Sachin Tendulkar vs Malcolm Marshall

[Sunil1z]

It isn't ordinary. M y mistake. But I would say generally, he was ordinary vs the great fast bowlers of the 90s. Now post those stats. Post his overall average featuring the following 90s greats: Wasim, Ambrose, Waqar, McGrath and Donald...

Tendulkar faced 2Ws 6 times in 90s . Didn’t get out to them even once
3 times to Saqlain
1 times to Mushtaq
1 times to Shoaib
1 times run out
whatever you are trying it isn’t going to be successful.

 

[subshakerz]

Tendulkar faced 2Ws 6 times in 90s . Didn’t get out to them even once
3 times to Saqlain
1 times to Mushtaq
1 times to Shoaib
1 times run out
whatever you are trying it isn’t going to be successful.

Saqlain did get Tendulkar to struggle in that series to be honest, because he wasn't used to the doosra.

But against Wasim, who was reversing it here and there, Tendulkar seemed safe as houses. Was odd to see.

 

[Slifer]

Tendulkar faced 2Ws 6 times in 90s . Didn’t get out to them even once
3 times to Saqlain
1 times to Mushtaq
1 times to Shoaib
1 times run out
whatever you are trying it isn’t going to be successful.

I'm trying to say he wasn't successful vs them. Was he??

 

[Sunil1z]

Saqlain did get Tendulkar to struggle in that series to be honest, because he wasn't used to the doosra.

But against Wasim, who was reversing it here and there, Tendulkar seemed safe as houses. Was odd to see.

He struggled against Saqlain and Razzaq the most .
Troll post: Tendulkar dismissed Inzy more times than 2Ws dismissed Sachin ( Test and ODI )

 

[kyear2]

I still did not get the right answer why Richie Benaud ignored Marshall but praised Tendulkar and included him in his All time XI

That's the problem with people like you and Subz, it's not the right answer of you disagree with it.

He said repeatedly while talking about the team that it wasn't the best team, it was the team that he wanted to represent him.

Look at the names shortlisted for the fast bowlers. Larwood, Lindwall. It was a personal grievance based on hypocrisy. Even the commentator asked about it, and when ever asked, he will let you know that he believes Marshall was the greatest fast bowler who's lived.

If you want collaboration efforts then there's the Cricinfo and Wisden teams.

But again, you have your beliefs that unfortunately based on criteria outside of just cricket.

 

[Sunil1z]

I'm trying to say he wasn't successful vs them. Was he??

He also wasn’t failure against them because he didn’t get out to them even once .

Now where is the list of Great batsmen that Marshall dominated? (Not even 1 in top 15 )

Whereas Tendulkar dominated 3 of the Top 7 bowlers according to this website ( Warne, Murali and Steyn )

 

[kyear2]

Also a minor point, but I find Tendulkar's narrative more compelling. He starts as this prodigy, scoring unbelievable tons on first tours to England, Aus and SA as a teen, then shouldering much of the batting pressure and public pressure, redefining his technique with new challenges and age, hitting a second late peak and ending with perfect figures.


Whereas Marshall entered in a team that was already ATG level, with the world's best batting lineup and the greatest pace bowling support in history to back him, does predictably awesome for a few years against mostly diminished batting lineups, and ends up slightly ahead of the rest of an assembly lineup of WI pacers. Just a bit better but more of the same.

This is a all new low level of posting, even for you. I will recall these arguments though, because apparently the '80's batting lineups were not very good, diminished even.

 

[capt_Luffy]

This is a all new low level of posting, even for you. I will recall these arguments though, because apparently the '80's batting lineups were not very good, diminished even.

I don't think it works as an argument honesty, but Sachin's wonderkid to best bar Don is really a more interesting narrative. It's not worth any points though.....

 

[Slifer]

He also wasn’t failure against them because he didn’t get out to them even once .

Now where is the list of Great batsmen that Marshall dominated? (Not even 1 in top 15 )

Whereas Tendulkar dominated 3 of the Top 7 bowlers according to this website ( Warne, Murali and Steyn )

Sunny, Border and Javed. Admittedly, there weren't as many great batting in the 80s as say the 90s or 2000s but he also didn't have pathetic teams like Zim or Bang to feast on either.

 

[subshakerz]

This is a all new low level of posting, even for you. I will recall these arguments though, because apparently the '80's batting lineups were not very good, diminished even.

What did you disagree with? I think it is an objective fact that Marshall got lucky and had it easier than Tendulkar overall in his career.

And we are comparing the bowling quality Tendulkar faced versus the batting quality Marshall faced, and yeah Tendulkar faced it tougher. Mind you, unlike Imran and Hadlee, Marshall never faced the WI.

 

[kyear2]

450 runs @ SR of 81. SR nuthuggers like yourself and @kyear2 should be wanking yourselves over it.

When have I said that Sachin was anything other than the 2nd best batsman of all time. Want you to see that no one is questioning that, not me, not @Slifer.
So to be extra clear I have a group of 7 cricketers whom I deem to be just a bit above the rest, Sachin is firmly in there, no one doubts his greatness.

 

[OverratedSanity]

It isn't ordinary. M y mistake. But I would say generally, he was ordinary vs the great fast bowlers of the 90s. Now post those stats. Post his overall average featuring the following 90s greats: Wasim, Ambrose, Waqar, McGrath and Donald...

