He broke his right forearm few weeks before India toured in early 2002. He used the matches against India to build back strength in his long rested forearm. He did pretty decently against New Zealand later that year.Lara had a pretty poor year in 2002 so maybe the peak should be 2003-2005. That way it’s also the same amount of years as the first peak.
His best two series probably came outside of the two peaks which is interesting.
Yeah, his two peak periods are 92 - 96 (before the Aus tour) & 03 - 06. But delivered the best batting performances (99 AUS, 01 SL) since WW2 during his low period.I liked all of that.. including the so-called down period Lara coz that was also the peak of his batting achievements. 1999
With a strike rate around 70 to boot. He was mesmerizing during this time.Excellent question. Probably first peak because he faced some serious bowling then, and except for the series in India he passed with flying colors:
Australia (a): 400 runs at 58 (Warne, McDermott, Hughes, Reid )
Pakistan (h): 200 runs at 43 (peak Waqar and great Wasim)
Eng(h): 800 runs at 99. (Caddick, Fraser)
Ind (a): 200 runs at 33 (Kumble)
NZ (a): 150 runs at 75
Aus (h): 300 runs at 44 ( Warne, McGrath, Reifel)
Eng (a): 765 runs at 85 (Fraser, Cork, Gough)
NZ (h): 150 runs at 50.
Then came his disastrous tour of Aus and a couple middling series vs India then his fall that began with the SL series.
Lara was also the best one day batsman at that timeWith a strike rate around 70 to boot. He was mesmerizing during this time.
2002 can be ignored considering he completely messed up his elbow after that collision with i believe it was AttapatuLara had a pretty poor year in 2002 so maybe the peak should be 2003-2005. That way it’s also the same amount of years as the first peak.
His best two series probably came outside of the two peaks which is interesting.
Spoken like someone who knows what they're talking about and followed Lara's career. That series in South Africa convinced me that though lara was uncomfortable vs pace he could still make runs. People look at the attack and dismiss it but Ntini was raining down fire that entire series. His best knock for me, was the 70 odd when Ntini and co were peppering and completely ran through the West Indies' top order except for Lara.Very hard to split.
Lara had a 50+ innings in 11 of his first 13 Test matches and this included Test matches in Australia, Test matches against peak Wasim-Waqar in 1993 and a one-off Test match against Donald in 1992. Very decent consistency against great attacks.
He missed it by a whisker in his debut innings against Wasim & Waqar in December 1990 (got out to Abdul Qadir on 44).
Have to go with the new Lara though. Had a 500+ run series when Aussie pace bowlers were raining down high pace bumpers at him. Repeated the 500+ run feat in South Africa when their pace bowlers did the same. He also tightened his technique, wisened up against the likes of McGrath (of the 16 innings they played against each other during this time, McGrath got him just once and that after Lara scored 226 in that innings). And he did all this without compromising on the basic attacking nature of his game.
Very unusually Lara's slump came bang in the middle of his career, from Aus tour in December 1996 to Aus tour in early 2001. A period of about 4.5 years. You could probably excuse his performances towards the end of this 4.5 year period, against Aus in 2000-01 and later South Africa in 2001 because as I said earlier he played those series even though he was not fit because the challenge was irresistible.
Lara averaged in the 30s during this low period. During this time, he basically was like how Hooper was throughout his career.
It wasn't like he was failing only against great attacks during this 4.5 year period, his Test averages against Sri Lanka and England during this slump time were 30 and 37, and neither side during that time had an attack so formidable as to result in those stats.
Irony though is, his most iconic performance - Aus 99 - came right in the middle of this slump period.