MrIncredible
U19 Cricketer
Yeah it does and credit to the little master for redeeming himself when India needed him to
-
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.
****OFFICIAL**** Lara vs Tendulkar Debate Thread
- Thread starter aussie
- Start date
MrIncredible
U19 Cricketer
Sorry to pick on u so much Aussie but i just re-read ur initial post and in ur summary u didnt say ne thing about away performances u said Sachin was better against the best bowlers whoch as ive illustrated he wasnt. And as far as cashing in is concerned Lara has faced Zimbabwe and Bangladesh a total of 4 times Bang at home and Zim away . Tendy has played both teams a total of 14 times!! I just noticed this in stats guru. I can only imagine what Laras overall record would like with those 10 extra tests against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.Well unlike the Warne vs Murali, Dravid vs Ponting, Hayden being a flat-track bully, Lee not being a good enough test bowler, in my time on this site this argument hasn't been around that much nor has caused much headaches on this site.
So unlike the infamous Warne vs Murali argument especially, i think between now & whenever these two legendary batsmen retire i think we can discuss a civilized manner which one of these two is better.
Ok so i'll start, before i had my little debate on this topic last year I definately thought Lara was better, but as C_C showed i think they are some fair reasons to say that Tendulkar up to 2001 (the established date here as the time when most of the top bowlers from around the world have declined & pitches around the world became extremely flat) the little master had a fair amount of aspects ahead of the Prince of port of spain up to 2001:
Lara up to 2001
Tendulkar up to 2001
1. Tendulkar is more consistent than Lara
2. Tendulkar averages better than Lara againts good/great attacks
3. Tendulkar is far more versatile than Lara overall and this is indicated by the fact that while their home averages are about the same (with Lara having a slight adavantage), Tendulkar has a better away average.
4. Tendulkar averages better in Australia when McGrath & Warne played together, stats show he averages 23 points more in England but i maintain that Tendulkar has faced poor english attacks in all his 3 tours here while Lara in lara's 3 tours he only encountered a poor attack in 95 & faced very good attacks in 2000 & 2004. But when India come here in 2007 we'll see how he goes, even if he isn't the same Tendulkar of post 2002..
Tendulkar averages 24 more in PAK, on his 1st tour to Pakistan at just 16 facing Imran/Wasim/Waqar/Qadir, Tendulkar averaged 36.Lara in 2 tours to Pakistan in 90/91 & 97 averaged 24.50 & 21.50. This is signigicant that a young tendulkar could average 36 vs these great bowlers & in 97 Lara barely averaged 21 vs Wasim/Waqar
While their is not much to pick and chose between their respective records in SRI, Lara has dominated Vaas & Murali at their peaks while Tendulkar never did that. But iverall its enough to say that Tendulkar has done much better than Lara overseas.
5. Tendulkar has averaged 40+ away from home againts good/great attacks more times than Lara. Lara up until 2001 only did so once vs SRI in 2001 while recently in Australia he averaged 57. Lara also never averaged 40+ in South Africa when Donald-Pollock were playing nor when Wasim-Waqar etc were playing.
But it can be argued here that Tendulkar's record in SA vs a good/great attack, he had more of a chance to prove himself over their vs Donald-Pollock at the peak of their powers than Lara did, but you can only take of what oppurtunities you get but the fact that Tendulkar played againts a good/great SA attack 3 times in the 90s compared to Lara's one is significant
6. Lara failed to score a century vs Donald-Pollock or Wasim-Waqar etc. Tendulkar did so againts both.
7. Tendulkar has faced a superior bowling opposition throughout his career than Lara has. The only good/world-class/great bowlers (which ever you prefer) that Lara faced but Tendulkar didn't was Kumble and Srinath in 1994. The world-class/great bowlers that Tendulkar faced but Lara didn't are Ambrose, Walsh, Imran Khan, Bishop, Qadir & Hadlee.
