Is Tendulkar a choker

[deb]

Why compare Dravid and Tendulkar?

It is true that Tendulkar failed under pressure many times, but that's why pressures are created. It is natural for any batsman to perform better under easier circumstances, isn't it? I don't think comparing Dravid and Tendulkar helps because they are different kind of players. In spite of being a whole hearted Tendulkar fan from childhood, I have no problem in accepting that Dravid has a better defence (the best I have seen from anybody) and Tendulkar does have some technical faults. He gets trapped by inswingers early in his innings, and he also gets out facing suddenly rising balls (Olonga in Sharjah, Gillespie in Chennai, Shoib in Centurian and Rawalpindi and many more). Also, Dravid has improved only recently (last 2/3 years), so we should wait until he keeps his consistency for a little longer, like Tendulkar.
But Dravid is performing India's best at the moment. Tendulkar is not doing particularly bad, it is just that Dravid is doing really good.

Tendulkar has played well under pressure a lot of times, a few times his team won, but many times lost just because there was nobody to support him. If you want, I can produce a list, but let's not be too long in my first posting.
However, it is true that Steve Waugh was better than him under pressure (by his utmost determination). But, you should not forget that Steve always got support from somebody else, and more than anything else, was always backed up by an excellent bowling line up. Steve knew, if he could put up anything reasonable on the board, bowlers would do the rest. Tendulkar never had this advantage. OK, this much for now.

 

[masterblaster]

Its your opinion tooextracool, but im so surprised that an Indian can be so Anti-Tendulkar.

I respect the man more than anybody in world cricket. Nobody has worked harder than Tendulkar has from such a young age. Its hard to play and succeed at International Cricket let alone from 16 years of age. He will be the only 16 year old debutant who finished up as an all time great.

He has provided immense joy and pride to over a billion Indians every time he has succeeded. Out of his 66+ international 100's many have been in pressure situations.

I doubt that you have seen all of his 66+ 100's tooextracool, and I doubt you have been following his career sinc 1989 like many have been.

What Sachin Tendulkar has done for Indian Cricket is utterly, utterly PRICELESS. He has worked so hard, and paid his dues for his country, and his team. Everything he has done whether its with the bat, ball or in the field he has done with great passion and great commitment and great intensity.

Tendulkar is an inspiration to me, because he lives by "Intensity, Integrity and Intelligence". He has always been humble in everything he does, and despite being such a megastar he has always been willing to talk to me everytime ive met the guy

He has not just been gifted the love and respect of the nation, he has earned it with over 14 years of hard work and sheer, sheer brilliance and consistency. I feel you are much too harsh on Tendulkar. Tendulkar has won games for India, many times.

Im not going to waste my time and bring up pointless statistics, but I have seen Tendulkar win matches for India many, many times. Im not going to waste my time and counter argue all your arguements either.

Its dissapointing to see a lay person as yourself criticise one of the most hard working and god gifted players of our generation. Im not sure about you, but I will always feel lucky to have been brought up and witnessed over 85% of Sachin Tendulkar's magnificent career.

Im lucky to have seen such a master at work.

 

[Sanz]

note the use of the words "generally" and "not all wickets"

Are you saying that in this case the pitch was breaking on the 1st day itself .

 

[Adamc]

Its your opinion tooextracool, but im so surprised that an Indian can be so Anti-Tendulkar.

Might be wrong, but I think TEC is an Englishman living in India.

 

[Sanz]

Here is another example of how Sachin is compared :-

1. Steve Waugh is better than Tendulkar in Pressure Situation
2. Brain Lara is a better batsman than Tendulkar when in full flow
3. Dravid has better defence than Tendulkar.
4. Ponting is better than Sachin on Fast Tracks

So basically you take are comparing 4 strong points of 4 different batsmen with One batsman Sachin. Despite all that None of them are as consistent as Sachin, Sachin holds more batting records than all the four combined and by the time he Hangs his boot, He will have most Batting records under his belt.

 

[Sanz]

actually hicks performance was on a turning pitch against a good indian spin attack

Okay so the pitch was turning on the first day itself ??
As far as the Good Indian Spin Attack goes, Anil Kumble, Raju and Chauhan were hardly good spinners

Needless to say that Vinod Kambli hammered a double century after that.

