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

[MrIncredible]

Even if you could it would be stats picking. Since those series where he maybe struggled early on before scoring big (during his peak) would most likely been bad shots, good deliveries etc. Unlike Lara who we know for sure would have had those struggled because of being exposed technically. Thats the key difference.



Perfect example of what is just said - stats picking. Tendy was not at his best during this series, since this was the early stages of his tennis elbow woes - added to the fact that was one of the worst AUS attacks since the dark 80s.

I have never considered this series of runs Tendy scored at his peak againts a good/great AUS attacks at home. I have saying this ALLL a long sir, you seem to missing when i say this.




That SA attack only looks good because it was the WI they were up againts. Pollock was passed his best, Ntini nor Nel hadn't peaked yet & Kallis was passed his wicket-taking best as a bowler. Plus overall those pitches where very flat.

Lee/Clark where at their peaks in 07/08 so there really is no comparison. They where jus as good an attack as McDermott/Hughes that both Lara & Tendy faced in the early 90s.

The point i was tryin to make is that u harp on how lara would have his woes early in a series only to do well in the last test and i simply showed that Tendy has done the same thing as well (and even vs an inferior Oz attack)

 

[aussie]

U got sumthin against Lara?? Those wicktes in RSA were not esp flat i wached that entire series WI bowling was just that poor.

I watched the series as well & i would have to disagree with that assesment. Yes the WI attack was poor, but you can't judge how strong the Saffie attack was by performances vs WI. This is same SA attack that 2 years prior was pumelled by AUS in 2001/02 over 6 tests. Plus had just entered that series after losing in PAK.

So what if they werent at their peak (thats debatable) Lara made runs vs a very good RSA attack away.

Lets see man for man:

Shaun Pollock
Makaya Ntini (at home)
Andrew Nel
Jacques Kallis

vs Brett Lee
Clark
Johson
Hogg/Tait

looks about even to me

Lee/Clark of 2007/08 as a new-ball pair>>>>>>>>Pollock/Ntini 2003/04 as a new-ball pair. Which is key i'm not really that fussy about the back-ups to them.

Since back in 91/92 & 92/93 when both young Tendy & Lara toured AUS only McDermott/Hughes where the regular quality bowlers, the rest of the attack was average since Reid hardly played.

Pollock was defiantely passed his peak by the stage. Ntini & Nel hadn't peak until about 2005/06 when SA toured AUS. This i am sure of.

And im not stats picking in lara vs WW/Donald . Fact is he averages more vs Donald and slightly less vs WW and significantly more vs McWarne.

You are still reading the stats blindy i'm afraid.

 

[aussie]

The point i was tryin to make is that u harp on how lara would have his woes early in a series only to do well in the last test and i simply showed that Tendy has done the same thing as well (and even vs an inferior Oz attack)

Again i say, that series was not Tendy at his peak. So it can't be considered when judging Tendy since that was at the height of tennis-elbow woes. You need to accept this.

 

[MrIncredible]

I watched the series as well & i would have to disagree with that assesment. Yes the WI attack was poor, but you can't judge how strong the Saffie attack was by performances vs WI. This is same SA attack that 2 years prior was pumelled by AUS in 2001/02 over 6 tests. Plus had just entered that series after losing in PAK.



Lee/Clark of 2007/08 as a new-ball pair>>>>>>>>Pollock/Ntini 2003/04 as a new-ball pair. Which is key i'm not really that fussy about the back-ups to them.

Since back in 91/92 & 92/93 when both young Tendy & Lara toured AUS only McDermott/Hughes where the regular quality bowlers, the rest of the attack was average since Reid hardly played.

Pollock was defiantely passed his peak by the stage. Ntini & Nel hadn't peak until about 2005/06 when SA toured AUS. This i am sure of.



You are still reading the stats blindy i'm afraid.

How should i read them then?? Tendy and Lara were poor vs WW/Donald but Tendy was a tad bit poorer. He was a slightly better traveller but it wasnt as if he set the world alight either. is that better??

 

[MrIncredible]

Again i say, that series was not Tendy at his peak. So it can't be considered when judging Tendy since that was at the height of tennis-elbow woes. You need to accept this.

Dont care, Tendy being injured or not at peak is not an excuse only because u dont afford Lara the same courtesy. Lara was clearly sub-par SL 97 to RSA (at home) '01. Fact is Tendy has had his own share of series where he would disappear and show up at the last gap.

 

[Pratters]

Harsha Bhogle on Lara v Tendulkar:

I have often marvelled at this ability to stay calm amidst extreme provocation. Maybe that is the secret of his ability and indeed, of his longevity, for a calm cricketer is a more dangerous cricketer with the mind uncluttered by thoughts of vengeance and anger. Maybe that is what separates him from Brian Lara, the other genuinely great cricketer of his era.

Lara was an astonishingly skilled sportsman and like Tendulkar took on the opposition and vanquished it with extraordinary strokeplay. But occasionally Lara's mind would wander away into a dangerous zone and he could be his own enemy. In the art of batsmanship, they were equals; indeed Lara sometimes took the art to more sublime levels, but it was Tendulkar's composure that gave him greater consistency.

Read the whole piece where Bhogle celebrates 20 years of Tendulkar in international cricket.

