The Master is at the pinnacle!

[Furball]

Of course Tendulkar is past his best.

That's not to say that Tendulkar is not a good batsman, or that he's not worth his place in the Indian (or indeed any other lineup) in the world.

All the greats of the modern era who have retired in the last couple of years - Lara, Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, Pollock - were irrefutably past their best when they called it a day. That didn't change the fact that they were still great players when they finished their careers.

 

[Richard]

Not to take anything away from either his skill or his fantastic innings in Australia, but his persistent lack of runs recently can't be ignored wholly. Aesthetics, of which Tendulkar is god, have done a good job of hiding his mediocre scores of late. His last 26 matches, dating back to this date three years ago, have yielded 1551 runs at an average of 36.9. Less than players like Hashim Amla and Ian Bell. I don't think one can compare Tendulkar to any Indian youngsters, but i also feel that one can't compare the Tendulkar of today to the man at his peak. In terms of his ability to consistently score big, he's undeniable declined.

I kinda dissected some of that spell of which you talk here. Since then there's been another barren spell, of course.

 

[Richard]

All the greats of the modern era who have retired in the last couple of years - Lara, Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist, Pollock - were irrefutably past their best when they called it a day. That didn't change the fact that they were still great players when they finished their careers.

I don't really think Pollock was TBH - in fact Pollock in 2006/07 in Tests bowled better than he had for some years and signed-off with another good (if very easy) match in 2007/08.

And certainly in ODIs he was as good as ever. Ditto McGrath. He perhaps wasn't quite the Test bowler he had once been but in ODIs McGrath too was as good as ever.

Lara I really don't know. He may have been past his best, but TBH I'd have liked to see him give it a bit longer. Lara is like Ali Brown - you just never write him off.

Warne I wouldn't disagree with, and Gilchrist had been past his best for 4 years by the time he retired - his best lasted just 4 years in any case.

 

[Furball]

Pollock had declined in ODIs. He was still nagging and accurate, but due to a deterioration in pace, was never a serious wicket taking threat.

McGrath I'll give you.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Lara I really don't know. He may have been past his best, but TBH I'd have liked to see him give it a bit longer. Lara is like Ali Brown - you just never write him off.

According to The ICL, Lara has suffered an injury that effectively rules out his participation in any form of competitive cricket hereon.

 

[Richard]

Pollock had declined in ODIs. He was still nagging and accurate, but due to a deterioration in pace, was never a serious wicket taking threat.

In ODIs, if you bowl as accurately as he does you don't need to bowl wicket-taking deliveries - you get batsmen to gift wickets because they can't simply hang around scoring at 2.5-an-over for too long. Nor do you have to bowl at even 80mph (which Pollock always retained the capability to do) to bowl wicket-taking deliveries, but that's by-the-by.

Economy-rate is so much more important in ODIs than bowling wicket-taking deliveries, and Pollock in the modern era is the best there's ever been at this. At least, outside the slog overs. Taking into account bowling both 1-40 and 41-50, Wasim Akram was indeed his superior.

And as far as Pollock's wicket-taking deterioration was concerned, well... in 2007/08 he didn't take that many wickets (10 in 13 matches) but he'd had spells like that before in his career.

 

[SJS]

His sixes have come down as you said. He is not hitting long on and long off shots even when the fielders are in as you say. He has added different strokes to his game like the backward slice. For every ball, it seems to me that he can play two-three different shots but choses the safer route as a strategic move which he has gained via experience. I am not saying there has been no physical deterioration, mind.

I am in the same boat as you that he is not any less a player than he was before. I have long argued against people who said that he is past his best.

It is all very interesting when it comes to Tendulkar.

Well if he is physically not the Tendulkar he was then one has to admit that brings him down a notch after all the physical aspect is not unimportant. In the last Test at Bangalore, I had mentioned about his pushing a slower ball to the close in fielder at short cover. This, when he was younger, he would have seen much earlier as a slower ball and adjusted his stroke to play it late and along the ground. Or, having seen it late would have goen through with the shot hitting powerfully and blasting the fielder with a cannon ball and it would have taken a miraculous catch to get him. Here he saw it late, checked his stroke and pushed the dolliest of dollies to the stunned fielder. This, is an effect of an ageing body and slowing reflexes and that does make him a lesser player overall.

When I say that he is still as good a player as ever, I mean that he is still as skillful a batsman, his timing is still perfect, his field placing still immaculate, his technique still exemplary, and the hunger to succeed as strong as ever. But being in great physical shape would add to these attributes. That is not the same today.

