Which cricketer has the most complete record?

[MrIncredible]

How many matches did he play in Pakistan, out of interest? Did he tour in Tubby's first tour as skipper? Can't say I can recall. Presumably he went on the later tour where Taylor made his triple ton, but I can't really remember him playing there much.

5 tests in all I think in Pakistan

 

[MrIncredible]

regarding lara vs dizzy+warne+mcgrath, he played 5 tests with all 3 in the Aus side, 3 of them during that series in 99. He was superlative in that series, no doubt.

two tests in Aus he scored 7 runs in 4 innings IN Aus , yes, just 7 runs

regarding tendulkar vs all 3 of them, he played 4 tests , all in Ind, averaged 50+ in the 3 test series in 2001. came back from injury in the 2004 series and failed in the nagpur test. so ?

I agree that the difference b/w lara and sachin vs Aus is not as large as the difference in averages suggests. The bold part is correct, but

Just pointing out:

a) sachin's average vs Aus in the matches mcgrath played is skewed by the wrong decisions that went against him to an extent. He did fairly well against Aus even with Mcgrath around.

b) lara was clearly better at home vs mcwarne , sachin was clearly better away

c) Just to illustrate, lara crossed 50 only 4 times in 27 innings vs Aus in Aus with mcgrath around, averaged just 37

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

mcgrath pretty much had his number in Aus

Again, stop taking stats at face value, especially when the sample size is small. Instead focus on what happened match by match, series by series

But I think its fair to say, that out of the 2, only Lara dominated a great Oz attack. Btw

dont want to turn this into a Lara vs Tendy argument. Already had a rather winded one with

that Aussie character a while back. I wonder what ever happened to him??

 

[bagapath]

Even in the matches where Tendulkar scored a sizeable amount, rarely did he get on top of McGrath.

That is true Ikki. Even though Sachin scored well in those two series featuring McGrath and Warne together, he didnt dominate McGrath the way he would dominate others, especially Warne. But that is okay as long as he didnt get out to him all the time. Seeing out Mcgrath (for a batter) is as important as getting Sachin's wicket (for a bowler).

 

[vcs]

Do you think there'd be any footage of these on youtube?

YouTube - Sachin Tendulkar 76 vs Australia, Mumbai 2001

YouTube - Sachin Tendulkar 65 vs Australia, 2000/01

The 126 at Chennai is there too:

YouTube - Sachin Tendulkar 126 vs Australia - Chennai Test - 2001

Even I hadn't seen it before.

 

[abmk]

But I think its fair to say, that out of the 2, only Lara dominated a great Oz attack. Btw

dont want to turn this into a Lara vs Tendy argument. Already had a rather winded one with

that Aussie character a while back. I wonder what ever happened to him??

not really, depends on how you define dominates. Lara might have dominated more in patches, but sachin was pretty consistent against them . Again there is the issue of home vs away

 

[vcs]

I think it's fair to say Tendulkar couldn't match those crazy run-scoring sprees Lara had a tendency to go on when everyone else was floundering... the '99 series and the one against Murali and co. in SL come to mind. Apart from the 3 Tests in '98 against Australia, Tendulkar hasn't "dominated series" like that. Unfortunately McGrath didn't tour in that series, so people will remain forever skeptical.

 

[Ikki]

That is true Ikki. Even though Sachin scored well in those two series featuring McGrath and Warne together, he didnt dominate McGrath the way he would dominate others, especially Warne. But that is okay as long as he didnt get out to him all the time. Seeing out Mcgrath (for a batter) is as important as getting Sachin's wicket (for a bowler).

I agree with you. Seeing off a bowler is more important than scoring 20 runs off him and getting out for less than 50, for example.

Again, stop taking stats at face value, especially when the sample size is small. Instead focus on what happened match by match, series by series

I know what happened, but you're making excuses for one and not the other. You're ignoring matches where Tendulkar came back from injury yet miss when Warne effectively played several series against Tendulkar coming back from multiple career-threatening injuries.

As I said...what you can't deny is that Tendulkar's average flatters him quite a bit against Australia. If one didn't know that for 77% of the time he didn't face Australia's best attack you'd think he's god.

 

[vcs]

If you were to look at it that way, every batsman that's ever played this game is flattered by his average, because by definition they all look to be careful against the best bowlers and cash in on the weak ones, to differing extents. No one faces an ATG attack every time they go out to bat. And the "weaker" ones are considered "weak" precisely for the reason that they get runs scored off them, by said batsmen.

 

[Ikki]

not really, depends on how you define dominates. Lara might have dominated more in patches, but sachin was pretty consistent against them . Again there is the issue of home vs away

If you're talking about McWarne, Lara does better regardless of home and away distinction. If you include Gillespie, he only played 2 tests away IIRC whereas he averaged 100+ at home. One would conclude the difference between the records is not the conditions as much as it is the sample.

