tendulkar not a match winner>>Imran

[Gangster]

My whole point is, since one perosn doesnt win or lose the match, the term 'matchwinning' is highly arbitary and superflous.



Like i said, there aint a player who won a match entirely by himself against a test side while leading the all national octagenerians on the field...so your whole idea of 'incapable for winning a game for their country' is irrelevant and superflous...
What you can do is play a big part in your team's performance CONSISTENTLY.....
Because by your definition, Lara is not a matchwinning batsman and hasnt been since the last 5 years...right ? since he has hardly won a match or two in that period...




No because thats wht constitues matchwinning performances...if you had ANY support from the bowling and/or the batting it simply wasnt your performance alone that won the match...therefore, matchwinning is superflous.



Lara has 'blown it' in all but maybe 1 or 2 instances.... Same with Viv....
So you are saying that what seperates the good from the great over decades of playing and hundreds of innings is less than half a dozen innings...eh ?



you dont say!!
I didnt know that


As usual, you miss the point.



So everytime tendy scored runs, it was flat wickets. And everytime he failed, it was a challenging wicket for batting....With Tendy in the side, IND have never crashed on a batting wicket due to inept batting or awesome bowling and neither have IND ever dominated on a bowling wicket due to awesome batting/inept bowling....
i would certainly like to see you TRY and justify these extremely ludicrous viewpoints...
essentially i can say the same about every single batsman!

And its interesting how when Tendy played in those overseas pitches, the pitch was made extra-extra flat and just a few weeks/months later it was restored back to its fearful bowling paradise self !

CC Bhai, don't argue with tooextracool, he is much too smart for our brown minds. Whenever Sachin Tendulkar scores run, that is an indication that the pitch is flat. When he does not score runs, it is an indication that the pitch is seaming or a bowler's paradise. Okay?

 

[shankar]

oh it is a team sport, but what i dont like is when players being incapable of winning a game for their country and then expecting to be called an all time great.

nor have i said it was his fault, but he had the chance of winning the game and he blew it, and thats what separates the good from the great.

So if in the Lara 153*, if Healy had held on to that chance and WI had lost the match, would that knock suddenly have become worthless because it wasnt a 'match-winning' one?

 

[SJS]

So if in the Lara 153*, if Healy had held on to that chance and WI had lost the match, would that knock suddenly have become worthless because it wasnt a 'match-winning' one?

Similarly, after scoring his 281, what did Laxman do to win the match ? Suppose Harbhajan had not delivered ?

 

[Jono]

no surprise that nearly all of them came at home. no surprise either that the few that did come abroad came on the flattest pitches possible. nuff said.

'nuff said'? Oh aren't you hip TEC. Left the Burns mansion for a bit of socialising?

 

[sledger]

Similarly, after scoring his 281, what did Laxman do to win the match ? Suppose Harbhajan had not delivered ?

well without all those runs it would be pretty useless wouldnt it? if harbs didnt deliver then laxman would have merely saved teh match.

 

[Anil]

So if in the Lara 153*, if Healy had held on to that chance and WI had lost the match, would that knock suddenly have become worthless because it wasnt a 'match-winning' one?

i watched that innings throughout, there were 2 hard chances that tha aussies dropped off lara(catches that the aussies will take in their sleep on another fielding day)...not that it takes away from a superb innings or the ultimate result he helped achieve but all batsmen, great or not-so-great need that slice of luck to play well....

 

[Anil]

even though india still lost that game
clearly match saving that. and incase you didnt realise, it came at home.

and home automatically means worthless, right? despite the fact that he was playing almost the entire innings suffering from back spasms, despite the fact that it had all the intense pressure of an india-pakistan match, despite the fact that most of the other batsmen were totally inept in that innings...and despite the fact that the last 4 wickets couldn't muster 16 runs to win the match after he fell...wasim akram called it the greatest innings he has seen under pressure, but then what does he know? he is only the greatest left arm fast bowler ever and just had the tiniest bit of experience bowling to sachin...paltry huh?

 

[Jono]

Anil, TEC knows more than Akram, you should know that. And since he believes that a test century against Pakistan whilst suffering from back spasms means nothing if you can't win the game for your team, we all should believe it. Who cares about the other 10 players, Tendulkar is useless.

 

[Anil]

Anil, TEC knows more than Akram, you should know that. And since he believes that a test century against Pakistan whilst suffering from back spasms means nothing if you can't win the game for your team, we all should believe it. Who cares about the other 10 players, Tendulkar is useless.

i know, i know...it's just that my ignorance and prejudices break through sometimes in spite of my best efforts to contain them... i guess you can chalk it down to us being lesser mortals compared to him... hey jono...can you let me in on the secret of how to resist the temptation to contradict the great one...?

 

[honestbharani]

I think TEC is taking this too far with his comments about Tendulkar. The guy is an all time great as a batter. I think Lara is slightly better than Sachin in tests in the same way that I feel that Murali is slightly better than Warne. It is definitely arguable that Sachin is better than Lara in the same way that Warne is better than Murali. To just shun off Sachin's best efforts is not showing you in any great light here, mate. I watched that 136 LIVE and trust me, no 5th day track at Chennai can be even REMOTELY associated with the word FLAT unless the match was played in September/October.

 

[Richard]

So if in the Lara 153*, if Healy had held on to that chance and WI had lost the match, would that knock suddenly have become worthless because it wasnt a 'match-winning' one?

It certainly wouldn't have won the extravagant praise it has, no.

