Sachin Tendulkar: stats analysis June 7, 2010

Master of the game

Sachin Tendulkar has such staggering numbers in both Tests and ODIs that it's conceivable some of those records may never be broken
  shares 125

A criticism that is sometimes levelled at talented cricketers is that their numbers didn't do justice to their ability. That certainly can't be said for Sachin Tendulkar, who has achieved truly staggering stats over a glittering career that is 20 years old and still going strong. That he was a precocious talent was known even before he played his first international game; even so, not many could have imagined that he would score more than 30,000 international runs and would be closing in on 100 international hundreds by 2010.

Perhaps the most impressive of several praiseworthy features about his career has been his sheer consistency. Since 1990, Tendulkar has played more than three Tests in a year 19 times, and in 17 of those years his annual average has been more than 40, and 12 times over 55. Of the 36 series of three or more Tests that he has played in, 20 times his average has exceeded 50, and only six times has it dropped below 30.

The first three years of Tendulkar's career weren't all that productive, but he'd already played enough innings to make the cricket world sit up and taken notice: his first Test century, an unbeaten 119 against England, saved India from defeat, while his 114 in Perth had all the experts gushing over his sheer class. During those early years his problem was a lack of consistency - his highest score in five innings immediately after his first Test hundred was 21.

Soon, however, that problem was conquered, and the result was stunning: he averaged almost 60 from 1993 to 1996, and more than 63 in the six years after that. The form dipped for a while as various injuries hampered him, but since 2007 Tendulkar has been outstanding once again, with 12 centuries in his last 32 Tests.

Tendulkar's Test career
Period Tests Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Till Dec 1992 20 1085 37.41 4/ 4
Jan 1993 to Dec 1996 26 2021 59.44 6/ 11
Jan 1997 to Dec 2002 59 5705 63.38 21/ 20
Jan 2003 to Dec 2006 29 1779 44.47 4/ 7
Jan 2007 onwards 32 2857 58.30 12/ 12
Career 166 13,447 55.56 47/ 54

During that six-year period from January 1997 to December 2002, Tendulkar was unquestionably the best batsman in the world, handling pace in Australia and South Africa as effectively as he did spin in Sri Lanka. And then, of course, there was the epic 136 against Pakistan in Chennai which, unfortunately for him, wasn't enough to take India to victory against Pakistan.

In only 59 Tests he managed 21 centuries - an average of one every 2.81 matches. His average during this phase was well ahead of the second-placed Andy Flower, who led a string of batsmen who averaged in the md-50s.

Best Test batsmen between Jan 1997 and Dec 2002
Batsman Tests Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Sachin Tendulkar 59 5705 63.38 21/ 20
Andy Flower 41 3464 56.78 9/ 18
Matthew Hayden 35 3054 56.55 12/ 10
Rahul Dravid 62 5178 55.08 14/ 25
Aravinda de Silva 38 3134 54.98 12/ 9
Inzamam-ul-Haq 49 3740 51.94 12/ 15
Jacques Kallis 63 4447 51.70 11/ 25
Ricky Ponting 57 3916 50.85 14/ 14

Unfortunately for Tendulkar, his best period coincided with one where India had a poor bowling attack, especially overseas, and a batting line-up that tended to crumble quite often on tours. In 69 Tests between the beginning of 1993 and the end of 2001, India won 23, but only three of those came abroad. During this period, Tendulkar contributed almost 20% of all runs scored off the bat by India, and more than 21% when they played in Australia, South Africa, England, New Zealand or the West Indies. From 2002 onwards, there were many more batsmen contributing - Rahul Dravid, Virender Sehwag and VVS Laxman weighed in consistently both home and away, which significantly reduced the dependence on Tendulkar: he has contributed only 14.30% of the team runs since 2002. With the bowling attack getting stronger as well, Tendulkar has been a part of 15 away Test wins during this period, and 32 wins in all in these eight-and-a-half years.

Tendulkar's contribution to the team
Period Tendulkar's runs Team runs Percentage
Till Dec 1992 1085 9122 11.89
Jan 1993 to Dec 2001 6334 32,048 19.76
Jan '93 to Dec '01, in Aus, SA, NZ, Eng, WI 1783 8368 21.31
Jan 2002 onwards 6028 42,140 14.30
Overall 13,477 83,310 16.18

A standout feature of Tendulkar's career has been his tendency to save his best for the greatest team of his generation. Few batsmen have consistently got the better of Australia over the last two decades, but Tendulkar is clearly one of them. His two stunning hundreds on his first tour to Australia announced him as a special talent, while his Boxing Day century in 1999 showed the gulf between him and the rest of the Indian batsmen. Later in his career some of the others - Laxman and Sehwag, especially - also showed their liking for the Australian attack, but Tendulkar is the one player who has sustained his performances against Australia for 20 years.

Highest Test averages against Australia since 1990
Batsman Tests Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Sachin Tendulkar 29 2748 56.08 10/ 11
VVS Laxman 24 2204 55.10 6/ 10
Virender Sehwag 15 1483 51.13 3/ 7
Brian Lara 31 2856 51.00 9/ 11
Kevin Pietersen 12 1116 50.72 2/ 7
Richie Richardson 14 1084 49.27 4/ 4
Graham Thorpe 16 1235 45.74 3/ 8
Shivnarine Chanderpaul 17 1303 44.93 4/ 8

Tendulkar's Test average in Australia is marginally higher than his average against them at home, while six of his ten hundreds against them have come in Australia.

Best Test averages by overseas batsmen in Australia since 1990 (Qual: 750 runs)
Batsman Tests Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Virender Sehwag 7 833 59.50 2/ 3
Sachin Tendulkar 16 1522 58.53 6/ 5
VVS Laxman 11 1081 54.05 4/ 3
Rahul Dravid 12 972 48.60 1/ 5
Jacques Kallis 12 915 45.75 2/ 5
Brian Lara 19 1469 41.97 4/ 4

Out of the 271 innings he has played in Tests, 220 have been at the No. 4 slot, where he has amassed more than 11,000 runs at an average exceeding 57. With a cut-off of 2500 runs at that position, only five batsmen have a higher average. And 41 of his 47 hundreds have been scored at this slot, with four coming at No. 5 and two at No. 6.

Best No. 4s in Test history (Qual: 2500 runs)
Batsman Innings Runs Average 100s/ 50s
Everton Weekes 57 3372 63.62 11/ 17
Jacques Kallis 130 6943 61.99 25/ 31
Mahela Jayawardene 133 7287 59.72 24/ 24
Mohammad Yousuf 60 3373 59.17 11/ 13
Greg Chappell 86 4316 59.12 15/ 19
Sachin Tendulkar 220 11,239 57.34 41/ 45
Javed Miandad 140 6925 54.10 19/ 31
Denis Compton 86 4234 53.59 13/ 20
Inzamam-ul-Haq 98 4867 52.90 15/ 21
Brian Lara 148 7535 51.25 24/ 31

One of the criticisms levelled against Tendulkar has been his relative lack of runs in second innings: he averages only 42.76 in all second innings, and 36.72 in the fourth innings. However, that also means he has been exceptional in the first innings, thus setting up games for India. He averages 62.88 in all first innings for the team, and 71.72 in the first innings of a match. His overall first-innings average is among the highest: among the batsmen with 4000 such runs, only six have a higher average.

The ODI master
Tendulkar has set some pretty awesome records in Tests, but some of his ODI stats are arguably more staggering. His career aggregate is currently more than 4000 ahead of his nearest competitor, and it'll certainly go up even further by the time he retires. As an opener, he has scored almost 15,000 runs at an average touching 49, which is the highest for openers who've scored at least 2500.

Like in Tests, Tendulkar has also raised his game against the Australians in one-day internationals, scoring more than 3000 runs against them - the only one to do so - at an average of more than 46.

Best ODI batsmen against Australia since 1990 (Qual: 750 runs)
Batsman ODIs Runs Average Strike rate 100s/ 50s
Aravinda de Silva 24 997 49.85 83.43 2/ 6
Hansie Cronje 39 1364 47.03 73.05 2/ 9
Sachin Tendulkar 67 3005 46.23 85.12 9/ 14
Lance Klusener 26 794 44.11 87.34 0/ 5
Kumar Sangakkara 28 1134 43.61 74.80 1/ 8
Jonty Rhodes 55 1610 40.25 77.92 0/ 10
Brian Lara 51 1858 39.53 76.58 3/ 15

Tendulkar has already stated that he will play the 2011 World Cup, and if his past record at the tournament is anything to go by, opposition bowlers will have plenty to worry about. He has already played five World Cups so far, averaging almost 58 in 36 matches. With the format guaranteeing each team at least six matches, Tendulkar has an excellent chance to become the first batsman to score 2000 World Cup runs.

Best performers in World Cups (Qual: 1000 runs)
Batsman Matches Runs Average Strike rate 100s/ 50s
Viv Richards 23 1013 63.31 85.05 3/ 5
Sachin Tendulkar 36 1796 57.93 88.21 4/ 13
Herschelle Gibbs 25 1067 56.15 87.38 2/ 8
Sourav Ganguly 21 1006 55.88 77.50 4/ 3
Mark Waugh 22 1004 52.84 83.73 4/ 4
Ricky Ponting 39 1537 48.03 81.06 4/ 6
Javed Miandad 33 1083 43.32 68.02 1/ 8
Brian Lara 34 1225 42.24 86.26 2/ 7

And here's further proof of Tendulkar's ability to rise to the big occasion: he averages more than 55 in tournament finals, with six hundreds in 39 games. There was a period, between 1999 and 2004, when his big-match form deserted him, but he hit back strongly in the CB Series finals against Australia in 2008, scoring an unbeaten 117 and 91, and he followed that with 138 in the final of the Compaq Cup in Colombo last year.

Best performers in ODI tournament finals (Qual: 750 runs)
Batsman Matches Runs Average Strike rate 100s/ 50s
Gary Kirsten 20 1019 67.93 74.16 3/ 7
Viv Richards 18 836 55.73 84.78 1/ 9
Sachin Tendulkar 39 1833 55.54 87.41 6/ 10
Matthew Hayden 17 760 50.66 73.14 1/ 6
Dean Jones 30 1064 48.36 73.12 1/ 8
Aravinda de Silva 24 930 44.28 88.06 2/ 6
Sanath Jayasuriya 39 1613 42.44 98.35 2/ 13
Marvan Atapattu 26 969 40.37 70.01 2/ 6

Some of the important records that stand in Tendulkar's name:
Tests

One-day internationals

S Rajesh is stats editor of Cricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • zxaar on June 10, 2010, 22:55 GMT

    @ fadooo "Its not fair to compare batsman from across eras, especially since the introduction of helmets. " -------------------- You correct about comparing across the era but wrong in suggesting that in modern era batting is easy. Along with helmets we now have computers too where batsman's single twitch is analyzed and a single flaw is exploited. We have no way of knowing how bradman would have stood against such scrutiny. Plus bowlers in last 20 years have been much ahead of what you had in bradman's time. Shoab, lee warne murali akram, mcgrath, donald all these are too good. We have no way of knowing how much bradman would have survived against all these. Anyway comparing across eras is not good. Bradman was no uno of his time. Sachin is num uno of his time.

  • rtmohanlal on June 10, 2010, 22:25 GMT

    I have to say I would support Fadooo here...I cannot support at all meaning less critics like pradeepplasantha and syedarbabahmed as their words convey only blind frustration.But at the same time just because Sachin is the most complete batsman IMO of the post helmet era, there is a big IF as to whether he is the all time best or atleast 2nd behind Bradman.This is because pre helmet era posed all together different challenges.Not only one needed super cricket skills, but super courage too.That's why with due respect to his greatness, i doubt whether Sachin could have been as succesful with cent percent surety.And that's exactly why I rate a proven master like Viv Richards & 99.96 avg: Bradman slightly above Sachin even though Sachin comes as the best even in expert IT analyst like Ananth Narayan's analysis.As we all know we cannot statistically measure this courage factor.So proven people like Viv Richards definitely have an edge here.

