Tendulkar v Inzamam TEST CRICKET ONLY

[shravi]

Oh, and another reason that Sachin's hundreds come up as draws is because the rest of our team was pants and the master simply couldn't do it alone.

What!? Dravid? Laxman? Ganguly? Azhar?

 

[pal]

Interesting you brought up those names. Look at their career averages in lost matches and compare them to Sachin's and you'll see why Cricketman's point that hardly any of them gave support to Sachin in tough matches holds true. Most of them even average less than Inzamam. You also have to remember that the bowlers have to take ten wickets in the ensuing innings (assuming India batted first).

 

[Insomniac]

Yes yes, an average of 54 is verrrrry bad, isn't it? Oh, and his terrible average at home is only eight higher then inzi's career average...

Well, Inzy's is higher. That statistic can be interpreted in many ways

And you just cannot compare a Ferrari with a Porche. It's like comparing a gourmet meal from a five star resteraunt to pizza hut or something.

What the hell does the car they drive have to do with this?!!

Cricketman added 15 Minutes and 19 Seconds later...

Lets go on to see innings where Sachin has helped India shall we?

155 v South Africa, Bloemfontein, 2001-02
On the first day on an overseas series, India's plight is a familiar one - four down for 68, with all the wickets going just the way the South Africans expected - to rising balls. Tendulkar has a debutant for company, with another to follow. He takes 17 balls to score his first run, but 101 come off the next 97 deliveries. It isn't the prettiest of Tendulkar's Test tons, but it is one of the most savage, characterised by pulls and vicious upper-cuts. The South Africans have a plan for India, and Tendulkar makes a mockery of it.

I bet Pollock wasn't playing in this test, since he averages 8.25 against Tendulkar.

119 not out v England, Old Trafford, 1990
England pile up 519 on a benign pitch, and India reply with 432. England stretch the lead to 407, and though the pitch is still good and the bowling (Malcolm, Fraser, Lewis, Hemmings) not terribly menacing, India find themselves in deep water at 127 for 5 with only one recognised batsman left. And he's only 17 years old. Tendulkar battles for nearly four hours, grimly but never dourly, and ends the day with 119.

Century number 35:
At exactly 16:44:19, in fading light on the first day of the second Test against Sri Lanka, at the Feroz Shah Kotla Sachin Tendulkar became Test cricket's most prolific century scorer. With a flick through square-leg off Chaminda Vaas he reached his 35th Test century, going past Sunil Gavaskar's record of 34 Test centuries. Gavaskar's record had stood for 22 years. As soon as Tendulkar reached his century, which included 13 fours and one straight six, and came off 177 balls, play was stopped for bad light with the score on 245 for 3 off 75.4 overs. Tendulkar was not out on an even 100, and had spent 279 minutes at the crease

Century No: 31(3rd Test v West Indies in India 2002 at Eden Gardens, Kolkata)

India had comfortably won the first 2 Tests and West Indies were looking to salvage some pride. West Indies had won the first round of the 3rd Test by taking a 139 run lead in the first innings. Now it was India's turn to be on the back foot and play for time and save the Test match. The Caribbean bowlers had their tails up when they had India tottering at 87 for 4 with Sehwag, Dravid & Ganguly back in the hut. But our maestro had other plans and put on a 214 run partnership with VVS Laxman (154) and making 176 in the process which was incidentally his first hundred in Kolkata and India had comfortably saved the Test match and won the three Test series 2-0

I can name many many more, but i simply don't have the time nor care to.

Oh, and another reason that Sachin's hundreds come up as draws is because the rest of our team was pants and the master simply couldn't do it alone.

Erm, I've shown you statistics from 2001 to now, 2002 to now, 2003 to now, when Waqar and Wasim were on the decline, Inzamam's average in wins went higher and higher. Care to explain that?

And believe me, a bowling attack of Sami, Akhtar (when rarely fit), Rana Naveed, and Danish Kaneria is not very threatening, and neither is Younis (well from 01 to 04), and Yousuf played the odd contribution here and there.

Please show me where Inzamam had the support of his teammates other than Waqar and Wasim, who by 2002 were well and truly past it.

