Criticising Tendulkar the in thing

[honestbharani]

Hmm..."India were press home the advantage by trying to get quick runs" Take a look at the strike rates of all the players...Seems like Dhoni was the only one who was smashing. I feel Dravid layed out a plan. I don't see why he needed to swing his bat.

Also, what does his century in his previous game have to do with the 2nd test ?

because, apart from Tendulkar, the other centurions all accelerated towards the latter half of their respective innings. It was obvious that the plan was to score quick runs around the time Tendulkar was batting, since we already had a big score on the board. Read the cricinfo article for more statistical evidence abt what I am saying. But just watching the game, it was obvious that the other batters were trying to accelerate and Sachin was just pushing around for his 100.


And the fact that he got a 100 in the previous game matters because had he gotten a pair or something there, one can understand him hanging around and trying to get a hundred and get himself into form. But he was already in good form and that is the confusing part. He was in good form, he was batting well, pitch was flat and bowling was ordinary and it was obvious that the team was looking to score as quickly as possible and yet he was just nudging around.

 

[SightForTheGods]

That cricinfo article whining about his slow performance is nothing but junk. In fact, I was laughing when Monga was talking about how "Efficient India failed to dominate"

It is not right to play cricket based on your previous inning. If he did not hit a century in the last game then it does not mean he should change his style to accommodate a century in the next one. Same applies the other way.

 

[honestbharani]

That cricinfo article whining about his slow performance is nothing but junk. In fact, I was laughing when Monga was talking about how "Efficient India failed to dominate"

It is not right to play cricket based on your previous inning. If he did not hit a century in the last game then it does not mean he should change his style to accommodate a century in the next one. Same applies the other way.

no, it was not junk as it points out how all other batsmen were accelerating when Tendulkar was content with just staying there. May have been a team decision, but if it was, it was a weird one.


And no, I am not saying one should be judged based on one's previous innings. But since he had runs behind his back, it was all the more inexplicable that he was batting as though he was just trying to get himself into form, which may be the only time when the way he batted, given the situation, would have been justifiable.

 

[sohummisra]

Hmm..."India were press home the advantage by trying to get quick runs" Take a look at the strike rates of all the players...Seems like Dhoni was the only one who was smashing. I feel Dravid layed out a plan. I don't see why he needed to swing his bat.

You fail to make a distinction between batting with positive intent and smashing the bowling around. No one is suggesting that Tendulkar should have been looking to take unneeded risks to up the rate. The only suggestion that is being made is that one believes he could have scored more positively without taking more risks.

 

[SightForTheGods]

You fail to make a distinction between batting with positive intent and smashing the bowling around. No one is suggesting that Tendulkar should have been looking to take unneeded risks to up the rate. The only suggestion that is being made is that one believes he could have scored more positively without taking more risks.

haha sorry I fail to understand how he could have done this more positively. Easier said then done.

 

[sohummisra]

haha sorry I fail to understand how he could have done this more positively. Easier said then done.

Well easier for me to say than do, definitely. Tendulkar scored 2 boundaries and one six when he reached 50 runs. In contrast, Jaffer had 7, Karthik had 8 and even Dravid had 7. Compare this to when the batsmen reached centuries: Jaffer added 6 more boundaries, Karthik added 5 more and Dravid added 5 boundaries and a 6. Tendulkar added 4 boundaries.

Tendulkar took 98 balls to reach his half century, which was second-fastest of the centurions on display. However, to get to his century, Tendulkar took 102 more balls, compared to Jaffer's 87, Karthik's 71 and Dravid's 69. It seems he got in and then started defending. This is just a purely statistical point of view and if you watched the match at all, I think you could easily tell that the other batsmen were hunting for runs more than Tendulkar. They were also playing the same bowlers and I think Tendulkar is at least a better batsman than Karthik and Jaffer, on current form.

A more in-depth statistical view is provided by the Cricinfo article, as well.

So one can conclude either that he was not looking for as many boundaries or that the bowlers were bowling better to him. I safely conclude that Tendulkar was playing it extra-safe, which was valid given that it wasn't really a close encounter. However, if it comes to a rain-curtailed match come England, we could well give up the advantage especially if we have the opponents down on the mat.