  • Alex10 on June 10, 2010, 15:08 GMT

    @SyedArbabAhmed ... perhaps you can define (i) match winning innings & (ii) winning tournaments. FYI, SRT helped Ind win ICC WC in 2002. Tournaments other than the World Cup matter. Check his record in those: for tournament finals, note down, just for starters, 138 vs SL in 2009 and 117* & 91 vs Aus in 2008 (all 3 are away innings). His 2009-10 ODI perfs that qualify as matchwinning for me: 163*, 46, 138, 96*, 200* ... look-up cricinfo for a fuller info on those! Finally, Anwar, Jaya etc. winning more trophies that SRT ... are you serious?

  • HP_75 on June 10, 2010, 8:22 GMT

    @shams, mate you're now clutching at non-existent straws by referring to away records! (1) Pls read my prior post on Away - Home performances...Tendulkar's Away performances easily trump Lara, Ponting, Inzamam. (2) Outside the subcontinent too Tendulkar's Test record is superior to Lara. Lara in Aus is av 42 with 4 100s, 4 50s; Sachin is av 59 with 6 100s, 5 50s. Lara in Eng is av 49 with 4 100s, 6 50s; Sachin is av 62 with 4 100s, 6 50s. Lara in NZ is av 37 with 1 100s, 3 50s; Sachin is av 50 with 2 100s, 5 50s. Lara in Ind is av 33 with 0 100s, 2 50s; Sachin in WI is av 48 with 1 100s, 5 50s. Lara in SA is av 47 with 2 100s, 5 50s; Sachin is av 40 with 3 100s, 3 50s. Further, while I too was mesmerized by Lara's 2001 run in SL, that came against the pre-doosra Murali! Aside from that series, Lara was hardly a major contributor in overseas series. And his 375 and 400* (both at home) were WRs, but both came on dodo-dead pitches (boring draws) & only served to inflate his numbers.

  • ramanzdaredevils on June 10, 2010, 5:58 GMT

    @pradeepplasantha, etc., U guys remind me a story.. There was once an International Frog exhibition. All the coutries' Frogs were put in glass cases covered with a lid.. but the Indian ones weren't.. when the Judge was amused.. the presenter said.. dont worry they are Indian.. even if a Frog tries to climb and jump out the others will hold its legs and PULL it to ground.. Had Sachin been born in Australia/England/NZ.. Sachin would have been in the same group as Sir Don, if not better.. Please don't even talk about Ponting in the same class as Sachin.. Hes been a person with personality disorder.. Imbiciles like you can only harp about the world cups and other trophies that Sachin couldn't WIN for India.. What u guys doing is comparing 11 Vs 1.. Ponting WON 3 world cups.. but work out the statistics and his contributions to the team... Australia won those cups not JUST because of Ponting.. but because of other players.. McGrath, Warne, Hydos, Gilchrist.. Y do u choose to ignore this?

  • Rohan1 on June 10, 2010, 2:22 GMT

    @shams,HP_75-Outside the subcontinent and away from home against the major Test playing countries: Aus,SA,NZ,Eng. SRT : 92 inn. 4501@52.95, 15 100s BCL : 91 inn. ,3984 @44.26 ,11 100s….Oops, this is getting embarassing now.you know shams, this is actually an understandable problem of yours. Lara at his flashy best was awesome and possibly tendulkars equal. But overall, all aspects, all the time ,different conditions, locations, bowlers etc…Tendulkar is in a different league. As close to a combination of Gavaskar and Richards you will ever hope to find.

  • Rohan1 on June 10, 2010, 2:02 GMT

    HP_75.dont bother about shams. like i said ,he will studiously pick and chose whatever data suits him after sufficient filtering..and discard whatever doesnt. Tenduklar was rated the 2nd best batsman of all time behind Bradman using an Icc model which also factors in several things. OF course ,you are right in that there are so many factors which go into a model, many of which are subjective and depends on the person creating the model. BUT still the icc model which shows Tendulkar as 2nd best of ALL time (with lara barely figuring in the top 10) is ignored for some other set of stats....this is the entire mode of operation of these ppl. like others have said- the basic point is that overral Tendulkar is MILES ahead of the pack...so the only hope is to filter away and get some combinations wherein others may have similar or better stats...you can apply the same approach to ALi,Pele,Federer etc....but of course it reveals more about the individuals mindset than anything else.

  • Rohan1 on June 10, 2010, 1:57 GMT

    lara avg. well below 50 in Aus, NZ, SA, Eng.The ONLY place lara has done better than tendulkar is SA, and that too post Donald. Anyone who has watched cricket will be aware of how pathetic lara was against donald at his peak..again, tendulkars avg suffers there coz of his first 91 tour, whereas lara only improves post donald in the 2000s.and of course u conveniently forget murali in 01 was hardly post murali.also check murali vs any good lefties. In other places "outside the subcontinent" lara avg. vs Aus:41.97, Eng:48.76, NZ: 36.9…You know…you are only further suceeding in letting me know how poor lara really was. Lara indeed seems to be a home town bully who pumped up his stats in the juicy mid 2000 period….hmmm…you know the more you keep dissecting stats the more you will find 3 stats in favor of tendulkar for 1 stat in favor of lara, that's in Tests. In ODIs -forget it. Overall -forget it…

  • Rohan1 on June 10, 2010, 1:53 GMT

    @shams.as per the icc tendulkar was the 2nd best batsman of all time behind bradman. these rankings used a similar model to what u refer to....lara was barely in the picture..im sure you are aware of this fact.

  • Shams on June 10, 2010, 1:34 GMT

    @HP_75 "any cricket connoisseur worth his salt would acknowledge that in the 1990s, Lara, Tendulkar and Steve Waugh were far more impactful than Gooch, Richardson and Miandad...and yet ICC ratings (according to you) put Gooch and richardson on top!"

    Did you miss the point where I said that since player's ratings start from 0, players making debut in late 80s and 90s would be at a slight disadvantage in the 90s averages compared to others who debuted earlier?

    However when you take entire career averages, it evens out for all players. As expected Bradman is far ahead of everyone else in that despite having played fewer matches than some of the others.

    The Batsmen-Bowlers averages is the next best thing we have to actual player v player stats. It is strange that against Donald, Wasim, Waqar, etc Lara is still ahead in terms of average despite being conceived to be pathetic against pace!!! (btw, I did not post those stats here)

  • zxaar on June 10, 2010, 22:55 GMT

    @ fadooo "Its not fair to compare batsman from across eras, especially since the introduction of helmets. " -------------------- You correct about comparing across the era but wrong in suggesting that in modern era batting is easy. Along with helmets we now have computers too where batsman's single twitch is analyzed and a single flaw is exploited. We have no way of knowing how bradman would have stood against such scrutiny. Plus bowlers in last 20 years have been much ahead of what you had in bradman's time. Shoab, lee warne murali akram, mcgrath, donald all these are too good. We have no way of knowing how much bradman would have survived against all these. Anyway comparing across eras is not good. Bradman was no uno of his time. Sachin is num uno of his time.

  • rtmohanlal on June 10, 2010, 22:25 GMT

    I have to say I would support Fadooo here...I cannot support at all meaning less critics like pradeepplasantha and syedarbabahmed as their words convey only blind frustration.But at the same time just because Sachin is the most complete batsman IMO of the post helmet era, there is a big IF as to whether he is the all time best or atleast 2nd behind Bradman.This is because pre helmet era posed all together different challenges.Not only one needed super cricket skills, but super courage too.That's why with due respect to his greatness, i doubt whether Sachin could have been as succesful with cent percent surety.And that's exactly why I rate a proven master like Viv Richards & 99.96 avg: Bradman slightly above Sachin even though Sachin comes as the best even in expert IT analyst like Ananth Narayan's analysis.As we all know we cannot statistically measure this courage factor.So proven people like Viv Richards definitely have an edge here.

  • Alex10 on June 10, 2010, 15:08 GMT

    @SyedArbabAhmed ... perhaps you can define (i) match winning innings & (ii) winning tournaments. FYI, SRT helped Ind win ICC WC in 2002. Tournaments other than the World Cup matter. Check his record in those: for tournament finals, note down, just for starters, 138 vs SL in 2009 and 117* & 91 vs Aus in 2008 (all 3 are away innings). His 2009-10 ODI perfs that qualify as matchwinning for me: 163*, 46, 138, 96*, 200* ... look-up cricinfo for a fuller info on those! Finally, Anwar, Jaya etc. winning more trophies that SRT ... are you serious?

  • HP_75 on June 10, 2010, 8:22 GMT

    @shams, mate you're now clutching at non-existent straws by referring to away records! (1) Pls read my prior post on Away - Home performances...Tendulkar's Away performances easily trump Lara, Ponting, Inzamam. (2) Outside the subcontinent too Tendulkar's Test record is superior to Lara. Lara in Aus is av 42 with 4 100s, 4 50s; Sachin is av 59 with 6 100s, 5 50s. Lara in Eng is av 49 with 4 100s, 6 50s; Sachin is av 62 with 4 100s, 6 50s. Lara in NZ is av 37 with 1 100s, 3 50s; Sachin is av 50 with 2 100s, 5 50s. Lara in Ind is av 33 with 0 100s, 2 50s; Sachin in WI is av 48 with 1 100s, 5 50s. Lara in SA is av 47 with 2 100s, 5 50s; Sachin is av 40 with 3 100s, 3 50s. Further, while I too was mesmerized by Lara's 2001 run in SL, that came against the pre-doosra Murali! Aside from that series, Lara was hardly a major contributor in overseas series. And his 375 and 400* (both at home) were WRs, but both came on dodo-dead pitches (boring draws) & only served to inflate his numbers.

  • ramanzdaredevils on June 10, 2010, 5:58 GMT

    @pradeepplasantha, etc., U guys remind me a story.. There was once an International Frog exhibition. All the coutries' Frogs were put in glass cases covered with a lid.. but the Indian ones weren't.. when the Judge was amused.. the presenter said.. dont worry they are Indian.. even if a Frog tries to climb and jump out the others will hold its legs and PULL it to ground.. Had Sachin been born in Australia/England/NZ.. Sachin would have been in the same group as Sir Don, if not better.. Please don't even talk about Ponting in the same class as Sachin.. Hes been a person with personality disorder.. Imbiciles like you can only harp about the world cups and other trophies that Sachin couldn't WIN for India.. What u guys doing is comparing 11 Vs 1.. Ponting WON 3 world cups.. but work out the statistics and his contributions to the team... Australia won those cups not JUST because of Ponting.. but because of other players.. McGrath, Warne, Hydos, Gilchrist.. Y do u choose to ignore this?

  • Rohan1 on June 10, 2010, 2:22 GMT

    @shams,HP_75-Outside the subcontinent and away from home against the major Test playing countries: Aus,SA,NZ,Eng. SRT : 92 inn. 4501@52.95, 15 100s BCL : 91 inn. ,3984 @44.26 ,11 100s….Oops, this is getting embarassing now.you know shams, this is actually an understandable problem of yours. Lara at his flashy best was awesome and possibly tendulkars equal. But overall, all aspects, all the time ,different conditions, locations, bowlers etc…Tendulkar is in a different league. As close to a combination of Gavaskar and Richards you will ever hope to find.

  • Rohan1 on June 10, 2010, 2:02 GMT

    HP_75.dont bother about shams. like i said ,he will studiously pick and chose whatever data suits him after sufficient filtering..and discard whatever doesnt. Tenduklar was rated the 2nd best batsman of all time behind Bradman using an Icc model which also factors in several things. OF course ,you are right in that there are so many factors which go into a model, many of which are subjective and depends on the person creating the model. BUT still the icc model which shows Tendulkar as 2nd best of ALL time (with lara barely figuring in the top 10) is ignored for some other set of stats....this is the entire mode of operation of these ppl. like others have said- the basic point is that overral Tendulkar is MILES ahead of the pack...so the only hope is to filter away and get some combinations wherein others may have similar or better stats...you can apply the same approach to ALi,Pele,Federer etc....but of course it reveals more about the individuals mindset than anything else.

