@madaboutsleep i let your mummy suck my dick every night. i hate it cause she is ugly but i let her cause she begs me to. an where did she learned to beg like that? she spreads her legs wide an asks to insert the coins in her various holes. it is hard to ignore such beggars.
but what is too much is that now she is not satisfied by just sucking my dick, she insists on undressing my penis and licking the cheese inside. yucks.
from the start i said to club donald and steyn bevause it will be universally accepted that they are of similar level. if lara did not played steyn? so what? his stats against donald should be considered representative. he might have done better against steyn or worse but evidence shows his average. and because both are comparable taking record just against donald if you have not played steyn is fair.
@ashokatibrewal No they can't be classified as similar bowlers since they are different. While comparing the two it is fair to restrict comparison to the same bowlers they faced. This is the closest we can get since they can never be compared identically as they played in different batting units, pitches, bowler's form, personal form, etc.
@ashokatibrewal Don't worry, neither have I used any abusive words against any user/player. As long as your language remains civil you won't be blocked :P
you include a pollock who was not even fast medium. he was just a slow bowler when lara feasted on him. and everyone knows lara feasts on medium pacers. why not just consider donald or steyn ??? you repeat your points. it was never a question od donald only so there is no question of bringing in steyn. it was i who started these arguments and it was from the start steyn and donald.
and averages are very important but so are hundreds. both matter on seperate levels.
@ashokatibrewal Please use the reply button as it is otherwise hard to keep trac on the thread for external users who read it and can justify individual claims. Statistically Donald, Steyn, Pollock and Nitni are amongst South Africa's best bowlers. Again, pace alone is not enough. Else McGrath, Pollock,Ambrose and Walsh who lost their pace in later years wold not be just as successful if not more. I would venture to say runs per inns is more important that hundreds scored.
and the heartless fact remains. Lara failed to bat authoratively enough against a top class sa attack consisting donald or steyn to notch up a single hundred. Tendulkar made 6. Lara 0.
@tony5486zo54l I think you now realize that Lara had a better record against SA - Donald or not. And you bring Steyn into the picture despite Lara not having played against him. You are back to tooting the hundreds tune as you've run out of arguments. Btw, just curious why the need to create a new account to post comments another another username?
ngam may have been almost as fast as hayward certainly not faster than him. Secondly lara or tenulkar never played him. I said nel was leading the attack cause he was the best then.pollock was not even fast medium by then. Ntini was always an average bowler and has fed on being in a transation period and so to gobble wickets. Hayward may not have long but he was very good in the time. Ur averages of lara gets pumped up because of a slow medium pabed(by then)allrounder pollock.
btw to make my stats fair i did not include tendu 7 ton even though it was played against an attack led by hayward- the fastest sa bowler till date.for he did not last long etc... Lara made his 4 tons against an attack led by nel!
@tony5486zo54l The fastest bowler from South Africa was Mfuneko Ngam. Nel was a better bowler than Hayward. Nel wasn't better than Pollock/Ntini, so it is incorrect to say the attack was led by Nel. As you should know, pace isn't enough. Else Shoaib Akhtar and Brett lee would be the best bowlers in the world! look at the Donald/Pollock/Steyn/Morkel stats below.
fact is sa attack led by donald and steyn are comparable.so u can look at the record as a single entity.tendulkar scored 6 test hundreds againrt them. Lara 0. When lara scored 4 hundred against sa it was at a transition period from donald and pollock era to steyn and morkel era.
@tony5486zo54l No you can't. They are not the same bowlers! Morkel isn't even as good a Ntini yet let alone Pollock. South Africa in general have always had a good seam attack. But, South Africa's 3rd and 4th bowlers have been comparatively weaker in recent times.
And again, counting hundreds isn't sufficient. Look at the total runs scored and inns batted.
besides a young murali spun the ball as much. And if u only include players at their absolut prime- why not count every run tendu scored till he was 20 as two? He had not attainem his mature skeletal structure by then,besides the obvious baby fat! Also discount all the wonderful lillee- viv duels cause lillee already had his injury and was past his absolut best?
@kinky1989568 You are again changing your tone, once you realize that against a lethal Murali, Tendulkar doesn't compare to Lara :) Murali without a doosra was very easy to play. Remember the Zimbabwe series where he decided not to bowl a doosra, he could hardly buy a wicket. Batsmen can play you much easier if they know which direction the ball is spinning!
and why do exclude steyn or w guys? Steyn and donald and w guys and akhtar are comparable. So against either tendu scored 8 tons and lara 0. That lara never played steyn or akhtar is irrelevant in this analysis. As u always have donald and wasim and waqar acting as proxier. And as a true lara fan concentrate on hundredr and not averages!!!
@kinky1989568 If we are comparing Lara and Tendulkar, why is the fact Lara never played Steyn/Akhtar in Tests iirelevant? It is very relevant as we can't compare the two. In any case, 100s are not an accurate measure. We should be looking at inns played and runs scored.
@kinky1989568 Against Wasim/Waqar Tendulkar edges Lara.
Lara: 13 Inns, 394 Runs average of 30.30.
Tendulkar: 12 Inns, 295 Runs, average of 32.91.
Why do you say, not playing against Akhtar saved his reputation? Lara played against Brett Lee with similar pace and managed him fine. I do know both Lara and Tendulkar have been hit on their heads flush by Akhtar bouncers and only been saved due to their helmets.
@shamsmi. You r being selective and prejudiced in ur opinions. Murali always had a doosra. If u donot know dont tell. U oz guys only realised it later. Tendulkar or any indian batsman never take likes of murali and sl seriously. For them its professional drudgery and lolipop slow bowling. Tendulkar was in general decline the period u mention.
@kinky1989568 Murali didn't always have a doosra. He only started bowling it around 1999. He was always a big off-spinner of the ball but he became lethal once he started bowling the doosra. First you say Indian batsmen had Murali for lunch and dinner, but when the stats show you up, you change your tone saying they didn't take him seriously. Wonder who is being selective!
@kinky1989568 To add to your decline argument, 1996-2000 Lara's form was in general decline, most probably due to the issues he was having with the WICB, but we didn't discount those years while including his results against Donald, Wasim/Waqar, ... ?
some comments below claim lara played murali better.that st never played a great inningr against the great chucker. Thats right. St made 8 hundreds against sl all of them casually. Whole of indian team has always treated murali as canon fodder. Look at the rejbords. Someone to pile ur runs against. And then one day they realise he is one of the best spinners ever. And then they start playing him with some respect.although with about the same results.
@kinky1989568 Muralitharan only became a threat post 1998 when he developed the doosra. Refer to his career numbers if you like, till mid-1998 Murali averaged 28 in Tests. He ended up with a career average of 22.72! Post 1998 Lara averaged 123 (9 Inns) against Murali compared to Tendulkar's 35.81 (17 inns)!!! Among leading Indian batsmen only Sehwag (73+) averages more than 50 in Tests in an attach including Muralitharan in this period - enough said.
tendulkar made 7 century against sa.6 featured steyn or donald. Lara made 0 featuring steyn or donald. Tendulkar made 2 featuring w guys or akhtar. Lara made 0.
if some think post 95 lara had same style then do not know nothing of cricket.he had put on weight and lorst the flexibility of body. Ditto with tendulkar post 95.in addition playing no cricket outside sub continent between 93-97 made him junk exaggerated feet movement for an exaggerated stillness at the crease style.
@shamsmi- lara was a grat stylist in the earliest years of his career.- 1992-1995. later the flaws of his technique were obvious. his idiosyncacies became a nuisance than a delight. but the man was already a myth( no doubt regardless of all the faults i mention h was always one of the bst natsman around) who commanded such frenzy no one could dislodge him. thats why the embarassment. notice the commentary on his hundreds in sa and australia after 1995.
@ashokatibrewal Lara's style remained similar throughout his career, he cut down on some of the risk taking later in his career but he was just as exciting to watch. His idiosyncrasies were mainly off the field and mostly against the wicb. It is amazing he still maintained his performance on the field often being the sole batsmen between a defeat and a humiliating defeat in his later years.
lara was a flasher. always flopped in south africa always flopped in australia the hundeds he got in australia with the obvious exception of his majestic first hunded in australia wer for some strange reason score largely against spinners and medium paces even in perth!! all his so called great hundreds came in the carribean which of course has the most batsman friendly pitches in the world- no spin,seam or pace. had a lousy technique
@ashokatibrewal Not sure *always* is valid. Lara has double centuries in South Africa, Australia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. 150+ score in every other country except India. It's funny you claim the caribbean wickets to be the flattest in the world, where most of the world believes otherwise (read sub-continent pitches in the 90s). Lousy technique - so funny. He was the most exciting player to watch of his generation.
Why must we always compare and in the process disrespect two giants of their times . Both were completely different batsmen and have mesmerized us with their batting ability, lets just leave it at that
lara the gratest flat tack bully in the history of the planet.west indian pitches are the flattest pitches in the world.sub continent pitches turn a lot fom the third day on.australian pitches bounce a lot.english and nz pitches assist swing.sa pitches have decent bounce and decent movement.but west indian pitches?they mostly stay flat 5 days.oh lara the great.destroyer of bolers on the flat decks of the caribbean
@tonytt55tony Have some damn respect. Lara scored some of his best centuries in AUS unlike a certain Tendulkar. Both are great....you fucking cock sucker.
mr kangaroo jump had a unique style,bu was and will always be the second best.
and someone said mc grath said he was the beest batsman he bowled to-is just distotrting the facs.mcgrath said lara was moe dangeous but tndulkar was the better batsman.so you can argu either ay from that statement.
those who say tndulkar played with better batsman they re joking right?in the 90's tendulkar was a one man team.emeber india had no bowlers not like WI with ambrose,walsh bishop dillon.if he had such bowlers som of his gratest away innings like the perth,captown,barbados,edgbaston all would have been great winnning hundreds.and lara had devcent batsman throughout.dont belittle guys like sarwan,hopper.chanderpaul,richie richardson even jimmy adams for a while
someone said lara tend to make bigger runs whenever he plays against australia and south africa.that is a friggin joke right?he scores big whenever he plays against australia in west indies.he nevr scored heavily against australia in australia.he struggled big time in sa.remember when wi lost 5-0 to south africa.lara struggled to put bat to ball entire series.a batsman of such supposd class should have come to terms with conditions atleast by the third or fourh test.but no sir-not even the fifth
compared to tendulkar lara had no balance in crease.his foor moivments were lousy,just a pr meditated kangaroo jump.to all those who say tndulkar is only an accumulator.they are right.last 7-8 years in tests he has been an accumulator-but with the best technique eve.and before that he was sheer delight.peerless.no body can touch him in style befoe that.his drives,both back and front foor were unmatchable.his flicks,pulls.cover drives all outstanding.
i hate this,having to belittle a great batsman.but u silly idiots leave me no choice.tendulkat was ofcours much better than lara.his defense was perfect.even to a true cricket fan,his style was more pleasing.lara could only hit square of the turf.tendulkar got all the shots.i think it comes down to racism.whites cannot accept an indian to be the best.they hav accepted blacks as their equal in sports because blacks dont threaten them in any other ara.but chinese and indians do.
