:redjump: :bluejump: Another milestone 8-)Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
Printable View
:redjump: :bluejump: Another milestone 8-)Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
The upper-cut from hell
Lee, who has had an ordinary series so far, built up consistent pace today. In the first over after lunch, he dug one in short. Sachin Tendulkar, well entrenched by then, waited for it to rise, arched his back a bit to make room, and guided it over slip. The shot was delicate and breathtaking at the same time. Lee's pace almost carried it for a six.
Another Record to Gods name
Guys i just realised that SRT has equalled Allan Borders record of scoring 50 or 50+ runs in an innings
Both are placed at 90 after todays innings (51 fifties + 39 hundreds) !!!!!!!
courtesy : orkut
http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite...8?OpenDocument
New Delhi, Oct 29 (PTI) The Delhi and District Cricket Association today felicitated Sachin Tendulkar for becoming the highest run-getter in Tests.
In a simple function held before the start of the third Test between India and Australia at the Ferozeshah Kotla stadium, DDCA President Arun Jaitley presented the star batsman a pair of shoes and congratulated him on crossing 12000 runs in the longer version of the game.
Indian opener and Delhi captain Virender Sehwag was also present at the function.
The 35-year-old Tendulkar surpassed former West Indies captain Brian Lara's record of 11,953 runs during the second Test against Australia which India won by 320 runs in Mohali. PTI
Totally unprofessional.. didn't expect this from you..
"not feeling well" ? :huh:
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemaster1982
:rotfl: :rotfl:
:lol: Niraiya leave edutthachu :oops:
Quote:
Originally Posted by crajkumar_be
'Kali, enna oru innings :bow: :bow: :bow: chinna pasangallAm pAthu kathukkanum. Vintage sachin as cricinfo put it. Mark Nicholas also acknowledged it in the commentary. Its a freakin shame that he got out on 68 :hammer:Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
inimEl ivinga eppa out aayi, australia out aayi thalaivar aaduRadhu.. A century is LONG due :cry:
http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite...6?OpenDocument
Tendulkar one of most well-behaved cricketers: Ranatunga
T V Sriram
Colombo, Oct 30 (PTI) Adam Gilchrist might have called Sachin Tendulkar a "bad sport" but for former Sri Lanka captain Arjuna Ranatunga the Indian batting maestro is one of the best well behaved cricketers he had played with.
"He (Tendulkar) was one of the nicest guys I played cricket with ... The thing I admired of him was the commitment for the game. I am very glad that he has left behind (the issue)," Ranatunga told PTI.
"I have not seen anyone who is so committed to cricket. Actually I learnt a lot from him. I was not committed enough for my batting. The result shows. I think he (Tendulkar) is a role model for any young cricketer," Ranatunga said.
Ranatunga, now the Chairman of Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC), said Tendulkar deserved to become Test cricket's highest run-getter surpassing West Indian great Brian Lara.
"I think he (Tendulkar) deserves to do that because of the commitment. He is one of the greatest cricketers I have played cricket with." Ranatunga feels that Tendulkar can easily play a couple of years of cricket and he should be given the luxury to decide when to hang his boots.
"I still feel he can easily play a couple of years. I think the important thing is he has to take care of his injuries. When you are getting older you are getting into all these issues.
"But he is still fit enough to play cricket. Even Sourav Ganguly, he is still getting runs. I think there will be a big vacuum when the 'fab four' goes," Ranatunga said.
