Who is better- Lara or Tendulkar?

[aussie]

Tendulkar played against Warne in 1991-92, 97-98, 99-00, 00-01, 04-05. I am sure Warnie was not at peak in any of those series. His peak must have lasted an awefully short period.

In 91/92 Warne was in his first series and wasn't proven has a good enough test match bowler, in 97/98 ihe came off a serious shoulder injury & in 2001 it was his first test series after an injury. In 2004 was was at his best while Sachin wasn't.

The only time that Tendulkar & Warne faced-off when both were at the peakof their abilities was in 99/2000 & Tendulkar had the better of Warne in that series....

 

[Sanz]

1. What does that have do with this argument

Do you remember making a ridiculous statement like this "..Lara has been faced with the stress even in the latter stages of Amborse & Walshes careers of ``Making big runs in the first innings then having to feel for long periods``

2. so if Lara was to make a big score in the 1st Innnings then fail in the 2nd that was due to fact that he was in the field for LONG periods which would affect him when he goes to bat a second time around...

wtf ?? What is this nonsense man ? I have not heard anything more weird than that.So when Lara fails in the second innings because he has been in the field for longer and if Sachin fails in the second innings because he is a choker, isn't it ? That is despite the fact that Sachin also bowls for his team, has played almost 100 ODIs more than Lara during the same period. Not to forget that Sachin for the most part of his career played with only one world Class bowler Kumble (that too only at home) whereas Lara had the support of Bowlers like Ambrose/Walsh for the majority of his career.

PS :- I can assure you that Lara has spent much less time than Sachin in the field, be it batting, fielding or bowling. Dont believe me, go and check the stats.

 

[aussie]

Do you remember making a ridiculous statement like this "..Lara has been faced with the stress even in the latter stages of Amborse & Walshes careers of ``Making big runs in the first innings then having to feel for long periods``



wtf ?? What is this nonsense man ? I have not heard anything more weird than that.So when Lara fails in the second innings because he has been in the field for longer and if Sachin fails in the second innings because he is a choker, isn't it ? That is despite the fact that Sachin also bowls for his team, has played almost 100 ODIs more than Lara during the same period. Not to forget that Sachin for the most part of his career played with only one world Class bowler Kumble (that too only at home) whereas Lara had the support of Bowlers like Ambrose/Walsh for the majority of his career.

PS :- I can assure you that Lara has spent much less time than Sachin in the field, be it batting, fielding or bowling. Dont believe me, go and check the stats.

1. That is a fact i illustrated the example of what happened in the recent home series againts SA where Lara made big hundreds in the 1st Innings of the Trinidad & Bridgetown test he was in the field for even longer periods so that would affect him physically & mentally which disbaled him form scoring that many runs in the 2nd innings. This is a fact that became very obvious even in the latter stages of Ambrose/Walshes careers, u think u understand now????

2. Secondly bringing in ODI facts to this is irrelevant because we are talking about test cricket mate . I'm not saying Tendulkar wouldn't have gone through that same scenario but clearly not has much has Lara because has i said before EVEN though Ambrose & Walsh were present in the latter stages of their careers WI still conceeded big totals.You want to research it check all the series WI played form the home series againts AUS in 95 to the UK tour in 2000 & check for Tendulkar during the same period....

 

[Sanz]

In 91/92 Warne was in his first series and wasn't proven has a good enough test match bowler,

In 1991/92 Sachin was 18 years old and playing only in his 5th series. Warne was good enough bowler to get into an Aussie Side.

in 97/98 ihe came off a serious shoulder injury

Really, I thought he had come off a pretty good series against SA.Infact Warnie did pretty well against other Indian batsmen, it was only Sidhu and Sachin he could't handle.

in 2001 it was his first test series after an injury.

On the contarary, Adam Gilchrist the Vice Captain during 2001 series had following to say about Warnie' (before the series) :-

Q: How effective will Shane Warne be on this tour? After all, he had a bad tour in 1998?

". I think he is fresh now, he had a very good season back in Australia and the world will get to see what the real Warne is like on this tour."

In 2004 was was at his best while Sachin wasn't.

Not Really, a 30+ avg when most indian batsmen were out of form cant be Warnie's best.


