• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

****OFFICIAL**** Lara vs Tendulkar Debate Thread

JBH001

JBH001

International Regular
(just to throw more dry wood on the fire)

Anyone read the recent article on cricinfo regarding matchwinning batsmen and hundreds made in tests won?

Apparently Sachin has a higher percentage oh hundreds (35%) in test matches won than Lara has (25%). So much for the Lara is a greater matchwinner theory...
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
JBH001 said:
(just to throw more dry wood on the fire)

Anyone read the recent article on cricinfo regarding matchwinning batsmen and hundreds made in tests won?

Apparently Sachin has a higher percentage oh hundreds (35%) in test matches won than Lara has (25%). So much for the Lara is a greater matchwinner theory...
Click to expand...
Anil Kumble might have been a big factor in that.
 
JBH001

JBH001

International Regular
True - but then I presume Walsh and Ambrose would have something to do with WI victories. But that brings me to another point.

A lot is made of batsmen winning matches but I think this aspect of the matter is over-rated. However great a batsman you are you are not going to win a test unless your bowlers have dismissed them twice (except of course in the case of a declaration).

Isn't it an old cricketing adage that it is bowlers who win matches - I believe this to be true, and therefore the argument between Lara and Tendulkar and their roles as matchwinnng batsmen is something of a mistake.

In general bowlers win matches, batsmen save them.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Benny2k1 said:
My version of a matchwinner isnt being in a good team and scoring 100s and letting your spinners do the work (although i am not taking anything away from any batsmen)

A matchwinner to me is some one with the ability to come in in an imposible/unlikley situation and turn the game single handedly

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1998-99/AUS_IN_WI/SCORECARDS/AUS_WI_T3_26-30MAR1999.html

Ive not seen that in Tendulkar as good as he is
Click to expand...

My post below shows how that is complete bunk.
 
Last edited:
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Benny2k1 said:
My version of a matchwinner isnt being in a good team and scoring 100s and letting your spinners do the work (although i am not taking anything away from any batsmen)

A matchwinner to me is some one with the ability to come in in an imposible/unlikley situation and turn the game single handedly

http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1998-99/AUS_IN_WI/SCORECARDS/AUS_WI_T3_26-30MAR1999.html

Ive not seen that in Tendulkar as good as he is
Click to expand...

Hahahahahaha...what a perfect time for this cricinfo article:

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/columns/content/story/250866.html

Cricinfo said:
Brian Lara's career is another example of how you can't win a Test match single-handedly. Despite his prolific run-scoring, thirteen of Lara's 32 hundreds haven't prevented West Indies from losing and only eight have led to wins. Even when Lara has gone on to score big - a double hundred for instance - it hasn't made a difference at times. Lara has passed 200 on eight occasions of which West Indies have won just one - against Australia in Jamaica - and lost three. Lara, in fact, holds the record for the most runs in a lost match. He scored 221 and 130 in Colombo in 2001 but Sri Lanka still won by ten wickets. He has a better record in one-day internationals - West Indies have won 16 of the 19 ODIs in which Lara has scored a hundred.
Click to expand...

OWNED. Matchwinner huh?
 
Last edited:
pasag

pasag

RTDAS
Last edited:
C_C

C_C

International Captain
You dont win matches by scoring more than the opposition in test cricket- you win by taking 20 wickets for less runs than the opposition made.
Viv Richards was once asked after WI made just over 200 against England- he simply replied with 'doesnt matter what we make-they will make less'.
This is the same reason why Pakistan has been more successful through the 90s than India as a test team-they had the bowling to win matches, India didnt.
As the old adage goes, batsmen save matches, bowlers win them.

As per singlehanded matchwinning capability- no one has ever done it apart from Botham and Imran ( tests where they took 10-fers and scored a ton).
Lara's 153* would've meant diddly squat if Walsh hadnt weighed in with a five-fer in OZ last innings and restricted them to a low total.
Tendulkar has played just as many 'matchwinning knocks' as Lara has- the only difference is, when Lara made runs pre 2000, WI had runs on the board for their excellent bowling attack to turn it into a win. India didnt -atleast not overseas.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
C_C said:
You dont win matches by scoring more than the opposition in test cricket- you win by taking 20 wickets for less runs than the opposition made.
Viv Richards was once asked after WI made just over 200 against England- he simply replied with 'doesnt matter what we make-they will make less'.
This is the same reason why Pakistan has been more successful through the 90s than India as a test team-they had the bowling to win matches, India didnt.
As the old adage goes, batsmen save matches, bowlers win them.

As per singlehanded matchwinning capability- no one has ever done it apart from Botham and Imran ( tests where they took 10-fers and scored a ton).
Lara's 153* would've meant diddly squat if Walsh hadnt weighed in with a five-fer in OZ last innings and restricted them to a low total.
Tendulkar has played just as many 'matchwinning knocks' as Lara has- the only difference is, when Lara made runs pre 2000, WI had runs on the board for their excellent bowling attack to turn it into a win. India didnt -atleast not overseas.
Click to expand...

