• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Sachin Tendulkar vs Malcolm Marshall

Who is the greater test cricketer?

  • Total voters
    40
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
OverratedSanity said:
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.
Click to expand...
Huh? Totally disagree.

I saw Tendulkar throughout that 96/97 season against Donald and he wasn't overtly struggling, it took a really top delivery to get Tendulkar out but he never seemed rushed for pace.
 
OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
subshakerz said:
Huh? Totally disagree.

I saw Tendulkar throughout that 96/97 season against Donald and he wasn't overtly struggling, it took a really top delivery to get Tendulkar out but he never seemed rushed for pace.
Click to expand...
He got out to Donald's inswinger multiple times. I remember the Kolkata test where he snuck one through at pace.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Slifer said:
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.
Click to expand...
Sigh. Yes sure I give Lara credit for that too.

I am comparing Tendulkar and Marshall as to who faced more pressure since they are close on most of the standard metrics.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
OverratedSanity said:
He got out to Donald's inswinger multiple times. I remember the Kolkata test where he snuck one through at pace.
Click to expand...
Not my recollection. I recall it being a draw between those two similar to McGrath/Tendulkar, who would occasionally choke Tendulkar but other times that trick didn't work.

Donald also tried to bounce out Tendulkar in SA from around the wicket and I don't recall it working.
 
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
capt_Luffy said:
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.
Click to expand...
It wasn't established, Sunilz gave an opinion which I disagree with. The atg great lineup around him is fair but he also played series minus them and excelled.
 
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
Sunil1z said:
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 .
Click to expand...
Years from now, people will look back on current players and come to a similar conclusion. Currently, only Australia have a genuinely great batting (debateable and maybe India). The others are propped by one or two players. Wi and RSA are downright atrocious. They'll look back on the likes of Bumrah and Cummins and draw similar conclusions. But we all know that wouldn't be fair.
 
OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
subshakerz said:
WI for one.

Imran and Hadlee also faced the earlier strong Aus lineup with the Chappells.
Click to expand...
Hadlee had a couple of good performances a bit earlier in his career (during his mediocre phase) against Australia when they had Stackpole, Redpath, Walters in addition to the Chappell brothers.
 
Sunil1z

Sunil1z

International Regular
Slifer said:
Years from now, people will look back on current players and come to a similar conclusion. Currently, only Australia have a genuinely great batting (debateable and maybe India). The others are propped by one or two players. Wi and RSA are downright atrocious. They'll look back on the likes of Bumrah and Cummins and draw similar conclusions. But we all know that wouldn't be fair.
Click to expand...
It is also true that batting standard is also low now . And before you misunderstand me only reason we are having this debate is because both Tendulkar and Marshall are at worst top 5 batsman and bowler . So every flaw in record is getting scrutinised.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
subshakerz said:
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.
Click to expand...
Marshall got lucky? That's the level you've got to, noted.

You keep taking about Imran and Hadlee, but both of them feasted on SL, where Marshall never did.

You talk about the 88 tour that Imran dominated the rough WI batting line up. The only match Pak won was one that both Vivian and Malcolm missed, and let's discuss the batting lineup that you profess was Imran's crowning career achievement. Viv, who was way past even the period after his prime, missed the first game, Greenidge was well off the cliff at that point, Carl Hooper, Phil Simmons and Gus Logie often portrayed as the weak link in the WI line up that Imran would have replaced. Haynes was never any better than decent and Richardson at that point was the team's best batsman. That was the team that you use as your standard that Imran managed to average 25 in the Caribbean against.

Can't have it both ways

And yet with these diminished lineups Imran still could only average 28 in Australia and India.

Yes Hadlee is definitely up in that tier with Marshall and McGrath, but yeah we. An cancel out the WI with SL, it evens out.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
kyear2 said:
Marshall got lucky? That's the level you've got to, noted.

You keep taking about Imran and Hadlee, but both of them feasted on SL, where Marshall never did.

You talk about the 88 tour that Imran dominated the rough WI batting line up. The only match Pak won was one that both Vivian and Malcolm missed, and let's discuss the batting lineup that you profess was Imran's crowning career achievement. Viv, who was way past even the period after his prime, missed the first game, Greenidge was well off the cliff at that point, Carl Hooper, Phil Simmons and Gus Logie often portrayed as the weak link in the WI line up that Imran would have replaced. Haynes was never any better than decent and Richardson at that point was the team's best batsman. That was the team that you use as your standard that Imran managed to average 25 in the Caribbean against.

Can't have it both ways

And yet with these diminished lineups Imran still could only average 28 in Australia and India.

Yes Hadlee is definitely up in that tier with Marshall and McGrath, but yeah we. An cancel out the WI with SL, it evens out.
Click to expand...
I guess it was only a matter of time before you brought Imran in.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
kyear2 said:
Marshall got lucky? That's the level you've got to, noted.
Click to expand...
He did he got a dream deal.

kyear2 said:
You talk about the 88 tour that Imran dominated the rough WI batting line up. The only match Pak won was one that both Vivian and Malcolm missed, and let's discuss the batting lineup that you profess was Imran's crowning career achievement. Viv, who was way past even the period after his prime, missed the first game, Greenidge was well off the cliff at that point, Carl Hooper, Phil Simmons and Gus Logie often portrayed as the weak link in the WI line up that Imran would have replaced. Haynes was never any better than decent and Richardson at that point was the team's best batsman. That was the team that you use as your standard that Imran managed to average 25 in the Caribbean against.
Click to expand...
Viv still had it in that series, so he did well against Viv, Greenidge, Haynes and Richardson. And he did the same in 86 at home.

kyear2 said:
And yet with these diminished lineups Imran still could only average 28 in Australia and India.
Click to expand...
Imran between 76 to 81 took 40 plus wickets in 8 tests @27 in Australia and averaged under 25 overall. More than good enough.

Please don't derail the topic with this pettiness.

Or maybe do the same breakdown of some of the poor Aussie and Eng lineups Marshall feasted on.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
Slifer said:
It wasn't established, Sunilz gave an opinion which I disagree with. The atg great lineup around him is fair but he also played series minus them and excelled.
Click to expand...
Not only disagree with, but is absolute nonsense. In '78 the entire team was away playing WSC, and Marshall after not even a season of FC cricket (1 match I recall) and in what was noting better than an A team had to go up against India, and that counts towards his figures against Gavaskar?

I see objectivity has left the chat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top