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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited by silentstriker; 18-12-2012 at 01:35 AM.
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.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)