The only time that Tendulkar & Warne faced-off when both were at the peakof their abilities was in 99/2000 & Tendulkar had the better of Warne in that series....[/QUOTE]

 

[Sanz]

1. That is a fact i illustrated the example of what happened in the recent home series againts SA where Lara made big hundreds in the 1st Innings of the Trinidad & Bridgetown test he was in the field for even longer periods so that would affect him physically & mentally which disbaled him form scoring that many runs in the 2nd innings. This is a fact that became very obvious even in the latter stages of Ambrose/Walshes careers, u think u understand now????

Dude, what are you on about, quit making excuses ?? If Lara isn't physically strong enough to play for 5 days of test match, he should retire. As for being in the middle, During his 241 against Australia, Tendulkar was in the middle for 613 minutes, he then came back to field and fielded for another 500 minutes, then came back to bat for 108 minutes, and finally came back to field again for 383 mins. And Sachin has done it throughout his career, half of it in the scorching heat and humidity of India.

2. Secondly bringing in ODI facts to this is irrelevant because we are talking about test cricket mate .

I brought of ODI stats not to boost Sachin's batting credentials but to say that Sachin has had much less rest compared to Lara during his career due to so many ODIs he has played during that time.

 

[aussie]

In 1991/92 Sachin was 18 years old and playing only in his 5th series. Warne was good enough bowler to get into an Aussie Side.



Really, I thought he had come off a pretty good series against SA.Infact Warnie did pretty well against other Indian batsmen, it was only Sidhu and Sachin he could't handle.



On the contarary, Adam Gilchrist the Vice Captain during 2001 series had following to say about Warnie' (before the series) :-

Q: How effective will Shane Warne be on this tour? After all, he had a bad tour in 1998?

". I think he is fresh now, he had a very good season back in Australia and the world will get to see what the real Warne is like on this tour."



Not Really, a 30+ avg when most indian batsmen were out of form cant be Warnie's best.


The only time that Tendulkar & Warne faced-off when both were at the peakof their abilities was in 99/2000 & Tendulkar had the better of Warne in that series....

[/QUOTE]

1. Thats not the point Warne still wasn't proven has a good enough test match bowler

2. Well thats was my mistake i got mixxed up with that series & the actual PAK tour in 98, Mate did you watch did entire 98 series againts India, because i did and its not true that Tendulakr & Sidhu were the only batsmen he couldn't handle, Tendulakr was the only batsmen he couldn't handle. After warne had taken that 4 wicket haul in the 1st innings in chennai where he troubled the Indians for the wrest of the series all the batsmen with the exception of Dravid played him pretty darn well.

3. Well mate ODI are totally diffent to test cricket so, so Warne coming back after that injury and doing well in the VB series would have been irrelevant to what he would have done in though Indian conditions, plus that quote form Gilchrist was just a quote of phoisterity in speaking well for his team mate warne.

4. Thats not the point before the series Warne was in good form, plus 2004 was argubaly the best Warne had bowled throughout his career.

 

[C_C]

4. Thats not the point before the series Warne was in good form, plus 2004 was argubaly the best Warne had bowled throughout his career.

No.
Warne bowled the best before his finger injury in late 97 or so. And Warne at his best got thumped by Tendulkar.
Plain and simple.
Oh and one more thing- in 1991 series in OZ, tendulkar wasnt a proven batsman either.

And if Lara flags in the second innings because he spends time being in the field, then its his fault for not being fit enough.

 

[aussie]

Dude, what are you on about, quit making excuses ?? If Lara isn't physically strong enough to play for 5 days of test match, he should retire. As for being in the middle, During his 241 against Australia, Tendulkar was in the middle for 613 minutes, he then came back to field and fielded for another 500 minutes, then came back to bat for 108 minutes, and finally came back to field again for 383 mins. And Sachin has done it throughout his career, half of it in the scorching heat and humidity of India.



I brought of ODI stats not to boost Sachin's batting credentials but to say that Sachin has had much less rest compared to Lara during his career due to so many ODIs he has played during that time.

1. Its not an excuse its a fact mate, the standard of bowling on each side contributed significantly to Tendulkar having a better 2nd Innnings average than Lara. Even Though Ambrose/Walsh were their WI conceded some big scores from March 95 to August 2000 (which was the latter half of Ambrose & Walshes careers).

