The Greatest of them all.....Who will it be ? (T..D..P..K then the big S)

[C_C]

Say what? Because he has to score runs before he runs out of partners. He is human. He can not dispatch the ball to the boundary at will. Oh, and he's also not Kallis. Lara is not one to stand around and preserve his wicket when he's running out of partners.

Common sense dictates that a man whose team gets bowled out in less than 90 overs does not have a whole lot of time to score big runs. Common sense...

The rest of your post is entirely irrelevant to any of my points. I was never attacking not outs.

I didnt accuse him of hanging around and preserving his wicket at the expense of the team- but remaining not out doesnt mean you put yourself above your team. You can still score away and not be dismissed. Infact, you'd see that Tendulkar does this - he scores with the same fluency as Lara when set.

Common sense dictates that if you routinely get to chase 300s and 400s as the target or bat till ya drop coz there is no remote possibility of declaration,you dont miss out on awesome pitches (like how tendulkar missed out batting in the first test ind-pak), etc. you are gonna score more runs per innings. Simply because you are getting the opportunity to bat till you drop. Transplant Lara's career into the 80s team and you'd watch his runs/innings go down and his not outs balloon up. Transplant Tendulkar's career in the current WI team and you'd see his runs/innings go up and his not outs whittle down.
Why ?
Simply because you got more opportunity to bat till ya drop.

When your team has other accomplished batsmen, you are gonna come in more often when the team needs 40-50 runs for victory or draw is looming. When you are the lone ranger, you bat,bat, bat and bat till ya get out.
Its simple really and it is evidenced in the cricket archives.
Analyse the careers of batsmen - you'd see that when the batting lineup is strong, the same batsman has more not outs than before.
Before Dravid and Laxman came to the scene, Tendulkar had 9 not outs. Since then he's had 12 more in the last 6 years...Therefore, runs/innings is absolutely irrelevant in determining how good or bad a batsman is - for runs/innings primarily depends on how often you get to bat with no timeframe in mind.

PS: You didnt answer my Taylor-Tugga or Deano-Border comments...going by your 'runs/innings' barometer, there is a hair's breadth difference between those two pairs..

 

[Pratters]

But the fact is that Tendulkar has played more Tests than Lara and scored less runs. Lara has played 8 more innings, but the difference in runs is substantial still. Therefore I don't see how number of Tests played by either can be a qualifying factor in this situation.

I am not arguing regarding this aspect.

I am not stating or pointing towards who will score most runs by the end of their careers or whether it will be a Ponting ahead.

I have countered Marc's contention that the major reason Tendulkar may not be the highest run scorer is because 16 years of cricket is taking a toll on his body.

The main reason, I repeat, would be because of the number of tests India have played. For 16 years would have already meant Tendulkar scoring more runs had he played for some other nations.

 

[marc71178]

So even though he's played more matches than Lara, it's because India don't play as many games that he hasn't scored more runs than Lara?

 

[Pratters]

So even though he's played more matches than Lara, it's because India don't play as many games that he hasn't scored more runs than Lara?

When did I compare Lara and Tendulkar?

I cannot help it if you do not want to see the point I have made just because it weakens your claim.

 

[C_C]

So even though he's played more matches than Lara, it's because India don't play as many games that he hasn't scored more runs than Lara?

He hasnt had the chance to complete as many innings as Lara has had.
So far its 185 completed innings vs 208 or so.

 

[honestbharani]

Lara's form of late has been patchy with one outstanding score. I wouldn't say that he will retire on top of his game.
http://statserver.cricket.org/guru?...edhigh=;csearch=;submit=1;.cgifields=viewtype

it has nothing to do with the umpiring down under, right?

 

[honestbharani]

Tendulkar's not outs:

119* vs England - match drawn, play closed. How is he gonna add to his tally ?

148* vs OZ- the team is allout. Tendulkar isnt. So lets penalise him. he should've thrown his wicket

9* vs England - match won. Too bad they were chasing only 79. I suppose its his fault that India wernt chasing 400 and as a result, didnt get to score 100 and then get out.

104* vs SL - captain declared on him. So lets penalise him for not throwing his wicket away

11* vs NZ - match drawn. play closed on 5th day. Since the bowlers failed to dismiss him, its his fault- he should've tossed his wicket and then he would've been held in higher regard.

0* vs NZ - whoa ! how dare he not face a single ball and remain not out ?! his fault !

52* vs NZ - rain curtailed match. Again, lets penalise him for not getting out.

15* vs WI - match drawn.

155* vs OZ - captain declared on him.

124* vs SL - ran outta time.

126* vs NZ - captain declared on him.

44* vs NZ - India chasing only 82 for victory.

