• 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.

Sachin - The Underperformer - Kapil Dev

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
I don't really consider these things when judging players. Lara's phenomenally big innings in bore-draw games mean very little to me. It's obviously useful to be able to cash in massively when the going's especially easy, it's just not personally something I look for in a batsman.
Yeah me too.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I don't really consider these things when judging players. Lara's phenomenally big innings in bore-draw games mean very little to me. It's obviously useful to be able to cash in massively when the going's especially easy, it's just not personally something I look for in a batsman.
You have just got NO IDEA what you are talking about if that is what you know of Lara.


It is obvious you never watched any of his matches LIVE and you are doing your favourite "lets rate them on scorecards" bit, which is, I am sorry to say, the stupidest way EVER of rating cricketers.
 

SaeedAnwar

U19 Debutant
Dhoni reportedly wants Tendulkar to play the 2015 WC in Aus/NZ too, and Steve Waugh reckons Tendulkar has it in him to carry on in Test cricket till he's 45.

I agree with Sanz about it being ironic that the man who neglected his batting is the one accusing another of underachieving.

I think he should play ODI's till 2011 worldcup and tests for another 4 years till he turns 40. No need to pressure him to play till 2015
 
Last edited:

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
You have just got NO IDEA what you are talking about if that is what you know of Lara.


It is obvious you never watched any of his matches LIVE and you are doing your favourite "lets rate them on scorecards" bit, which is, I am sorry to say, the stupidest way EVER of rating cricketers.
I don't think Uppercut was saying Lara wasn't in Sachin's league. He just said that his 375 or 400 isn't necessarily goign to distinguish the two in his opinion.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
You have just got NO IDEA what you are talking about if that is what you know of Lara.


It is obvious you never watched any of his matches LIVE and you are doing your favourite "lets rate them on scorecards" bit, which is, I am sorry to say, the stupidest way EVER of rating cricketers.
Hahaha, I was just waiting for HB to comment on that. Very predictable HB when it comes to Lara.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Hahaha, I was just waiting for HB to comment on that. Very predictable HB when it comes to Lara.
I would love to see his defence of the point though... It is as if Lara scored runs knowing they were draws. If it weren't for his innings, most of them would have been losses and if he had a better bowling attack, quite a few of them would have been wins... It is juz the height of stupidity listening to arguments based on guys who never see cricket, juz enjoy reading scorecards and statsguru and then pass judgement.


I mean, that knock by Hussey, gng this wonderful logic of UC, is worthless as it was played in a losing cause and since they lost by quite a margin, it would have never made any difference.


But of course, the ones who watched the match will ALL KNOW that it was the opposite... But cricket is all about scorecards and statsguru. Why watch the game at all? 8-)
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I don't think Uppercut was saying Lara wasn't in Sachin's league. He just said that his 375 or 400 isn't necessarily goign to distinguish the two in his opinion.
Nope.. he clearly mentions that he doesn' rate most of Lara's big knocks because they were made "when the going was easy".. Shows the guy has no idea what he is talking about, has never watched any of these innings in question and given that England were 4 wickets away from losing and probably would have had Lara himself not dropped a sitter, I don't see why the 400 SHOULD NOT be considered a good knock or something that sets him apart comparing to other players..


A good 90+ percent of the big knocks since 2000 have been on flat tracks and have produced a number of draws, esp. when Australia is not involved... So why don't we juz not consider every single big knock played?


I am sorry if this comes across as just a defence of Lara. I mean, to an extent, it is but what I am mainly against here is this stupidity of rating an innings based on results and scorecards not even giving an iota of consideration to what the actual circumstances were when the innings was played. When you try to be Mr. Know-it-all, it is obvious you place all confidence in scorecards and that is why such arguments are stupid.
 
Last edited:

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
You're right...many of the 200 + scores Lara scored actually secured draws for West Indies in the face of defeats especially after the retirement of Walsh and Ambrose. But you know Sachin Tendulkar is not allowed the same defence when people complain that he doesnt have enough match winning centuries. Well ofcourse he doesnt because he had a bowling attack of Anil Kumble, Javagal Srinath, Venkatesh Prasad for most part.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
You're right...many of the 200 + scores Lara scored actually secured draws for West Indies in the face of defeats especially after the retirement of Walsh and Ambrose. But you know Sachin Tendulkar is not allowed the same defence when people complain that he doesnt have enough match winning centuries. Well ofcourse he doesnt because he had a bowling attack of Anil Kumble, Javagal Srinath, Venkatesh Prasad for most part.
I am not saying this in relation to Sachin Vs Lara.


