lara vs tendulkar

[tooextracool]

When there is little to seperate a batsman avrage wise strike rate is worth considering. Having said that Dravid plays a role Ponting cant that being of being a "Wall" and thats probably just as importaint to India as Pontings more aggressive aproch is to Australia.

your system of comparing near inseparable players is ludicrous. strike rate ??good god. two good players should be assessed on the basis of performances: under pressure,home/away and against stiffer opposition.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

nope a dependable player is one that plays well consistently when the team needs him to. players who score 100s when the team declares at 600 is not what id call a dependable player unless he scores those centuries under pressure too. steve waughs averages definetly lies, because 7/10 times he scored when his team was 50/4 and 7/10 times he failed when his team was 300/3.

Are you saying that Lara is one of those players who doesn't score under pressure? You are clearly mistaken if that's your suggestion.

 

[tooextracool]

Are you saying that Lara is one of those players who doesn't score under pressure? You are clearly mistaken if that's your suggestion.

where did u get that from? my point is that averages lie in steve waugh's case and also in tendulkar's case becuase they arent really a true reflection of their abilities.how do u always manage to bring in a West indian into the discussion, are you tony cozier?

 

[deb]

wait a bit, let ponting face a litte tough bowling. his most big scores have come against a very bad bowling line up of india. ponting is excellent, but he probably is not as good as Lara, Dravid or Tendulkar, or should prove himself more. even dravid is consistent only for last two seasons.

 

[deb]

the only reason why i dont rate steve waugh as an "excellent" captain is because he lost twice to india in india despite having the best team in the world(dont forget their loss in SL too). yea india played well etc but for fleming to captain an average side and yet avert a loss in india is remarkable and just goes to show what an excellent captain can do.the recent series against india at home also delineated that he had no gameplan whatsoever.orthodox fields were set and bowlers didnt know what they were supposed to bowl to whom.
that being said i rate him as a good captain with a "never say die" spirit which he instilled in every one of his players and thats why we've seen australia battle out from so many of those seemingly impossible situations.but but i wouldnt go as far as calling him an "intelligent"captain because he wasnt innovative.
regarding hanse cronje and pollock.....cronje was a brilliant captain and he managed to lead his side to victories all over the world except australia(yes even india). he or rather his team had a mental block against australia and they couldnt overcome it.yet to lead a relatively new side and make them the 2nd best team of the world is remarkable.pollock...well he just wasnt that good was he?(aka duckworth lewis ).

yes, you have a point here. probably u are right. determination and spirit is not all about captaincy, good gameplan and thinking is also something. when australia won matches under steve waugh, he didn't have to do much as a captain, all he did was playing under pressure and so did his teammates.

 

[deeps]

wait a bit, let ponting face a litte tough bowling. his most big scores have come against a very bad bowling line up of india. ponting is excellent, but he probably is not as good as Lara, Dravid or Tendulkar, or should prove himself more. even dravid is consistent only for last two seasons.

precisesly... this is a golden era for batting... what happened to great bowlers, of the early 90's... ambrose, walsh, donald, waqar,wasim, mcdermott, hughes, gough and caddick??? when they were all in their primes, they were HEAPS btter than the pathetic excuse for bowlers out ther rolling their arms over nowadays... ther's only a few geniuine good bowlers out there... the rest just do a decnet job...

Waugh and lara and tendulkar are IMO the best batsman in the last 15 years.... Ponting, Kallis, Hayden and Dravid have not been tested enough against QUALITY bowling... These batsman have been lucky not to face any superb quality bowling, and are reaping the rewards... I wonder how their averages would be had the above mentioned bowlers been bowling to them at their primeS?i very much doubt that ponting, Hayden and Kallis would be anywhere near as good.. the only one i believe that would still perform well is Dravid...

1) Waugh
2) Lara
3) Tendulkar
Large Gap
4) Dravid
Smaller Gap
5) Ponting
6) Kallis
7) Hayden
etc

is my rating for the last 15 years.... waugh has scored when the situation demands him...lara has risen to the occasion many times as well...tendulkar...well, he's done it a few times, but he tends to choke under pressure..but still a cut above the rest

 

[Eclipse]

wait a bit, let ponting face a litte tough bowling. his most big scores have come against a very bad bowling line up of india. ponting is excellent, but he probably is not as good as Lara, Dravid or Tendulkar, or should prove himself more. even dravid is consistent only for last two seasons.

You have a point but of all the current top batsman I belive Ponting has the best avrage against Pakistan who over the years have had one of the best bowling attacks going around.

obviously of late it's not been so great but Ponting has been in International cricket for 9 years now people seem to forget how long he has been around because he is still ralitivly young.