8. Tendulkar's technique is superior to Lara's which is shown by the fact that Lara had a big technical flaw throughout the 90s when he was vulnerable outside off-stump and was caught in the slips & the gully & point region a lot. A weakness exposed superbly by the great Glenn McGrath. Tendulkar at his best during the 90s has only been occasionally vulnerable to the incutter, a weakness exposed at times by Donald, McGrath & Wasim Akram.
But for me with Lara never needed great technique, Lara is all about great hand-eye co-ordination, utter brilliance, powerful, stamina, a huge appetite for runs & an the temperament for the big occasion.
The three (3) main area's where i could say Lara is better than Tendulakr are:
1. When in full flow Lara is definately more destructive than Tendulkar & better to watch IMO.
2. Lara can hurt an attack more than Tendulkar, which is shown by the amount of scores he has over 150.
3. Under pressure Lara has the ability to make runs in those situation and win games for his side, which is showed by the famous 153* not out in 1999.
So to summarize even though since 2001 Lara has really been dominant againts less superb-attacks of the 90s & much flatter pitches, Tendulkar has faced the same bowlers but hasn't cashed in for various reasons (injuries probably being a major reason), one can say that you can't really say much about them during this period. But sadly for Lara the fact is that while the best bowlers were around & pitches were not so flat during the 90s Tendulkar was better.
Its all againts Lara but i'll still rather to see him bat than Tendulkar any day
But overall i hope this argument doesn't become like Warne vs Murali but somehow i dont think so..
Would be cool if the mods could stick this.
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
That ratio of scoring was a very common trend in Lara's career - after ENG 95.
Check AUS 96/97, 2000/01, Eng 04 (home & away), SRI 97, ENG 2000, SA 05, IND 06, NZ 05/06. A string of low scores then a big one. Which shows Lara inconsistency & his unpredictability.
But thats not Tendy's fault. Lara was just conquered by the Aussie greats.
Look at Tendy vs SA, in his first series in 92/93 he averaged 33.66, then on a second try averaged in 96/97 averaged 40.16. That gives a clear idea of Tendy's superiotity as a traveller
Just like againts ENG 2004 when he score the 400 in a dead rubber test. In this series although he had a few shocking decisions againts him, he never looked truly comfortable againts McGrath/Warne.
Tendy's performances againts AUS in 03/04 doesn't hold merit really - since it was clear Tendy was out of form & it was a weak Australian attack on some flat pitches. That series doesn't count in any argument when talking about Tendy's record vs good/great AUS attacks.
I never said he Tendy was superb away from home. Just that he was better than Lara away from hom.
I dont think that record away from home is accurate.
Lara would averaged 40+ away vs good/great attacks in 92/93 (AUS), 2001/02 (SRI), AUS 05/06 (although he wasn't ever dominant in this series).
Tendy averaged 40+ away vs " in 99/00 (AUS), 96/97 (SA), 97 (SRI) - although these where some ABSOLUTE ROADS, 96/97 (WI), AUS 2007/08
At his peak Tendy has never struggled at home againts any good/great attack except for SA 96/97.
I was never downplaying those achievments. As i said in point 3...Tendulkar is far more versatile than Lara overall and this is indicated by the fact that while their home averages are about the same (with Lara having a slight adavantage), Tendulkar has a better away average.
Lara averaged 58 at home while 47 away, while Tendy averaged 54 home & away. Thats pretty clear cut, to my point 1 - that Tendy is more consistent.
Lara also was not out of form in 2001 when he faced SA @ home.
Last edited:
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Haa...my intial analysis never payed attention to runs vs ZIM & BANG - or any other weak bowling attacks from any nations.
Plus im quite sure if you remove ZIM & BANG from Tendy's record. He would still average more than Lara
MrIncredible
U19 Cricketer
See above or better yet try stats guru. I cant understand the logic of Lara's dry spells being down to being found out and Tendy's to being out of form. My responses are embolded because im new to this forum and i still dont know how to use mutiple quotes. Sorry about that.