 

[Insomniac]

Interesting you brought up those names. Look at their career averages in lost matches and compare them to Sachin's and you'll see why Cricketman's point that hardly any of them gave support to Sachin in tough matches holds true. Most of them even average less than Inzamam. You also have to remember that the bowlers have to take ten wickets in the ensuing innings (assuming India batted first).

I'm confused now, you're saying that lost games are the fact that tell the quality of a batsman?

That doesn't sound right, because if Sachin was so great in Test match cricket, then why, when his bowlers (since they only have a bowler who averages 24 and the rest 28-32 which isn't HORRIBLE by any means) are crap, but performed on the odd occasion, did Sachin not perform as well as Inzamam in those games that India won.

Sachin had 47 tests to prove himself mate, 47 (wins). Inzamam had 49 tests to prove himself, as he did.

I hope you understand my point there - read it several times.

 

[h123786]

I'm confused now, you're saying that lost games are the fact that tell the quality of a batsman?

That doesn't sound right, because if Sachin was so great in Test match cricket, then why, when his bowlers (since they only have a bowler who averages 24 and the rest 28-32 which isn't HORRIBLE by any means) are crap, but performed on the odd occasion, did Sachin not perform as well as Inzamam in those games that India won.

Sachin had 47 tests to prove himself mate, 47 (wins). Inzamam had 49 tests to prove himself, as he did.

I hope you understand my point there - read it several times.

He is not sayin that lost games demonstrate the quality of the batsman.And regarding your earlier posts that inzi is and sachin is not one of the top 5 batsmen i certainly dont and am sure many would agree.Look dude we have said it before why dont you move on ahead with some other aspect?Afraid inzi would lose???Ask any cricket analyst and they'll tell u why tendulkar is better than inzamam.So i ask for the others please dude move on with some other aspects whats the point if you keep pestering about one point?read all your posts and you yourself see your boasting about how inzi won matches for his country and stuf...fine we accept it so now can u move on and show us how tendy isnt one of the top five batsmen and while inzi with one ability better than him is one of them??

 

[Insomniac]

He is not sayin that lost games demonstrate the quality of the batsman.And regarding your earlier posts that inzi is and sachin is not one of the top 5 batsmen i certainly dont and am sure many would agree.Look dude we have said it before why dont you move on ahead with some other aspect?Afraid inzi would lose???Ask any cricket analyst and they'll tell u why tendulkar is better than inzamam.So i ask for the others please dude move on with some other aspects whats the point if you keep pestering about one point?read all your posts and you yourself see your boasting about how inzi won matches for his country and stuf...fine we accept it so now can u move on and show us how tendy isnt one of the top five batsmen and while inzi with one ability better than him is one of them??

Did I ever say Inzamam is in the top 5? No, I didn't. I only said Sachin is not in the top 5 test batsmen, which is true.

I have an idea. How about you attempt to actively contribute to this debate instead of telling others to "move on". Obviously you are showing signs of "giving in".

The Ten Sports panel that I gave a summary of what was spoken said Inzamam was better (along with Steve Waugh). So there goes your "cricket analyst theory".

It is a very important point. The job of a batsman is to score runs to help his team win. I have shown that Inzamam has done that job better than Tendulkar. It is the Indian fans who are very stubborn and are not willing to accept that fact since "Sachin is God"

So you accept that Inzamam won more matches for his country with the bat, and therefore fulfilled the job of a batsman better than Tendulkar? If so, I can move onto the next point, which is how Tendulkar isn't one of the top 5 batsmen.

Tendulkar would get into the top 25, but would struggle into the top 10, and definitely not in the top 5.

^^ Test cricket Only ^^

 

[h123786]

Ok you say tendulkar chokes his best performances(source:cricinfo if you wanna check)

1.119 not out v England, Old Trafford, 1990
England pile up 519 on a benign pitch, and India reply with 432. England stretch the lead to 407, and though the pitch is still good and the bowling (Malcolm, Fraser, Lewis, Hemmings) not terribly menacing, India find themselves in deep water at 127 for 5 with only one recognised batsman left. And he's only 17 years old. Tendulkar battles for nearly four hours, grimly but never dourly, and ends the day with 119. India lose only one more wicket, ending up with 343. With one more session, they might even have won.