He has previously been suspect to quality spin bowling and is still not that fantastic against good spin but he has always been a great player of pace bowling Wasim Akram even said he was one of best player of pace he had ever seen BIG WRAP coming from the best LF bowler ever.

 

[deeps]

obviously of late it's not been so great but Ponting has been in International cricket for 9 years now people seem to forget how long he has been around because he is still ralitivly young.

he's been around for 9 years , but is only becoming great NOW! for the first 6or7 years, he was good...but not brilliant...

NOW = when there are no good bowlers left

 

[Eclipse]

he's been around for 9 years , but is only becoming great NOW! for the first 6or7 years, he was good...but not brilliant...

NOW = when there are no good bowlers left

Yeah true but he was good against Pakistan even before some of there great bowlers retired. He did make 3 ducks ina row against them once thats about the only time's he has faild.

His ODI avrage is also extreamly good against them and most of that was accomplished when the Pakistan attack was very good.

 

[V Reddy]

precisesly... this is a golden era for batting... what happened to great bowlers, of the early 90's... ambrose, walsh, donald, waqar,wasim, mcdermott, hughes, gough and caddick??? when they were all in their primes, they were HEAPS btter than the pathetic excuse for bowlers out ther rolling their arms over nowadays... ther's only a few geniuine good bowlers out there... the rest just do a decnet job...

Waugh and lara and tendulkar are IMO the best batsman in the last 15 years.... Ponting, Kallis, Hayden and Dravid have not been tested enough against QUALITY bowling... These batsman have been lucky not to face any superb quality bowling, and are reaping the rewards... I wonder how their averages would be had the above mentioned bowlers been bowling to them at their primeS?i very much doubt that ponting, Hayden and Kallis would be anywhere near as good.. the only one i believe that would still perform well is Dravid...

1) Waugh
2) Lara
3) Tendulkar
Large Gap
4) Dravid
Smaller Gap
5) Ponting
6) Kallis
7) Hayden
etc

is my rating for the last 15 years.... waugh has scored when the situation demands him...lara has risen to the occasion many times as well...tendulkar...well, he's done it a few times, but he tends to choke under pressure..but still a cut above the rest

Erm.. Dravid avg never dipped below 50 throughout his career . He started playing for India in 96 and there were very good bowling attacks even then with Donald, Pollock( at his peak) , Devilliers, Walsh, Ambrose, Bishop, McGrath,Warne, Wasim, Waqar,etc,. The thing is he is now scoring big centuries while then it was almost a formality for him to score 50's but never posted big scores

 

[Eclipse]

Erm.. Dravid avg never dipped below 50 throughout his career . He started playing for India in 96 and there were very good bowling attacks even then with Donald, Pollock( at his peak) , Devilliers, Walsh, Ambrose, Bishop, McGrath,Warne, Wasim, Waqar,etc,. The thing is he is now scoring big centuries while then it was almost a formality for him to score 50's but never posted big scores

I am fairly sure it droped below 50 after his first tour of Austraia.

 

[V Reddy]

I am fairly sure it droped below 50 after his first tour of Austraia.

Well it dipped to around 49.5

 

[Sehwag309]

On a lighter note

 

[Sehwag309]

A comparison of the 5 major Indian batsmen

 

[marc71178]

You have a point but of all the current top batsman I belive Ponting has the best avrage against Pakistan who over the years have had one of the best bowling attacks going around.

Yes, 5 years ago they did, but look at the attacks he's faced - the W's when they were on the decline and aside from that, not really any great bowlers.

 

[marc71178]

Yeah true but he was good against Pakistan even before some of there great bowlers retired. He did make 3 ducks ina row against them once thats about the only time's he has faild.

He's only played 7 matches and about 10 innings. And although Waqar and Wasim hadn't retired, it is crazy to think they were anywhere near as good as at their best.

His ODI avrage is also extreamly good against them and most of that was accomplished when the Pakistan attack was very good.

Oh yes the attack where Aamir Sohail bowled a full 10 overs and Saleem Malik 7 was a wonderfulyy strong one (!)

 

[Eclipse]

Yes, 5 years ago they did, but look at the attacks he's faced - the W's when they were on the decline and aside from that, not really any great bowlers.

Do you think I am dumb?

look I really dont need you to tell me that he has had an easy ride in the last few years like all batsman have I was just trying to point out on the occasions and there have been a few were he has faced quality bowling he has done well.

