Cricinfo All-time series "Eleven of the best"

[Ikki]

i disagree. sachin played mcgrath and warne together in 1999-00, 2001-02 and in 2004-5. he was the man of the series in the first one. scored a century and two cracking fifties in the second one. sounds good enough to me.

Sachin played 2 tests of 11 IIRC back in the 90s against Warne and McGrath. In fact, he averages 39 when you simply look at when he played McGrath which is 3 tests. Tendulkar took apart Warne at his worst, but whenever McGrath was there he had a poor record. His numbers are average at best, and at some points pretty poor. 'Sounding' good is not enough.

Sachin's record vs:
McGrath+Warne: 7 matches @ 42.
McGrath: 9 matches @ 37.
Warne: 12 matches @ 60.


His runs are obviously heavily influenced by the period where Warne was injured/out of form and that's when he played Warne most from 98-01. When he played against McGrath, he was usually losing the battle. When he played both, he was good in Australia but averaged 39 in India.

He's played 29 matches against Australia and only 7 times against them both, so clearly, his record is not as successful as appears.

----

I didn't want to get into a whole Tendulkar thing, but just showing why I think his 90s record is a bit overrated.

 

[aussie]

Yea Ikki you are right on point, on putting Tendys record vs McGrath/Warne in proper context.

 

[Ikki]

He was hardly mediocre when McGrath and Warne both featured right?

He only played them 2 times in the 90s. 3 times when you include when McGrath and Warne wasn't there. To make any trend out of that would be a stretch.

I thought we were looking only at their respective peaks. Sachin played SA during his peak between 97-02 and did pretty well, considering both Pollock and Donald were at their peaks. Overall record of Tendulkar is bad against SA and Pakistan mainly because he played most of the tests either when he was very young (96 and before) or when he was at his worst following injuries (03 & 06-07). He featured in just 3 tests against Pakistan during his peak.

I am talking about the 90s. So my stats have the 90s. Maybe in that period you consider his peak he was okay? I would have to look at that closer. But overall, he did have a problem against S.Africa, and the 90s where Tendulkar is seen as the best, he wasn't upto scratch against them.

If non peak periods are also to be considered, Waugh was terrible before 1993, his averages against WI against whom subsequently he did well was terrible before that.

If you look at his record in the 90s, Waugh averages 45 against the WIndies, 65 (IIRC) against S.Africa and 37 is his worst average against one of the best, which is Pakistan. So IMO, it's clear he did better against the best.

 

[Pigeon]

You win.

 

[bagapath]

He's played 29 matches against Australia and only 7 times against them both, so clearly, his record is not as successful as appears.

sachin faced mcgrath and warne in two full series when they all were in good form and in both series none of them had injury problems

and his record is..

6 12 0 582 126 48.50 1017 57.22 2 4 1 76 3


in india 3 6 0 304 126 50.66 509 59.72 1 2 0 46 2
in aus 3 6 0 278 116 46.33 508 54.72 1 2 1 30 1 (man of the series)

sounds good to me

 

[Pigeon]

You win too

 

[Ikki]

sachin faced mcgrath and warne in two full series when they all were in good form and in both series none of them had injury problems

and his record is..

6 12 0 582 126 48.50 1017 57.22 2 4 1 76 3


in india 3 6 0 304 126 50.66 509 59.72 1 2 0 46 2
in aus 3 6 0 278 116 46.33 508 54.72 1 2 1 30 1 (man of the series)

sounds good to me

Sorry, but that's non-sense. Warne only played 1 Test outside of said period, and Sachin scored 8 and 2 (2004). The only other time Warne played Sachin was when he was debuting and there was no McGrath back then - nor was the attack good .

 

[bagapath]

Sorry, but that's non-sense. Warne only played 1 Test outside of said period, and Sachin scored 8 and 2 (2004). The only other time Warne played Sachin was when he was debuting and there was no McGrath back then - nor was the attack good .

in essence what you are saying is you don't care that sachin won the man of the series in 99-00 playing both mcgrath and warne and that his success in 97-98 against warne alone doesnt count because warne was not in form and you dont care much for reid, mcdermott and hughes which nullifies sachin's exploits in the 91-92 series and so you claim that sachin never played the best aussie attacks in 90s well. well, ikki. you are a smart guy. you are welcome to believe whatever you want.

 

[Burgey]

Ikki in "Tendulkar's no good" shocker....

 

[Ikki]

in essence what you are saying is you don't care that sachin won the man of the series in 99-00 playing both mcgrath and warne and that his success in 97-98 against warne alone doesnt count because warne was not in form and you dont care much for reid, mcdermott and hughes which nullifies sachin's exploits in the 91-92 series and so you claim that sachin never played the best aussie attacks in 90s well. well, ikki. you are a smart guy. you are welcome to believe whatever you want.

Yes, that is the essense of it. Tendulkar played McGrath and Warne for more than 1 series. The question is not: can Tendulkar play great attacks (which seems to come up for the likes of Hayden)? He certainly can. The question is his overall record against Australia. Is it as good as it appears on the face? Not really. Reid played 1-2 tests IIRC and was injured. McDermott and Hughes are poor substitutes for the great attacks in question (Warne/McGrath, Waqar/Wasim, Donald/Pollock, Ambrose/Walse). And yes, not only did Warne get hit around by Sachin, but by practically everybody; obviously, it will mean less. And even if he weren't so out of shape, it'd still mean less because McGrath wasn't there most of the time. Remember, I didn't say it means nothing, I said it means less.

I didn't say Sachin didn't ever play the best aussie attack, I said his record consists of him largely not playing them. This is simply a fact. Lara, for example, played a large portion against Warne and McGrath, and did very well against both.