I remember my uncle telling my how delightful David Gower was to watch in full flow...but I can't imagine anyone more pleasing to watch than Brian...on days like this he was almost impossible to bowl to...there was a hundred he scored against South Africa in 1996 World Cup in which he single handledly destroyed the strongest attack in the competition and knocked out the favourites where he simply hammered anyone that came on to bowl...
WASIM ONCE SAID IN HIS INTERVIEW IN 1992 LARA CAN CLEAR THE FENCE ON THE BALLS THAT ALL OTHER GREAT PLAYER LEAVE!
SANJAY MANGREKAR SAID IF SACHIN WAS PLAYING ON 374 WOULD NEVER EVER HAD TRIED FOR A BIG SIX AS THE KING LARA WENT AFTER THE OFF BREAK OF MICHAEL WAGHN!
HULLOW PEOPLE HOPE U GUYS R GUD! LET ME ADD A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT BRIAN CHARLES LARA AND SACHIN!
THE CENTURIES RECORDS AND MATCH WINNING PERFORMANCES DO MATTER BUT AS U GUYS R TALKING ABOUT THE NOVELTY OF THE PLAYERS LET ME TELL YOU THE ONLY BATSMAN IN THE HISTORY OF THE GAME HAS RAVISHED EVERY BOWLING ATTACK UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES IN ANY KIND OF SITUATIONS( WEATHER, WICKET, COUNTRY, BOWLERS AND MOST OF ALL THE SITUATION OF THE MATCH) IS ONLY THE KING OF THE GAME BRIAN CHARLES LARA!
One day and twenty twenty is not cricket,TEST cricket is cricket,that is what u have to look at! in test Tendulkar is an Accumulator not a dominator, Lara changes the game after his innings,he scores quickly and is constantly looking to attack! WI team is the most crap,there is alot of internal player disputes{like between gayle and lara,stupid Holding,etc},no bowlers, facilities,wicb disputes and lara had to deal with all that,that's why he quit abruptly. Caribbean isnt unified!
MCGRATH said at the end of his career that Lara was Harder to bowl at than Sachin. MURALI said that Lara was the best he ever bowl to and he dominated him like no other ,when murali was at his lethal best. Shane Warne had to be dropped in 1999 series to prevent Lara from ripping him to Shreds & warne was in top form!! Lara has a higher strike rate,Lara test hundreds have Weight to them,as well as DOMINATING Flamboyance under Career-Ending Pressure,time& time again!!
@hypersonicdragon not to mention sachin has been playing with 2 or 3 other world class batters for his whole career, in the 21st century lara has been holding the west indies up himself
ou can come at any angle...at the end of the day its TEST Cricket that reign Supreme.Tendulkar needed 15 innings more just to catch up to Lara, not to mention,Out of all the hundreds Sachin has produced in TEST how much of them actually stand out Dominating to the External Observer? NONE,he hasnt even produced any that come close to 277,375,213,153,400,and all those double centuries!he took back his record under career-ending pressure bearing the weight of a very weak team,WI administrators!
well,well...im just reading some of the comments posted and let me say tendulkar is the most worshipped cricketer in the world,they consider him a god..now you think you can argue with such ignorant people and tell them Lara is Better,it's like talking to a bag of manure.
Lara is the better batsman and it's only Test cricket u have to consider kids,
ODI and 20/20 is Not cricket! they call it "Test" cricket for a reason.
to all those having an aneurysm."Brian Lara is One of the best batsmen of my generation, if not the best ever." Sachin Tendulkar
"Lara is the greatest batsman I have ever bowled to." Glenn McGrath .
genius is just not about numbers how can u say that lara is not consistent when he retired with a avg of 53 and only 6 not outs. Lara produced some of the finest and greatest knocks ever in the greatest fashion with the upmost skill and entertainment l
check the stats from jan 1993 to dec 2002- 10 yrs when the baddest bowlers were at their peak. check them "away" too...lara aint even close-till tendulkar physically breaks down.
sachin only plays for records.... he never single handedly won a match for india...... lara is an artist... i would pay to watch lara rather than watch sachin for free.....
I think Brian Lara, bless his heart, was a great batsman. But he is held in such high regard partly because of his swashbuckling style and the fact that his few highest notes(out of a career spanning several hundreds of matches )were higher than anyone else's. The truth is that he was nowhere near as consistently good as Tendulkar has been and still is.Also, Tendulkar has done better “away” than Lara.
Consider this. In 4th innings, Brian averaged 2 runs lower than Sachin, and has 8 hundreds in winning causes vs Sachin's 18. And apart from the 153*, he has done virtually nothing in 4th innings chases. But that innings has always been cited in a "what has sachin done?" argument. Before Sachin buried the idiots at Chennai last year, of course.
And let's not even bring ODIs into the picture. I'll risk sounding like a troll and say that it's ludicrous to me that anyone would look beyond Sachin as the greatest player in limited overs history. He has 33 hundreds in winning causes, has made runs eveywhere and in real pressure cooker situations (he averages 56 with 6 hundreds in ODI finals v Ponting's 38 or Lara's 28).
The closest anyone comes in the ODI greatness stakes is Viv Richards, and Tendulkar has 10,000 more runs (say it out loud - TEN THOUSAND), at a marginally (45 v 47) lower average and marginally lower strike rate.
So, please, I beg of you fine folks, end this Sachin v Lara debate once and for all. I'll get an aneurysm if I have to listen any more about Brian Lara winning more matches (all eight of them) or having been a better batsman than Sachin
ill sum up everything for u.. as a slefish batsman..sachin was the best..as a team player and a miracle worker..it is lara..he played when it mattered sooo much...
@ayaazcyclops yaar ayaaz i think u r an indian..cmon bro.this guy worked for 20 years for india and it took u couple of lines to sum him up as a selfish player.well if that is selfish then every1 shud giv selfishness a chance.try it out.wud make this world a better place..but remember selfishness does not inspire that amount of dedication which sachin possesses
@ayaazcyclops bcoz sachin gave up many timeswhen india needed him...2003 WC final..99' test against PAK at chennai..he got out to saqlains doosra..there r many such innings..and when on 99 or 98..sachin always plays a single or a couple..lara hit 4s or even 6s to get to his 100s..thats y he is a team player..in terms of ability..wasim rated lara > sachin so did murali in terms of playing spin..
@21jasonh What that actually means is that you have seen extremely little of Tendulkar or that your knowledge of cricket is extremely limited and blinkered by innate biases.
@SonofPs thats just how i see it thats my point what is so wrong with what i think do u want me to agree with you ok i will tendulkar is the best bataman when it comes to storke play brian lara has to sit behing he can tcompaoir to tendulkar. ther u have it are u happy now
@21jasonh oh, thrilled. just wanted to point out how little u actually know about cricket- did you watch the roy fredericks clips right here on youtube? lara was fab when on song, but tendulkar was a cut above as an allround batsman...whether u like it or not,too bad......anyhow...ciao
@SonofPs well i hve seen alot of cricket i do a lot of reading i represent my contry in d under 19 so i played for barbdosany how my point still remains ur point remains also so explian somthing if tendulkar is an allround batsman what is brian lara u tell or what is an alround batsman
@21jasonh Oh well. basically lara is a hometown bully. SRT is king everywhere. also, check their stats till 2003. till tendulkar's career was almost finished with injuries and looked over he was miles ahead of not only lara, but also the pontings,kalliss etc....basically the others had to WAIT till 2003 for tendulkar to physically breakdown before they "caught up"...so lara, the others (and u ) can thank god for tendulkars injuries-they are the ONLY reason we are having this conversation
@21jasonh From 1993-2003, SRT avg.62 (including MUCH better away vs most of the major test playing nations)...Lara avg. 50 in this period ..basically till SRTs physical breakdowns it was a no contest.
& since u are playing in d "under 19" i honestly dont know how much cricket u have actually watched - cept for a few lara highlights and youtube clips..
i suggest u find some old tapes of '90s lara vs donald,and some other serious pace..then watch SRT vs the same bowlers- then u will understand
@SonofPs no no no i said i played under 19 for barbados im 30 yrs now so that was a while ago our argument was about style and grace not arvages 2 see lard cover drives with aaaaawww and ooooohs jus pure class i watch a lot of cricket alot and ive nevr seen grace like dat since lawrence rowe tendulkar style of battin looks ordinanry like any other batsman
ordinary cut shots drives flicks and pulls any way your point still taken and agian mines stays the same have a good day
i would like all idians to see what flair and grace is all about tendulkar vs lara in full flight would u watch a tendulkar 100 before a brian lara 100 not me lol
the best thing about being a west indian bowler is that you never have that feeling that Lara can put on a bowler----look at Kaneira's face lol. if you want more examples--check out chris lewis during the 375, and Peterson after the 28 runs in an over lol
you'll never see that from Tendulkar in Test cricket!
You can come at any angle...at the end of the day its TEST Cricket that reign Supreme..
now for the Tendulkar worshippers..tendulkar needed 15 innings more just to catch up to Lara, not to mention,Out of all the hundreds Sachin has produced in TEST how much of them actually stand out to the External Observer? NONE..he hasnt even produced any that come close to 277,375,213,153,400, and all those double centuries!