 

[honestbharani]

Harsha Bhogle on Lara v Tendulkar:

I have often marvelled at this ability to stay calm amidst extreme provocation. Maybe that is the secret of his ability and indeed, of his longevity, for a calm cricketer is a more dangerous cricketer with the mind uncluttered by thoughts of vengeance and anger. Maybe that is what separates him from Brian Lara, the other genuinely great cricketer of his era.

Lara was an astonishingly skilled sportsman and like Tendulkar took on the opposition and vanquished it with extraordinary strokeplay. But occasionally Lara's mind would wander away into a dangerous zone and he could be his own enemy. In the art of batsmanship, they were equals; indeed Lara sometimes took the art to more sublime levels, but it was Tendulkar's composure that gave him greater consistency.

Read the whole piece where Bhogle celebrates 20 years of Tendulkar in international cricket.

Well, it is his opinion and I respect that.. But for my money, I would still take Lara by the slightest bit ahead of Sachin in tests. Obviously, in ODIs it is Sachin easily...

 

[Slifer]

Harsha Bhogle on Lara v Tendulkar:

I have often marvelled at this ability to stay calm amidst extreme provocation. Maybe that is the secret of his ability and indeed, of his longevity, for a calm cricketer is a more dangerous cricketer with the mind uncluttered by thoughts of vengeance and anger. Maybe that is what separates him from Brian Lara, the other genuinely great cricketer of his era.

Lara was an astonishingly skilled sportsman and like Tendulkar took on the opposition and vanquished it with extraordinary strokeplay. But occasionally Lara's mind would wander away into a dangerous zone and he could be his own enemy. In the art of batsmanship, they were equals; indeed Lara sometimes took the art to more sublime levels, but it was Tendulkar's composure that gave him greater consistency.

Read the whole piece where Bhogle celebrates 20 years of Tendulkar in international cricket.

Nothing wrong with what this guy wrote agree whole heartedly. No one can argue that Lara did reach heights Tendulkar never touched

 

[SaeedAnwar]

any one who likes aggressive batting will take Lara over Tendu any day, but Tendu is definatly more technical then lara

 

[Pratters]

any one who likes aggressive batting will take Lara over Tendu any day, but Tendu is definatly more technical then lara

Brian Lara career S/R - 79.5
Sachin Tendulkar career S/R - 85.7

 

[0RI0N]

Brian Lara career S/R - 79.5
Sachin Tendulkar career S/R - 85.7

oh hai ODI S/R's, meet
Test S/R's:
Lara 59
SRT 55
Lara definately a better attacker in Tests.

 

[Pratters]

That's hardly a significant difference to separate them.

 

[marc71178]

Likewise in ODIs - it's pretty much the same difference in fact.

 

[Pratters]

I know. To call one player superior based on him being more attacking would not make sense, hence.

 

[0RI0N]

I know. To call one player superior based on him being more attacking would not make sense, hence.

yourargumentfailsheavily.jpg

 

[Cevno]

Harsha Bhogle on Lara v Tendulkar:

I have often marvelled at this ability to stay calm amidst extreme provocation. Maybe that is the secret of his ability and indeed, of his longevity, for a calm cricketer is a more dangerous cricketer with the mind uncluttered by thoughts of vengeance and anger. Maybe that is what separates him from Brian Lara, the other genuinely great cricketer of his era.

Lara was an astonishingly skilled sportsman and like Tendulkar took on the opposition and vanquished it with extraordinary strokeplay. But occasionally Lara's mind would wander away into a dangerous zone and he could be his own enemy. In the art of batsmanship, they were equals; indeed Lara sometimes took the art to more sublime levels, but it was Tendulkar's composure that gave him greater consistency.

Read the whole piece where Bhogle celebrates 20 years of Tendulkar in international cricket.

Agree with this.

 

[mohammad16]

There is just far too much about Lara's batting that just glues you to the screen. With Tendulkar I got soooo accustomed to the tradmark flick and drives, they kinda grew old on me but I can watch any of lara's flourishing slashes and pulls for the rest of my life without getting enough.

I dont know who is greater, I would have to say Tendulkar due to the pressure he sustained, his consistency and his off the field personality but Lara is a once in a lifetime sort of player who literally takes the sport by its neck (Art of batting in this instance) and does things you couldnt imagine were possible. Some of his stroke play was just jaw dropping.

 

[Top_Cat]

Quite sick of articles where the authors feel the need to denigrate Lara in order to spruik Tendulkar's achievements. The man's record and achievements speak for themselves (as do Lara's), there's just no need for it. Both were and are ****ing awesome players.

 

[asty80]

Its not fair to distinguish between the 2 greatest batsmen of this era. Add Richards and Ponting in this mix and you would still have a tie.

It then depends on your nationality/ your personal taste/ who you have watched the most/ who you have heard about the most to rank them.

Personally, I cannot rank anybody over Sachin. If God asked me to take any 1 batsman's talent completely, Sachin it would be. But thats also because I have hardly watched any of Richards' innings, watched a few of Lara's innings, and think Ponting is less talented as a batsman as compared to Sachin.

But I'm sure there are other people who have watched Lara much more than Sachin and feel the exact opposite. To rank these great players is ranking the intangibles. Figures dont tell the truth.

 

[Slifer]

At the end of the day for sheer weight of numbers, longevity etc etc Sachin will go down as the greater of the 2 no doubt.