Mostly averaged mid-high 30s vs them (except against Ambrose against whom he averaged 50+ in the 97 tour). However, I put very little stock in batting averages in small sample sizes for series separated by several years. Instead I will analyze his performance on quality/context.

vs Ws:
He played 2 series:

1) In 1989 when he was 16 years old. Preserved a series draw by playing a match saving fifty with a broken nose in the final test when India were collapsing. (https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...kistan-vs-india-4th-test-63516/full-scorecard)
2) In 1999, when he got out to Saqlain, not once to the Ws. Also made that classic 4th innings century at Chennai

Conclusion: Not a failure. Considering age/context, I would give this a passing grade.

vs Donald/Pollock:
Several genuinely great knocks (111 at Joburg as a 19 year old, 169 at Capetown, 97 at Mumbai in a low scoring test) but lots of low scores too. Donald's pace and his inswinger also seemed to bother him if we're going by the eye test. Even though Cronje got him out a lot, I'd say Tendulkar actually did struggle with Donald overall. This is the one where I'd be reasonably comfortable saying Tendulkar actually udnerperformed.

vs McGrath:
Partly discussed above (http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/thr...vs-malcolm-marshall.92199/page-7#post-5217020) when you mentioned McWarne.

But overall, he played 2 full series against McGrath, in one he was MotS, in the other he averaged 50+ and played 3 superb innings including a hundred that was crucial in us winning the series.

The other two series were:

1) A one off test in 1996 where McGrath got him out when India was coasting to a 4th innings target of 58. Whoop de ****ing do congrats to McGrath.

2) The tennis elbow series where he made a match winning 55 on a completely unplayable pitch.



Definitely not ordinary at all if you look at the actual games. Tendulkar more than held his own vs McGrath in tests. There's several great/crucial innings there. A couple of low scores in series where he was unfit don't mean anything. McGrath had the wood over Tendulkar in ODIs. In tests, it just wasn't the case.

vs Ambrose:

Averaged 58 in 5 tests in the 1997 series. Despite a good average, I do not consider this to be as good as his performances vs McGrath. Quite average and unmemorable (although the first innings 90 in the Bridgetown test was great)

And that's before we get to Steyn, against whom Tendulkar made 4 great tons during a period (in 2010) where Steyn was breathing fire and bowling at a level rarely seen for any fast bowler.

 

[Sunil1z]

Every Team except WIs in 80s didn’t have Great batting line up . Pakistan and NZ success in 80s were due to mainly 2 players ; (Imran + Miandad, Hadlee + Crowe ) . IND , ENG and Aus were ordinary teams . You don’t need a genius to tell that .

 

[Slifer]

Also a minor point, but I find Tendulkar's narrative more compelling. He starts as this prodigy, scoring unbelievable tons on first tours to England, Aus and SA as a teen, then shouldering much of the batting pressure and public pressure, redefining his technique with new challenges and age, hitting a second late peak and ending with perfect figures.


Whereas Marshall entered in a team that was already ATG level, with the world's best batting lineup and the greatest pace bowling support in history to back him, does predictably awesome for a few years against mostly diminished batting lineups, and ends up slightly ahead of the rest of an assembly lineup of WI pacers. Just a bit better but more of the same.

Sachin is better but him shouldering more of the batting pressure is not borne out by facts. Of all test batsmen, Lara scored a higher percentage of his team's runs than any other in the games history with the exception of Headley and the Don.

 

[subshakerz]

I don't think it works as an argument honesty, but Sachin's wonderkid to best bar Don is really a more interesting narrative. It's not worth any points though.....

Well behind the narrative is the fact that Tendulkar path was a lot more difficult at pretty much every stage of his career to achieve the kind of success he did compared to Marshall who relatively coasted by having all the conditions you would dream of to become an ATG pacer.

 

[kyear2]

It's pretty much India and late Aus. None I would rate as a genuine great batting side though like the other pacers faced.

What did the other pacers face?

Interested in the great lineups all of them faced.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sunny, Border and Javed. Admittedly, there weren't as many great batting in the 80s as say the 90s or 2000s but he also didn't have pathetic teams like Zim or Bang to feast on either.

Wasn't it already established that:
A) He didn't really "dominated" Sunny
B) Border still averages 40ish
C) Miandad is valid

But the thing I am more interested in, is that he had an ATG support unit, especially in his later matches against Gavaskar (only which counts according to Kyear). He wasn't a lone wolf like Hadlee tearing apart batting line-ups, but the alpha of the Greatest pack ever. Fwiw, I do think it's very impressive he also didn't got dominated by anyone.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Miandad wasn’t very good against pace so doesn’t count

 

[OverratedSanity]

When have I said that Sachin was anything other than the 2nd best batsman of all time. Want you to see that no one is questioning that, not me, not @Slifer.
So to be extra clear I have a group of 7 cricketers whom I deem to be just a bit above the rest, Sachin is firmly in there, no one doubts his greatness.

I dont know what that has to do with anything. I was poking fun at your strike rate fetish lol

 

[Sunil1z]

Sunny, Border and Javed. Admittedly, there weren't as many great batting in the 80s as say the 90s or 2000s but he also didn't have pathetic teams like Zim or Bang to feast on either.

Sunny averaged 50 vs Marshall. If you are counting that as success then I may as well count Tendulkar as successful against McGrath. And no , I won’t remove 1978 for Marshall because you also won’t remove 2004 for Sachin vs McGrath when Sachin was suffering from injury and was recalled mid series. You can’t have it both ways .

if you are counting Miandad then let me also include Walsh in favour of Tendulkar .

So , list of great bowlers that Tendulkar dominated is nearly twice the number of great batsmen that Marshall dominated.