  • Rohan1 on June 10, 2010, 1:57 GMT

    lara avg. well below 50 in Aus, NZ, SA, Eng.The ONLY place lara has done better than tendulkar is SA, and that too post Donald. Anyone who has watched cricket will be aware of how pathetic lara was against donald at his peak..again, tendulkars avg suffers there coz of his first 91 tour, whereas lara only improves post donald in the 2000s.and of course u conveniently forget murali in 01 was hardly post murali.also check murali vs any good lefties. In other places "outside the subcontinent" lara avg. vs Aus:41.97, Eng:48.76, NZ: 36.9…You know…you are only further suceeding in letting me know how poor lara really was. Lara indeed seems to be a home town bully who pumped up his stats in the juicy mid 2000 period….hmmm…you know the more you keep dissecting stats the more you will find 3 stats in favor of tendulkar for 1 stat in favor of lara, that's in Tests. In ODIs -forget it. Overall -forget it…

  • Rohan1 on June 10, 2010, 1:53 GMT

    @shams.as per the icc tendulkar was the 2nd best batsman of all time behind bradman. these rankings used a similar model to what u refer to....lara was barely in the picture..im sure you are aware of this fact.

  • Shams on June 10, 2010, 1:34 GMT

    @HP_75 "any cricket connoisseur worth his salt would acknowledge that in the 1990s, Lara, Tendulkar and Steve Waugh were far more impactful than Gooch, Richardson and Miandad...and yet ICC ratings (according to you) put Gooch and richardson on top!"

    Did you miss the point where I said that since player's ratings start from 0, players making debut in late 80s and 90s would be at a slight disadvantage in the 90s averages compared to others who debuted earlier?

    However when you take entire career averages, it evens out for all players. As expected Bradman is far ahead of everyone else in that despite having played fewer matches than some of the others.

    The Batsmen-Bowlers averages is the next best thing we have to actual player v player stats. It is strange that against Donald, Wasim, Waqar, etc Lara is still ahead in terms of average despite being conceived to be pathetic against pace!!! (btw, I did not post those stats here)

  • zxaar on June 9, 2010, 23:04 GMT

    @SyedArbabAhmed "I am not talking about taking the last winning single, I am saying "WINNING" and Saeed Anwar, Mark Waugh, Sanatch Jaysura etc they all have won more matches for their teams and have won more international trophies than Tendulkar." ----------------------------- Can you tell us about a single match where any of these guys scored more than 95% of runs and then took at least 9 wickets to win that match and tournament. If not that these stats team stats and not admissible for comparing batsman. For example saying that Ponting won world cup is also not admissible because he did not take indian wickets needed to win that world cup. You want to compare batsman then talk about run scored and averages not about team achievement. Now answer how much runs ponting scored in that world cup. What is his away average. How many centuries he scored. Lol.

  • fadooo on June 9, 2010, 21:57 GMT

    While I am a big fan of Tendulker, I would hesitate to call him the best ever after Bradman. Its not fair to compare batsman from across eras, especially since the introduction of helmets. Tendulkar is without a doubt the best batsman of the helmet era, and perhaps is likely to remain for a long time to come. But the introduction of helmets has changed the entire challenge of batting. I have seen tendulkar being hit on the head at least twice (by shoiab akhtar and allan donald). Both of those blows might have been enough to end his career in the bygone eras, both by inflicting severe injury and then shattering his confidence. It remains a point of conjecture how he would have fared against 4 man pace attacks in an era with no bouncer limits without helmets. If you look at tendulkar's record, his average against South Africa which has had the best pace bowling attack in the last two decades is pretty mediocre. Therefore gavaskar was a better test batsman in my opinion.

  • Gupta.Ankur on June 9, 2010, 18:18 GMT

    Its so disturbing to note that no topic on Tendulkar can go without belittling him......if you don't like him............leave him........simple.

    Why can' there be respect shown to the most successful batsman in history and IMHO the greatest cricketer........Is is it so impossible to do?

    Cricinfo must ban such sick comments......

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 16:45 GMT

    so, shams..as per the previous stats you are right. lara outside the subcontinent and outside home as well is so bad he cannot even be considered a great batsman...let alone be compared to the incomparable tendulkar...you were actually wrong in saying ppl would be pleasantly surprised, i am shocked. pls stop running down poor lara anymore

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 16:43 GMT

    The bottom line is that it is only injurys which enabled other batsmen to catch up stat wise to tendulkar. as kapil dev says you can only compare tendulkar to bradman...lara,ponting and co. are in a rung below...Only the injurys from 03-07deprived tendulkar of what would otherwise have been for him what it was for lara,ponting,dravid,kallis and co...a sheer run feast...for those who have followed tendulkars career , this is a known fact. for those who havent (or prefer to ignore this fact) the stats given in the article are crystal clear.

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 16:35 GMT

    Hey Shams. Outside the subcontinent. AusSRT: 30 inn, 1522@58.53 6 100s BCL:35 inn, 1469@41.97 4 100s EngSRT: 22 inn, 1302@62.00 4 100s BCL:27inn, 1268@48.76 4 100s SASRT: 22 inn, 835@39.76 3100s BCL:18 inn, 841@46.72 2100s NZSRT: 18 inn, 842@49.52 2 100s BCL:11 inn, 406@36.9 4 100s The ONLY place lara has done better than tendulkar is SA, and that too post Donald. Anyone who has watched cricket will be aware of how pathetic lara was against donald at his peak..again, tendulkars avg suffers there coz of his first 91 tour, whereas lara only improves post donald in the 2000s In other places "outside the subcontinent" lara avg. vs Aus:41.97, Eng:48.76, NZ: 36.9…You know…you are only further suceeding in letting me know how poor lara really was. Lara indeed seems to be a home town bully who pumped up his stats in the juicy mid 2000 period….hmmm…you know the more you keep dissecting stats the more you will find 3 stats in favor of tendulkar for 1 stat in favor of lara, that's in Tests. In

  • HP_75 on June 9, 2010, 15:45 GMT

    As for your dodgy Oz decisions against Lara...some more rigour please! Could you pls be more specific (year and test match) about your references? I'm not saying you're cooking up stuff! :) But those of us with cricket video libraries would like to check some of those...coz I have massive amounts of Lara and Tendulkar footage, and I'm convinced no one had it as bad against the Aussies as Tendulkar. And certainly no Aussie umpire ever openly expressed regret about past decisions the way Harper has about the Sachin "shoulder before wicket!"

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 15:43 GMT

    shams.as per the very same ICC model, Tendulkar is the 2nd best batsman of all time behind the Don...with Lara way off...but for some reason best known to you that seems to have escaped your attention. Also, as usual, your so called reasoning is skewed when u mention that a batsman who has a start will have a higher avg. this is nonsense. actually a poor start will only bring down future averages. lara had a couple of good yrs in the 90s which help him up the avgs. also ,when it suits u it becomes "pre doosra murali" etc...this is pathetic. murali had hardly mastered the doosra in laras 01 tour.also check out muralis record vs ANY top leftie. Again except for the 03-07 period tendulakr has handled murali without any prob whatsoever....if you had actually followed tendulkars career you would have realised this...but u prefer to filter stats in order to pick and chose whatever stats suit you..and ignore the rest...

  • HP_75 on June 9, 2010, 15:36 GMT

    @shams - the limited datapoints I was referring to were the Batsman vs Bowler averages, which are based on just a few innings in many cases...as you acknowledge too. As for your ICC ratings, since when have they become sacrosanct in determining the worth of a player??? Who is even aware of the specifics of its methodology??? (If you are, then pls put up a full post outlining the process, so its merits can be debated) In any case, some of its results are pretty ABSURD - any cricket connoisseur worth his salt would acknowledge that in the 1990s, Lara, Tendulkar and Steve Waugh were far more impactful than Gooch, Richardson and Miandad...and yet ICC ratings (according to you) put Gooch and richardson on top!

  • Shams on June 9, 2010, 14:27 GMT

    @ HP_75 Try away averages considering outside the subcontinent, you might be a bit surprised ;) In any case raw numbers can be misleading, shouldn't one take into account the bowling quality one faces? That's what the ICC Ratings does (among other factors). An average for Tests does reveal a difference between Lara and Tendulkar. Some of Tendulkar's numbers are inflated by Zim, Ban and pre-doosra-Murali-SL stats - the weakest bowling attacks over last 20 yrs.

    Btw, neither Tendulkar nor Lara is the best batsman in Tests all-time. That goes to Don Bradman. Others like Sobers, Headley, Richards, Pollock, etc can lay claim to be better than them.

    Regarding inns/100, I'm sure there are a handful of players who have a better rates than both Tendulkar and Lara. Does that necessarily make them better than both? I think Hayden, Pietersen, Sehwag etc have high or higher inns/00 too. Does that make them better. What about past greats like Sobers, Headley, Hammond, Hobbs, etc?

  • CricFan24 on June 9, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    SRT is King everywhere. Lara and Ponting are hometown bullys.

  • Shams on June 9, 2010, 14:13 GMT

    @HP_75 "if all one has are scant or highly limited datapoints" The ICC Averages are limited data points?

    "Are you aware of how MANY times Tendulkar's innings were cut short in Australia by dodgy decisions" Is it any different for Lara? Add to that dismissals by Healy for a stumping and a S. Waugh for a catch when there was some doubt as to they had the ball in the hand / it touched the ground. Just like Tendulkar was hard done by against Aus, so was Lara. In his last tour down under he was given out to iffy decisions first 3 out of 4 inns alone.

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 14:06 GMT

    @SyedArbabAhmed..as per your frustration levels and ridiculous line of reasoning it is clear that i have completely and utterly demolished your so called argument. as per your logic Every batsman who was part of a WC winning team is better than Tendulkar...LOL, when will ppl come to their senses?!

  • Neil247 on June 9, 2010, 13:31 GMT

    Former Pakistan Test player and chief selector, Salahuddin Ahmed said Indian batting maestro Sachin Tendulkar only deserves the title of Asian 'Bradman' and no one else can match up to his charisma. "People talk about so and so is or was the Asian Bradman but to my mind there is no doubt this title only belongs to Sachin Tendulkar. The rest are like made in Taiwan," .... This would apply to ALL batsmen since Bradman. There is Bradman and then there is Tendulkar.........then a long way away...the rest.

  • pradeeplasantha on June 9, 2010, 13:16 GMT

    @mrgupta,ramanzdaredevils ...ect, Great Heat coming now....remember mate just scoring runs, don't become anyone a legend as i always say...Look Ponting Test averages almost same Sachin, but what he acieved to the country is ,getting bloody three word cups plus piles of Major trophies....what about Sachin o...but he scored runs...good for him..what about Akram...Aravinda...Vivi Richards...Macrath,SK,Loyd....ect even other palyers who not in the world cup winning team,they at least contributed winning matches ....again Sachin is great interms of Quantitative value not quality cricket...that does know even many indians.....but problem also some indian fans honestly like to see sachin performance though they loose the match.then fair enough for Sachin...i think those Sachin's big fansneed to grow up......

  • HP_75 on June 9, 2010, 12:46 GMT

    @SyedArbabAhmed:- And at least get your facts, right! On ICC tourneys: Tendulkar helped India win the ICC Champions Trophy in SL in 2002, and also helped India reach the finals in 1999 and the semifinal in 1998 (both times knocking out Australia en route). He was instrumental in India reaching the World Cup final in 2003 (tournament MVP) and the WC semifinal in 1996 (tournament top scorer). He was not lucky enough to have a world-class bowler (a McGrath, Akram, Warne, Donald or Ambrose) or an agile fielding unit to back up his efforts with the bat...and you know it (even if you won't admit it)! And so even a Mark Waugh or a Damien Martyn are World Cup winners, while Tendulkar - the SINGLE BEST player over ALL World Cups in the last 20 years - is still not.

  • SyedArbabAhmed on June 9, 2010, 12:23 GMT

    @HP_75: I am not talking about taking the last winning single, I am saying "WINNING" and Saeed Anwar, Mark Waugh, Sanatch Jaysura etc they all have won more matches for their teams and have won more international trophies than Tendulkar. @Rohan1: Stats does not show that who is a bigger match winner, certainly not tendulkar as he chokes when it comes to win a match more ofter than not. I see blind supporter of tendulkar keep repeating themselves and have no answers, so there is nothing left to talk.

