Is Tendulkar a choker

[tooextracool]

I cannot believe you're still going on about this!

How can you blame SRT for this when you look at the efforts of the rest of the top order?

You have a go at him for getting out, yet not at the one's who got out before him?

1) i have never EVER blamed tendulkar for the loss.... my point is that tendulkar is a choker and that has been successfully delineated in this match and in many others.
2)in any inning generally only 2 or 3 players in the side tend to get a start.yes the ones that fail everytime under pressure are chokers,but great players in any team have at some point in their careers won a game under pressure....good ones might or might not have.in the 4th innings the ones that make it past 50 shoulder the responsibility of carrying their team home.a great player would almost always have carried his team home...a good player might have. in this case the 2 players who got a start happened to be mongia and tendulkar. mongia well isnt that good and it was acceptable that he couldnt carry his team home. tendulkar couldnt either, thats allright too but tendulkar has never managed to take his team home, and im sry but that is just not acceptable from a great batsman. the only other great player in the side at that time was dravid(perhaps not that great then)....and how many times has he carried his team home?

 

[tooextracool]

So doesn't that even things out ?? That means batsmen are taking more chances, playing more shots and giving the bowlers a fair chance to take wickets by attacking them ?

i think you missed out the part about the flat wickets.

 

[tooextracool]

So the pitches in NZ had too much lateral movement ? Is that a characteristic of a "non-flat pitch" which can be called a "minefield" where decent enough runs are hardly ever scored ? Your theory that runs need to be scored in a non-flat pitch, and yet not too many runs can be scored for it to qualify as a non-flat pitch are self-contradictory. And to apply that theory to judge a batsman and to say that he should have scored more in such surfaces is ludicrous.

you do realise that not all wickets tend to be flat or complete "minefields". earlier i had used an example of thorpe's 118 on what was a difficult wicket to bat on....and even hes not considered to be "great". im looking from those sort of innings from tendulkar too.

 

[aussie_beater]

these stats dont prove anything.....how do you know that in those 33 winning games that tendulkar didnt score a 100 in the first innings and fail in the 2nd innings when they needed him to score?or that he wasnt aided by someone else who scored 150* and batted till the end with 8 wickets down while tendulkar got out on 75 pretending that the ball kept low by squating on the floor after playing the shot? or that he got out when the score was 254 chasing 270??



probably 1 or 2 at most which came around 15 yrs ago

hmmm..... 2001-02 is surely 15 years ago in your galaxy's time...eh ? One example....remember Bloomfontein in 2002, with India tottering at 68-4, Sachin steps in with a rookie(Sehwag) at the other end and he scores 150 odd runs and on the way helps the rookie also to a century to stabilize the ship. Here's another... Port of Spain 2002, India in trouble with both openers gone in the first morning and in comes Sachin and scores over a third of the team's runs in the first innings which eventually helps India win the match. These sure were eons ago.. Oh my bad, I forgot you don't understand numbers or statistics....

 

[tooextracool]

Records do matter, Otherwise why do we see a Brian Lara score 400 runs and Hayden score 380 runs ? It is important for them.

do records make someone great though?i dont think so. just because tendulkar has more records that doesnt mean he is a greater batsman than don bradman or viv richards does it? nope...records are personal....they dont make you great.

As for Sachin's useless innings of 241 & 194, Well India ended up winning one and was an the verge of winning another one.?

anyone in that indian batting lineup would have scored those runs on those wickets. they are all just about as capable of the big scores on those flat wickets.

I can show you lot Viv's useless inning which did not do his team his team any good.

sure you can but you can also show me many more match winning innings than you can for tendulkar.

As for Steve Waugh batting in pressure situation well all I can say is he still has (much)lower 3rd & 4th innings avg than Sachin. Did you know that Steve Waugh has not scored single test century in 4th innings of a test ? Tells a lot about batting well under pressure, isn't it ?

so you're actually trying to tell me that sachin was a better player under pressure than steve waugh? talk about comparing an ice cream to a rock in a desert.