I am just mentioning in general. Look Sachin did not get a 400 and Lara did. Iit was a fine knock and it may well have been the difference between a draw and a loss in that test too. So it is a credit to Lara and it will always be something Sachin never did.


But there are so many things which Sachin has done and Lara hasn't. There are a number of areas where Sachin scores over Lara just like there are number of areas wherre Lara scores over Sachin. That is why it is literally dead heat beween them as test batsmen and it just boils down to personal preference. You can check out my comments in any of the Lara V Tendulkar debates we have had.

I am simply responding to UC saying he does not rate Lara because most of his big innings came in dead draws and when the "going was easy". It is obvious to me that it is a stupid comment and I am calling him on that, that is all.
 

Sir Alex

Banned
I agree with honestbharani here. Whatever be the case of the pitch, even if it is concrete, a batsman has to possess incredible amount of concentration and flair to notch up garguantan scores like Lara did. And that too he did twice. The opposition bowlers were hardly dunces. Although in the grander scheme of things it may have resulted in a bat fest and a dull draw but that is something beyond the control of the batsman. He is paid to bat and that is all.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You have just got NO IDEA what you are talking about if that is what you know of Lara.


It is obvious you never watched any of his matches LIVE and you are doing your favourite "lets rate them on scorecards" bit, which is, I am sorry to say, the stupidest way EVER of rating cricketers.
Jesus, what the hell. Asshole.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Well sorry if I'm not entirely sure how to react to a completely out-of-the-blue personal attack following the most inert, inoffensive post concerning what things I take into account when I'm rating players. If you're going to be so militant all the time it would be nice if you actually read and try to understand what I say before launching yourself into an aggro episode of penis-jousting at me. Or better still, just stay the hell out of my way.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Well sorry if I'm not entirely sure how to react to a completely out-of-the-blue personal attack following the most inert, inoffensive post concerning what things I take into account when I'm rating players. If you're going to be so militant all the time it would be nice if you actually read and try to understand what I say before launching yourself into an aggro episode of penis-jousting at me. Or better still, just stay the hell out of my way.
I didn't take offence to what stupid criteria you use to judge a player and I am least bothered if you think Lara is not a great player, it is your fault, not his... But when you prance out words like "he made runs when the going was easy", I am sorry, that is completely false and I called you out on it.


You got a problem with people telling you straight when you are wrong, I suggest you don't post in public forums...
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Well sorry if I'm not entirely sure how to react to a completely out-of-the-blue personal attack following the most inert, inoffensive post concerning what things I take into account when I'm rating players. If you're going to be so militant all the time it would be nice if you actually read and try to understand what I say before launching yourself into an aggro episode of penis-jousting at me. Or better still, just stay the hell out of my way.
And how the hell is this personal? This is not the first time I am seeing you post like this about matches just based on scorecards and results and we have argued this before. It gets tiresome when you keep passing off stuff as if it is fact. It is one thing to say you don't rate Lara coz the matches he scored big in were draws, quite another to suggest that he only scored in draws and when the going was easy...


And yes, I do rate quite a few of your opinions on cricket and think we can talk it out and that I can make you understand where you are going wrong. I used the word "stupid" on the way you rate players and on the criteria you set and how you set them, I don't think I ever implied that you were personally stupid. I am completely sorry and tender my sincerest apologies if that is what you got from my posts.


Frankly mate, I do have a lot of time for your opinions, juz that I get frustrated that you can't see a very simple point. I guess I did over-react although I don't think I personally insulted you at all. I guess I did insult your opinion on this matter and the way you judge an innings to be important or not.

I am not sure how you are gonna take this but here is a bit of friendly advice.. Next time, also give time to the people who watched the stuff live.. They will be the best ones to tell you whether an innings was played with nothing at stake or everything at stake. The scorecards never really will...
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
But when you prance out words like "he made runs when the going was easy", I am sorry, that is completely false and I called you out on it.


You got a problem with people telling you straight when you are wrong, I suggest you don't post in public forums...
My bad, Lara definitely didn't score any runs when the going was easy.

:huh:
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I did watch Brian Lara's 400 live. Why wouldn't I have?

Strange assumption to make. Where did it come from?
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I did watch Brian Lara's 400 live. Why wouldn't I have?

Strange assumption to make. Where did it come from?
coz you seemed to be talking as if it was a draw all along.. No, it wasn't till an hour or so after he dropped that sitter.. Till then it was heading straight for a result.
 

Top