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

[G.I.Joe]

Australia's tour of England 2009:

5 Tests
2 FC tour games
1 4 day game
1 2 day game
2 T20Is
8 ODIs (1 v Scotland)

1989:

6 Tests
14 FC tour games
3 ODIs
12 one day tour games

That's amazing.

Plus the FC cricket in those days was not so much detached from test cricket in terms of standards...

Yeah, amateurs weren't paid either, there really wasn't incentive other than national pride to give up playing within their country and travel for months to Australia/England by boat. Would have been sort of a cruise vacation, however



Calculations show that Sachin Tendulkar has taken the field for 1734 days in his cricketing career so far. (74% of them in International matches)

Wilfred Rhodes - 3456 days. (8.3% in International matches)
Jack Hobbs - 2624 days.
Mark Ramprakash - 2265 days.
Allan Border - 2091 days. (50.3% in International matches)
Garry Sobers - 1720 days. (27% in International matches)
Donald Bradman - 728 days. (35% in International matches)

Perhaps Tendulkar should get credit for the greater intensity required of ODI cricket, and more toll on his body due to a greater proportion of 4 and 5 day games played by him compared to Rhodes and Hobbs who played mostly 3 day games.

What is obvious though is the monster of the game that Rhodes was. To have played twice as much cricket as Tendulkar has so far, and to be involved as both batsman and bowler is simply staggering.

 

[Jarquis]

What's that? Over 9 years of his life spent on the cricket field? Insane

 

[Sir Alex]

Hahahaha comparing backyard games to International games. There is a reason why FC games are called FC and tests are called that, not to mention the ODIs.

BTW how many different countries and grounds did Rhodes or the luminaries mentioned therein played? My last count shows Sachin has played on atleast 55 different TEST grounds. Not to mention FC or ODI grounds.

 

[Jarquis]

All hail Sachin. Sachin is god.

ok.

 

[vcs]

Dude, don't dismiss first class games as backyard games without possessing knowledge of the facts.

 

[Sir Alex]

Dude, don't dismiss first class games as backyard games without possessing knowledge of the facts.

How can one even suggest 1 test cricket day = 1 FC day then? It'sa ridiculous pointless comparison although as standalone stuff it is good trivia

 

[Matt79]

Presumably because you'd spend close to an equal amount of time actually batting/bowling/fielding in a day of FC as you would Tests.

EDIT: probably more in FC when Rhodes played as they tended to fairly rip through the overs back then and get through 100+ overs a day. You can discuss relative intensity, which I think would be a pretty debateable point in anycase, but the two are obviously comparable when talking about the amount of time and repetitions of actions involved.

 

[Teja.]

Hahahaha comparing backyard games to International games. There is a reason why FC games are called FC and tests are called that, not to mention the ODIs.

BTW how many different countries and grounds did Rhodes or the luminaries mentioned therein played? My last count shows Sachin has played on atleast 55 different TEST grounds. Not to mention FC or ODI grounds.

SA, Do you realize that praising any other cricketer is not necessarily a secret attack on Tendulkar's achievements?

 

[vcs]

How can one even suggest 1 test cricket day = 1 FC day then? It'sa ridiculous pointless comparison although as standalone stuff it is good trivia

It illustrates the point he is trying to make i.e. players in previous eras played a lot more cricket than younger generation fans would be willing to believe, part of the reason being they had to earn as much as possible by playing a lot of cricket as they weren't well remunerated as players are today. Same thing holds for tennis players of the 50s and 60s who played insane amounts of tennis on professional tours because they needed the money.

 

[Sir Alex]

SA, Do you realize that praising any other cricketer is not necessarily a secret attack on Tendulkar's achievements?

Perhaps then what is the reason for that comparison in this thread? Other than a "take" on Tendulkar's longetivity?

I am quite liking this debate though. It is like dissecting an allrounder by comparing his performances in each discipline with the best in each discipline. That is a compliment in itself.

 

[Sir Alex]

It illustrates the point he is trying to make i.e. players in previous eras played a lot more cricket than younger generation fans would be willing to believe, part of the reason being they had to earn as much as possible by playing a lot of cricket as they weren't well remunerated as players are today. Same thing holds for tennis players of the 50s and 60s who played insane amounts of tennis on professional tours because they needed the money.

Surely Mark Ramps and Allan Border can be said belonging to this era?