  • mrgupta on June 9, 2010, 10:41 GMT

    @ pradeeplasantha: Do you think by winning t20 WC Dhoni becomes better than Tendulkar? Then are you aware how many Runs Dhoni scored when we won the WC? Sachin has been the Top Scorer in WC twice (More times than anybody else), he was the top scorer in IPL 2010 too, has scored more centuries in Finals than anybody else. From your list of players Lara, AB, Sanga, Mahela and Viru have never been a part of any WC squad. So are how can these be match winners? Mahela's test batting avg outside Sri-Lanka is 40. Sachin has not been a part of WC winning team, big deal, then neither been Kallis, Sir Hadlee, Sir Ian Botham, Chappel Brothers, Donald, Lara, Gooch or even Ambrose, Walsh. They too are bunch of loosers? get real, understand the context and stop comparing T20 with real Cricket. Grow Up!

  • HP_75 on June 9, 2010, 10:30 GMT

    And check this revealing information about performing in RIVALS' BACKYARDS! (the bigger test of a player, right?)

    Test match Away - Home Records: Sachin: Away: avg 55, 26 tons, 30 fifties. Home: avg 56, 21 tons, 24 fifties. Lara: Away: avg 48, 17 tons, 22 fifties. Home: avg 59, 17 tons, 26 fifties. Ponting: Away: avg 48, 16 tons, 18 fifties. Home: avg 60, 21 tons, 33 fifties. Inzamam: Away: avg 46, 13 tons, 26 fifties. Home: avg 54, 11 tons, 20 fifties.

    (@SyedArbabAhmed - Inzi was a terrific player, but he had his weaknesses...and he averaged only 31 in Aus, with just 1 ton)

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 10:08 GMT

    pradeeplasantha,you sound exactly like SyedArbabAhmed, pls read my comment addressed to him. In FINALS :SRT averages 56 with 6 hundreds in ODI finals v Ponting's 38 or Lara's 28....Pls also check out the stats i mentioned to him...then wake up

  • HP_75 on June 9, 2010, 10:03 GMT

    Btw, on being a MATCHWINNER. In GAMES WON: Sachin: ODIs: Av of 58, 33 100s 56 fifties. Tests: Av of 67, 19 100s & 17 fifties. Lara: ODIs: Av of 62, 16 100s 42 fifties. Tests: Av of 61, 8 100s & 16 50s.

    Both mighty impressive! But remember that Lara for ~10 out of his 16 years had a bowling unit of Ambrose, Walsh, Bishop, et al to help him win games. Whereas Tendulkar had to rely mainly on Kumble, Prabhakar and Srinath in the 90s (Harbhajan and Zaheer came in the 2000s). So who had a bigger mountain to cllimb to ensure a win???

  • ramanzdaredevils on June 9, 2010, 9:37 GMT

    @pradeepplasantha.. When Sachin scores big and gets out just before finishing the game ala 175 Vs Australia, 2009 @Hyderabad.. imbiciles like you blame Sachin for not finishing the game in India's favour.. Wot u guys forget is that there are so called other LEGENDS who still left the job undone.. Such are the expectations of the Nation.. Fulfilling the expectations of a billion people for 20 years.. with APLOMB is what makes Sachin the Legend.. Conquering pressure can only be the yardstick to put Sachin miles and miles ahead of the contemporary cricketers.. Fianlly.. its not sachin lovers that bring down other players.. but hypocrites like you... when Sachin is praised its not an insult to other players.. the so called OTHER LEGENDS.. ala Viru, Dhoni, Harbhajan themselves claim to have learnt a mountain from the GOD of Cricket... If they rn't ashamed to admit.. why r u.. Stop passing futile comments and degrade the legends of the game.. Learn to respect others before u expect to b...

  • SyedArbabAhmed on June 9, 2010, 9:31 GMT

    @ Rohan1: U failed to demolish my claim, u talked about stats read 1st comments of others as well, tendulkar went not out more than lara, so your claim is rejected here.

    And can any blind supporter tell me how many world cups Tendulkar has won? or any other major competition? Javed, Inzamam, Ponting, Viv, even lara with his pathetic team won ICC champions trophy they all have won it but Tendulkar, what else I have to prove? nothing, everything is proved.

  • HP_75 on June 9, 2010, 9:19 GMT

    @SyedArbabAhmed - In case you didn't notice, Sachin OPENS in ODIs...he does not bat at 5,6 or 7 like Bevan, Hussey, Yuvraj or Inzamam. He OPENS because he can negotiate the new ball as well as attack it, and build a sound foundation for the team. Whereas the other batsmen above (including Inzamam) were either not good enough to open consistently (over 100s of games) or not brave enough to accept that challenge (You and I both know that Inzamam, Yousuf and Younis Khan very often slipped down the order and sent younger batsmen up front!) So you need to compare Sachin to OPENING batsmen like Saeed Anwar, Mark Waugh, Gilchrist, Hayden, etc...NONE OF WHOM stayed till the last run was scored either! Because that is the JOB FOR THE NO. 5,6 AND 7 BATSMEN!!!

  • zxaar on June 9, 2010, 9:18 GMT

    @ pradeeplasantha on (June 09 2010, 07:11 AM GMT) "o stop harping on that Sachin didn't have a support to win matches rather he had but he just coundn't do it" ------------ we have just seen the support , how many matches these supports won without sachin,sehwag,dravid in recently finished t20 world cup and in previous. Let these supports learn to play anything that bounces then we will talk whether they could really contribute anything or not.

  • zxaar on June 9, 2010, 9:10 GMT

    @shams "Having the most number of centuries doesn't necessarily mean you are the best batsman" --------------- if you care to read my comment again i never said tendulkar is better because he has more centuries . I said tendulkar is better because he has more centuries per innings 17% compared to lara at 14%. What it means that if they both played 100 ininings sachin would hit 17 centuries and lara would hit 14. Clearly showing that sachin is more consistent in playing long innings. Plus he does not get out so much as lara too.

  • HP_75 on June 9, 2010, 9:05 GMT

    @shams - as for your insistence on the adverse impact of McGrath-Warne on Tendulkar...have you REALLY watched Border-Gavaskar encounters??? (I have...since they started in 1996 in Delhi). Are you aware of how MANY times Tendulkar's innings were cut short in Australia by dodgy (sometimes clearly biased) umpiring?? Let me recount some for you: 1) 1999 Test 1 in Adelaide - wrongly given out in the 60s at bat-pad off Warne. 2) Same test - "shoulder before wkt" to McGrath in 2nd innings...even Harper admits he regrets that. 3) 1999 3rd test sydney - LBW to McGrath despite significant doubt about height. Still he was Man of the Series with 1 100 and 2 50s @ avg. 46. 4) In 2003 (though McGrath absent) Aussie umpires struck again...out off a no-ball in Brisbane. 5) In 2008 - given out on 70+ at Perth vs. Lee despite serious height issue (replays showed ball going over). And despite all that the man averages 56 in Aus! With 6 100s!

  • Sumeet.Gupta on June 9, 2010, 9:05 GMT

    if Mcgrath and Warne could not play together against Sachin, is it Sachin's fault? He didn't ask them to not turn up together so that he could feast on the (supposedly)"B" grade bowling of the Aussies? Guys, arguments can be made for and against and stats can be moulded in any shape to suit your respective arguments. But one thing's for sure - what makes Sachin special is not only what he does on the field. His off-field demenaors are the ones that make him stand apart. A very humble, down to earth sporstman who was/is never involved in any controversy. His mannerism, his ability to present himself is what is truly astonishing. Hats off to the genius and let us all, for once keep our differences aside and enjoy his feats, for they are very precios and very rare. Peace

  • HP_75 on June 9, 2010, 8:38 GMT

    @shams - if all one has are scant or highly limited datapoints, it means no definitive conclusion can be drawn based on that evidence...not that conclusions MUST ALWAYS be drawn just because one has gleaned some data.

  • pradeeplasantha on June 9, 2010, 8:06 GMT

    Contd....also it very sad & Pathetic taht some ppl try to let other indian players down to put sachin over the moon.it is really disapointing beacuse India won after years ICC T20 WORLD CUP 2008.was tehre Sachin in taht team.NOOOO.so why don't you give a bit of respect To Dhoni ,Harbajan,VIRU ...ect they at least bought to india major ICC trophy after Kapil dev.so stop harping on that Sachin didn't have a support to win matches rather he had but he just coundn't do it. so conclude , intermrs quantitative factors sachin is first but interms qualitative cricket he is behind from other legends.....

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 7:55 GMT

    SyedArbabAhmed,the only thing you are revealing here is your utter lack of cricketing knowledge. check out Tendulkars 4th inn stats compared to laras. lara has the one "finishing" inn. , so does tendulkar. please check out the number of times a batsman has come in when the team required 250+ runs to get and stayed there till the end. in both tests and ODIs...Tendulkar must be the only batsman in history who is expected to have a bombastic opening, steady the middle inn AND then finish...ridiculous.When u ppl grow up and get real???

  • pradeeplasantha on June 9, 2010, 7:11 GMT

    let me clear again Sachin is a great batsman interms of quantitative aspects beacuse he scored most runs,most years.that is it.what that tells you he has bulit a great & massive individual career.am i correct.so next step, are we looking to compare those with what he managed to produce as a team... !)how many times as he contributed to win a world cup or even a major competition???? 2) centuries that he made & did they impact to win the matches(Ratio) 3) leadership ability, how many matches did he lead india then what is the result...ect.i mean master of the game, doesn't it mean how much you can score???? or it maens what you can produce to make impact to the game.that is why Ponting,great Vivi ,Lara..then Aravinda,Steve Waugh,even now adays KP,Mike hussy ,sanath,AB,Mahela,viru,Dohni ...are regarded as genuine match winners.....

  • SyedArbabAhmed on June 9, 2010, 4:41 GMT

    @ josephg1981: Even Sachin admitted that he needs to work on that (Finishing the game), winning the game is one of the most important aspects of any cricketer and Sachin lacks in that very badly, unlike other greats, how many times you can name other legends to choke in the end when they were set? may be once or twice in their whole career but when it come Sachin it bound to happen more than expected.

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 4:03 GMT

    So, as several ppl have mentioned , here is your modus operandi: 1)for whatever reasons it cannot be admitted that Tendulkar is the best.2) overrall clearly it is a no contest 3)so, filter out and pick and chose whatever stats suit u (a similar procedure can be carried out with pele, jordan, woods, federer etc) 4) post such figures ,all the while studiously avoiding those (dozens ) which do not suit your premise....expect to be taken seriously...as mentioned the above stats do show that Tendulkar fit was clearly the best- Tests,ODIs, home,away- you name it....It is ONLY from 03-07 that his contemporaries lara,dravid,ponting,kallis etc have caught up. For some reason this obvious fact doesnt seem to strike u.

  • Rohan1 on June 9, 2010, 3:58 GMT

    @shams.im afraid you've got it the other way around. the stats presented here are infact much more holistic and wholesome than yours. you are the one who is attempting to deconstruct the "whole into various parts" in the hope that at least some of the parts may coincide with your initial bias. But the strange part is that after effectively admitting that the stats you use are dicey ,you still attempt to use the same or particular filters of your chosing.! the point is very simple..lara and others may (or may not)depending on what stats u use and how u interpret them ...may have marginally superior stats in certain highly filtered situations of your own chosing...but on the whole Tendulkar is the Best by a country mile...it's not even a close call for 1st place...the rest are all vying for 2nd

  • vimalan on June 9, 2010, 2:35 GMT

    the frustrated souls here as well..even after Rajesh has clearly written an article on stats, still the so called geniuses come up with their own stats to prove that Sachin is not great, selfish, etc. Guys, why you waste your time. Do you think your constant posts will hide the truth ? If you want to read more about the overall stats, read some of the articles written by Ananth under IT Figures here in cricinfo, especially the one called "The best batsman, across years and formats" dated Jan 4, 2010. If you still have any questions after reading that, lets discuss. If not, just accept the genius of this man and enjoy him till he last.

