lara vs tendulkar

[marc71178]

in tests, lara gets it
in odis, its tendulkar.

also, overall in tests, dravid has got to be the best batsman.

Why does he?

He's in the top grouping, but so are a few others.

 

[marc71178]

The 5 or 6 batsman mentioned earlier (Sachin, Lara, Ponting, Dravid, Kallis & Hayden) are all full of class,

Hayden, class?

 

[marc71178]

you've got to be kidding me. steve waugh is more dependable than lara or sachin any day. and please dont bring up averages to try and disprove me

Why, because they'd only make you look silly?

 

[marc71178]

And Steve Waugh was an excellent captain

No, Steve Waugh captained an outstanding side.

He's by no means best captain of his generation.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

you've got to be kidding me. steve waugh is more dependable than lara or sachin any day. and please dont bring up averages to try and disprove me

But if it were possible to bring averages and disprove you, you'd be wrong, because a player can't be dependable if the stats don't back it. That said, I'm not denying your point.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Yeah but isn't a captain's job to win? Score a thousand runs every series if you like, but if you lose every series, you stink. Maybe it's a function of having poor players, but I think perhaps Lara has mismanaged some of his decent players so as to make them look worse than they actually are.

And Steve Waugh was an excellent captain, but he's not a better batsman than Lara or Tendulkar.

It would have been interesting to see Steve Waugh captain the current West Indian side.

 

[Lions81]

No, Steve Waugh captained an outstanding side.

He's by no means best captain of his generation.

Somehow out of the words "Steve Waugh is an excellent captain", you managed to extract "Steve Waugh is the best captain of his generation." I didn't say that.

I nevertheless remain steadfast that he was an excellent captain. So what if he had excellent players? That doesn't diminish the qualities of captaincy he had, such as his ability to lead men and to outthink his opponents, as well as his generally intimidating demeanor which does a lot to put fear and doubt into the opponents' minds. And ask Hansie Cronje and Shaun Pollock if it's all that easy to lead a bunch of superstar players. They didn't managed to do anywhere near what Waugh did. Obviously Waugh's side was better, but they weren't rated that much higher but the two sides accomplished vastly different things.

 

[Lions81]

It would have been interesting to see Steve Waugh captain the current West Indian side.

Regarding the Lara at #1 thing, I wasn't putting words in your mouth, I was just wondering if that was what you were arguing.

I think Waugh would do a magnificent job captaining the West Indies. First and foremost he'd instill a sense of discipline. No more "optional" practice sessions or things like that. I think he'd first change the mental makeup of the team, and even if he can't find better talent in the short-term, I believe that shift in mindset would win more games. Also I think Waugh's in-game tactics would be good, but of course you need bowlers to bowl where you tell them and fielders to hold on to catches...

 

[a massive zebra]

Hayden, class?

Your joking, right? Since 2001 Hayden has dominated opponents in a way not seen since Bradman, averaging 69 over roughly 40 matches, with an imposing strike rate of around 70 in that time. How can someone so destructive over such a long period not be thought of as class?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Regarding the Lara at #1 thing, I wasn't putting words in your mouth, I was just wondering if that was what you were arguing.

I think Waugh would do a magnificent job captaining the West Indies. First and foremost he'd instill a sense of discipline. No more "optional" practice sessions or things like that. I think he'd first change the mental makeup of the team, and even if he can't find better talent in the short-term, I believe that shift in mindset would win more games. Also I think Waugh's in-game tactics would be good, but of course you need bowlers to bowl where you tell them and fielders to hold on to catches...

I agree with you on the discipline aspect. A captain like Waugh or Fleming would certainly get the professionalism into them.

However, I believe that Lara is a good tacticion. Hear me out. Yes, he has some extreme tactics at times, but the fact is that the ordinary tactics aren't working. When your bowlers aren't bowling to any effect with orthodox fields and batsmen are racking up hundreds like dominoes (insert LE crack), you have to try something different. This has backfired at times, but as anyone who has avidly watched the West Indies team over the last year or so, it tends to work more than it backfires. With a more disciplined team, Lara's captaincy would be a lot better.

The question is, does that make Lara a bad captain that he can't instill that discipline? I'm not sure. In a way perhaps, but no captain is perfect. Each captain lacks in some aspect, and unfortunately Lara is lacking in one of the major aspects. Still, he is truly dedicated to West Indies cricket once more and has great respect from the players. Basically he's the best man for the job at the moment. That said, Sarwan showed big potential on Sunday IMO.

To sum up my comments, Lara isn't perfect. Neither is Steve Waugh. Whether or not Lara is a good captain is inconsequential, as he'll never be considered one unless the team starts winning. So no one can actually claim he's a good captain until the teams wins. I guess that's the difference between Lara and Streak...

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Your joking, right? Since 2001 Hayden has dominated opponents in a way not seen since Bradman, averaging 69 over roughly 40 matches, with an imposing strike rate of around 70 in that time. How can someone so destructive over such a long period not be thought of as class?