:cool:
 
C_C

C_C

International Captain
Benny2k1 said:
The whole title of the article proves how much those stats matter, "is smith a bigger matchwinner than bradman"

And those stats actually show that lara even in a team that is gettin beat everyweek he still puts his hands up.
Click to expand...
Yeah. So does Tendulkar.
Most people forget that till around 99 or so, Lara was in a better boat than Tendy.
He had slightly inferior support from the batsmen but whenever WI scored runs, they stood a good chance of winning thanks to the A&W combo.
Tendulkar was often the only one to 'put his hand up' and that too at an age where most batsmen (Lara included) were still feeling their way into international cricket.

And if you are gonna talk about pressure- well, nothing compares to the pressure of a billion people's hopes!
 
adharcric

adharcric

International Coach
Tendulkar makes 155 on return for Lashings, never mind that it's against a university side.
Alright, back on topic ...
 
Benny2k1

Benny2k1

U19 12th Man
sachin had
M Azharuddin
SV Manjrekar
Srinath
Kumble
Dev
Shastri

Lara had
Ambrose
Walsh
hooper
Bishop
and the last year or so of Malcom Marshells career

Lara hardly had it That much better?! and now

sachin has the backup of dravid, Sehwag, Ganguly(until recently), Laxman, Yuvi, Dhoni, Kumble, harbajan,

Lara has Shiv, Sarwan and gayle with maybe bravo joining them as conistent performers
 
Last edited:
C_C

C_C

International Captain
Benny2k1 said:
sachin had
M Azharuddin
SV Manjrekar
Srinath
Kumble
Dev
Shastri

Lara had
Ambrose
Walsh
hooper
Bishop
and the last year or so of Malcom Marshells career

Lara hardly had it That much better?! and now

sachin has the backup of dravid, Sehwag, Ganguly(until recently), Laxman, Yuvi, Dhoni, Kumble, harbajan,

Lara has Shiv, Sarwan and gayle with maybe bravo joining them as conistent performers
Click to expand...

Manjrekar was overrated and no better than Hooper with the bat. Lara also had Chanderpaul and Adams, who make up for Azharuddin and some-no-name-kid or a newbie Ganguly/Dravid in the lineup.
Lara has had it worse since 2000 or so but before that(which represents the bulk of their careers), Sachin was in a worse boat than Lara.
 
JBH001

JBH001

International Regular
Also, for a long time Kumble did not take many wickets overseas.
That has only recently begun to change, despite wickets getting flatter and maybe because Kumble now has a greater degree of control over his bowling.
(Especially with being able to bowl slightly round arm and have an effective leg spinner)

Kapil Dev? You have to be joking - for most of Sachins early career he was a passenger in the side. Hanging on until he got past Hadlee.

Kapils last great outing was the 1990-91 tour of Australia where he took 25 wickets. (It was Sachins first tour and he hit 2 hundreds) But after that Kapil was in serious decline - if I remember for a while there he was only taking a wicket a test. A sad decline.

As for Manjrekar, a decent batsman but not a great one. You may as well mention Ajay Jadeja and be done with it, though that may be a little harsh - and lets not mention Navjot Siddhu either, that giant on home pitches and nowhere else.

Srinath? Fair enough. One of the most under-rated bowlers of all time and a real trier.
Became a real force after he devised that leg cutter - I think with some help from Walsh.

As for Lara, I think besides Adams you also forgot Richardson, Haynes and maybe Greenidge (I cant remember if he was done by then or not).

Remember that though the WI were in decline they remained serious contenders in world cricket up until the mid to later stages of the 1990's.
Conversely it was at this time that India's star began to rise.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
C_C said:
You dont win matches by scoring more than the opposition in test cricket- you win by taking 20 wickets for less runs than the opposition made.
Viv Richards was once asked after WI made just over 200 against England- he simply replied with 'doesnt matter what we make-they will make less'.
This is the same reason why Pakistan has been more successful through the 90s than India as a test team-they had the bowling to win matches, India didnt.
As the old adage goes, batsmen save matches, bowlers win them.

As per singlehanded matchwinning capability- no one has ever done it apart from Botham and Imran ( tests where they took 10-fers and scored a ton).
Lara's 153* would've meant diddly squat if Walsh hadnt weighed in with a five-fer in OZ last innings and restricted them to a low total.
Tendulkar has played just as many 'matchwinning knocks' as Lara has- the only difference is, when Lara made runs pre 2000, WI had runs on the board for their excellent bowling attack to turn it into a win. India didnt -atleast not overseas.
Click to expand...
India had more than enough guys at home to turn Sachin's hundreds into match winning ones. Lara had good bowlers till what 99? And don't tell me Walsh and Ambit were all that threatening post 97. They were merely very good bowlers after that point, not the GREATS that they were before that. The whole idea of matchwinning batsmen is not set in stone. In any case, a batsman can only play a matchwinning knock if he is batting in the 4th inning, IMO. I would definitely call Lara's 153* a matchwinning one, because that is what it was. Sachin's knock in Chennai would have been one as well, but for the ineptitude of his team mates, and some good bowling under pressure by Saqlain.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
honestbharani said:
why? u know of someone who can do better?
Click to expand...
I don't think the Windies batting line up of mid 90s was better than the Indian batting line up of the mid 90s. Adams had a golden run from around 93 to 95 and did squat since then. Richardson retired around 96 and Hooper was always Hooper. Simmons, Arthurton, Holder, Campbell etc. aren't what I would call strong back up. Sachin had batsmen making scores around him at least at home at that point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top