"Only Sachin should decide (on his retirement). If he feels that he is not enjoying the game he should announce his retirement," he added. PTI
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content...ds/283032.html
Test matches
Most fifties in career
Player Span Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 50+ 0
SR Tendulkar (India) 1989-2008 153* 249 26 12105 248* 54.28 39 51 90 14
AR Border (Aus) 1978-1994 156 265 44 11174 205 50.56 27 63 90 11
BC Lara (ICC/WI) 1990-2006 131 232 6 11953 400* 52.88 34 48 82 17
SR Waugh (Aus) 1985-2004 168 260 46 10927 200 51.06 32 50 82 22
SM Gavaskar (India) 1971-1987 125 214 16 10122 236* 51.12 34 45 79 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
http://www.sachinism.com/viewArticle.php?articleid=202
By far the best i have seen or played against-ALLAN DONALD
Sachin Tendulkar has often reminded me of a veteran army colonel who has many medals on his chest to show how he has conquered bowlers all over the world. Which is why I find it amusing when critics suggest that he plays well only at home. Do they realise that they are talking about a guy who has scored centuries in almost all the Test-playing countries?
I must admit that I was not entirely convinced that Tendulkar had something special about him when I first heard about him. It was prior to South Africa's return to world cricket that the "Tendulkar buzz" was heard around the county circuit. He played a season for Yorkshire, but did not really get going. However, he did score one century in a Sunday League, the rerun of which I saw on television. There was a lot of Sunil Gavaskar in his style, and he also had the balance that nobody else possessed. But these were glimpses of potential and I did not think he would be consistently good for a long period of time.
How wrong I was. Tendulkar got better and better with each passing year and today he is the most frightening batsman as far as bowlers across the world are concerned. Everybody is king at home, and scoring heavily in your backyard has never really impressed me. However, Tendulkar has 16 centuries outside India, which is more than half of all his centuries. Many quality batsmen end up with that many centuries in their entire career, so that number is a clear indication that we are talking about a freak player - someone who is as good and as consistent abroad as he is at home.
As a bowler you have to have your gameplan ready before bowling to Tendulkar. Sachin looks to leave a lot of balls in the beginning, and as a bowler your best chance against him is in the first 20 minutes. During our team meetings, we often speak about the importance of the first 12 balls to Tendulkar. If you get him then you can thank your stars, otherwise it could mean that tough times lie ahead.
Consistency is the factor that makes Tendulkar special. He is often spoken about in the same breath as Brian Lara, but as far as I am concerned, the comparison does not even begin. Lara is not half as consistent as Tendulkar and lacks the discipline of the latter. The left-hander plays in a more loose manner and is not that controlled or patient during the first 20 minutes of his innings. Lara was unbelievable in 1994, but he has never been able to recreate that magic consistently after that
Which is why I rate my dismissal of Tendulkar at Durban in 1996 as the best ball I've ever bowled in Test cricket. I remember that over very clearly. Tendulkar had just hit me for two boundaries, but I decided to stick to my outside-the-off-stump line. The ball just nipped back sharply and claimed his off-stump. It was a perfect ball and, more importantly, exposed a tiny chink in the army colonel's armour. Since then we have worked on bowling that ball against Tendulkar and have had some degree of success with it.
At 29, Tendulkar is at the middle of his career and from hereon he can score another 15 to 20 centuries, taking him close to the 50-century mark. He will continue to terrorise bowlers for another six to eight years, and, hopefully, he will be able to keep the motivation going.
Great players often decide to retire out of the blue. This is particularly common among those who are family men because they find it increasingly difficult to spend time away from their near and dear ones. I've heard that Tendulkar is deeply attached to his children and might face such a crisis. However, like many admirers all over the world, I certainly hope that he succeeds in keeping his focus on the game for many more years. I think he owes it to the game and to his admirers.
ALLAN DONALD
'the white lightning'
confesses that sachin is the best
http://in.news.yahoo.com/48/20081017...tendulkar.html
Pakistani cricketers hail Tendulkar's record breaking feat
Fri, Oct 17 09:24 PM
Renowned Pakistani cricketers today lavished praise and accolades on Sachin Tendulkar after he eclipsed Brain Lara's record to become the highest run-getter in the history of Test cricket.
