Black Caps v India

[Cyclops]

I'm probably in the Lara camp as well, but the margins are pretty slim between him and the other greats from his era (or other eras).

The idea that anyone is a clear second behind the Don is absurd.

[newsjunkie]

@mariner4life

which Brian Lara? The sulky one who shat the bed a big chunk of the times? Or the one who batted brilliantly some of the time?

Until 2002 Tendulkar NEVER had a slump, pretty much dropped a century every damn series, everywhere in the world. The definition of Consistent excellence. Brian was one of my favorite batsman, and absolutely brilliant when the mood took him. His peaks were awesome, but far too many valleys separated them.

But feel free to stick to your confirmation biases - I can't be bothered about arguing such history. It doesn't matter really.

[akan004]

@newsjunkie The problem with Sachin was that he almost always failed during a tight chase. Hence why I rate Lara and Kohli ahead of him. They perform when the pressure is on.

[newsjunkie]

@akan004 said in Black Caps v India:

@newsjunkie The problem with Sachin was that he almost always failed during a tight chase. Hence why I rate Lara and Kohli ahead of him. They perform when the pressure is on.

This is a myth. Neither Lara nor Kohli open the innings in ODIs, and both have "failed" in plenty of chases. Lara's 153 against Aus in a test chase gets him a lot of deserved credit, but few remember that he was dropped towards the end. By Contrast Tendulkar's magnificent 136 in the 4th innings against Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain in their absolute pomp, with back spasms - fell short by 17 runs. Tendulkar scored 98 in a must-win WC game in 2003 against Pakistan - he was lucky enough that Dravid and Kaif finished the game behind him.

There are literally dozens of instances where Tendulkar won the match single-handedly for India - in tests and ODIs. But confirmation bias is a powerful thing.

All that being said, Tendulkar did have his mental frailties, especially in the 2nd half of his career. He simply wasn't as good a player after his elbow injury in the early 2000s. The problem is that even at 70% of his prime, he was still good enough to be effective to play for another decade. Most other players, once they pass their prime - Ponting, etc, fade away within a year or so. And many today remember the Tendulkar from the 2nd half of his career, forgetting the absolute dominance of the 1992-2002 timeframe.

Edit: Here's a link to an article about the Chennai test - it was around 20 years ago and Cricinfo's done a decent write-up on it. Bit of a long read, but good one if you like to read - http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1172609

[Siam]

@newsjunkie said in Black Caps v India:

But confirmation bias is a powerful thing.

That's twice now you've confirmed that

[newsjunkie]

@Siam

"No I'm right, YOU"re wrong". OK sure. Snark is great and all, but I've yet to see you present an argument to support your opinion.

[Siam]

@newsjunkie my opinion is that in a discussion involving an impossibly subjective verdict, allocating and inferring a mental shortcoming says more about you than your opinion.

We call it playing the ball and not the man.

Both Lara and Sachin were magnificent, and displayed their mastery differently. Admiring the pair of them needn't be a zero sum game.

Yep the fence is the best vantage place to compare 2 titans

[mariner4life]

I'll take the word of two different international players who told me Lara was the best they played against

[Cyclops]

@newsjunkie said in Black Caps v India:

@akan004 said in Black Caps v India:

@newsjunkie The problem with Sachin was that he almost always failed during a tight chase. Hence why I rate Lara and Kohli ahead of him. They perform when the pressure is on.

This is a myth. Neither Lara nor Kohli open the innings in ODIs, and both have "failed" in plenty of chases. Lara's 153 against Aus in a test chase gets him a lot of deserved credit, but few remember that he was dropped towards the end. By Contrast Tendulkar's magnificent 136 in the 4th innings against Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain in their absolute pomp, with back spasms - fell short by 17 runs. Tendulkar scored 98 in a must-win WC game in 2003 against Pakistan - he was lucky enough that Dravid and Kaif finished the game behind him.

There are literally dozens of instances where Tendulkar won the match single-handedly for India - in tests and ODIs. But confirmation bias is a powerful thing.

All that being said, Tendulkar did have his mental frailties, especially in the 2nd half of his career. He simply wasn't as good a player after his elbow injury in the early 2000s. The problem is that even at 70% of his prime, he was still good enough to be effective to play for another decade. Most other players, once they pass their prime - Ponting, etc, fade away within a year or so. And many today remember the Tendulkar from the 2nd half of his career, forgetting the absolute dominance of the 1992-2002 timeframe.

Edit: Here's a link to an article about the Chennai test - it was around 20 years ago and Cricinfo's done a decent write-up on it. Bit of a long read, but good one if you like to read - http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1172609

Those examples of Tendulkar winning a match single handed are him getting out and leaving someone else to finish?

