• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Rank the 10,000 club

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Anymore criticism of Tendulkar and I see this thread going down the drain quickly with mad mud slinging between numerous, extremely touchy Tendulkar fans and whoever is crazy/patient enough to point out -what they think are - holes in his “almighty” CV
Industrial level projection. About an even number of people have had Lara and Tendulkar #1 and most people have been appreciating how good both were. Do better.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
Anymore criticism of Tendulkar and I see this thread going down the drain quickly with mad mud slinging between numerous, extremely touchy Tendulkar fans and whoever is crazy/patient enough to point out -what they think are - holes in his “almighty” CV
Every hole that you have pointed out has been acknowledged. Only thing people have argued is that's not the whole story. This forum is not your YouTube or Cricinfo comment section kind of place. Spend more time here. So far you are the one sounding petulant, not for what you have said about Tendulkar but for trying to act like a victim of e-mob attack.
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
One thing I never understood is a few posts here and a lot in PakPassion that Sachin never played against Wasim and Waqar in their prime. That works both ways isn't it ? They did not play against him for lot of his prime either. Both got opportunity to bully Sachin to submission in 1989 series when he was only 16, and yet neither did.

The only bowler who I thought had a wood on Tendulkar was Allan Donald. This is by watching 1992-93 series and two series in 1996-97. Tendulkar got a couple of hundreds against Donald but was otherwise a bit below par. Saqlain did well against him 1999 series, but it was one series, so I am not so sure.
ODI exchanges between the sides give an idea the massacre India escaped in tests during that time. Out of all bowlers in ODIs, Pakistanis bowled best to Indians. They simply knew how to get subcontinent batsmen cheaply even on slow tracks.
 

pardus

School Boy/Girl Captain
One thing I never understood is a few posts here and a lot in PakPassion that Sachin never played against Wasim and Waqar in their prime. That works both ways isn't it ? They did not play against him for lot of his prime either. Both got opportunity to bully Sachin to submission in 1989 series when he was only 16, and yet neither did.

The only bowler who I thought had a wood on Tendulkar was Allan Donald. This is by watching 1992-93 series and two series in 1996-97. Tendulkar got a couple of hundreds against Donald but was otherwise a bit below par. Saqlain did well against him 1999 series, but it was one series, so I am not so sure.
Well, in addition to limited appearances against Wasim+Waqar, the same applies to Tendulkar's performance against Ambrose & Walsh also. Tendulkar played them together in only 1 series, with weather and surfaces being such that 4 of the 5 Tests end up as draws. Pretty lifeless surfaces, and one of the dullest series, despite the presence of Lara & Tendulkar. I remember the series well for how dull it was. Sidhu scored a double hundred that was agonizing to watch. Laxman scored two 50s as an opener (his first fifties as opener). I don't recall another Test series in last 3 decades with 4 draws.

Same thing also applies to Tendulkar's away against McGrath. Just one series - with 3 Tests (in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney).

This reinforces the point that Tendulkar didn't face great attacks as often as many of his contemporaries did. And on the few occasions he did, while he was good, he couldn't produce the kind of series that he had against Kasper+Fleming in 1998 (which is what I define as a spectacular series performance)

He did have a spectacular series against Steyn in 2010. No question about that. It is not the point that he never had great series against great attacks, it is just that they were relatively far and few in between, compared to few other batsmen in this list of 10ers.
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
ODI exchanges between the sides give an idea the massacre India escaped in tests during that time. Out of all bowlers in ODIs, Pakistanis bowled best to Indians. They simply knew how to get subcontinent batsmen cheaply even on slow tracks.
Yeah, let's extrapolate from ODIs. No problems with that approach.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Well, in addition to limited appearances against Wasim+Waqar, the same applies to Tendulkar's performance against Ambrose & Walsh also. Tendulkar played them together in only 1 series, with weather and surfaces being such that 4 of the 5 Tests end up as draws. Pretty lifeless surfaces, and one of the dullest series, despite the presence of Lara & Tendulkar. I remember the series well for how dull it was. Sidhu scored a double hundred that was agonizing to watch. Laxman scored two 50s as an opener (his first fifties as opener). I don't recall another Test series in last 3 decades with 4 draws.