Pakistani greats -- Hanif Mohammad, Javed Miandad, Zaheer Abbas, Aamer Sohail, Rashid Latif, Saleem Malik, Mohammad Asif, Aaqib Javed -- and current leg spinner, Danish Kaneria all agreed that Tendulkar deserved the feat and said only he should decide when it is time for him to call it a day.
"I am very happy to see Sachin achieve this record. I have been waiting for it because it is a pleasure watching him bat. He has brought a lot of joy to, not only Indians, but cricket fans the world over," Hanif said.
Hanif, who himself was known as the "little master" for his concentration and ability to make big scores, said Tendulkar still had cricket left in him and can continue playing for a year or two.
"He is still hungry for runs and he is batting superbly even now. I think only he can decide when he must retire but for now he has done the subcontinent proud," he said.
He rated Tendulkar and West Indian great Lara as close to Don Bradman in terms of their achievements.
Miandad, who remains Pakistan's highest test run-getter with 8832 runs, said he had always admired Tendulkar as a batsman and his ability to stay focused on his game in such a long career.
"I am not surprised he got to the record today. Records are meant to be broken but this one is special because it shows the enduring qualities of Sachin's batting," Miandad said.
"He stands apart because he is a true professional and can take pressure," he added.
Miandad played in the Test against India at Karachi in November, 1989 in which Tendulkar made his debut and said even then he had realised Tendulkar was destined for greater things as he was very composed while facing a fierce bowling attack.
"He was a teenager but he was very composed and calm and although he didn't score many runs we all felt he was a different class from others." Abbas said people who compared Tendulkar and Lara and commented that the former was not a match winner were mistaken.
"Tendulkar is a superb player of any bowling and under any conditions. The way he has kept on scoring runs all these years proves his staying power and world class quality. He truly deserved this record and honour," said Abbas, known as the "Asian Bradman" for his run making qualities.
Former captain and wicketkeeper, Latif said he had learnt a lot watching Tendulkar bat from behind the stumps.
"There is no doubt about his greatness as a batsman and he is also a very good human being. I learnt seeing him bat and guide the other batsmen with whom he batted." Latif, however, felt that Tendulkar had reached 12,000 runs two years late.
"He has been under pressure for a while now and he has come out firing everytime. I think he can continue playing for another two years. He should decide when is the best time to go because it would be sad if he was also forced to leave like some other former greats in acrimonious circumstances," he said.
Sohail said Tendulkar is still the top batsman in the Indian team in terms of sheer performance.
"I think this record today shows he is still up there on dent of his performances. He has been and has remained a pure run machine," Sohail said.
Malik said he was just proud that Tendulkar had brought the Test record to Asia and the subcontinent.
"I have always enjoyed watching him bat when in full flow. I wish him the best for the future." Javed, who figures in many a battles against Tendulkar, said the master blaster deserved the record.
"He is the best batsman I have bowled too and I am really happy he has broken the record." Kaneria said he had played a number of Tests against India in the last four years and bowling to Tendulkar was always a challenge.
"I enjoyed his wicket the most because of his sheer greatness as a batsman. It is no surprise he is now a record holder. He is really one of the top batsmen around even now," he said.
Asif was of the view that India's last tour to Australia has seen the rebirth of Tendulkar.
"The way he played there he showed it was all rubbish that he had become fallible to the short pitched ball. I think no batsmen has scored so consistently in every second match like he has done. It was a great experience bowling to him," he said.
http://cricketnext.in.com/blogs/vvee...n-batsman.html
From boy wonder to champion batsman
Posted Friday , October 17, 2008
It's been a long and hard journey, which has lasted nearly two decades, from a modest middle class boy to becoming a champion batsman, Sachin Tendulkar, has made the cricket-crazy country of ours go wild with joy by becoming the highest run-getter in Test cricket.
The Mumbai lad, whose only interest as a kid was to play cricket round the year, looked relieved and relaxed during the ceremony to honour him after the first day's play in Mohali, as he must have been sick of being reminded day in and day out by everybody who came in contact with him.