Furthermore, in your other post you point out Lara averaging 37 in Aus against McGrath. But you don't mention that Tendulkar averaged 32 against McGrath in India. If McGrath had Lara's 'number' at home he had Tendulkar's home address in India.

If you were to look at it that way, every batsman that's ever played this game is flattered by his average, because by definition they all look to be careful against the best bowlers and cash in on the weak ones, to differing extents. No one faces an ATG attack every time they go out to bat. And the "weaker" ones are considered "weak" precisely for the reason that they get runs scored off them, by said batsmen.

All batsmen probably do to one extent or another versus certain bowlers. But 77% of matches? Unlikely that such a thing is common place because that'd essentially mean Warne and McGrath barely played Test cricket.

 

[abmk]

I know what happened, but you're making excuses for one and not the other. You're ignoring matches where Tendulkar came back from injury yet miss when Warne effectively played several series against Tendulkar coming back from multiple career-threatening injuries.

As I said...what you can't deny is that Tendulkar's average flatters him quite a bit against Australia. If one didn't know that for 77% of the time he didn't face Australia's best attack you'd think he's god.

he was coming off a shoulder injury in the 98 series as far as I know. But he was ripping it as well as he ever did in that series as well. siddhu, sachin and azhar just didn't wouldn't allow him to settle down.

Keep in mind that the margin of error for a bowler is more than that for a batsman

He was fine during the 99 series as well as the 2001 series. Either ways, sachin dominated him everywhere, almost every single time, in India, in Aus, in tests , in ODIs. It was as complete a domination as you can get. You can't be serious in telling me that he was injured all those times

 

[abmk]

If you're talking about McWarne, Lara does better regardless of home and away distinction. If you include Gillespie, he only played 2 tests away IIRC whereas he averaged 100+ at home. One would conclude the difference between the records is not the conditions as much as it is the sample.

incorrect, sachin did clearly better in Aus in the one series vs mcwarne in Aus in 99 than lara did in ANY series in Aus with mcwarne .

Furthermore, in your other post you point out Lara averaging 37 in Aus against McGrath. But you don't mention that Tendulkar averaged 32 against McGrath in India. If McGrath had Lara's 'number' at home he had Tendulkar's home address in India.

mcgrath got lara out 10 times in 27 innings in Aus. that's a fairly decent sample

he got sachin out 4 times in 12 innings in India, one of which was essentially useless as it was when India were chasing 58 in the 4th innings, another time was when he just returned from injury. yes, he did have success vs tendulkar in India, but not close to how much he had vs lara in Aus .

Again, anyone who watched those series would know this, I really doubt you watched much of mcgrath vs lara IN Aus

Just FYI, lara had four 50+ scores in 27 innings vs Aus in Aus with mcgrath in the team, sachin had four 50+ scores in 12 innings in Ind vs Aus with Mcgrath in the team

Overall, lara did better vs mcgrath, but I sure as hell would take sachin over him when it comes to facing mcgrath IN Aus

 

[centurymaker]

regarding lara vs dizzy+warne+mcgrath, he played 5 tests with all 3 in the Aus side, 3 of them during that series in 99. He was superlative in that series, no doubt.

two tests in Aus he scored 7 runs in 4 innings IN Aus , yes, just 7 runs

regarding tendulkar vs all 3 of them, he played 4 tests , all in Ind, averaged 50+ in the 3 test series in 2001. came back from injury in the 2004 series and failed in the nagpur test. so ?

I agree that the difference b/w lara and sachin vs Aus is not as large as the difference in averages suggests. The bold part is correct, but

Just pointing out:

a) sachin's average vs Aus in the matches mcgrath played is skewed by the wrong decisions that went against him to an extent. He did fairly well against Aus even with Mcgrath around.

b) lara was clearly better at home vs mcwarne , sachin was clearly better away

c) Just to illustrate, lara crossed 50 only 4 times in 27 innings vs Aus in Aus with mcgrath around, averaged just 37

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

mcgrath pretty much had his number in Aus

Again, stop taking stats at face value, especially when the sample size is small. Instead focus on what happened match by match, series by series

3 of the 4 50+ scores were made in adelaide, including the 2 big hundreds.

 

[abmk]

I think it's fair to say Tendulkar couldn't match those crazy run-scoring sprees Lara had a tendency to go on when everyone else was floundering... the '99 series and the one against Murali and co. in SL come to mind. Apart from the 3 Tests in '98 against Australia, Tendulkar hasn't "dominated series" like that. Unfortunately McGrath didn't tour in that series, so people will remain forever skeptical.

yeah, true.

 

[Ikki]

incorrect, sachin did clearly better in Aus in the one series vs mcwarne in Aus in 99 than lara did in ANY series in Aus with mcwarne .

Wrong. Lara averaged 58 in his best series against them in Aus. Tendulkar's best is 46.