Same thing also applies to Tendulkar's away against McGrath. Just one series - with 3 Tests (in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney).

This reinforces the point that Tendulkar didn't face great attacks as often as many of his contemporaries did. And on the few occasions he did, while he was good, he couldn't produce the kind of series that he had against Kasper+Fleming in 1998 (which is what I define as a spectacular series performance)

He did have a spectacular series against Steyn in 2010. No question about that. It is not the point that he never had great series against great attacks, it is just that they were relatively far and few in between, compared to few other batsmen in this list of 10ers.
What we learn from this is something Vcs often brings up. That BCCI officials of the era should be castrated for wasting peak Tendulkar on random ODI series like Singer Cup. Would've been so much better to watch Tendulkar vs Walsh/Ambrose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vcs

_00_deathscar

International Debutant
ATG upgrade on Joe Root is probably accurate.

Also, you're welcome for the phrase meme opinion, CW.
I said it about 8 pages back that he's basically an ATG version of Joe Root who actually scores a ton of tons.

Ponting/Lara at 3 and Tendulkar at 4, so long as the top 2 haven't collapsed, would have complemented each other extremely well with Tendulkar just keeping things ticking along (but at a near 60 S/R!), while Ponting/Lara absolutely dominate the attack into submission.

Basically, Dravid/Tendulkar, but much, much better and way more aggressive.
 

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
ODI exchanges between the sides give an idea the massacre India escaped in tests during that time. Out of all bowlers in ODIs, Pakistanis bowled best to Indians. They simply knew how to get subcontinent batsmen cheaply even on slow tracks.
Was talking about only Sachin vs Wasim/Waqar, not India vs Pakistan in general. Yeah, India escaping massacres against Pakistan in 90s is a fair take, just like Pakistan escaping massacres against India in 2010s. We never know for sure though.
 

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
Well, in addition to limited appearances against Wasim+Waqar, the same applies to Tendulkar's performance against Ambrose & Walsh also. Tendulkar played them together in only 1 series, with weather and surfaces being such that 4 of the 5 Tests end up as draws. Pretty lifeless surfaces, and one of the dullest series, despite the presence of Lara & Tendulkar. I remember the series well for how dull it was. Sidhu scored a double hundred that was agonizing to watch. Laxman scored two 50s as an opener (his first fifties as opener). I don't recall another Test series in last 3 decades with 4 draws.

Same thing also applies to Tendulkar's away against McGrath. Just one series - with 3 Tests (in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney).

This reinforces the point that Tendulkar didn't face great attacks as often as many of his contemporaries did. And on the few occasions he did, while he was good, he couldn't produce the kind of series that he had against Kasper+Fleming in 1998 (which is what I define as a spectacular series performance)

He did have a spectacular series against Steyn in 2010. No question about that. It is not the point that he never had great series against great attacks, it is just that they were relatively far and few in between, compared to few other batsmen in this list of 10ers.
It had a lot to do with factors not in Tendulkar's control, like Mcgrath not available in 1998 or 2003, Ambrose not available in 94, or no India-Pakistan matches happening for most of 90s. India played very few 5 test series in 90s unlike Aus or WI, and were never the top draw attraction through that decade. And when it happened in 2000s, a lot of ATG bowlers had retired. So ultimately, one could judge him on what he did, i.e the ability to score hundreds against bowlers of any quality at least once in a series.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Probably doesn't count as a "great" attack but Tendulkar had a pretty spectacular series when we toured Australia in 2007-08. Yeah Hogg was rubbish but Lee had finally figured out how to bowl in Test cricket by then, an upcoming Mitchell Johnson and Stuart Clark was pretty decent. It was certainly a better attack than what Australia put out in 2003-04.
 

pardus

School Boy/Girl Captain
It had a lot to do with factors not in Tendulkar's control, like Mcgrath not available in 1998 or 2003, Ambrose not available in 94, or no India-Pakistan matches happening for most of 90s. India played very few 5 test series in 90s unlike Aus or WI, and were never the top draw attraction through that decade. And when it happened in 2000s, a lot of ATG bowlers had retired. So ultimately, one could judge him on what he did, i.e the ability to score hundreds against bowlers of any quality at least once in a series.
That's your criteria, but that needn't be everyone's criteria in this analysis of splitting the best of the best. Career average in 30s, and (relatively speaking) a lack of great series performances against many of the best attacks of his era, do carry some weight to me. I am not too much into "scored a 100, therefore great series" thing. Tendulkar didn't score a single 100 in his only Test series against Ambrose+Walsh in 1997, but IMO his series performance against Ambrose+Walsh (without a 100) was far more successful performance than any of his series performances against Donald, where he scored 100s.
If Bradman had scored a 100, but averaged in the 30s in the bodyline series, I am sure a lot of people would have zeroed in on his low series average.
Anyways, to each their own.
 