 

[SightForTheGods]

Well easier for me to say than do, definitely. Tendulkar scored 2 boundaries and one six when he reached 50 runs. In contrast, Jaffer had 7, Karthik had 8 and even Dravid had 7. Compare this to when the batsmen reached centuries: Jaffer added 6 more boundaries, Karthik added 5 more and Dravid added 5 boundaries and a 6. Tendulkar added 4 boundaries.

Tendulkar took 98 balls to reach his half century, which was second-fastest of the centurions on display. However, to get to his century, Tendulkar took 102 more balls, compared to Jaffer's 87, Karthik's 71 and Dravid's 69. It seems he got in and then started defending. This is just a purely statistical point of view and if you watched the match at all, I think you could easily tell that the other batsmen were hunting for runs more than Tendulkar. They were also playing the same bowlers and I think Tendulkar is at least a better batsman than Karthik and Jaffer, on current form.

A more in-depth statistical view is provided by the Cricinfo article, as well.

So one can conclude either that he was not looking for as many boundaries or that the bowlers were bowling better to him. I safely conclude that Tendulkar was playing it extra-safe, which was valid given that it wasn't really a close encounter. However, if it comes to a rain-curtailed match come England, we could well give up the advantage especially if we have the opponents down on the mat.

With all due respect, your analysis fails to convince me in the sense that you are measuring his innings with respect to the total number of boundries and/or sixers; you are not considering the running between wickets. Some batsmen could possibly hit several fours and then give away a lot of dot balls. On the other hand, some batsmen could constantly run between wickets and give less dot balls. He might have hit only half as many fours as Jaffer and Karthik, but other than Dravid's strike rate, both Jaffer and Karthik's century strike rate are not substantially different from Tendulkar's strike-rate. Had he played with the similiar style as Karthik and Jaffer he would have ended up with at most 10-15 more runs.

 

[SightForTheGods]

Suppose Tendulkar took more risks and in process got out soon then we would only be left with one semi-capable test player - Dhoni (SUPER-capable when it comes to ODI mind you); rest are all bowlers. Thus, securing a risk-free large total would help secure a good chance for a follow-on. This is obviously what Dravid wanted and it was pretty efficient.

 

[honestbharani]

With all due respect, your analysis fails to convince me in the sense that you are measuring his innings with respect to the total number of boundries and/or sixers; you are not considering the running between wickets. Some batsmen could possibly hit several fours and then give away a lot of dot balls. On the other hand, some batsmen could constantly run between wickets and give less dot balls. He might have hit only half as many fours as Jaffer and Karthik, but other than Dravid's strike rate, both Jaffer and Karthik's century strike rate are not substantially different from Tendulkar's strike-rate. Had he played with the similiar style as Karthik and Jaffer he would have ended up with at most 10-15 more runs.

That is the mistake that a lot of people make. One CANNOT score quickly just by running well between the wickets. And he was hardly running like a Jonty or a Bevan there that day anyway. And even if he did, as one of the premier batsmen in the world of all time and one of India's best batsmen even today, he is supposed to go for his strokes. There is a difference between scoring 4 2s in an over and hitting 4 boundaries. And plz don't tell me he isn't capable of it. He has shown it a lot of times in ODIs recently that when he puts in the effort, he can turn it on when we are looking for quick runs. For some strange reason, he decided to concentrate on his 100 and remaining not out and that is the end of it. As I have said earlier, it never really mattered because it was never going to cost India much unless BD batted out of their skins and yet that doesn't make the point itself or the criticism invalid.

 

[honestbharani]

Suppose Tendulkar took more risks and in process got out soon then we would only be left with one semi-capable test player - Dhoni (SUPER-capable when it comes to ODI mind you); rest are all bowlers. Thus, securing a risk-free large total would help secure a good chance for a follow-on. This is obviously what Dravid wanted and it was pretty efficient.

India were already well on their way to declare and it is not like a Kumble or a Zaheer can't hang around to get singles and give Dhoni the strike. And given the situation of the game, Dhoni was our best bet at that stage. And there is no such thing as a risk-free large total. Once we crossed 550, any score would have been the same for us as you would expect our bowlers to bowl out BD for lesser than 300 anyday and on most pitches, esp. after they have been in the field in hot weather for so many hours.