  • CricFan24 on June 9, 2010, 1:53 GMT

    As "chakdesachiin" says, the best part after the satisfaction of watching Tendulkar break record after record is watching the frustration of his so called critics grow endlessly-and desperately watch them hammer away on statsguru or some such format to obtain some filter to suit them! Most hilarious is the indian sounding screen names used to attempt to hide the fact that they are from "neighbouring" countries which are genetically and intrinsically programmed to resist an indian being hailed as the Greatest.

  • Shams on June 9, 2010, 1:35 GMT

    @bentarm "personal opinion .so dont start loading your guns.." I like how you put it: everyone is entitled to their opinion and we should respect that. Just like Tendulkar is the best for you, over the last 15 or so years Lara is the best for me.

    Regarding being injured 2003-2007 this is hardly true as Tendulkar played quite a few matches (when he was match fit) and averaged well in 2004, 2005 and 2007. He only missed out in 2003 due to poor form. Lara was injured (broken elbow) in the series against India in 2001 just after the SL series which was clealry visible. I have hardly brought that up before now. Add to that Lara's constant tussles with the board and his careless attitude for most of the late 90s, that's the reason for Lara's poor numbers during that period.

    "lara NEVER had a patch where he was that far ahead of the rest" Lara was clearly ahead till 1996. In the 2000s quite a few competitors emerged.

  • Shams on June 9, 2010, 1:30 GMT

    @Rohan1 on (June 08 2010, 13:55 PM GMT) "studiously filtered by you to suit your particular theory" Certainly not, I've searched for these stats from my intuition of watching all these players and I'm glad stats agree with me. I'm certainly aware there will be stats where Tendulkar trumps Lara: they are after all the best of their generation and a fine line separates them. However, as is evident, imho, Lara was better than Tendulkar in Tests which is the case I present.

    Most certainly what I started out with is the avergae against Australia mentioned in this article doesn't tell the entire story for Tendulkar.

  • Shams on June 9, 2010, 1:09 GMT

    @HP_75

    "a) the failing of the "Batsman A vs. Bowler B" stats posted earlier, and" This is not entirely fruitless, as presence of (a quality) bowler A in a bowling attack means the overall bowling attack was much stronger. In the absence of stats for player-player comparison, this is the next best thing we have.

    "b) the statistical insignificance of inadequate datapoints" Agreed, but we can only compare with what we have!

  • Shams on June 9, 2010, 1:06 GMT

    @HP_75 Even in the 90s Tendulkar was behind. 1990s average ratings: G.A. Gooch = Mchs: 45, Avg: 759.49 R.B. Richardson = Mchs: 41, Avg: 751.51 B.C. Lara = Mchs: 65, Avg: 740.22 Javed Miandad = Mchs: 23, Avg: 729.35 S.R. Waugh = Mchs: 89, Avg: 726.78 S.R. Tendulkar = Mchs: 69, Avg: 691.17 A.R. Border = Mchs: 45, Avg: 679.73 I.V.A. Richards = Mchs: 13, Avg: 671.38 R. Dravid = Mchs: 34, Avg: 671.18

    Players who made their debuts in the late 80s and 90s are lower down as they had to start from zero compared to some of the other players.

  • Shams on June 9, 2010, 1:03 GMT

    @zxaar on (June 08 2010, 09:15 AM GMT) "mcgrath also said that Lara was much easier to bowl to" Pity Lara still managed to score all those runs even with McGrath around. The onyl series McGrath really trouble Lara was 1995 in Aus. Before/after that though Lara got out to him, he scored his runs.

    "You keep harping about not outs" Where have I harped about it, I believe that is the only comment here I mention about it.

    "lara 34 centuries in 232 innings (that 14% innings are centuries) . Tendulkar 47 centuries in 271 innings" Care to post the avergae number of runs per inns also. Having the most number of centuries doesn't necessarily mean you are the best batsman.Is Ponting with 39 centuries Australia's best batsman, or Kallis for SA or Jayawardene for SL?

  • Sach_is_Life on June 8, 2010, 23:51 GMT

    Contd...that means a player who misses a Test match is going to loose 1% of his points that means the points they are going to loose depends on their overall points b4 that particular match..That means one might lose more points than other just bcaz he's injured..How fair was that? So..there are loop holes in every rating system..we can manipulate anything ..So, Just relax...BTW, do u know that SRT was declared as 2nd best test batsmen of all time by Wisden where as Lara is in 10th position ..So stop whining and hav fun ..:d

  • Sach_is_Life on June 8, 2010, 23:30 GMT

    @Shams..Dude..when u spend this much time 2 prove that some X is better than Sachin..y dont u spend few more mins 2 read ICC ranking's frequently asked Questions?That might actually answers ur doubts na..? anyway lemme tell u y SRT's career avg rating is less than Lara ...SRT has slow start 2 his career where as Lara had great start.U can see that in this article itself ..SRT's avg after 1st 20 tests is mere 37.4 and ICC's FAQ number 10 says this : "One way of assessing a player would be to calculate his 'average rating' over his career though of course this could penalize a player whose long career included a slow start. So it's over to you to make your own judgment by comparing graphs, or by other more subjective means" and Q 13 says "A player who misses a game for his country is treated exactly the same whatever the reason (injury, poor form etc). In Tests, the player loses 1% of his points for each match missed, and a similar amount in ODIs." to be contd..

  • zxaar on June 8, 2010, 22:02 GMT

    @Neil247, you noted correctly even if someone to say that tendulkar has more not outs, he is saying that he is better batsman. Here is why: Lara was not out in 6 of his innings out of 231 he played. What it means is that 97% of times opposition was able to claim his wicket. While tendulkar was not out 29 times of his 271 this means opposition claimed his wicket 89% of time. This is big difference. And add to this everytime he remained not out he lost a chance to finish his hundred. Since 17 % of sachin' innings are hundreds, I could argue that sachin lost on at least 3-4 hundreds there. In anyway not outs only say sachin is better here.

  • doesitmatter on June 8, 2010, 17:17 GMT

    may be for many people too but for me he is numero uno for the sheer reason that him scoring runs makes me forget the problems in life for that few hours ..no stats can match that..and even when you use stats to compare let us say with BCL his closest competitor it is just a point difference here and there..but like i said in making me happy BCL is no match to SRT..personal opinion .so dont start loading your guns..

  • Rohan1 on June 8, 2010, 14:04 GMT

    Till dec 2002 BCL:157 inn, 7572 @49.49,18 100s, SRT :169inn,8811@ 57.58, 31 100s CLEARLY, Till Tendulkar was fit he was in a different league. From 2003-07 lara (and everybody) piled on the runs. NOTE just about everybody.Essentially, Tendulkar missed out due to injurys on the biggest run fest on the last few decades. Note also the gap between Tendulkar and the rest at his relatively injury free peak. lara NEVER had a patch where he was that far ahead of the rest.

  • Rohan1 on June 8, 2010, 13:55 GMT

    shams and co. You just don't get it do you? what you are doing is striving furiously to show that at least someone was better than SRT in some facet of the game. This may or may not be the case, since we have seen that the stats you chose are arbitrary and studiously filtered by you to suit your particular theory. However,even if we take it as holding true- what is obtained? That someone did slightly better from A date to B date, vs C bowler, at Home/away, in D(test , ODI, whatever) format, etc etc...get it? Once you start to use this kind of analysis and attempting to deconstruct stats as per your preference, all the while studiously avoiding stats which contradict your theory- there is no end. The whole point is that on a holistic basis SRT is by far and away the Greatest Modern day batsman. It would take an incredible amount of pigheadedness to dispute this fact.

  • Neil247 on June 8, 2010, 13:41 GMT

    shams and co. as we have seen and i have mentioned to you -you can manipulate stats endlessly to "prove" something you have already made up your mind about. these stat tricks have no end....such as the "superstock" mcgrath trick you tried to pull.(i had already explained this to you on youtube)...as with all your other stats of batsman vs bowler, icc rankings, NOs ,etc etc...there are many sides to the story...of which you conveniently filter whatever suits u. the amazing thing is you seem to have got it all stored somewhere and copy/paste it the moment a tendulkar article comes up-seriously something wrong somehwere.

  • pradeeplasantha on June 8, 2010, 13:31 GMT

    also i heard somewhere mentioned though Ponting was in the match,he didn't contribute any thing decent to win world cup final matches, what about 140 runs not out 2003 WC Final ???? i think South affrican Kallis & Sachin in the same boat, they can piles up runs but impact to the game is so little.sorry guys in the modern day cricket we don't care about how much you have scored we care only what have you achived as a team...Sachin you still have a chance to do it.......next world cup 2011.....

  • Neil247 on June 8, 2010, 13:24 GMT

    @shams. and i clearly remember to that Tendulkar was rated the 2nd best batsman behind Bradman using the same ICC type of model that you mention. Lara was way off, nowhere close. As mentioned, strangely your mind only retains what suits you and conveniently "forgets" what doesnt- why i wonder?

  • Neil247 on June 8, 2010, 13:21 GMT

    @shams. do u know what a NO means? means that a batsman was good enuf to be NO.There is a strong line of thought which maintains that if a batsman was allowed to complete his NO innings he would have averaged higher...because he was already in-possibly the toughest part of an innings. So, even if you take a career avg figure 55 (which would actually be on the lower side for a batsman who was in) of 55 that gives Tendulkar well over a 1000 runs more...please stop picking and chosing stats as they suit you and intentionally ignore those that don't(as mentioned we've been through this on youtube, with you going on and on with the same nonsense)- this points to some sort of psychological issue more than anything if you ask me.

  • josephg1981 on June 8, 2010, 13:08 GMT

    SyedArbabAhmed: I find your comments really funny. In Chennai, Sachin got out and others could not finish the job. Blame Sachin. In the '03 WC, Sachin got out and the ones to follow did the job. Again blame Sachin. What do you expect Sachin to do, bro? Open the batting, get 150 in every innings and stay on till the end?

  • pradeeplasantha on June 8, 2010, 13:04 GMT

    @ rachits & surib4u, to be honest, i always say Sachin is a great player, but what i am trying to say what impact can he do to the game.....is anyone saying taht Sachin didn't have enough support to win major competition.that is rubbish, look how many players that india have with massive Averages & Strike rates,look at present dravid,Ganguly,Luxman,Doni,Gambier,Shewag ect then Bowlers like Harbajan,S. Khan then in the past Kapil,Kumble,Srinath ect.....so Sachin had an ample of support....if you look at individual records, sachin is great but but if you compair records with impact to the game,sachin far behind from Great Vivi,Ponting,Lara.....i will give you real example, very first match, that sachin was captain for india against SL, can you believe, he scored a century not out(120 odds) as an oppener but india simply lost the match.....because Sachin looked at his runs but didn't looked at what they needed as a team..... To be continued.....

  • HP_75 on June 8, 2010, 9:58 GMT

    When Donald wrote in 2001 "There's Tendulkar, then daylight, and then the rest" he wasn't going simply by stats. When Warne said (or joked) in 1998 about "nightmares" he didn't need to look up StatsGuru. Bishop says he was the best he bowled to. As does Lee. Steve Waugh said in 1998 we lost to a man, not to a team (and that "we" had Mark and Steve Waugh, Gilchrist, Ponting, Bevan, Warne, Fleming, et al). McGrath said Lara was more flashy, while Tendulkar always seemed in control. Colin Croft includes him in his all-time XI. As did a gentleman by the name of Sir Don Bradman...perhaps you've heard of him! And Ponting jokes that he would need a wheelchair to survive 20+ years of modern day cricket! And the man scores 200* in an ODI in his 21st FREAKING YEAR IN THE SPORT!!! If that's not ONE OF A KIND, then what the heck is???

