***Official*** Tendulkar vs Ponting Thread

[Ruckus]

This would have been discussed somewhere else, surely, but does anyone know why there is a trend (I know there are exceptions) for great test batsmen to be short in height?

Bradman: 5'7"
Tendulkar: 5'5"
Lara: 5'8"

Even Ricky Ponting who is of average height 5'10" seems to compensate by really 'leaning' into his shots.

However, as I said there are exceptions like Sobers at 5'11", Viv at 5'10", Chappell at 6'1", however none of these guys are particularly tall. So do you think there is actually a trend, or am I just making things up? And if so, what advantages do you think short stature has when batting?

 

[TumTum]

Hmm, you are right I say Tendulkar now.

 

[vcs]

incredible how people can't accept criticism of one of their favourite players. most people here question inzi, yusuf, jayawardene etc's records because of their lack of success in Australia, SA and England. why's it a crime when aussie doesn't rate sehwag at all? he has given reasons as to why he doesn't.

It's not criticism, it's blind refusal to give credit where due and twisting facts to suit his agenda. No one does it here for any other batsman to the extent Aussie does to Sehwag to discredit anything he has ever accomplished.

 

[Burgey]

It's not criticism, it's blind refusal to give credit where due and twisting facts to suit his agenda. No one does it here for any other batsman to the extent Aussie does to Sehwag to discredit anything he has ever accomplished.

Actually reckon a fair few people do it with regard to several players, to both overstate and understate erecords, depending how it suits them.

 

[vcs]

Actually reckon a fair few people do it with regard to several players, to both overstate and understate erecords, depending how it suits them.

Overstating and understating one's record purely going off Statsguru is one thing, but who says stuff like "OK, let's ignore this because it didn't count for whatever reason, and that as well, and that other thing as well, and let's take these two series where he failed as a perfect indicator of his calibre as a batsman." Like Ankit said, fair enough if you think the guy has technical flaws and will fail more often than not in bowler-friendly conditions, but atleast give him credit for the occasional good thing he managed.

Probably too much to expect though.

 

[aussie]

Here's what I recall from Sehwag's debut ton. First session the ball was moving around quite a lot, bowlers werent that great but got through the Indian top order. No doubt the pitch got a LOT easier after lunch, ball stopped swinging, Sachin took over first then Sehwag came in and hit around an attack that was devoid of answers once the ball stopped moving. Team was in a tricky position and that counts for some, pitch might have been getting easier but the side was still 5 down when Sehwag came in, by the end of the day didnt India reach close to 400??? Pretty awesome last 3 hours of that days play. Sehwag was a normal batsman back then too, no trademark shots that he invented later after 2003, just hit bad balls for four, instead of now where there is almost no good balls to the man!!!!

Pretty much just like how i remember it: http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/2298167-post74.html

Firstly Sehwag debut ton in 2001/02 was not againts a quality SA attack. One good bowler in Pollock does not make an entire attack good. I've said this over & over on CW.

I remember that Test well and the deck offered a decent bit in the opening session-and-a-bit, hence Pollock (who was by then only capable of bowling really well on seaming decks no longer flat ones) and co. reduced India to 60-odd for 4. Tendulkar played superbly for 20 overs or so to coast that out, Sehwag played really well for about 5-6 overs to do likewise. They then both made spectacular hay when the deck flattened-out, which it did and remained thus for the rest of the game. You compare that 2001/02 SA to the 2006/07 SA attack in which he averaged 14 for the series & the gap in quality was immence.

Basically proving that when Sehwag came into bat whatever zip in the pitch was basically gone & the acceptance that SA attack overall wasn't quality. Once you agree uncle rob, i am comfortable.

 

[aussie]

Great,so this series is being mentioned because he failed.Had he done well-"that was just in India,flat home pitches".

Its being mentioned because his weakness againts inswinger where well exposed by the ENG attack, nothing more.

If someone does well on debut/early in their career,it deserves praise.But if they have a bad series early on,it isn't the end of the world really.Who doesn't fail?!no double standards there at all.The series in question was a 2 test series played on absolute green tops like I said.I reckon those were among the most bowler friendly pitches in the last two decades.

Of course if a batsman scores a hundred on debut or a bowler takes a 5 wicket haul on debut he deserves praise. But if wont mean anything if later in your career, when bowlers/batsmen figure you out & you fail to maintain that standard you set on your debut. Which is the story of Sehwag's career so far againts quality pace attacks in bowler friendly conditions.

On the NZ series i have seen comparable bowling conditions to that this decade:

- Lords 2005
- Kandy 04
- Darwin 2004
- AUS vs PAK in ENG 2000
- WI vs ENG @ Leeds
- ENG vs SA @ Joburg 2010

Also as i said in that series. The proven Indian batsmen in all conditons Dravid & Tendy stood up to NZ quicks & battled, although the NZ bowlers generally where on top of them too. Unlike Sehwag who was a hopeless walking wicket.

Yeah,as usual-flat pitch and average attack when he scores and the opposite if he doesn't.

Haha. Post like really expose some you posters real lack of understanding of cricket history & progression of various players careers. So let me ask you this then since you want troll & say i am basically trying to pick you chose whether Sehwag scores runs on flat pitches or againts an average attack:

- Are you telling me Makhaya Ntini in 2001 that Sehwag scored his hundred againts was of the same quality & level as a bowler when he Sehwag faced him in SA 06/07 when he averaged 14 for the series?

- Are you telling Shaun Pollock in 2001 that Sehwag scored his hundred againts was of the same quality & level as a bowler when he Sehwag faced him in SA 06/07 when he averaged 14 for the series?