 

[sohummisra]

With all due respect, your analysis fails to convince me in the sense that you are measuring his innings with respect to the total number of boundries and/or sixers; you are not considering the running between wickets. Some batsmen could possibly hit several fours and then give away a lot of dot balls. On the other hand, some batsmen could constantly run between wickets and give less dot balls. He might have hit only half as many fours as Jaffer and Karthik, but other than Dravid's strike rate, both Jaffer and Karthik's century strike rate are not substantially different from Tendulkar's strike-rate. Had he played with the similiar style as Karthik and Jaffer he would have ended up with at most 10-15 more runs.

He was not exactly burning up the pitch with his running, either. He looked scratchy and looked like he wanted to dig in rather than grab the opportunity to face some low-quality bowling with both hands.

Now with respect to Jaffer and Karthik, you also have to keep in mind that they had to see the new ball off which was moving quite a bit. They scored only about 70 runs in the first session but turned on the heat after that. In fact, if you read the Cricinfo article, all these statistics were presented pretty concisely.

Also, I don't know how you deduced he would have ended up with 10-15 more runs. Also, the argument is not how many runs he made. A century is definitely good whenever and against whoever it comes (except if it's Ganguly against Zimbabwe ). Playing against Bangladesh was a good opportunity for Sachin to get some runs convincingly. He got runs, but he wasn't very convincing in getting them.

 

[sohummisra]

Suppose Tendulkar took more risks and in process got out soon then we would only be left with one semi-capable test player - Dhoni (SUPER-capable when it comes to ODI mind you); rest are all bowlers. Thus, securing a risk-free large total would help secure a good chance for a follow-on. This is obviously what Dravid wanted and it was pretty efficient.

The point I am trying to make is that I firmly believe that Tendulkar would not have to take too much risk in scoring more freely. He played very much within himself. If he allowed himself a few more shots given that the old ball wasn't exceptionally difficult to play and the bowlers were all tiring under the sun, I think he would have scored a fair number more runs without increasing the probability of losing his wicket non-trivially.

 

[Manee]

His innings today really shut this thread up.

 

[Sanz]

His innings today really shut this thread up.

Nope. Actually his innings today was pretty slow esp the first 50, where his strike rate was about 50. Not trying to criticize him but just pointing out the facts.

 

[Raghav]

His innings today really shut this thread up.

Never

 

[SightForTheGods]

Manee, there is no point in arguing. I simply can't buy the justifications they provided !

 

[Pratters]

Haven't read the last few pages of the discussion but would like to make one point. Playing slower in tests, curtailing risks isn't bad if you can score more runs. While strike rate's importance has increased in modern day test cricket, making more runs is still the more vital aspect of test cricket more often than not. Players change their styles over the years. That does not necessarily mean that they will contribute less.

 

[Dasa]

There was another article on CricInfo critical of Tendulkar today. I don't have any objections with this one though - the difference in tone and the way the criticism is made in the article is much better and more professional than the other one discussed in this thread.

 

[pup11]

Tendulkar is an all-time legend of the game and though his performances off late have dipped and that to when compared to his own very high standards, Tendulkar doesn't need to proven anything to anyone at this stage of his career he has achieved everything a batsman can possibly dream of achieving through their career. He holds almost every possible batting record to his name, but still there is a genuine fear of failure in him which has hampered the fluency in his batting, due to which he has struggled for runs off late.

 

[jeevan]

Actually 15-20 more runs from him (to come to his average strike rate), coupled with 10-15 more runs from the rest would've raised the total to 270+ and caused SA a bit of a bother. So criticism today would be somewhat justified.

The original article that started this thread was quite ****oo though. (Didnt affect the result one bit, was in line with his career, notwithstanding a couple of other batsmen that day or Tendulkar himself of a few years ago).

OTOH his last 4 international innings have been 100+, 100, 4, 99. A couple more like these should be enough to boost the confidence of the plainest of grafters (which Tendulkar even at his half-best is not).