I think he was more referring to the word class in terms of classiness of play.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Your joking, right? Since 2001 Hayden has dominated opponents in a way not seen since Bradman, averaging 69 over roughly 40 matches, with an imposing strike rate of around 70 in that time. How can someone so destructive over such a long period not be thought of as class?

I think Marc meant he is not stylish, or classy.

I could be wrong, though.

 

[Lions81]

I think Marc meant he is not stylish, or classy.

I could be wrong, though.

I thought he was saying Hayden's a foulmouthed Aussie with a big head who is in no way an example of the sociological definition of the word "class". I.e., he's a bull in a china shop and someone who you'd never want to introduce your mother to because he might slap her then bodyslam her.

 

[marc71178]

Liam and Halsey are on the right lines.

 

[Lions81]

Liam and Halsey are on the right lines.

Oh and I suppose my interpretation didn't merit a mention? I thought it was darn good.

 

[deeps]

No, Steve Waugh captained an outstanding side.

He's by no means best captain of his generation.

he captained an outstanding side...which HE built...when he took over the reins from mark taylor, australia had plenty of good players...but the results were not brilliant..sure,they won more than they lost..but nothing spectacular...

HE helped langer,hayden, lee, and many other players fit into test cricket well... They all say it was because of Steve Waugh that they are currently playing test cricket... Langer was a fringe player, hayden was nowhere to be seen after making his debut about 5years before that..

His batting also led from the front... Whenever the team needed him, he was there... The team is brilliant, coz he made it brilliant...

infact, the last series taylor captained...an ashes series, australia won 3-1...not impressive against a very weak england team

a few series before that, they beat south africa 1-0 in a three test series...how many draws under waugh's captaincY? VERY few.there was a total of 8 minutes of rain in the 3rd test... and none in the 1st..so australia were unable to outplay South africe...

Now the reason for that would be...Taylor captained traditionally...scoring at the usual 2 an over...Waugh has transformed test cricket forever... increasing the scoring rate to 3 and 4 an over, making almost every match a result..of course,this has lost them a few games as wel, but it's a very effective way of winning.


Look at pakistan...the amount of talent there...India...Even england have a lot of good talent... How much difference would there be ,had waugh captained one of those sides...He is a tactician, and a great thinker..one of the greatest thinkers the game has seen...

If ponting had taken over captaincy at the same time waugh did, we would not have the same results....PONTING has aqcuired a brilliant team,which he has to maintain....WAUGH acquired a gifted and talented team,which he moulded into a BRILLIANT team

 

[Eclipse]

if ur rating batsman on basis of their strike rate then why not include shahid afridi in there too?
so tell me how many of those centuries has ponting made under pressure?

Dont be a dill the reason Afridi is not there is because he is souch a crap batsman regardless of his strike rate.

When there is little to seperate a batsman avrage wise strike rate is worth considering. Having said that Dravid plays a role Ponting cant that being of being a "Wall" and thats probably just as importaint to India as Pontings more aggressive aproch is to Australia.

 

[tooextracool]

Why, because they'd only make you look silly?

because they make anderson look like an all rounder and viv richards look like hes not amongst the top 10 best batsmen ever.

 

[tooextracool]

But if it were possible to bring averages and disprove you, you'd be wrong, because a player can't be dependable if the stats don't back it. That said, I'm not denying your point.

nope a dependable player is one that plays well consistently when the team needs him to. players who score 100s when the team declares at 600 is not what id call a dependable player unless he scores those centuries under pressure too. steve waughs averages definetly lies, because 7/10 times he scored when his team was 50/4 and 7/10 times he failed when his team was 300/3.

 

[tooextracool]

I nevertheless remain steadfast that he was an excellent captain. So what if he had excellent players? That doesn't diminish the qualities of captaincy he had, such as his ability to lead men and to outthink his opponents, as well as his generally intimidating demeanor which does a lot to put fear and doubt into the opponents' minds. And ask Hansie Cronje and Shaun Pollock if it's all that easy to lead a bunch of superstar players. They didn't managed to do anywhere near what Waugh did. Obviously Waugh's side was better, but they weren't rated that much higher but the two sides accomplished vastly different things.

the only reason why i dont rate steve waugh as an "excellent" captain is because he lost twice to india in india despite having the best team in the world(dont forget their loss in SL too). yea india played well etc but for fleming to captain an average side and yet avert a loss in india is remarkable and just goes to show what an excellent captain can do.the recent series against india at home also delineated that he had no gameplan whatsoever.orthodox fields were set and bowlers didnt know what they were supposed to bowl to whom.
that being said i rate him as a good captain with a "never say die" spirit which he instilled in every one of his players and thats why we've seen australia battle out from so many of those seemingly impossible situations.but but i wouldnt go as far as calling him an "intelligent"captain because he wasnt innovative.
regarding hanse cronje and pollock.....cronje was a brilliant captain and he managed to lead his side to victories all over the world except australia(yes even india). he or rather his team had a mental block against australia and they couldnt overcome it.yet to lead a relatively new side and make them the 2nd best team of the world is remarkable.pollock...well he just wasnt that good was he?(aka duckworth lewis ).