****OFFICIAL**** Lara vs Tendulkar Debate Thread

[Lillian Thomson]

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.

That is pretty hard to believe considering he was prepared to needlessly bat for two and half days for the personal glory of making 400 and at the same time kill a Test Match stone dead.

 

[subshakerz]

That is pretty hard to believe considering he was prepared to needlessly bat for two and half days for the personal glory of making 400 and at the same time kill a Test Match stone dead.

No, I believe he left plenty of time for England to bat two innings. He batted long enough to make sure West Indies would not have to bat again, and got some personal glory along the way.

 

[oitoitoi]

Personally I take the Mcgrath view; Tendulkar was better, but Lara just had so much style.

This is a really pointless debate, it's basically arguing over personal tastes, they were both awesome, once in a lifetime players, Lara should still be playing IMO, let it go.

 

[Pigeon]

That is pretty hard to believe considering he was prepared to needlessly bat for two and half days for the personal glory of making 400 and at the same time kill a Test Match stone dead.

Year		Runs	Inngs	NO	Runs	 Avg 	100s	50s
year 1997	12	17	1	1000	 62.50 	4	3
year 1998	5	9	1	647	 80.87 	3	1
year 1999	10	19	3	1088	 68.00 	5	4
year 2000	6	10	1	575	 63.88 	2	1
year 2001	10	18	2	1003	 62.68 	3	6
year 2002	16	26	1	1392	 55.68 	4	5
year 2003	5	9	0	153	 17.00 	0	1
year 2004	10	15	5	915	 91.50 	3	2
Total		74	123	14	6773	 62.14 	24	23

That's Tendulkar at his peak. I am not sure Lara managed such a peak. This he managed despite playing with injury, and amongst countless ODIs, which sapped him.

 

[Pigeon]

No, I believe he left plenty of time for England to bat two innings. He batted long enough to make sure West Indies would not have to bat again, and got some personal glory along the way.

No he did not, as the match result suggested.

2.5 days of batting on a dead surface would never win you test matches especially against such a strong team like England (of that day!).

 

[Pigeon]

Personally I take the Mcgrath view; Tendulkar was better, but Lara just had so much style.

This is a really pointless debate, it's basically arguing over personal tastes, they were both awesome, once in a lifetime players, Lara should still be playing IMO, let it go.

I agree with this, except that I subscribe to Warne.

 

[subshakerz]

Personally I take the Mcgrath view; Tendulkar was better, but Lara just had so much style.

This is a really pointless debate, it's basically arguing over personal tastes, they were both awesome, once in a lifetime players, Lara should still be playing IMO, let it go.

Actually, by the end of his career, McGrath rated Lara as better than Tendulkar. Murali also rated Lara ahead, along with plenty of pundits and peers.

Cricket News - Lara is the best: McGrath

 

[Cruxdude]

I am biased. It will always be Tendulkar > all for me.

Started watching cricket in 1996 and throughout the worldcup Sachin smashed all and sundry. The test series in 1998 against Australia was too good. Warne was pitching it way beyond leg stump and Tendulkar kept hitting him over Midwicket and Long-on. Those were some of the best exhibition of attacking cricket. I remember one banner particularly well. It was the second Indian innings and Sachin and Sidhu were going after Warne. Some guy held up a banner saying 'Warne you can as well have your fielders in the Marina' . Marina is a beach that lies near the Chennai cricekt ground.

1998 was a really great year for Sachin fans. Sharjah was the best one-day innings I have ever seen. I still remember Sachin pushing for twos when he had been batting for more than forty overs. He actually started shouting at poor Laxman who had just come in for running too slow

Ohh..Those were great days.

 

[Pratters]

I'll select Warney. Thanks.

 

[Pigeon]

I am biased. It will always be Tendulkar > all for me.

Started watching cricket in 1996 and throughout the worldcup Sachin smashed all and sundry. The test series in 1998 against Australia was too good. Warne was pitching it way beyond leg stump and Tendulkar kept hitting him over Midwicket and Long-on. Those were some of the best exhibition of attacking cricket. I remember one banner particularly well. It was the second Indian innings and Sachin and Sidhu were going after Warne. Some guy held up a banner saying 'Warne you can as well have your fielders in the Marina' . Marina is a beach that lies near the Chennai cricekt ground.

1998 was a really great year for Sachin fans. Sharjah was the best one-day innings I have ever seen. I still remember Sachin pushing for twos when he had been batting for more than forty overs. He actually started shouting at poor Laxman who had just come in for running too slow

Ohh..Those were great days.