And Sachin can realise that and he has adjusted his game to that but after the adjustment, he has become a player every team would like to get out but I am not sure they fear him as they used to. He used to pulverise young bowlers and even experienced one's would hesitate saying anything to provoke him for his reply would be to humiliate them on the cricket field. He isn't able to do that. He is not able to disperse the field when it is brought in specifically for him. I am sure that he does not like that he isnt able to. Hence this need to put a bigger price on his wicket than he ever did before. The exaggerated forward defense and the long spells of going into the shell. This is Sachin trying to regain his position of pre-eminence by trying to show the bowler, "you don't have the skill to get my wicket or even beat me". Earlier he was telling them "You cant contain me". This is a big difference for Sachin and I am not sure he relishes it. But the pressure to succeed, imposed on him from all sides, is not making things easier. So you see sudden spells of brilliance in an innings and then, as if he suddenly remembers that his goal is not to get out, he shuts shop. I find it very sad even though I rejoice with every run he scores,

But the point of this entire analysis is, that Sachin is dwarfed by another, younger Sachin of ten years ago, not by the young men who are on the fringe of selection.

Finally, I would love it if Sachin told himself, I am going to play for exactly so many, say ten months (or till so and so series) in form the selectors so that they know and let him play without pressure and then enjoy himself for this period of time. I have no doubt that if he did that, we would see some glorious batting from his unfettered bat.

 

[Furball]

Bowling economically only helps if you've got an effective bowling unit bowling the other 40 overs.

If the bowling unit is rubbish, then there's nothing wrong with giving Pollock respect, leaving him with match figures of 10-35-0, and going after the rest of the attack. You'll still be able to post a competitive total, particularly given how awful South Africa are at death bowling.

 

[Uppercut]

I kinda dissected some of that spell of which you talk here. Since then there's been another barren spell, of course.

It's a shame to say that the awesome form against Pakistan and Australia look to be the exception rather than a return to form- perhaps this series is key to finding out for sure. If, as is the point you repeatedly make in the piece, his loss of form had a lot to do with fitness problems, then so be it- fitness is the main reason that a batsman declines with age. I'm not, unlike with Dravid, advocating dropping Tendulkar- i may come across as though i am at times, but if i was picking the team he'd definitely be in there. My argument is solely that the Tendulkar of today /= Tendulkar of five years ago- for whatever reason, he's certainly less capable of consistently scoring big than he was before.

 

[Uppercut]

You want me to contest that claim and shred it to pieces

I sincerely do

 

[Pratters]

Well if he is physically not the Tendulkar he was then one has to admit that brings him down a notch after all the physical aspect is not unimportant. In the last Test at Bangalore, I had mentioned about his pushing a slower ball to the close in fielder at short cover. This, when he was younger, he would have seen much earlier as a slower ball and adjusted his stroke to play it late and along the ground. Or, having seen it late would have goen through with the shot hitting powerfully and blasting the fielder with a cannon ball and it would have taken a miraculous catch to get him. Here he saw it late, checked his stroke and pushed the dolliest of dollies to the stunned fielder. This, is an effect of an ageing body and slowing reflexes and that does make him a lesser player overall.

When I say that he is still as good a player as ever, I mean that he is still as skillful a batsman, his timing is still perfect, his field placing still immaculate, his technique still exemplary, and the hunger to succeed as strong as ever. But being in great physical shape would add to these attributes. That is not the same today.

And Sachin can realise that and he has adjusted his game to that but after the adjustment, he has become a player every team would like to get out but I am not sure they fear him as they used to. He used to pulverise young bowlers and even experienced one's would hesitate saying anything to provoke him for his reply would be to humiliate them on the cricket field. He isn't able to do that. He is not able to disperse the field when it is brought in specifically for him. I am sure that he does not like that he isnt able to. Hence this need to put a bigger price on his wicket than he ever did before. The exaggerated forward defense and the long spells of going into the shell. This is Sachin trying to regain his position of pre-eminence by trying to show the bowler, "you don't have the skill to get my wicket or even beat me". Earlier he was telling them "You cant contain me". This is a big difference for Sachin and I am not sure he relishes it. But the pressure to succeed, imposed on him from all sides, is not making things easier. So you see sudden spells of brilliance in an innings and then, as if he suddenly remembers that his goal is not to get out, he shuts shop. I find it very sad even though I rejoice with every run he scores,

But the point of this entire analysis is, that Sachin is dwarfed by another, younger Sachin of ten years ago, not by the young men who are on the fringe of selection.

Finally, I would love it if Sachin told himself, I am going to play for exactly so many, say ten months (or till so and so series) in form the selectors so that they know and let him play without pressure and then enjoy himself for this period of time. I have no doubt that if he did that, we would see some glorious batting from his unfettered bat.

