Sachin - The Underperformer - Kapil Dev

[Uppercut]

coz you seemed to be talking as if it was a draw all along.. No, it wasn't till an hour or so after he dropped that sitter.. Till then it was heading straight for a result.

Really, is that how I was talking, because I hadn't actually mentioned that innings until my last post.

I don't know what you think you're arguing against. I say something like, "I don't really consider the ability to cash in massively in a drawn game too heavily when judging a batsman's ability" and you read, "Lara's 400 was no good, the game was destined for a boredraw from the toss, the going was easy, Lara's overrated and actually pretty crap. Oh and by the way, I definitely didn't watch that game, nor have I ever spoken to anyone who has."

 

[honestbharani]

Really, is that how I was talking, because I hadn't actually mentioned that innings until my last post.

I don't know what you think you're arguing against. I say something like, "I don't really consider the ability to cash in massively in a drawn game too heavily when judging a batsman's ability" and you read, "Lara's 400 was no good, the game was destined for a boredraw from the toss, the going was easy, Lara's overrated and actually pretty crap. Oh and by the way, I definitely didn't watch that game, nor have I ever spoken to anyone who has."

cashing in on a drawn game.. How the hell does a batsman know it is drawn when he is still out there batting in the game?


It might make sense if he was making cheap 4th innings hundreds, but no he doesn't really have any of those... And in most if not all matches he made big scores, esp. after 2000, he got litle to no support. I know it coz I ve seen every single innings of his and that is where your point falls flat on its face. Again, you have not the first idea of what you are talking about because no batsman can EVER cash in on a drawn game unless it is all rain affected or something and we are still in the 2nd or 3rd dig on the last day...

 

[Pratters]

I strongly agree with honestbharani in this debate. He played good innings in games won for his country. He scored well on flatter pitches but I would hardly call him some one who purely cashed in on drawn games. He was a match winner, if ever there was one.

 

[Uppercut]

There is no debate! He's arguing with a straw man.

 

[Black_Warrior]

But there are so many things which Sachin has done and Lara hasn't. There are a number of areas where Sachin scores over Lara just like there are number of areas wherre Lara scores over Sachin. That is why it is literally dead heat beween them as test batsmen and it just boils down to personal preference. You can check out my comments in any of the Lara V Tendulkar debates we have had.

True that..I have always maintained that you cannot possibly assert who is the better player by citing cricketing reasons at least at the Test level. Both score over the other in certain aspects and it boils down to personal preference. I personally rate Tendulkar higher only because of his superior consistency which even Lara has admitted. But I have no problems if people rate Lara higher because he gets 400 and Sachin doesnt.

 

[honestbharani]

There is no debate! He's arguing with a straw man.

being modest much? You said ""I don't really consider the ability to cash in massively in a drawn game too heavily when judging a batsman's ability" in a straight reply reg. a Sachin V Lara post and even mentioned Lara's name in the post and if I take offence to the fact that your point was completely false in every conceivable way, I am arguing with "straws"????


Try facts and understanding them once in a while mate... They are good stuff.

 

[James]

Uppercut/honestbharani - if you can't discuss the topic pleasantly, don't discuss with it with each other at all.

If you keep this going, be warned that it will properly result in a banning.

 

[Richard]

You know..I really think you overrate Younis a lot

Why?

Personally I just think many people overrate Kallis (as a batsman) quite a bit, along with several others whose careers took a near-identical pattern to his.

 

[Black_Warrior]

well for starters, I remember you rated Younis better than Mohammad Yousuf because Yousuf scored most of his runs on flat decks and actually fails when the opposition or the conditions is a bit tough. I agree with that assessment, but its not like Younis excels in such conditions.
He has no century in either Australia or South Africa
He has scored runs under the same conditions that Mohammad Yousuf has, that is flat subcontinent wickets
He managed to score a century in England in 06 but so did Yousuf, he managed a double.
So how is Younis even better than Yousuf?
If Yousuf is just a decent batsman then so is Younis, no better.
Kallis>Jayawardene>Younis IMO

 

[honestbharani]

Uppercut/honestbharani - if you can't discuss the topic pleasantly, don't discuss with it with each other at all.

If you keep this going, be warned that it will properly result in a banning.

I am sorry that things got out of hand and I do apologize for the fact that I contributed to it. It should not have got this personal. Apologies to UC. I only meant to criticize his point but ended up doing it wrong.


But UC saying Lara is someone who scored when the going was easy and that he "cashed in on drawn games", is, for me, up there with Richard suggesting that Bond did not play a key role in NZ's win over WI in the other thread. And I called him on it. That is the end of that. Sorry again.