Best After The Don

[Ikki]

That's plain wrong. This opinion of a journalist aside, nowhere have cricinfo endorsed Tendulkar equal or better than Bradman view in their editorials. Not on Tendulkar profile page, not in the ESPNCricinfo all time XI series, not in the ESPN legends of cricket series, nowhere. That's why cricinfo remains a more respectable site.

Nonsense. I've brought this up several times when before Tendulkar's slump the ridiculous news cycle that circulated around Tendulkar. It still kinda persists, even now. If he scratches his ass, there are articles on whether he is the best ass-scratcher ever.

Not meant to be inflamatory, but looking at Ikki's signature why are those comments not seen as equally rediculous specifically Haigh's and Botham's?

Because he's not saying Warne is greater than Bradman - and neither am I. The quote, if you had bothered to Google it, refers to Warne as a character as much as a cricketer.

The World Today - Gideon Haigh discusses Warne legacy

 

[sledger]

The quote, if you had bothered to Google it, refers to Warne as a character as much as a cricketer.

It seems to be missing the words "fat", "drugs", "cheat" and "philanderer". Not necessarily in that order.

 

[Jono]

Nonsense. I've brought this up several times when before Tendulkar's slump the ridiculous news cycle that circulated around Tendulkar. It still kinda persists, even now. If he scratches his ass, there are articles on whether he is the best ass-scratcher ever.

This sumps up pretty much your whole posting on this issue and why you are just relentless. You have an agenda and a specific one. You do not like the attention Sachin gets (which is very similar to the things people dislike about Viv and Warne have received, albeit in different ways) and hence go on the attach 24/7.

I very much doubt you were saying the same things about Ponting in 2005/06 when there was an absolute flurry of media articles in this country calling him the 2nd best after Bradman when he was on his amazingly dominant run.

 

[Jono]

It seems to be missing the words "fat", "drugs", "cheat" and "philanderer". Not necessarily in that order.

and "liar" - I mean, he denies having any plastic surgery or facelift.

 

[smash84]

and "liar" - I mean, he denies having any plastic surgery or facelift.

He might be telling the truth though. At the very least it looks like plastic the plastic surgery was performed by Kamran Akmal

 

[Satyanash89]

Nonsense. I've brought this up several times when before Tendulkar's slump the ridiculous news cycle that circulated around Tendulkar. It still kinda persists, even now. If he scratches his ass, there are articles on whether he is the best ass-scratcher ever.

[/url]

You're honestly jealous of Tendulkar's popularity?
Atleast that's what I took from that sentence. What does the amount of attention Tendulkar get have anything to do with the topic and why does it bother you? I don't think Cricinfo have published anything in the past suggesting they thought Tendulkar was a greater batsman than Bradman, or even his equal.

 

[ankitj]

Nonsense. I've brought this up several times when before Tendulkar's slump the ridiculous news cycle that circulated around Tendulkar. It still kinda persists, even now. If he scratches his ass, there are articles on whether he is the best ass-scratcher ever.

I mentioned places where there was opportunity for endorsing Tendulkar as equal to or better than Bradman, but cricinfo did not do that. You can check out each of those article. It's very obvious to the reader that they are making a conscious effort not to spur on the Tendulkar fanboys while still lavishing praise on Tendulkar that he deserves.

You on the other have showed me nothing.

FWIW, I know at least one columnist in cricinfo personally. He is an Indian and is generally a Tendulkar critic (reactionary critic if you like).

 

[H4G]

In my opinion, Viv Richards is better than 3rd best batsman ever by as much margin as Bradman is better than 2nd best batsman ever(Viv Richards).For anyone who followed cricket closely during 1970s & 1980s Richards is closest thing to Bradman. Hobbs, Headley & Lara despite being great are nowhere near to be as good as Richards.

 

[Ikki]

This sumps up pretty much your whole posting on this issue and why you are just relentless. You have an agenda and a specific one. You do not like the attention Sachin gets (which is very similar to the things people dislike about Viv and Warne have received, albeit in different ways) and hence go on the attach 24/7.

I very much doubt you were saying the same things about Ponting in 2005/06 when there was an absolute flurry of media articles in this country calling him the 2nd best after Bradman when he was on his amazingly dominant run.

Yes, it would bother me just as much. Perhaps its because you like the attention on him that you don't realise the exaggeration of someone who is basically on par with 3-4 other batsmen during his career gets an absurd proportion of attention and adulation.

Ponting at his peak (averaging near 60 overall) got nowhere near this much attention. I should know, because I was one of those who actually started asking questions of posters where they rated him with respect to Tendulkar. I remember having a discussion with Manan who said Ponting would have to average 65 (!) for Manan to consider him superior - and Manan is a pretty logical/reasonable poster. This was also at a time where Tendulkar's average was plummeting. And even then...was Ponting considered better than Bradman? Give me a ****ing break dude, its not even close.

I mentioned places where there was opportunity for endorsing Tendulkar as equal to or better than Bradman, but cricinfo did not do that. You can check out each of those article. It's very obvious to the reader that they are making a conscious effort not to spur on the Tendulkar fanboys while still lavishing praise on Tendulkar that he deserves.

You on the other have showed me nothing.

FWIW, I know at least one columnist in cricinfo personally. He is an Indian and is generally a Tendulkar critic (reactionary critic if you like).

There is no instance where Tendulkar can be endorsed as better than Bradman, what are you talking about? How can you show an instance which doesn't exist?

And re-read I said sites like Cricinfo, which is just one site. Or are you seriously contesting that there haven't been comparisons made between Tendulkar and Bradman at all?

