Which cricketer has the most complete record?

[Ikki]

It isn't though. No Australian batsman's reputation hinges on their performances against India. No one considers India a great bowling attack for it to matter so pretending as if there is some sort of double-standard is off the mark - if that is what you're saying.

The reality is his overall average against Australia and his average against Australia when her best bowlers were present are quite different - some 20 points of difference. Now, the bowlers Australia had throughout the period were generally very good bowlers but do not compare to the WIndies pace quartet or the McWarne attack. You're kidding yourself if you think they did.

 

[Furball]

Yeah, but the proposal was not Tendulkar's record vs. McGrath, it was Tendulkar vs. Australia.

The Tendulkar v McGrath aspect is implied when you bring up his record v Australia though. Otherwise you'd just praise his record v Bangladesh.

 

[vcs]

The Tendulkar v McGrath aspect is implied when you bring up his record v Australia though. Otherwise you'd just praise his record v Bangladesh.

When have Bangladesh ever had comparable bowlers to some of the aforementioned in this thread?

 

[Furball]

When have Bangladesh ever had comparable bowlers to some of the aforementioned in this thread?

Thats my point.

When you're talking about any player in the last 15 years' record v Australia, implicitly you're talking about his record v Warne and McGrath.

 

[vcs]

Not for me. Many great batsmen haven't done that well against the likes of Gillespie, MacGill, Reiffel, Lee, Clark, Johnson either. Tendulkar showed up every time against Australia, not his fault McGrath/Warne had shorter careers or missed tours through injury.

 

[abmk]

Warne wasn't really a problem for Tendulkar; mostly that McGrath played less than half the matches Tendulkar has against Australia. Lara has the best record against a great attack of the 3.

It wasn't just that warne wasn't a problem for tendulkar. Tendulkar just owned him completely, as much as a batsman could own a great bowler.

Let's see , he played 7 tests when both mcgrath and warne played

was MoS in Aus in the 3 test series ( 1 wrong decision in favour of warne + 1 dubious decision for mcgrath - still averaged 45+ )

another series in Ind - avged 50+ ( this with gillespie getting him out on a no-ball in the final innings )

another test in India in 2004 - where he was just coming back from injury in that match

That is pretty good performance ( especially if you consider the context )

As far as lara is concerned, at home yes, but he struggled far too much away ( in Aus ) IMO

 

[vcs]

It wasn't just that warne wasn't a problem for tendulkar. Tendulkar just owned him completely, as much as a batsman could own a great bowler.

This.

 

[MrIncredible]

It wasn't just that warne wasn't a problem for tendulkar. Tendulkar just owned him completely, as much as a batsman could own a great bowler.

Let's see , he played 7 tests when both mcgrath and warne played

was MoS in Aus in the 3 test series ( 1 wrong decision in favour of warne + 1 dubious decision for mcgrath - still averaged 45+ )

another series in Ind - avged 50+ ( this with gillespie getting him out on a no-ball in the final innings )

another test in India in 2004 - where he was just coming back from injury in that match

That is pretty good performance ( especially if you consider the context )

As far as lara is concerned, at home yes, but he struggled far too much away ( in Aus ) IMO

Yeah but the point is, Lara always faced a full strength Aussie attack away (same at

home). Imagine if Lara had faced Australia in Australia w/o Mcgrath in the attack,

common sense said he would have done much better. PS Tendulkar is no great shakes at

home vs Mc Warne either

 

[abmk]

Yeah but the point is, Lara always faced a full strength Aussie attack away (same at

home). Imagine if Lara had faced Australia in Australia w/o Mcgrath in the attack,

common sense said he would have done much better.

its not as simple as that. tendulkar for example averaged ~60 with ambrose/walsh in the WI attack but lesser without them in the WI attack. It depends on a variety of factors

PS Tendulkar is no great shakes at

home vs Mc Warne either

I already elaborated on the sachin's average in India vs mcwarne, didn't I ?

Lara was great against mcwarne at home, clearly better than tendulkar at home vs them ( mcgrath esp. ). But tendulkar was clearly better away against them IMO.

 

[abmk]

If we're talking about performance vs Aus in the past 2 decades, IMO the top 3 would be tendulkar, VVS and Lara.

 

[abmk]

sachin played them very well and also scored well against mcdermott, reid, mcgill, stuart clarke and mitchell johnson. he scored hundred after hundred against all of them, and against mcgrath andd warne too whenever they played against him.

considering the australian batsmen's reputation against india is built on them scoring against much much lesser bowler units including zaheer, bhaji, kumble, agarkar etc - and in the case of ponting only in australia - sachin doing great against so many very good bowlers everywhere and winning a man of the series award against two ATGs and also scoring very well against them in 2001 makes it a clean sweep for him against australia.

I think this post seals it perfectly !

 

[Ikki]

its not as simple as that. tendulkar for example averaged ~60 with ambrose/walsh in the WI attack but lesser without them in the WI attack. It depends on a variety of factors

He also averaged in the 30s against SA and Pak. What does that have to do with Australia though?

