People 'tarnishing their legacy' by going on too long...

[Zinzan]

Not sure why people are making such a 'beat-up' over this. I already pointed out that by 'tarnish' his legacy, I meant 'blemish' and not 'ruin'. If you don't agree it would be sad to see Tendulkar continuing playing on and failing, that's fine, but quit making out people have been suggesting his whole career will be ruined, because that just isn't the case. Talk about blowing things out of proportion.

 

[Bahnz]

Crowe certainly had an end of career slump. In the last year of his career he was extremely average. He only managed to average about 19 after the 1994 tour of England. That was probably mainly due to the fact that at that stage he couldn't really put any pressure on his right leg anymore, and that's probably why his legacy wasn't remotely tarnished by it.

 

[Jono]

I remember this article on Cricinfo when Brian Lara was playing ICL, and sucking balls. It was about how he should be careful not to hurt his legacy and have people remember him for that

No, but it would have been sad if Lara had played Test cricket for 12 months longer than he did and averaged in the 20s.

Haha actually wasn't referring to you or your views this time. Just saying this thread reminded me of that article.

Bloke just went to the ICL to make money.

 

[Jono]

Bingo

Not sure why people are making such a 'beat-up' over this. I already pointed out that by 'tarnish' his legacy, I meant 'blemish' and not 'ruin'. If you don't agree it would be sad to see Tendulkar continuing playing on and failing, that's fine, but quit making out people have been suggesting his whole career will be ruined, because that just isn't the case. Talk about blowing things out of proportion.

I think this is where your argument is a little inconsistent though.

At times you have talked about Tendulkar's average dipping.

Then you've also talked about it just being sad to see him struggle as if he can't hold a bat.

They are two different things. One is you saying his average falling below 55 will hurt his legacy. The other is just a general sadness of seeing a former great no longer be any good.

Everyone agrees with your latter point. But not everyone agrees with your first point.

 

[centurymaker]

if he plays the upcoming border-gavaskar series and inevitably fails in it too, then yeah it'll be a tiny blemish.

maybe he's thinking that if he has one good series for the final time, he'll go out on a bit of a high and all will be rosy, cosy.
another possibility could be that BCCI don't want him to go yet as it will no doubt affect their income significantly.

they apparently blocked dhoni's axing earlier this year for perhaps the same reason.

$$$$$ talks.

 

[uvelocity]

look he's pretty much not a patch on his former self, but I won't forget as a kid watching this kid from india play test cricket and smack our bowlers around all day. that incredulity will stay with me forever, nothing he does now has any effect on that memory.

 

[benchmark00]

You're a long time retired.

 

[Tangles]

I wouldnt be surprised if he is going for 200 tests if he is that close.

 

[abmk]

again, there are two cases here :

1. performing quite a bit below the player's own high standards, but still contributing well enough to the team , that shouldn't hurt the legacy that much ....

2. performing well below average by a decent batsman's standards for an extended amount of time ..... that would hurt the legacy quite a bit ...

as far as ponting goes, he'd been out of form in tests for quite some time ( minus the India series ) ..

for sachin, the time has been lesser comparatively ( since 2011 WC ), especially when compared to someone like gambhir in the same team who hasn't done that well since 2010 ....

but its about time that he performed well in the next series or two .... absolute shame that he didn't capitalize in Aus, where he looked in excellent touch ....

 

[M0rphin3]

Ishant Sharma IMO

 

[Zinzan]

I think this is where your argument is a little inconsistent though.

At times you have talked about Tendulkar's average dipping.

Then you've also talked about it just being sad to see him struggle as if he can't hold a bat.

They are two different things. One is you saying his average falling below 55 will hurt his legacy. The other is just a general sadness of seeing a former great no longer be any good.

Everyone agrees with your latter point. But not everyone agrees with your first point.

The reason for the confusion is the two points are not mutually exclusive of each other. The dipping average is a function of the decline in performances.

My tongue and cheek comment about the 55 average was a secondary concern to his decline as a batsman, correct, but without being a total stats-maggot, it does irk me a little all the same.

 

[Uppercut]

This is basically it.

Well it comes up a lot in reference to, say, Muhammad Ali. And I don't think there are many stats goblin boxing fans.

But then, Ali is still probably the most iconic sportsman ever so maybe it just isn't really that important when you bow out.

 

[The Sean]

I think the Ali example actually supports what a lot of people here are saying. While his last few fights are often brought up in discussion, they're usually mentioned in the context of him being so far gone he was getting beaten by blokes who shouldn't have been fit to lace his gloves and that while it was sad to watch, those bouts are no way to judge his greatness.

 

[BoyBrumby]

There's an interesting article by Ed Smith on cricinfo today that touches on this issue.

Ed basically says that cricket today is, in most aspects, very hard-nosed and professional, but becomes very coy and bashful when deciding on the exits of great players.

In this area, modern sport goes all weak and wobbly, prone to fits of extravagant sentimentality. We hear the usual phrases over and over: "He'll know when the time is right… he's got to be able to make the decision himself when he's ready… after so many years of service, it's only fair he gets to choose… his home town would be a fitting finale…"

Really? Since when did the player know better than the selector who is selecting him? Since when is a batsman or bowler the best judge the trajectory of his own ability? It sounds like a highly amateurish set-up for such professional times. And why should a team organise its selection to provide "closure" for one player in the form of a ticker-tape send-off in his home town? By that logic, it is time to send home all the statistical analysts who try to provide coaches with what gamblers call "the edge" in selection. If the modern way is just to ask the star players what suits them best, sports teams could save themselves a fortune by abolishing support staff.

Very fair point, IMHO.

 

[Spiced]

Tendulkar would have been dropped if it was not for his "legacy", this year he scored 2 fifties out of 15 innings at an average of 23.8. Tendulkar is cricket in India. It will be easier for Tendulkar to announce retirement then wait for a decision from cricket India or his fans as they will most likely want to see him play badly then not see him play at all.