Can Ponting overtake Tendulkar?

[Sir Alex]

Ponting will need to replicate his peak performance and will have to sustain it for atleast two years after Tendulkar has retired. That looks remote.

Ben, What was his shield record at 16 or 17? i am not sure whether he would've been able to match Tendulkar considering he really started dominating only by about 2003 odd when he was about 29.

[silentstriker]

Not that I particularly care, but at one point I thought the ODI record might be in overtaken...don't think that's a remote possibility now.

Tendulkar needs eight more combined centuries to get to 100 international centuries.

[Sir Alex]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

End of 2006:
Sachin 35
Ponting 33

End of 2007:
Sachin 37
Ponting 33

End of 2008:
Sachin 41
Ponting 37

End of 2009
Sachin 43
Ponting 38

2010
Sachin 47
Ponting 39

Sachin so far has scored equal or more centuries every year since 2006. Ponting needs to start reversing this trend very quickly. As I said, I think he'll do it, but it has to start happening soon.

Sachin is about 13 years past his absolute peak (IMO 1998 was his absolute peak), Ponting about 3-4ish...Ponting is about year and a half younger and has much less mileage on his body. So yea, I think it'll happen.

My guess is Ponting might use the 2013 Ashes to retire, while Tendulkar may use next year's WC....unless he keeps scoring a century per Test or something...

Some interesting points in there but if the peak is something measured statistically, then Tendulkar averages 91 this year with 4 hundreds which is jus 1 short of his maximum of 5 scored in 97. Also he has been averaging close to 58 since 07 World Cup, which which is numerically comparable to what he used to average in his absolute peak.

[silentstriker]

Peak is when I thought he was the best. Around 1998, he was at the top of his game in every way.

If you look at Tendulkar now, and Tendulkar of 1998, I wouldn't bat an eyelid regarding which one I'd want for my team.

[wfdu_ben91]

Originally Posted by Sir Alex

Ben, What was his shield record at 16 or 17? i am not sure whether he would've been able to match Tendulkar considering he really started dominating only by about 2003 odd when he was about 29.

Averaged 49-50 in his first season, as a 17 year-old, playing in by far the weakest cricketing state at that time, Tasmania.

[Sir Alex]

Edit. Tendulkar scored 5 hundreds in 99. Not in 97 as I mentioned above.

[silentstriker]

I don't care if he is scoring a hundred every innings, he is a completely different player. Still very good, but not Sachin of mid-late nineties.

[Sir Alex]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Peak is when I thought he was the best. Around 1998, he was at the top of his game in every way.

If you look at Tendulkar now, and Tendulkar of 1998, I wouldn't bat an eyelid regarding which one I'd want for my team.

Interesting. I actually think today we have players like Gautam and Sehwag to play the dasher role that Tendulkar used to play in the 90s. What the team needs from Tendulkar today is risk free accumulation of runs and solidity in the wake of Dravid's decline, both which he has given fully. The fact that India did well despite having a sub par Dravid for more than two years, is testimony to it. That is why today's Tendulkar is actually better than peak Tendulkar from a team pov.

[silentstriker]

No, the team is better from a team PoV. Tendulkar is not. To say a 1998 Tendulkar would offer less value to the team is ridiculously wrong.

If they were offered a 1990s Tendulkar in exchange for this one, they'd take it and laugh at you for offering such a 'choice'.

[Sir Alex]

Originally Posted by wfdu_ben91

Averaged 49-50 in his first season, as a 17 year-old, playing in by far the weakest cricketing state at that time, Tasmania.

Thank you, but is that really enough to merit a test debut? What about the latter seasons? Tendulkar's figures were nothing less than phenomenal in his first year of test cricket yet he took about a year or so to really become accustomed to it.

[silentstriker]

I don't think this is going to be a productive argument. If you watched both 1998 and 2010 Tendulkar and have to think about which one is better, I'll never convince you.

[Sir Alex]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

No, the team is better from a team PoV. Tendulkar is not. To say a 1998 Tendulkar would offer less value to the team is ridiculously wrong.

If they were offered a 1990s Tendulkar in exchange for this one, they'd take it and laugh at you for offering such a 'choice'.

Well finally it boils down to the runs scored does it not? Tendulkar of today is adding roughly the same amount of runs per match as he used to in his 'peak'. The fact that he adds those runs at much less risk than he used to only adds to the value of those runs. However brilliant he used to be in the nineties there was always that 'uncertainty' factor about him whenever he came out to bat. That uncertainty is at it's lowest these days.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Sir Alex

Well finally it boils down to the runs scored does it not?

No.

[Sir Alex]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

I don't think this is going to be a productive argument. If you watched both 1998 and 2010 Tendulkar and have to think about which one is better, I'll never convince you.

Yes. Let's agree to disagree.

[AaronK]

if he did.. he doesn't deserve it... such record only suits a great batsman like Tendulkar to keep.. Pointing may go down as one of the best..but I don't think he will be as good as sachin..