  • HP_75 on June 8, 2010, 9:36 GMT

    @shams - I'm also surprised that a seemingly smart chap like you doesn't acknowledge a) the failing of the "Batsman A vs. Bowler B" stats posted earlier, and b) the statistical insignificance of inadequate datapoints. Even if bowler C dismisses Batsmen A, the direct benefit is accruing to Bowler B! And even if there are just 6-8 datapoints, conclusions are being presented! How ridiculous to say Sachin is 100 @ 25 vs. Bond when they only played in 2 tests (4 innings) and Bond got him out once!

  • HP_75 on June 8, 2010, 9:22 GMT

    @shams - your ICC ratings stats are career averages. Well, Tendulkar's career spans 20.5 years whereas the other modern batsmen span only 5-16 years (5 for KP and 16 for Lara). Further, Tendulkar was troubled by serious injuries over 3 years: ~2004 to 2006...and if you know your cricket, that was the beginning of the era of BATTING INFLATION...even lesser batsmen were raking in the runs hand over fists, and we had over a dozen batsmen averaging well over 55 (some over 60 and 70)! To get a fairer picture of modern batting, you need to look at ICC ratings in the 1990s separately from the 2000s...and I'm almost certain Tendulkar will turn up best in the 1990s and Ponting in the 2000s.

  • zxaar on June 8, 2010, 9:15 GMT

    @ HP_75, mcgrath also said that Lara was much easier to bowl to. He said if he wanted he could make his (Lara's) life miserable at crease. He said he knew what lara likes and dislikes.

  • zxaar on June 8, 2010, 9:12 GMT

    @Shams ". (Tendulkar over his career has more not outs causing his overall average to be higher than Lara)" ----------------- You keep harping about not outs. Here is another stat lara 34 centuries in 232 innings (that 14% innings are centuries) . Tendulkar 47 centuries in 271 innings which is 17 % of innings. And this is why tendulkar averages higher and this is why tendulkar is better batsman because he scores more consitently (17% to 14%). No matter how much you worship Lara, numbers only say tendulkar is better.

  • SyedArbabAhmed on June 8, 2010, 9:08 GMT

    I agree that he is one of the very best the world has ever seen, but there is a big "BUT" he has won less matches than Lara, Inzaman, Ponting, Javed Miandad etc for his team than them.

    1- The writer talked about "epic 136 against Pakistan in Chennai", but what happened? India lost the match as he played a bad short against Saqlain when India could have easily won the match.

    2-People praise so much about his inning in 2003 world cup against Pakistan, but when he got out, devastating opener sehwag, captain Ganguly both were out and India still needed more than 100 runs to win, thanks to Dravid and Yuvraj who won it in the end for India.

    3-In Sharjah when he played out standing innings against Australia, which is well known even today, but again guess what India lost that match too.

    I can give you many many examples like that when he played well but India lost the match, which was not the case with other greats that I mention earlier.

  • Quazar on June 8, 2010, 9:00 GMT

    To me, Sachin was much superior to Lara against pace (better technique, balance and overall comfort), but Lara was more destructive against spin. Further, Sachin was / is far superior in ODIs, while Lara has the edge in Tests. Also, Lara had a significant natural advantage being a LH bat...90% bowlers were right-arm over the wicket and used to bowling at RH bats (probably 75%-80% of batsmen)...and so hardly anyone was swinging it both ways vs. Lara...most just angled it across him...so his defence was less tested than a RH bat. Overall, Sachin has been a better batsman, and easily the more committed cricketer, while Lara was more artistic / flamboyant to watch and also undeniably produced some incredible Test innings (such as the 153*, that whole 1999 series vs. Aus, the 277 in Sydney, and the 2001 series vs. SL).

  • HP_75 on June 8, 2010, 8:40 GMT

    Ha! Some Lara fans here think the rest of us were asleep on occasions when he was brutally exposed, especially against pace! He was ANNIHILATED in tests in Pakistan vs. Waqar, Akram and Saqlain in 1997 - just 129 runs in 6 innings; and check out on youtube how Waqar toppled him over like a tailender with a gorgeous yorker! Then he was manhandled again by Mohammed Zahid (young and fast) as well as Glenn Mcgrath in the triseries in Aus in 1998...looked incredibly amateurish vs. both! And I still remember how Donald & co. neutralized and embarrassed him in 1998 in SA with short-pitched bowling! He managed just 228 runs in 10 innings (5 tests) after hopping around embarrassingly in several innings. And if you saw enough cricket, you would have seen him get hurried and hassled by Akhtar, Lee and other quickies numerous times. As for his match-winning prowess, just check the records - WI only won when they had Ambrose, Walsh and Bishop in the team...without them, WI / Lara won zilch!

  • Neil247 on June 8, 2010, 7:56 GMT

    Ha,Ha- poor anti tendulkar sods.they know completely that Sachin is the Greatest batsman of the modern age. so what do they do? they try to "filter" away this fact. "lets take Tendulkar in A format, vs B opposition, in C location, against D bowler and lets see"....oh, someone else had done better!? Yeah, great !see, see....see my proof! Tendulkar aint that great afteral!!.....LOL...There is only one batsman who can be compared to Don Bradman- and that is Sachin Tendulkar...the others, great though they be in their own rights..will always come into the next bracket.

  • Shams on June 8, 2010, 7:53 GMT

    Overall ICC rating career averages:

    All-time top 2: D.G. Bradman : Matches: 52, Avg: 855.37. J.B. Hobbs : Matches: 61, Avg: 799.00.

    Modern Players: B.C. Lara = Mchs: 131, Avg: 783.55. K.P. Pietersen = Mchs: 60, Avg: 752.00. R.T. Ponting = Mchs: 144, Avg: 748.77. R. Dravid = Mchs: 139, Avg: 748.02. M.E.K. Hussey = Mchs: 50, Avg: 741.68. S.R. Tendulkar = Mchs: 166, Avg: 724.18. M.L. Hayden = Mchs: 103, Avg: 723.27. J.H. Kallis = Mchs: 137, Avg: 718.46.

    Note the ICC rating scale is super-linear. 750 to 775 is a bigger gap than 725 to 750.

  • Shams on June 8, 2010, 7:52 GMT

    @ CricFan24

    "The initial innings are the same"

    I did some search on the cricinfo statsguru and found the first 18 inns for Lara and Tendulkar: BC Lara 18 Inns - 666 Runs @ 39.18 (Entire career had 46 inns vs McGrath) SR Tendulkar 18 Inns - 662 Runs @ 36.77

    Though the runs are almost the same, Lara has a not out which causes his average to be quite a bit higher. (Tendulkar over his career has more not outs causing his overall average to be higher than Lara)

  • clr3 on June 8, 2010, 7:31 GMT

    and a lot of ppl say...he scores only in the first innings and not in the second.well again.a hundred is a hundred.well if only scoring hundreds in the second innings is that tough.and its so easy to score hundreds in the first innings.why is it that no other batsmen does it as many times as sachin does it.and a person was actually crazy enough to say.sachin scored 175 and he still dint finish it. wow.175 in a ODI is wat a lot of cricketers don achieve before they retire.chasing 350 a man scores half the runs.and the team does not finish it.happy he is still playing for that team.and u can blame only him.who got the team close to winning and not others who dint even contribute.is that wrong to actually bring the team as close as possible.maybe he should have got out like evry other batsmen and then the team wld b blamed..the world cup is not wat sachin needs to win for his team.its something the team needs to win for him. they owe him that much.a great cricketer without a worldcup win

  • Shams on June 8, 2010, 7:26 GMT

    @ Gupta.Ankur

    "Tendulkar is the best cricketer and best batsman ever." Most cricket professional cricket pundits will say: Best Cricketer Ever: Gary Sobers Best Batsman Ever: Don Bradman

  • clr3 on June 8, 2010, 7:12 GMT

    hey...u guys got to be joking....u say lara scored better against the top bowlers....and sachin against the so called not the best bowlers....well i don get the point...if your trying to say its easier to score against those bowlers... why cant lara score against them too...and i guess...its a well known fact that...westindian bowlers were better then indian bowlers in the 90's.....so its not true lara always played with a weaker team....lara is definietly a great batsmen...one of my fav too...but then talking abt scoring 400 and 500....both matches ended in a draw.... wats the point... and finishing games... well as many have already said...its a team game....guess its high time we stop complaining abt the man who just fails in the finals...and start analysing players who don contribute at all...and i don get the point of sachin not scoring in the finals...wat happens to all the other matches...if again.if it is easier to score in those matches...why does not every other player do it.

  • Shams on June 8, 2010, 6:57 GMT

    @Gupta.Ankur

    CalvinHobbes123 pointed out stats for most of the bowlers you mention

  • Shams on June 8, 2010, 6:53 GMT

    @CricFan24

    We should then also compare Lara and Tendulkar with an equal number of inns played and see who comes out on top? After all we don't know what would have happened in the extra inns Lara might have played ;)

  • Shams on June 8, 2010, 6:50 GMT

    @Bhavya Nagar Again those are aggregate stats without respect to quality of bowling faced. A better measure will be the average ICC ratings (which take all sorts of factors into account while producing the ratings) for Tendulkar, Lara, etc. I'm know Lara will come out ahead in that measure.

  • Gupta.Ankur on June 8, 2010, 5:47 GMT

    And are you guys kidding me? McGrath and Warne were the only good bowlers? in Sachin's prime?

    Did Donald,Pollock,Walsh,Ambrose,Wasim,Waqar,Imran Khan,Murali play in the 70's?

    Please do not bring out false and malicious statements just to bring-down tendulkar.....

  • CricFan24 on June 8, 2010, 5:14 GMT

    The bottom line as someone said "Tendulkar fit= simply the best"...The above stats reveal this truth in an undeniable and brutal manner....31,000 international runs, 93 Int.Hundreds,All over the world, in all conditions, home and away, against top class bowling for 21 yrs, through several injuries and surgeries.....and he STILL averages as good or better than his contemporaries!!!! As Steve Waugh said in his article Sachin is a "Once in a Century Star"!

  • CricFan24 on June 8, 2010, 5:00 GMT

    @shams etc. what did happen was that there was no diff. in the 1st 18 inn tendulakr and lara played in teams "including" mcgrath. that is all. so, by your own logic we should stop there. it has already been clearly explained that these stats bases are extremely vague and are not head to heads. to go on banging your head on the wall with vague stats in order to "prove" your already preconceived notions is an insult to the intelligence of readers. The sooner you realise that Lara will always be 2nd to Tendulakr the better. othewise as "chakdesachin" said so appropriately, that as long as Sachin is fit it is a no contest....and your frustration levels are only going to immeasurably increase as the Genius continues his immortal run.

  • knowwho on June 8, 2010, 4:55 GMT

    @sifter132 continuing my toughts

    total score 304 runs

    thk his average would be around 48/49 which could have been much higher but for the obivious mistakes.

    next time around in 2004 series played in india sachin was unfit yet he played in the last 2 test. but warne did not play the last test.

    thk he got out for sigle digit scores,which cannot be really discussed.

    thk cricket is a team game and stats is not the only way to measure a batsmans stature.it is not about individual but the team. that wy australia or number one in the game. not just only becuase of macgrath and warne.

    for your kind information do a stats analysis of how the players fared against mcgrath and warne in australia that would give a better idea beacuse as a batsmen it is abroad performance that provides a true measure rather than home performance.

    see bc laras record in australia.he was at his ravaging best in adelaide.

  • Gupta.Ankur on June 8, 2010, 4:51 GMT

    I can't believe people are pulling out all sort of stats to belittle Tendulkar here.........I am sure if Sachin was playing for Aus or Eng no such comments would have been passed....

    No matter what stats you put out...............Tendulkar is the best cricketer and best batsman ever.

  • knowwho on June 8, 2010, 4:47 GMT

    @sifter132 What ever you have said is absolutely true, if blindfoldely look at stats. macgrath and warne played a full test series only two times against sachin. two back to back series in 1999/00 and 2000/01.

    let us see the performance of ur so called macgrath and warne vs sachin. 1st test @ adelaide 61&0 if ur a purist both were notouts (similar sort of things happened to bc lara also) 2nd test @ melbourne 116&52 both decisions were legitimate outs 3rd test@sydeny 45 &4 (the first one was notout wrongly given out)

    total series score 277. was adjudged MOS . probably few australians in that particular series scored atleast 150 runs more than sachin. thnk about why the adjudicatore made him mos.

    in the next series in india 1st test @mumbai 76&65 second innings was a very freak dismissal. 2nd test@kolkatta 10&10 only test in the backto back test series where he failed 3rd test@chennai 126&17 second dismissal was of a noball which umpire failed to spot.

