Tendulkar becomes ODI top scorer!!!

[honestbharani]

It's seriously crap satire, but the reaction from Tendulkar's disciples makes it worth it IMO.

satires are supposed to be funny.. I could not laugh at any of them there... How the hell is that satire? He gives a good name to Sunny writing "I will fall at his feet and get his blessings" tbh....

 

[Sir Alex]

satires are supposed to be funny.. I could not laugh at any of them there... How the hell is that satire? He gives a good name to Sunny writing "I will fall at his feet and get his blessings" tbh....

It is just to rile up Tendulkar fans. A massive troll sponsored by Wisden. Disgusting.

 

[biased indian]

It is just to rile up Tendulkar fans. A massive troll sponsored by Wisden. Disgusting.

come on man just have a look at his other articles you will get the picture

 

[Ikki]

Bradman must have been a pretty good batsman to play on with shoelaces untied

Haha...where is the bow/pray smiley when you need it. Awesome comeback.

 

[Hurricane]

Congrats Sachin. I am glad that he acheived a major record. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving cricketer.

 

[Zinzan]

Agree it's deserved, especially if you consider this previous effort 3rd ODI: New Zealand v India at Christchurch, Mar 8, 2009 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

 

[Richard]

Try telling that to the posters here who think Stats guru is everything..


I really find it funny people would find it strange that cricket doesn't rely on stats alone as the be all and end all... It is pretty bleeding obvious why it is the case and honestly, playing the game at any reasonable level would show you why it is so...

Even so, I think the extent to which some posters rely on statistical input is in turn exaggerated by people like you who have relative disdain for it. The number of posters on CW who "think StatsGuru is everything" are minimal, and mostly aren't worth bothering with. All of the best posters rely on a combination of qualitative and quantitative data.

In fact most realise that the quantitative data is near-useless without the qualitative data.

 

[Uppercut]

It is just to rile up Tendulkar fans. A massive troll sponsored by Wisden. Disgusting.

 

[Richard]

Haha...where is the bow/pray smiley when you need it.

Here.

 

[Pratters]

I will pay anything, even go to the theatre, to watch the innings 100 times. I have already reserved a CD to watch it any time I want.
Virender Sehwag is ready to stake everything for a replay of Sachin Tendulkar's epochal double ton

I missed most of the inning and haven't found ball by ball yet and ball by ball is the only version I want to watch.

 

[Jono]

That highlights package you sent through though Pratters was awesome. 23 minutes of Tendulkar smacking the ball all over the park

The best bit was when Sachin was on 199 and the score is 367 and then when he scores his 200th run the score is suddenly 392. And you just know Dhoni went nuts in the 10 balls in between, but you don't see it.

 

[honestbharani]

Even so, I think the extent to which some posters rely on statistical input is in turn exaggerated by people like you who have relative disdain for it. The number of posters on CW who "think StatsGuru is everything" are minimal, and mostly aren't worth bothering with. All of the best posters rely on a combination of qualitative and quantitative data.

In fact most realise that the quantitative data is near-useless without the qualitative data.

yes I do... and then I hear gems like "but he only scored in draws!!!"..

 

[Pratters]

That highlights package you sent through though Pratters was awesome. 23 minutes of Tendulkar smacking the ball all over the park

The best bit was when Sachin was on 199 and the score is 367 and then when he scores his 200th run the score is suddenly 392. And you just know Dhoni went nuts in the 10 balls in between, but you don't see it.

They are broadcasting his inning on PPV on local DTH if my cousin is to be believed. Will check it out once I go to Calcutta.

 

[SJS]

Even so, I think the extent to which some posters rely on statistical input is in turn exaggerated by people like you who have relative disdain for it. The number of posters on CW who "think StatsGuru is everything" are minimal, and mostly aren't worth bothering with. All of the best posters rely on a combination of qualitative and quantitative data.

In fact most realise that the quantitative data is near-useless without the qualitative data.

Thats an interesting point. Actually most posters use stats really well on CW when they initially make a point or write a new post. Its when people start getting into arguments that stats are really made the only point of the discussion and then they are really abused.

Stats can be very useful tool to convey one's point of view but they cant be THE point of view or be used selectively to buttress the argument one finds oneself in.

 

[honestbharani]

Thats an interesting point. Actually most posters use stats really well on CW when they initially make a point or write a new post. Its when people start getting into arguments that stats are really made the only point of the discussion and then they are really abused.

Stats can be very useful tool to convey one's point of view but they cant be THE point of view or be used selectively to buttress the argument one finds oneself in.

It is what I mean.. If you need to show why Tendulkar is a better batsman than a Mark Waugh, stats are a great tool... It works even more at a very basic level, like comparing a Cameroon White to a Sachin Tendulkar.. It is only when you start thinking it is the ONLY thing that can prove Lara was not a great, or that Tendulkar is over rated or that Ponting doesn't belong in the "great" category that it starts becoming tedious. And it just becomes unadulterated crap most of the time in the Vs threads between two equally good players.