 

[aussie_beater]

not much on a flat wicket. there was movement with the new ball in the 1st session and i clearly remember hoggard and caddick bowling ridiculously short and wide right from the very first over. no the confidence of the bowler hadnt been shattered...they were just completely out of rhythm from ball one.




yep you were fortunate to witness 2 good batsman giving SA a flat track belting. tendulkar is good enough to score off good bowlers on flat tracks....but definetly not good enough to score on tracks that offer a little bit to the bowlers.

Why are you skirting the question that I asked you. Here's what I wrote -

Answer me one thing..... how many runs need to be scored on an average by the top order batsman and lower order batsman to qualify a pitch as a non-flat pitch by your definition....because it seems that anytime you see runs being scored, it becomes a non-flat pitch. I reckon only minefields of the likes of the surfaces in NZ for the India-NZ series of 2003(that sometimes are called pitches by some nuts) and the likes of the Bangalore surface of the 1987 test between India-Pak and the Madras surface for the match between India-WI in 1988, will qualify as non-flat pitch in your book..... if that's the case, I rest my argument and I would recommend that you start watching something else then cricket.

And why is Multan not a non-flat pitch..... from what I saw of the pitch, it had consistent bounce.....didn't you say a non-flat pitch is where consistent bounce needs to be there ??

 

[tooextracool]

Why are you skirting the question that I asked you. Here's what I wrote -



And why is Multan not a non-flat pitch..... from what I saw of the pitch, it had consistent bounce.....didn't you say a non-flat pitch is where consistent bounce needs to be there ??

nope u've got it all mixed up. i said a flat pitch is one that offers consistent pace and bounce without too much lateral movement. so multan was IMO definetly a flat wicket.
and in response to your question....my definition of a flat wicket is mentioned above. runs dont come into the equation really, but u dont expect teams to score 600/6 declared on a non flat wicket now do you(unless the bowling was absolutely pathetic)

 

[tooextracool]

Here is another example of how Sachin is compared :-

1. Steve Waugh is better than Tendulkar in Pressure Situation
2. Brain Lara is a better batsman than Tendulkar when in full flow
3. Dravid has better defence than Tendulkar.
4. Ponting is better than Sachin on Fast Tracks

if you have inferred this from what i have said then you're obviously mistaken.
ive never made 3 out of those 4 statements.

Sachin holds more batting records than all the four combined and by the time he Hangs his boot, He will have most Batting records under his belt.

perhaps that is because he would have played test cricket for nearly 20 years(assuming that he retires at age 36),which is more than any other batsman in the world.and with the pitches getting flatter and flatter and the bowling getting progressively worse thats nothing to be proud off.

 

[tooextracool]

As far as the Good Indian Spin Attack goes, Anil Kumble, Raju and Chauhan were hardly good spinners

ahh kumble at his peak was rubbish wasnt he?around about the time he took 6-12 against WI too.
chauhan was a decent bowler,id rate him higher than harbhajan.
raju wasnt too bad either.

Needless to say that Vinod Kambli hammered a double century after that.

AMEN to that,the spin attack of john emburey,tufnell and hick definetly sent quivers down the spines of the best batting side against spin bowling.

 

[tooextracool]

Might be wrong, but I think TEC is an Englishman living in India.

well spotted.

 

[a massive zebra]

chauhan was a decent bowler,id rate him higher than harbhajan.

There really can be no comparison between Harbhajan and Chauhan. Harbhajan was good enough to destroy the mighty Australians with his bouncy off-spinners, taking 32 wickets in just 3 matches. Chauhan, on the other hand was so unthreatening that he never took 5 wickets in an innings once and was unable to cause even Zimbabwe problems. Even in First-class cricket Chauhan's strike rate was around 80. Take a look at their respective records:

Harbhajan 1607.5 353 4299 151 28.47 8-84 11 2 63.8 2.67
Chauhan... 791.3 238 1857 47 39.51 4-48 0 0 101.0 2.34

No contest.