 

[marc71178]

Do you think I am dumb?

look I really dont need you to tell me that he has had an easy ride in the last few years like all batsman have I was just trying to point out on the occasions and there have been a few were he has faced quality bowling he has done well.

So how come almost all his big scores have come recently when the attack has been a lot weaker then?

Looking at the bowling attacks in the 7 games, none of them leap out at me as outstanding attacks, but then again since he scored runs against them, you go ahead and talk them up since it helps you put him alongside the likes of the 2 great players of the last 10 years (neither of which are Australian)

 

[Eclipse]

So how come almost all his big scores have come recently when the attack has been a lot weaker then?

Looking at the bowling attacks in the 7 games, none of them leap out at me as outstanding attacks, but then again since he scored runs against them, you go ahead and talk them up since it helps you put him alongside the likes of the 2 great players of the last 10 years (neither of which are Australian)

Whats the fact he is an Australian got anything to do with it?

Obvoisly there attacks are not that great compaired to maybe five years before that but apart from Australia's it was probably the next best going around maybe throw in South Africa witch Ponting also has a good record against.

 

[hellnback]

Dravid:

Mat I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 0 R I Match

1 1 0 95 95 95.00 0 1 0 95 2 2nd Test v Eng 1996 [1328]
2 2 0 179 95 89.50 0 2 0 84 1 3rd Test v Eng 1996 [1329]
2 3 0 187 95 62.33 0 2 0 8 3
3 4 0 227 95 56.75 0 2 0 40 2 Only Test v Aus 1996/97 [1335]
3 4 0 227 95 56.75 0 2 0 - 4
4 5 0 251 95 50.20 0 2 0 24 1 1st Test v SA 1996/97 [1338]
4 6 0 285 95 47.50 0 2 0 34 3
5 7 0 316 95 45.14 0 2 0 31 2 2nd Test v SA 1996/97 [1341]
5 8 0 339 95 42.37 0 2 0 23 4
6 9 0 346 95 38.44 0 2 0 7 1 3rd Test v SA 1996/97 [1344]
6 10 0 402 95 40.20 0 3 0 56 3
7 11 0 409 95 37.18 0 3 0 7 2 1st Test v SA 1996/97 [1347]
7 12 1 436 95 39.63 0 3 0 27* 4
8 13 1 438 95 36.50 0 3 0 2 2 2nd Test v SA 1996/97 [1349]
8 14 1 450 95 34.61 0 3 0 12 4
9 15 1 598 148 42.71 1 3 0 148 1 3rd Test v SA 1996/97 [1350]
9 16 1 679 148 45.26 1 4 0 81 3
10 17 1 722 148 45.12 1 4 0 43 2 1st Test v WI 1996/97 [1357]
10 18 2 773 148 48.31 1 5 0 51* 4
11 19 2 830 148 48.82 1 6 0 57 2 2nd Test v WI 1996/97 [1361]
12 20 2 908 148 50.44 1 7 0 78 2 3rd Test v WI 1996/97 [1363]
12 21 2 910 148 47.89 1 7 0 2 4
13 22 3 947 148 49.84 1 7 0 37* 2 4th Test v WI 1996/97 [1364]
14 23 3 1039 148 51.95 1 8 0 92 1 5th Test v WI 1996/97 [1365]
15 24 3 1108 148 52.76 1 9 0 69 1 1st Test v SL 1997 [1374]
16 25 3 1110 148 50.45 1 9 0 2 2 2nd Test v SL 1997 [1376]
16 26 3 1116 148 48.52 1 9 0 6 4
17 27 3 1150 148 47.91 1 9 0 34 2 1st Test v SL 1997/98 [1385]
18 28 3 1242 148 49.68 1 10 0 92 1 2nd Test v SL 1997/98 [1387]
