Sachin Tendulkar vs Brian Lara

[SaiSrini]

Yeah it sure was, I mean it's ok for your God of cricket to play till he dies no matter how much talent is sitting around and waiting, and you call scoring 400 not out in a match that was destine to draw selfish. You are so amazing, are you Indian by any chance??? Just curious.

Sachin is 36. People have played till 38. Wasnt Lara 37 odd when he retired (dont exactly know but I am confident he was older than what Sachin is now when he retired)? the age for retiring has increased these days with players playing on past 35. But they dont go past 40.

saisrini80 added 2 Minutes and 3 Seconds later...

WOW spoken like a true Indian and Indian cricket fan:hpraise

Was that sarcastic? Hints at being so... Whatever I told was my side of the fact.

 

[WestIndian]

I am dismayed by the poll results. Looks like we're fighting a losing battle. Dare, Rabs....vote now!!!:cool:

I've been to the odd forum where they voted Lara over Tendulkar with an overwhelming majority, citing Lara as a better player under pressure situations and in big matches. So I am quite surprised by the poll, but maybe Chennai has changed all of that.

The poll don't me jack...., if I get a dozen West Indians in here they would vote for Lara, I expect the same from the Indians!!!

WestIndian added 5 Minutes and 19 Seconds later...

Was that sarcastic? Hints at being so... Whatever I told was my side of the fact.

Fact!!! Man please educate me, am yearning to learn, what is a fact?? Or the the "fact" as you put it!!

 

[Gunner786]

its obvious tendulkars gonna win the poll though,
its like ponting not winning a poll with tendulkar on an aussie forum.

 

[mrtwisties]

WOW spoken like a true Australian and Australian cricket fan, you guys are the best in the world, and proving that even this moment in SA!!! ase----

Brian Lara was a great player, no-one's denied that. But when you're comparing two greats you look for comparatively minor differences so you can make a distinction between them.

There's no need to respond to that sort of reasoning with eye-rolling and sarcasm. Try engaging with the logic of Ben's argument instead:

1. An important measure of the greatness of a batsman is how he performs against the toughest opposition in the toughest circumstances.
2. During Lara's career, you couldn't get much tougher than facing Australia in Australia.
3. Tendulkar averaged 58.53 in these circumstances, Lara averaged 41.97.
4. Therefore, Tendulkar outperforms Lara on this measure of the greatness of a batsman.

I think it's pretty hard to disagree with premises 1, 2 and 3.

Re 1, a hypothetical batsman who scored hard fought, back-to-back centuries off the bowling of Malcolm Marshall and Shane Warne and then scored unlucky ducks against Bangladesh would be clearly superior to a batsman who scored back-to-back centuries against Bangladesh but couldn't get off the mark when facing real bowlers.

Re 2, Australia might be having a mediocre time of it right now, but that's scarcely relevant to how good they were during Lara's career.

Re 3, you could quibble with the use of average-per-wicket as the right measure of performance against Australia, but Tendulkar has the upper hand in other statistical measure of greatness, too. Against Australia in Australia:

• Tendulkar scored 50+ every 2.7 innings and a century every 5.
• Lara scored 50+ every 4.38 innings and a century every 8.75.
• Tendulkar had a duck every 10 innings.
• Lara had a duck every 8.75 innings.
• Tendulkar scored 1522 runs in 30 innings with a high score of 241*.
• Lara scored 1469 runs in 35 innings with a high score of 277.

I think Ben's right about this being an important measure that Tendulkar wins.

Here's another measure:

1. A great batsman performs consistently well all around the world.
2. Lara averages 100+ in Sri Lanka, 50+ in West Indies/Zimbabwe, 40+ in Australia/England/Pakistan/South Africa and 30+ in India/New Zealand (ie 50+ in 3 countries, 40+ in 7 countries).
3. Tendulkar averages 130+ in Bangladesh, 60+ in England/Sri Lanka, 50+ in Australia/India, ~40+ in New Zealand/Pakistan/West Indies/Zimbabwe/South Africa (ie 50+ in 5 countries, ~40+ in 10 countries).
4. Therefore, Tendulkar outperforms Lara on this measure of the greatness of a batsman.

The only measure where I see Lara outperforming Tendulkar is "highest score". But "highest score" isn't usually seen as being a true measure of a batsman's greatness - scoring match-winning runs is much more important.

mrtwisties added 6 Minutes and 46 Seconds later...

Yeah it sure was, I mean it's ok for your God of cricket to play till he dies no matter how much talent is sitting around and waiting, and you call scoring 400 not out in a match that was destine to draw selfish. You are so amazing, are you Indian by any chance??? Just curious.

Brave man, calling for the retirement of a batsman who averaged 55, 48 and 69 in the last 3 years. I think it's generally accepted that a giant of the game can keep on playing until he ceases to be great.

 

[Slowcoach]

If I wanted someone to singlehandedly win me a test by scoring 150* out of 300 I would pick Lara.

If I wanted someone to score me 500* I would pick Lara.

