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

[MrIncredible]

I think the whole term "matchwinning batsman" is a bit misleading. With a few exceptions, its bowlers in tests who win matches, not batsmen. I think the correct way to frame it is if someone is a "pressure" batsman. For me, Lara would more likely to score runs when they are needed, regardless of if the team wins or not. Sri Lanka 2001 is a good example of this, and there are many more. If the team is 50-4 on a first day pitch, I would back Lara to perservere over Tendulkar. If the team needs to grind out a draw, I would back Lara to stay at the crease over Tendulkar. If the match is in the balance, I would back Lara to gain the momentum over Tendulkar.

Not that Tendulkar hasn't performed under pressure, its just that he hasn't as often as Lara. He seemed to make most of his runs either in lost causes or when the team is already in the supremacy.

I have to say i agree. If not for Walsh and Amby bowling over Oz for 146 Lara's 153* probably would have been in vain (as would have been his 213 in the previous test).

 

[Pratters]

Yeah it is a bit tedious to use match winning batsman for tests but I meant more as a 'pressure' player. Tendulkar handled pressure too, hell he had the pressure of millions riding when he batted but Lara handled in game pressure situations better.

 

[bagapath]

Warne got injured afterwards.

Moreoever, except for perhaps the miniscule sample of 2 tests in 2004, virtually every other series, tendulkar owned Warne, right from 92 to 2001.

even in 2004 sachin got out cheaply in one test but scored a match winning 50 in the last match (in which warne didnt play)

 

[aussie]

Not u again. If u add it all up (incl the 04 series) Lara still averages more vs good/great Oz attacks. Dont know y tendulkar gets a pass for playing while being injured and Warne, Lara and everyone else dont.

Not in away to PAK, AUS, SA when the Donald, Pollock, Warne, McGrath, Wasim, Waqar where playing. Both of them are even at home, its the runs away which is the acid test, which shows Tendy was more versatile againts the big boys.

Dont know y tendulkar gets a pass for playing while being injured and Warne, Lara and everyone else dont.

.

As i told you before. None of Lara's injuries where as major as Tendys tennis elbow which affected him on & off for 5 YEARS (ENG 02-PAK 07/08) in tests.

Lara first out of form/injury period was 2000 vs ENG when he took 6 months away from game after a miserable stint in ENG, he came into that tour with an eye problem since he was batting with shades. That affected him during that tour only.

Secondly a dislocated shoulder after 2002 CT in SRI. But he back to his best right away for the 2003 WC until the end of his career.

Plus im a Lara fan as i told. Just giving Tendy his correct props..

 

[subshakerz]

Injured or not, he wasn't at his best in 1998. It is still creditable that Tendulkar destroyed him the way he did and the short boundaries in India hard a part to play in it but Warne wasn't really bowling at his best in the series. Tendulkar could never destroy Warne like he did in 1998 if Warne was playing with his A game on.

I never really bought this. If you look at the records, Warne had ripped through a fine South African side the series prior to the Indian one. And his shoulder injury became an issue after the test series.

The reality is that with McGrath out of the attack, he had to take up longer spells against an Indian lineup with two of the best players of spin, Sidhu and Azhar, and Tendulkar in peak form. And he came up short.

It goes to Tendulkar's credit that he reduced the best legspinner of all time to a novelty, with a bit of help from his pals.

 

[The Sean]

Warne wasn't ready in 1992.

I am talking about 1998-99.

Warne's record in 97 and 99 are mediocre to say the least. He only excelled versus England for a period. He had a great 1997 series v England which enhanced his figures but except that, Warne wasn't at his best during this period.

Warne's 97/98 series' against NZ and SA just before the India tour was his most successful home summer ever. Whether or not he was injured before, during or after the India tour which followed I don't know - but his form leading into it was exceptional.

EDIT - as subshakerz mentioned a few minutes before I did!

 

[Pratters]

Yeah I am wrong. I had read a few stats ages ago in which it showed Warne was average barring England but I was mistaken. Warne was excellent prior to the series in 1997 and then 1997-98. I have had this misconception for a while now. Thank god it is now removed.

 

[MrIncredible]

Not in away to PAK, AUS, SA when the Donald, Pollock, Warne, McGrath, Wasim, Waqar where playing. Both of them are even at home, its the runs away which is the acid test, which shows Tendy was more versatile againts the big boys.

.

As i told you before. None of Lara's injuries where as major as Tendys tennis elbow which affected him on & off for 5 YEARS (ENG 02-PAK 07/08) in tests.

Lara first out of form/injury period was 2000 vs ENG when he took 6 months away from game after a miserable stint in ENG, he came into that tour with an eye problem since he was batting with shades. That affected him during that tour only.

Secondly a dislocated shoulder after 2002 CT in SRI. But he back to his best right away for the 2003 WC until the end of his career.

Plus im a Lara fan as i told. Just giving Tendy his correct props..

Aussie the way u put it u make it seem as if Tendy buried Lara away. And they are not even at home either. Thank (insert Deity) for statsguru.

Against the bowlers listed above Tendy played 27 tests and averaged 34 overall. 29.96 at home and 39 away.

Against the said bowlers Lara played 40 tests averaged 41 overall. 50.78 at home and 33 away. Advantage Lara my friend. (Granted tendy is a better traveller 39 vs 33 is poor either way)

(Left out the 98 series in India for obvious reasons, Warne was the notable oz bowler in that series and the 92 series since Warne was debuting)

 

[honestbharani]

Lara wouldn't have made it to the ground with the sort of injuries TEndulkar was sporting

now you are juz sprouting bs... Lara played with as many, if not more, injuries than Sachin.. He had a fractured elbow or something from december 98 that only really healed around the 2003 world cup.