Physical decline does not necessarily mean a decline in one's game. A player can adapt, McGrath for instance. Tendulkar is not an inferior player today to what he was 10 years ago because he doesn't play attacking IMO. His test batting has changed, not declined. There is a subtle difference between the two. I differ with you on this. He has been making runs now in tests and I am sure that he will do it for the next 12-36 months as I do not see any great deterioration in his game due to the physical aspect you talk about. While he is not attacking in his stroke play, he is inventive. I do not think that he is playing under any pressure which is bogging him down. He is playing the way he wants to and this is the right way I feel. He made an 88 today and hit some classic shots. There was not one poor shot except the french cut four before he got out. You over analysed Tendulkar's first test dismissal IMO, with all due respect. Johnson bowled a similar slower ball to Dravid today and he was nearly foxed by it as well. It is that kind of a delivery.

I have believed that there is a lot of good cricket left in Tendulkar and he is making the runs to prove that now. Iti s not as if he is having a barrage of low scores or showing lack of ability - he played Mendis well in Lanka. I don't believe that you have to attack only to make runs. As long as you make the runs and are contributing to the team's cause like he did in the first test playing an important role in saving the test with the partnership with Laxman. Today, he saved the ass of his team again. Had he played more attacking (which he could have easily done on a flat deck like today), not that his S/R was bad at all today, he could have got out to a careless stroke. Instead, he toiled on the wicket and did not let the opposition have his wicket. What got him was the change in the ball and the new ball meant that he was a minisecond late in his footwork. He couldn't adopt to the changed new ball for a delivery (which can happen with the best of the best players at times) but was not way off the mark which meant that he edged the ball. A poorer player may have missed the delivery entirely.

I am a Tendulkar fan but try to remain as unbiased as possible while analysing him. I often feel that he is over analysed when people should just let him be. His tennis elbow injury was analysed to such great degree by the Indian media and fans. Tendulkar said that even Kallis had a tennis elbow and no one talked much about it in an interview with Bhogle about two months back.

People expect Tendulkar to bat the same way he did 10 years back. That can't remain the same. A player's batting style changes when he is playing the game for twenty years. Tendulkar was a much more attacking player in his youth than he was in 95-99. Yet, he used to play those out shots which meant that he was getting out in the 50s in the ODI's for a long time before he got his first century. He improved his game from there to be a tremendous player for a period. His problem then was that he was not getting the double hundreds or big hundreds (150 plus scores). He was changing that when the tennis elbow happened. His game is suited to get big scores now as he can get runs with minimum risk (as he showed v Australia with his 154 and 153) and I think that this is a very interesting time in Tendulkar's career.

Cheers.

 

[SJS]

I sincerely do

Okay.

First and foremost. Last three years is not relevant if you want to talk in terms of "recent" form Yes sachijn has had a couple of bad patches and I think he should have been dropped at that time. Continuing him when out of form did no good for the team and was even worse for Tendulkar. Selectors should have the guts to drop a player, howsoever big, when he is clearly struggling (not when he is having low scores for that can happen even when you are not struggling). Sachin was struggling and a quiet talk with the chairman of slectors and giving him "rest", if you please, at that time would have done less damage to his reputaion and he would have come back stronger and hungrier as has been shown every time he has taken a rest due to injury.

For me recent form is last three four series. That is recent enough. India, before the current series, played four series.

• Vs Pakistan (home) : 3 Tests
• Vs Australia (away) : 4 Tests
• Vs South Africa (home) : 3 Tests
• Vs Sri Lanka (away) : 3 Tests

Against South Africa he played just one innings (5 deliveries) and did not play again. So to me that series doesn't show anything.

Of the other three series, he had one poor series in Sri Lanka as did most of his colleagues. He did start well and seemed to be the only one who had the measure of Mendis but faded away as did India.

Against Pakistan, he played only two Tests, averaged 69.5 with two fifties in three innings and was run out for 1 in the third. His scores

- 1 run out
- 56 not out
- 82​

Not bad by any yard stick.

Against Australia he scored 493 runs - the difference between his tally and that of the next indian batsman was 207 runs !!

He averaged 70.43

The 493 runs he scored in this series is his highest tally for any series in the 59 Test series that he has played in since his debut in 1989 !!!

He scored two centuries. All the other batsmen put together scored just two.

His scores in the four Tests were

• Melbourne : 62 (in 77 balls) out of 196 (in 72 overs) and 15
• Sydney : 154 and 12
• Perth : 71 and 13
• Adelaide : 153 (in 205 deliveries) out of 563 in 181 overs and 13 run out

He was the leading run scorer from either side.