If I wanted someone to score me 100 off 60 balls I would pick Lara.

If I wanted someone to score me 30 off an over I would pick Lara.

Tendulkar is slightly more consistent due to a more solid defensive technique, but Lara was by far the more talented batsman and more of a genuine matchwinner.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Seriously Ben really gets to me, I try to avoid most of these thread, just that I don't have to response to free speech, opinions and honestly the bull---- that some of these guys comes out with. It's like they sit home and have nothing to jerk so they come and post some crap. They and their mother are expert on all things cricket, and on all nations and individuals.
I really gets ticked off at times with these experts, one say Lara could not score tough runs, I mean that guy must have been on Mars if he can type BS like this, just because it's free speech and his opinion!!
When these guys come and post their expert opinions, do some goddamn in depth research, get the facts and post something that can be respected and educate, he sits his little arse somewhere, prejudice by his national team and the rest is history.

lol that's why you ignore them as much as you can. There was a dude in here that called Lara selfish. Anyone that says that Lara had "huge" flaws in his batting and that Malcolm Marshall is a like a medium pace bowler should not be taken seriously or responded to much.

You two are just fanboys and you can't handle the fact that non-Indians think that Tendulkar is better then Lara. It's a fact. Tendulkar > Lara

I tell you what, go watch Lara bat and specifically watch his technique. It's flawed, that's he had so many low-scores throughout his career. He had a massive backlift and he didn't play with his hands close to his body, like you're supposed to. He was a technically incorrect batsman. Not many other batsman would get away with a Test average of 50 by using copying Lara's technique. You seriously know nothing about your own players and you're too blindsided.

Lookup "waqar younis yorker to lara and clean bold A toe crusher" on youtube. It's a slow motion replay and just watch how bad of a position Lara gets into. He was exposed like that, so often early on in his innings.

 

[mrtwisties]

During Lara's career:

• Without Lara, the West Indies won 37%, drew 30% and lost 33%
• With Lara, the West Indies won 25%, drew 28% and lost 48%

Truly a magnificent match-winner you've got there...

 

[Dare]

You two are just fanboys and you can't handle the fact that non-Indians think that Tendulkar is better then Lara. It's a fact. Tendulkar > Lara

Look its Mr.Hayden calling me a fanboy, or Mr Hughes calling me a fan boy, wow.

I tell you what, go watch Lara bat and specifically watch his technique. It's flawed, that's he had so many low-scores throughout his career. He had a massive backlift and he didn't play with his hands close to his body, like you're supposed to. He was a technically incorrect batsman. Not many other batsman would get away with a Test average of 50 by using copying Lara's technique. You seriously know nothing about your own players and you're too blindsided.

Or are we to say that with a "flawed" technique Lara managed to average 50+. His technique was fine, for the majority of his career Lara had to be the guy in the WI team and carry the team. I don't know how to use the stats that well but I would like to see the percentage of runs Lara scored in a WI career throughout his career.

Lookup "waqar younis yorker to lara and clean bold A toe crusher" on youtube. It's a slow motion replay and just watch how bad of a position Lara gets into. He was exposed like that, so often early on in his innings.

wow one ball by one of the greatest swing bowlers ever, in swing conditions. Yay Lara is a failure based on one ball.

Look up Akhtars 1st ball ever to Tendulkar, according to you Sachin is a failure based on that.

 

[King Cricket]

If I wanted someone to singlehandedly win me a test by scoring 150* out of 300 I would pick Lara.

If I wanted someone to score me 500* I would pick Lara.

If I wanted someone to score me 100 off 60 balls I would pick Lara.

If I wanted someone to score me 30 off an over I would pick Lara.

Tendulkar is slightly more consistent due to a more solid defensive technique, but Lara was by far the more talented batsman and more of a genuine matchwinner.

Lol at you. My question, did Lara ever in his career score 100 out of 60 balls or 30 off an over? Real LOL.

 

[Dare]

Lol at you. My question, did Lara ever in his career score 100 out of 60 balls or 30 off an over? Real LOL.

28 close enough?? lol

 

[King Cricket]

I don't want to get involved in any arguments as they do no good, but the fact remains that, Sachin Tendulkar is the better batsman between these two with Lara awesomely awesomely awesomely close. This is the thing.

 

[Dare]

I don't want to get involved in any arguments as they do no good, but the fact remains that, Sachin Tendulkar is the better batsman between these two with Lara awesomely awesomely awesomely close. This is the thing.

well that can be argued to death. I don't rate one above the other, rate them as equals.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Or are we to say that with a "flawed" technique Lara managed to average 50+. His technique was fine, for the majority of his career Lara had to be the guy in the WI team and carry the team. I don't know how to use the stats that well but I would like to see the percentage of runs Lara scored in a WI career throughout his career.

