Can Tendulkar get 100 international hundreds?

[Cevno]

Well, I watched him bat and to me, he wasn't very good despite the runs he got in those years. On the other hand, he only averaged 38 or so in the 2007 England tour but batted much better than he did at any point in that period. You could see the signs of recovery.

And that is why i rate his 248 * in sydney as among his best knocks ever.

He was in poor form ,had major injury issues and had problems with his body.

He cut out the cover drive from that innings ,displayed rigid defense and in between showed his grace.
He was calculating every shot and just got the aussies in a quandry as to how to dismiss him.

Not many if any in such bad form ,coming out of a injury would have done what he did and showed he could still contribute and showed that they do not need everything to go for them to score runs.

 

[vcs]

...

I would take anyday Tendulkar Mark III (ie now) to even Tendulkar of the 90s. Back then Tendulkar looked imperious but also vulnerable. But now there is almost a predictable constancy and safe feeling to his innings....

In Tests maybe, just about. In ODIs, it isn't even close, '98 Tendulkar was probably the peak of ODI batsmanship since Richards' heyday.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Quite an easy argument to make isn't it? But when u dig in deep, you are basically talking about 2 years, and tell me how many such instances can u recollect when Sachin failed to deliver when India needed him (ie, 2004 and 2005). Agreed he had his share of failures but relatively how worse did Sachin perform than say a ponting or a Lara whent they too were/are going through a bad patch?

Bangalore test vs Pak and Melbourne vs Aus from the top off my head.

 

[Sir Alex]

Decline of someone like Dravid, who has been pivotal to India's batting resurgence in the early 2000s, never really took a big toll on India, because almost unnoticed, Tendulkar took upon that role also unto himself. Just look at the last innings, India after a good start, quiclkly slided to 170-3 odd still over 450+ runs in deficit with Laxman, a newbie and Dhoni to come in. Laxman departed quickly too but Tendulkar played the anchor and the driver simultaneously. I am sure that test won't be regarded as the best test of alltime, but I am sure in future debates that innings would be regared as "easy average boosting opportunity cashedin".. while it was not that.

 

[Cevno]

In Tests maybe, just about. In ODIs, it isn't even close, '98 Tendulkar was probably the peak of ODI batsmanship since Richards' heyday.

Personally i would take Tendulkar of the late 1990's in both tests and ODI's marginally.

He was Flamboyant and had that Sehwag like streak of making the best of bowlers look like ordinary.
He took on everyone despite the team depending more on him than now and still delivered on most occasions. The dependancy levels had reduced somewhat in the past few years.

 

[Sir Alex]

Bangalore test vs Pak and Melbourne vs Aus from the top off my head.

I am asking how 2 instances where he failed can be held against him as if he was the only one to fail? Or do you expect him to score in every innings he walk out to the crease?

 

[vcs]

Quite an easy argument to make isn't it? But when u dig in deep, you are basically talking about 2 years, and tell me how many such instances can u recollect when Sachin failed to deliver when India needed him (ie, 2004 and 2005). Agreed he had his share of failures but relatively how worse did Sachin perform than say a ponting or a Lara whent they too were/are going through a bad patch?

Pak home and away 2005 and early 2006, England home in 2006, SA away 2006-07. Pretty much all the major series we played.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

I am asking how 2 instances where he failed can be held against him as if he was the only one to fail? Or do you expect him to score in every innings he walk out to the crease?

I am not saying it should be held against him...you asked for instances where he did in the period in question and I mentioned a couple...

 

[Sir Alex]

In Tests maybe, just about. In ODIs, it isn't even close, '98 Tendulkar was probably the peak of ODI batsmanship since Richards' heyday.

Would politely disagree. He has in the last 3 years scored series winning hundreds in Australia, Sri lanka and of course three 150+ knocks, the 175 (which for me is about his best hundred) and 160 odd in NZ and of course the double hundred. He has averaged 52 (see signature) in the last 3 years which is just brilliant for someone at his age.
The only thing that tugs me back to 90s are the Sharjah hundreds. Perhaps emotions are clouding judgements here, which is not terrible thing.

 

[Sir Alex]

Pak home and away 2005 and early 2006, England home in 2006, SA away 2006-07. Pretty much all the major series we played.

I have acknowledged 2003 and 2006 were dire years for him. Am asking about 2005 and 2004. Isn't a batsman allowed to be mediocre for 2 years in a 20 year old career???

Agree with Pakistan. But it is no more than "normal" failures for a bat.

 

[vcs]

Personally i would take Tendulkar of the late 1990's in both tests and ODI's marginally.

He was Flamboyant and had that Sehwag like streak of making the best of bowlers look like ordinary.
He took on everyone despite the team depending more on him than now and still delivered on most occasions. The dependancy levels had reduced somewhat in the past few years.

I agree. In Tests, he was both the destroyer (Chennai '98 against Australia) and the anchor (Chennai '99 against Pak ) as and when the situation demanded. But his standard deviation in Tests over the last year or two is probably even lower than it was then.