 

[maxpower]

well spotted.

well that explains the whining

 

[Sanz]

if you have inferred this from what i have said then you're obviously mistaken.
ive never made 3 out of those 4 statements.

I never said you did.

perhaps that is because he would have played test cricket for nearly 20 years(assuming that he retires at age 36),which is more than any other batsman in the world.and with the pitches getting flatter and flatter and the bowling getting progressively worse thats nothing to be proud off.

Steve Waugh did play more than 18 years and despite being a fine batsman he hardly holds any batting records, so your logic of playing for 20 years being the reason for having most batting records is not correct. Anyways Sachin already has 50% of the Individual ODI batting record in his name and lot of Test batting records as well.

As far as the quality of bowlers is concerned - I guess so far Tendulkar has played in an era of Great Fast Bowlers and Spin Bowlers and has done better than every other batsman. Just to name a few bowlers he played against :-
Ambrose, Walsh, Mcgrath, Akram, Waqar, Saqlain, Warne, Gough, Akhtar, Gillespie, Donald, Pollock, Murali. If you think these bowlers were mediocre than I guess you get your head examined.

Actually Pitches are flat only for Sachin, For every other batsman of his generation pitches become superfast or they are spinning tracks. Bowlers become mediocre only when they bowl to sachin otherwise they are fine.

 

[maxpower]

pathan-is a genuine swing bowler and will get some amount of swing on most and balaji certainly didnt move the ball much in multan. pakistan batter poorly on that wicket to lose. i also notice how u consider wickets to either be completely flat for all 5 days or seaming around for all 5 days. balaji and pathan moved the ball around in the 1st innings against pakistan when the pitch was a seamers paradise really.

no i dont think wickets are same throughout 5 days, but I do expect bowlers to adapt to tracks no matter how they are. It would be hard to argue that Akhtar, Sami has less potential than pathan and balaji, but pathan and balaji played to their potential, while Pak bowlers did not, that is their failure and not the opposing batsmen. So before I discredit all sachin or anyone else's batting, I would make sure if the bowlers did perform well, and as I have found alot of times bowlers will have not performed well or played their potential. Dont blame the tracks.

 

[Sanz]

ahh kumble at his peak was rubbish wasnt he?around about the time he took 6-12 against WI too.
chauhan was a decent bowler,id rate him higher than harbhajan.
raju wasnt too bad either..

Anil was just starting his career, it was his first home series. He was hardly at the peak of his career.

BTW, Anil never took 6/12 again WI in a Test match. It was an ODI game which was almost an year after the England series and most of the batsmen were Tailenders

As for You rating Chauhan being better than Harbhajan, well I am just waiting for you to rate him higher than Shane Warne.

 

[maxpower]

it does but my point is that tendulkar can only play on flat wickets regardless of the bowling on it.

my point is most tracks appear flat because of bad bowling, hardly the tracks fault or even sachin's.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

my point is most tracks appear flat because of bad bowling, hardly the tracks fault or even sachin's.

I'd have to disagree with that. Most tracks in the world today genuinely are flat.

 

[aussie_beater]

nope u've got it all mixed up. i said a flat pitch is one that offers consistent pace and bounce without too much lateral movement. so multan was IMO definetly a flat wicket.
and in response to your question....my definition of a flat wicket is mentioned above. runs dont come into the equation really, but u dont expect teams to score 600/6 declared on a non flat wicket now do you(unless the bowling was absolutely pathetic)

Multan provided consistent pace and bounce without too much lateral movement. Can you dispute that ?

And runs do come into the picture as you said 600/6 won't really cut it, and also it seems everytime you see runs being scored and that too by Indian batsman, you say its all a flat pitch. So then how much runs need to be scored if not 600/6, to qualify it as a non-flat pitch ?

 

[aussie_beater]

chauhan was a decent bowler,id rate him higher than harbhajan.

Now this is bordering on lunacy.....Chauhan better then Harbhajan ?? Are you out of your mind.... have you seen Chauhan bowl ? The flattest stock offie that you can see, is now better then Harbhajan who ranks as one of the better spinners to come around for the Indian team after Kumble ! You need to take a chill pill man..... these debates are really driving you nuts and you are trying to prove your point by resorting to absurdity.