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

[bagapath]

lara was more fun to watch. and he composed more classics than sachin. but sachin has had more consistent success around the globe and he was, slightly, more reliable.

though they both can be called aethetically pleasing (artist vs classical technician) and they both can be praised for their consistency and durability (10000 + runs at 50+ avg) lara's special moments outnumber sachin's. tough tough call. but it should be lara on his day. but sachin will always have his own supporters for the way he has managed his career and fame (which I dont want to consider in this debate). we are really really lucky to have seen most of the careers of these two champions. both significantly ahead of ponting in my book. after these three would be daylight, pietersen, waugh, dravid, inzamam, sehwag, hayden, sangakkara, kallis and smith from the last 20 years.

 

[Shri]

Sachin was denied a match winning century record by India's tailenders at Chennai against Pakistan in 1999. He made 136 in that match and was the sixth(iirc) wicket to fall. India needed only 16 to win. Then the last 4 wickets fell for 4 runs and India lost the game by 12 runs. I rate that innings next only to Laxman's 281 when following on. Shame that we lost but that game was one helluva contest.

http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/410452.html

 

[aussie]

Sachin was denied a match winning century record by India's tailenders at Chennai against Pakistan in 1999. He made 136 in that match and was the sixth(iirc) wicket to fall. India needed only 16 to win. Then the last 4 wickets fell for 4 runs and India lost the game by 12 runs. I rate that innings next only to Laxman's 281 when following on. Shame that we lost but that game was one helluva contest.

Chennai applauds Pakistan | Specials | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com

I have always viewed that innings in comparison to Lara's 153, in that Tendy played a poor shot to get out at crucila time after he was playing brilliantly. Unlike Lara (although he was dropped by Healy near the end) who held his nerve under equal pressure.

 

[aussie]

Doesnt remotely compare to Lara's 153* tbh

It doesn't have to compare. That innings erased the demons of Chennai 99. If Tendy had gotten out & IND at lost ppl would still be saying he is a choker.

 

[honestbharani]

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!).

If Lara had taken a simple catch, Windies would have won and this post would have been pointless!!!



And btw, Sachin did the exact same thing against Australia at Sydney in 2004 and FFS, he scored slower than Lara..

 

[honestbharani]

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

That 1999 series was amazing because Lara did all that with that chipped bone in his right elbow or something. He had not fully recovered in 2002 from that... Against INdia in the Windies that season, he could not play the cut, pull or down the track lofted shot.. Basically most of the power shots...

 

[honestbharani]

What next?

Ponting's runs in Australia don't count as he is a great player of pace bowling.

McGrath's wickets v tail enders don't count.


On a serious note, I can't decide between Lara and Tendulkar. For the 90s, I rate Lara higher but only once Tendulkar's career is over, I will be able to compare them career wise.

For me, as a test batsman, Lara still ever so slightly edges it... When you include ODIs, Sachin little easily.



But boy are we lucky to have watched two of the greatest all time batsmen at their peaks!!!

 

[Pigeon]

It's pretty hard to choose between great batsmen when they both don't have any glaring weaknesses in their records or techniques. What I do notice is that although they are at the same level they contrast pretty well also.

Would you choose a technically proficient right-hander who is more consistent and harder to get out when he gets to the crease? Or a stylish left-hander who is slightly less consistent and more vulnerable when he first gets to the crease, yet is capable of near superhuman feats of batsmenship and plays better when under pressure?

Your choice between the batsmen depends on what you prioritize in batting. If you care more about consistency and obduracy, they you would choose Tendulkar. If you prefer the ability to perform when under the fire or to produce special innings, like I do, then Lara is your man.

This.

 

[Pigeon]

Tendulkar is a great player of spin. No one denies that.

I still remember Ganguly crying like a little child over the 2nd test pitch against Australia in 2004 when they lost the series.

It had some green on it. GREEN. In India! And he smashed his toys in a fit a bit like how my 3 and a half year old nephew does.

Actually, thats an unfair comparison to make. I shouldnt compare my nephew to someone like Ganguly.

What has Ganguly got to do with this thread?

 

[Pigeon]

I don't agree with the view that in the 90's Lara was better.

Records from 1990-1999 without Zimbabwe (Bangladesh wasn't a test side then)


Sachin 1990-1999 66 matches 5523 runs 59.38 average 22 centuries
Lara 1990-1999 65 matches 5573 runs 51.60 average 13 centuries

Sachin averages more against Aus, Eng, NZ, SA, SL
Lara averages more against Pakistan by 0.3

actually both have pretty poor averages against Pakistan 30 and 30.3.

In away series

Tendulkar averages more against Australia by 5, SA again by 5 (though both have poor averages)
Lara averages more against Eng (Sachin averages 74, Lara 85) and New Zealand by 3.

90's were Tendulkar's.

I don't understand the logic of excluding Zimbabwe of the 90s. They were good enough test team and though not the top drawer still exuded quality. Akin to today's NZ team.

 

[Pigeon]

Lara played the more match winning test match innings which lacked from Tendulkar's repertoire. He didn't make the big double hundreds either. While Tendulkar was more consistent, Lara achieved greater feats and for that, I rate Lara higher.