Ikki in "Tendulkar's no good" shocker....

Please, that's hardly what I am saying.

 

[bagapath]

ikki. i get you now.

 

[bagapath]

btw, just read on cricinfo that ricky ponting is not after border's record alone and is looking beyond that. in that article he mentions that he came to know of the proximity of border's tally as the stats came up on boards at the beginning of the tour. having spent months on CW arguing against ponting (mostly in favor of sachin and sometimes in favor of border or lara or greg chappell) i have to take a moment now to convey my admiration for him as a batter and cricketer. when he says he doesnt follow stats at all i completely believe him. he has always come across as a no nonsense cricketer with immense self belief and will to win. even after the acrimonious sydney test against india two seasons ago i never felt he had done anything against the spirit of the game and the indians were crying like kids. ricky ponting played to win and didn't do anything illegal to acheive his ends. saurav ganguly seemed to be the only guy with the right perspective.

here is wishing ricky in advance on becoming australia's highest run getter. had he been more successful in india or more pleasing to the eye he would have replaced border or g.chappell in this team.

 

[aussie]

Yes, that is the essense of it. Tendulkar played McGrath and Warne for more than 1 series. The question is not: can Tendulkar play great attacks (which seems to come up for the likes of Hayden)? He certainly can. The question is his overall record against Australia. Is it as good as it appears on the face? Not really. Reid played 1-2 tests IIRC and was injured. McDermott and Hughes are poor substitutes for the great attacks in question (Warne/McGrath, Waqar/Wasim, Donald/Pollock, Ambrose/Walse). And yes, not only did Warne get hit around by Sachin, but by practically everybody; obviously, it will mean less. And even if he weren't so out of shape, it'd still mean less because McGrath wasn't there most of the time. Remember, I didn't say it means nothing, I said it means less.

I didn't say Sachin didn't ever play the best aussie attack, I said his record consists of him largely not playing them. This is simply a fact. Lara, for example, played a large portion against Warne and McGrath, and did very well against both.

I agree with your overall assessment on Tendy of course. But just a few comments on the highlighted.

Even though Hughes/McDermott aren't all-time great bowlers like those listed. But they still constituted a very good AUS attack in AUS. Just like the Lee/Clark combination that Tendy faced in 2007/08 & did well againts. So that shouldn't be looked down upon.

On Warne, he wasn't injured in 1998. He was had just come off running through SA. Tendy did dominate Warne in that series.

But that was MAINLY because given the injury woes to AUS fast bowlers. Warne was forced to being both the attacking bowler & defensive bowler like Ashes 05. But given IND superiority to playing spin, even the great Warne couldn't take up that mantle on his own.

 

[bagapath]

I was at the chennai ground in 2004 when warne went past murali and also got his only five-fer in india. sehwag scored a cracking hundred on that day. but what i remember more clearly is the dip and overspin warne produced on the ball resulting in biting leg breaks sizzling off the wicket. it was fascinating to watch a master give it all from my pavillion seat.

but, despite the five wicket haul he manged to get, i still think indians played him very comfortably. there was no tendulkar in that side. and dravid, ganguly and laxman didnt fire. still no one was unduly bothered by the great man in top form. pathan whacked him for a six and eventually became the world record victim. but i saw no indian batsman getting beaten by the flight or turn. i guess some indian teams have been exceptionally talented in playing spin, most are crap against good swing bowling, that my respect for murali (on account of his better record against india) went several notches up.

 

[aussie]

I was at the chennai ground in 2004 when warne went past murali and also got his only five-fer in india. sehwag scored a cracking hundred on that day. but what i remember more clearly is the dip and overspin warne produced on the ball resulting in biting leg breaks sizzling off the wicket. it was fascinating to watch a master give it all from my pavillion seat.

but, despite the five wicket haul he manged to get, i still think indians played him very comfortably. there was no tendulkar in that side. and dravid, ganguly and laxman didnt fire. still no one was unduly bothered by the great man in top form. pathan whacked him for a six and eventually became the world record victim. but i saw no indian batsman getting beaten by the flight or turn. i guess some indian teams have been exceptionally talented in playing spin, most are crap against good swing bowling, that my respect for murali (on account of his better record against india) went several notches up.

That Chennai pitch was extremely flat though. The spin was very slow, the ease at which Martyn & Gillespie batted in that partnership to give IND a decent 4th innings chase proved that.


The thing with bowling in IND is that, you cant beat IND at home with spin thats a myth really. Saqlain is probably the only that really has played a test series in IND & was generally on top of the home side. Since IND have become a force, Pace wins in IND. WI in the 80s, SA in 99, AUS in 04. PAK 87 & AUS 69 sort of defies this rule due to different circumstances.

So going back to 04, its not Dravid & Laxman didn't fire. AUS pace trio worked them out technically. Which made Warne's work MUCH easier because the pacers continously went through the top order which is key.

 

[Ikki]

On Warne, he wasn't injured in 1998. He was had just come off running through SA. Tendy did dominate Warne in that series.

IIRC he did. Warne then had a shoulder reconstruction in 1998. To quote Richie Benaud: "they opened him up and found his shoulder being held together by a string".

 

[Sanz]

I have some time to kill, Moderators/Admins May I join this party ?

 

[aussie]

Meaty in the middle

May, Hammond & Compton for me. Would have preferred them to have given 4 middle-order options though.

 

[subshakerz]

Big men, big deeds | All-time XIs | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

Botham, obviously. But it would be interesting to see who would be considered the next best, Greig or Flintoff. Greig had much better stats, but Flintoff seems to have an x-factor that can't be quantified in numbers.

 

[aussie]

I didn't vote. Since i dont agree with batting Botham @ 6.