Depends on what you want to see. Since you put in 153, try these: 241*, 136, 165, 169, 177, 155, 155*, 154*, 153, 103*, 160, 105* ... not to dispute the fact that BCL, when he got going, was more destructive.
Agreed you said it man tell them..they cant talk...^^^^^^^^ Tendulkar has no innings of significance just meaningless runs an hundreds!!LARA FAN 4 LIFE SIGNAL 2 LARA!! :D
thanks...just look at kaneria's face..{it's what did just happen..} that is the magic of Lara in Test Cricket...he dominates with Spectacular style and Flair with the weight and pressures of a weak team on his back!!!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Sachin is the best........he has very consistent for last 20 years........where can you find such a batsman?i am also a great fan of lara.....i love watching his batting......but sachin is better than lara.....
wunder how we guys sittin in front of our friggin lappies post such bold statements(literally).btw to all here...do u guys get into a fit of vengeance against sachin wen u see lara battin well..neways sachin wud care more about wat lara says about him than any of us dumbfucks..and lara himself admits that sachin is better
@MATMICSHA i think i saw it b4 sayin.look bro thr is a weight of expectations which lara did not hav..windies has an amazin crowd support who back them up even when they lose..while sachin was booed at his own home ground at wankhede for underperformin..its beyond a human to handle it.the way it is in our country.the guy has handled all that.if v cud get lara to vote he wud vote for sachin
@estimate15accurate Please go to youtube and type in " a word with sir viv richards part 2" and the very end he himself says who is the more Un- selfish player Lara or Tendulkar see for yourself in Sir Vivs words himself.
In terms of talent, Lara is Pele whereas Tendulkar is Ronaldo. One who simply takes the opportunity without creating one. Lara is a beauty of the game. What a genius!
I'm not sure about the analogy. I think I'd go with Lara being Barcelona's Xavi; creative, brilliant, underrated. Tendulkar could be Ibrahimovic; very good but wildly overrated.
You see we can't use Pele and Maradona or even Zidane and (Brazil's) Ronaldo.
In the analogy, these players are all combined into someone called "Bradman".
The pro-Tendulkar people just point to statistics, but Lara brought far more to the game when he batted than pure numbers - style, finesse, genius, unpredictability, drama, power, entertainment, character, and most of all for me - pure, thrilling BEAUTY
Ten is the best batsman. Even a basic look at the stats will show that Lara only overshadowed Tenfor a continuous stretch of 3 / 4 yrs in the 2000s corresponding with Ten injuries. But several other batsmen also overshadowed Ten at that period. So, the only thing it would be truly fair to say is that a fit Lara is better than an injured Ten..otherwise why would he lag behind Tendulkar so much right up to 2003- a period at the end of which Lara was 34yrs old? Only one answer to that question.
Classic and basic logical error. Flair is not equal to better. Sure Lara may have had more flair than Tendulkar. So? If you cant find beauty in the glory of Tendulkars batting...then you dont know anything about batting... or you are a kid who has watched only cricket for the last decade or so..On you tube clips.
The oldest observers in cricket..Whove been watching before you were born...Benaud,Woodcock hold Tendulkar as the best they have ever SEEN. Never mind Lara.
Indians and others can appreciate both Tendulkar AND lara. Lara for his artistic genius. Tendulkar for his superior allround skills and lack of any weaknesses.
You pakis unfortunately cant...and are anti Tendulkar for obvious reasons.
I don't want to add more woods to this useless Lara,Sachin tag or war. Let me straight all what u say are true. Sachin has records. But lara can bat. If you don't understand it watch Tendulkars inning somewhere in You Tube and Then Lara's this inning or else in somewhere. You may understand what I mean.(Not the score). It has a word call "Entertainig".
Check out their respective records till 2003. Tend was miles ahead of all batsmen. It is just that Lara (and a dozen others) filled themselves silly with easy runs from 2003-07 while Tend was struggling with serious injuries...that Lara,ponting and co. even figure in the same FRAME as Tendulkar.
If Tend had been fit he would easily have had 15000 runs, 50 hundreds and a 60+ avg by now.
The only thing you can fairly say is that a fit lara is better than an injured Ten..thats ALL.
@SonofPs sachin is a very good batsman and so is lara but sachin made most of his runs on flat WKTs in the sup continents and playing for a good team helps.Lara play for a team that put lot of pressure on him to score big. Lara is a player who will single handedly win a test match and that is something you cant say about sachin or any other player "as far as i know". Lara is a better test match player
@MATMICSHA . unfortunately, that is a very incorrect assumption. Tendulkar has done considerably "away" than lara. Lara , in fact, was more a home town scorer. Also, Lara,ponting etc have done quite poorly on the "flat" indian tracks.
A simple check would be Tendulkars and Laras performances in Australia, on the supposedly bouncy tracks( be prepared to get shocked)...
so, basically, your argument is wrong on almost every single count.
@MATMICSHA .Also, till the 2000s, lara was infact in a better team than tendulkar was. Also, please note that lara has 8 matchwinning hundreds as compared to tendulkars 18. Except for the 153 lara(now countered by tendulkrs 103) has done virtually nothing in 4th inn chases, and actually avg less than tendulkar in the 4ht inn.
The thing is the flair, and artistry of lara are what make him endear himself to fans. Unfortunately ,though, in terms of pure batsmanship Tenduklar is simply better
@SonofPs you should get your facts rite IND was better that WI from1996 to ?????. the only reason why TEND have more than him is because he dont have to worry if he get out IND would have on chance of winning. have you notice when lara scores he will normally make more than haft the runs WINDIES made. do you know that lara broke almost all the test records? what has TEND did in TEST to be consider better than LARA?
@SonofPs Lara averages 42.31 while Tendulkar averages 48.45 in second innings knocks. However, Lara holds a slight edge over the Mumbai Maestro in fourth inning performances with an average of 37.17 to an average of 35.68 for Tendulkar. Lara's average of 165.65 in innings when he crosses the three-figure mark, as opposed to Tendulkar's corresponding average of 147.25.
you dont even know what the stats are....and before you forget Tendulkar has crossed the 3 figure mark 93 times (47 + 46)....by the time tendulkar finishes lara will not even be half the batsman of tendulkar...fitting
@SonofPs Lara is a better batsman than Sachin simply because he tends to score big whenever he plays against teams like Australia and South Africa and the stats actually support it. Lara has scored three 200s against the Aussies 2 of which have come in Australia and apart from that he has a test record of 400 as well whereas Sachin has a couple of 200s against New Zealand and Zimbabwe and that too in India.
Also check their records "Away" outside the subcontinent and home in the major Test nations : NZ,SA,Aus,ENG...Lara ONLY does better in SA, and that TOO post Donald. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of cricket will know how poor Lara was vs extreme pace inc. Donald.
@MATMICSHA Tendulkar is not only a much ,much better batsman than lara ever was- he is still goint strong. Lara was good in patches when on song -and then he was awesome. Stats wise he filled his bootsesp 03-07 when EVERY fit good batsman in the world filled his boots , so making it superficially appear that the laras,pontings,dravids,kalliss etc of the world are Tendulkars equal.
@SonofPs so you are saying that an in form lara is not as good as an in form tend? when lara is in from he scores 200s vs SA and AUS.when tend is in form he score 100s and just a few 200s VS ZIM and NZ he score most of then in india( 200s). i forget an in from lara also broke the world of most runs in an innings not once but .......you know this too don't you?
that is EXACTLY what im saying. only in patches he is tendulkars equal when tendulkar is fit.
check the stats from jan 1993 to dec 2002- 10 yrs when the baddest bowlers were at their peak. check them "away" too...lara aint even close-till tendulkar physically breaks down.
@SonofPs Lara has big scores vs big teams carring the west Indese on his back. I always felt he should not have been captain then there would not been any wondering who's better. A man carring a load vs a man with free hands,Tendulkar was captain, did he not fail? why did he give it up? what do you think would of happen if lara had give up? By the why the two best bowlers in world cricket Glenn McGrath and Muttiah Muralitharan consider Lara to be a better batsman than Tendulkar.
Hmm, for every bowler who says lara is best...there are 3 who say tendulkar is better...including warne, wasim akram, donald etc etc...also, in 2003 till tenduklar was injured mcgrath said that tendulkar was the best. in 2007 he said lara was slightly more dangerous...so, he was not the only one fooled by the 03-07 tendulkar break down...as for murali,why dont u check out his record vs any top leftie
@SonofPs "I have bowled to both Tendulkar and Lara and I have found Lara more attacking. Tendulkar has a tighter technique, no doubt, but Lara can single-handedly win the game for his team. I am not saying Tendulkar cannot do it but Lara has maybe done it more often than him. If you are asking me who the best batsman I have bowled to is, then it's not Tendulkar and not Lara as well. It's Martin Crowe... he was an amazing batsman. " BY AKRAM
@SonofPs "Unfortunately, I have not bowled enough to Tendulkar in Test matches but there is no doubt about his class. I have bowled against Lara and I have had some success against him. I think over the years I would say I have been fifty-fifty against both Tendulkar and Lara. I have got them a few times and they have got runs against me as well. I can never forget a 16-year-old Tendulkar batting on after being struck on the nose by a fast bouncer from me." BY WAQAR
@SonofPs yea ppl make double tons but only one has as much as lara ( bradman). Tend is only more consistent than LARA. what did tend do to be consider better than lara. if you say by being consistent, then he is the 7 best batsmen to ever live. i know 7 players who is more consistent than tend. i sure they r more then 7 players who is consistent than tend.
so, lara converts more centuries into doubles -what it tells u is that when the going is good lara infact is the one who plays for records.opposite of what u said...the only reason lara has decent stats is because he makes sure to pile on runs when the going is good to cover up for the innumerable flops - and because of the 03-07 period when he filled his boots with cheap ,easy runs like a lot of batsmen
@SonofPs what do you mean by cheap runs? because lara coverts more tons to double tons mean he plays for records? By the way what kind of injury did tend had? was because tend was injure lara was able to score the runs he scored? THE ONLY THING YOU SAID THAT MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL IS THAT TEND WAS INJURY. by the way what was the going was ever good for him, if their was ever a time why shouldnt he "pile on runs" because tend is more consistent mean he is better?