Last edited:
MrIncredible
U19 Cricketer
Just did over their entire careers if u removed Zim and Bang from both players' records (TBF) Tendy averages 51.8 and Lara 52.83. Didnt expect Tendulkars record to take such a hit but just underscores the point that u cant always go by what people say. Incidentally Tendy also loses out on two of his 4 highest scores.
99*
International Debutant
Lara, when I first saw him was for me the best batsman I was ever going to see. The dominance that shone through when he was at the crease was obvious, he was aggressive without looking too reckless. But you knew he could fail at times, most of the time he would look unstoppable but there where always times where he looked sluggish and had to work for runs. But that was what Lara 'was', part of his image was the unknown, would Lara be his amazing best or would it be a struggle.
Tendulkar on the other hand struck me as technical perfection in a batting world, every time he walked out you knew, he was scoring big today. No matter the pitch or bowlers, if Tendy was at his best form it would be as close to watching Bradman as I would ever come to see. But, sometimes he would just look average. It was a 'Wow, that shouldn't happen' moment, few and far between, but they are always there. There was the image of, this is Tendulkar, he will do well. But every so often he wouldn't and it never looked like he could change that.
Because of that I always liked Lara more.
Tendulkar on the other hand struck me as technical perfection in a batting world, every time he walked out you knew, he was scoring big today. No matter the pitch or bowlers, if Tendy was at his best form it would be as close to watching Bradman as I would ever come to see. But, sometimes he would just look average. It was a 'Wow, that shouldn't happen' moment, few and far between, but they are always there. There was the image of, this is Tendulkar, he will do well. But every so often he wouldn't and it never looked like he could change that.
Because of that I always liked Lara more.
Slifer
International Captain
Interesting and tbh ill be sure to look into this myself but if what u wrote is true (not that im doubting u) I might have to reverse my stance on this debate. Looks like Lara > SRT from whats been posted by Mr Incredible
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
Thats the truth.
As i said before to argument you brought up about Lara being out of form from 96-01, thats not true. Since as we have agreed, you are basically saying the amount of times McGrath worked him out, was not a fluke.
The only time Lara was out of form in his career was in ENG 2000 "to a level", when he just came back from 6 months away from the game - and he was batitng with shades which clearly indicated he was having some eye issues. Other than that his low to big ratio of scores againts the good/great attacks is jsut how the great man plays.
Great players like Lara dont loose form like that, Shane Warne was out for a year & came back with a bang in SRI 04...
Click on my quote button on my post & look how i structure it. Hopefully that helps...
Amm sir, these series have basically nothing in comparison to the incosistencies Lara in various series that i highlighted.
I never saw NZ 95 (live or highlights) so i wont comment, but whats wrong with that series?
SRI 97 - Whats the issue there & how is it comparable to Lara's inconsistencies?
I have the PAK 99 series on tape & Tendy got himself out in each innings, rather than good deliveries or being worked out. Especially his hundred in Chennai, so thats out...
IND never played NZ away in 02 or home in 05 (only in 02/03 they toured NZ), while the PAK series in 04 Tendy was clearly out of form suffering from the ill-effects of his tennis elbow injury.
Since you brought up those latter series, I should probably highlight what i consider to TENDULKAR's PEAK, his injury woes period and the revival.
From Old trafford 1990 (that hundred that benaud always talks about) TO QPO 2002 (until the pedro collins geniunely found a weakness in his technique in the caribbean). Tendulkar was at his ultimate best.
Then from ENG 02 to PAK 07/08. He struggled on & off with his tennis elbow woes & although he still made hundreds it was generally felt that Tendy was not the same batsmen he was during the 90s.
But since his performances in AUS 07/08 until now, Tendy has been showing that old spark in test matches again & has even banised a MAJOR point Lara had ahead of him that:
His hundred vs ENG @ Chennai, quite fittingly where he failed vs PAK in that famous test, proves that he can do that also.me said:
As i said, that series like ENG 04 & may others when Lara has been worked out & smashed a big hundred in a dead-rubber test - should be taken on its face value. Since it was clear that big average during that series vs AUS in 05, is misleading since he never looked dominant in that series.
