Brian lara vs Steve Waugh

[Jumno]

Although Lara is my favourite player and pleasing to the eye.

Lara did not score a hundred against Donald, Wasim and Waqur.

Didn't fact Ambrose or Walsh.

 

[Johan]

Yes and out thrice in 7 tests.

Lara 5 times in 98 series.

And Tendulkar was still a teen. That whole phase should be considered as a prodigy.

or just fast development? if you wanna give him longetivity point then you should give his atleast 18+ self some scrutiny as well

why does that matter though? their run output against a Donald led south Africa is the same, if you ask me, needing the best bowler of the team to get you out is far less humiliating then getting out to McMillan and Cronje.

 

[Johan]

Anyway I agree with most all of the above. Objectively, both Lara and Sachin were well below par vs Donald led South African bowling, Wasim, and were mixed vs McGrath.

Lara has good output against McGrath while Sachin against Steyn imo

 

[subshakerz]

And the fact of the matter remains, Lara essentially only played Donald with both in their respective primes in that one series.

Fun fact both Lara and Sachin faced Donald over the same number of innings with Donald dismissing Lara 6 times and Sachin 5.

If you are going to suggest that single 98 series is relevant since it was their both primes don't bring out stats of dismissals in total innings when Donald wasn't in his prime to make it misleading.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Lara has good output against McGrath while Sachin against Steyn imo

I would say Sachin has good output vs McGrath as well. Re Lara, 99 is enough to cover any other mediocrity.

 

[Coronis]

Donald was 26/27 and had debuted in 92 but had been playing county cricket for a long time prior and was a fairly seasoned bowled even out of the gate.

tbf Sachin had already played 60 first class matches and had himself just played a county season too.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Lara has good output against McGrath while Sachin against Steyn imo

Yeah but Lara never played Steyn. Wish he did. Would've been interesting to say the least. Would assume Steyn would do well in South Africa but get taken apart in the Caribbean

 

[subshakerz]

or just fast development? if you wanna give him longetivity point then you should give his atleast 18+ self some scrutiny as well

I give him extra credit for maturing before his years but don't expect him to have the same output.

why does that matter though? their run output against a Donald led south Africa is the same, if you ask me, needing the best bowler of the team to get you out is far less humiliating then getting out to McMillan and Cronje.

Because it's two different arguments. You can say they had the same success rate against SA in that period but Donald objectively did better against Lara.

 

[Johan]

I would say Sachin has good output vs McGrath as well. Re Lara, 99 is enough to cover any other mediocrity.

What's the context behind Sachin averaging 32 vs McGrath in India?

 

[subshakerz]

tbf Sachin had already played 60 first class matches and had himself just played a county season too.

As a teen which is exceptional

 

[Coronis]

What's the context behind Sachin averaging 32 vs McGrath in India?

Broken toenail

 

[Sliferxxxx]

If you are going to suggest that single 98 series is relevant since it was their both primes don't bring out stats of dismissals in total innings when Donald wasn't in his prime to make it misleading.

Oh ok so I'll stick to the ONE series then and judge Lara on that ONE series. Interesting how all of a sudden that's good enough for you but hey you do you as the yanks would say.....

 

[Coronis]

As a teen which is exceptional

I know but you’re implying Donald shouldn’t be given leeway due to his late international start and prior domestic experience. Tendulkar was pretty damn experienced at that time himself. Same standard should apply to both probs.

 

[subshakerz]

Oh ok so I'll stick to the ONE series then and judge Lara on that ONE series. Interesting how all of a sudden that's good enough for you but hey you do you as the yanks would say.....

Just be consistent. I know it's hard for you but try.

 

[Johan]

I give him extra credit for maturing before his years but don't expect him to have the same output.

Okay

Because it's two different arguments. You can say they had the same success rate against SA in that period but Donald objectively did better against Lara.

Donald had plenty of success against Sachin, 5 dismissals in 20 innings vs 6 dimissals in 20 innings, the gap is minimal, Sachin getting dismissed by McMillan and Cronje is not something I'm going to give him points for, Donald has shown he is more than capable of taking prime Sachin out.

 

[capt_Luffy]

What's the context behind Sachin averaging 32 vs McGrath in India?

2 series.

2001: 3 Tests. 76 and 65 in Wankhede, 126 in Chennai

2005: Was out with an injury and not supposed to play that series. Was called in mid series to prevent humiliation. Played 2 Tests, 55 in a tough Wankhede pitch.

 

[subshakerz]

Oh ok so I'll stick to the ONE series then and judge Lara on that ONE series. Interesting how all of a sudden that's good enough for you but hey you do you as the yanks would say.....

Just be consistent. I know it's hard for you but try.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Just be consistent. I know it's hard for you but try.

Pot say hello to kettle. The nerve....

 

[subshakerz]

I know but you’re implying Donald shouldn’t be given leeway due to his late international start and prior domestic experience. Tendulkar was pretty damn experienced at that time himself. Same standard should apply to both probs.

Huh? Just saying Donald started out international cricket as a pretty good bowler since he was already matured and with experience.

Tendulkar having first class and county experience doesn't change the fact that he was physically not even matured at that point.

 

[Johan]

@subshakerz plus, if teen excuse works, I'm just gonna make the excuse for the 98 series that Lara had zero interest in playing and was leading a player strike and thus being distracted from the actual tour.

When Lara led a players' strike

West Indies cricket hit a new low in November 1998 when the captain and his squad refused to travel to South Africa

www-espncricinfo-com.cdn.ampproject.org

The tour party were heading to South Africa in November 1998 from different places, a few from the Caribbean while most were going straight on from a one-day tournament in Bangladesh. But on November 5, nine of them, including Brian Lara, the captain, told tour manager Clive Lloyd during a stopover in Bangkok that they were heading to London not Johannesburg, after a row with WICB board officials. A bemused Lloyd and entourage headed south while the players flew to Heathrow Airport.

The players were not so much unhappy with their tour fees - up to £35,000 each - as much as peripheral issues such as training and meal allowances, and these proved the catalyst in a row that had been brewing for months. They were also uneasy with security arrangements following incidents earlier in the year when Pakistan had visited the republic.

As soon as Pat Rousseau, the WICB president, heard what was happening he called a board meeting, and by the time Lara and Carl Hooper, the vice-captain, arrived at their London hotel a fax was waiting informing them they had been fired and the other squad members fined 10% of their tour fees.

Rousseau, whose relationship with Lara was strained, seemed to believe this would break the back of the strike but the action backfired badly, only serving to make the players more determined.

Lara took a back seat, telling reporters: "I'm on the outside. I'm not a member of the West Indies cricket team at the moment. But I still want to go to South Africa." The spotlight fell on Walsh, Lara's predecessor and now president of WIPA, the players' association.
[\QUOTE]