Can Ponting overtake Tendulkar?

[Jono]

Originally Posted by Ikki

Like I said that. Nice try. You were going to mention to me which part of my points were particularly biased? Was mentioning that he scored many 100s against minnows biased, or merely a fact? I see, it hurts...so it's biased.

Are you that ****ing daft?

You quoted my post where I said I enjoyed SS shutting down HGB1892 (NOT YOU), who said Sachin scored all his ton on ridiculously flat pitches in India.

Samuel Vines pointed out how SS just completely killed HGB's stupid argument, and I said "so good reading that stuff"

Believe it or not Ikki mate, this forum doesn't revolve around you.

I called you biased because you are btw.

I'm the guy that said Sachin choked against Australia in this thread: *Official* Australia in India - ODIs. I'm not going to pretend I have a bias for Sachin, but **** me I don't go into every thread and debate with you about why he's better than Ponting, unlike you do with Sir Alex or whoever says anyhting about Sachin.

I don't care if you think Ponting is better than Sachin, it's a fair enough comment. If you said Hayden, then I'd debate with you.

I know it ****ing annoys you that Sachin now has 8 more tons than Ponting, and more test runs, but it doesn't mean you need to take it out on everyone here on the forum who seems to enjoy Sachin batting and celebrate him breaking record after record.

[Ikki]

The post I made had nothing to do with India or Sachin scoring all their runs on flat tracks. It's your own sensitivity to the subject matter and the player that got you from A to B.

I specifically mentioned in my post that that Tendulkar is FAR FROM A FLAT TRACK HOME BULLY. That was in plain words, not even insinuated. I just stated that there is also some truth to it being easier to bat in India.

Just like there is some truth to saying it is easier to bat now than in the 00s. But it's limited and not near definitive.

I called you biased, because you are too. Everytime Tendulkar is mentioned negatively I can see your panties rolling into a knot or trying to denigrate a poster who wants to argue or discuss it. You do it in a way so as not to cause attention to yourself...but I've read you long enough to notice a trend. If you don't like people arguing about him, piss off. It's that easy because...guess what, the forum doesn't revolve around you either Mr. 23k posts.

If you think I defend Ponting's record because I like him then you have no clue. I defend his record because I know if Tendulkar had the same record he'd be revered even higher than he is now. I like Sehwag and Dravid more than I like Ponting FFS. So your childish finger-pointing can be reversed to yourself.

All that aside I like you as a poster, but p-lease...

[Jono]

IKKI, I wasnt referring to YOUR POST about flat tracks. I was referring to HGB1892.

Are you even reading what I'm saying? Seriously?

I don't really care if you want to call me biased, but when you hijack threads I will have a crack at you.

Oh and "Mr. 23k posts". Wow man you're hardcore with your disses. I bet you say that stuff to everyone with a lot of posts on here? Or just the ones that disagree with you.

[Sir Alex]

Please keep the tempers cool. I don't want to have this thread locked. I don't wish to personally debate more of this Ponting vs Tendulkar.

[GotSpin]

Originally Posted by Sir Alex

Please keep the tempers cool. I don't want to have this thread locked. I don't wish to personally debate more of this Ponting vs Tendulkar.

Spoil sport

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by Jono

IKKI, I want referring to YOUR POST about flat tracks. I was referring to HGB1892.

Are you even reading what I'm saying? Seriously?

I don't really care if you want to call me biased, but when you hijack threads I will have a crack at you.

My bad I thought you were referring to the fact that I posted a reply to your comment, which is a response to his comment, that I was insinuating that as well. Since I had asked you before to state something showing I am biased, I thought that was your example.

But my point still stands, look at you love it when someone says something for the player you favour. Don't pretend you're not biased, you are. Everybody is. But the way you mention that I am biased, you're insinuating that what I am saying is not true or illogical as my bias is clouding my judgement.

So either put up where I am saying something illogical or inconsistent, even if it's just your opinion, and if you can't there is no reason to say anything at all.

Originally Posted by Jono

Oh and "Mr. 23k posts". Wow man you're hardcore with your disses. I bet you say that stuff to everyone with a lot of posts on here? Or just the ones that disagree with you.

No, only the genius smart enough to say that I feel I am the centre of a forum...which ironically I post much much less in than he does.

Or maybe I should call you biased since you disagree with me?

[jeevan]

Originally Posted by Ikki

Yet Tendulkar who faced the same weak attack in 02 couldn't muster much against them - ironically 2 of his 3 100s against WIndies come in the time they were weak. See, if they've both played them when they were weak, it's Tendulkar's inability that should stand out. It doesn't matter if they're weak or even not Test class. Tendulkar had his shot, and didn't score. Conversely, Ponting has not had his shots against B/Z.

This is like me mentioning Tendulkar playing Pakistan more. In 00s Tendulkar has 1 century in 11 tests; Ponting has 4 in 9. Yes, Ponting may have scored a bit more had he played more but that's not the real difference between them.