SO, for 10 yrs , in more difficult conditions for batting, with most of the top bowlers at their peaks, Tendulkar was well ahead of not only lara- but everybody.
including, and importantly , AWAY.
lara, never ever, had even a few years when he was well ahead of the pack. from 03-07 lara was just one of numerous batsmen who piled on the runs
@MATMICSHA BUT the greats are the ones who are consistently better than ALL others in the sport.
Lara was equal or perhaps even more dangerous than tendulkar in PATCHES when he would cash in and make sure to score big and so make up for the umpteen flops.
But lara was never ahead of the rest of the pack for any prolonged period..Tendulkar was for a decade.
Why is Federer considered the Greatest? coz he is consistently better than the rest for a long time now...Nadal is Federers equal or perhaps even better in patches on certain surfaces...but if you ask the knowledgeable tennis fan he will tell you that Federer has to go down as the Best over Nadal.
Because Fed is better than ALL others over a period, Nadal has not yet achieved that peak as yet
@SonofPs tennis is not a team sport , it is two guys playing against each other. let me answer your question, he is the greatest because he win more turny than anyone. but you can not compare a tennis great to a cricket great. cricket is a team sport. in your logic TEND is the 12 th greatest batsmen.
@MATMICSHA .Lara was basically a hometown bully. i saw in another vid his record "away" from 93-03.... If you take away lara's home scores and dead rubber scores he wouldnt even count as a great batsman. he would probably avg 40 or less
@SonofPs check lara record in SA AUS ENG and SL. when lara was play with a good team from 1990 to 95 he avg 60 and he played for the worse WI team he avg 38 from 1996 to 2001 and 2001 to 2005 he avg 64( yea 64!!). dont know how much he avg from 05 to 07.
@SonofPs why can't you get your facts right !!!!!!!!check dravid record from when he start playing cricket to when he stop you will notice how much help TEND had. Dravid avg 60!!! away from home compare to TEND 55. dravid carved up four centuries in successive innings, and hit four double-centuries in the space of 15 Tests he is a "great player" , he often outscores team-mates like Tendulkar and Laxman in the course of partnerships with them.DRAVID is the player who carry IND.
@MATMICSHA As regards “Away” matches if you exclude Ban and Zim in this period and only include “major test playing nations” as is your wont you get :
@SonofPs like i said your facts are wrong RD avg 60 away SRT 55...most of the stuff you posting is wrong. you should try cricinfo.com, beside when did donald or wasim ever said that SRT was better than lara? Warne said tend was better, this should make my point, LARA has a better record against warne but warne thinks that TEND is better WHY? have you ever watch lara play murali? do you even know murali record against lefties? you should find out and don't be ignorant ( lack of knowledge)
@SonofPs from 90 to 96 lara had a better avg and from 97 to 99 tendulkar had a better away avg that dravid and from 2000 to now dravid away record is better. so is steve waugh better than both lara and tendulkar, steve was the leading runs scorer for over 12 year and tendultar for a year or two and lara was for 3 years i think.
Dude, for 10 (TEN) years from 93-03 Tendulkar has done much better than ANYONE. except for bradman , noone has done so much better than all his peers for a 10 year period (lots and lots and lots of batsmen do well for a few years here and there)
ONLY the KINGS like bradman and SRT dominate the world for TEN years in a ROW. these kind of feats are RESERVED for the KINGS>
@SonofPs you check lara and tend record between 1990 - 96 and tell me who had a better record!!! , tendulkar was not better than rest for ten years he was more consistent for a longer period than the rest. when lara was playing with a team as good as india he avg 60+(1990 to 96).hooper and richie is not in the same class as vvs, dravid etc. india team is better than WI from 96 to now( batting).
ALSO. Till 1993 Tenduklar is better. he avcg 50. lara 46. Lara had perhaps 2 of the best yrs of his life in 94 and 95. In 95 Tenduklar DID NOT PLAY test matches.
So, out of a 14 career till 2003, lara was basically better for ONE yr -1994(95 tendulkar did not play)
And till 2003 ALSO - you will find that Lara is a Hometown bully- and only with the the exception of SL Lara is below average everywhere else
@SonofPs tendulkar play with the likes of dravid,VVS,Sourav Ganguly and Mohammad Azharuddin. What most people fail to realize is that LARA carry the WI team all by himself, have you notice when lara fail WI also fail and when tendulkar fail, india is not likely to fail as well. i believe what make a player great is not only being consistent but what you have done for your team and the impact you have on a match
Bullshit. Lara played in an equall good batting team in the 90s- perhaps better with richie, hooper, etc....lax,dravid,sehwag etc only came into their own in the 2000s. also the WI bowling was MUCH better especially away.
This has been flagged as spam show
@madaboutsleep i let your mummy suck my dick every night. i hate it cause she is ugly but i let her cause she begs me to. an where did she learned to beg like that? she spreads her legs wide an asks to insert the coins in her various holes. it is hard to ignore such beggars.
but what is too much is that now she is not satisfied by just sucking my dick, she insists on undressing my penis and licking the cheese inside. yucks.
sanjay49700 2 months ago
from the start i said to club donald and steyn bevause it will be universally accepted that they are of similar level. if lara did not played steyn? so what? his stats against donald should be considered representative. he might have done better against steyn or worse but evidence shows his average. and because both are comparable taking record just against donald if you have not played steyn is fair.
ashokatibrewal 4 months ago
@ashokatibrewal No they can't be classified as similar bowlers since they are different. While comparing the two it is fair to restrict comparison to the same bowlers they faced. This is the closest we can get since they can never be compared identically as they played in different batting units, pitches, bowler's form, personal form, etc.
shamsmi 4 months ago
i have lots of youtube accounts because many lara fans block me. even though i have never used a single abusive word or a single wrong fact.
ashokatibrewal 4 months ago
@ashokatibrewal Don't worry, neither have I used any abusive words against any user/player. As long as your language remains civil you won't be blocked :P
shamsmi 4 months ago
you include a pollock who was not even fast medium. he was just a slow bowler when lara feasted on him. and everyone knows lara feasts on medium pacers. why not just consider donald or steyn ??? you repeat your points. it was never a question od donald only so there is no question of bringing in steyn. it was i who started these arguments and it was from the start steyn and donald.
and averages are very important but so are hundreds. both matter on seperate levels.
ashokatibrewal 4 months ago
@ashokatibrewal Please use the reply button as it is otherwise hard to keep trac on the thread for external users who read it and can justify individual claims. Statistically Donald, Steyn, Pollock and Nitni are amongst South Africa's best bowlers. Again, pace alone is not enough. Else McGrath, Pollock,Ambrose and Walsh who lost their pace in later years wold not be just as successful if not more. I would venture to say runs per inns is more important that hundreds scored.
shamsmi 4 months ago
and the heartless fact remains. Lara failed to bat authoratively enough against a top class sa attack consisting donald or steyn to notch up a single hundred. Tendulkar made 6. Lara 0.
tony5486zo54l 4 months ago
@tony5486zo54l I think you now realize that Lara had a better record against SA - Donald or not. And you bring Steyn into the picture despite Lara not having played against him. You are back to tooting the hundreds tune as you've run out of arguments. Btw, just curious why the need to create a new account to post comments another another username?
shamsmi 4 months ago
ngam may have been almost as fast as hayward certainly not faster than him. Secondly lara or tenulkar never played him. I said nel was leading the attack cause he was the best then.pollock was not even fast medium by then. Ntini was always an average bowler and has fed on being in a transation period and so to gobble wickets. Hayward may not have long but he was very good in the time. Ur averages of lara gets pumped up because of a slow medium pabed(by then)allrounder pollock.
tony5486zo54l 4 months ago
btw to make my stats fair i did not include tendu 7 ton even though it was played against an attack led by hayward- the fastest sa bowler till date.for he did not last long etc... Lara made his 4 tons against an attack led by nel!
tony5486zo54l 4 months ago
@tony5486zo54l The fastest bowler from South Africa was Mfuneko Ngam. Nel was a better bowler than Hayward. Nel wasn't better than Pollock/Ntini, so it is incorrect to say the attack was led by Nel. As you should know, pace isn't enough. Else Shoaib Akhtar and Brett lee would be the best bowlers in the world! look at the Donald/Pollock/Steyn/Morkel stats below.
shamsmi 4 months ago
fact is sa attack led by donald and steyn are comparable.so u can look at the record as a single entity.tendulkar scored 6 test hundreds againrt them. Lara 0. When lara scored 4 hundred against sa it was at a transition period from donald and pollock era to steyn and morkel era.
tony5486zo54l 4 months ago
@tony5486zo54l No you can't. They are not the same bowlers! Morkel isn't even as good a Ntini yet let alone Pollock. South Africa in general have always had a good seam attack. But, South Africa's 3rd and 4th bowlers have been comparatively weaker in recent times.
And again, counting hundreds isn't sufficient. Look at the total runs scored and inns batted.
If you include Donald/Pollock/Steyn/Morkel:
Lara: 31 I, 1326 R @ 42.77
Tendulkar: 43 I, 1644 R @ 42.15
shamsmi 4 months ago
besides a young murali spun the ball as much. And if u only include players at their absolut prime- why not count every run tendu scored till he was 20 as two? He had not attainem his mature skeletal structure by then,besides the obvious baby fat! Also discount all the wonderful lillee- viv duels cause lillee already had his injury and was past his absolut best?
kinky1989568 4 months ago
@kinky1989568 You are again changing your tone, once you realize that against a lethal Murali, Tendulkar doesn't compare to Lara :) Murali without a doosra was very easy to play. Remember the Zimbabwe series where he decided not to bowl a doosra, he could hardly buy a wicket. Batsmen can play you much easier if they know which direction the ball is spinning!
shamsmi 4 months ago
and why do exclude steyn or w guys? Steyn and donald and w guys and akhtar are comparable. So against either tendu scored 8 tons and lara 0. That lara never played steyn or akhtar is irrelevant in this analysis. As u always have donald and wasim and waqar acting as proxier. And as a true lara fan concentrate on hundredr and not averages!!!
kinky1989568 4 months ago
@kinky1989568 If we are comparing Lara and Tendulkar, why is the fact Lara never played Steyn/Akhtar in Tests iirelevant? It is very relevant as we can't compare the two. In any case, 100s are not an accurate measure. We should be looking at inns played and runs scored.
shamsmi 4 months ago
u say about akhtar but what about w guys? And lara not playing against akhtar saved his reputation.
kinky1989568 4 months ago
@kinky1989568 Against Wasim/Waqar Tendulkar edges Lara.