With over a million hearts rooting for him to get the record and another ten million tongues wagging, it was time to act, and act he did in style despite the pressures building up within, especially for those last ten innings when he came in sight of the world record. For him every time he came out to bat for those 246 innings so far must have been pure magic with the knowledge and satisfaction of conquering the world and entertaining the millions of his fans world over.
It was in 1989-90 series in Pakistan that as a curly haired 16-year-old boy wonder Sachin took on the might of Imran Khan, Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis and came out with flying colours. The little man (then a boy)built the platform for a great career with sweat and blood (literally). Who can forget the blood soaked face of the little boy after being hit on the face by Waqar bouncer in the very first over he faced.
But that hit on the face perhaps acted as a catalyst and the poor bowlers world around were to suffer later on. The little lad, more determined than ever to prove a point, took on the might of Pakistan cricket almost singlehandedly and proved to the world that he was here to stay.
He not only made it a habit to rub the best bowlers in the business in the wrong side but also enjoyed watching them react. The more frustrated they became the more joy he would give the spectators by punishing them mercilessly. He was the matador while the bowlers were like the bulls to slaughter.
As the rigors of different format of the game took its toll on his body, particularly his elbow and back, the carefree and attacking young batsman, that he was, gave way to a cautious and matured but rarely a defensive one but the magic and innovative shots he churned out mesmerized even the biggest critics of his, including some of the senior and retired Aussie cricketers.
Probably the only blemish in his entire career was to discard the Indian captaincy, some thought, but again here the sixth sense or shall we say the seventh sense in this case proved the master-blaster was right because he started playing more freely without the burden of captaincy and put great spinners like Shane Warne and Mutthiah Muralitharan to sword.
An innocent looking boy suddenly seemed to acquire gladiatorial proportion in the eyes of his bowlers but a messiah to his die-hard fans, who would travel miles just to watch their idol bat out the opposition.
It has been a long and hard journey for the boy wonder but there was no denying that we were witnessing the future champion batsman in the making and true to our belief, he proved it by first becoming the highest run-getter in One-Day cricket and then on a bright and sunny day set the stands at Mohali on fire by becoming the highest scorer in Test cricket as well.
Indeed, it has been a wonderful experience for people who have watched him play in both versions of the game and it will take some beating for the likes of Pontings, Haydens or Smiths to surpass this champion of champions in the near future.
Every Indian, I am sure would have jumped with joy as the little master Sachin Tendulkar surpassed Lara's Test aggregate of 11,953 runs and many more might be planning a grand party to celebrate this feat and why not.
Its party time folks! Let's celebrate this feat of Sachin as it is not everyday that an Indian becomes the highest run-getter in the world.
http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2002/sep/03sachin.htm
He is adored by millions, yet he is a man utterly, completely, alone.
Year in and year out, he outscores everyone in the international arena -- and is deemed a failure.
There is no known means of calculating the pressure -- in pounds per square inch -- he has constantly performed under, ever since he came on the international scene as a chubby faced 16-year-old. So what makes him tick? What is this metal he is made of, that can take stress levels spaceships could crack under, and still survive and excel?
In a bid to find out, I went over to the MIG sports club in Mumbai one Friday afternoon last year -- and watched, while he lifted and pushed and pulled and tugged at weights with the same intensity he brings to his batting.
I then spent an hour talking to him. He took every question head on, answered without hesitation.
And through it all, he was still -- as still as when he addresses the ball. Occasionally, there would be the slightest of nods. Even more rarely, the barest hint of a smile.
And so he talked, till the tape in my recorder ran out. And then he asked me, have you got all you were looking for?
How does one answer that? How does one tell a Tendulkar that I could ask questions, and listen to his answers, for hours without even scratching the surface?
He shook my hand, he trotted off to his gleaming red sports car, he put his gym gear and music into the boot, and he slid away from the parking lot.
