dravid failed in s.a, he was due for a failure after carrying the baton around alone for so long, tendulkar was not a huge success(this is an understatement, he scraped together some runs but in my books, every indian batsman except ganguly and laxman(to an extent) failed there) there either if that's what you are getting at....
...and what i am saying is that he has been due some valid criticism for a while now and these hundreds against bangladesh should not be enough to make them go away....
So what? It's still not as if he didn't make any runs at all. He made 122* ffs. Why criticise him now? I know what you're getting at, and I'll clarify it now (although I think I implied this anyway) - I don't think 'Tendulkar is back' because of a couple of innings against Bangladesh. I just don't think that the criticism coming from that article is really warranted, and the article author(s) went too far imo in suggesting Tendulkar is a selfish batsman or anything like that. Anyway, as I've said before, the real test will come against England.
It's not what I'm getting at. I was just pointing out that what you said wasn't quite accurate.
I understand that scoring a hundred against Bangladesh should not halt criticism but do you believe it should start it?
...but that's not what the article is about. IF the article was indeed criticising Tendulkar for his prolonged period of poor performance, then that would be fine. However, this article focused solely on his innings' versus Bangladesh in this series and such harsh criticism of these two knocks isn't warranted.
Great minds think alike eH?
Haha yeah, although you put the point across a bit better than I did.
i would love to say that tendulkar is an unselfish batsman as well(i have believed that for any number of years myself) but from what the article pointed out about his scoring rate(and compared it to the others) especially nearing his century, it looked like 1. he is definitely not in the best of touch 2. he was indeed playing for his century rather than for upping the team's run rate....now if the team was ok with him keeping one end and working on his 100 while having the other batsman work on the run rate, i don't have anything further to say on it, but if not, it doesn't show him in the best light, does it?
fair enough...although dravid has still been india's best(and very often only) away/back-to-the-walls/unfriendly-scenarios batsman for quite some time now inspite of that failure....
Personally (and I've changed my view of this from the past), I reckon you'd be hard pressed to find any player in international cricket who would pursue their own personal goals ahead of what's best for the team. I don't know what was going through his mind while he was approaching his hundred today, but I doubt he was consciously thinking about his hundred while forgetting about the best result for the team.
Yeah, definitely agreed.
why do you think it is starting anything? just because it came at a time when he hit a century? no, this is just like the criticism when he was not scoring runs, for a player of his calibre, lack of fluency against bangladesh is just an indication that he isn't out of the woods yet...
well, i sure hope that was it...
You make it seem like he's the new Malinga.
his cricinfo profile said:
Ian Bishop said:
AND: http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/143710.htmlcricinfo said:
He is called medium fast because cricinfo have not really seen him bowl often. Cricinfo do not watch Indian domestic cricket, nor do I since I live in England, but the point is clear that they rarely see him bowl.You make it seem like he's the new Malinga.
India's quickest pace is rest-of-the-world's medium-fast. It's just such a damn mystery.
Actually, India's quickest seamer is Sreesanth and he is quick (but not express) by "rest-of-the-world's" standards as well. Stock deliveries at 87 mph will suffice for someone who can utilize swing and seam.You make it seem like he's the new Malinga.
India's quickest pace is rest-of-the-world's medium-fast. It's just such a damn mystery.