***Official*** Tendulkar vs Ponting Thread

[shankar]

didnt realise Tendy's stats took such a nose dive if u removed Zim and Bang

They don't. There are three phases in Tendulkar's career:

1. From debut to the end of the 2003/04 season before his Tennis elbow injury. Excluding Bangladesh he averages 57.63 over 14.5 years.

(There is no justification to remove runs against Zim prior to the player exodus in 2004 since the average of batsmen against Zim in this period is much lower than that against say WI in the last 7 or so years. But if you do remove them he still averages 56.14)

2. During his tennis elbow injury when he tried to continue playing without getting the required corrective surgery. This was a period of 3 years when he averaged 31.51 excluding Zim + Ban.

3. Since recovering from surgery to today: A period of 3.5 years when excluding Zim + Ban he averages 59.88.

So overall apart from the 3 years of injury, he scored 12500 runs over 18 years at an astounding average of 58.17. This is excluding Ban and Zim post 2004.

 

[vcs]

They don't. There are three phases in Tendulkar's career:

1. From debut to the end of the 2003/04 season before his Tennis elbow injury. Excluding Bangladesh he averages 57.63 over 14.5 years.

(There is no justification to remove runs against Zim prior to the player exodus in 2004 since the average of batsmen against Zim in this period is much lower than that against say WI in the last 7 or so years. But if you do remove them he still averages 56.14)

2. During his tennis elbow injury when he tried to continue playing without getting the required corrective surgery. This was a period of 3 years when he averaged 31.51 excluding Zim + Ban.

3. Since recovering from surgery to today: A period of 3.5 years when excluding Zim + Ban he averages 59.88.

So overall apart from the 3 years of injury, he scored 12500 runs over 18 years at an astounding average of 58.17. This is excluding Ban and Zim post 2004.

When exactly was this surgery out of interest?

 

[Sanz]

He averaged 36 when he was 16-17 and 30 when he faced them later in his prime. What's not to get?

Since you are so much into Stats. Statistically His prime is now in 2010. So he never played Pakistan @ his prime.

Is that all it took? Should have done that ages ago.

Yeah, Next time just post that smiley, instead of the filtered stats, it will be a lot faster.

 

[Ikki]

You seriously wouldn't give him credit for preventing an embarrassing loss against an opponent with absolutely nothing to lose... Australia coming off a 3-0 win in SA losing in Bangladesh, do you not see what a massive comedown it would be? One could argue that Australia's loss to Bangladesh in an ODI in 2005 softened them up for the loss of the Ashes. It was a tough, tough situation and Ponting pulled them through, and Tendulkar has also bailed India out several times against minnows. So I don't agree.

If you were making the case for a batsman notorious for succeeding only against minnows I might buy it, but we're talking of great great batsmen here so I for one will certainly judge their records in totality.

Not sure if you recall the match but Australia were buggered and really tired for that Test. It was a good knock, but to have lost against that team would have been a disgrace I am not sure any of those players could outlive. Frankly, I just remove minnows otherwise it gets a bit tedious and you have people arguing over other knocks where the batsmen may have scored easy runs although against better teams.

For the purposes of comparison, one player getting to play another minnow much more often (even if their averages are the same) really affect averages. Both players are averaging close to, if not above 100 against these two teams. I think it's fair to just disregard them.

 

[kingjulian]

Ikki - Re the Pak scores...

This is one of your two proofs for his weakness against good pace bowling is it not?

It would at least help to have a look at the score card....for ****s sake.

It would also help to know what happened in the Chennai test when India were chasing in the 4th innings.

There is a context to any stat. When you miss that, it is just some stupid number.

 

[aussie]

Ponting has never played a better innings than this one on the subcontinent BTW... but yeah, all innings played against minnows count for **** all.

That is one of the few times where performances againts minnows actually mean something. Along with:

- Gilly 144 & MacGills 8 for in that same test
- Inzamam's hundred @ Multan 03
- Vettori @ Chittagong 08
- India's team performace vs BANG in their 1st ever test in 2000
- Allan Davison vs IND @ Kanpur 1959

 

[sachin200]

I heard Sanjay manjareker once saying that Sachin Tendulkar hated facing Hansie Cronje, Dion Nash, Abdul Razzaq etc. because he coudn't read their seam movements. He preferred Donald wasim etc

 

[shankar]

When exactly was this surgery out of interest?

It was sometime in mid 2006. And if I recall correctly he had had an unsuccessful surgery earlier on, soon after he acquired the condition, as well.

 

[Ikki]

They don't.

They clearly do. He averages 53.20 overall in the 00s and he averages 47.19 without B/Z. That is a 6 point drop.

 

[shankar]

I heard Sanjay manjareker once saying that Sachin Tendulkar hated facing Hansie Cronje, Dion Nash, Abdul Razzaq etc. because he coudn't read their seam movements. He preferred Donald wasim etc

I dont know about the other two but Hansie Cronje was a main factor in him not scoring more against S.Africa. He would get past Donald and Pollock, reach about 30 or so and then get out to Hansie inexplicably. I think he got Sachin 5 times in those 2 test series which they played.

 

[Ikki]

Ikki - Re the Pak scores...

This is one of your two proofs for his weakness against good pace bowling is it not?

It would at least help to have a look at the score card....for ****s sake.

It would also help to know what happened in the Chennai test when India were chasing in the 4th innings.

There is a context to any stat. When you miss that, it is just some stupid number.

