Discussion in 'Cricket Talk' started by Passionate Pakistani, Oct 5, 2018.
If you have to pick one in your team, who will you go for ?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Virat kohli probably. It is going to be a hard decision.
Probably Kohli. Will easily go down as the greatest batsman from Asia by the time he finishes.
Virat any day. Impact player
Gesendet von meinem SM-G925F mit Tapatalk
Tbf Sachin had a very weak team until Ganguly rise otherwise Sachin was carrying the whole Indian team whereas Virat has plenty of good batsmen and bowlers around him.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
kohli, he will break sachin's records.
Virat without a doubt.
Kohli is by far the better batsman among the two.
I don’t buy this at all. Before Ganguly and Dravid in 1996, Manjrekar was phenomenal for a few years, there was always Azharuddin too.
After 1996 Dravid and Ganguly provided a solid lineup who were then followed by the likes of Sehwag and Laxman and Co.
So, the oh-so-emotional sob story of tendi being some kind of Lone Ranger “carrying the burden of a nation on his shoulders” is pure fantasy and as a result complete rubbish.
It’s just another excuse to try to prop up a player who in reality was one of about a dozen or so players in his era with similar records and ability to a league above them.
Back to point, if I had to pick between kohli and Tendulkar, it’s kohli all the way. He has an impact on the team, has better shots, is much better to watch and will probably end up with better stats too.
He may have an attitude problem, but at least he shows he cares about the team and will go to lengths to get the team to win. Tendi was a boring individual and always just about himself.
Agreed Tendulkar was having one of the best all time batting lineup of Indian History around him. He was not even the best among his own team.
Exactly, I will never understand why Indians downgrade some very fine players and servants of Indian cricket just to somehow prove ONE person’s greatness.
Hopefully be the time he retires, we'll see his name along side SRT in respected All Time XI's created, and his name alongside SRT among the top 5 in the greatest cricketers lists created by greats of the game.
A real tough decision but i will go with Virat.
Virat does have a attitude problem, if it was just good attitude, i would always pick Sachin.
Sachin, for most part of his career, played in a weak team.
Stood above all of his pears for most of that time, yet many of his great knocks weren't able to fetch his team the victory.
Gave him the WRONGFUL title of being "selfish".
Now, Virat, is just simply the best. He is peerless in ODI's.
He is THE BEST chaser that there ever WAS. Even Bevan doesn't come close to what Kohli does.
The only guys who come close to him in tests, are, Smith and Williamson. (Root is a DISTANT third)
He bats big, likes the captaincy challenge. (Reminds me of Ponting with that)
Sent from knowhere
Can people please qualify this statement instead of just saying it?
And what what difference does it make anyway. Sangakarra played in a weak team - maybe he should be the greatest ever too. Williamson is playing in a weak team now. Does that make him greater than kohli and smith just because of that?
I never called him the "greatest ever". Just that he stood WAY above his peers, is all.
Lara, in later part of his career, was even more great because he was in a weak (terminal) team. That one series against SL is proof enough.
The same can be said of Sangakara, although he was without Jiyawardene for only 3 years or so.
That depends on one's viewpoint.
Say, Ponting played in a would beater team and performed extremely well, in wins. But does his performance is as good as, say, Younus Khan, when his team is in trouble or even loosing?
For me, its good when your team is performing well and you do slightly better than your peers but GREAT players come through when the rest of the team is down (and out).
That is just my personal opinion.
Sent from knowhere
I respect your opinion, and you make some good points, I just don’t agree with a lot of what you said.
When you say sangakarra was only without jaywardene for 3 years, does that mean, if you have another good player in your team, that the team is not weak? What about tendi having ganguly and dravid at the other end from 1996? Then having the likes of Laxman and Sehwaq from 99/2000 in addition to the other two? What about Azharuddin being part of the team until 2000? I mean that covers tendi’s whole career! So why is it said that he was in a weak team? I never understood that!
Lara proved his greatness way before that SL series - almost single handedly taking on the Aussies not to mention the mauling he continually gave England over the years. There’s no way tendi was WAY above this peer.
When India beat Australia in 2001, it had more to do with Laxman, Dravid and ganguly’s captaincy than tindi
Thanks (i guess)
A team's TRUE weakness depends more on bowling than batting. What's that saying? Bowlers win matches..
Now India, for the first decade of Sachin's career, only had one world class bowler, Kumble. In order to seriously challenge big teams, one need at least one world class fast bowler. India, had NONE.
I mean, srinath, psrsad, kurovela, mohanty etc were serviceable but not world beaters like, say, Wasim, Waqar, Walsh, Ambrose, Shoaib .
Sorry to have mislead you. By "peers" i meant his "team mates", so my bad on that.
Sangakara had a fast bowler like Vaas, who was just short of great. He also had murli, also mendis for a year or so (at his peak) than Herath took over from 2009 onwards.