Lara: 13 Inns, 394 Runs average of 30.30.
Tendulkar: 12 Inns, 295 Runs, average of 32.91.
Why do you say, not playing against Akhtar saved his reputation? Lara played against Brett Lee with similar pace and managed him fine. I do know both Lara and Tendulkar have been hit on their heads flush by Akhtar bouncers and only been saved due to their helmets.
shamsmi 4 months ago
@kinky1989568 Just to add to Wasim/Waqar here are their stats against another top fast bowler you are conveniently missing - McGrath:
Lara: 44 Inns, 2000 runs, 47.61 average.
Tendulkar: 18 Inns, 662 runs, 36.77 average.
shamsmi 4 months ago
@shamsmi. You r being selective and prejudiced in ur opinions. Murali always had a doosra. If u donot know dont tell. U oz guys only realised it later. Tendulkar or any indian batsman never take likes of murali and sl seriously. For them its professional drudgery and lolipop slow bowling. Tendulkar was in general decline the period u mention.
kinky1989568 4 months ago
@kinky1989568 Murali didn't always have a doosra. He only started bowling it around 1999. He was always a big off-spinner of the ball but he became lethal once he started bowling the doosra. First you say Indian batsmen had Murali for lunch and dinner, but when the stats show you up, you change your tone saying they didn't take him seriously. Wonder who is being selective!
shamsmi 4 months ago
@kinky1989568 To add to your decline argument, 1996-2000 Lara's form was in general decline, most probably due to the issues he was having with the WICB, but we didn't discount those years while including his results against Donald, Wasim/Waqar, ... ?
shamsmi 4 months ago
some comments below claim lara played murali better.that st never played a great inningr against the great chucker. Thats right. St made 8 hundreds against sl all of them casually. Whole of indian team has always treated murali as canon fodder. Look at the rejbords. Someone to pile ur runs against. And then one day they realise he is one of the best spinners ever. And then they start playing him with some respect.although with about the same results.
kinky1989568 4 months ago
@kinky1989568 Muralitharan only became a threat post 1998 when he developed the doosra. Refer to his career numbers if you like, till mid-1998 Murali averaged 28 in Tests. He ended up with a career average of 22.72! Post 1998 Lara averaged 123 (9 Inns) against Murali compared to Tendulkar's 35.81 (17 inns)!!! Among leading Indian batsmen only Sehwag (73+) averages more than 50 in Tests in an attach including Muralitharan in this period - enough said.
shamsmi 4 months ago
tendulkar made 7 century against sa.6 featured steyn or donald. Lara made 0 featuring steyn or donald. Tendulkar made 2 featuring w guys or akhtar. Lara made 0.
kinky1989568 4 months ago
@kinky1989568 Lara never faced Steyn or Akhtar in Tests. Are centuries the only measure? In matches involving Donald in Tests:
Lara: 20 Inns, 681 Runs, 34.05 avg. No centuries.
Tendulkar: 20 Inns, 658 Runs, 32.90 avg. 2 centuries.
Lara was better than Tendulkar in Test matches that involved Doanld in the attack!
shamsmi 4 months ago
if some think post 95 lara had same style then do not know nothing of cricket.he had put on weight and lorst the flexibility of body. Ditto with tendulkar post 95.in addition playing no cricket outside sub continent between 93-97 made him junk exaggerated feet movement for an exaggerated stillness at the crease style.
kinky1989568 4 months ago
@shamsmi- lara was a grat stylist in the earliest years of his career.- 1992-1995. later the flaws of his technique were obvious. his idiosyncacies became a nuisance than a delight. but the man was already a myth( no doubt regardless of all the faults i mention h was always one of the bst natsman around) who commanded such frenzy no one could dislodge him. thats why the embarassment. notice the commentary on his hundreds in sa and australia after 1995.
ashokatibrewal 5 months ago
@ashokatibrewal Lara's style remained similar throughout his career, he cut down on some of the risk taking later in his career but he was just as exciting to watch. His idiosyncrasies were mainly off the field and mostly against the wicb. It is amazing he still maintained his performance on the field often being the sole batsmen between a defeat and a humiliating defeat in his later years.
shamsmi 5 months ago
notice how commentrators wee always embarassed about lara when ever he was playing. but later they say he was great.
cricket's greatest myth.
ashokatibrewal 5 months ago
@ashokatibrewal I find this so funny, why would be commentators be embarrassed if someone is playing good :D
His greatness as a batsman was confirmed quite early in his career.
shamsmi 5 months ago
lara was a flasher. always flopped in south africa always flopped in australia the hundeds he got in australia with the obvious exception of his majestic first hunded in australia wer for some strange reason score largely against spinners and medium paces even in perth!! all his so called great hundreds came in the carribean which of course has the most batsman friendly pitches in the world- no spin,seam or pace. had a lousy technique
ashokatibrewal 5 months ago
@ashokatibrewal Not sure *always* is valid. Lara has double centuries in South Africa, Australia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. 150+ score in every other country except India. It's funny you claim the caribbean wickets to be the flattest in the world, where most of the world believes otherwise (read sub-continent pitches in the 90s). Lousy technique - so funny. He was the most exciting player to watch of his generation.
shamsmi 5 months ago
@ashokatibrewal,
Got to be one of the worst comments i have ever read about Lara.
There are enough videos of Lara hitting 100s in South Africa and Australia on youtube itself.
sonofthedestroyer 5 months ago
ping pong ping pong ping... "dis is domination man"
PREDATOR: "dis is dread, man! truly dread!" (click click chirrruup)
Blackhoundrise 5 months ago
everytime i watch him i feel like i want to cry ,knowing i'll never get to see him bat again :'(
shantal577 8 months ago 2
Why must we always compare and in the process disrespect two giants of their times . Both were completely different batsmen and have mesmerized us with their batting ability, lets just leave it at that
joyd 8 months ago
tonytt55tony ure a dick, shut the hell up!
FalconzRETREAT 9 months ago
will gonna miss him forever...
jawadtlg 9 months ago
a god amongst men
10zs 10 months ago
it looks like he is playing base ball
best
thesmartone360 10 months ago
lara the gratest flat tack bully in the history of the planet.west indian pitches are the flattest pitches in the world.sub continent pitches turn a lot fom the third day on.australian pitches bounce a lot.english and nz pitches assist swing.sa pitches have decent bounce and decent movement.but west indian pitches?they mostly stay flat 5 days.oh lara the great.destroyer of bolers on the flat decks of the caribbean
oh mr kangaroo jump.keep jumpin jumpin jumpn
tonytt55tony 1 year ago
@tonytt55tony indian pitches are batting pitches no good bowler can take wickets in sub continent
and sachin has scored more hundreds at home rather away
thesmartone360 10 months ago
@tonytt55tony Have some damn respect. Lara scored some of his best centuries in AUS unlike a certain Tendulkar. Both are great....you fucking cock sucker.
trinikagekavir 8 months ago
till the 90's tendulkar was evn a better stylish.i dont call the pre meditated kangaroo jump all that sty;lish.
tonytt55tony 1 year ago
@tonytt55tony ofcourse coz you r from india. lol
xpressme21 11 months ago
mr kangaroo jump had a unique style,bu was and will always be the second best.
and someone said mc grath said he was the beest batsman he bowled to-is just distotrting the facs.mcgrath said lara was moe dangeous but tndulkar was the better batsman.so you can argu either ay from that statement.
tonytt55tony 1 year ago
those who say tndulkar played with better batsman they re joking right?in the 90's tendulkar was a one man team.emeber india had no bowlers not like WI with ambrose,walsh bishop dillon.if he had such bowlers som of his gratest away innings like the perth,captown,barbados,edgbaston all would have been great winnning hundreds.and lara had devcent batsman throughout.dont belittle guys like sarwan,hopper.chanderpaul,richie richardson even jimmy adams for a while
tonytt55tony 1 year ago
someone said lara tend to make bigger runs whenever he plays against australia and south africa.that is a friggin joke right?he scores big whenever he plays against australia in west indies.he nevr scored heavily against australia in australia.he struggled big time in sa.remember when wi lost 5-0 to south africa.lara struggled to put bat to ball entire series.a batsman of such supposd class should have come to terms with conditions atleast by the third or fourh test.but no sir-not even the fifth
tonytt55tony 1 year ago
compared to tendulkar lara had no balance in crease.his foor moivments were lousy,just a pr meditated kangaroo jump.to all those who say tndulkar is only an accumulator.they are right.last 7-8 years in tests he has been an accumulator-but with the best technique eve.and before that he was sheer delight.peerless.no body can touch him in style befoe that.his drives,both back and front foor were unmatchable.his flicks,pulls.cover drives all outstanding.
tonytt55tony 1 year ago
i hate this,having to belittle a great batsman.but u silly idiots leave me no choice.tendulkat was ofcours much better than lara.his defense was perfect.even to a true cricket fan,his style was more pleasing.lara could only hit square of the turf.tendulkar got all the shots.i think it comes down to racism.whites cannot accept an indian to be the best.they hav accepted blacks as their equal in sports because blacks dont threaten them in any other ara.but chinese and indians do.
tonytt55tony 1 year ago
i love the sound of th bat,why dosent other matches have souch soun?anyway a good batsman and a smashing hitter.
tonytt55tony 1 year ago
Lara was most inconsistent batsman amongst greats
007dalal 1 year ago
1:01.....that is the sweetest most exquisite piece of timing I have ever seen...mouthwatering strokeplay from the Caribbean magician.
maxlogica 1 year ago
I could watch him bat for weeks!!!! I was so lucky to watch 3 greats playing together Warne, Tendulkar and Lara.
maxlogica 1 year ago
I remember my uncle telling my how delightful David Gower was to watch in full flow...but I can't imagine anyone more pleasing to watch than Brian...on days like this he was almost impossible to bowl to...there was a hundred he scored against South Africa in 1996 World Cup in which he single handledly destroyed the strongest attack in the competition and knocked out the favourites where he simply hammered anyone that came on to bowl...
maxlogica 1 year ago
Lara is unbelievable to watch better than Sachin
gunot5827 1 year ago
WASIM ONCE SAID IN HIS INTERVIEW IN 1992 LARA CAN CLEAR THE FENCE ON THE BALLS THAT ALL OTHER GREAT PLAYER LEAVE!
