• 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.

The best batsman and bowler of the 1990s

stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
subshakerz said:
The only comfortable one there is Tendulkar. Lara has to battle with Steve Waugh for second spot.

There's very little to chose between Ambrose, Akram and Donald, all of their records are superb. I would go slightly for Akram as he was excellent in almost all conditions.
Click to expand...
I was refering to the voting record.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Sir Alex said:
I think he is. Lara was never consistent like Tendulkar.
Click to expand...
I dunno want to do this again, but no, the consistency thing is just not true... Both have had their off times during the careers... I am not gonna post further on Lara V Tendulkar here.. If you want, you can dig up the main thread and we can start it there...
 
aussie

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
honestbharani said:
I dunno want to do this again, but no, the consistency thing is just not true... Both have had their off times during the careers... I am not gonna post further on Lara V Tendulkar here.. If you want, you can dig up the main thread and we can start it there...
Click to expand...
Its not true in your opinion, alot of people think otherwise. Plus yes you may need to dig back main thread & start the war again..
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Quit the bickering guys. Tendulkar and Lara are two of the finest batsmen that any of us are ever likely to see.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
honestbharani said:
I don't see why Tendulkar is comfortably ahead of Lara at all, tbh...
Click to expand...
Because Lara had significant downtime in the period in question; Tendulkar was basically good for the entire thing. On the basis of entire careers they have less to split them, but had the careers of both ended in September 2000 or June 2001 then Tendulkar would unequivocally have been the better.

Tendulkar was outstanding 1990-2002, then bad 2003-2005/06, then has been good again since 2006/07; Lara was outstanding 1992-1996, moderate 1996/97-2001 then outstanding again 2001/02-2005/06 (and moderate for a short period at the end of his career as Tendulkar had been at the start of his).

If one was to start with 1990 and end with 1999/2000, Tendulkar comes-out on top of Lara by a fair bit.
 
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Yeah I agree. Is there really an argument that Lara was better than Sachin in the period in question? I don't think you can do that, he went away for a substnatial period of the decade, just like Sachin did in the current decade in question.
 
S

SAURABH BAHUGUN

Cricket Spectator
Absolutely

sjs said:
here are the test bowling figures for the top four fast bowlers

Code: 
[b]player        	tests	w	5w	10w	 avg	 s/r	 e/r	w/t[/b]

waqar       	[color="darkred"][b]56[/b][/color]	273	[color="darkred"][b]21	5[/b][/color]	21.7	[color="darkred"][b]41.0[/b]	[/color]3.18	[color="darkred"][b]4.88[/b][/color]

donald      	59	284	19	3	21.8	45.8	2.86	4.81

wasim      	62	289	17	3	21.5	48.9	2.63	4.66

ambrose   	71	309	21	3	20.2	52.3	2.31	4.35
the odi figures . . .

Code: 
[b]player	odi's	 w	 4w	 avg	 s/r	 e/r	w/m[/b]

waqar	163	275	[b][color="darkred"]20[/color][/b]	23.1	[color="darkred"][b]30.0[/b][/color]	4.6	[b][color="darkred"]1.69[/color][/b]

donald	125	206	11	21.1	[b][color="darkred"]31.3[/color][/b]	4.0	[b][color="darkred"]1.65[/color][/b]

wasim	195	279	16	23.4	36.7	3.8	1.43

ambrose	135	160	[b][color="darkred"]5[/color][/b]	25.9	[b][color="darkred"]44.6[/color][/b]	3.5	[b][color="darkred"]1.19[/color][/b]
Click to expand...
i agree with u 100 percent. I will not say anything further as i have already said a lot about waqar younis in my threads and replies
 
S

SAURABH BAHUGUN

Cricket Spectator
subshakerz said:
For bowlers, I would have to say Akram. Warne was only really good between 93-97, and his failures against India have been discussed before. Waqar had his peak between 90-94 but was nowhere near good for the rest of the decade. That leaves Donald, Ambrose and Akram for true contenders.

There isn't much to choose between them, but I think Donald lags behind compared to Ambrose and Akram in making his mark against Australia. Between Akram and Ambrose, I would go for Akram for a few reasons. First, he was successful in the subcontinent in the decade, whereas Ambrose never played in India, had a poor series in Pakistan and a single test against an average Sri Lankan side. Second, and this is pure speculation, but I would argue that the majority of his peers would rate Akram better during this time, simply for being more versatile and awkward a proposition to face.
Click to expand...
YOU ARE WRONG.CHECK THE STATS FOR THE DECADE AND ALL THE MATCH WINNERs.WAQAR YOUNIS IS THE BEST BY A LONG DISTANCE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top