Well technically the ENG attack Lara faced in 2004, was in its embryonic stages. All the bowlers except Harmison had improved beyond sight come 2005. No English fan although they had bowled wonderfully as a unit, was at the time saying "this attack could win the Ashes next year".
What those series does prove though clearly is my point 8:
Lara in 2004 was 35 & Flintoff along with that others bowlers exposed that weakness Mcgrath had done so well - plus Flintoff himself a few times in England found a new flaw by bowling Lara around his legs a few times.me said:
As i said above between Barbados 2002 to Kolkatta 07. Tendy was universally said be past his best days until recently.
That series vs AUS in 04 where hs averaged below 30 is a perfect example, since Tendy CLEARLY was having serious problems with his tennis-elbow. He missed the first two test of the series because of it.
Nonsense. In the 90s againts the best bowlers when the pitches weren't as flat as this 2000s era. Tendy was better than Lara.
Haa...well having watched the 05/06 series i can safely saw that wasn't the case. It was 96/97 & 2000/01 all over again.
I dont disagee, i said so myself:
me said:
I explained this above..
I disapproved this above...
No he just was worked out in PAK & SA by Wasim, Waqar, Donald & Pollock.
I dont disgree that Tendy could have such a high scoring series like Lara, its the two things Lara has over him that i said in my initially summary:
me said:
Having seen that 98 serie, its just one of those oddd things. He didn't look out of form in that series at all, just unfortunately didn't score a hundred.
No attack never exposed Tendulkar technically as they did with Lara.
Tendy has never been dominant against ne great attack home or away so this point is mute.
I was never advocating that Tendy was dominant againts any of these great attacks. Just that he did more often - simple.
Well then if my memory is correct Tendy two stints as IND test captain coincidentally came vs SA at home in those two series haaa. So thats why he sort of struggled for the Proteas in those two series.
I predit you may want to counter & say Lara having the captaincy from ENG 98-AUS 99 & he struggled, but lets not forget that would not be true.
Given that when Lara had the captaincy again from AUS 03 until retirement (except for a few series when C'Paul lead). The same ratio of scoring was prevalent again, nothing had changed.
Tendy never was captain no other time & didn't face AUS in 05, rather 04 & he wasn't captain.
Haaa...im surprised myself. But thats easily corrected when you take out any failures Tendy has from WI 02 (Barbados test) to PAK 07 (kolkatta test). For reasons i already stated
Last edited:
MrIncredible
U19 Cricketer
U cant take them out my friend otherwise u will have to do it for all cricketers who have experienced poor form and ailments (which is pretty much everyone). Tendy owes his reputation to making runs against less than stellar attacks. Its no coincidence that all his great performances vs Australia (for example) came when McWarne were missing or when Warne was bowling with a bunch of no-name bowlers (see 97 series in India). Unlike Lara he has had his fill of lightweights like Bangladesh and Zim, and the current English team (who even Sarwan made runs against, Sarwan!!!) I suspect Tendy will correct his record vs RSA and his supporters will be shouting from the roof top how great he is keenly forgetting that when he had the chance to make runs vs a peak RSA attack he got owned (and averaged less than LAra lol). Lara>Tendy. O and btw Tendy is the highest run maker in tests and has the most centuries too bad it took him an extra 10 inns to pass Lara's mark.
Zinzan
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Haha, nice one. Only took me 3 years to notice
aussie
Hall of Fame Member
I think you stats picking here. As i said i never saw that IND in NZ series of 1995. Unless But his scores of 4, 0 not out, 52 not out & 2. Hardly show a situation based on blind stats they he was worked out technically - especially a NZ attack who clearly didn't have any teeth to trouble him on Indian pitches.