SANJAY MANGREKAR SAID IF SACHIN WAS PLAYING ON 374 WOULD NEVER EVER HAD TRIED FOR A BIG SIX AS THE KING LARA WENT AFTER THE OFF BREAK OF MICHAEL WAGHN!
ronyaroon 1 year ago
HULLOW PEOPLE HOPE U GUYS R GUD! LET ME ADD A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT BRIAN CHARLES LARA AND SACHIN!
THE CENTURIES RECORDS AND MATCH WINNING PERFORMANCES DO MATTER BUT AS U GUYS R TALKING ABOUT THE NOVELTY OF THE PLAYERS LET ME TELL YOU THE ONLY BATSMAN IN THE HISTORY OF THE GAME HAS RAVISHED EVERY BOWLING ATTACK UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES IN ANY KIND OF SITUATIONS( WEATHER, WICKET, COUNTRY, BOWLERS AND MOST OF ALL THE SITUATION OF THE MATCH) IS ONLY THE KING OF THE GAME BRIAN CHARLES LARA!
ronyaroon 1 year ago
Some absolutely godlike strokes played right there.
Lawlz0rz 1 year ago 6
just google- best batsman of the modern era .... and watch the cricinfo video!
hypersonicdragon 1 year ago
One day and twenty twenty is not cricket,TEST cricket is cricket,that is what u have to look at! in test Tendulkar is an Accumulator not a dominator, Lara changes the game after his innings,he scores quickly and is constantly looking to attack! WI team is the most crap,there is alot of internal player disputes{like between gayle and lara,stupid Holding,etc},no bowlers, facilities,wicb disputes and lara had to deal with all that,that's why he quit abruptly. Caribbean isnt unified!
hypersonicdragon 1 year ago
MCGRATH said at the end of his career that Lara was Harder to bowl at than Sachin. MURALI said that Lara was the best he ever bowl to and he dominated him like no other ,when murali was at his lethal best. Shane Warne had to be dropped in 1999 series to prevent Lara from ripping him to Shreds & warne was in top form!! Lara has a higher strike rate,Lara test hundreds have Weight to them,as well as DOMINATING Flamboyance under Career-Ending Pressure,time& time again!!
hypersonicdragon 1 year ago 19
@hypersonicdragon not to mention sachin has been playing with 2 or 3 other world class batters for his whole career, in the 21st century lara has been holding the west indies up himself
lozzag13 1 year ago
@lozzag13 well said.
hypersonicdragon 1 year ago
@hypersonicdragon Damn rite its nice to] be so appreciated, I is a left handed genius of sorts, lol ;)
manomogul 11 months ago
ou can come at any angle...at the end of the day its TEST Cricket that reign Supreme.Tendulkar needed 15 innings more just to catch up to Lara, not to mention,Out of all the hundreds Sachin has produced in TEST how much of them actually stand out Dominating to the External Observer? NONE,he hasnt even produced any that come close to 277,375,213,153,400,and all those double centuries!he took back his record under career-ending pressure bearing the weight of a very weak team,WI administrators!
hypersonicdragon 1 year ago
well,well...im just reading some of the comments posted and let me say tendulkar is the most worshipped cricketer in the world,they consider him a god..now you think you can argue with such ignorant people and tell them Lara is Better,it's like talking to a bag of manure.
Lara is the better batsman and it's only Test cricket u have to consider kids,
ODI and 20/20 is Not cricket! they call it "Test" cricket for a reason.
hypersonicdragon 1 year ago
look on his face... he enjoyed molesting the bowlers hehehe
Blackhoundrise 1 year ago
to all those having an aneurysm."Brian Lara is One of the best batsmen of my generation, if not the best ever." Sachin Tendulkar
"Lara is the greatest batsman I have ever bowled to." Glenn McGrath .
genius is just not about numbers how can u say that lara is not consistent when he retired with a avg of 53 and only 6 not outs. Lara produced some of the finest and greatest knocks ever in the greatest fashion with the upmost skill and entertainment l
thebegotten0007 1 year ago 2
@vindaisatossermini Very good point man.
drthom007 1 year ago
@vindaisatossermini
check the stats from jan 1993 to dec 2002- 10 yrs when the baddest bowlers were at their peak. check them "away" too...lara aint even close-till tendulkar physically breaks down.
SonofPs 1 year ago
sachin only plays for records.... he never single handedly won a match for india...... lara is an artist... i would pay to watch lara rather than watch sachin for free.....
thebegotten0007 1 year ago
@thebegotten0007
I think Brian Lara, bless his heart, was a great batsman. But he is held in such high regard partly because of his swashbuckling style and the fact that his few highest notes(out of a career spanning several hundreds of matches )were higher than anyone else's. The truth is that he was nowhere near as consistently good as Tendulkar has been and still is.Also, Tendulkar has done better “away” than Lara.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@thebegotten0007
Consider this. In 4th innings, Brian averaged 2 runs lower than Sachin, and has 8 hundreds in winning causes vs Sachin's 18. And apart from the 153*, he has done virtually nothing in 4th innings chases. But that innings has always been cited in a "what has sachin done?" argument. Before Sachin buried the idiots at Chennai last year, of course.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs dude please do not make up stats , produce your source?
drthom007 1 year ago
@thebegotten0007
And let's not even bring ODIs into the picture. I'll risk sounding like a troll and say that it's ludicrous to me that anyone would look beyond Sachin as the greatest player in limited overs history. He has 33 hundreds in winning causes, has made runs eveywhere and in real pressure cooker situations (he averages 56 with 6 hundreds in ODI finals v Ponting's 38 or Lara's 28).
SonofPs 1 year ago
@thebegotten0007
The closest anyone comes in the ODI greatness stakes is Viv Richards, and Tendulkar has 10,000 more runs (say it out loud - TEN THOUSAND), at a marginally (45 v 47) lower average and marginally lower strike rate.
So, please, I beg of you fine folks, end this Sachin v Lara debate once and for all. I'll get an aneurysm if I have to listen any more about Brian Lara winning more matches (all eight of them) or having been a better batsman than Sachin
SonofPs 1 year ago
ill sum up everything for u.. as a slefish batsman..sachin was the best..as a team player and a miracle worker..it is lara..he played when it mattered sooo much...
ayaazcyclops 1 year ago
@ayaazcyclops yaar ayaaz i think u r an indian..cmon bro.this guy worked for 20 years for india and it took u couple of lines to sum him up as a selfish player.well if that is selfish then every1 shud giv selfishness a chance.try it out.wud make this world a better place..but remember selfishness does not inspire that amount of dedication which sachin possesses
maverickkris84 1 year ago
@ayaazcyclops bcoz sachin gave up many timeswhen india needed him...2003 WC final..99' test against PAK at chennai..he got out to saqlains doosra..there r many such innings..and when on 99 or 98..sachin always plays a single or a couple..lara hit 4s or even 6s to get to his 100s..thats y he is a team player..in terms of ability..wasim rated lara > sachin so did murali in terms of playing spin..
ayaazcyclops 1 year ago
i never saw tendulkar look this elegant or so classy.
21jasonh 1 year ago
@21jasonh What that actually means is that you have seen extremely little of Tendulkar or that your knowledge of cricket is extremely limited and blinkered by innate biases.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs thats just how i see it thats my point what is so wrong with what i think do u want me to agree with you ok i will tendulkar is the best bataman when it comes to storke play brian lara has to sit behing he can tcompaoir to tendulkar. ther u have it are u happy now
21jasonh 1 year ago
@21jasonh oh, thrilled. just wanted to point out how little u actually know about cricket- did you watch the roy fredericks clips right here on youtube? lara was fab when on song, but tendulkar was a cut above as an allround batsman...whether u like it or not,too bad......anyhow...ciao
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs well i hve seen alot of cricket i do a lot of reading i represent my contry in d under 19 so i played for barbdosany how my point still remains ur point remains also so explian somthing if tendulkar is an allround batsman what is brian lara u tell or what is an alround batsman
im waitin for ur answer
21jasonh 1 year ago
@21jasonh Oh well. basically lara is a hometown bully. SRT is king everywhere. also, check their stats till 2003. till tendulkar's career was almost finished with injuries and looked over he was miles ahead of not only lara, but also the pontings,kalliss etc....basically the others had to WAIT till 2003 for tendulkar to physically breakdown before they "caught up"...so lara, the others (and u ) can thank god for tendulkars injuries-they are the ONLY reason we are having this conversation
SonofPs 1 year ago
@21jasonh From 1993-2003, SRT avg.62 (including MUCH better away vs most of the major test playing nations)...Lara avg. 50 in this period ..basically till SRTs physical breakdowns it was a no contest.
& since u are playing in d "under 19" i honestly dont know how much cricket u have actually watched - cept for a few lara highlights and youtube clips..
i suggest u find some old tapes of '90s lara vs donald,and some other serious pace..then watch SRT vs the same bowlers- then u will understand
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs no no no i said i played under 19 for barbados im 30 yrs now so that was a while ago our argument was about style and grace not arvages 2 see lard cover drives with aaaaawww and ooooohs jus pure class i watch a lot of cricket alot and ive nevr seen grace like dat since lawrence rowe tendulkar style of battin looks ordinanry like any other batsman
ordinary cut shots drives flicks and pulls any way your point still taken and agian mines stays the same have a good day
21jasonh 1 year ago
@21jasonh
oh well, i guess lara at his best was more like pop art.
it does take a more sophisticated taste to appreciate the subtle sublime genius of a tendulkar.