Mark Ramps has put in 2,265 days of cricket already, and in all probability will overtake Jack Hobbs in terms of no. of days put on field. But seriously does that really give the impression he has better endurance than Tendulkar?

Why did Trescothick quit in the first place? Apparently he is playing county games as usual and perhaps putting in more days per calendar year than he'd be if in English colors. So it is obvious it is not the number of days on field, but the pressure, the travel, the homesickness, and the fact that you wake up every day preparing to face the best the opposition country can offer, and not just stroll on to the ground near your home and face a first class attack.

 

[vcs]

I'm pretty sure the stakes for FC games back in the day must have been a lot higher than they are now. Obviously not comparable to a Test, but not a "stroll" either.

 

[G.I.Joe]

It was brought up because honestbharani brought up the point that modern players play a lot more games because they have the advantage of improved fitness techniques. It was to show that that basic premise isn't necessarily so, because the pioneers actually played comparable amounts of cricket, if not more.

 

[Sir Alex]

I'm pretty sure the stakes for FC games back in the day must have been a lot higher than they are now. Obviously not comparable to a Test, but not a "stroll" either.

Could you please explain "stakes being higher back then"?

It was brought up because honestbharani brought up the point that modern players play a lot more games because they have the advantage of improved fitness techniques. It was to show that that basic premise isn't necessarily so, because the pioneers actually played comparable amounts of cricket, if not more.

As I said, what you brought up is good trivia. But I think it is of little relevance in a thread like this.

BTW Graeme Hick has spent 2857 days on the field. Huge effort that!

 

[Furball]

Hahahaha comparing backyard games to International games. There is a reason why FC games are called FC and tests are called that, not to mention the ODIs.

BTW how many different countries and grounds did Rhodes or the luminaries mentioned therein played? My last count shows Sachin has played on atleast 55 different TEST grounds. Not to mention FC or ODI grounds.

Travelling would have been a lot more intensive back in the day because to get from England to Australia for an Ashes tour would literally take months.

The worst, most tiring thing about travelling intensely (IMO) is the actual travelling itself.

 

[honestbharani]

Hahahaha comparing backyard games to International games. There is a reason why FC games are called FC and tests are called that, not to mention the ODIs.

BTW how many different countries and grounds did Rhodes or the luminaries mentioned therein played? My last count shows Sachin has played on atleast 55 different TEST grounds. Not to mention FC or ODI grounds.

so if I DO find someone who HAS played in more grounds than Sachin, you will give up this drivel?



And here R_D was wondering why I was getting worked up......

 

[Sir Alex]

Travelling would have been a lot more intensive back in the day because to get from England to Australia for an Ashes tour would literally take months.

The worst, most tiring thing about travelling intensely (IMO) is the actual travelling itself.

So how many such tours used to happen? And with what regularity?

These days player do as many as 3 tours every single year.

I am no way denigrading the effort that those people took in the earlier half of 1900s for such tour. But fact is the effort they took is no way comparable to what cricketers are taking now. They have to adapt to different conditions very quickly, as there are hardly any FC fixtures to "get yourselves in". All that takes a toll.

 

[honestbharani]

It was brought up because honestbharani brought up the point that modern players play a lot more games because they have the advantage of improved fitness techniques. It was to show that that basic premise isn't necessarily so, because the pioneers actually played comparable amounts of cricket, if not more.

I meant more about the intensity of it. Do you seriously think we have not made ANY progression in terms of fitness and taking care of the body so that we can be in better shape for the sport?

 

[Ikki]

It was brought up because honestbharani brought up the point that modern players play a lot more games because they have the advantage of improved fitness techniques. It was to show that that basic premise isn't necessarily so, because the pioneers actually played comparable amounts of cricket, if not more.

That's not necessarily a good counter to his point as the fitness level required back then was probably much lower. I remember watching ESPN Legends of cricket and the historians talking how about in WG Grace's era they wouldn't go for sliding saves or dives, etc, which kinda points to how Grace himself played so long.

 

[vcs]

Could you please explain "stakes being higher back then"?

Well, it's obvious, with less Test cricket played those days, FC cricket must obviously have received a lot more attention relative to now. Many of Bradman's FC knocks are held up as all-time great ones and if FC cricket was such a low grade of cricket in comparison to Tests, nobody would have bothered mentioning them.