Should Sachin Tendulkar retire from International Cricket?

[Richard]

except that he was a much better batsman than waugh in his prime so his decline is much more marked

That's nonsense, Tendulkar may have been a more natural-looking batsman and certainly more beautiful of stroke but he was absolutely no more effective in his prime - Tendulkar and Waugh's primes produced markedly similar results (both averaged around the 60 mark for a period of 80 or 90 Tests). Waugh just had a far, far longer introduction of paucity than Tendulkar did - for Tendulkar it was only 9 Tests or something, with Waugh it was 50-odd where he was being picked as much for bowling as batting.

 

[Richard]

Its not really a case about averages. A player should only retire when he feels that he offers nothing to the team and the team doesnt need him. Pollocks bowling may have declined significantly but there is no question that his accuracy is still as good as it ever was and just by keeping one end tight he offers as much to the SA team as anyone else(although recently hes been making a case for the side for his batting alone).

A SA Test side without Pollock is currently inconceivable - I thought that even as he was being reduced by a bad back to bowling fingerspin in Sri Lanka.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

You think Nishant doesn't know that ?

I really hope he does.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

That's nonsense, Tendulkar may have been a more natural-looking batsman and certainly more beautiful of stroke but he was absolutely no more effective in his prime - Tendulkar and Waugh's primes produced markedly similar results (both averaged around the 60 mark for a period of 80 or 90 Tests). Waugh just had a far, far longer introduction of paucity than Tendulkar did - for Tendulkar it was only 9 Tests or something, with Waugh it was 50-odd where he was being picked as much for bowling as batting.

Indeed. Steve Waugh averaged under 40 until his 61st Test. He had crossed 40 before then, but never dropped below 40 after his 60th. He averaged 39.84 after his 60th Test. He averaged 57.11 with 27 hundreds and 33 fifties over his next 108 Tests, having scored 5 hundreds and 17 fifties in his first 60.

 

[Sanz]

Err - Waugh averaged 39.57 in his last 20 Tests (post-2001) and Tendulkar has averaged 35.04 in his last 16.

Not much difference, I'd say...

It must be one your cooked up averages or half baked BS theories, because the stats book I am looking at it shows to me that SRW averaged 60 in his last 20 tests, Tendulkar is 42.

 

[Jono]

Richard probably removed Bangladesh, which is when Steve Waugh scored his last test century.

 

[sideshowtim]

Probably not even in the Top 5 batsmen in the world anymore. He's an okay player these days, but that doesn't count for much.

 

[silentstriker]

Probably not even in the Top 5 batsmen in the world anymore. He's an okay player these days, but that doesn't count for much.

He isn't in the top five, and I don't think anyone will claim that he is.

 

[Evermind]

Tendulkar in his prime was one of the top 3 batsmen in the world. Now, way past his prime, I'd still rate a depleted Tendulkar miles ahead of Gambhir, Jaffar, Sehwag, Raina, Kaif, Pathan. If those clowns can make the ODI squad, Tendulkar surely makes it ahead of them (I'm aware that Jaffer isn't an ODI prospect, but he's been tried out in a couple of games).

 

[Sanz]

Richard probably removed Bangladesh, which is when Steve Waugh scored his last test century.

If you remove Bangladesh, Tendulkar Avg drops to 30, Waugh Drops to 43, still huge difference. 30 is poor, 43 is good.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

It must be one your cooked up averages or half baked BS theories, because the stats book I am looking at it shows to me that SRW averaged 60 in his last 20 tests, Tendulkar is 42.

Without Bangladesh and Zimbabwe he averaged 40.65 after 2001.

 

[Anil]

That's nonsense, Tendulkar may have been a more natural-looking batsman and certainly more beautiful of stroke but he was absolutely no more effective in his prime - Tendulkar and Waugh's primes produced markedly similar results (both averaged around the 60 mark for a period of 80 or 90 Tests). Waugh just had a far, far longer introduction of paucity than Tendulkar did - for Tendulkar it was only 9 Tests or something, with Waugh it was 50-odd where he was being picked as much for bowling as batting.

you just proved my point...

 

[Nishant]

You think Nishant doesn't know that ?

exactly....i do know that, but i dont see why he should be dropped! Who will replace him in tests? Raina?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

exactly....i do know that, but i dont see why he should be dropped! Who will replace him in tests? Raina?

I wouldn't endorse dropping him just yet, but since you ask, is India in such a poor state that they can't find someone who can average more than the low 30s? That's worrying.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Probably not even in the Top 5 batsmen in the world anymore. He's an okay player these days, but that doesn't count for much.

On likliness to score a hundred at the moment, I wouldn't put him in the top 20 tbh.

 

[Nishant]

I wouldn't endorse dropping him just yet, but since you ask, is India in such a poor state that they can't find someone who can average more than the low 30s? That's worrying.

its not that we cant find any talent! But, there is a huge diffrence bt having talent being able to score 50s etc on good batting tracks....but tendulkar brings with him experience which is important!
I know that people laugh when tendulkar is said to be part of the 'think tank' of indian team, but he actually is! I wouldnt expect any youngster to be part of this!

 

[silentstriker]

its not that we cant find any talent! But, there is a huge diffrence bt having talent being able to score 50s etc on good batting tracks....but tendulkar brings with him experience which is important!
I know that people laugh when tendulkar is said to be part of the 'think tank' of indian team, but he actually is! I wouldnt expect any youngster to be part of this!

Think tank? I don't care how well you know your cricket, I'll take the guy who is going to score more runs for me consistently.

If cricketing knowledge was the criteria, I'd be the captain.

 

[Richard]

It must be one your cooked up averages or half baked BS theories, because the stats book I am looking at it shows to me that SRW averaged 60 in his last 20 tests, Tendulkar is 42.

Pretty basic, really - no cooking-up or half-baking required.

Waugh averaged 37 against Test-class teams between 2001\02 and 2003\04.

 

[Richard]

Indeed. Steve Waugh averaged under 40 until his 61st Test. He had crossed 40 before then, but never dropped below 40 after his 60th. He averaged 39.84 after his 60th Test. He averaged 57.11 with 27 hundreds and 33 fifties over his next 108 Tests, having scored 5 hundreds and 17 fifties in his first 60.

For 90 Tests between NZ 1992\93 and England 2001 Waugh averaged 61.06.

Until NZ 1992\93 he'd been pretty average with the exception of 1989 in England, and was dropped more than once (and would've been more had he not been a semi-decent bowler of batsman-who-bowls status in those days).

 

[Richard]

you just proved my point...

How, by saying Tendulkar was a more natural-looking batsman or took less games to come into his own at Test level?