What is a match winning innings?

Only 4th innings 100s count as matchwinning?

Many a time, Tendulkar set up Indian wins in the first innings itself with a splendid hundred and left enough stuff for Kumble & Co. to enforce a victory. It is not Tendulkar's fault that he had for most of the period a terrible bowling attack, except for Kumble, to do the job.

 

[Pigeon]

I will always give the edge to Lara.

1. Lara averages more vs the great attacks that both players played against (WW, Donald/Pollock, and Mcwarne) dont believe me then just try statsguru at cricinfo.

2. Tendy has never dominated ne very good/great attacks the way Lara has (Aust 99, SL 01, RSA 03)
3. Lara has reached depths Tendy has only recently experienced but Lara has also touched heights Tendy can only dream of ( 7 500+ series, 9 doubles (none vs Zim or Bang), 99 series vs Oz, 01 series vs SL, 400* etc )
4. Tendy is a better traveller but lets not pretend like it is cake walk making runs on some of the wickets we have in the WI (Sabina, Kensington, QPO).

No point in just "dominating" the great attacks of the 90s if you cannot maintain consistency over your career. Nadal may have defeated Federer more times than otherwise, but the legend among them is undoubtedly Federer.

I love to watch Lara on song. However his inconsistency is what irked me the most. For my Heart XI, he would be in, but for my Head XI, Tendulkar would get the nod.

 

[Pigeon]

If Lara had taken a simple catch, Windies would have won and this post would have been pointless!!!



And btw, Sachin did the exact same thing against Australia at Sydney in 2004 and FFS, he scored slower than Lara..

"If" is a funny word. I don't exactly remember this, but wasn't Lara dropped on the way to his magnificient 153*?

 

[honestbharani]

"If" is a funny word. I don't exactly remember this, but wasn't Lara dropped on the way to his magnificient 153*?

I guess you also don't exactly remember that Healy dived full length right to the foot of first slip for that catch and would have been considered a "great" catch had he taken it...


"if" is indeed a funny word.

 

[Pigeon]

I have always viewed that innings in comparison to Lara's 153, in that Tendy played a poor shot to get out at crucila time after he was playing brilliantly. Unlike Lara (although he was dropped by Healy near the end) who held his nerve under equal pressure.

Lara should be thankful to Ambrose and Walsh at the other end to have assisted him in the chase then.

Tendulkar unfortunately didn't have that luxury. It is no secret that he was in total pain which led him to that reckless shot. He himself described he felt like dying.

It is not as if Tendulkar has never performed in critical junctures. Tendulkar's 3rd innings 150 on a turner track during the Chennai 98 test match was stuff of glory. India had quite significant 1st innings deficit and Warne, who was living upto his name with 4 wickets incl Tendulkar in the first innings, was threatening to run through the Indian innings.

But Tendulkar just scythed through the Aussie attack.

 

[Pigeon]

I guess you also don't exactly remember that Healy dived full length right to the foot of first slip for that catch and would have been considered a "great" catch had he taken it...


"if" is indeed a funny word.

Still is a drop right? healy has taken plenty of such catches in the past also. See I am not finding fault with that innings, it was simply glorious. But it was not blemishless and without luck.

 

[honestbharani]

Still is a drop right? healy has taken plenty of such catches in the past also. See I am not finding fault with that innings, it was simply glorious. But it was not blemishless and without luck.

why is that relevant here, though? You talked about Lara's 400 being selfish and costing his team time.. I replied with that post to show that they were well on their way to winning even though they had batted for 7 sessions and a bit.

 

[Pigeon]

why is that relevant here, though? You talked about Lara's 400 being selfish and costing his team time.. I replied with that post to show that they were well on their way to winning even though they had batted for 7 sessions and a bit.

They were not "well on their way" to a win as you said. England in the end comfortably batted out the draw, if you remember.

I am not suggesting it was not a top effort. It was, but it came at the cost of good amount of time which robbed WI time to push for the win. It also did not help that WI did not possess a good bowling attack also. However it would have taken a combination of McGrath-Warne to take 20 wickets in that surface within 2.5 days.

 

[bagapath]

They were not "well on their way" to a win as you said. England in the end comfortably batted out the draw, if you remember.

I am not suggesting it was not a top effort. It was, but it came at the cost of good amount of time which robbed WI time to push for the win. It also did not help that WI did not possess a good bowling attack also. However it would have taken a combination of McGrath-Warne to take 20 wickets in that surface within 2.5 days.

even on the flattest track on earth, against the worst bowling attack a first class team - leave alone a test playing nation - can put together, it is not possible for even the greatest batsmen in the world to score 400 runs (and remain unbeaten). it is a monumental knock and since that also resulted in the only face saving result for west indies in that series (apart from lara winning back the world record from hayden), that innings deserves to be treated with absolute reverence.

 

[Sanz]

tendulkar is a great player of spin. No one denies that.

I still remember ganguly crying like a little child over the 2nd test pitch against australia in 2004 when they lost the series.

It had some green on it. green. In india! And he smashed his toys in a fit a bit like how my 3 and a half year old nephew does.

Actually, thats an unfair comparison to make. I shouldnt compare my nephew to someone like ganguly.