- Are you telling me the Lance Klusener the Sehwag faced in 2001/02 was of the same quality as a bowler compared to Lance Klusener than India encoutnered in 96/97 home & away?. When he produced this bowling performace:

2nd Test: India v South Africa at Kolkata, Nov 27-Dec 1, 1996 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

Or Klusener was difficult opponent in 2001, than Andre Nel in 2006/07 when Sehwag averaged 14 for the series?

- Are you telling me Nantie Hayward in 2001 who Sehwag faced when he scored his hundred, was a more difficult opponent than Dale Steyn in 2006/07 when he averaged 14 for the series?

- Are you telling me Kallis in 2001 that Sehwag scored his hundred againts was of the same quality & level as a bowler when he Sehwag faced him in SA 06/07 when he averaged 14 for the series?

I EAGERLY look for to your responses to this portion of the post.

Doesn't ans my question.Don't avoid it.

I haven't avoided anything. I answered you question, if you dont understand the post in relation to your question, that not my point. Just read it again...

 

[robelinda]

Chill man, relax.........I do rate that debut Sehwag ton, but the better one really was the one in England when he first opened, you just knew he would fail but he didnt, played a patient excellent innings in very foreign conditions. That one and his 201* in SL were his best for me, but particularly the England one, because he wouldve not faced those conditions ever in his career up til then.

 

[aussie]

It's not criticism, it's blind refusal to give credit where due and twisting facts to suit his agenda. No one does it here for any other batsman to the extent Aussie does to Sehwag to discredit anything he has ever accomplished.

Haha. I have never ever twisted facts to suit no damn agenda.

Just to use two simple examples. Is it my agenda or twisted facts that Sehwag averaged 10 in NZ 02/03?.

- Is it my agenda or twisted facts that Sehwag averaged 14 in SA 06/07?.

- Is it my agenda or twisted facts Sehwag averaged 19 vs ENG 05/06?.

Secondly clearly you are generalising baselessly since to suggest i have discredit everything Sehwag has ever done is his career is just ridiculous. I simply criticise his poor record againts everyquality pace bowling attack in bowler friendly conditons (or bowlers who have exposed his technical weakness to inswingers) that he struggled in his career to date.

For eg i applaued his 155 @ Chennai 04 vs AUS & his 319 vs SA & Chennai 08 is one my favourite innings to watch on tape when i want to shotgun batting.

 

[vcs]

 

[aussie]

Chill man, relax.........I do rate that debut Sehwag ton, but the better one really was the one in England when he first opened, you just knew he would fail but he didnt, played a patient excellent innings in very foreign conditions. That one and his 201* in SL were his best for me, but particularly the England one, because he wouldve not faced those conditions ever in his career up til then.

All i'd say about that hundred vs ENG 02 is that Hoggard/Flintoff/Harmison & co where all novices then. When they peaked as bowlers when Sehwag faced them in IND 05/06, Sehwag averaged 19 for the series.

 

[aussie]

Unfortunately thats all some of you CW can do when the facts hit you. Avoid the debate that you started.

 

[TumTum]

Ironic how most threads turn into Tendulkar vs Ponting, except this one.

 

[vcs]

Unfortunately thats all some of you CW can do when the facts hit you. Avoid the debate that you started.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Why didn't Steyn and co. expose Sehwag earlier this year,if they already knew his weakness from 06?Let me guess-this doesn't count because Sehwag scored two tons.

You are the one adopting blatant double standards,and to hide it you are accusing people of being trolls and what not.

 

[Ruckus]

Why didn't Steyn and co. expose Sehwag earlier this year,if they already knew his weakness from 06?Let me guess-this doesn't count because Sehwag scored two tons.

You are the one adopting blatant double standards,and to hide it you are accusing people of being trolls and what not.

What are people actually trying to argue here though? Because imo, overall Sehwag hasn't performed well enough in Eng/NZ/SA to prove he is a capable player of swing. His averages in those countries of 39.50, 20.00 and 26.44 clearly show that.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

What are people actually trying to argue here though? Because imo, overall Sehwag hasn't performed well enough in Eng/NZ/SA to prove he is a capable player of swing. His averages in those countries of 39.50, 20.00 and 26.44 clearly show that.

That Sehwag has played (sporadic) good knocks in adverse conditions.

As for averages,true, it's pretty mediocre but a series by series breakdown shows that he has had his moments.

SA debut series-averaged 50+(1 ton)

Eng 02 averaged nigh on 40 with 1 ton.

NZ 02-03-explained earlier.

SA 06-he failed.

NZ 09-He was poor but this wasn't because of the pitches at all,which were good ones for batting.

No one is arguing that Sehwag is Don Bradman in difficult conditions,but he isn't an FTB.He is a much improved batsman since that 07-08 tour down under.

 

[ankitj]

What are people actually trying to argue here though? Because imo, overall Sehwag hasn't performed well enough in Eng/NZ/SA to prove he is a capable player of swing. His averages in those countries of 39.50, 20.00 and 26.44 clearly show that.

What people (or at least me) are arguing is that let's give credit to some great knocks that Sehwag has undoubtedly played. As far as establishing his greatness goes, I am waiting to see some of the upcoming series. Nonetheless you have to give him credit that even on supposedly flat tracks (which aren't exactly so, as McGrath and Donald had destroyed India on those tracks at times) he has scored 150s and 200s at about run-a-ball so many times that noone else has done. Let's recognize that irrespective of our stand on where Sehwag is to be placed among the great batsmen. That's all!

 

[aussie]

Ye man keep running. Thats all you are good for.

 

[vcs]

Ye man keep running. Thats all you are good for.

Yeah, it's better than wasting my time on this with someone like you. Should have realized that long back.