SonofPs 1 year ago
i would like all idians to see what flair and grace is all about tendulkar vs lara in full flight would u watch a tendulkar 100 before a brian lara 100 not me lol
21jasonh 1 year ago
this batting display defines the word marvellous.
someone please upload his inning of 213 vs Australia in 1999.
TheSinnical 1 year ago
the best thing about being a west indian bowler is that you never have that feeling that Lara can put on a bowler----look at Kaneira's face lol. if you want more examples--check out chris lewis during the 375, and Peterson after the 28 runs in an over lol
emproar02 1 year ago
Did u see those shots..... poetry in motion!
sandivtt 2 years ago
you'll never see that from Tendulkar in Test cricket!
You can come at any angle...at the end of the day its TEST Cricket that reign Supreme..
now for the Tendulkar worshippers..tendulkar needed 15 innings more just to catch up to Lara, not to mention,Out of all the hundreds Sachin has produced in TEST how much of them actually stand out to the External Observer? NONE..he hasnt even produced any that come close to 277,375,213,153,400, and all those double centuries!
hypersonicdragon 2 years ago
Depends on what you want to see. Since you put in 153, try these: 241*, 136, 165, 169, 177, 155, 155*, 154*, 153, 103*, 160, 105* ... not to dispute the fact that BCL, when he got going, was more destructive.
alextierno98 2 years ago 9
Agreed you said it man tell them..they cant talk...^^^^^^^^ Tendulkar has no innings of significance just meaningless runs an hundreds!!LARA FAN 4 LIFE SIGNAL 2 LARA!! :D
J81988 1 year ago
thanks...just look at kaneria's face..{it's what did just happen..} that is the magic of Lara in Test Cricket...he dominates with Spectacular style and Flair with the weight and pressures of a weak team on his back!!!
hypersonicdragon 1 year ago
@J81988 For a cricket "fan" your comment is incredibly ignorant.
SonofPs 1 year ago
A grand total of 18 scores of more than 150. That says a lot.
bublubhuyan 1 year ago
LARA you beauty...
shaanju 2 years ago
musn't like running.
DKLillee355 2 years ago
what a batsman lara was
khanpreston1 2 years ago 2
this nigga could play
mkhan888 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Sachin is the best........he has very consistent for last 20 years........where can you find such a batsman?i am also a great fan of lara.....i love watching his batting......but sachin is better than lara.....
varunakavoor 2 years ago
did we ask you buddy??!!?
SACHIN IS A GOOD BATSMAN
he play for the records, look at his stats maan centuries!!!
LARA was a match winner.. when he came in his side great player of windies retired and he kept winning for them unlike gayle!!!
Gayle is like tendulkar, all he wants to do is put a show, but doesnt win for his team!!!!
LARA and INZI were class match winners
TENDULKAR and GAYLE are perfomers!!!
estimate15accurate 2 years ago
wunder how we guys sittin in front of our friggin lappies post such bold statements(literally).btw to all here...do u guys get into a fit of vengeance against sachin wen u see lara battin well..neways sachin wud care more about wat lara says about him than any of us dumbfucks..and lara himself admits that sachin is better
maverickkris84 1 year ago
@maverickkris84 you should listen to the entire interview, lara didnt say Tend was better than him.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA i think i saw it b4 sayin.look bro thr is a weight of expectations which lara did not hav..windies has an amazin crowd support who back them up even when they lose..while sachin was booed at his own home ground at wankhede for underperformin..its beyond a human to handle it.the way it is in our country.the guy has handled all that.if v cud get lara to vote he wud vote for sachin
maverickkris84 1 year ago
@estimate15accurate lara has 8 matchwinning hundreds to tendulkars 18. as far as
ODIs are concerned , i suggest we not even go there
SonofPs 1 year ago
@estimate15accurate Please go to youtube and type in " a word with sir viv richards part 2" and the very end he himself says who is the more Un- selfish player Lara or Tendulkar see for yourself in Sir Vivs words himself.
subroto81 1 year ago
In terms of talent, Lara is Pele whereas Tendulkar is Ronaldo. One who simply takes the opportunity without creating one. Lara is a beauty of the game. What a genius!
nasratkha 2 years ago
I'm not sure about the analogy. I think I'd go with Lara being Barcelona's Xavi; creative, brilliant, underrated. Tendulkar could be Ibrahimovic; very good but wildly overrated.
You see we can't use Pele and Maradona or even Zidane and (Brazil's) Ronaldo.
In the analogy, these players are all combined into someone called "Bradman".
Tr33fiddy 2 years ago
Lara is greater than Tendulkar.
The pro-Tendulkar people just point to statistics, but Lara brought far more to the game when he batted than pure numbers - style, finesse, genius, unpredictability, drama, power, entertainment, character, and most of all for me - pure, thrilling BEAUTY
mccoist355isback 2 years ago 4
Ten is the best batsman. Even a basic look at the stats will show that Lara only overshadowed Tenfor a continuous stretch of 3 / 4 yrs in the 2000s corresponding with Ten injuries. But several other batsmen also overshadowed Ten at that period. So, the only thing it would be truly fair to say is that a fit Lara is better than an injured Ten..otherwise why would he lag behind Tendulkar so much right up to 2003- a period at the end of which Lara was 34yrs old? Only one answer to that question.
SonofPs 2 years ago
Classic and basic logical error. Flair is not equal to better. Sure Lara may have had more flair than Tendulkar. So? If you cant find beauty in the glory of Tendulkars batting...then you dont know anything about batting... or you are a kid who has watched only cricket for the last decade or so..On you tube clips.
The oldest observers in cricket..Whove been watching before you were born...Benaud,Woodcock hold Tendulkar as the best they have ever SEEN. Never mind Lara.
SonofPs 2 years ago
See... its simple dude.
Indians and others can appreciate both Tendulkar AND lara. Lara for his artistic genius. Tendulkar for his superior allround skills and lack of any weaknesses.
You pakis unfortunately cant...and are anti Tendulkar for obvious reasons.
all the best ...anyway.
alllman2000 2 years ago
im not a paki
ZeAssain 2 years ago
sorry for the insult then. but u sounded like one.
alllman2000 2 years ago
I don't want to add more woods to this useless Lara,Sachin tag or war. Let me straight all what u say are true. Sachin has records. But lara can bat. If you don't understand it watch Tendulkars inning somewhere in You Tube and Then Lara's this inning or else in somewhere. You may understand what I mean.(Not the score). It has a word call "Entertainig".
hkadira 2 years ago
Check out their respective records till 2003. Tend was miles ahead of all batsmen. It is just that Lara (and a dozen others) filled themselves silly with easy runs from 2003-07 while Tend was struggling with serious injuries...that Lara,ponting and co. even figure in the same FRAME as Tendulkar.
If Tend had been fit he would easily have had 15000 runs, 50 hundreds and a 60+ avg by now.
The only thing you can fairly say is that a fit lara is better than an injured Ten..thats ALL.
SonofPs 2 years ago
@SonofPs sachin is a very good batsman and so is lara but sachin made most of his runs on flat WKTs in the sup continents and playing for a good team helps.Lara play for a team that put lot of pressure on him to score big. Lara is a player who will single handedly win a test match and that is something you cant say about sachin or any other player "as far as i know". Lara is a better test match player
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA . unfortunately, that is a very incorrect assumption. Tendulkar has done considerably "away" than lara. Lara , in fact, was more a home town scorer. Also, Lara,ponting etc have done quite poorly on the "flat" indian tracks.
A simple check would be Tendulkars and Laras performances in Australia, on the supposedly bouncy tracks( be prepared to get shocked)...
so, basically, your argument is wrong on almost every single count.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA .Also, till the 2000s, lara was infact in a better team than tendulkar was. Also, please note that lara has 8 matchwinning hundreds as compared to tendulkars 18. Except for the 153 lara(now countered by tendulkrs 103) has done virtually nothing in 4th inn chases, and actually avg less than tendulkar in the 4ht inn.
The thing is the flair, and artistry of lara are what make him endear himself to fans. Unfortunately ,though, in terms of pure batsmanship Tenduklar is simply better
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs you should get your facts rite IND was better that WI from1996 to ?????. the only reason why TEND have more than him is because he dont have to worry if he get out IND would have on chance of winning. have you notice when lara scores he will normally make more than haft the runs WINDIES made. do you know that lara broke almost all the test records? what has TEND did in TEST to be consider better than LARA?
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
There is this arcicle out now "Master of the Game" - some stats on Tendulkar. Please read and learn.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs Lara averages 42.31 while Tendulkar averages 48.45 in second innings knocks. However, Lara holds a slight edge over the Mumbai Maestro in fourth inning performances with an average of 37.17 to an average of 35.68 for Tendulkar. Lara's average of 165.65 in innings when he crosses the three-figure mark, as opposed to Tendulkar's corresponding average of 147.25.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
check your stats again.
you dont even know what the stats are....and before you forget Tendulkar has crossed the 3 figure mark 93 times (47 + 46)....by the time tendulkar finishes lara will not even be half the batsman of tendulkar...fitting
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs Lara is a better batsman than Sachin simply because he tends to score big whenever he plays against teams like Australia and South Africa and the stats actually support it. Lara has scored three 200s against the Aussies 2 of which have come in Australia and apart from that he has a test record of 400 as well whereas Sachin has a couple of 200s against New Zealand and Zimbabwe and that too in India.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
In Aus:
SRT :16 Tests 1522@58.53 6 100s
BCL: 19 Tests 1469@41.97 4 100s
Also check their records "Away" outside the subcontinent and home in the major Test nations : NZ,SA,Aus,ENG...Lara ONLY does better in SA, and that TOO post Donald. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of cricket will know how poor Lara was vs extreme pace inc. Donald.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA Tendulkar is not only a much ,much better batsman than lara ever was- he is still goint strong. Lara was good in patches when on song -and then he was awesome. Stats wise he filled his bootsesp 03-07 when EVERY fit good batsman in the world filled his boots , so making it superficially appear that the laras,pontings,dravids,kalliss etc of the world are Tendulkars equal.
