Tendulkar is no god. Kapil Dev is bang on

[nair]

May I ask why?

Both are batsmen, both played all three formats in recent years. Maybe you don't want to compare these two because you just don't want to?

If you just ignore numbers, which Tendulkar aggregated in so many years and compare his percentages with ABD - you'll find interesting results - in all three formats of the game.

Both are from different eras..........

 

[Jazzbot]

Both are from different eras..........

lol?

How are they from different eras when both played together for several years? Yes Sachin started back in 80s but he retired just few years ago.

And if eras are the only criteria, then Bradman & Viv were greater batsmen than Sachin, no?

 

[nair]

lol?

How are they from different eras when both played together for several years? Yes Sachin started back in 80s but he retired just few years ago.

And if eras are the only criteria, then Bradman & Viv were greater batsmen than Sachin, no?

I said they cannot be compared, So do you want to compare Bradman and Viv?

 

[Mike_Brando]

lol?

How are they from different eras when both played together for several years? Yes Sachin started back in 80s but he retired just few years ago.

And if eras are the only criteria, then Bradman & Viv were greater batsmen than Sachin, no?

Lol,Bradman and Viv never encountered bowlers like Wasim,Waqar,Ambrose,Walsh,Mcgrath,Lee,Warne,Saqlain,Muralidharan,Chaminda Vaas.Alan Donald etc,Believe me,if they had played against these bowlers their records would have been a lot different that what they are actually.AB is no doubt one of the best batsmen of modern era but comparing him with Sachin is pure stupidity.He started playing in an era when most of the top bowlers of the world had retired plus the fielding restrictions were also changed in the last 3-4 years which have benefited him immensely.The day he makes 50 centuries in any of the two forms of the game will be the day when i'll start comparing him with Tendulkar but till then it's Sachin all the way!!

 

[Jazzbot]

Lol,Bradman and Viv never encountered bowlers like Wasim,Waqar,Ambrose,Walsh,Mcgrath,Lee,Warne,Saqlain,Muralidharan,Chaminda Vaas.Alan Donald etc,Believe me,if they had played against these bowlers their records would have been a lot different that what they are actually.AB is no doubt one of the best batsmen of modern era but comparing him with Sachin is pure stupidity.He started playing in an era when most of the top bowlers of the world had retired plus the fielding restrictions were also changed in the last 3-4 years which have benefited him immensely.The day he makes 50 centuries in any of the two forms of the game will be the day when i'll start comparing him with Tendulkar but till then it's Sachin all the way!!

And Sachin never played on old muddy tracks with no protection against rains, that too without helmet and under no field restrictions, power plays, road like flat tracks, short boundaries etc.

Even a worst bowler of today can become a monster on such pitches under those old conditions, so your argument is flawed. Those old batsmen, especially Don Bradman played in very difficult, maybe most difficult and batsman unfriendly era. Today's cricket is very batsman friendly with field restrictions, power plays etc..

There is a reason why no batsman of today is able to sustain an average of 70+ for more than 2 years on the trot, even with all these helpful conditions. But Bradman maintained average of 99 in his career.

I said they cannot be compared, So do you want to compare Bradman and Viv?

Ok, there is different of decades between Bradman, Viv and Sachin so your argument somewhat makes sense. But ABD & Sachin played against each other in a single match many times. How these two cannot be compared is beyond me.

 

[Mike_Brando]

And Sachin never played on old muddy tracks with no protection against rains, that too without helmet and under no field restrictions, power plays, road like flat tracks, short boundaries etc.

Even a worst bowler of today can become a monster on such pitches under those old conditions, so your argument is flawed. Those old batsmen, especially Don Bradman played in very difficult, maybe most difficult and batsman unfriendly era. Today's cricket is very batsman friendly with field restrictions, power plays etc..

Now comes a counter argument-the level of umpiring in those days was seriously flawed plus the lack of technology ensured that the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman 9.9 out of ten times!!You should consider this too.During Sachin's era even a small umpiring mistake could be reviewed by the off field third umpire,a "luxury" that neither Bradman nor Viv had encountered in their career.Again another important point,during the era of Bradman both the Umpires were generally selected from the home country and hence used to be considered as a 12th man for the home team,again a "luxury" that Tendulkar didn't enjoy most of the time in his career!!

 

[Jazzbot]

Now comes a counter argument-the level of umpiring in those days was seriously flawed plus the lack of technology ensured that the benefit of doubt goes to the batsman 9.9 out of ten times!!You should consider this too.During Sachin's era even a small umpiring mistake could be reviewed by the off field third umpire,a "luxury" that neither Bradman nor Viv had encountered in their career.Again another important point,during the era of Bradman both the Umpires were generally selected from the home country and hence used to be considered as a 12th man for the home team,again a "luxury" that Tendulkar didn't enjoy most of the time in his career!!

Another counter argument.

Don didn't play all of his matches at home ground of course, but still managed to maintain an average of 99. He played many matches outside too, especially Ashes in England. So based on your argument, he achieved that feat against a team of 12 men. I've read how the newspapers were all filled with headlines on front pages when Don Bradman use to finally get out. It used to be such a big news those days. No other batsman till date managed to come anywhere near that.


