Richards v Tendulkar - ODIs

[The Sean]

Correct me if I'm wrong Sean, but I think what you're basically saying is that this thread should actually be Richards V Collingwood?

Not remotely GIMH. Paul Collingwood has now won two Ashes series against Australia, whereas Viv never lifted the Ashes in his entire career. Collingwood is therefore by some distance the greater of the two.

 

[honestbharani]

Yeah it was a lot of pressure pocketing the $ 8 mil to $ 10 mil SRT was/is making each year - Viv and his whole team put together did not have to pocket that of money - Must have been very hard for SRT that.

Not to mention the burden of asking for tax waiver on free cars - lot of pressure that - something that Viv did not have to shoulder.

Mate, there is no need to resort to personal judgements when comparing two batsmen on their batting in ODIs, I think..

 

[honestbharani]

We're talking cricket let's talk cricket.

Noone is taking cheap shots at Viv's impeccable disciplinary record and his fondness for marijuana, so please refrain from taking cheap shots at Tendulkar everytime you see an opportunity.

tbh, Cevno and his posts were as much of gibberish for this comparison as the other guy's (cric love or whatever, forgot) posts were... Neither of them have anything to do with the topic.

 

[honestbharani]

And the car incident was hardly his fault too.

It was the sponsors who wanted the tax break.

He should got an idea, you think, when he said it was like the Audi Ravi Shastri won for being MoS... Anyways, enough derailment. He has been an impeccable guy as far as behaviour is concerned and there are hardly 2 or 3 blemishes.. But this is a big one and even you shud accept it.

 

[Maximus0723]

Now we'll see fro the other side of the story, that is what IVARs and SRTs fellow batsmen did for them.

Once again all stats are sans minnows.

IVARs fellow batsmen

Avg - 30.25, Adjusted Avg - 31.71
SR - 68.81, Adjusted SR - 76.16

SRTs fellow batsmen

Avg - 29.06
SR - 75.8

Now we ave found that IVAR on average makes 48.98 runs in 49.37 balls and SRT makes 43.36 runs in 50.92 deliveries.

That gives 250.63 and 249.08 balls left for IVARs and SRTs fellow batsmen in average.

In that time, they score 190.88 runs and 188.80 runs respectively. Once again, Tendulkar had poorer support from batsmen as well.

This clearly shows that SRT played with poorer support from both bat and ball, and perhaps field as well.

Migara, what team did you count as minnows

 

[Migara]

Migara, what team did you count as minnows

It's easy to say who I counted as top teams.

During IVARS time, AUS, ENG, IND, PAK, NZ and WI
During SRTs time AUS, ENG, IND, NZ, PAK, SAF, SL and WI

 

[Maximus0723]

It's easy to say who I counted as top teams.

During IVARS time, AUS, ENG, IND, PAK, NZ and WI
During SRTs time AUS, ENG, IND, NZ, PAK, SAF, SL and WI

During SRT i would also count Zim and Ken, not BL.
Can't comment on if I would count SL during IVA's time. Don't know much about SL at that time.

Just my opinion...

 

[Sanz]

SL were no minnows in the 80s. They always had very good batsmen and at times their bowling was way better than Indian bowling.

 

[Pratters]

In ODI Cricket? India had one of the strongest teams in the world in 1985 and then again in 1987. I wouldn't compare them to Sri Lanka in the 80s. What was Sri Lanka's win/loss record in the 80s in ODIs?

 

[Migara]

You can only define minnows relative to the top sides. SL was not as weak as BAN or ZIM, but no match for top teams in 1980s. But they managed more vicotories against top sides than BAN / ZIM

 

[Furball]

In ODIs?

 

[Migara]

I haven't checked it out, but AFAIK, it's the case. SL was better than BAN and ZIM as minnows

 

[Pratters]

Minnows all the same.

 

[Sanz]

In ODI Cricket? India had one of the strongest teams in the world in 1985 and then again in 1987. I wouldn't compare them to Sri Lanka in the 80s. What was Sri Lanka's win/loss record in the 80s in ODIs?

In ODIs?

They were not minnows.

Cricinfo.com Statsguru - Sri Lanka (and Ceylon) - One-Day Internationals - Team analysis

They played consistently well enough to win some games. Even when they lost many a times they compete very well.

 

[Furball]

Wouldn't put Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in the same bracket, Zimbabwe in the 90s were a decent ODI side, certainly a level above anything Bangladesh have shown in their 10 years at the top.

 

[Pratters]

They were not minnows.

Cricinfo.com Statsguru - Sri Lanka (and Ceylon) - One-Day Internationals - Team analysis

They played consistently well enough to win some games. Even when they lost many a times they compete very well.

Clearly minnows though not as weak as Bangladesh.

 

[Sanz]

Wouldn't put Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in the same bracket, Zimbabwe in the 90s were a decent ODI side, certainly a level above anything Bangladesh have shown in their 10 years at the top.

Yeah, that's an accurate assessment.

 

[Sanz]

Clearly minnows though not as weak as Bangladesh.

Not 'Clearly' Minnows.

 

[Pratters]

I don't see how they weren't.

 

[Sanz]

I don't see how they weren't.

Because they competed well, won matches against every one they played. Won 5 matches against a very strong Pakistan Side under Imran, played many close matches against India. They had an established batting lineup of guys like Roy Dias, Mendis, Ranatunga, Desilva, Gurusinghe etc. bowlers like Asantha De Mel, Rumesh Ratnayke and a decent allrounder in Ravi Ratnayke.

They were an established team which lacked experience and perhaps some leadership, They had the talent to replace the guys that were aging out.