The point you made their about the SCG test is exactly what i'm saying Tendulkar would have had that problem but not as much as Lara would have had from March 95 to August 2000. Check the amount of Huge totals WI & IND bowlers conceded during that period.

India throughout the 90s were just about invincible in home conditions so even though the heat & humidity factor would have troubled any player India's bowlers very rarely conceded big totals in home conditions....

 

[aussie]

No.
Warne bowled the best before his finger injury in late 97 or so. And Warne at his best got thumped by Tendulkar.
Plain and simple.
Oh and one more thing- in 1991 series in OZ, tendulkar wasnt a proven batsman either.

And if Lara flags in the second innings because he spends time being in the field, then its his fault for not being fit enough.

Yes everyone knows Warne was at his supreme best as a bowler form 93 to late 97 but 2004 was Warne most successful wicket-taking year in his career so thats why i used the term ``ARGUABLY``.

Thats right neither Warne or Tendular were proven in 91/92.

Well Lara suffered from fielding for long periods more than Tendulkar form March 95 to August 2000, so having to put up with that problem so often over a 5 year period is bound to have some effect surely...

 

[C_C]

Well Lara suffered from fielding for long periods more than Tendulkar form March 95 to August 2000, so having to put up with that problem so often over a 5 year period is bound to have some effect surely...

I am not sure i buy that, really. Not to mention, even if Tendulkar fields for less time than Lara, he expends far more energy in the field - Tendy stopped being a slip fielder in 1994 or so and usually fields around mid-on/mid-off region,which involves a lotta running. Plus he bowls. He doesnt just stand there in the slips all day, like Lara. Plus if you are talking about being exhausted because of a higher workload, Tendy has played a lot more cricket than Lara- he has played far more ODIs than Lara has and thus he would be 'more' exhausted than Lara, if anything.


Lara was in a better boat till 1998 or so- till then, both had similar batting supports but WI had bowlers to make Lara's scores count.

 

[aussie]

I am not sure i buy that, really. Not to mention, even if Tendulkar fields for less time than Lara, he expends far more energy in the field - Tendy stopped being a slip fielder in 1994 or so and usually fields around mid-on/mid-off region,which involves a lotta running.

Lara was in a better boat till 1998 or so- till then, both had similar batting supports but WI had bowlers to make Lara's scores count.

1. That may be true but what i'm saying is that the majority of the time that Lara has made big 1st innings scores during the late 90s even though Ambrose/Walsh were still their WI still conceded big totals when was the oppositons turn to bat. So that has to be taken into consideration when we look at both of their averages in 2nd innings.

WI did have better bowlers during that period to make Lara's scores count but they didn't always do..., plus i think Tendulkar had a much more CONSISTENT batting support than Lara since they both became recognised has the star batsmen in their sides, No doubt both has carried the burden of being the best batsmen in their respective sides but i think Lara burden was greater.

 

[C_C]

s not an excuse its a fact mate, the standard of bowling on each side contributed significantly to Tendulkar having a better 2nd Innnings average than Lara. Even Though Ambrose/Walsh were their WI conceded some big scores from March 95 to August 2000 (which was the latter half of Ambrose & Walshes careers).

I dunno why you use selected arbitary dates such as these to try and shore up Lara but here are some facts.
Between March 1995 and August 2000, India played 39 tests and conceded 20349 runs, or around 520 runs/match. India's overall bowling average was 34.00, meaning that IND picked up around 600 wickets during that span.

In the SAME timeframe, West Indies played 51 matches, conceded 23407 runs, or around 458 runs per match. WI's bowling average was 27.2, which means they took around 870 wickets during that span.
WI conceded 400+ runs 15 times in those 51 matches while IND conceded 400+ runs in 13 outts 39 occasions. ( % per match being 29.41% time while for IND it was 33.33% of the time).

Based on all the abovementioned data, it is INCORRECT to say that Lara fielded more in the field since WI bowlers conceded more runs in that timeframe.

Ofcourse, you could argue that Lara would've played 12 more tests but India has played 67 more ODIs, which equates to more time spent in the middle ( even if WI played all 5 days in those 'extra' 12 tests, it would come to 60 days, not to mention that 1 day of test cricket has less action than 1 day of ODI cricket).