  • on June 8, 2010, 4:20 GMT

    @shams....... opponent runs average sachin aus 2748 56.8 lara aus 2856 51.00

    sachin africa 1415 38.24 lara africa 1715 49.00

    sachin eng 2150 61.05 lara eng 2983 61.82

    sachin nz 1406 52.07 lara nz 704 41.07

    sachin west indies 1328 57.38 lara india 1002 34.00

    lara's avg. against lanks is 86,but he just played 8 tests v/s lanka, whereas sachin played 23 tests v/s lanka.. averaging 58

  • Shams on June 8, 2010, 3:46 GMT

    @varun_akavoor

    "sachin was very successful against warne" who is the batsman that caused Warne to be dropped the only time in his career?

    "he has scored 6 centuries against aussies in australia n 5 50's in tests...he has better avg in australia than kp n anwar" Please count the test matches involving both McGarth and Warne

    "u cannot say sachin is not a match winner" I've not claimed that! But in Tests, Dravid has played a bigger role in Indian victories than Tendulkar since Dravid's debut.

    Comparing stats of recent Indian batsmen in Aus in 2000s: SR Tendulkar 925@66.07 VVS Laxman 1034@64.62 R Dravid 885@63.21 V Sehwag 750@62.50 With so many batsmen scoring runs, what does it say about the bowling attack on offer/battig conditions! In addition, none of the matches involved McGrath-Warne bowling attacks.

    In victories in Aus in 2000s: R Dravid 401@133.66 VVS Laxman 286@71.50 V Sehwag 166@41.50 SR Tendulkar 122@30.50

  • Shams on June 8, 2010, 3:28 GMT

    Just wanted to clarify my previous comments were regarding Tests only, Tendulkar is far better than anyone bar Richards in ODI imho.

    As CalvinHobbes123 pointed out against the best bowlers, Tendulkar was not necessarily better than Lara. Tendulkar has fewer inns in general against some of the better bowlers compared to Lara. The inference is that Tendulkar generally feasted on slightly weaker bowling attacks. This is readily seen in his averages vs Zim, Ban and pre-doosra Murali-SL. Also, Tendulkar had a better all-round batting attack.

    Some say Tendulkar lost form in 2003-2007 which is not entirely true, I think he only had a horrible year in 2003. If you compare with Lara, he too had a lean period between 1996-2001.

    Also, Tendulkar might well have improved his stats against McGrath had he played him more often - but it didn't happen so we don't really know what would've happened, we judge by what did happen.

    @Ravi Kumar Till 1 Jan 97: Tendulkar: 3106@49.30, Lara 3274@55.49

  • zxaar on June 7, 2010, 22:12 GMT

    "How many ICC tournament titles Sachin as helped his team win? " - How many icc tournaments Indian team has won??? Last time i checked he smashed two world records of highest runs in world cup and still indian team failed to win both those cups. Was it sachin tendular who let other team score 350odd runs in finals. And by the way how many teams have chased 350 runs?? And further did you check how many runs he scored in that world cup???. He gave them chance to win world cup by taking them into finals and what does the poor teams give him in return. A lifetime of stupid comments like yours to belittle his achievements.

  • sifter132 on June 7, 2010, 21:45 GMT

    Agree with CalvinHobbes about Sachin v Australia - it's a very misleading stat because he made many of those runs against Australia 'A' calibre bowlers. He's had the great fortune of avoiding McGrath and sometimes Warne too in many of the Aus-Ind series. Of SRTs 10 100s v Aus - only 2(!) have been made vs a McGrath/Warne combo. Tendulkar's great series' v Aus were 1997/98 - No McGrath, so Warne had little support. 2003/04 - No Mcgrath or Warne and 2007/08 - Both Warne and McGrath had retired. No doubt a great player, but lets be real about his record v Australia: he cracked Gavin Robertson, Brad Williams, Nathan Bracken and Andy Bichel more than he did McGrath and Warne.

    From the Cricinfo Statguru, there are only 5 players who average 50 or more in games featuring both McGrath and Warne (minimum 3 games played): Kevin Pietersen - 57.42 Virender Sehwag - 52.71 Saleem Malik - 52.57 Brian Lara - 51.03 Saeed Anwar - 50.60

    Sachin averages 42.28 when McGrath and Warne play together.

  • HP_75 on June 7, 2010, 21:10 GMT

    @a133936 - On ICC tourneys: He helped India win the ICC Champions Trophy in SL in 2002, and also helped India reach the finals in 1999 and the semifinal in 1998 (both times knocking out Australia en route). He was instrumental in India reaching the World Cup final in 2003 (tournament MVP) and the WC semifinal in 1996 (tournament top scorer). He was not lucky enough to have a world-class bowler (a McGrath, Akram, Warne, Donald or Ambrose) or an agile fielding unit to back up his efforts with the bat...and you know it (even if you won't admit it)! And so even a Mark Waugh or a Damien Martyn are World Cup winners, while Tendulkar - the single best player over all World Cups in the last 20 years - is still not.

  • Avid.Cricket.Watcher on June 7, 2010, 20:50 GMT

    I hate petty, childish arguments about A being better than B. So I won't add to that. But one thing that always struck me (still does) about Tendulkar was his sheer class against all types of bowling. Be it high pace (Lee, Akhtar, Tait, Donald, etc.), wrist spin (Warne, Murali, Mushtaq, etc.), seam (McGrath, Pollock, Walsh, etc.) or swing (Akram, Fleming, Cork, etc.). What makes him even more remarkable is his ability to masterfully play pace and bounce (esp in Australia) despite the slow and low pitches on which he grew up, and his short stature (it was quite stunning the way he'd get on top of the ball and punch it powerfully off the back foot, especially in the '90s). Is it any wonder that Brian Lara calls this man a genius (genius knows genius!) and Ricky Ponting (just last year) called him the modern benchmark?

  • Rishindra on June 7, 2010, 20:13 GMT

    The buck Stops at No.4... One of the Greatest Players of All time... All that remains is the WC in 2011 and 100 100s.

  • HP_75 on June 7, 2010, 19:34 GMT

    Forget stats! Just try to get a tape of these to see GENIUS AT WORK: a) 98 at Centurion in '03 vs Akhtar, 2Ws, et al b) 169 at Capetown in '96 vs Donald, Pollock, Klusener, Mcmillan, et al c) 90 at Mumbai in '96 WC vs Mcgrath, Warne, Fleming, et al d) 114 at Perth test in '91 vs. Mcdermot, Reiffel, Hughes, Whitney e) the whole 2001 ODI series vs Aus in Ind where he made 280 runs @ SR of 120 vs. Mcgrath, Warne, Bracken, Fleming - he BLASTED Mcgrath like you wouldn't believe! f) 143 & 134 back-to-back at Sharjah in '98 vs. Warne, Fleming, Kasper, et al g) 45 (yes, only 45!) at Durban in tri-series final '97 vs. Donald, Pollock, Klusener, Bryson, et al - 7 CRUNCHING 4s and 1 SMASHED 6 (pull off Donald) on a greasy fast pitch (just after a shower) - just AWESOME! h) the sensationally MASTERFUL 200* vs Steyn & co. recently, i) the scintillating 160 (Test) and 163* (ODI) vs. NZ in NZ in '09. There are more! But you simply must see the ones above to witness TRUE GENIUS!

  • a133936 on June 7, 2010, 18:44 GMT

    How many ICC tournament titles Sachin as helped his team win?

  • satyachowdary on June 7, 2010, 18:19 GMT

    Sachin is the great, but will never accept that he is the most complete batsman until he's plays a major/is part of a world cup winning Indian Side. This will make sachin complete/greatest batsman.....

  • chandau on June 7, 2010, 18:10 GMT

    lol Lot of Indian comments seem to forget that Lara holds the 1st class (501) and test (400) batting records. Moreover Lara held the test record 10years apart !!! Comparison between the two is like apples and oranges for LHB v RHB is never right. Also Lara played in a weaker team than Sachin but both were failures as captain. Still these comparisons are insane for the real batsmen were way before modern cricket was televised. Uncovered pitches, minimal protection, normal bats, ec., and they still made music with those willows on rainy days. My memory of batsmanship is of Richards walking onto the middle in a floppy hat and hammering Willis over long on :) cheers

  • shashankvaish on June 7, 2010, 17:49 GMT

    he is truely the best....even better than lara n ponting.....not because of the sheer load of runs that he has scored....but because of the peer pressure of being sachin...i billion people chanting ur name ........n those who say he cant win matches for india...they must notice that has arguably the worst bowling line up in the past two decades....spin comes gud only on fourth or fifth day......n pace attack has been horrible except for a few occasions.......n by the way how can we forget lara played till he got 400 n match was a draw due to lack of time...was that not selfishness..

  • rabsusa on June 7, 2010, 17:21 GMT

    Sachin maybe current day master-blaster, but lets not forget in his greatness he still has to break highest individual test score of 400 not out, held incedently by Lara. -R

  • on June 7, 2010, 16:05 GMT

    @halum

    remarkable analysis. i think your research can prove once and for all that lara was a better fighter and a better player. sachin has clearly struggled against the best bowlers of the generation wheras lara has excelled. and sachin has almost never finished off a match for india. he is not good under pressure. eg:175 vs australia 2009, 136 vs pakistan in 99 test.

  • CricFan24 on June 7, 2010, 13:52 GMT

    from the other blog: by ChakDeSachin on (June 07 2010, 06:19 AM GMT) "What's even more satisfying than watching Sachin smash records after records, is watching the frustration of the critics. LOL, poor souls, they have no other way of venting their frustration that they have inside them...." NAIL on the head and hilarious!

  • CricFan24 on June 7, 2010, 13:49 GMT

    @ CalvinHobbes123.Also Lara improved against Mcgrath as he went along. The initial innings are the same. the int 18 inn for Tendulkar include some 6 ridiculous decisions. i.e some 33% of all dismissals. your argument seems to be that Tendulkar wouldnt have improved his stats while lara did...that is an extremely blinkered assumption. PLEASE do not DISTORT stats and filter them out to suit your convenience. For EVERY stat you think you can find in lara's favour I can find TWO in Tendulkars favour. Lara , great though he was - will always be the second best batsman of the generation. and all your desperate stat filtering unfortunately cannot change that fact.

  • CricFan24 on June 7, 2010, 13:46 GMT

    @CalvinHobbes123. Your comments show a fundamental lack of understanding of how stats bases work. 1)if you take averages, then only those runs wherein the bowler got the batsman out are counted2)if you take matches "including" some bowler then even if another bowler gets a particular batsman , the bowler "included" gets credit for that. how stupid is that? in any case try out the stats when Tendulkar was injury free.

  • CricFan24 on June 7, 2010, 13:36 GMT

    1) Sachin Tendulkar 2) Daylight 3)The rest........

  • surib4u on June 7, 2010, 11:56 GMT

    @ pradeeplasantha, Poor analysis boss, sachin didn't play for himself. He played extremely well but others in our team very badly so we lost many matches or tournaments. Did Ricky ponting played that much well to hold three world cups in his career? I think Mcgrath and Warne did more job than him . No team can win with individual performance , only with team effort. India played only few times with team effort in 90's. Thats the reason we lost badly even though tendulkar played extreemly well.There are plenty of examples where tendulkar lead the team to victory to 75% when he got out and still we lost the match.

    Tendulkar is legend, god of cricket and he will win world cup 2011 for us.

