't.

are you guys referring to the "50" guy or the "40" guy as tendulkar here or is it just a hypothetical case? 'cuz while he has been consistent the guy you have been describing is just not tendulkar.....

 

[silentstriker]

A guy with 35 test centuries is definatly not guy that you can say 'wastes' his good form.

if you refering to Lara here that would not be a fair thing to say, since the West Indies have been able to count on him over the last 15 years.

I was responding to that hypothetical question, not Lara specifically.

 

[honestbharani]

are you guys referring to the "50" guy or the "40" guy as tendulkar here or is it just a hypothetical case? 'cuz while he has been consistent the guy you have been describing is just not tendulkar.....

I said it in a strictly hypocritical sense. I don't think Lara has been all that inconsistent to be named such. And I don't think Sachin has been all that non-match winning (to put it that way) as people make it out to be. But one thing I have noticed is that Sachin at his peak, was extremely comfortable against pace and Lara, almost all the time, looks totally at ease against spin. Lara is a brilliant player of pace himself and Sachin is extremely good against spin as well, but if forced to make a choice, I would call Sachin very very slightly better against pace over the course of his career and Lara very very slightly better against spin over the course of his career.

 

[oz_fan]

I said it in a strictly hypocritical sense. I don't think Lara has been all that inconsistent to be named such. And I don't think Sachin has been all that non-match winning (to put it that way) as people make it out to be. But one thing I have noticed is that Sachin at his peak, was extremely comfortable against pace and Lara, almost all the time, looks totally at ease against spin. Lara is a brilliant player of pace himself and Sachin is extremely good against spin as well, but if forced to make a choice, I would call Sachin very very slightly better against pace over the course of his career and Lara very very slightly better against spin over the course of his career.

Agree with your opinion on how they face spin and pace.

Lara is always classed as 'inconsistent' but he has remained in the top 10 of the ICC batsmen rankings throughout most of the nineties and from 2000 onwards.

 

[C_C]

Firstly, I would say that both Lara and Tendulkar are a cut above any other batsman in the last 15-16 years, with Dravid and Steve Waugh comming closest to them.
Ponting, Kallis, Sehwag, Hayden, Gilly all come a level below the Laras, Tendulkars, Chappells, Richards,Sobers,Gavaskars of the world as far as i am concerned.

But out of the two, i would pick tendulkar as the better batsman.
In One day cricket, it is a no-contest really. Tendulkar ( along with Bevan and Viv) is a cut above anyone else in one day cricket's history.
In Tests, its narrower, but i would give the edge to Tendulkar.

Batting is all about consistency ( not the way a recent crickinfo article described it - consistency as in consistency of getting 50+ or 100+ scores in an innings) and Tendulkar is more consistent than lara career-wise. Tendulkar has had a poor 3 years, largely marred by injury and some directionless batting. Lara went through much the same between 96 and 2001. However, Tendulkar hasnt struggled as badly as Lara had during that patch(where he only had one monster series and a typical '1 huge score followed by half a dozen real poor ones' pattern).
The fact that Tendulkar averages significantly better than Lara away from home and that for most of his career, he's been in a worse boat ( IND batting and WI batting were very much comparable until 97/98, which is almost a decade into Tendulkar's career and 6-7 years into Lara's but WI bowling made the WI a genuine threat everywhere unlike India) would make me give it to Tendulkar - who in my books, has legitimate claims to being the second best batsman since Sir Don AFAIAC.

 

[Benny2k1]

Sachin Vs Lara

Both Men are incredible talents and we are very lucky to be in the era of two of the all time greats, I think its two hard to seperate them, because they are both braught up in different conditions, sachin on the sub continent, lara in the WI and they both have so many different records and strenghts its hard to pick!

Some people will say sachin because of his consistancy, number of centries and most ODI runs
Some people will say lara because of his redicliously high scores, most Test runs and matchwinning ability

Even statistics can lie because of conditions, match sitiuation and the strength of the team they play in.