They are not- never have been ,never will be.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
pls also see some roy fredericks clips- lara was basically just copying all the batsmen before him....Tendulkar is an original.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs so you are saying that an in form lara is not as good as an in form tend? when lara is in from he scores 200s vs SA and AUS.when tend is in form he score 100s and just a few 200s VS ZIM and NZ he score most of then in india( 200s). i forget an in from lara also broke the world of most runs in an innings not once but .......you know this too don't you?
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
that is EXACTLY what im saying. only in patches he is tendulkars equal when tendulkar is fit.
check the stats from jan 1993 to dec 2002- 10 yrs when the baddest bowlers were at their peak. check them "away" too...lara aint even close-till tendulkar physically breaks down.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs Lara has big scores vs big teams carring the west Indese on his back. I always felt he should not have been captain then there would not been any wondering who's better. A man carring a load vs a man with free hands,Tendulkar was captain, did he not fail? why did he give it up? what do you think would of happen if lara had give up? By the why the two best bowlers in world cricket Glenn McGrath and Muttiah Muralitharan consider Lara to be a better batsman than Tendulkar.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
Hmm, for every bowler who says lara is best...there are 3 who say tendulkar is better...including warne, wasim akram, donald etc etc...also, in 2003 till tenduklar was injured mcgrath said that tendulkar was the best. in 2007 he said lara was slightly more dangerous...so, he was not the only one fooled by the 03-07 tendulkar break down...as for murali,why dont u check out his record vs any top leftie
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs "I have bowled to both Tendulkar and Lara and I have found Lara more attacking. Tendulkar has a tighter technique, no doubt, but Lara can single-handedly win the game for his team. I am not saying Tendulkar cannot do it but Lara has maybe done it more often than him. If you are asking me who the best batsman I have bowled to is, then it's not Tendulkar and not Lara as well. It's Martin Crowe... he was an amazing batsman. " BY AKRAM
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
Tendulkar is the "unbowlable" batsman of my generation. He is ahead of lara.
AKRAM
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs "Unfortunately, I have not bowled enough to Tendulkar in Test matches but there is no doubt about his class. I have bowled against Lara and I have had some success against him. I think over the years I would say I have been fifty-fifty against both Tendulkar and Lara. I have got them a few times and they have got runs against me as well. I can never forget a 16-year-old Tendulkar batting on after being struck on the nose by a fast bouncer from me." BY WAQAR
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA where you get that from?
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
and many ppl have got double many more double hundreds such as attapatu...
remember, for every stat u may find in favour of lara there will be 3 in favour of tendulkar
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs yea ppl make double tons but only one has as much as lara ( bradman). Tend is only more consistent than LARA. what did tend do to be consider better than lara. if you say by being consistent, then he is the 7 best batsmen to ever live. i know 7 players who is more consistent than tend. i sure they r more then 7 players who is consistent than tend.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
so, lara converts more centuries into doubles -what it tells u is that when the going is good lara infact is the one who plays for records.opposite of what u said...the only reason lara has decent stats is because he makes sure to pile on runs when the going is good to cover up for the innumerable flops - and because of the 03-07 period when he filled his boots with cheap ,easy runs like a lot of batsmen
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs what do you mean by cheap runs? because lara coverts more tons to double tons mean he plays for records? By the way what kind of injury did tend had? was because tend was injure lara was able to score the runs he scored? THE ONLY THING YOU SAID THAT MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL IS THAT TEND WAS INJURY. by the way what was the going was ever good for him, if their was ever a time why shouldnt he "pile on runs" because tend is more consistent mean he is better?
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
By "cheap" I mean EVERYONE (who was fit) scored HUGE runs from 03-07.
From 03-07 when ALL the bowlers u mention were fit- Tendulkar avg. 62- miles ahead of the rest.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
SO, for 10 yrs , in more difficult conditions for batting, with most of the top bowlers at their peaks, Tendulkar was well ahead of not only lara- but everybody.
including, and importantly , AWAY.
lara, never ever, had even a few years when he was well ahead of the pack. from 03-07 lara was just one of numerous batsmen who piled on the runs
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs tend better because he more consistent
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA yes or no ??
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
Oh well, ive got most of my comments from other blogs...
but it isnt only more consistent......it is also at what "level" you are consistent.
a person may be a consistent club player, a consistent national player, a consistent international player etc.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA BUT the greats are the ones who are consistently better than ALL others in the sport.
Lara was equal or perhaps even more dangerous than tendulkar in PATCHES when he would cash in and make sure to score big and so make up for the umpteen flops.
But lara was never ahead of the rest of the pack for any prolonged period..Tendulkar was for a decade.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
Why is Federer considered the Greatest? coz he is consistently better than the rest for a long time now...Nadal is Federers equal or perhaps even better in patches on certain surfaces...but if you ask the knowledgeable tennis fan he will tell you that Federer has to go down as the Best over Nadal.
Because Fed is better than ALL others over a period, Nadal has not yet achieved that peak as yet
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs tennis is not a team sport , it is two guys playing against each other. let me answer your question, he is the greatest because he win more turny than anyone. but you can not compare a tennis great to a cricket great. cricket is a team sport. in your logic TEND is the 12 th greatest batsmen.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA Sachin Tendulkar: An ``unbowlable'' batsman of my era "--------WASIM AKRAM
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA .Lara was basically a hometown bully. i saw in another vid his record "away" from 93-03.... If you take away lara's home scores and dead rubber scores he wouldnt even count as a great batsman. he would probably avg 40 or less
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs check lara record in SA AUS ENG and SL. when lara was play with a good team from 1990 to 95 he avg 60 and he played for the worse WI team he avg 38 from 1996 to 2001 and 2001 to 2005 he avg 64( yea 64!!). dont know how much he avg from 05 to 07.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA Sure, LOTS and lots and lots of players have done well for a 2,3 year stretch...but mostly in groups.
Tendulkar was well ahead of ALL other players for a DECADE....only Don Bradman was that ahead of others for a decade. certainly not Lara.
And from 93-01, Tendukar was the main batsman carrying the indian team.dravid,lax,sehwag took over later
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs why can't you get your facts right !!!!!!!!check dravid record from when he start playing cricket to when he stop you will notice how much help TEND had. Dravid avg 60!!! away from home compare to TEND 55. dravid carved up four centuries in successive innings, and hit four double-centuries in the space of 15 Tests he is a "great player" , he often outscores team-mates like Tendulkar and Laxman in the course of partnerships with them.DRAVID is the player who carry IND.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
And why dont you try comparing Tendulkars and Dravids record from the time Dravid debuted to 03, b4 tendulkar almost retired?
From Dravids debut to 1st Jan 2003, here’s the stats overall:
SRT : 114 inn, 6328 runs @ 60.26 , 23 Hundreds
RD : 118 inn, 5614 runs @ 53.46 , 14 Hundreds
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA As regards “Away” matches if you exclude Ban and Zim in this period and only include “major test playing nations” as is your wont you get :
SRT : 53 inn , 2955 @ 59.10 , 11 Hundreds
RD : 58 inn, 2896 @ 55.69 , 9 Hundreds
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs like i said your facts are wrong RD avg 60 away SRT 55...most of the stuff you posting is wrong. you should try cricinfo.com, beside when did donald or wasim ever said that SRT was better than lara? Warne said tend was better, this should make my point, LARA has a better record against warne but warne thinks that TEND is better WHY? have you ever watch lara play murali? do you even know murali record against lefties? you should find out and don't be ignorant ( lack of knowledge)
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
ALL my stuff is right. like i said it is from 93-03.
ALSO ,check the parallel periods from dravids debut to 03
TILL tendulkar got injured from 03-06 , he is ahead of dravid both at home AND away against MAJOR test playing nations.
easy to check-so why dont u?
ANd the best part is that after he got reasonably fit again (though arguably not at his peak)after 2007- he AGAIN betters Dravid etc.
SO out of a 21 yr career the others catch up ONLY during tendulkars injuries.
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs from 90 to 96 lara had a better avg and from 97 to 99 tendulkar had a better away avg that dravid and from 2000 to now dravid away record is better. so is steve waugh better than both lara and tendulkar, steve was the leading runs scorer for over 12 year and tendultar for a year or two and lara was for 3 years i think.
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
Dude, for 10 (TEN) years from 93-03 Tendulkar has done much better than ANYONE. except for bradman , noone has done so much better than all his peers for a 10 year period (lots and lots and lots of batsmen do well for a few years here and there)
ONLY the KINGS like bradman and SRT dominate the world for TEN years in a ROW. these kind of feats are RESERVED for the KINGS>
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs you check lara and tend record between 1990 - 96 and tell me who had a better record!!! , tendulkar was not better than rest for ten years he was more consistent for a longer period than the rest. when lara was playing with a team as good as india he avg 60+(1990 to 96).hooper and richie is not in the same class as vvs, dravid etc. india team is better than WI from 96 to now( batting).
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MATMICSHA
Bullshit: Tendulkar was better from 93-03. Not JUST better than Lara but better than ANY other batsman.
ONLY Bradman has had a ten yr period when he was the best
Lara is a hometown bully and a dead rubber player.
Take away his dead rubbers and hometown scores his average will be LESS than 40/45.
SRT is KING everywhere, vs anyone
SonofPs 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
ALSO. Till 1993 Tenduklar is better. he avcg 50. lara 46. Lara had perhaps 2 of the best yrs of his life in 94 and 95. In 95 Tenduklar DID NOT PLAY test matches.
So, out of a 14 career till 2003, lara was basically better for ONE yr -1994(95 tendulkar did not play)
And till 2003 ALSO - you will find that Lara is a Hometown bully- and only with the the exception of SL Lara is below average everywhere else
SonofPs 1 year ago
@SonofPs tendulkar play with the likes of dravid,VVS,Sourav Ganguly and Mohammad Azharuddin. What most people fail to realize is that LARA carry the WI team all by himself, have you notice when lara fail WI also fail and when tendulkar fail, india is not likely to fail as well. i believe what make a player great is not only being consistent but what you have done for your team and the impact you have on a match
MATMICSHA 1 year ago
@MATMICSHA
Bullshit. Lara played in an equall good batting team in the 90s- perhaps better with richie, hooper, etc....lax,dravid,sehwag etc only came into their own in the 2000s. also the WI bowling was MUCH better especially away.