  • on June 7, 2010, 11:55 GMT

    quite horrible to read one post saying that tendulkar is one of the greatest bt nt the greatest.To that person who wrote that post, i wud say that if tendulkar averaged less than lara in matches in which Mcgrath or bond or Donald played then don't u think scoring a lot against the less effective (according to u) oz,or SA,or NZ bowlers makes him superior by far to Lara if u go fr comparison of the overall stats?? and to add to that,one can always luk at a video in which Mcgrath himself admitted saying that Tendulkar is more difficult to bowl to then Lara.There is one video of Alan Donald as well saying the same thing.If the bowler himself is saying that then how does that argument can be referred to as one that can support that statemnt Tenedulkar nt the greatest?Tendulkar truly is the greatest cricketer that the world has seen,Sir Don Bradman offcourse is also there who conquers that place as well.

  • on June 7, 2010, 11:12 GMT

    When u see sachin's record from 1990 to 1997,it is awsome. That was the time where the pitches were hard to bat comparing to now, which is now a days being prepared 4 the batsmen. Dravid is also a great match winning player, but when u compare him with sachin, latter is slightly better than the former. Sachin played on difficult pitches than dravid before latter made his debut on 1996. After 1998-99, most pitches even in australia were easy to bat, so he is the best batsmen comparing to dravid.

  • _Rafi_ on June 7, 2010, 9:43 GMT

    Lara had to come at crease when WI are like 20/2 and Sachin has to come when India 150-200\2. Sachin comes when Sehwag, Dravid Gambir already make the platfor. In middle Sachin had Laxman, Azharuddin, Dhoni etc type of batsmen accompanying. So its lot easier to score run. Actually a class batsmen like him has only 2 double(1 agnst BD) means how much time he has got to score big innings. So I cant put him above Lara by judging stats. Sachin imo a run machin precisely a robot who will give his 100 percent everytime but not more or not less. Every team will want to have him. Lara on the other hand a match changer and unpredictable and had to play in more adverse situation. Opposition bowler had to work solely on Lara where they has to distribute their focus on different players while playing against India.

  • CalvinHobbes123 on June 7, 2010, 9:39 GMT

    Sachin vs Lara... In the tests where the best bowlers of the generation played ( 1 bowler from each team. Hv not considered Kumble & Ambrose, as comparison wouldn't have been possible. No bowler from England, coz no one was good enough for a sustained period ) ---

    Tests - McGrath - Sachin 662 runs @ 36.77, Lara 2000 @ 47.61. Donald - Sachin 658 @ 32.9, Lara 681 @ 34.05. Akram - Sachin 395 @ 32.91, Lara 394 @ 30.3. Murali - Sachin 1124 @ 48.86, Lara 1125 @ 86.53. Bond - Sachin 100 @ 25, Lara 237 @ 39.5.

    Sachin's best against Aussies was Aussie widout McGrath.

    ODIs McGrath - Sachin 828 runs @ 36, Lara 1059 @ 48.13. Donald - Sachin 625 @ 24.03, Lara 719 @ 51.35. Akram - Sachin 769 @ 36.61, Lara 1139 @ 40.67. Murali - Sachin 1861 @ 47.71, Lara 891 @ 52.41. Bond - Sachin 62 @ 15.5, Lara 95 @ 23.75.

    Again Sachin's best against Aussies was Aussie widout McGrath.

    The point I wanna make is Sachin is "ONE OF THE GREATEST" but "NOT THE GREATEST".

  • Gupta.Ankur on June 7, 2010, 9:19 GMT

    I can't see Ponting and Lara dominating any list...................i think his critics must take a print-out of this article and paste it on their desks.......

    Sachin you are God Of Cricket.............

  • Gupta.Ankur on June 7, 2010, 9:09 GMT

    Sachin is simply the best batsman and best cricketer ever to have played the game...........

    Critics have been on his case even when he was in his Prime part-1 in the 90's and they are still at it in his Prime Part-2....

    Best of luck to them and let us enjoy this genius....

  • Rohan1 on June 7, 2010, 8:51 GMT

    Most brilliant comment was on the other post along with this lot of articles........... "Posted by ChakDeSachin on (June 07 2010, 06:19 AM GMT) What's even more satisfying than watching Sachin smash records after records, is watching the frustration of the critics. LOL, poor souls, they have no other way of venting their frustration that they have inside them, hence the internet is the only way for them to vent it out..........." couldn't have been more accurate!!

  • vaks on June 7, 2010, 8:16 GMT

    @shams.. lol.....people always find something against sachin....sachin was very successful against warne.......even warne had admitted that bowling to sachin was a nightmare.....sachin was also very successful against mcgrath....he has scored 6 centuries against aussies in australia n 5 50's in tests...he has better avg in australia than kp n anwar......u cannot say sachin is not a match winner.....cricket is a team game,they should play as a team to win the match....take an eg, in 350 runs chase against australia no one played other than sachin......all of them were irresponsible..den hw sachin alone can win match 4 india?

  • on June 7, 2010, 8:01 GMT

    Mind Boggling Figures. That is why HE is called GOD of Cricket.

    I always think, what would have happenned if he had support of bowlers also, would have played more freely

  • srini1088 on June 7, 2010, 7:52 GMT

    read someone stating that sachin didn face mcgrath and warne....lol:)he s playin the aussies form 1990 and u mean he didn face warne and mcgrath...please stop kiddin...no one else would have face them more and handled them netter than Sachin..and the first person to accept this would be SHANE WARNE

  • rachits on June 7, 2010, 7:32 GMT

    pradeeplasantha: no facts or logic, just a rambling notion that sachin is a selfish player...one that is possibly put inside ur head by listening to ur equally less aware colleagues at the water cooler! so wat u r saying is that in all the 29 tests played by tendulkar, McGrath and Warne were missing? Or that he has a way of deciding which runs go in his personal kitty (selfish interests, as u said) and which runs help the team? Basically the almost 14000 runs were scored for his own interest and did not contribute to the team at all...and the 5000 odd runs made by pieterson went straight to the team score! and sachin is the reason we even made it to the WC final...wat abt the other 10 players...why cudnt they win us ONE match? its this side of us indian fans that sometimes disgusts me...for over a decade we sat on his shoulders n he carried the entire weight...now that we feel there are others, we are the quickest to pelt stones! BTW, supper is a meal!!

  • _Rafi_ on June 7, 2010, 7:16 GMT

    Another fact- Lara had to play with tailenders in regular occasion than Sachin. Thats why he had to take more risk and thus deteriorated his average

  • prashant1 on June 7, 2010, 6:47 GMT

    Sachin Tendulkar=Greatest batsman of All Time. Period.

  • prashant1 on June 7, 2010, 6:46 GMT

    @Shams. Check out Tendulkar's and Dravids parallel careers since Dravids debut till 2003. You will find Tendulkar outperforms Dravid in all aspects including away , excluding Ban and Zim. Ditto for Tendulkar vs. Lara. It was ONLY when Tendulkar got hampered and bust up with injurys that the others "caught up"...essentially the formula is simple : Tendulkar fit= Simply the Best.

  • hadnuvaidya on June 7, 2010, 5:52 GMT

    i was looking at the Most Tests in a career chart, and it seems that the only players to get stumped are wicket keeper's! is this really the truth?

  • pradeeplasantha on June 7, 2010, 5:39 GMT

    It is good to see great & classy performance from Asian player.he is great palyer. but most of these records come under his own interest, aren't they????but Sachin still has an opportunity to make things happen & telling to world India has won a world cup while he is in the team. so next year going be the most crucial year for Sachin.as we all know, Ricky pointing has got the great recod as well as Aussies won 3 world cup while he was in the team. i think it is not all about cricket numbers any more it is about what they achieved as a team. i still apprciate plaeys like Lara,Mark waugh,Aravinda,Akram,Magrath ect...who are supper match-winners.any way Sachin you have done a great job for the country but still yet to complete it, that is will be the winning next world cup....can he do it for India?????

  • Shams on June 7, 2010, 5:06 GMT

    The analysis against Australia is slightly skewed as compared to some of the other batsmen he rarely faced McGarth-Warne attacks. Kevin Pietersen and Saeed Anwar have been stand outs when you compare stats against Australia as they faced and performed against McGrath-Warne attacks. The same can be said of Lara, esp the 1999 series.

    Also, his stats are less impressive when you take away Zim, Ban, and pre-98 SL (Murali without a doosra). I think for India, Dravid has been the best batsmen in Tests, esp away, over the last decade and a half until he suffered a slump in the last 2/3 years.

  • on June 7, 2010, 3:35 GMT

    What to say about this man?Genius , Match Winner ,Run Machine ,Master Blaster and how many nicknames can we give to him?

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on June 7, 2010, 3:35 GMT

    What to say about this man?Genius , Match Winner ,Run Machine ,Master Blaster and how many nicknames can we give to him?

  • Shams on June 7, 2010, 5:06 GMT

    The analysis against Australia is slightly skewed as compared to some of the other batsmen he rarely faced McGarth-Warne attacks. Kevin Pietersen and Saeed Anwar have been stand outs when you compare stats against Australia as they faced and performed against McGrath-Warne attacks. The same can be said of Lara, esp the 1999 series.

    Also, his stats are less impressive when you take away Zim, Ban, and pre-98 SL (Murali without a doosra). I think for India, Dravid has been the best batsmen in Tests, esp away, over the last decade and a half until he suffered a slump in the last 2/3 years.

  • pradeeplasantha on June 7, 2010, 5:39 GMT

    It is good to see great & classy performance from Asian player.he is great palyer. but most of these records come under his own interest, aren't they????but Sachin still has an opportunity to make things happen & telling to world India has won a world cup while he is in the team. so next year going be the most crucial year for Sachin.as we all know, Ricky pointing has got the great recod as well as Aussies won 3 world cup while he was in the team. i think it is not all about cricket numbers any more it is about what they achieved as a team. i still apprciate plaeys like Lara,Mark waugh,Aravinda,Akram,Magrath ect...who are supper match-winners.any way Sachin you have done a great job for the country but still yet to complete it, that is will be the winning next world cup....can he do it for India?????

  • hadnuvaidya on June 7, 2010, 5:52 GMT

    i was looking at the Most Tests in a career chart, and it seems that the only players to get stumped are wicket keeper's! is this really the truth?

  • prashant1 on June 7, 2010, 6:46 GMT

    @Shams. Check out Tendulkar's and Dravids parallel careers since Dravids debut till 2003. You will find Tendulkar outperforms Dravid in all aspects including away , excluding Ban and Zim. Ditto for Tendulkar vs. Lara. It was ONLY when Tendulkar got hampered and bust up with injurys that the others "caught up"...essentially the formula is simple : Tendulkar fit= Simply the Best.

  • prashant1 on June 7, 2010, 6:47 GMT

    Sachin Tendulkar=Greatest batsman of All Time. Period.

  • _Rafi_ on June 7, 2010, 7:16 GMT

    Another fact- Lara had to play with tailenders in regular occasion than Sachin. Thats why he had to take more risk and thus deteriorated his average

  • rachits on June 7, 2010, 7:32 GMT

    pradeeplasantha: no facts or logic, just a rambling notion that sachin is a selfish player...one that is possibly put inside ur head by listening to ur equally less aware colleagues at the water cooler! so wat u r saying is that in all the 29 tests played by tendulkar, McGrath and Warne were missing? Or that he has a way of deciding which runs go in his personal kitty (selfish interests, as u said) and which runs help the team? Basically the almost 14000 runs were scored for his own interest and did not contribute to the team at all...and the 5000 odd runs made by pieterson went straight to the team score! and sachin is the reason we even made it to the WC final...wat abt the other 10 players...why cudnt they win us ONE match? its this side of us indian fans that sometimes disgusts me...for over a decade we sat on his shoulders n he carried the entire weight...now that we feel there are others, we are the quickest to pelt stones! BTW, supper is a meal!!

  • srini1088 on June 7, 2010, 7:52 GMT

    read someone stating that sachin didn face mcgrath and warne....lol:)he s playin the aussies form 1990 and u mean he didn face warne and mcgrath...please stop kiddin...no one else would have face them more and handled them netter than Sachin..and the first person to accept this would be SHANE WARNE

  • on June 7, 2010, 8:01 GMT

    Mind Boggling Figures. That is why HE is called GOD of Cricket.

    I always think, what would have happenned if he had support of bowlers also, would have played more freely