Also a factor that people take into account is nationalaty, alot of people i have seen vote for sachin support india! and people from the West Indies will vote for lara

Im gonna vote purley on the player i prefer to watch, not saying he is better or worse just a personal preference due to entertainment and thats lara

 

[Jono]

Sachin's home batting average: 55.25
Sachin's away batting average: 55.52

Lara's home batting average: 61.29
Lara's away batting average: 45.98

Statistics never tell the full story, but that is a striking one. Players like Kumble are often criticised for the large difference between their home and away records, well Lara's is mammoth. His away batting average is still excellent mind you, and I'm not necessarily using this stat to prove that Sachin is the better batsman, but it definitely says something.

 

[Slifer]

Yes i think that SRT is ever so slightly better than Lara in tests but the gap has closed significantly, especially in the most recent years. Its just that consistency factor that does it for me with SRT and the fact that he came off slightly better than Lara against the likes of Donald, Wasim, Waqar and co. Oh and one last bit I also believe the gap between them in ODIs is not a large as some people let on. I think if anything in recent times, Lara has been focusing most of his attention on tests to the detriment of his ODI career. Anyone who saw Lara in ODIs in his earlier years will know better than to class him that far below SRT or any other ODI batsman

 

[aussie]

Oh and one last bit I also believe the gap between them in ODIs is not a large as some people let on. I think if anything in recent times, Lara has been focusing most of his attention on tests to the detriment of his ODI career. Anyone who saw Lara in ODIs in his earlier years will know better than to class him that far below SRT or any other ODI batsman

yea i agree here i think when comparing Lara & Tendulkar in ODI's even though Tendulkar is an all-time great in this area, people do tend to overate the gap between these 2 in this format for sure. I may not have been old enough to see Lara in ODI's post 97 but i don't think the gap can be that huge.

 

[aussie]

Firstly, I would say that both Lara and Tendulkar are a cut above any other batsman in the last 15-16 years, with Dravid and Steve Waugh comming closest to them.
Ponting,all come a level below the Laras, Tendulkars, Chappells, Richards,Sobers,Gavaskars of the world as far as i am concerned.

i don't want to bring the Dravid/Ponting argument into this but i really cant see how Dravid could come close to comparison with Lara & Tendulkar and yet Ponting cant. We all know that Ponting has not proven himself in India but i really think you are exaggerating the gulf between Dravid & Ponting & over-rating Dravid's ability a bit (although he is no doubt a superb player).

 

[adharcric]

If I had to rate them on a 10-point system, here's how I'd do it:

Sachin Tendulkar ~ 9.6 ODI, 9.0 Test, 9.2 Overall
Brian Lara ~ 9.0 ODI, 9.1 Test, 9.1 Overall

 

[C_C]

Yes i think that SRT is ever so slightly better than Lara in tests but the gap has closed significantly, especially in the most recent years. Its just that consistency factor that does it for me with SRT and the fact that he came off slightly better than Lara against the likes of Donald, Wasim, Waqar and co. Oh and one last bit I also believe the gap between them in ODIs is not a large as some people let on. I think if anything in recent times, Lara has been focusing most of his attention on tests to the detriment of his ODI career. Anyone who saw Lara in ODIs in his earlier years will know better than to class him that far below SRT or any other ODI batsman

C'mon mate. Its not exactly a " Bradman vs Rodney Marsh with the bat" situation but Tendulkar, Bevan and Richards are significantly ahead of any other ODI batsman in ODI history.....

 

[C_C]

i don't want to bring the Dravid/Ponting argument into this but i really cant see how Dravid could come close to comparison with Lara & Tendulkar and yet Ponting cant. We all know that Ponting has not proven himself in India but i really think you are exaggerating the gulf between Dravid & Ponting & over-rating Dravid's ability a bit (although he is no doubt a superb player).

I dont rate Ponting (and Kallis) as highly as Dravid simply because :

1. Both of them are cashing in massively on third-rate bowling on third-rate pitches
2. Ponting has a categoric weakness that Dravid doesnt have - spin on uneven spinning tracks.
3. Before 2001 or so, Dravid was the only one among the three to have a great average- after 5-6 years of test experience, mind you.

 

[Slifer]

How? Bevan yes with his montrous average and Viv by the mere fact that he excelled in ODIs at a time when others were jus trying to adapt to the new came. But how is SRT significantly ahead of Lara in ODIs? Prove it!!