 

[Richard]

i watched that innings throughout, there were 2 hard chances that tha aussies dropped off lara(catches that the aussies will take in their sleep on another fielding day)...not that it takes away from a superb innings or the ultimate result he helped achieve but all batsmen, great or not-so-great need that slice of luck to play well....

WHY DOES IT NOT TAKE AWAY FROM THE INNINGS?
But for the dropped catches (from what I remember the Warne c&b wasn't really a chance but the Healy one was), the innings would have been terminated before it was, and West Indies would have lost the game.
Of course, if Healy had taken the catch it would still have been a phenoninal effort at the task. But it'd not have been a successful one, and that would have meant, beyond all question, that for most people it'd have been far lesser than it has become renowned.
Would you say that an innings where someone got themselves out with 7 needed was still great because if the chance had been dropped it'd have been a matchwinner? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[Richard]

well without all those runs it would be pretty useless wouldnt it? if harbs didnt deliver then laxman would have merely saved teh match.

And as a result Laxman's phenominal performance would have been rated nowhere near as highly as it has ended-up being.

 

[Richard]

CC Bhai, don't argue with tooextracool, he is much too smart for our brown minds.

There's no need for that, tec has never been anti-Indian.

 

[Richard]

sure...if you say so, it must be true of course...

Thing is, any fool can see that Bevan is a much superior batsman in the ODI form of the game to Tendulkar.
The fact that Tendulkar managed to get out far more than Bevan and have an average substantially lower attests to that.

 

[Richard]

This a ridiculous debate. There is no such thing as a match winning innings in cricket.

Exactly and that's why I can't stand the term.
Yet it is possible for a player - batsman or bowler - to play an innings that almost single-handedly turns a game on it's head. ie Botham in 1981 - but to say that Botham's was a matchwinning knock is almost belief-defyingly stupid, because Bob Willis played a part every bit as large and astonishing.
Similarly, I just don't know why everyone goes on only about Laxman in Kolkata 2000\01, because Dravid played a part only slightly smaller, and Harbhajan played a part that was IMO very comparable to Willis' part in 1981.
But just because an innings or spell wasn't single-handed doesn't mean it's any less valuable a contribution to a positive result (be it victory or unlikely draw) - Atherton played 2 knocks in the year of 2000 that had a massive bearing on two of the most significant victories in the history of English cricket. Yet both games were studded with other performances of excellence.

 

[Richard]

no surprise that nearly all of them came at home. no surprise either that the few that did come abroad came on the flattest pitches possible. nuff said.

No, Tendulkar's a better player at home than away. And India tend to win far more matches at home than away, due far more to bowling than batting (as victories tend to be - you can't win a match without good bowling-figures).
So it's not surprising at all. But it doesn't change the fact that Tendulkar has played a huge part in winning plenty and plenty of matches and to say he's "not a matchwinner" is wholly ludicrous.

 

[C_C]

actually with tendulkar, his home and away averages are seperated by just 2 runs : 58.82 and 56.58..
he is wee bit more consistent at home than away but to say he cant play well outside the subcontinent is ridiculous....
Allan Border is the only batsman in history of cricket who has scored more runs away from home at a higher average than Tendulkar....

Infact, i think Lara is more of a 'home grown bread' than Tendulkar - his home and away averages are seperated by more than 12 points : 59.34 at home as opposed to 47.17 away...
so in reality, Tendulkar is more adaptable to unknown/foreign conditions than lara is.....unless ofcourse you really believe TEC's theory that whenever Tendy bats overseas and does well, it is because the curators have made the pitches flatter to accomodate the great Indian and whenever Lara bats overseas, the pitch curators make a minefield to deny the great west indian...

On a side note, what is astonishing about Lara is that he has benifitted IMMENSELY from one particular ground, probably one of the flattest on this planet : Antigua recreation center....

In 19 innings there, Lara has scored 1628 runs @ 90.44 with 4 centuries and six fifties...
I dont think bradman apart, any other batsman has such a huge impact ( 16% of career runs at an average that is 71% above his career ave.) from one ground...but then again, Bradman scored heavily in almost every ground...

 

[Anil]

Thing is, any fool can see that Bevan is a much superior batsman in the ODI form of the game to Tendulkar.
The fact that Tendulkar managed to get out far more than Bevan and have an average substantially lower attests to that.

sure...anyone who doesn't agree with you automatically has to be a fool, right?

the fact that he has been an opener for most of his career is the reason he managed to get out more, his riskier style of play till very recently has also resulted in more outs compared to bevan...for all that he has played a higher percentage of substantial innings than bevan, or in fact anyone else except maybe, viv. bevan's one day game revolves around pushing the ball around and scampering for quick ones and two(he doesn't even place the ball particularly well, he is fleet-footed enough to counter the associated risks), hit the occasional boundary or six when well set...basically his goal is to stick around till the end whether batting first or second...he has been a superb, extremely efficient middle order batsman in one dayers but pales in comparison to the magnificience of a viv or a tendulkar in full flow....

 

[Anil]

WHY DOES IT NOT TAKE AWAY FROM THE INNINGS?

because it was a superb effort against an exceptional attack in a high pressure situation when his teammates just did not rise to the occasion....

if a bowler bowls a few wayward deliveries in an otherwise excellent spell, takes a bunch of wickets, maybe even one with a bad delivery, it does not diminish his spell in my eyes...why is the spell less-than-perfect? because the bowler is human and human beings are not perfect...similar is the case with batsmen...a very chancy innings against a pathetic fielding side does lessen the quality of a knock in the onlooker's eyes(not that lara's was one) but ultimately the utility of the runs scored determines the significance of an innings....