But yes, after Vaas, SL has dipped quite a bit in bowling quality wise.
Sent from knowhere
Great player, I was reserving my judgment until after the England series but this guy just makes runs and more runs, he doesn’t even get out, Even in England when he got out it wasn’t as if he had been figured out, these days there is this thing about his that he hasn’t scored in KO WC matches but knowing Kohli he’ll make 200 in next years WC Final.
Hmmmm ..... it's funny how SRT's fellow batsman in the 90's were so good now all of a sudden. But the problem here is that India has always had brilliant batsman at home. The issue comes up while playing abroad. Mr. Azharuddin has an average of 36.40 away from home. I'm not even talking about his performance away from Asia. That's how good he was.
As for Mr. Brian Lara, let's introspect a bit. Let's look at his and SRT's Test performances in the 90's, minus Zimbabwe -
From 1st Jan, 1990 till 31st Dec, 1999 (minus Zimbabwe) -
Lara - Innings - 112; 51.60 (ave); 100's - 13; 100/innings ratio - 8.61
Home - 59.33 (ave); Away - 44.68 (ave)
SRT - Innings - 105; 59.38 (ave); 100's - 22; 100/innings ratio - 4.77
Home - 59.82 (ave); Away - 59.03 (ave)
Caught, cough ........ but, but, but ........ Errr, I mean .... Errrr .... next criteria, please?
Such a shame Sulty Gaga deliberately stopped posting in this thread the moment I made my last post. LMAO.
Between the two, Ill pick Sachin. If I have to pick best batsman of all time, its Inzi!!
Tendulkar was a great player without a doubt and he was in a weak team!! Kohli was part of a strong team but this indian team is about to get serious hammerings now! As this Kohli team is entirely dependent on 3 senior players in Rohit, Kohli and Dhoni. Everybody knows you get Rohits partner out and get through Rohit and Kohli partnership then you get soft 2 batsmen in that middle order. In lower order, you have resistance in shape of Dhoni but thats about it rest of the cast can be tamed!!
Neither of those. I'd rather play with 10 men than have those guys in the team
Basically both chokers. Stats can be racked up as much as you want, but that thing in your belly called guts, will, fight when you are under the cosh. Neither have it. Scoring in losing causes is just for losers.
Look at Lara, that 99 series alone vs Aus outdoes anything these two have ever done.
Look at babar, no one gave him any respect until the NZ WC match despite him racking up a mountain of runs.
If I were to pick one, Kohli hands down. At least has something more than just sitting scoring selfishly at one end.
Babar has been a revelation.. top top batsman.
He's only young yet carries the team well in all situations. Only thing letting him down is he's Pakistani and won't get same recognition. Just like Sanga of SriLanka or Kallis of SA
“Scoring in losing causes is just for losers” ..... LMAO.
Someone’s lungi is in a twist after the stats above proved that Lara wasn’t even in Tendulkar’s league back in the 90’s.
But coming to the point. Which batsman held the world record of scoring most Test runs and most Test centuries in loses when he retired in 2007? His name is Brian Charles Lara. LMAO. That was until Shiv Chanderpaul broke those records.
BTW, let’s focus on another aspect. Who made it to Richie Benaud, Don Bradman, Cricinfo, and WISDEN’s All Time Test XI, Tendulkar or Lara? Someone please answer me, LMAO.
BTW, who was rated as the 7th greatest cricketer of all time by ESPN Legends of Cricket back in 2001, a list compiled by 20 highly qualified ex legends and pundits of the game. Tendulkar or Lara? Someone please answer me. And why exactly did Lara go missing in that list? Awwwww ...... the whole world is against Sulty Gaga.
Who made it at #3 in David Gower’s list of 50 greatest Test players, Tendulkar or Lara? HaHa ..... Awwww ...... such a shame that he too is blind to what’s obvious to Sulty Lala.
You would be better off making love to your Chicken Younis’s posters that you bought back in the 90’s. A joker who couldn’t even make it to Cricinfo’s Test XI of the last 20 years. Your and his auqaad goes hand in hand.
BTW, here’s Viv Richards saying whom he would have in his team, Tendulkar or Lara. From 0:43 -
Here’s the most respected cricket analyst in history speaking on who he thinks in the best batsman after Bradman -
HaHaHa. And please, try starting your post with something else other than the boring, predictable, “Touched a nerve ....”
Imbecile, you aren’t capable of getting on mine or anyone else’s nerve.
Ooh looked like I touched a nerve!
Little missy bubbly changing goal posts....why keep changing them - before it was 90s....now up to 2007?
Well congratulations.....2 can play at that game.
Ponting, Ian Chappell, David boon along with many more all rated Lara higher
So whatever little girly - cricket is a man’s game. Let the men discuss shall we? Don’t worry your little head about it.