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
That's your criteria, but that needn't be everyone's criteria in this analysis of splitting the best of the best. Career average in 30s, and (relatively speaking) a lack of great series performances against many of the best attacks of his era, do carry some weight to me. I am not too much into "scored a 100, therefore great series" thing. Tendulkar didn't score a single 100 in his only Test series against Ambrose+Walsh in 1997, but IMO his series performance against Ambrose+Walsh (without a 100) was far more successful performance than any of his series performances against Donald, where he scored 100s.
If Bradman had scored a 100, but averaged in the 30s in the bodyline series, I am sure a lot of people would have zeroed in on his low series average.
Anyways, to each their own.
When did I say "scored a 100, therefore great series" ?

Lara had one great series against an ATG attack in 1998-99(or may be one more) but was largely just decent like Tendulkar against a similar quality otherwise.

On the other hand, Lara had a few more poor series against ATG attacks.

How do we judge Lara vs Tendulkar then ? Honestly, I can't split.
 

pardus

School Boy/Girl Captain
When did I say "scored a 100, therefore great series" ?

Lara had one great series against an ATG attack in 1998-99(or may be one more) but was largely just decent like Tendulkar against a similar quality otherwise.

On the other hand, Lara had a few more poor series against ATG attacks.

How do we judge Lara vs Tendulkar then ? Honestly, I can't split.
Neither can I unambiguously pick between the two, tbh. But it's not about Lara or Tendulkar. My main point is - as great as Lara, Tendulkar, Ponting etc. are, IMO they all have "incompletions" in their accomplishments. I am just pointing out what I feel are Tendulkar's incompletions, and why I am not entirely sold on average of 60 for 18 years therefore second best batsman ever. That doesn't mean I am calling him a bad batsman. I am not even saying he is inferior to Lara etc. I might rate Lara slightly higher but I put them both (and Sanga - I watched him against Bond and am shamelessly biased towards him) in the same bracket, far away from rest of their contemporaries.
Again, all I am saying is - like every great batsman other than Bradman, I feel Tendulkar also has a few shortcomings, and I am just presenting what I feel are his shortcomings. I don't intend to pull him down.
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Tendulkar isn't even the third best batsman of all time. Bradman, Sobers, Hobbs, Smith are all definitively better IMO. Lara was his equal and Ponting wasn't far behind.

An ATG top 6 doesn't even let Tendulkar bat at 4, he has to bat 5 or not at all.

Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman
Smith
Lara/ Tendulkar/ Richards/ Headley
Sobers
Gilchrist+
Wasim
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

Is my ATXI for all conditions. Basically only the #5 spot is up for grabs. A good argument could be made for Viv batting at 5 given his aggression could swing the match. Similarly Headley has the reputation and record to suggest he could easily bat there. Tendulkar brings a "subcontinent specialist" into the mix while Lara brings someone who has the chops to pull off remarkable feats against all time great attacks. All 4 have a claim to the spot, though given the lack of subcontinental batsmen in this XI, Tendulkar probably fits best.
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The cognitive dissonance of definitively ranking Smith ahead of Lara/Tendulkar/Viv because output>aesthetics and at the same time having Wasim ahead of Steyn/Hadlee/etc because aesthetics>output
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The cognitive dissonance of definitively ranking Smith ahead of Lara/Tendulkar/Viv because output>aesthetics and at the same time having Wasim ahead of Steyn/Hadlee/etc because aesthetics>output
Wasim is there for variety in the attack. I rate Hadlee ahead of him but Wasim fits a niche that no better bowler fills.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
No way Smith should be there based on 5-6 years worth of output

Let's see what his numbers look like after 130 Tests
 

Top