In fact, Tendulkar;s prime was "wasted" away in meaningless ODIs. Had he played the same no. of tests that Ponting played in his prime, his stats would be looking much different. Also these ODIs sapped the energy out of him and injured him when he was still in his peak.

 

[Cruxdude]

In fact, Tendulkar;s prime was "wasted" away in meaningless ODIs. Had he played the same no. of tests that Ponting played in his prime, his stats would be looking much different. Also these ODIs sapped the energy out of him and injured him when he was still in his peak.

Ya, but these ODIs helped build the Legend that is Sachin. BCCI has always been greedy. In the days of ODIs it was ODIs all the time and now it is the IPL all the time. With the form Tendulkar is in now I feel so sad not watching him play test matches. Hope when the tests do come he can cling on to this form.

 

[Pigeon]

Ya, but these ODIs helped build the Legend that is Sachin. BCCI has always been greedy. In the days of ODIs it was ODIs all the time and now it is the IPL all the time. With the form Tendulkar is in now I feel so sad not watching him play test matches. Hope when the tests do come he can cling on to this form.

Sure it created Tendulkar the marketing giant. But it destroyed Tendulkar the cricketer to a great extent.

 

[Cruxdude]

Sure it created Tendulkar the marketing giant. But it destroyed Tendulkar the cricketer to a great extent.

Won't say destroyed. Wasted his best years as you said earlier.

 

[bagapath]

Actually, by the end of his career, McGrath rated Lara as better than Tendulkar. Murali also rated Lara ahead, along with plenty of pundits and peers.

Cricket News - Lara is the best: McGrath

i cant choose between them. but benaud rated tendulkar above lara. bradman preferred him, too. warne also thinks sachin was better than lara. ESPN legends panel chose sachin above lara. CMJ has got him much higher on his top 100 list compared to brian.

 

[Pigeon]

i cant choose between them. but benaud rated tendulkar above lara. bradman preferred him, too. warne also thinks sachin was better than lara. ESPN legends panel chose sachin above lara. CMJ has got him much higher on his top 100 list compared to brian.

cue a Lara fan coming up with exactly same no. of past greats preferring Lara over Tendulkar.

:waiting:

 

[The Sean]

cue a Lara fan coming up with exactly same no. of past greats preferring Lara over Tendulkar.

And what would be the problem if they did precam?

 

[slippyslip]

Sure it created Tendulkar the marketing giant. But it destroyed Tendulkar the cricketer to a great extent.

Thats purely arbitrary. If you throw away his ODI record which is fantastic. Clearly better than Lara's.

 

[slippyslip]

That is pretty hard to believe considering he was prepared to needlessly bat for two and half days for the personal glory of making 400 and at the same time kill a Test Match stone dead.

Right, because even if West Indies had declated when he hit 300 you think there would have been a result? Theres no guarantee West Indies could have won. And lets not forget that Tendulkar doesnt even have a first class triple century.

Looking back at the scoresheets you could argue Lara had demoralised England so much that it caused them to fail in the first innings. And even if West Indies did they would still have lost the series 3-1. Big deal.

Tendulkar has got to bat on plenty of flat tracks in India. But, oh no! Lara is not allowed to smash runs on a flat track.

 

[slippyslip]

In fact, Tendulkar;s prime was "wasted" away in meaningless ODIs. Had he played the same no. of tests that Ponting played in his prime, his stats would be looking much different. Also these ODIs sapped the energy out of him and injured him when he was still in his peak.

Lara's prime was wasted in a sub-standard team with poor management. If you want to bring in mitigating circumstances I can bring in as many for Lara as you can for Tendulkar.

Remember that 1999 series against Australia? Lara, from the batting side, single handedly saved West Indies from defeat.

And as I pointed out before Lara scored 688 runs in 3 test matches in Sri Lanka. Imagine if it was a 5 test series. He would have been the first to score 1000 runs in a series. He scored something like 43% of the total West Indian runs - a record for a series.

And they still lost 3-0

 

[aussie]

Personally I take the Mcgrath view; Tendulkar was better, but Lara just had so much style.

This is a really pointless debate, it's basically arguing over personal tastes, they were both awesome, once in a lifetime players, Lara should still be playing IMO, let it go.

Well for me given i started the thread, i prefer Lara still. But its clear Tendy was slightly better when bowling was tougher in the 90s, which is the ice-breaker when judging them.