Congrats, little wuss! You make a hell of a comeback. HaHa ..... who is changing goal posts? You were the one dancing naked and screaming how Lara was so much better in the 90’s. All it took is just a look at the stats to confirm that Lara wasn’t even anywhere near, let alone better.
cricket is a man’s game? And that’s coming from someone who has a Chicken Shit as his hero, LOL. And I guess it was because of your manliness that you were booted out from the other forum, right?
Hmmm - I didn’t actually say anything above about Lara being the best in the 90s. That’s assuming you can read and assimilate information. Please go back and educate yourself.
And goalposts - why pick up the whole of the 90s only and excluding Zimbabwe? Why? Zimbos were certainly a better side in the 90s than they are now with the flowers, heath streak and co. Tindi started his career in 89, so why not go back to then. Oh yes he got owned by pak in 89. Found the pace too hot to handle by his own admission. Yea let’s exclude that! Fact of the matter is their records up to the end of 1999 were very similar with tendulkar having a better average due to his 12 not outs (mainly due to his selfishness).
And if we go in to weighting in terms of meaningful runs - it’s a complete no contest! Lara’s one 153 not out is better than anything tindi’s ever done in his career.
So little missy. As I said cricket is a man’s game. Let the men analyse ok?
And you’re a little indian following Pakistani men around in not one but two different PAKISTANI forums! Have some dignity! Don’t humiliate yourself further.
HaHa .... if I recall correctly, Lara’s own team mate Ridley Jacobs called him a selfish player who cared very little for his team. How does that taste? Of course you’ll find selfishness in the Indian one because you have no other way to counter it, LOL. A fan of those match fixing scroundels of the 90’s accusing others of selfishness, LMAO.
I removed Zimbabwe because they were minnows for the first half of the 90’s, while being descent for the other half. Of course they still managed to defeat your bunch of match fixers that too at your home.
I excluded the year 1989 because Lara didn’t make his debut back then. I’m comparing both of them in a 10 year period. Found those ball tampering cheats too hot too handle? HaHa .... a 16 year old kid making his debut in an alien country and still managed an average of 35. BTW, how many centuries did Lara score against Wasim Akram and Chicken Younis?
Laxman’s 281 is better than anything Lara has done in his career. It came at the height of Aussie dominance. India were 1 down in the series, and following on in that match. Laxman helped us win that Test and the series. That’s better than anything Lara ever did. How does that taste?
BTW, Tendulkar helped India chase 380+ against England at home, scoring an unbeaten century. And unlike Lara, he wasn’t dropped a dozen times.
Yea, and your manhood resulted in you being thrown out of the big forum, and now having to live in this small pond, right? LMAO.
Let’s address one thing at a time. I don’t really like to talk about my escapades elsewhere but since you fangirls are so obsessed with it, I’ll oblige. I was asked to leave that forum in a PM conversation because I criticised Misbah too much who was playing a very darpok (you can even say girlie) brand of cricket. The forum owner didn’t like it because PP was basically Misbah’s PR machine and said it’s better I take a break and come back when Misbah has retired.
So you are right - it was my manliness (extreme manliness may I add!) that caused me to leave that forum so (I can’t believe I’m saying this but) you may have a point.
Incidentally, I left that forum in 2013ish and joined this forum in 2010. So it wasn’t actually because of that that I joined Cricistan. I was already a member and posted on both.
On to Laxman - great innings and also great 180 by Dravid too (shame tindi choked and made only 10!)
Honestly that really is greater than anything tindi’s ever done, so respect to both of them especially Laxman. It doesn’t quite rank as high as Lara’s 153 not out because Lara did it in the 4th innings against a great bowling attack, batting and shepherding the tail - I still marvel at that innings. Pure genius of batsmanship in every respect.
In 2001 Aussies were chasing 380 odd and were 74-0 at one stage. So we must give harbajhan a lot of credit there too.
But seriously, I salute Dravid and Laxman for that performance. Had a real impact on world cricket too as that is what stopped the trend of enforcing the follow on.
On to 1989 - another cry baby story. Oh boo hoo he was only 16 making his debut. Who cares 18 year old Waqar was making his debut too, but while Waqar showed he was ready for international cricket, the little mister clearly wasn’t. It’s ok feasting on indian medium pacers, but you play against pak and you’re in with the big boys son!
So Lara never made a test century vs wasim and waqar, that’s true. But now comes the crunch - why do you mention it? According to you, the Ws were rubbish right? So what difference does it make? Can’t have it both ways beti.
And remind me, how many test centuries did tindi make vs Waqar and wasim? Oh...the one century right...when Waqar was wayyy past peak....and oh yes what match was that? That’s right the one tindi choked in!! The man had 16 runs to get with plenty of wickets in hand, and....cough cough choke choke! This is brilliant - talk about shooting yourself in the foot!
I see it slightly differently. Waqar and wasim were so great that they didn’t let the greatest batsman in the world prince Brian Charles Lara make a century against them. Shows the W’s greatness! I want to thank you miss bubbly, you have allowed me to kill 2 birds with one stone!