19 29 3 1335 148 51.34 1 11 0 93 1 3rd Test v SL 1997/98 [1390]
19 30 3 1420 148 52.59 1 12 0 85 3
20 31 3 1472 148 52.57 1 13 0 52 1 1st Test v Aus 1997/98 [1405]
20 32 3 1528 148 52.68 1 14 0 56 3
21 33 3 1614 148 53.80 1 15 0 86 2 2nd Test v Aus 1997/98 [1409]
22 34 3 1637 148 52.80 1 15 0 23 1 3rd Test v Aus 1997/98 [1413]
22 35 3 1643 148 51.34 1 15 0 6 3
23 36 3 1761 148 53.36 2 15 0 118 2 Only Test v Zim 1998/99 [1425]
23 37 3 1805 148 53.08 2 15 0 44 4
24 38 3 1805 148 51.57 2 15 1 0 1 2nd Test v NZ 1998/99 [1435]
24 39 3 1833 148 50.91 2 15 1 28 3
25 40 3 2023 190 54.67 3 15 1 190 2 3rd Test v NZ 1998/99 [1438]
25 41 4 2126 190 57.45 4 15 1 103* 4
26 42 4 2179 190 57.34 4 16 1 53 2 1st Test v Pak 1998/99 [1442]
26 43 4 2189 190 56.12 4 16 1 10 4
27 44 4 2222 190 55.55 4 16 1 33 1 2nd Test v Pak 1998/99 [1443]
27 45 4 2251 190 54.90 4 16 1 29 3
28 46 4 2275 190 54.16 4 16 1 24 2 1st Match v Pak 1998/99 [1444]
28 47 4 2288 190 53.20 4 16 1 13 4
29 48 4 2395 190 54.43 5 16 1 107 1 2nd Match v SL 1998/99 [1445]
29 48 4 2395 190 54.43 5 16 1 - 3
30 49 4 2396 190 53.24 5 16 1 1 1 1st Test v NZ 1999/00 [1462]
30 50 4 2540 190 55.21 6 16 1 144 3
31 51 4 2588 190 55.06 6 16 1 48 2 2nd Test v NZ 1999/00 [1464]
31 52 4 2589 190 53.93 6 16 1 1 4
32 53 4 2622 190 53.51 6 16 1 33 1 3rd Test v NZ 1999/00 [1465]
32 54 4 2634 190 52.68 6 16 1 12 3
33 55 4 2669 190 52.33 6 16 1 35 2 1st Test v Aus 1999/00 [1476]
33 56 4 2675 190 51.44 6 16 1 6 4
34 57 4 2684 190 50.64 6 16 1 9 2 2nd Test v Aus 1999/00 [1479]
34 58 4 2698 190 49.96 6 16 1 14 4
35 59 4 2727 190 49.58 6 16 1 29 1 3rd Test v Aus 1999/00 [1481]
35 60 4 2727 190 48.69 6 16 2 0 3
36 61 4 2749 190 48.22 6 16 2 22 1 1st Test v SA 1999/00 [1484]
36 62 4 2786 190 48.03 6 16 2 37 3
37 63 4 2803 190 47.50 6 16 2 17 1 2nd Test v SA 1999/00 [1486]
37 64 4 2821 190 47.01 6 16 2 18 3
38 65 4 2849 190 46.70 6 16 2 28 2 Only Test v BD 2000/01 [1512]
38 66 5 2890 190 47.37 6 16 2 41* 4
39 67 6 3090 200* 50.65 7 16 2 200* 2 1st Test v Zim 2000/01 [1515]
39 68 7 3160 200* 51.80 7 17 2 70* 4
40 69 7 3322 200* 53.58 8 17 2 162 1 2nd Test v Zim 2000/01 [1517]
41 70 7 3331 200* 52.87 8 17 2 9 1 1st Test v Aus 2000/01 [1531]
41 71 7 3370 200* 52.65 8 17 2 39 3
42 72 7 3395 200* 52.23 8 17 2 25 2 2nd Test v Aus 2000/01 [1535]
42 73 7 3575 200* 54.16 9 17 2 180 3
43 74 7 3656 200* 54.56 9 18 2 81 2 3rd Test v Aus 2000/01 [1539]
43 75 7 3660 200* 53.82 9 18 2 4 4
44 76 7 3704 200* 53.68 9 18 2 44 2 1st Test v Zim 2001 [1548]
44 76 7 3704 200* 53.68 9 18 2 - 4
45 77 8 3772 200* 54.66 9 19 2 68* 1 2nd Test v Zim 2001 [1549]
45 78 8 3798 200* 54.25 9 19 2 26 3
46 79 8 3810 200* 53.66 9 19 2 12 1 1st Test v SL 2001 [1555]
46 80 9 3871 200* 54.52 9 20 2 61* 3
47 81 9 3886 200* 53.97 9 20 2 15 2 2nd Test v SL 2001 [1557]
47 82 9 3961 200* 54.26 9 21 2 75 4
48 83 9 3997 200* 54.01 9 21 2 36 1 3rd Test v SL 2001 [1559]
48 84 9 4033 200* 53.77 9 21 2 36 3