2.114 v Australia, Perth, 1991-92
The fastest pitch in Australia has been reserved for the last Test. India have been beaten already, only humiliation awaits. Batting first, Australia score 346. Tendulkar enters at a relatively comfortable 100 for 3, but watches the next five wickets go down for 59. Tendulkar is the next man out... at 240. He has scored 118 of the 140 runs added while he is at the crease, and has made them in such an awe-inspiring manner that commentators are asking themselves when they last saw an innings as good.
3.169 v South Africa, Cape Town, 1996-97
Batting first, South Africa make a matchwinning 529.
Playing only for honour, India find themselves groveling before Donald, Pollock, McMillan and Klusener. Tendulkar and Mohammad Azharuddin get together at 58 for 5, and start spanking the bowling as if they were playing a club game in the park. They add 222 for the sixth wicket in less than two sessions, and Tendulkar has 26 boundaries in his score of 169. Even Donald says that he felt like clapping.(definetly he frustrated Donald enough to clap for him)
So here they are three performances to show he isnt a choker

 

[Ponting_14]

Dear load, 800 posts in not even 2 weeks? I didn't even think I want to know what happened in this thread.

 

[smssia0112]

Did I ever say Inzamam is in the top 5? No, I didn't. I only said Sachin is not in the top 5 test batsmen, which is true.

Tendulkar would get into the top 25, but would struggle into the top 10, and definitely not in the top 5.

It's not truth, it's opinion. There is no true list of the top 5 test batsmen, but I daresay that the majority of cricket fans worldwide would have Sachin in there.

 

[shravi]

Interesting you brought up those names. Look at their career averages in lost matches and compare them to Sachin's and you'll see why Cricketman's point that hardly any of them gave support to Sachin in tough matches holds true. Most of them even average less than Inzamam. You also have to remember that the bowlers have to take ten wickets in the ensuing innings (assuming India batted first).

I remember a time when Dravid averaged 58 and Sachin averaged 55. Sure, Sachin was in and out of the team but Dravid really stepped up to the plate. He may not have given support in those particular matches, but he's won matches for India in which Sachin hasn't performed as well.

 

[Insomniac]

How is Tendulkar better than:

Jacques Kallis
Mohammad Yousuf
Brian Lara
Ricky Ponting
Rahul Dravid

I believe all those players are better than Tendulkar...

Top 5 of test cricket? Never.

 

[metallics2006]

You say you wont add Sachin to that top list of yours because he got his runs selfishly to secure a draw most of the time yet you add Lara who scored 400 instead of winning that test match? Strange logic mate

 

[h123786]

How is Tendulkar better than:

Jacques Kallis
Mohammad Yousuf
Brian Lara
Ricky Ponting
Rahul Dravid

I believe all those players are better than Tendulkar...

Top 5 of test cricket? Never.

Ok fine you want me to actively cotribute to this thread by putting ahead facts and stats ok fine Here we go then
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content/records/223646.html
if these batsmen are better than tendulkar why is he second only to Lara?and by the way inzamam is 11th and i dont agree with u that tendulkar is not in the top 5 list.Its not cause i am indian i am being modest and why are more fans supporting tendulkar then??
And heres another one
Two fifties in a test match
Tendulkar features here vs australia at sydney 2 jan 2004 and inzamam is nowhere here
And then fastest to 1000 runs tendulkar 28 test innings
And talk about consistency tendulkar is the fastest to reach 8000 runs in 154 innings at 51.96
On the other hand inzy is 11th with 175 innings for 8000 at 45.71
And inzamam also features in most ducks in an innings though hes last and tendulkar isnt in the list
Now i leave it to the people on this forum to judge and i cant understand even after all these records how tendulkar isnt in the top 5

 

[Annoyingdevil]

Tendulkar is number 7 in ESPN legends of Cricket and Inzaman is not even in top 50.
and Brain Lara is number 34 so that mean he is better then both of them.
Tendulkar is Legend man

 

[Highlander999]

Ah well he has been banned now. Looks like too much Sachin bashing