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

[silentstriker]

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!!

How about twice as many centuries at a higher s/r and a higher average?

 

[Slifer]

How about twice as many centuries at a higher s/r and a higher average?

twice as many centuries in significantly (he has 3 times as many centuries as IVA BTW) more matches!! Strike rate Bevan's SR is lower than Lara's!! Anyway i think u r missin the point, i agree that SRT is a better ODI batsman than BCL but there is no way in hell its by that significant of a margin.

 

[C_C]

twice as many centuries in significantly (he has 3 times as many centuries as IVA BTW) more matches!! Strike rate Bevan's SR is lower than Lara's!! Anyway i think u r missin the point, i agree that SRT is a better ODI batsman than BCL but there is no way in hell its by that significant of a margin.

It is by a significant margin - he's succeeded far more than Lara and most importantly, he is more consistant, scores more runs, more centuries, strike rate, has a higher average than Lara. Not to mention, he's done that all despite having a very slow start to his ODI career - he averages 50 over his last 250 ODIs or so and thats significantly ahead of Lara in ODIs as far as i am concerned.

His stats are very similar to Viv's in ODI cricket ( slightly inferior but over 3x as much games) and if Viv is a cut above Lara, so is Tendulkar.

 

[Slifer]

Im glad u brought up that slow start to his career because at that time even though he was the better test batsman, Lara still edged him in ODIs up until around 2001-02 anyway. So overall what we can say is this: Lara had a much better start to his ODI career than SRT and SRT has had a been better lately. Therefore overall ( as evidenced by his superior SR, Average, and consistency) SRT is the better ODI batman but not by that significant of a margin. You r yet to convince me of this statistically.

 

[C_C]

Im glad u brought up that slow start to his career because at that time even though he was the better test batsman, Lara still edged him in ODIs up until around 2001-02 anyway. So overall what we can say is this: Lara had a much better start to his ODI career than SRT and SRT has had a been better lately. Therefore overall ( as evidenced by his superior SR, Average, and consistency) SRT is the better ODI batman but not by that significant of a margin. You r yet to convince me of this statistically.

Err no. By slow start, i meant before 94 or 95 he was a rather mediocre ODI player but then absolutely blitzed around for the next 8-9 years in ODIs. He was considerably superior to Lara even back in 2000 or so in ODIs.
Around 96, Tendy pulled even with Lara in ODIs and by 98 was over, he'd cleared Lara when he scored almost 2000 runs and 10 runs in that year alone. ( from when on he's only been putting more and more gap between himself and the rest and as such, is considered in an echelon only with Richards and Bevan as their only other inhabitants)

 

[Slifer]

Well of course he's puttin more breathin room between himself and Lara, he's still playing ODIs and Lara has cut back significantly. This is not unlike Murali and Warne where Murali IMO was the better ODI bowler, but he has opened up the gap because simply put he's still playin ODIs and Warne is not.

As for startin off slow and finishin strong, i thought u were one who considered a players entire career and not just specific periods? Over their entire careers the Stats and actually seeing the 2 play myself tell me that SRT is the slightly better ODI batsman and nothing more.

 

[C_C]

Well of course he's puttin more breathin room between himself and Lara, he's still playing ODIs and Lara has cut back significantly. This is not unlike Murali and Warne where Murali IMO was the better ODI bowler, but he has opened up the gap because simply put he's still playin ODIs and Warne is not.

As for startin off slow and finishin strong, i thought u were one who considered a players entire career and not just specific periods? Over their entire careers the Stats and actually seeing the 2 play myself tell me that SRT is the slightly better ODI batsman and nothing more.

Actually Lara has curtailed his ODI participation for the last one year or so...thats till the end of 2004. What i meant was, Tendulkar was already ahead of Lara by 98 in ODIs and all the while the gap has grown bigger, not smaller.

And yes, i am considering their whole careers- over their whole careers, Tendulkar has essentially been on par with him since 94/95 and significantly better than Lara since 1998.

Thats essentially, being a worse performer for 2-3 year period, on par for 3-4 years and superior to Lara(sometimes significantly so) for another 6 years.

