If you were Sachin Tendulkar . . .

[centurymaker]

Originally Posted by Jono

Also I think its quite clear that Ponting and Tendulkar did not have a priority to go out on on top of their game. Their priority was doing what they love as long as they can.

As long as a player contributes he shoud stay!
Even if a great's avg drops because he's averaging 40, I don't think it tarnishes his legacy because he is still adding value to his team

[Jono]

I would think there is a difference between "a shame he went past his peak and played when he was clearly not up to it. Was tough viewing" and "he has tainted his legacy". Ah well, not going to change your mind Zinzan and you're entitled to think the way you do, so fair enough.

[Zinzan]

Originally Posted by Cruxdude

Surely the 22 years of scoring at 57 would give him something over the NZ cricketer. With Sachin you can never say never. People wrote him of in 2006. Yes this patch is worse than his earlier one but it has only been since the NZ series that he has looked gone. He will surely believe that it is a matter of one good knock. He played one first class match before this series and promptly scored a century. This does not tarnish his record. It happened and he is trying to fight against it, good on him. He has no obligation to retire.

Some of you guys seriously need to face facts. I know he's been an ATG player, but he's not superman. He's 5 months shy of 40 years old. Do you think he might suddenly have another golden run against between the ages of 40 and 41 (or maybe between 41-42)?

I have to confess I didn't see him in the recent series against England, but I watched every ball in the series against NZ and what stood out to me is his eye had clearly diminished, hence why he was cleaned bowled 4 times. Obviously everyone is entitled to their own view on this one, I for one just think it will be extremely sad if he continues to keep diminishing.

[centurymaker]

Since tendulkar hasn't contributed since the nz series and has had 9 innings (6 tests) to see that he is well past it, I believe this is the ideal time to leave.

if he were to continue like this for another 10 tests for example, then it would no doubt taint his legacy somewhat.

[Zinzan]

Originally Posted by centurymaker

As long as a player contributes he shoud stay!
Even if a great's avg drops because he's averaging 40, I don't think it tarnishes his legacy because he is still adding value to his team

Again, let's conveniently ignore the fact that in 10 tests in the last 12 months he's averaged 27. 27 is not 40 and averaging 27 certainly doesn't add value to the team. But once again, that's probably acceptable to you because he used to be great right?

[centurymaker]

Originally Posted by Zinzan

Some of you guys seriously need to face facts. I know he's been an ATG player, but he's not superman. He's 5 months shy of 40 years old. Do you think he might suddenly have another golden run against between the ages of 40 and 41 (or maybe between 41-42)?

I have to confess I didn't see him in the recent series against England, but I watched every ball in the series against NZ and what stood out to me is his eye had clearly diminished, hence why he was cleaned bowled 4 times. Obviously everyone is entitled to their own view on this one, I for one just think it will be extremely sad if he continues to keep diminishing.

yea thats true. 3 innings against NZ & 6 innings against ENG is long enough for a 40 yo.

[centurymaker]

Originally Posted by Zinzan

Again, let's conveniently ignore the fact that in 10 tests in the last 12 months he's averaged 27. 27 is not 40 and averaging 27 certainly doesn't add value to the team. But once again, that's probably acceptable to you because he used to be great right?

noooooooooo
i was using that to defend Ponting

[Jono]

Originally Posted by Zinzan

Some of you guys seriously need to face facts. I know he's been an ATG player, but he's not superman. He's 5 months shy of 40 years old. Do you think he might suddenly have another golden run against between the ages of 40 and 41 (or maybe between 41-42)?

I have to confess I didn't see him in the recent series against England, but I watched every ball in the series against NZ and what stood out to me is his eye had clearly diminished, hence why he was cleaned bowled 4 times. Obviously everyone is entitled to their own view on this one, I for one just think it will be extremely sad if he continues to keep diminishing.

Couple of things:

1. Who here is saying Sachin isn't past it? ZInzan you're arguing against something no one is saying. He's old and past it, everyone agrees. We are saying his last 12 months does not ruin his career at all. You disagree. I think you are wrong, you think you are right. Fair enough.