He scored 1 century and 5 single digit scores to render an average of 30. Is that not doing worse than averaging 36 as a 16 year old?

 

[Contra]

It was sometime in mid 2006. And if I recall correctly he had had an unsuccessful surgery earlier on, soon after he acquired the condition, as well.

Yeah I remember he missed out on that 06 tour of WI. Woulda scored a ****load amount of runs on those feather beds.

If your gonna take out B-desh then WI should be kept out as well as they haven't been much better.

 

[shankar]

They clearly do. He averages 53.20 overall in the 00s and he averages 47.19 without B/Z. That is a 6 point drop.

Let me put it differently, excluding Ban+Zim (post 2004) his average is above 58 over all but a 3-year period of his 21 year career.

 

[vcs]

It was sometime in mid 2006. And if I recall correctly he had had an unsuccessful surgery earlier on, soon after he acquired the condition, as well.

I vaguely remember reading he carried some sort of injury through the '03 WC. Not sure if it was tennis elbow, though.

I tend to regard his 241* at the SCG as the start of the "accumulator" phase of his career, BTW. I read a line somewhere on cricinfo that when Tendulkar started off, he was considered a hybrid of Gavaskar and Richards, and somewhere down the line, he turned into Gavaskar. I think the 241* was the start of it.

 

[kingjulian]

He scored 1 century and 5 single digit scores to render an average of 30. Is that not doing worse than averaging 36 as a 16 year old?

In the second innings of the first test - he injured his back in a painfull narrow loss for India. He got out 15 runs from the end, after score 130 odd runs and by the time he reached the dressing room, the rest of the Indian line up got out inexplicably resulting in a narrow loss.

Anyway, he was not at his best fitness in the next test, and he got out to Spinners in all the innings including a run out. What exactly is this proving about his abilty to play pace?

I fully expect you to dodge this question, because it doesn't suit your agenda...

 

[Ikki]

I dont know about the other two but Hansie Cronje was a main factor in him not scoring more against S.Africa. He would get past Donald and Pollock, reach about 30 or so and then get out to Hansie inexplicably. I think he got Sachin 5 times in those 2 test series which they played.

Not really, Donald got Sachin's wicket as many as Cronje (5 times) and it was Donald that was taking Sachin's wicket earlier and cheaper. Tendulkar's average when Cronje would get him out was 47.20. Pollock took his wicket 4 times and even cheaper than Donald.

 

[JBH001]

They don't. There are three phases in Tendulkar's career:

1. From debut to the end of the 2003/04 season before his Tennis elbow injury. Excluding Bangladesh he averages 57.63 over 14.5 years.

(There is no justification to remove runs against Zim prior to the player exodus in 2004 since the average of batsmen against Zim in this period is much lower than that against say WI in the last 7 or so years. But if you do remove them he still averages 56.14)

2. During his tennis elbow injury when he tried to continue playing without getting the required corrective surgery. This was a period of 3 years when he averaged 31.51 excluding Zim + Ban.

3. Since recovering from surgery to today: A period of 3.5 years when excluding Zim + Ban he averages 59.88.

So overall apart from the 3 years of injury, he scored 12500 runs over 18 years at an astounding average of 58.17. This is excluding Ban and Zim post 2004.

That is a great post. More evidence that despite the greatness of Ponting (and Lara), Tendulkar really is the pre-eminent batsman of his generation.

 

[aussie]

My position was that you can't credit Lara and Tendulkar extra praise for succeeding against the better attacks in the 90s because it seems to forget that Tendulkar had mixed success, Lara was even worse, and ironically Ponting had the better all-round success against said attacks - even if he played less matches overall. It became even more silly because the attacks Ponting did struggle with in the 90s were the weaker ones. It also seems to forget that they all played in the 00s and you can compare them there too. If Tendulkar had just played in the 90s and Ponting just in the 00s, that'd be something different.

All true. Although as aformentioned i wont necessarily call Tendy record a mixed success againts top AUS, WI, PAK attacks. I always give him extra credit on versatily grounds given he averaged 40+ in those countries back-yards @ least once which is good enough for me.

But looking at these factual stats that you stated, it depends what you personally want to derive from it though. If it is you want to rate Ponting over Tendy & Lara over it then i dont agree.

Since this is where the old adage "just watching them bat" would come in. Since watching all 3 @ their peaks which is saw most of (especially Ponting). Ponting will always be behind them.

 

[Ikki]

In the second innings of the first test - he injured his back in a painfull narrow loss for India. He got out 15 runs from the end, after score 130 odd runs and by the time he reached the dressing room, the rest of the Indian line up got out inexplicably resulting in a narrow loss.

Anyway, he was not at his best fitness in the next test, and he got out to Spinners in all the innings including a run out. What exactly is this proving about his abilty to play pace?

I fully expect you to dodge this question, because it doesn't suit your agenda...

What are you talking about? He played 1 good inning in 8 tests when Pakistan were at their peak. He's also gotten his bat handed to him by S.Africa throughout his career (until recently) and wasn't great shakes against Australia when McGrath played either.

He's a very good player of pace (although not as good as Ponting) and he has played all-time great bowlers well. But not across the board. End of story.

 

[Ikki]

Since this is where the old adage "just watching them bat" would come in. Since watching all 3 @ their peaks which is saw most of (especially Ponting). Ponting will always be behind them.

In terms of watching them; I'd rate Lara ahead of both. In reality, I'd place him 3rd.