How would Sachin Tendulkar have fared in T20s?

[_00_deathscar]

We only really got a glimpse of it in the IPL but it was at the tail end of his career - he seemed a consistent scorer who could motor on but not someone who would get you a 200+ S/R (at that stage of his career). He sort of became a reliable opener scoring at a decent nick without really powering on. Wouldn't hit many 6s.

But what would peak Sachin have been like as a T20 player? No different? More like Kohli? Or would he somehow (no idea why) have struggled to adapt to the format?

 

[trundler]

Something tells me he'd be a more consistent Aaron Finch

 

[stephen]

I think he'd have been considered an ATG in the format if he played it from his youth. Though the Indian player I think who the format is most suited for is Yuvraj Singh.

 

[indiaholic]

Would have been an ATG.

 

[trundler]

His 90s ODI peak was a cross between Jayasuria and Mark Waugh. I would say Roy and Babar are T20 versions of the 2 respectively. Make of that what you will.

 

[ankitj]

We saw a late stage Tendulkar in IPL. In 90s he was among the quickest scorers. Of T20 existed then I think he would have been a leading T20 player.

 

[honestbharani]

Think he would have batted how he did in his very initial days opening the innings in ODIs where he scored something ridiculous like 82 off 49 balls and stuff like that. An innings that really won't be out of place in a T20 today.

 

[vcs]

Think he would have batted how he did in his very initial days opening the innings in ODIs where he scored something ridiculous like 82 off 49 balls and stuff like that. An innings that really won't be out of place in a T20 today.

He'd definitely have been great at T20s but ODI format suited him just perfectly. 15 overs of field restrictions vs. just 4 in T20s.

 

[srbhkshk]

T20s have 6 overs of restriction unless I have completely forgotten about cricket in lockdown.

wrt Sachin, I think he would have averaged somewhat less than Kohli , maybe ~45 and scored at a higher clip , maybe ~145 or more.

 

[vcs]

Haha you're right. Point still applies, I guess... Tendulkar's MO in the first 15 overs was to clinically find the gaps (bit like Babar Azam these days), didn't play as many dots early in the innings as Rohit but not quite as prolific a hitter either.

 

[honestbharani]

Sachin's ability to rotate strike and take quick singles even with the 15 over field restrictions and two catching men within 15 yards, is an extremely under rated aspect of his ODI batting genius. And I think it would have suited him just fine in T20s. Its not just that knock in NZ, btw. I remember the ICC KnockOut innings against Australia when he just went berserk against McGrath and went at a ridiculous pace very early on. Think he made 40 or so and got out like in the 8th over. And he can brutal against the spinners too. He definitely figured out a template and often used to be in cruise control in ODIs but the early career aggressive Sachin would have ruled T20s IMO.

 

[harsh.ag]

He wasn't a great strike rotator in the 90s ODIs. A lot of dot balls between boundaries. But that was just how the game was played back then and he was probably better than most.

 

[vcs]

Not sure why you think he wasn't a great strike rotator.. there were awesome boundary hitters like Lara, Ganguly, Mark Waugh, Anwar etc. around that time but Sachin easily matched or exceeded their SR's because he was much better at strike rotation.

 

[harsh.ag]

Only when compared to how much better he became later in his career. The game was just different back then. Everyone took up lots of dots for no reason.

 

[srbhkshk]

I mean somehow the established wisdom was that if you hit a boundary you can basically sleep for the next ball. (well not exactly, but similar). and for some reason batsman did believe it. Then someone would come along who would hit three in a row and shock the hell out of everyone else.

 

[Burgey]

against Australia when he just went berserk against McGrath and went at a ridiculous pace very early on. Think he made 40 or so and got out like in the 8th over.

must not have been a WC game

 

[honestbharani]

The tournament was literally called the ICC KnockOuts. Obviously a lot more pressure than silly WC games.

 

[h_hurricane]

The 2 WC matches which Mcgrath pawned Tendulkar, he had a mountain to climb as far as chasing those targets was concerned. It wasn't a level playing game to start with, when they locked horns with each other. Would be interesting to see how they would have fared against each other with India batting first in a knockout or near knockout match. Alas, it never happened.

 

[srbhkshk]

The 2 WC matches which Mcgrath pawned Tendulkar, he had a mountain to climb as far as chasing those targets was concerned. It wasn't a level playing game to start with, when they locked horns with each other. Would be interesting to see how they would have fared against each other with India batting first in a knockout or near knockout match. Alas, it never happened.

Not a knock out, but this was an important match.

AUS vs IND Cricket Scorecard, 11th Match at Centurion, February 15, 2003

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get Australia vs India 11th Match, cricket scorecard, ICC World Cup 2002/03 dated February 15, 2003.

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[vcs]

Man, just look at the middle order strike rates there. I remember watching this match, Tendulkar was batting well before they collectively robbed him of the strike and completely stalled the momentum.