Against McWarne (home, away)

Lara: 51 (68, 40)
Sachin: 42 (39, 46)

Does the distinction between home and away even need to be made here? Tendulkar was better away but Lara wasn't poor. Whereas Lara was superlative at home and Tendulkar was mediocre.

mcgrath got lara out 10 times in 27 innings in Aus. that's a fairly decent sample

And yet he averaged 40 - which is including the ICC XI game.

he got sachin out 4 times in 12 innings in India, one of which was essentially useless as it was when India were chasing 58 in the 4th innings, another time was when he just returned from injury. yes, he did have success vs tendulkar in India, but not close to how much he had vs lara in Aus .

And yet Sachin averages 39.

Success is not just taking their wicket...it is also helping restrict their runs.

Again, anyone who watched those series would know this,

Just FYI, lara had four 50+ scores in 27 innings vs Aus in Aus with mcgrath in the team, sachin had four 50+ scores in 12 innings in Ind vs Aus with Mcgrath in the team

One averages 51 the other averages 42. Who would you take?

 

[Ikki]

he was coming off a shoulder injury in the 98 series as far as I know. But he was ripping it as well as he ever did in that series as well. siddhu, sachin and azhar just didn't wouldn't allow him to settle down.

Keep in mind that the margin of error for a bowler is more than that for a batsman

He was fine during the 99 series as well as the 2001 series. Either ways, sachin dominated him everywhere, almost every single time, in India, in Aus, in tests , in ODIs. It was as complete a domination as you can get. You can't be serious in telling me that he was injured all those times

Ripping them and landing them properly are two different things. In all of Warne's series against India he had one form of injury or another bar his debut. The only series he went in fully fit, 04, he still got injured for his last match. Between 98-01 he had several surgeries on his shoulder and his finger. He did worse against WIndies and NZ in this time than he did against India.

So don't excuse Tendulkar coming back from injury then ignore Warne when his injuries were more frequent and serious.

 

[centurymaker]

YouTube - Sachin Tendulkar 76 vs Australia, Mumbai 2001

YouTube - Sachin Tendulkar 65 vs Australia, 2000/01

The 126 at Chennai is there too:

YouTube - Sachin Tendulkar 126 vs Australia - Chennai Test - 2001

Even I hadn't seen it before.

OMG Tendulkar- such a freak!!! Pure Domination!
After watching these vids, I reckon he under-performed in his peak years.

 

[abmk]

Edit: double post

 

[abmk]

Wrong. Lara averaged 58 in his best series against them in Aus. Tendulkar's best is 46.

Against McWarne (home, away)

Lara: 51 (68, 40)
Sachin: 42 (39, 46)

Does the distinction between home and away even need to be made here? Tendulkar was better away but Lara wasn't poor. Whereas Lara was superlative at home and Tendulkar was mediocre.

oh jeez, he made one big score, one more 40+ in that series.

sachin made 116,61,52 and a 40+ score in the 99 series

Anyone who watched those 2 series would know who was better , lara got one bad decision IIRC, sachin got 1 bad one , 1 dubious one

And yes, lara was poor IN Aus with mcgrath around for most part. Did you even watch those series ? Seriously ?

Just FYI, one stage in the 96-97 series , these were his scores - 2,1,2,2. All 4 times dismissed by mcgrath

In another stage in the 2000 series, these were his scores - 0,4,0,17, first three times dismissed by mcgrath, last time by mcgill

And yet he averaged 40 - which is including the ICC XI game.

37 actually with just mcgrath

And yet Sachin averages 39.

Success is not just taking their wicket...it is also helping restrict their runs.

he had lara in more trouble IN Aus than he had sachin in Ind, it was plain visible to anyone who actually saw those series'

One averages 51 the other averages 42. Who would you take?

in Aus, sachin definitely. At their respective homes, lara definitely

overall: lara, but not by the margin the averages seem to suggest. Would also add that sachin's average would definitely have gone up had mcgrath played in the 98 series , he was in better form than he was in the 2001 series when he averaged 50+

 

[abmk]

Ripping them and landing them properly are two different things. In all of Warne's series against India he had one form of injury or another bar his debut. The only series he went in fully fit, 04, he still got injured for his last match. Between 98-01 he had several surgeries on his shoulder and his finger. He did worse against WIndies and NZ in this time than he did against India.

So don't excuse Tendulkar coming back from injury then ignore Warne when his injuries were more frequent and serious.

never heard of any injuries before the 99 series in Aus and the 2001 series in Ind.

tendulkar actually missed two tests of the series because of his injury, warne played in all those series with injuries /just recovering from injuries supposedly ( never heard of any besides the 98 one anyways ), guess which is/was more serious ?

besides all it takes is one ball for a batsman to get out. Even if a bowler is recovering from injuries, he has time to get back into rhythm , while his figures might suffer somewhat, he can still make it up

 

[centurymaker]

You guys lol need to chill out , you're arguing over such trivial things.