I already elaborated on the sachin's average in India vs mcwarne, didn't I ?

Tell us what Tendulkar averaged in matches against McGrath again?

 

[vcs]

So my biggest takeaway from this thread -

Australia in the last 15 years = McGrath

 

[bagapath]

Ikki. Didn't I show you once that mcgrath was not the reason for sachin's low average in matches against australia in which mcgrath played? He fell as many times to gillespie too in those games.of course mcgrath got him a few times. But even you agreed that he can't be credited for sachin's low avg in those games. Why do you want to change it again?

Saying he didn't do well against mcwarne is ridiculous; not after a MOS award in one and 50+ avg in the other series.

 

[shankar]

Ikki. Didn't I show you once that mcgrath was not the reason for sachin's low average in matches against australia in which mcgrath played? He fell as many times to gillespie too in those games.of course mcgrath got him a few times. But even you agreed that he can't be credited for sachin's low avg in those games. Why do you want to change it again?

Saying he didn't do well against mcwarne is ridiculous; not after a MOS award in one and 50+ avg in the other series.

Average in matches where player X played is one of the silliest statistics ever. It's this sort of stuff that brings a bad name to statistics.

 

[bagapath]

It isn't though. No Australian batsman's reputation hinges on their performances against India. No one considers India a great bowling attack for it to matter so pretending as if there is some sort of double-standard is off the mark - if that is what you're saying.

no i am not saying that. i am trying to explain how reputations are built. take the 2007-8 ind vs aus series for example. sachin scored two hundreds against the likes of lee, clark and johnson. ponting too, IIRC, scored a hundred. but that series is considered a triumph for tendulkar the batsman despite his team losing the series 2-1. no one remembers what ponting did with the bat. it is because sachin played against a better bowling attack, and in alien conditions. for the opposition batter to score runs against zaheer and co in his home, it would not take the same amount of skill and talent. so tendulkar is hailed as a genius. no one is asking how he would do against mcgrath and warne.

now extend the whole scenario to all of india - australia rivalry in tendulkar's time. or for that matter india vs anyone in his time. while his opponents have feasted on india's weak bowling attack he has consistently delivered against much tougher bowlers. this has been going on for decades. in australia in 99-00 he did that against mcwarne too. and won MOS. did that against mcdermott, reid etc. in 92. delivered against SA in 96. and even in the recent series in SA, his century in third test is more valuable than kallis' twin hundreds because had he not weathered the steyn storm the series would have been lost. his third test century against mcwarne in chennai in 2001 set up the series win for india. the series in which he once again averaged 50+.

had he played all his tests against australia only if warne or mcgrath played in them then he would still have been called a legend. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...er_involve=2101;template=results;type=batting

this is how reputations are built. this is how a great player becomes a legend. it is always about doing better than others. look at the context. and please stop relying on that stupid stat about a player X's avg in games against player Y. it means nothing.

 

[abmk]

He also averaged in the 30s against SA and Pak. What does that have to do with Australia though?

that it is not necessary that a player does better against a better attack of a team than when its attack is worse

Tell us what Tendulkar averaged in matches against McGrath again?

prima facie , ~ 37 .

If you investigate further and look at the events that actually happened, he had 2 pretty good series , in 99 in Aus and in 2001 in Aus ( with some bad decisions against tendulkar thrown in there in those 2 series, that affects the averages massively because it is a small sample )

a one-off test in delhi in 96, mcintyre got him out in the first innings there, mcgrath got him out in the 4th innings at 26 with India chasing a mere 58, which is as useful as almost nothing

then in the 2004 series in India, he was just coming back from injury, failed in the 3rd test.

In the 4th test on a minefield of a pitch in mumbai, failed in the 1st innings, but scored a crucial 55 in the 2nd

Edit: You talk too much about stats at face value instead of looking at what actually happened.

I'll give you another example, in 99-00, sachin ended up with ~270 runs at ~45. But he was batting splendidly and had it not been for a couple of bad decisions would've easily averaged 50+ IMO.

In 2003-04, he scored 400+ at an average of 80+. Looking at that you'd think he had a pretty good series , irrespective of the bowling , right ? He actually struggled for the majority of the series ( 2nd and 3rd tests especially ) and only scored in the 4th

In 2007-08, he averaged less than what he did in 2003-2004, but he was batting MUCH better in 2007-08

 

[bagapath]

Tell us what Tendulkar averaged in matches against McGrath again?

he played two full series against mcgrath. averaged 46 in one and was MOS. averaged 50 in the other one and scored the match winning hundred in the decider.

 

[Bun]

he played two full series against mcgrath. averaged 46 in one and was MOS. averaged 50 in the other one and scored the match winning hundred in the decider.

McGrath averaged 13.77 and 15.35 respectively in 99-00 and 01 series, which means to have averaged 45 and 50 against him is commendable.

 

[Contra]

McGrath averaged 13.77 and 15.35 respectively in 99-00 and 01 series, which means to have averaged 45 and 50 against him is commendable.

Wow. That's something I didn't know. Awesome to know that.