He is more consistent than Lara, scores at a quicker pace and scores more tons. Thats pretty categoric to me.Essentially what seperates the Greg Chappells and Doug Walters of the world...or the difference between Viv and Greenidge.
Lara is a great ODI batsman in my books and a very likely pick for my alltime ODI XI too. Lara is one of the greatest ODI batsmen, no doubt but i put Viv, Bevan and Tendulkar above him or anyone else in cricket. Perhaps what you define as a slight advantage, i define as a distinct one.
But in my ODI team, five names get put down, no questions asked - Viv, Tendulkar, Gillchrist, Bevan and Garner Then i weigh the options for the other six.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Surely Murali would almost command a spot in your OD XI, the best OD spinner ever by a fair margin.

 

[vic_orthdox]

But in my ODI team, five names get put down, no questions asked - Viv, Tendulkar, Gillchrist, Bevan and Garner Then i weigh the options for the other six.

Automatic selection? As opener?

 

[C_C]

Automatic selection? As opener?

Not as an opener per-se. No doubt, Gillchrist is a brilliant opener in his own right but its the fact that he's such a brilliant ODI player AND a wicket-keeper makes him an automatic in my team.
Flower was a quite competent ODI batsman but Gillchrist shades him comprehensively in ODI batting and the only other person i can think of even remotely in the equation is Dravid- but Dravid's case for keeping is pretty dodgy- he did an adequate job as a keeper but i wouldnt pick him for a keeper in my alltime XIs.

Not to mention, i think a Gillchrist like opener would complement Tendulkar perfectly - the one automatic in my team ( in the opening slot). Tendulkar is the perfect tempo-builder type anchorman in ODIs- consistently scores a truckload of ODI runs at 85-90 strike rate. Gillchrist is one of the best 'explosive start' guy and essentially a better ODI batting version of Sehwag.

 

[C_C]

Surely Murali would almost command a spot in your OD XI, the best OD spinner ever by a fair margin.

Almost.


I just think that there is a categoric gap between Viv, Bevan and Tendulkar from the rest in batting and Garner and the rest in bowling.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Just thought that there were a few other keeper batsmen who would make push Gilchrist for automatic selection, considering that his average isn't all that outstanding.

 

[aussie]

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.

well cleary there isn't total truth to all three of these points, but for the sake of not getting into a Dravid/Ponting argument i won't say any more..

 

[C_C]

Just thought that there were a few other keeper batsmen who would make push Gilchrist for automatic selection, considering that his average isn't all that outstanding.

In ODIs, its not just the average though...strike rate matters immensely too...a 36 average and almost 100 strike rate is exceptional territorry in ODIs right there...i am not sure if there are many keeper-batsmen who are a better package overall.

 

[marc71178]

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.

3456 @ 45.47
3151 @ 44.38
3182 @ 42.43


Me thinks you overestimate the differences...

 

[honestbharani]

CC has this funny way of almost bringing out a bit of finality in his posts here. It is almost as if he is laying down the law. Kinda enjoyable, even though we don't agree on a few issues.

 

[aussie]

3456 @ 45.47
3151 @ 44.38
3182 @ 42.43


Me thinks you overestimate the differences...

right you are, my little research found that out as well

 

[C_C]

3456 @ 45.47
3151 @ 44.38
3182 @ 42.43


Me thinks you overestimate the differences...

False. One was averaging over 50, the other two below 45.

 

[Benny2k1]

Interesting the stats after 250 odis (lara has only played 261) how can ppl say sachin is miles ahead?
M I NO R HS AVG 100 50 0
Lara 250 243 26 9261 169 42.67 19 57 12
Sachin 250 243 22 9287 186* 42.02 25 47 12

 

[C_C]

Interesting the stats after 250 odis (lara has only played 261) how can ppl say sachin is miles ahead?
M I NO R HS AVG 100 50 0
Lara 250 243 26 9261 169 42.67 19 57 12
Sachin 250 243 22 9287 186* 42.02 25 47 12

Umm pray tell why you restricted it to 250 ODIs.