201* vs ZIM - captain declared on him

36* vs ZIM- chasing 184 for victory,comes to the crease when the score is 2-132, scores 36 in 49 balls - so lets penalise him for remaining not out.

22* vs RSA - match drawn.ran outta time.

16* vs WI - chasing 81 for victory...

241* vs OZ - captain declares on him.

60* vs OZ - captain declares on him

194* vs PAK - captain declares on him- AGAIN!

32* vs RSA - match won, no more runs to score.

248* vs BD- captain declares on him


Those are his not outs. Clearly, he is hanging around, not scoring runs and padding his average. Nevermind the fact that in most of those knocks he ran outta time or the total was accomplished....he doesnt get to bat till he drops every single time like Lara does - he doesnt go in all the time knowing that he can score 100 if he hangs around....

I am pretty sure that Zaheer was the last man out when Sach made 248* against Bangladesh. He ran out of partners.

 

[honestbharani]

He hasnt had the chance to complete as many innings as Lara has had.
So far its 185 completed innings vs 208 or so.

A lot of batters get out after being well set as well... Doesn't really matter what score the batter is on, he has an equal chance of getting out and carrying on if we are to hypothetically consider the scenario of him carrying on.... I mean, looking at the way Lara played during that 400*, I think he would be batting till today and would have probably scored 2000 or 3000 runs had the match carried on... Just to assume that he would have scored a lot more had he carried on is not really right. Just look at the no. of times Sachin has gotten out between 100-200 and look at the no. of not out innings. Also, if you look at his batting, recently he has had a lot of 200+ not out innings. Most of these matches, he carried on for his 200 and then the team declared. Compare that with Lara who has looked very good on "oh so many" occassions only to run out of partners and getting out anywhere between 70-200..... It is always arguable that had Lara had the guys around him to support him like Sachin has had, Lara would have made a LOT more runs himself.


But this whole thing is fruitless though, because we are all talking about "if"s and "but"s... Had Lara been in Sachin's shoes, he would have had all those not outs as well, simply because when a guy declares, it is to maximize his own team's chances of winning. And had Sachin been in Lara's shoes, I am sure he would have gotten out a lot of times as well, simply because he would look for quick runs with the tailenders at the other end.


But I can see why Liam brought up the runs/innings thing. The fact that Lara has 800+ runs on Sachin having just played 8 more innings means that it is really not a given that Sachin would have scored as many as Lara had he had those 8 extra innings....

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

A lot of batters get out after being well set as well... Doesn't really matter what score the batter is on, he has an equal chance of getting out and carrying on if we are to hypothetically consider the scenario of him carrying on.... I mean, looking at the way Lara played during that 400*, I think he would be batting till today and would have probably scored 2000 or 3000 runs had the match carried on... Just to assume that he would have scored a lot more had he carried on is not really right. Just look at the no. of times Sachin has gotten out between 100-200 and look at the no. of not out innings. Also, if you look at his batting, recently he has had a lot of 200+ not out innings. Most of these matches, he carried on for his 200 and then the team declared. Compare that with Lara who has looked very good on "oh so many" occassions only to run out of partners and getting out anywhere between 70-200..... It is always arguable that had Lara had the guys around him to support him like Sachin has had, Lara would have made a LOT more runs himself.


But this whole thing is fruitless though, because we are all talking about "if"s and "but"s... Had Lara been in Sachin's shoes, he would have had all those not outs as well, simply because when a guy declares, it is to maximize his own team's chances of winning. And had Sachin been in Lara's shoes, I am sure he would have gotten out a lot of times as well, simply because he would look for quick runs with the tailenders at the other end.


But I can see why Liam brought up the runs/innings thing. The fact that Lara has 800+ runs on Sachin having just played 8 more innings means that it is really not a given that Sachin would have scored as many as Lara had he had those 8 extra innings....

Top post.

Just to clarify. I never meant to stumble anywhere close to a Lara v Tendulkar argument. I realize that it reached that point, but I never actually called either better or worse than the other.

My point was really about Sachin Tendulkar catching Lara at this stage in their careers. What is already in the books is just that - inked. Nothing can be done about those stats at this stage. Given the positions of both players, I stated my point.

 

[weldone]

Bump. Some parts of this thread looks so funny now!

 

[honestbharani]

lol... bumping for some chest thumping huh?

 

[ganeshran]

Love Internet forum threads on Sachin in the 2006 and 2007 era when he was at the lowest point of his career. Makes the resurgence looks even more prominent.

Cumulative runs of Sachin, Lara, and Ponting in their career. While Lara averaged higher than Sachin for quite some time in their careers, post 2007 Sachin has hit another peak and left Lara and Ponting far behind

Also, the innings Lara, Sachin and others took to complete each 2000 run milestone in their careers. Some manual calculation here so please dont mind if innings are off by one or two.