Tendulkar has lots of points in his favour for best since Bradman. So does Lara. So does Ponting. So does Waugh. So does Kallis. So does Richards. So does Sobers. So does Dravid. There just isn't the clear separation between those players that you claim.

[Gunner]

This Tendulkar v Lara argument is putting me to sleep.
Someone give me a nudge when we’re back talking about Black Caps v India.
Ta.

[MN5]

@Gunner said in Black Caps v India:

This Tendulkar v Lara argument is putting me to sleep.
Someone give me a nudge when we’re back talking about Black Caps v India.
Ta.

Bit hard when it doesn't start til tomorrow but I'd say the team with the most runs will win.

[MN5]

@mariner4life said in Black Caps v India:

I'll take the word of two different international players who told me Lara was the best they played against

Name and shame

[MN5]

@Cyclops said in Black Caps v India:

@newsjunkie said in Black Caps v India:

@akan004 said in Black Caps v India:

@newsjunkie The problem with Sachin was that he almost always failed during a tight chase. Hence why I rate Lara and Kohli ahead of him. They perform when the pressure is on.

This is a myth. Neither Lara nor Kohli open the innings in ODIs, and both have "failed" in plenty of chases. Lara's 153 against Aus in a test chase gets him a lot of deserved credit, but few remember that he was dropped towards the end. By Contrast Tendulkar's magnificent 136 in the 4th innings against Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain in their absolute pomp, with back spasms - fell short by 17 runs. Tendulkar scored 98 in a must-win WC game in 2003 against Pakistan - he was lucky enough that Dravid and Kaif finished the game behind him.

There are literally dozens of instances where Tendulkar won the match single-handedly for India - in tests and ODIs. But confirmation bias is a powerful thing.

All that being said, Tendulkar did have his mental frailties, especially in the 2nd half of his career. He simply wasn't as good a player after his elbow injury in the early 2000s. The problem is that even at 70% of his prime, he was still good enough to be effective to play for another decade. Most other players, once they pass their prime - Ponting, etc, fade away within a year or so. And many today remember the Tendulkar from the 2nd half of his career, forgetting the absolute dominance of the 1992-2002 timeframe.

Edit: Here's a link to an article about the Chennai test - it was around 20 years ago and Cricinfo's done a decent write-up on it. Bit of a long read, but good one if you like to read - http://www.thecricketmonthly.com/story/1172609

Those examples of Tendulkar winning a match single handed are him getting out and leaving someone else to finish?

Tendulkar has lots of points in his favour for best since Bradman. So does Lara. So does Ponting. So does Waugh. So does Kallis. So does Richards. So does Sobers. So does Dravid. There just isn't the clear separation between those players that you claim.

Hence my initial point about him not even clearly being the best of his era.

[booboo]

@MN5 said in Black Caps v India:

@Gunner said in Black Caps v India:

This Tendulkar v Lara argument is putting me to sleep.
Someone give me a nudge when we’re back talking about Black Caps v India.
Ta.

Bit hard when it doesn't start til tomorrow but I'd say the team with the most runs will win.

Unless DRS DLS ...

[newsjunkie]

@Siam said in Black Caps v India:

my opinion is that in a discussion involving an impossibly subjective verdict, allocating and inferring a mental shortcoming says more about you than your opinion.
We call it playing the ball and not the man.

Fair point.

[shark]

@Gunner said in Black Caps v India:

This Tendulkar v Lara argument is putting me to sleep.
Someone give me a nudge when we’re back talking about Black Caps v India.
Ta.

Agree. It's like listening to people argue the toss between an Envy apple and a Jazz apple.

[mariner4life]

@shark said in Black Caps v India:

@Gunner said in Black Caps v India:

This Tendulkar v Lara argument is putting me to sleep.
Someone give me a nudge when we’re back talking about Black Caps v India.
Ta.

Agree. It's like listening to people argue the toss between an Envy apple and a Jazz apple.

Gala apple motherfucker!!!

[nzzp]

@mariner4life said in Black Caps v India:

@shark said in Black Caps v India:

@Gunner said in Black Caps v India:

This Tendulkar v Lara argument is putting me to sleep.
Someone give me a nudge when we’re back talking about Black Caps v India.
Ta.

Agree. It's like listening to people argue the toss between an Envy apple and a Jazz apple.

Gala apple motherfucker!!!

Jazz all the way baby

[booboo]

Pacific Rose ...

[newsjunkie]

Fuji apples - that's where its at!