We can round and round on this.

 

[jaunty]

Eyeball grabbing sensational headline...Kapil didn't exactly say the way it sounds by reading the title. Anyone would agree with him when he says Tendulkar did not do justice to the kinda talent he had at his disposal..

It's actually funny that people turned what Kapil said negatively. His comment was actually positive. I have also said this before. Tendulkar under-performed in test matches IMO. He is easily the most technically sound batsman I have seen, did not have a single weakness against any type of bowling. He had the talent to avergage 60 in test cricket. There are three reasons why he could not - 1) India played very few test matches when he was at his absolute best, 2) Injuries took a toll and he had to modify his game in the 2000s and 3) Stayed 2 years longer than he should have, his average dropped from 57+ to 53+. Tendulkar averaged 58 in the 1990s, in a period when bowlers dominated. There were only 3 or 4 players who had 50+ average in the 90s and Tendulkar was 5 ahead of the next best Steve Waugh. But India played only 60 odd test matches then in those 10 years. Now a days they play 100+. From 2003-04 Tennis elbow limited him as a player. He had to let go his natural attacking instinct. Very few players could have done that and still average over 50. And of course should have retired after the world cup in 2011 (although it is easy to say that now in hindsight).

Another counter argument.

Don didn't play all of his matches at home ground of course, but still managed to maintain an average of 99. He played many matches outside too, especially Ashes in England. So based on your argument, he achieved that feat against a team of 12 men. I've read how the newspapers were all filled with headlines on front pages when Don Bradman use to finally get out. It used to be such a big news those days. No other batsman till date managed to come anywhere near that.


We can round and round on this.

You compare players with their contemporaries. No one in Don Bradman's time had an average even remotely close to his. He is the undisputed king of cricket. It does not matter what he would have or could have done today. He was so much better than everyone else of his time that there is a daylight between Bradman and every cricketer. It is quite simple, Bradman has the #1 spot reserved. The discussion is always about the next best.

 

[AyanRay]

He got some talent no doubt, but his individual record is more important for him than the teams benefits. What i said is just an example.. After his 99th century it took 34 innings to score his 100th ton. Would you think, if bcci is like ACB he would have scored 100 tons? Tendulkar is just over rated.

Do you have any idea what Ponting's record was at the end of his career? Still ACB kept him in the team.

First you criticize him for scoring only centuries and not playing for the team and then you critize him for not scoring a century for 34 innings!!??? And Btw do you know how many times he got out in the 90s during those 34 innings?

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Mr Kapil used to win games for his country , unlike Mr Shorty

 

[vsdoc]

I truly consider Gavaskar a better batsman than Sachin.

And as players, as a fan, I rate Dravid above Sachin.

Cheers, Doc

 

[AyanRay]

May I ask why?

Both are batsmen, both played all three formats in recent years. Maybe you don't want to compare these two because you just don't want to?

If you just ignore numbers, which Tendulkar aggregated in so many years and compare his percentages with ABD - you'll find interesting results - in all three formats of the game.

Tendulkar just played 1 international T20, and he was 35+ when this format started.
Secondly look at the era when Sachin played his ODI, 250 would give you victory 70% of the times, there was no need for Sachin to be ruthless.

Fact is everyone has a rise, a peak and a downfall, AB is at his peak, but he is 31. Let's see his long he goes.

 

[vsdoc]

The fact that Pakistan cannot produce a batsman to save its soul and we are in the same boat with regard to fast bowlers makes me of course conclude that we are at least as far as cricket is concerned half the nations we could have been had Partition not happened.

(bracing for little nunnis flapping angrily all over my face)

 

[Raheel Khan_1]

To compare Sachin and AB, one has to look at the kind of bowlers they faced. Sachin in his entire career of 24 years faced some of the greatest bowlers the world has ever produced. (Not sure though , might be Gavaskar faced tougher bowlers), but the point is Sachin had tougher opponents than AB surely.

And it would be premature to compare both of them, remember Sachin is still 10000 runs ahead of AB in the ODIs, which is huge and has a higher average at tests.



The title of God of cricket was not given by any Indian, it was given by Mathew Hayden.

Secondly, Sachin had a career spanning 24 years, which phase of his carrer are you talking about ? If you call his cricket boring, do watch the videos of 90s, when Indian cricket was struggling through its worst phase there was just one bastmen who stood up. Later came the Dravids and Gangulis.

And regarding the golden duck, did you forget World Cup 2003??

Sachin always struggled against Pakistan. It was given since Pakistan had the most talented bowlers at the time. His average against Pakistan is much lower than his overall average.

 

[Donatello]

So according to you, Since he has a golden duck in his name He is not good????

He was good no doubt, but maybe an Indian can explain his 'God' status.....because what i know of my religion and belief, a god is almighty, undefeatable and all knowing.

But then again, he is god of cricket in India. No where else have i seen cricketers being referred to as 'God'

Donald Bradman was aptly called the 'Don'.....that i can understand....but god? Seriously?

And he better take up active role in Indian cricket or else old timers like Ravi Shastri and Kapil Dev will keep making bullshyt noises.