 

[vcs]

Would politely disagree. He has in the last 3 years scored series winning hundreds in Australia, Sri lanka and of course three 150+ knocks, the 175 (which for me is about his best hundred) and 160 odd in NZ and of course the double hundred. He has averaged 52 (see signature) in the last 3 years which is just brilliant for someone at his age.
The only thing that tugs me back to 90s are the Sharjah hundreds. Perhaps emotions are clouding judgements here, which is not terrible thing.

Nah, not at all. You are forgetting that the average run-scoring rate in ODIs has increased drastically in this century so Sachin, while still a very fast run-scorer does not stand out in comparison to his peers. In '98, he averaged around 68 in ODIs, scoring close to 1700 runs with 9 hundreds at a SR of 102 when probably you could count batsman who scored at that rate in the world on one hand. It was truly phenomenal. The fact that his runs mostly came against Australia that year added the cherry to the cake.

He's still a superb ODI batsman, one of the best in the business, but that year, he raised the bar for batting in that format.

 

[vcs]

I have acknowledged 2003 and 2006 were dire years for him. Am asking about 2005 and 2004. Isn't a batsman allowed to be mediocre for 2 years in a 20 year old career???

Agree with Pakistan. But it is no more than "normal" failures for a bat.

In 2004, India managed to dig out the results despite not depending much on him (apart from Australia where I excuse him because of the return from injury) and he did average 90 odd anyway. Yeah, they're not bad numbers for "poor" seasons.

 

[Cevno]

Pak home and away 2005 and early 2006, England home in 2006, SA away 2006-07. Pretty much all the major series we played.

Pak home he was pretty decent.

He was poor Pak away and England at home.

But he he was just below average in South africa Away .

Only Ashwell prince averaged above 40 in that series and was a pretty low scoring series for both teams.
Which is often the case with south africa preparing green tracks against India and that is somehow strangely held against Indian batsmen.

He was 4th in the run scoring charts for the series by the way for both teams -

Cricket Records | Records | India in South Africa Test Series, 2006/07 | Most runs | Cricinfo.com

Aesthetically speaking though he was pretty bad.

 

[Sir Alex]

Nah, not at all. You are forgetting that the average run-scoring rate in ODIs has increased drastically in this century so Sachin, while still a very fast run-scorer does not stand out in comparison to his peers. In '98, he averaged around 68 in ODIs, scoring close to 1700 runs with 9 hundreds at a SR of 102 when probably you could count batsman who scored at that rate in the world on one hand. It was truly phenomenal. The fact that his runs mostly came against Australia that year added the cherry to the cake.

He's still a superb ODI batsman, one of the best in the business, but that year, he raised the bar for batting in that format.

Not a bad thing when we are having divergent views about which was Sachin's best year, is it?? Let's agree to disagree. For me the 200 was every minute bowler killer (Steyn/Morkel - Not exactly duds) innings as the Sharjah ones were. Atleast in Sharjah he targeted the lesser bowlers like Tom Moody and Shane Warne ().

 

[Avada Kedavra]

. Atleast in Sharjah he targeted the lesser bowlers like Tom Moody and Shane Warne ().

 

[vcs]

Pak home he was pretty decent.

He was poor Pak away and England at home.

But he he was just below average in South africa Away .

Only Ashwell prince averaged above 40 in that series and was a pretty low scoring series for both teams.
Which is often the case with south africa preparing green tracks against India and that is somehow strangely held against Indian batsmen.

He was 4th in the run scoring charts for the series by the way for both teams -

Cricket Records | Records | India in South Africa Test Series, 2006/07 | Most runs | Cricinfo.com

Aesthetically speaking though he was pretty bad.

True. What mostly sticks in the mind from that series (which was there for the taking) was the scratching around in the 2nd innings by Sachin and Dravid against Paul Harris on his debut FFS.

 

[Sir Alex]

In 2004, India managed to dig out the results despite not depending much on him (apart from Australia where I excuse him because of the return from injury) and he did average 90 odd anyway. Yeah, they're not bad numbers for "poor" seasons.

Without taking anything away from Sehwag, India well could've bundled up for say 400 odd with Sehwag stranded had Tendulkar got out early at Multan and the match could have petered to a draw and the series not won too. There is no way conclusively saying that the innings did not affect the result of that match or the series.

 

[vcs]

Without taking anything away from Sehwag, India well could've bundled up for say 400 odd with Sehwag stranded had Tendulkar got out early at Multan and the match could have petered to a draw and the series not won too. There is no way conclusively saying that the innings did not affect the result of that match or the series.

Unlikely.. even Yuvraj got a fifty didn't he? Anyway, have to go now, good night.

 

[Sir Alex]

True. What mostly sticks in the mind from that series (which was there for the taking) was the scratching around in the 2nd innings by Sachin and Dravid against Paul Harris on his debut FFS.

Worst worst worst memory as a Sachin fan that.