By all accounts he was brilliant throughout the series and absolutely magnificent in the virtual semi finals against Sri Lanka and the two finals against Australia in the ODI series that followed. Those three innings won us the tri-series. The scores need mention:-

- 63 (54)
- 117 not out (120)
- 91 (121)​

I mention those three innings although they are not in test matches just to show the kind of form he has been in this year (inspite of the Sri Lankan series)

Add to that this scores where in the first Test he scored a match saving 43 in the second innings and today his brilliant 88 (111 balls)

In the ten Test matches Test matches since the start of that Australian series in December last year, he has scored 738 runs at 43.4 with two hundreds and three fifties. Only Sehwag has scored more runs or more centuries.

I hope you are not suggesting we drop every Indian batsman other than Sehwag

PS : Correction Laxman has scored 24 more runs than Sachin but played two more Test matches.

 

[SJS]

Ian Chappell mentioned today that Sachin Tendulkar's batting in Australia was as good as any he has seen from Him in his entire career. He rated one of those two i50 plus scores, I cant recall which, as one of the finest innings he has seen in recent years.

 

[Richard]

Bowling economically only helps if you've got an effective bowling unit bowling the other 40 overs.

If the bowling unit is rubbish, then there's nothing wrong with giving Pollock respect, leaving him with match figures of 10-35-0, and going after the rest of the attack. You'll still be able to post a competitive total, particularly given how awful South Africa are at death bowling.

If the rest of the attack is poor, Pollock could get 10-25-3 and a hefty total would still be on the cards.

In a 50-over game, where 10 overs is the most any bowler can bowl, no one bowler can carry his team, as regularly taking five- and six-fors is virtually impossible in so few overs.

 

[pup11]

Sachin is one of my all time favourite players, has always come as a wonderful human being too, for a man who has achieved so..so.. much i don't think there is anything left for him to achieve on a personal level, but if he still wants to play then let him play, all these bull**** talk that he should retire everytime his form dips slightly is a bit dire imo, i mean ffs he's a legend and he has the right to choose the time which he thinks is right for him to leave, after having done so much for Indian and world cricket, atleast the great man deserves that much.

SRT = All Time Legend!!

 

[Precambrian]

If anyone is arguing Sachin circa 2008 < Sachin circa 1998, should get their heads analysed. Goodness me, he scored 88 off 111 balls at a Strike Rate of 80!! And he never even looked risky at any point during that innings!!! And he was comfortable and dominant over the likes of Lee and Johnson.

 

[Precambrian]

A very good article from Harsha Bhogle in the Times of India

The incomparable Don Bradman became part of folklore because he brought cheer to the people in depressing times. History has brought such depression upon us again as people see their savings evaporate, seemingly harmless cyclists become human bombs. There is much misery in our times. But there is also Tendulkar, who you know will be earnest and honest in his effort, who will let you forget your existence for a while, playing a real man in a real world.

Good lines those.

 

[weldone]

His last 26 matches, dating back to this date three years ago, have yielded 1551 runs at an average of 36.9.

If 'by this date three years ago' you mean 17th October, 2005, then it's 29 matches, 1893 runs@42.6 which is very decent by any standard (not by his standard of course)...

 

[G.I.Joe]

Akash Chopra on Tendulkar in the 2003 World Cup:

I asked him about how he prepares for a big match. He said that his preparation is always the same regardless of the importance of the occasion.

But sometimes even he gets carried away. On one such instance he did not sleep for 15 consecutive nights. That was before the India-Pakistan match in the 2003 World Cup.

The thoughts of how to handle every bowler, and working out strategies against the likes of Shoaib and co, kept him awake.

One must not forget that he was actively involved and scoring heavily in the games prior to that one, and all that without adequate sleep.

He went on to score 90-odd in that game, and many rate that knock off as one of his best ever.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7676509.stm

 

[Precambrian]

Akash Chopra on Tendulkar in the 2003 World Cup:

I asked him about how he prepares for a big match. He said that his preparation is always the same regardless of the importance of the occasion.

But sometimes even he gets carried away. On one such instance he did not sleep for 15 consecutive nights. That was before the India-Pakistan match in the 2003 World Cup.

The thoughts of how to handle every bowler, and working out strategies against the likes of Shoaib and co, kept him awake.

One must not forget that he was actively involved and scoring heavily in the games prior to that one, and all that without adequate sleep.

He went on to score 90-odd in that game, and many rate that knock off as one of his best ever.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7676509.stm

Unbelievable is his commitment!!! Lara definitely had inborn genius and talent more than Tendulkar. However Tendulkar is supreme when it comes to converting talent into substance.

And that 98 odd was off 75 balls, and he completely destoyed the famed trio of Wasim Waqar and Akthar in that match. BTW he "retired" many bowlers in that tournament, didnt he? Caddick comes into mind, esp how he was treated after his not so impressive comments before that match regarding Tendulkar.