Viv had a slight dip in 82 and 83, and between 84 and 88 he averaged 49, very good but still far from the monster he was in his peak.
Good job Narayana. Better than the previous ones, I must say.
How many of those were Aussies?
You sound more like a Smith fan than Sachin fan.
Can you give me your top 5 bowlers??
Tendulkar's prime started in 93.
Literally a 1 run difference whereas he failed his biggest test in Australia. And this is mostly due to Dravid 2002 England series which was at the start of his own golden run.
That bowling attack had Walsh who was ace in SC.
Ok thats great for Dravid, don't see how Tendulkar is discredited.
Yes and most of these coincided with the early 2000s flattening of pitches. This isnt some new revelation.
not sure I can agree it was, I've never seen enough to suggest it was anything but the traditional English conditions honestly, plus, Dukes.76 was a batting friendly series bro c'mon. That's what made Holdings 14 wickets so exceptional.
Ok but I think you are overdoing Sachins flaws while glossing over Viv a bit to just suggest parity. Viv just wasn't the type to plan innings (like Sachin did to take down Warne) and adapt his game with new strokes and modified technique over his career. Viv's output declined with age and lessening of his physical attributes whereas Sachin encountered actual injuries 2003 to 2006 that put a halt to his worldclass returns.
Sachin bounced back 2007 to 2011 and that included series in SA on pace friendly wickets and a great series in Australia in 2007/8 against a very good attack. I don't think reclaiming the no.1 title at near 40 years is a small feat. It's a bit disrespectful to his mastery to just chuck that all to 'flat pitches' because even with those he was averaging 64 in his second peak, well ahead of any post-peak phase of Viv.
Viv never came close to the bat he was in his peak whereas Sachin did thanks to his technique and adaptability.
All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com
stats.espncricinfo.com
Numbers are closer than I thought.
I don't greatly disagree
It was a two match series, he had to open the batting in the first and he saved the game with a great knock in the second test. Was as good as a big hundred on value. He sucked in 06 and 2011 but his first two tours of SA were fine imo.
I consider 76 an ATG series but it clearly was batting friendly as per the match reports I read.
Sorry, but Vivs condition was largely part of his physical aging process and not really a classic injury per se, almost like Wasim getting diabetes, you don't excuse lack of performance based on that.
Sachin 2007-2011 was clearly a tier better batsman than Viv 84-88 and that is largely due to him having the technique to do so. Vivs 'force of will' wasn't going to replicate his original dominance.
He averaged the same (yes flatter era) and had two of his best ever career series from 2007 to 2011.
Smith didn't have the better peak.
Fair enough. I only remember Sehwags and Tendulkars knocks from that tour, was some time ago.
Yeah but England didn't really make much, and plenty of bowlers found success at moment, it might be closer to batting friendly but I don't buy it being all roads.
Pterygium is caused by ocular exposure to the ultra violat rays of the sun, Like C'mon, I get you like Tendulkar but let's not associate Pterygium to just natural aging.
I don't think Sachin 2007-2011 was a tier above in batting, without Bangladesh he averages 55 and Viv 50, while one is batting in mid 80s and Sachin had...a lot more generous wickets to say the very least. I think he was better though.
Ykw, sure, he came closer to his peak, but Viv's peak is harder to come close to than Sachin's
