Rank the 10,000 club

[Coronis]

I don't think you'll find a single 'fanboy' or whatever you want to call them (Indian?) on here who would argue vehemently with Lara being rated ahead of Sachin. It's a fair opinion - both great players, it could swing one way or that. Some Indians (many even) pick Lara ahead of Sachin themselves.
It's the BS arguments we're disagreeing with.

On the other hand, the Aussies throw an absolute fit when someone suggests Warne (a player who has SERIOUS holes in his record by the way) might be a tad bit overrated...

Pretty much all great players are overrated, the only differences being who overrates each one and how vocal they are defending them. For instance I’ll happily admit I probably overrate Sutcliffe. Probably underrate Viv too but what are you gonna do?

 

[ankitj]

Yes, other than Lara how many players have had that kind of series? And it's not Tendulkar's fault that one or more of Dravid, Laxman, Sehwag, Ganguly were stepping up. Tendulkar was besting this set of batsmen more than they were besting him. Some credit for that may be? If they all sucked for a decade and more (or if Tendulkar played for Zimbabwe), are we saying Tendulkar world have never had a good series?

Alternatively, how many times did all Indian batsmen go bust in a series to give Tendulkar an opportunity to play a series where he outshines others by a huge margin.

 

[ankitj]

Pretty much all great players are overrated, the only differences being who overrates each one and how vocal they are defending them. For instance I’ll happily admit I probably overrate Sutcliffe. Probably underrate Viv too but what are you gonna do?

Make you post stats in each country against each attack, what else?

 

[stephen]

@stephen Indian batsmen were not lucky to avoid Warne in 03/04, just McGrath.

Sure, McGrath was the bigger loss but Warne would have been better than MacGill, not giving a 4 ball every over. That makes a bigger difference than you might think. Even though Warne deserved his ban it sucked that it denied us that particular match up.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Sure, McGrath was the bigger loss but Warne would have been better than MacGill, not giving a 4 ball every over. That makes a bigger difference than you might think. Even though Warne deserved his ban it sucked that it denied us that particular match up.

Can't really argue with this. MacGill averaged 50 with the ball that series. Even with how bad Warne was against India he probably would have been better than MacGill. I seem to recall MacGill bowling a lot of **** that series too.

 

[Neptune]

Where was Sunil Gavaskar racist? Keep seeing people mentioning it.

 

[Burgey]

Was genuinely surprised to find McGrath only bowled to Tendulkar in 9 tests. Feels like it should have been heaps more for some reason. Suppose he missed the 98 and 03/04 series.

 

[Burgey]

Where was Sunil Gavaskar racist? Keep seeing people mentioning it.

This is a sad matter for all lovers of the game, mate. There's a lot of examples of him being racist, and not a shred of contrition from him about it. An indictment.

 

[Burgey]

Pardus man, I couldn't help taking a look at your posting history. Last time you were in an active debate was DoG's top 100 ranking thread and your comments were again on Tendulkar and your were constantly wanting a fanboy meltdown or complaining about hyper sensitivity of Sachin fans when nothing of that sort was warranted. And I gave you this exact advice then to spend more time here.

If you have a single agenda to push you are not going to contribute meaningfully to what makes this forum great. Sort yourself out.

I feel that this is an unwarranted slur on a newish forum member (in terms of post numbers at least) who has contributed some worthwhile, detailed material in this thread.

 

[Neptune]

This is a sad matter for all lovers of the game, mate. There's a lot of examples of him being racist, and not a shred of contrition from him about it. An indictment.

Found some of his comments on t internet, shocking to be honest. The way he described the West Indian crowd in his book was disgusting and staggeringly racist. A shame.

 

[morgieb]

Was genuinely surprised to find McGrath only bowled to Tendulkar in 9 tests. Feels like it should have been heaps more for some reason. Suppose he missed the 98 and 03/04 series.

Sachin also missed part of the 04 series.

 

[Daemon]

Can't really argue with this. MacGill averaged 50 with the ball that series. Even with how bad Warne was against India he probably would have been better than MacGill. I seem to recall MacGill bowling a lot of **** that series too.

Haha, pretty sure Stephen didn't mean that when he initially said India were lucky Warne didn't play. Far more likely that Stephen just meant India were lucky because Warne would've done well/ok against them.

He's just shifted his argument slightly once he realised the statement was pretty iffy.

It would be a bit odd to say a team is lucky that they didn't get to face a guy they historically dominated just because his replacement was poorer too. I mean it may be technically correct, but a very bizarre thing to say.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No evidence whatsoever that Warne wouldve troubled India to any meaningful degree if he'd played in 03/04, and thats ok ffs. Even many all time great cricketers have a bogey team here and there, its India for Warne. Hardly any shame in that (apart from getting outbowled by Colin Miller)

I feel that this is an unwarranted slur on a newish forum member (in terms of post numbers at least) who has contributed some worthwhile, detailed material in this thread.

You really think indian posters are "ganging up" on him? Aussie sensitivity smh

 

[h_hurricane]

Stephen's point is that Warne would have been better than MacGill in 2003/04. Facts seem to prove the contrary.

MacGill's average against India in 2003/04 series : 50.78
Warne's average against India when Mcgrath didn't play : 69.81 (and this does not include the 1999-2001 period which he brings up stating Warne was injured and in poor form)

 

[OverratedSanity]

This is a sad matter for all lovers of the game, mate. There's a lot of examples of him being racist, and not a shred of contrition from him about it. An indictment.

Poor bloke's 71. Let him be ok.

He strikes me as the kind of guy who'd double down and justify why it somehow wasnt racist if someone confronted him with the quotes.

 

[Daemon]

Poor bloke's 71. Let him be ok.

He strikes me as the kind of guy who'd double down and justify why it somehow wasnt racist if someone confronted him with the quotes.

"Racist?? I'm great friends with Mikey and Bish. I love their culture, their flair and their accent mon."

 

[honestbharani]

3) Ponting would have done well in India in his prime.

This prime is a fictional period that is supposed to happen every time he did not play India, right?

 

[honestbharani]

poorer

That is still debatable, FTR. I, like vcs, think Aus were lucky MacGill played and not Warne, as he was instrumental in getting Aussies pull one back at the MCG. May well have lost the series but for that.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Haha, pretty sure Stephen didn't mean that when he initially said India were lucky Warne didn't play. Far more likely that Stephen just meant India were lucky because Warne would've done well/ok against them.

He's just shifted his argument slightly once he realised the statement was pretty iffy.

It would be a bit odd to say a team is lucky that they didn't get to face a guy they historically dominated just because his replacement was poorer too. I mean it may be technically correct, but a very bizarre thing to say.

Beyond my scope to try and guess what he meant. I just play each post on it's merits. Play the post not the poster, nomsayin?

This prime is a fictional period that is supposed to happen every time he did not play India, right?

Don't be dense man. I'm not going through it again.

 

[h_hurricane]

Surely how rest of the Indian team wilted against these pacemen also had an impact on Tendulkar's scores against them (and the only time Tendulkar averaged 50+ against McGrath, VVS Laxman & Dravid had a fabulous series).

This is where you are wrong. In the first test in Mumbai when Dravid and Laxman failed, Tendulkar scored 141 runs.
In the second test in Kolkata when Dravid and Laxman played really well, Tendulkar failed. VVS and Dravid having a fabulous series had no impact on Tendulkar's performance. They were mutually exclusive.