Tendulkar becomes ODI top scorer!!!

[Streetwise]

Hussain just said on Sky Sports News that he and Sachin basically played Bodyline type bowling, as that's what they faced in his era, with short pitched bowling aimed at the ribs, just with less fielders on the leg-side. He then used this to bring in a stat about Bradman "only" averaging "around 50" in the Bodyline series, which is very similar to Tendulkar's average. Very interesting points it has to be said, can't say I agree with him.

I wonder how Bradman would have went on the roads of today, probably would have increased his average 20-30 runs.

 

[stephen]

Hussain just said on Sky Sports News that he and Sachin basically played Bodyline type bowling, as that's what they faced in his era, with short pitched bowling aimed at the ribs, just with less fielders on the leg-side. He then used this to bring in a stat about Bradman "only" averaging "around 50" in the Bodyline series, which is very similar to Tendulkar's average. Very interesting points it has to be said, can't say I agree with him.

While that may have been possibly true a long time ago (late 70s/80s), protective equipment and the two bouncer law has really nullified the bulk of the threat of intimidatory bowling these days. I think Nasser is just trying to get himself some headlines is all.

There is no way that Tendulkar is statistically twice as good as his next best today, which Bradman certainly was.

 

[Matt79]

Crap, looks like the discussion has already derailed, but coming to the news of Sachin's innings a bit late, just wanted to post to say WAG. Another amazing accomplishment to add to his already incredulously impressive record. Funny, but when people have asked who would do the 200 first, and names like Gilly, Sehwag, or Gayle were thrown around, I don't think I've ever seen anyone suggest Sachin, but it fits that it was him.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I don't agree with the #2 case either, but you can make the argument for any player from #2-#10, and I don't care much where you rank guys from Hobbs, Sobers, Tendulkar, Chappell, etc. Up to you, go for it.

I do care if you want to ignore 99.97 based some some exaggerated fanboism.

And you call yourself a cricket fan

 

[GIMH]

I don't agree with the #2 case either, but you can make the argument for any player from #2-#10, and I don't care much where you rank guys from Hobbs, Sobers, Tendulkar, Chappell, etc. Up to you, go for it.

I do care if you want to ignore 99.97 based some some exaggerated fanboism.

the shame!

 

[pasag]

And you call yourself a cricket fan

Not the first time either, did it in one of your threads

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/45121-cw50-no-8-a.html

for shame

 

[masterblaster]

Just saw the innings on Youtube as I missed out on watching the game. Just an unbelievable innings by Tendulkar. I'm so proud as a cricket fan and a Tendulkar fan that he was the first one ever to score 200 in an ODI game. He deserves this record more so than anyone else.

I'm not going to enter the debate whether he was better than Don Bradman, Viv Richards or Brian Lara but I'm just going to really enjoy this innings for what it truly is, which is something very special. Well done to Sachin, a true champion.

 

[Pothas]

Not the first time either, did it in one of your threads

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/45121-cw50-no-8-a.html

for shame

forgot how funny that was, seriously Pratters is comic genius in that thread, almost impossible to believe that he was not joking.

 

[honestbharani]

So so fitting.

This.

 

[honestbharani]

Ponting the first past 50 in Twenty20Is

hahaha.. even more fitting?

 

[honestbharani]

Quite interesting that Lara got the 400 when he was 35 or 36 and Sachin has now gotten his when he is 37... Both innings were chanceless.. Extremely interesting, I think.. Maybe there is one for Ponting when he is 36+...

 

[GIMH]

Quite interesting that Lara got the 400 when he was 35 or 36 and Sachin has now gotten his when he is 37... Both innings were chanceless.. Extremely interesting, I think.. Maybe there is one for Ponting when he is 36+...

Debatable on the Lara one

 

[honestbharani]

really? I watched it live and then a few times on DVD.. Didn't see a single chance...

 

[King Pietersen]

Just watching the 400* DVD I've got now, and at 42-1, with Lara on 0, there appeared to be a noise, which sounded like a nick, as the ball passed the edge of Lara's bat. Harmison certainly looked convinced he'd nicked it. Whether it was actually off the edge is almost impossible to detirmine without use of Hotspot, but the England side certainly looked pretty convinced. Not to take anything away from the innings of course, was a marvelous display of strokeplay, just thought it deserved a mention given that I'm watching the dvd now.

 

[honestbharani]

Darrell Hair was quoted after the match saying he definitely didn't nick it. And none of the England players made any noise about it. And having watched Lara for almost the whole of his career, I am yet to see an instance when he knew he nicked it and then hung around.. As I said, that replay is just a lot of conjecture to be even termed a chance...

 

[GIMH]

Darrell Hair was quoted after the match saying he definitely didn't nick it. And none of the England players made any noise about it. And having watched Lara for almost the whole of his career, I am yet to see an instance when he knew he nicked it and then hung around.. As I said, that replay is just a lot of conjecture to be even termed a chance...

Well of course the umpire would say that...and Flintoff mentions it in his book, says they were certain he was out but then goes on to say how brilliant he was through the rest of it

I don't mean to take anything away from it, but I think it's debatable, highly debatable, that it's chanceless

 

[honestbharani]

Well of course the umpire would say that...and Flintoff mentions it in his book, says they were certain he was out but then goes on to say how brilliant he was through the rest of it

I don't mean to take anything away from it, but I think it's debatable, highly debatable, that it's chanceless

As I said, I watched it live and thought he did not nick it then... debatable maybe but only Flintoff has said anything about it and nothing was mentioned at that time.. And heck, it was not even agreed to be a chance even here at CW during the game.. I think it was not a nick, at all...

 

[silentstriker]

I wonder how Bradman would have went on the roads of today, probably would have increased his average 20-30 runs.

Well, now you don't want to be going the other way either. The 1930s were some of the flattest pitches in cricket history.

the shame!

And you call yourself a cricket fan

Totally deserved. Every time I type, I write that number. I have no idea why. I know its 99.94, but it's seriously like the 10th time I've said 99.97 by mistake. It makes no sense. People rightfully correct me every time, and I always keep changing....but 99.97 always comes back the next time I mention it.

 

[Ikki]

I don't agree with the #2 case either, but you can make the argument for any player from #2-#10, and I don't care much where you rank guys from Hobbs, Sobers, Tendulkar, Chappell, etc. Up to you, go for it.

I do care if you want to ignore 99.97 based some some exaggerated fanboism.

I agree. He clearly has a case for #2. I have no problem with that as a discussion, even if I disagree...what irks me especially are the reasons why - i.e. aggregate runs made, centuries, etc - people are calling him #1.

 

[GIMH]

As I said, I watched it live and thought he did not nick it then... debatable maybe but only Flintoff has said anything about it and nothing was mentioned at that time.. And heck, it was not even agreed to be a chance even here at CW during the game.. I think it was not a nick, at all...

LOL, people have been saying for six years that they felt he got a nick, but whatever hb