• 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.

Sachin Tendulkar vs Malcolm Marshall

Who is the greater test cricketer?

  • Total voters
    32
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
Coronis said:
Respectfully disagree.

Tendulkar is significantly better than Richards and Headley for me, and slightly but clearly ahead of Lara, that would be a significant advantage for me. Marshall replacing anyone bar McGrath (whether it be Lillee, Lindwall, Davidson, Cummins, Miller or whoever you have) is definitely a significant upgrade and significant advantage for the team.
Click to expand...
Tendulkar might be better but it's not by enough of a significant margin for him to replace them... Imho. The gap between Sunny and either Gordon/Hunte is enough for me to replace either one with Sunny.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Slifer said:
Tendulkar might be better but it's not by enough of a significant margin for him to replace them... Imho. The gap between Sunny and either Gordon/Hunte is enough for me to replace either one with Sunny.
Click to expand...
Over Headley, sure, I.V.A. no. But Coronis does severely under rate Viv compared to the general opinion.
 
Slifer

Slifer

International Captain
kyear2 said:
Over Headley, sure, I.V.A. no. But Coronis does severely under rate Viv compared to the general opinion.
Click to expand...
I can agree with George since he probably didn't play enough tests but the other 3, no.
 
Last edited:
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Slifer said:
I can agree with George since he probably didn't play enough tests but the other 3, no.
Click to expand...
George really is an enigma, he missed out on Cricinfo's team by one vote and was rated as highly as anyone at the start of the war.

Plus lack of tests doesn't diminish O'Reilly's reputation any. We need to put some respect on the Black Bradman's name.
 
M

ma1978

State Captain
The question is “who is the greater test cricketer?”, not “who at any single point in time will create the greatest impact”

Given the question, when you are talking about two inner circle ATGs, longevity / career value has to factor into the equation and that has to pull this in Tendulkar’s favor.
 
centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
I honestly think Sangakkara is the biggest FTB and minnow basher of the modern era and is arguably not an ATG. A number of people would rank him outside the Top 20 batsmen of all time.
 
Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
centurymaker said:
I honestly think Sangakkara is the biggest FTB and minnow basher of the modern era and is arguably not an ATG. A number of people would rank him outside the Top 20 batsmen of all time.
Click to expand...
It smashes the argument that Murali had tailor made spin wickets to bowl in SL. Thank you for that honest assessment of SL tracks.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Sunil1z said:
If George Headley is being discussed as good as Tendulkar, then I have no regret or shame in claiming Bumrah is as good as Marshall.
Click to expand...
Whare did anyone say Headley was as good as Sachin?

These fake arguments are becoming preposterous.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
capt_Luffy said:
Silver said (previously) replacing Headley with Sachin isn't a significant upgrade
Click to expand...
If you're talking about shoring up weaknesses, having Headley at 3 isn't one. That was the core of the discussion.

But no one said he wasn't better.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

International Regular
kyear2 said:
If you're talking about shoring up weaknesses, having Headley at 3 isn't one. That was the core of the discussion.

But no one said he wasn't better.
Click to expand...
I said Marshall and Sachin will make any team in the World better, not just shoring off weaknesses. I think I and Silfer disagree on this point; as let's take Marshall who I would think would be a pretty big upgrade on Lillee let alone Lindwall in Aussie XI.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
capt_Luffy said:
I said Marshall and Sachin will make any team in the World better, not just shoring off weaknesses. I think I and Silfer disagree on this point; as let's take Marshall who I would think would be a pretty big upgrade on Lillee let alone Lindwall in Aussie XI.
Click to expand...
You exact post was that he would make any team significantly better.

In a WI XI it would be

Headley
Richards
Lara
Sobers

Even if you replace Headley and move the master blaster to 3, is the team significantly better?

My earlier post was directed to Headley missing the all time team by 1 vote, and I've read up enough about Headey during his prime to see that he was only improving as the war commenced and in some circles was seen as better than Hammond.

But to be clear, Sachin was better.

Re Marshall and Lillee, while you and I would, I'm sure an Ian Chappell would argue that the latter was better. But yeah, if I were in charge of said team the only players I'm not trading Marshall for are Bradman, Gilchrist, Warne and McGrath. Possibly Smith, but not sure.
 
Coronis

Coronis

Cricketer Of The Year
kyear2 said:
You exact post was that he would make any team significantly better.

In a WI XI it would be

Headley
Richards
Lara
Sobers

Even if you replace Headley and move the master blaster to 3, is the team significantly better?

My earlier post was directed to Headley missing the all time team by 1 vote, and I've read up enough about Headey during his prime to see that he was only improving as the war commenced and in some circles was seen as better than Hammond.

But to be clear, Sachin was better.

Re Marshall and Lillee, while you and I would, I'm sure an Ian Chappell would argue that the latter was better. But yeah, if I were in charge of said team the only players I'm not trading Marshall for are Bradman, Gilchrist, Warne and McGrath. Possibly Smith, but not sure.
Click to expand...
Yes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top