Originally Posted by Zinzan

Again, let's conveniently ignore the fact that in 10 tests in the last 12 months he's averaged 27. 27 is not 40 and averaging 27 certainly doesn't add value to the team. But once again, that's probably acceptable to you because he used to be great right?

2. Here is the main point, you are missing just how quickly Sachin fell away. His 2012 has been awful, but if you asked anyone in the Melbourne and Sydney tests 2011/2012 who the best batsman for India was, they would say Tendulkar hands down.

Age catches up to people quickly. Sachin went from our best to being past it in the space of 12 months. You are acting like he's hung on for years and years. He would have only realised he's starting to suck balls against NZ and now England. That's a space of only 6 months.

[Teja.]

Originally Posted by Jono

Couple of things:


Age catches up to people quickly. Sachin went from our best to being past it in the space of 12 months. You are acting like he's hung on for years and years. He would have only realised he's starting to suck balls against NZ and now England. That's a space of only 6 months.

Yeah exactly, can't stress this enough. He was the world's best batsman in 2010 (1568 runs @ 78 with 7 tons), Indian's best batsman barring Dravid in 2011 despite being merely 'good' (756 runs @ 47.25).

It's all well and good to sit on that wonderful armchair of hindsight and say he should have to retired sooner but that ignores the actual context of his decline.

[Zinzan]

Originally Posted by Jono

Couple of things:

1. Who here is saying Sachin isn't past it? ZInzan you're arguing against something no one is saying. He's old and past it, everyone agrees. We are saying his last 12 months does not ruin his career at all. You disagree. I think you are wrong, you think you are right. Fair enough.

Actually If you looked who I quoted when I typed that, you'll see I was replying to Cruxdude who was actually implying that he may well be back to his best i.e. references about how people wrote him off in 2008.

Also, in terms of continued failures tarnishing his career, sadly, it doesn't really matter what you or I think, it's the way history will remember him and let's not pretend that averages suddenly don't impact the way a player is judged, because we all know on the face of it it does. Only then can context be provided. I personally find it to be a shame that his average has dropped below 55, if others find that petty, so be it.

[Jono]

Considering how Viv is treated by the main cricket public compared to Clyde Walcott, Javed Miandad and some others, I reckon you overstate how people remember averages, as opposed to what they saw.

[Jono]

Also you ignored the other point, just how quickly Sachin fell away. No one would have thought he was past it heading into Australia or even the NZ series in India.

It has been a quick fall.

[silentstriker]

FTR I didn't rate Ponting any lower when he was averaging 58 vs. now. This happens to virtually EVERY batsmen. How many people retire at their absolute peak? Precious few.


On a second note, I do count their performance when they were **** just as much as I do when they were great. If you put on the cap for your country and go out - you will score runs and take wickets or you won't. Those runs and wickets count - they win or lose you test matches, and as long as they do, they should count in judging you as a player.

This is why Ian Botham isn't considered the greatest player of all time - because if you're only taking a player at his best - you could make an argument that he'd be #1 player on a team, even above Bradman.

[Zinzan]

Originally Posted by Jono

Age catches up to people quickly. Sachin went from our best to being past it in the space of 12 months. You are acting like he's hung on for years and years. He would have only realised he's starting to suck balls against NZ and now England. That's a space of only 6 months.

Agree it's predominately been the last 6 months, as he still did relativity well in Aust compared to his team mates. Not sure what gives you the impression I think it';s been years. The reason I sound so strong about it is due to how awful he's 'looked' at the crease against NZ.

[Jono]

You keep talking about tarnishing his legacy. You're acting as if Sachin has tarnished his legacy by playing well after his peak despite knowing he was done. Everyone has only just realised he's done, probably himself too. There was no way for him to prevent this really, unless he quit after the NZ series based on 2 poor tests, but he probably believed he could come back to somewhere near his 2010/11 form during the England series.

Evidently not