First of all I didn't say that Garner, Lillee etc weren't great, I just said that Ambrose, Walsh, Donald, Mcgrath, Waseem, Waqar, Warnie, Murali etc were great fast bowlers and were no way Ordinary even in the comparisons of the greats like Marshal, Holding etc. It just seems that you will go to any extent to prove your point and even call bowlers like Waqar, Akram, Donald, Mcgrath, Warnie etc as Ordinary. Btw is it Sachin's fault that he wasn't born in the era of Lillee, Holding etc ?

you need to learn to read. i said comparing them to the marshalls,holdings,lillees etc that list looked ordinary because those guys were much much better.

It's not Sachin's fault that Gough was not able to play in any of the 15 tests Sachin has played against England in last 10 years. Sachin has played him in ODIs and was alright against his bowling. I never said Sachin has played TESTS against Gough. Give a rest to your assumptions.

so we're talking about ODI's now? you're trying to show me how great a player he is by talking about his flat pitch record??im sure hes been tested by gough on those flat wickets just like afridi,gayle,razzaq etc have.

It's not his fault that he didn't get to play Ambrose or Waqar at their prime, Btw he did play Ambrose in 1996-1997 and consistently played Waqar in ODIs. I am just waiting for you to declare that Ambrose's prime was over by 1995.

yes its not his fault but how in the world can u counter my argument that tendulkar has been fortunate to have played in an era of low quality fast bowling by saying stuff like "its not his fault".jeez some arguments just get silly.oh and btw if you're going to continue to tell me how he has been tested by waqar and ambrose in ODIs im just not going to reply

 

[tooextracool]

Remember, there is an objective thing called statistic ? ....not sure if your school had that in its curriculum, but most people in the world look at that for an objective analysis, alright !! Now I can't help an ostrich, can I ?

ahh yes the same statistics that show that anderson is an all rounder?or the ones that show that kambli is better than vivian richards?? or maybe the one that shows that ricky ponting is better than viv richards?

Now how can someone's article prove me wrong. Has right and wrong become that subjective ? Well I may have gotten G.Bush's brain transplanted into mine, but I would say good luck with yours.....check out for those haemorrages mate

well done, you've just proved that you do in fact have the IQ of g.bush!

 

[tooextracool]

Hehehe, Just wanted to quote this one so that it doesn't get lost in the Galaxy of other posts. So you think Akram, Younis, Mcgrath, Warnie, Murali, Donald, Akhtar etc are Ordinary ??

DJ has already answered that for you.

BTW - Sachin Did play against Hadlee in his first Series against NZ, Against Imran in his debut series, needless to say that he was pretty comfortable against their bowling even as a Kid.

yes well done to him....he does seem to have a knack of scoring off bowlers past their prime,particularly on flat wickets. a couple of years ago i had no problem facing kapil dev either....it should be a cinch for me to get into the side.

 

[tooextracool]

Well I have seen Chauhan bowl in almost every test & ODI he has played for India. Infact I was right there at Wankhede Stadium in Mumbai in 1997 winter when chauhan bowled the best of his career in best of the conditions and I still think he was Ordinary at best and can't be compared to Harbhajan at all.

is this the same match when he took more wickets than kumble and the rest of the indian team?

Well In the Mumbai Test, Chauhan did get an extended spell on a spinning track in Mumbai and he still could't take a fifer in any of the innings.

now im convinced you're talking gibberish. i didnt know g.bush had such an influence on so many ppl.

 

[chicane]

ahh yes the same statistics that show that anderson is an all rounder?or the ones that show that kambli is better than vivian richards?? or maybe the one that shows that ricky ponting is better than viv richards?

well done, you've just proved that you do in fact have the IQ of g.bush!

You also got to use your brains while looking at statistics.

 

[marc71178]

anyone in that indian batting lineup would have scored those runs on those wickets. they are all just about as capable of the big scores on those flat wickets.

So how come they didn't then?

It seems to me when he scores runs, any of the others could've done according to you (even though they didn't)

 

[marc71178]

ahh yes the same statistics that show that anderson is an all rounder?

Interestingly enough, you are the only one who has ever said anything along these lines, because the rest of us know how to interpret something like that.