The real difference is B/Z. Ponting's played them far fewer times and situation is compounded since they're the opponents most likely to score 100s against.

Also, Zimbabwe prior to 02 were minnows and Tendulkar had scored 2 100s prior to 02 against a very weak Zimbabwean attack.

Simple solution. Take away BD, WI and Zim, thx.

Eventually it boils down to the best 4-5 teams.

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by jeevan

Simple solution. Take away BD, WI and Zim, thx.

Eventually it boils down to the best 4-5 teams.

Why remove WIndies? Because Tendulkar couldn't cash in? Game, set, match.

[Jono]

Lol, Ikki if someone here said Ponting only scored his runs when there was no pressure (for example) and then someone replied absolutely crushing that argument in 2 lines, I'm sure you wouldn't also reply saying "yeah, good post" or something similar.

With regards to why you're biased, I still have nightmares with regards to your posts under the alias Kazaholic. And you've constantly denigrated Sachin's accomplishments... and I don't really know why to be honest.

But anyway it's hypocritical for me to criticise you and Sir Alex for hijacking a thread when I've just done so with you. So I'll end it here. But next time you're going to have a go at me about my number of posts, warn me beforehand. Because that one hurt right to the core, and I need to brace myself.

[Ikki]

I don't accuse anyone of being biased unless I think they're so biased they've lost the plot. And my pet peeve is when people put things out of proportion. As good as Sachin is, he is overrated. As good as Ponting is, he is underrated. That's why you see me try to be a leveller. It's the same when I argued for Sehwag against Merchant, for Donald against McGrath, for Kallis against Sobers.

I can see why you'd love a post crushing an argument in 2 lines...but at the same time you let go of many inane comments made in favour of your favoured cricketer(s). So you are just as biased. It doesn't need saying that "everyone knows you're biased!" as if I should be ignored and you listened to. We're all biased, let's cut the ****.

[jeevan]

Originally Posted by Ikki

Why remove WIndies? Because Tendulkar couldn't cash in? Game, set, match.

WTF? He hasn't played them since 2002 to cash in. This has been pointed out. Hasnt played Zim either since they became minnows, also been pointed out.

The only thing you're winning at is the selective discarding of data. That I'll grant you, you and the 5 year old I get to baby sit (who also keeps going "I win" "I win" all the time).

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by jeevan

WTF? He hasn't played them since 2002 to cash in. This has been pointed out. Hasnt played Zim either since they became minnows, also been pointed out.

The only thing you're winning at is the selective discarding of data. That I'll grant you, you and the 5 year old I get to baby sit (who also keeps going "I win" "I win" all the time).

The attacks he faced in 2002 were as poor as many of the attacks the WIndies had thereafter. Tendulkar didn't cash in, that's his own fault. In fact, India lost the series in WIndies against them. He played 8 tests against the likes of Dillon, Cuffy, Sanford, Black, Hooper and Collins and scored 2 100s. In the same period Ponting played 9 tests and scored 6 100s against them. In one series he scored at least a century in every match. So arguing that Tendulkar played them less is irrelevant because a) it isn't that much less and b) he didn't cash in anyway to suggest he missed out.

Zimbabwe were minnows for all but a small period after the turn of the century. The attacks Tendulkar faced before then against Zimbabwe were really bad. The one year they did have a good team and he played them, he scored 2 100s against WIndies and 1 against Zimbabwe - as I have pointed out to Sir Alex n amount of times. Do you wanna swap them around then? That would actually hurt Tendulkar's record.

[jeevan]

^ Nope, not into slicing & dicing myself.

The interpretation that seems suitable to me is a few pages ago (overall, against top 4 teams). Sachin comes out on top in all except against SA.

SA was a mark against him, but this series puts that to rest to a quite an extent imo. (Just like WC 2003 finals called into question his big game abilities and that lingered for a long time due to his injuries and then his slump. But that too he eventually has set to rest.)

I'm done with this thread. Field is all yours.

[Ikki]

Sure, whatever that puts Sachin on top I'm sure will do fine.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Burgey

What happened to this thread?

It's gone to the ****ter, that's what's happened. FMD, I just cannot believe this **** happens in every ****ing thread where one of these two players or both get mentioned. Honestly, every ****ing time.

It's ****ed. I mean, do the protagonists who do this in every bloody thread (and you know who you are) just cut and paste this ****? Honestly, it makes me want to eat my own vomit, which would be appropriate really, because it's all been regurgitated so ****ing often.

I'd rather have bowel surgery without anasthetic than read this every time there's a reaosnably long thread in CC these days. And if I did have that surgery, there'd be a lot less **** flying around than there is in here.

What amazes me is that the posters who do this on a consistent basis (you know who you are) generally are bright blokes who otherwise have some (I find anyway) interesting things to say. It's just every time there's a bloody opportunity to start with this **** it's grabbed with both hands.

From now on, we need to make this like S&M play - other forum members need to decide on a "safety" word, one that they can type in, the protagonists cease, the punishment stops and all the pain can go away. Suggestions for the word please?