49 85 9 4035 200* 53.09 9 21 2 2 1 1st Test v SA 2001/02 [1564]
49 86 9 4046 200* 52.54 9 21 2 11 3
50 87 9 4048 200* 51.89 9 21 2 2 2 2nd Test v SA 2001/02 [1569]
50 88 9 4135 200* 52.34 9 22 2 87 4
51 89 9 4221 200* 52.76 9 23 2 86 2 1st Test v Eng 2001/02 [1574]
51 89 9 4221 200* 52.76 9 23 2 - 4
52 90 9 4228 200* 52.19 9 23 2 7 2 2nd Test v Eng 2001/02 [1575]
52 91 10 4254 200* 52.51 9 23 2 26* 4
53 92 10 4257 200* 51.91 9 23 2 3 2 3rd Test v Eng 2001/02 [1578]
54 93 10 4322 200* 52.07 9 24 2 65 2 1st Test v Zim 2001/02 [1589]
55 94 10 4323 200* 51.46 9 24 2 1 2 2nd Test v Zim 2001/02 [1591]
55 95 10 4329 200* 50.92 9 24 2 6 4
56 96 11 4473 200* 52.62 10 24 2 144* 2 1st Test v WI 2001/02 [1598]
57 97 11 4540 200* 52.79 10 25 2 67 1 2nd Test v WI 2001/02 [1599]
57 98 11 4576 200* 52.59 10 25 2 36 3
58 99 11 4593 200* 52.19 10 25 2 17 1 3rd Test v WI 2001/02 [1601]
58 100 11 4607 200* 51.76 10 25 2 14 3
59 101 11 4698 200* 52.20 10 26 2 91 1 4th Test v WI 2001/02 [1602]
60 102 11 4703 200* 51.68 10 26 2 5 2 5th Test v WI 2001/02 [1604]
60 103 11 4733 200* 51.44 10 26 2 30 4
61 104 11 4779 200* 51.38 10 26 2 46 2 1st Test v Eng 2002 [1610]
61 105 11 4842 200* 51.51 10 27 2 63 4
62 106 11 4855 200* 51.10 10 27 2 13 1 2nd Test v Eng 2002 [1612]
62 107 11 4970 200* 51.77 11 27 2 115 3
63 108 11 5118 200* 52.76 12 27 2 148 1 3rd Test v Eng 2002 [1613]
64 109 11 5335 217 54.43 13 27 2 217 2 4th Test v Eng 2002 [1614]
65 110 12 5435 217 55.45 14 27 2 100* 1 1st Test v WI 2002/03 [1616]
66 111 12 5446 217 55.01 14 27 2 11 2 2nd Test v WI 2002/03 [1618]
66 112 13 5452 217 55.07 14 27 2 6* 4
67 113 13 5466 217 54.66 14 27 2 14 1 3rd Test v WI 2002/03 [1622]
67 114 13 5483 217 54.28 14 27 2 17 3
68 115 13 5559 217 54.50 14 28 2 76 1 1st Test v NZ 2002/03 [1631]
68 116 13 5566 217 54.03 14 28 2 7 3
69 117 13 5575 217 53.60 14 28 2 9 1 2nd Test v NZ 2002/03 [1633]
69 118 13 5614 217 53.46 14 28 2 39 3
70 119 13 5836 222 55.05 15 28 2 222 1 1st Test v NZ 2003/04 [1660]
70 120 13 5909 222 55.22 15 29 2 73 3
71 121 13 5922 222 54.83 15 29 2 13 2 2nd Test v NZ 2003/04 [1662]
71 122 13 5927 222 54.37 15 29 2 5 3
72 123 13 5928 222 53.89 15 29 2 1 2 1st Test v Aus 2003/04 [1671]
72 124 14 5971 222 54.28 15 29 2 43* 4
73 125 14 6204 233 55.89 16 29 2 233 2 2nd Test v Aus 2003/04 [1673]
73 126 15 6276 233 56.54 16 30 2 72* 4
74 127 15 6325 233 56.47 16 30 2 49 1 3rd Test v Aus 2003/04 [1678]
74 128 15 6417 233 56.78 16 31 2 92 3
75 129 15 6455 233 56.62 16 31 2 38 1 4th Test v Aus 2003/04 [1680]
75 130 16 6546 233 57.42 16 32 2 91* 3
76 131 16 6552 233 56.97 16 32 2 6 1 1st Test v Pak 2003/04 [1693]
77 132 16 6585 233 56.76 16 32 2 33 1 2nd Test v Pak 2003/04 [1695]
77 133 16 6585 233 56.28 16 32 3 0 3
78 134 16 6855 270 58.09 17 32 3 270 2 3rd Test v Pak 2003/04 [1697]

~~~~~~~~~~

*Sarcasm* Yeah I only count one 'dip' below 50 also */Sarcasm*

Check facts before you spout them.