The argument is not just the statistical ratio of lower scores - followed by a big hundred. The argument is againts Lara is that in between big scores he was worked out technically.
As i said i have the IND vs PAK series on tape. Tendulkar was never troubled technically, he got out to good deliveries in all his innings, excpet the lose lofted drive that got him out in that hundred in Chennai.
So their is no compariosn to what how Lara performed in AUS 96/97 or 2000/01 for example.
Yes Lara was affected by that dislocated shoulder, but it lasted about what 5-6 months?. Lara was back for the 03 world cup & up unitl retirement Lara was batting brilliantly.
Tendy tennis-elbow clearly affected him MUCH more for years, especially in tests (His ODI was still very good). Tendy played because he knew IND needed him, that doesn't change the fact that between ENG 02 to PAK 07/08 it made him lesser of a test batsman.
This clearly isn't the case, especially in their own back-wards which was the point i was making Lara averaged 37 vs Mcgrath between 96/97 - 2005/06. While Tendy in his only series vs them in 99/2000 & averaged 46.
On their records vs PAK & SA in those countries againts Donald/Pollock & Wasim/Waqar let me repeat these key inital quote:
post 1 said:
Of the AUS attack was better. But the point of the comparison is that is descredits one of the 3 things i always gave Lara ahead of Tendy:
It was a general consensus for a long time, that Tendy couldn't play such an innings under pressure like what Lara did in 99. His innings vs ENG @ Chennai dispelled it.point 3 said:
Thats irrelevant he chose to bat Aussie so he has to accept the good, the bad and the ugly.
And as im telling you, which is fact. Tendy tennis elbow injury was at its worst state. He clearly wasn't in any sort of form vs AUS in 2004. He played because his presence was hopefully going to maybe help IND during that major series.
But nun where as significant as Tendulkar's tennis elbow injury which affected him from pretty much 5 years.
The argument is all about the runs they made away from home againts good/great attacks.
Its the truth. Coincidentally whether you wish to look at in hindsight, statistically or the situation ATT. When Tendy captained IND in the 90s it clearly affected his batting.
This is all wrong. Hopefully by the time you reach this quote, you would have seen your mistakes.
Last edited:
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Its not fair to make such short posts.
If you had put two smilies in that post I would have taken one of them out of context and told you what was wrong with it
slippyslip
U19 12th Man
If the Tendulkar fans can show me Tendulkar doing the same as Lara against Austrlalia in 1999 or Sri Lanka in late 2001 then I will say Tendulkar is better.
Lara averaged 114.66 against Sri Lanka in 2001 with 0 not outs.
But Tendulkar never did the heroics that Lara did.
I still cant believe Lara only had 6 not outs in his career.
Lara averaged 114.66 against Sri Lanka in 2001 with 0 not outs.
But Tendulkar never did the heroics that Lara did.
I still cant believe Lara only had 6 not outs in his career.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
When you say wrong, I take it you've done nothing but look at Statsguru and cut and pasted selected portions to make your pointIts not fair to make such short posts.
If you had put two smilies in that post I would have taken one of them out of context and told you what was wrong with it
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
What do you mean "when I say wrong"? I never say wrong
As for your "taking it that I've done nothing" , who cares what you take or leave
See this is exactly what is wrong with your types. When you cut and paste you are making a point when others make a point they are cutting and pasting.you've done nothing but look at Statsguru and cut and pasted selected portions to make your point
Typical double standards .. Bah !!
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Just got some weird looks on the bus when I loled at that.What do you mean "when I say wrong"? I never say wrong
As for your "taking it that I've done nothing" , who cares what you take or leave
See this is exactly what is wrong with your types. When you cut and paste you are making a point when others make a point they are cutting and pasting.
Typical double standards .. Bah !!
Which proves bus passengers better than train passengers, except in swinging condititons when bus passengers have epic failure.
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
And thank God you broke that "chain" I was on the verge of putting you on my overflowing ignore list