 

[C_C]

1. That may be true but what i'm saying is that the majority of the time that Lara has made big 1st innings scores during the late 90s even though Ambrose/Walsh were still their WI still conceded big totals when was the oppositons turn to bat. So that has to be taken into consideration when we look at both of their averages in 2nd innings.

WI did have better bowlers during that period to make Lara's scores count but they didn't always do..., plus i think Tendulkar had a much more CONSISTENT batting support than Lara since they both became recognised has the star batsmen in their sides, No doubt both has carried the burden of being the best batsmen in their respective sides but i think Lara burden was greater.

As my above post will show, your contention that WI conceded big totals when it ws the opposition's time to bat in the late 90s ( compared to IND) is false.

And i dont think that before 1998 or so, Tendy was in a better boat. Tendy had Azhar and Sidhu, who was comming to the end of his road.
Ganguly and Dravid were pups and so was Laxman.
Lara had Hooper,Adams, Shiv and Campbell, who are not as good batsmen as Azhar or Sidhu but those four overall were better than India's four overall ( given that IND had NO opener at that stage worth his salt). Not to mention, Lara had bowling support, ensuring that WI chased high targets a lot less often than IND did and conversely a 300+ target was a lot more defensible for WI than for IND.

And lemme get this straight.
You are saying that standing in the slips for 2 days is more 'exhausting and work' than standing at mid off/mid on, chasing a gajillion deliveries to the boundary and bowling 10-15 overs every other match or two ?
Riiiiiight!

 

[Anil]

Lara had Hooper,Adams, Shiv and Campbell, who are not as good batsmen as Azhar or Sidhu

hooper and chanderpaul are far better than sidhu....they are not in the azhar class is a more accurate statement....

 

[C_C]

hooper and chanderpaul are far better than sidhu....they are not in the azhar class is a more accurate statement..

Disagree. Sidhu was one of the very few batsmen who averaged 40+ in Test cricket as an opener, despite being in and out of the team over a dozen times.
It is inherently difficult to compare test openers to middle order batsmen and Chanderpaul today may be better or equal to Sidhu but Chanderpaul back then was not. And Hooper never was.

 

[aussie]

Ofcourse, you could argue that Lara would've played 12 more tests but India has played 67 more ODIs, which equates to more time spent in the middle ( even if WI played all 5 days in those 'extra' 12 tests, it would come to 60 days, not to mention that 1 day of test cricket has less action than 1 day of ODI cricket).

We would have to discount the ODI's because we are refering mainly to test matches, so the fact that WI played 12 more test is significant.

 

[aussie]

And lemme get this straight.
You are saying that standing in the slips for 2 days is more 'exhausting and work' than standing at mid off/mid on, chasing a gajillion deliveries to the boundary and bowling 10-15 overs every other match or two ?
Riiiiiight!

when did i say that?????

 

[C_C]

We would have to discount the ODI's because we are refering mainly to test matches, so the fact that WI played 12 more test is significant.

No we cannot discount ODIs, since your contention is that Lara is usually more 'tired' than Tendulkar when the second innings comes around.
Tired or not is not restricted to Tests only. You can be very tired if you play 400 club matches a year and as such, Tests and ODIs are relevant to this point.

 

[aussie]

A

And i dont think that before 1998 or so, Tendy was in a better boat. Tendy had Azhar and Sidhu, who was comming to the end of his road.
Ganguly and Dravid were pups and so was Laxman.
Lara had Hooper,Adams, Shiv and Campbell, who are not as good batsmen as Azhar or Sidhu but those four overall were better than India's four overall ( given that IND had NO opener at that stage worth his salt). Not to mention, Lara had bowling support, ensuring that WI chased high targets a lot less often than IND did and conversely a 300+ target was a lot more defensible for WI than for IND.

Yes i agree that the WI batsmen were better than the 4 Indians overall, but i am talking about who got more CONSISTENT support from their batsmen, Tendulkar did...

 

[C_C]

when did i say that?????

You are implying that,by saying that WI bowlers conceded as many, if not more runs than IND during that timespan ( which is inaccurate) and thus Lara had to stay on the field longer and thus be more 'tired' cometh the second innings.