Lara does have a flawed technique. Anyone who knows remotely anything about batting and how techniques work would agree. Are you even listening to what I'm saying? Ricky Ponting has the exact same technique as Lara but as a right-hander. Even Matthew Hayden doesn't have a great technique. Neither have good techniques, so swallow some pride and admit it.

wow one ball by one of the greatest swing bowlers ever, in swing conditions. Yay Lara is a failure based on one ball.

Look up Akhtars 1st ball ever to Tendulkar, according to you Sachin is a failure based on that.

No it's not because Tendulkar's technique isn't exposed. You can't possibly expose Tendulkar's technique because it is 100% techinically correct. I'm not trying to prove anything else other then that Lara has a flawed technique, so stop trying to ignore and get escape from the point. I've taken some screenshots from that clip, hopefully this will help you understand what I'm talking about.

Look at Lara's handposition in this picture and look where the bat is, pointing straight back up to the sky. It looks awful and he looks like a baseball player. This is not an ideal position you want to be in because any slight movement off the seam or in the air and you'll fall over, being trapped LBW or bowled. And no, I'm not saying that just because I know what's going to happen next. It'll happen regulary if you don't get it fixed and you'll be vonarable to any vertical movement. Hoggard once did the same thing to Graeme Smith.

Obviously, you can hardly see the bat in this image but it is pointing in the direction of point, nowhere near close to hitting the ball which is pitching on yorker length. This is after the ball has swung aswell. So at this point rignt here, Lara can't defend the ball because of a shocking technique.

Look now, Lara has finally grounded the bat. But guess what? It's a bit too late. The ball has already hit the stumps and Lara is completely off balance.

Leg-stump out of the ground. Lara's about to fall right on his face. Had this ball been bowled to Sachin Tendulkar then I'm sure he would've kept it out. Tendulkar has the most perfect technique that you could ever wish to have. His bat comes through straight so he would've been able to jam out this yorker. None of this baseball style slashes across your front legs.

 

[Dare]

Lara does have a flawed technique. Anyone who knows remotely anything about batting and how techniques work would agree. Are you even listening to what I'm saying? Ricky Ponting has the exact same technique as Lara but as a right-hander. Even Matthew Hayden doesn't have a great technique. Neither have good techniques, so swallow some pride and admit it.

Ay but Hayden is the GOAT and Lara with his "flawed technique" is a tool.

No it's not because Tendulkar's technique isn't exposed. You can't possibly expose Tendulkar's technique because it is 100% techinically correct. I'm not trying to prove anything else other then that Lara has a flawed technique, so stop trying to ignore and get escape from the point. I've taken some screenshots from that clip, hopefully this will help you understand what I'm talking about.

now you want to point out to me where exactly I said that Lara didn't have flaws in his technique? Every batsman including Tendulkar has something in his batting that is not perfect. If Sachins technique is 100% perfect why isnt his average right up there with Bradmans. From what I understand 100% means no fail.
Once again you go on bashing someone like you are better than him. If I had to learn from you whats good and bad in cricket I would have given up a long time ago on this cricket stuff.

Look at Lara's handposition in this picture and look where the bat is, pointing straight back up to the sky. It looks awful and he looks like a baseball player. This is not an ideal position you want to be in because any slight movement off the seam or in the air and you'll fall over, being trapped LBW or bowled. And no, I'm not saying that just because I know what's going to happen next. It'll happen regulary if you don't get it fixed and you'll be vonarable to any vertical movement. Hoggard once did the same thing to Graeme Smith.

Glad to hear that Hoggard did it once to Smith. Just like Waqar did it once to Lara. The ball that Lara got from Waqar is unplayable, any batsman would have struggled with it not just Lara. Perfect delivery for a left hander.

Obviously, you can hardly see the bat in this image but it is pointing in the direction of point, nowhere near close to hitting the ball which is pitching on yorker length. This is after the ball has swung aswell. So at this point rignt here, Lara can't defend the ball because of a shocking technique.

His "shocking technique" got him damn far in his career, don't you think so?

Look now, Lara has finally grounded the bat. But guess what? It's a bit too late. The ball has already hit the stumps and Lara is completely off balance.

Yay wicket for Waqar...wouldn't have expected anything else from a swing bowler in his prime in swing conditions.

Leg-stump out of the ground. Lara's about to fall right on his face. Had this ball been bowled to Sachin Tendulkar then I'm sure he would've kept it out. Tendulkar has the most perfect technique that you could ever wish to have. His bat comes through straight so he would've been able to jam out this yorker. None of this baseball style slashes across your front legs.

so you did all this work to once again try to convince me that his technique is flawed, because of the way he played one ball and probably the only one you ever saw Lara play at.

Laras technique obviously worked for him, check the rap sheet. runs, and records all over the place.

Also I need to get me that crystal ball you got man, Sachin would have kept that ball out for sure? Just like he kept out that one from Shoaib?

Also whoever reps without leaving their names, grow some kahones.

 

[mrtwisties]

Technique is not the same as performance. Performance is a function of natural ability (hand-eye, power, etc), technique and shot selection out in the middle. A batsman with loads of natural ability and good shot selection can still perform well despite having poor technique.