[rajeev k]

I would have liked Sachin announcing the retirement ahead of a match so that the excitement of that last match would have been an occasion worth cherishing forever. Even Sachin lost that opportunity.

[shankar.balan]

Originally Posted by mac187

uch a celebrated sportsman of India, does he deserve a decent farewell match? Its bad that Dravid and Laxman didnt get one, now Sachin too doesn't get a farewell match! Is it just that we dont have the culture to celebrate sportsman like other countries like Aus, Eng etc.

ces retirement.

We in India don't have the culture of appreciation for some of the most deserving and important categories of people in our country. Teachers, Soldiers, Public Service people and Sportspersons.

We can only mindlessly worship our religious icons, worthless idiot celebrities like those dam fool actors, actresses, beauty queens who cavort about ( with a good dose of lechery thrown in) and of course the scum politicos, specifically of the dynastic rule oriented variety.

These traits cut right across this nation of India as of now, regardless of language, faith, origin or state.

[MrinalSinha]

Originally Posted by amalji

I'm happy that Sachin retired not because I want to see him go but because, people who doesn't even have the ability to clean his bat stop blabbering about how bad Sachin is batting at the moment. He was one of a kind. For me, cricket will never be the same without him.

It's not just the runs that he scored that made us watch him. But, it's the way he scored those runs and the passion and genuine love he had towards cricket. Maintaining that passion for 23 years is no easy job. Most of his fans became a fan of him even before he hit his first century. The way he played was at a different level compared to the batsman of his generation.

+1

Cricket doesn't remains the same anymore. Sachin was the reason becuase of which 90% people in 90's and 2000's started playing cricket. On tough pitches, against tough oppositions, with weak team - he shouldered on and on and on. I remember a discussion I had with one of my team mates when Australia visited us in 99. We were usually 2 or 3 down before we got to 50 - be it tests or odis. He is and will remain the best batsman I have seen playing. Against England when got 76, his defense was so beautiful against Monty that I took the day off to watch him play. No one can replace him as the best batsman ever.

[MrinalSinha]

Originally Posted by shankar.balan

Just a query and submission.

How many matches in all different formats and types did Don Bradman, Viv Richards, Gavaskar and others play in total each and how many runs in total did each of them score vis a vis SRT?

While I don't want to take away anything from SRT I believe he probably must have played a lot more cricket overall in the last 23 years than the others named above did in their entire lives.

Here you go -

For International matches -
Mat Inns NO Runs Ave 100 50
Sunny + Viv + Don 593 745 76 35471 53.02 99 175
Sachin 658 773 73 34081 48.69 100 162

For All 1st Class matches

Mat Inns NO Runs Ave 100 50
Sunny + Viv + Don 1740 2307 245 111702 54.17 226 544
Sachin 927 1089 113 49140 50.35 140 241

PS - Collectively Sunny, Viv and Don played 67 years to accumulate the runs

[carboy]

Originally Posted by MrinalSinha

Here you go -

For International matches -
Mat Inns NO Runs Ave 100 50
Sunny + Viv + Don 593 745 76 35471 53.02 99 175
Sachin 658 773 73 34081 48.69 100 162

Statistics in terms of international 100s or 50s or 1000 wkts etc are really meaningless. Tests and ODIs are so different that clubbing their stats together makes no sense whatsoever. For wickets it was started by some stupid journalist for Murali. For 100s it was started by some stupid journalist for Sachin.


Don obviously is so ahead of the pack that it would be silly to compare him with the other 3. Also I have not watched Don play but have watched the other 3.

Each of the 3 have their own strengths
- No one could destroy an attack like Viv. He did to good attacks what Sehwag does to poor attacks. He was a little bit weak against spin. It would have been very interesting to watch Viv play someone like Warne.
Viv had a bad end of career - his career average shrunk a lot during the end phase.
- Gavaskar was mentally the strongest of the 3, I think.
- I consider SRT the better batsman than Gavaskar but Gavaskar probably used his talent better than SRT. SRT also was destructive in his youth - but not so much as Viv. But SRT was far better against spin than Viv.

[faustus77]

Hi everybody
Here is an excellent cartoon from Amul on ST's greatness.
Regards

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Defau...&ViewMode=HTML

Carboy hi
That is why Viv was termed as king.
A not too well known fact about him.
He had to seek pysichiatric help so that he could face bowlers.I dont remember whether he needed the help for spin or fasst bowlers.
Regards

[chevelle]

A must read article from Times of India. It came straight from Horse's mouth a.k.a Sachin Tendulkar. This should put all the rumors to rest

[bbhavan]

Also I have not watched Don play but have watched the other 3.


Dear friend,


So if you have not seen Bradman play,how can you evaluate him?

1.on basis of statistics?

2. Or from the opinion of others?

Pls dont compare players of different generations.

Each player has his own strenghts and weaknesses, and pls leave them with that and just enjoy their game,

[shankar.balan]

Nice stats - would have been lovely to have these on an excel sheet.

