Jack Hobbs vs Sachin Tendulkar

[capt_Luffy]

I find this a very arrogant position frankly.

But not necessarily one very wrong.

 

[subshakerz]

He was lucky that his family was very supportive.

Even now he avoids being a selector, coach or mentor. He tries to stay away from any controversy.

IMO I find him too politically correct. He should have used his voice to weigh in on major cricket issues rather than stay squeaky clean.

 

[subshakerz]

But not necessarily one very wrong.

Do you have more confidence in the assessment of a player you yourself watched play or one you did not? And if the former, why?

 

[capt_Luffy]

Not really - a lot of sports players have bizarre opinions, either cos they’re really weird or like attention seeking pieces (Pele considered El Hadji Diouf one of the 100 best players. Sometimes, like you see in cricket especially, it can just be a case of “I found this player the hardest to face/bowl to” (Crowe/Wasim) but they don’t always caveat it like that and just go all in with “this guy was the best”.

You could argue consensus sure, but individual opinions don’t really matter much as shown above.

Re Péle, that list I am 99.94% sure actually wasn't made by Péle, but given to him. Nakata, Diouf, Ji Sun, etc were clearly to appeal en masse to Asia and Africa. I am 100% Péle didn't considered them better than Gerson, Zizinho, etc.

 

[subshakerz]

You could argue consensus sure, but individual opinions don’t really matter much as shown above.

Yes I argue consensus, not singular opinions which I agree aren't as reliable.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Do you have more confidence in the assessment of a player you yourself watched play or one you did not? And if the former, why?

Because I have better context.

 

[subshakerz]

Because I have better context.

Same principle applies with factoring in peer opinion of those who played against them.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Same principle applies with factoring in peer opinion of those who played against them.

Unless it's my opinion on my perception. There perception could be motivated by a large number of factors including personal relations and bias, nationalistic bias, stylistic bias, finding personally tougher to play/bowl to, etc etc.

 

[DrWolverine]

IMO I find him too politically correct. He should have used his voice to weigh in on major cricket issues rather than stay squeaky clean.

Sachin is too politically correct.

In one way I feel it is better to be silent rather than be like Gavaskar and have an opinion on everything

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sachin is too politically correct.

In one way I feel it is better to be silent rather than be like Gavaskar and have an opinion on everything

Sometimes. I would rather prefer a better balance. During the wrestlers' protests, Sachin didn't spoke a single word. I really expected him to. The whole Indian 1983 WC winning team did. Sometimes stewing irritating nonsense about things not that important in the grand scheme of things and speaking up on important issues is better than saying nothing.

 

[Coronis]

Why? Why does he have to do stuff for you lol

 

[Johan]

....Why are we discussing Sachin's political correctness in Hobbs vs Tendulkar thread? do we even know Hobbs's political views?

 

[subshakerz]

Unless it's my opinion on my perception. There perception could be motivated by a large number of factors including personal relations and bias, nationalistic bias, stylistic bias, finding personally tougher to play/bowl to, etc etc.

Sure but why would you discard who they find tougher to play? It is part of quality assessment.

 

[subshakerz]

Sometimes. I would rather prefer a better balance. During the wrestlers' protests, Sachin didn't spoke a single word. I really expected him to. The whole Indian 1983 WC winning team did. Sometimes stewing irritating nonsense about things not that important in the grand scheme of things and speaking up on important issues is better than saying nothing.

I was thinking more on issues that arose in his time like ball tampering and matchfixing.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I was thinking more on issues that arose in his time like ball tampering and matchfixing.

Nah. Him remaining silent on those works better for the team. What could he had said even??

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sure but why would you discard who they find tougher to play? It is part of quality assessment.

I am not saying discard it completely, but you have to take it with a big grain of salt and can never be sure the extent to which the other factors dictate that rating.

 

[subshakerz]

I am not saying discard it completely, but you have to take it with a big grain of salt and can never be sure the extent to which the other factors dictate that rating.

Hence why I care more about consensus of such rating.

 

[subshakerz]

Nah. Him remaining silent on those works better for the team. What could he had said even??

I believe in the matchfixing issue he knows more than he has shared.about who was culpable.

On other issues, he is a big voice and can drive the debate but I think he chooses to remain uncontroversial.

 

[ma1978]

Sure but why would you discard who they find tougher to play? It is part of quality assessment.

because we don't have proper analytic tools to do this, and it comes down to people's subjectives judgment. and i find that in the absence of such tools, people bias their subjective analysis (i am sure i am guily of this0 to justify preecisting opinions

 

[DrWolverine]

I believe in the matchfixing issue he knows more than he has shared.about who was culpable.

I had the same feeling. He was responsible for Nayan Mongia and Manoj Prabhakar being dropped for playing slowly in that odi match