 

[maxpower]

and have u been able to convince me as to why harbhajan is better? i think not.
he was lucky enough to come across an underprepared aussie batting against off spin and was also given the opportunity to be indias strike bowler while chauhan was forced to be the defensive bowler to counter kumble.

you mean the same aussie team under steve waugh who were on a roll on winning test matches, the same team under steve waugh who called india "the last frontier", the final test and so on, THAT TEAM was underprepared ???

 

[Sanz]

DJ has already answered that for you.
yes well done to him....he does seem to have a knack of scoring off bowlers past their prime,particularly on flat wickets. a couple of years ago i had no problem facing kapil dev either....it should be a cinch for me to get into the side.

Yeah Right and one year before Tendulkar had faced Hadlee, Hadlee had toured India, He took 10 wickets in one Test match and won the Test for NZ. Not to mention that immidiately after the IND series Aus lost a test match against NZ, thanks to Hadlee's bowling.

It's not his fault that Hadlee, Ambrose, Gough etc didn't get to bowl against him.

 

[Sanz]

is this the same match when he took more wickets than kumble and the rest of the indian team?

I dont know if it is the same match or not but He did take more wickets than Kumble(but not more than rest of the Team), but it was the same wicket where an offspinner like dharmasena ended up taking a fifer, but Chauhan was worse than Dharmasena.

now im convinced you're talking gibberish. i didnt know g.bush had such an influence on so many ppl.

The way Tony Blair and his troops are lining up in Iraq and the way you are posting, It seems you are more Influenced by GWB than rest of us.

 

[Sanz]

DJ has already answered that for you.

I dont think he has - So let me ask again, Do you think Bowlers like Walsh, Ambrose, Akram, Waqar, Mcgrath, Warnie, Murali, Gillespie, Donald, Pollock, Akhtar are Ordinary ??

 

[Sanz]

..maybe the one that shows that ricky ponting is better than viv richards?

Is it a Written rule that Ricky Ponting can't be better than Viv Richards ??

 

[a massive zebra]

Most of tooextracool's comments are laughable baseless subjective nonsense. Statistics need to be handled with care but a total dismissal of them in place of personal preference is nonsense. Your argument such as Chauhan being better than Harbhajan cannot be correct if there is no evidence and the stats dont support it. Facts dont lie fools do.

Kambli does not have a better record than Richards if you use your brain because he played about 100 less matches. Anderson's figures do not suggest he is an allrounder if you use your brain because he has only got out once. Why does Dravid have a better Test batting record than Hussain? Because he is a better player. Why does Lara have a better Test batting record than Flemming? Because he is a better player.

 

[aussie_beater]

ahh yes the same statistics that show that anderson is an all rounder?or the ones that show that kambli is better than vivian richards?? or maybe the one that shows that ricky ponting is better than viv richards?

Cut the crap and grow up.... learn to look at stats that mean something...comparing oranges and apples don't mean a thing... Is it so hard to notice that Kambli did not play the same number of matches as Viv did ? And who said that Anderson is an allrounder....maybe you did, but no sane person would do that. Anderson has played in only 28 ODIs and averages 4 with the bat and has played 8 test matches with a highest score of 21 and most of the innings are N.O.s ..... and you are talking about IQs ??? It doesn't take much of an intelligence to understand that this is not the type of stats that we are talking about here.

 

[luckyeddie]

Is it a Written rule that Ricky Ponting can't be better than Viv Richards ??

Not at all - but let's not make that judgment just yet.

 

[aussie_beater]

you do realise that not all wickets tend to be flat or complete "minefields".

Yes absolutely....not all wickets are totally flat or complete minefields.... but then you cannot come to a judgement about those types of wickets by just comparing them with minefields or totally dead tracks or looking at runs scored or bowlers statistics or the like... you need to have seen the match.Relying on stats for making your judegements about this sort of stuff and then ignoring stats to keep on harping about a pre-concieved notion that you might have about some player is just too dumb and suits a ten-year old.

earlier i had used an example of thorpe's 118 on what was a difficult wicket to bat on....and even hes not considered to be "great". im looking from those sort of innings from tendulkar too.

And I have given enough examples of those in a reply post to DJ in this same thread, where Sachin was the only centurion from the team.... Save your reply if you are gonna come up saying that most of those innings were against poor bowling or the pitches were totally flat or some nonsense on those lines.