Am I right that all of the other three players put together did not get an opportunity to play as many matches as did Mr SRT?

Or am I reading something wrongly here?

Thanks

Originally Posted by MrinalSinha

Here you go -

For International matches -
Mat Inns NO Runs Ave 100 50
Sunny + Viv + Don 593 745 76 35471 53.02 99 175
Sachin 658 773 73 34081 48.69 100 162

For All 1st Class matches

Mat Inns NO Runs Ave 100 50
Sunny + Viv + Don 1740 2307 245 111702 54.17 226 544
Sachin 927 1089 113 49140 50.35 140 241

PS - Collectively Sunny, Viv and Don played 67 years to accumulate the runs

[carboy]

Originally Posted by bbhavan

Pls dont compare players of different generations.

Why not?

Even if you don't want to compare the raw stats of 2 people of different generations, you can compare their stats with their contemporaries.
In this comparison, Bradman was nearly 50% or more better than his contemporaries. No other batsmen has this kind of advantage over their contemporaries.

Originally Posted by bbhavan

Each player has his own strenghts and weaknesses, and pls leave them with that and just enjoy their game,

Feel free to do this. However, I am going to compare and contrast players all the time. That's one of the thrills of a spectator sport for me. Otherwise next step would be to say "Each team has it's strength and weaknesses - let's stop worrying about who wins and who loses". And it goes downhill from there till I stop watching cricket all together.

[M35]

Thank you Master for entertaining us,the true cricket lovers, all these years.Wish to see him play in Tests for another couple of years more.After Sachin's retirement we certainly lack quality in our batting department. Apart from Virat and Rahane to some extend, we have no quality left especially in conditions away from sub-continent even in ODIs.

Its high time that the selectors need to think differently and get rid of those flat track bullies and start searching for Sachins/Dravids/Gangulys in the crowd. We are a big cricket loving nation and are not short of quality and skillful cricketers.

[bbhavan]

Originally Posted by carboy

Statistics in terms of international 100s or 50s or 1000 wkts etc are really meaningless.

Originally Posted by carboy

Even if you don't want to compare the raw stats of 2 people of different generations, you can compare their stats with their contemporaries.
In this comparison, Bradman was nearly 50% or more better than his contemporaries. No other batsmen has this kind of advantage over their contemporaries.

Dear friend,

I am confused, after seeing your above two posts. Are you saying that statistics need to be considered or not?

Originally Posted by carboy

Feel free to do this. However, I am going to compare and contrast players all the time. That's one of the thrills of a spectator sport for me. Otherwise next step would be to say "Each team has it's strength and weaknesses - let's stop worrying about who wins and who loses". And it goes downhill from there till I stop watching cricket all together.

Even I have the same doubt. If by statistics and comparison, one can assess the strength of each team, then what is the need of the match? The winner is already there with his figures.

Or in a lighter note, what was the need for Bradman to play so many test innings, even after knowing that he is well above his peers?

bbhavan.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by bbhavan

Dear friend,

I am confused, after seeing your above two posts. Are you saying that statistics need to be considered or not?

May be you did not understand the first post you quoted. I am not saying no of 100s is a meaningless stat. I am saying 'international 100s' i.e. no of Test 100s + no of ODI 100s is a meaningless clubbing together of 2 stats when individually considered is meaningful.

Originally Posted by bbhavan

Even I have the same doubt. If by statistics and comparison, one can assess the strength of each team, then what is the need of the match? The winner is already there with his figures.

Because teams change regularly, playing conditions change, players skills increase/decrease etc.
However, if I want to find out which was the best team of the last 10 years, I am going to use stats.

Originally Posted by bbhavan

Or in a lighter note, what was the need for Bradman to play so many test innings, even after knowing that he is well above his peers?

So you are saying if somebody is really good - he should just quit?
I really don't see your point.

As I said you feel free not to compare players. I am going to continue doing doing so.

[harry10]

For me SRT is the best batsman i had seen playing in my lifetime. Period.
A nice article by Bhogle.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine...ry/598770.html

[ashokrajagopal]

Waking up a sleeping thread, please forgive if I am annoying.

Who is this Sumit Chakraberty who wrote that article Tendulkar's last hurrah.. ? He terms the only contribution from Sachin for the World cup India won was the 85 against Pak.
In fact I am sick and tired of all those who say that.

These were Sachin's scores in the WC.
28, 120, 38, 27, 111, 2, 53, 85, 18

The 120 against England : the great Indian bowling couldnt defend 338 runs that the batsmen posted.
The 111 against SA : Sachin got out in the 40th over and scorecard read 267/2. And India got bundled for 296.
Guess I do not have to talk about the QF match against Aus and SF against Pak.
And still he contributed nothing ??

People who say that would have sidelined Kapil Dev's 175* if indeed zimbambwe managed to score 267 runs.
It is a team game brothers. And Sachin Tendulkar has contributed to his team more than anybody else has done for any team.