Let's cut the crap: he is one of the greatest batsmen of all time but due to the fact that he is Indian (and the adulation they have for him) he will get far more clicks than any other cricketer. In fact, Cricinfo ran an article saying that Tendulkar was so popular that he crashed the site. Other than the fact that he is Indian, his talent/ability does not put him on a different stratosphere to explain the constant news barrage; as there are at least 3 other batsman during his own career which are comparable - and several other cricketers who aren't specialist batsmen. Imagine if he was a controversial figure or sent texts

 

[Ikki]

You're honestly jealous of Tendulkar's popularity?
Atleast that's what I took from that sentence. What does the amount of attention Tendulkar get have anything to do with the topic and why does it bother you? I don't think Cricinfo have published anything in the past suggesting they thought Tendulkar was a greater batsman than Bradman, or even his equal.

No, I am just a critic of the disproportionate amount of praise and attention he gets. If you bring it up and mention that it is because he is Indian...you have an agenda, or hate the guy.

Unfortunately, some people take the fact that media sites focus on a player (and they do so largely for hits as well as real news) as legitimising their opinion that the player is as good or as important as they think. I'm Persian, I remember an article naming Ali Daei in the top 100 football players of all time. The Iranian fans LOVED to believe it, and ate up any special adulation they got...but the truth is he isn't even in the top 100 players that played in the Bundesliga. But because Ali Daei was their "hero"...bringing it up meant you had a personal problem with him.

 

[ankitj]

There is no instance where Tendulkar can be endorsed as better than Bradman, what are you talking about? How can you show an instance which doesn't exist?

And re-read I said sites like Cricinfo, which is just one site. Or are you seriously contesting that there haven't been comparisons made between Tendulkar and Bradman at all?

My bad. People like Ikki post such crap that it's sometimes difficult to decipher such posts. (Yeah that makes a lot of sense!)

A reminder : it is cricinfo that is running the feature on "Best AFTER Bradman". They can't do anything more to endorse Bradman as the greatest batsman. So you should have no reason to criticize sites like cricinfo.

 

[harsh.ag]

It is cricinfo that is running the feature on "Best AFTER Bradman". They can't do anything more to endorse Bradman as the greatest batsman. So you should have no reason to criticize sites like cricinfo.

True.

Completely separate from this, in the wisden poll of the five greatest cricketers of the century in the 90s, I remember reading that one of the experts did not have Bradman in his list of five. Any idea as to who it was? Or is my memory just going downhill already?

 

[ankitj]

It's your memory.Wisden - Five cricketers of the century

 

[harsh.ag]

It's your memory.Wisden - Five cricketers of the century

Touche.

By the way, Dickie Bird's All Time Test XI apparently is:

Barry Richards
Sunil Gavaskar
Vivian Richards
Graeme Pollock
Greg Chappell
Garry Sobers
Imran Khan
Alan Knott
Shane Warne
Dennis Lillee
Lance Gibbs

What in the world is Gibbs doing there?? I think this is a team of players who he has actually seen play, so Don, Hobbs, Grace, Hutton, Barnes, Headley, Hammond, Miller were disqualified. But why Gibbs?

 

[smash84]

so you are copy pasting posts across threads harsh

 

[harsh.ag]

so you are copy pasting posts across threads harsh

In all fairness, I didn't copy paste the other two posts from that thread

 

[Ikki]

My bad. People like Ikki post such crap that it's sometimes difficult to decipher such posts. (Yeah that makes a lot of sense!)

A reminder : it is cricinfo that is running the feature on "Best AFTER Bradman". They can't do anything more to endorse Bradman as the greatest batsman. So you should have no reason to criticize sites like cricinfo.

You don't get it. I am not saying sites like Cricinfo are actively calling Tendulkar better than Bradman. I am saying the disproportionate attention someone like Tendulkar gets often gets translated (by many of his adoring fans) as a legitimate concentration on his talent. That kind of constant barrage about how great he is - when in reality, there are many comparable players in his own career, let alone of all time - is only going to be used as legitimisation of opinions (like, that some actually think he is better than Bradman).

Tendulkar isn't setting records at a Gretzky-like pace (let alone a Bradman-like one) over his peers to deserve the aggregate attention of Lara and Ponting combined. It is simply because he is Indian. You may not like to hear that...but he gets eyeballs on news moreso than others because of his name, because he is Indian. Not because he is many times better than his peers.

Go reread the first I responded to...it was about the insinuation that many of Tendulkar's peers aren't close to him. It's taken for granted that he is either the best or second best batsman of all time. And my point is that this kind of thinking is just propagated because sites like Cricinfo give Tendulkar an exaggerated amount of attention.

 

[Days of Grace]

I am cringing at the thought of how many articles cricinfo will have when Tendulkar announces his retirement from tests.

 

[doesitmatter]

It's also business decision that drives the online sites,newspapers,television to give as they say more "air time" for SRT than say other "great" players as Tendulkar's anme drives the revenues up of these medium..a small minority may not like the attention he gets or some even cringe but it has been proven that vast majority likes it ..With competition of so many online sites and every tom,dick and "doesitmatter" having an opinion these sites do what they can to feed the many staff they employ ..Other greats might generate nostalgia and admiration here and there but the bottom line it's also "Per qualche dollaro in più"(a few dollars more) that has SRT getting splashed across pages..It happened during Don's time even though there were other equally great players...More and more of Tendlya please ..that's me the fanboy..

 

[Satyanash89]

It happened during Don's time even though there were other equally great players...

No, there weren't.

But all this talk about Tendulkar getting too much attention is such a trivial matter... don't like reading articles about him everyday? Don't read them. I've been critical of Tendulkar plenty of times especially in the last year or two, but why it annoys people is beyond me. Let people talk about him, how does it even matter ?