 

[Pigeon]

Aussie the way u put it u make it seem as if Tendy buried Lara away. And they are not even at home either. Thank (insert Deity) for statsguru.

Against the bowlers listed above Tendy played 27 tests and averaged 34 overall. 29.96 at home and 39 away.

Against the said bowlers Lara played 40 tests averaged 41 overall. 50.78 at home and 33 away. Advantage Lara my friend. (Granted tendy is a better traveller 39 vs 33 is poor either way)

Add to that Tendulkar's awesomeness against the best of WI he faced, which in return Lara did not against India.

 

[aussie]

Injured or not, he wasn't at his best in 1998.

He was going into the series & after the 1st innings of the Chennai test. I still maintain Warne had Tendy LBW @ 10 till this day in the second innings (dont know what umpire G Sharp was thinking).

But as i said, given he had no Mcgrath to pack him up. He was forced to be both the defensive & attacking bowler - so doing that againts IND @ home he was struggled to contain them for the rest of that series.

The key to winning in IND is pace as was shown by WI, AUS 04, SA 2000.

it is still creditable that Tendulkar destroyed him the way he did and the short boundaries in India hard a part to play in it but Warne wasn't really bowling at his best in the series.

Chennai & Bangalore dont have short boundaries, but Kolkatta was.

Tendulkar could never destroy Warne like he did in 1998 if Warne was playing with his A game on.

His A-game in IND as was the case in 2004 & for any spinner in IND (even for Murali). Depends on the fast bowlers dealing with the top-order, thus exposing the middle-order so the spinner can attack

 

[honestbharani]

Helped that he scored at a significantly faster rate than Lara.

u have conveniently forgotten that Sachin himself batted 7 sessions against Australia to score 241* and basically we went on batting for far longer than required..


And yes Hayden was sprouting BS and I don't think it was him who mentioned that. Ponting was the one who called Lara selfish IIRC.. AS a matter of fact, Hayden rated Lara as the best batsman of his time while Ponting has always maintained it was Sachin as far as I remember.

 

[Pratters]

But as i said, given he had no Mcgrath to pack him up. He was forced to be both the defensive & attacking bowler - so doing that againts IND @ home he was struggled to contain them for the rest of that series.

By that accord, Lara's ventures versus Murali should be discredited as Murali had no McGrath to back him. Fact is Tendulkar owned Warne and Warne has himself acknowledged that he was outplayed.

Chennai & Bangalore dont have short boundaries, but Kolkatta was.

Indian boundaries in general are short compared to Australian boundaries. It is advantageous to have longer boundaries as a leg spinner as batsmen can't hit you over the top.

 

[honestbharani]

He made a brilliant 136 ffs. It is not as if he chickened away.

Remember Lara's chickening out due to mysterious illnessess?

again.. more bs.. any real proof that he was "chickening out"?



And there were no mysterious illness.. He had Hepatitis.. Batted with it in the ICC Champions Trophy 2002 against Kenya and got a hundred without which Windies would have most probably lost to even that team....

 

[bagapath]

this thread will never die... unless tendy's career takes a very steep upward or downward jump long enough to alter his career stats significantly. it is too close otherwise. will always be.

bharani! the man in your avatar has also been compared with his arch rival for 30 years and still there is no answer to that question either.

 

[honestbharani]

Add to that Tendulkar's awesomeness against the best of WI he faced, which in return Lara did not against India.

u call that series in 97 as awesome? And the windies attacks he faced since then were worse, much worse than anything India fielded in the 90s... AT least our guys would do well at home.. They were just so bad...

 

[MrIncredible]

Add to that Tendulkar's awesomeness against the best of WI he faced, which in return Lara did not against India.

I purposely left out his stats vs WI because

a. he only faced a full wi attack in one series (granted he did very good averagin 55 not awesome
b. Lara never faced his own attack so its just a guessin game how he'd have done vs Amby and co. (do u know for sure Tendy would have done well vs his own attack??)

 

[Pigeon]

u have conveniently forgotten that Sachin himself batted 7 sessions against Australia to score 241* and basically we went on batting for far longer than required..


And yes Hayden was sprouting BS and I don't think it was him who mentioned that. Ponting was the one who called Lara selfish IIRC.. AS a matter of fact, Hayden rated Lara as the best batsman of his time while Ponting has always maintained it was Sachin as far as I remember.

I am sorry. It was Ponting who cribbed.

Ponting points finger at 'selfish' Lara | Australia Cricket News | Cricinfo.com

As to the Tendulkar story, there is a small bit of correction, Tendulkar came in the 43rd innings of Indian innings, and stayed till the end, ie 187th over. So total of 144 overs which roughly translates to 5 sessions of batting.

In contrast, Lara came in 14th over and stayed till (my god!) 202nd over, thus about 7 sessions.

 

[MrIncredible]

Are people seriously debating whether Lara was selfish or not?? I wish he was more selfish as he could have had many more than 6 not outs and could have raised his average to well over 55.

 

[Pigeon]

u call that series in 97 as awesome? And the windies attacks he faced since then were worse, much worse than anything India fielded in the 90s... AT least our guys would do well at home.. They were just so bad...

What is his record against the two greatest fast bowlers of his time Walsh and Ambrose?