Alone, in a world of his own making.
Excerpts, from a conversation with Faisal Shariff:
How different is the Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar of today from the SRT who walked out 14 years ago at the National stadium in Karachi?
I think I am more or less the same, but a few changes have taken place. One is the experience I have gained – I have learnt to analyze the game a little more. Every player is a learner in this game and learning never stops at any age. That is the beauty of this game, and that is happening with me as well. I have learnt a lot of things, but it is never enough.
What do you remember most clearly of that first outing as a Test player in Karachi?
I remember taking my stance with the people jeering at us. I cannot forget that -- I was tense and nervous. I didn’t know what was happening around me.
How much have you changed as a batsman down the years?
I’d like to put it this way – the destination is still the same but one tends to use different avenues to reach there. Then I wanted to score big, now I want to do the same. But now I have got more options to solve the problems, and that happens with experience.
You score 1000 runs in a calendar year, and are told that you are out of form. How do you live with that?
It is very difficult to live up to people’s expectations, which are very high. I believe that if I can live up to my own expectations -- and I believe that I set reasonably high standards for myself -- then I am doing a decent job.
But does it upset you to be told that you have failed?
Yes it does. But I don’t blame them -- it’s their opinion, I can’t go around changing people’s views. I set my own goals and if I can reach my targets, then it is not a bad thing.
You live in a narrow world, bounded by 70 yards in the field and the four walls of your home or hotel room. You are a prisoner of your own fame. How do you live with that?
It’s not easy, but sometimes it is very interesting. It works well when you want to be away from people, to be by yourself or with your family and close friends. But there are times when I feel like going out and mixing, and that is not easy; there are times when my family wants to go out but we can’t, because there are boundaries for me. I don’t want to blame anyone for it. People wish you well and pray for you – and then when they see you in real life they get excited and want to come up and say hello. It is nice, but it does not allow us to live our personal lives freely.
When you walk through hotel lobbies and stadia, you have your earphones plugged in and your eyes are fixed on the ground. Is that escapism?
I accept that I do it. It may sound funny, but I’m still very shy. I can’t face people sometimes. Very rarely can I look back at someone and smile. That’s probably something that I’m still learning to do.
What do you listen to?
Everything. I love Pink Floyd and Dire Straits. I also like Lata Mangeshkar, Kishore Kumar and Asha Bhosle. I also like the new singers. That keeps me going. I love (the Dire Straits album) ‘Sultans of Swing’.
Is there a personal vendetta involved when you bat against certain bowlers? You have taken on Henry Olonga, Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne, Michael Kasprowicz and Fanie De Villiers. Is that rivalry for real?
I wouldn’t say it is an intentional thing. But yes, it does play on my mind. If ‘X’ bowler gets a batsman, he will then want to level the scores. People pick up on that and say, this is where he leveled scores. Sometimes you want to take charge, get on top of the bowler and show him that you can bat. Sometimes it just happens.
Lately, you seem to be more willing to give lip to bowlers who give you a mouthful. What’s with this new avatar?
I have always been aggressive. Sometimes it happens on the spur of the moment, and it only happens because I want to win. I never cross limits and I never start it myself -- it’s only if it starts at the other end that I give it back. And it is never personal.
Statistics show that as a captain, you failed...
I wouldn’t say I failed, because I’ve always had tough tours, tough opponents. I led against South Africa, West Indies and Australia in their respective countries. I wouldn’t say the team loses because of the captain or wins for the captain. It is always a collective effort. If the team wins, it is not the captain’s victory, it is a victory of the team.
As a batsman, whenever a bowler has looked to get on top of it, you have taken the challenge. For instance against Fanie De Villiers in 1996, when he kept getting you out. Have you felt similarly the need to prove yourself as a captain?
First, I want to clear this -- I got out to Fanie only twice. That happens to everyone, it doesn’t mean that if you get out a couple of times you stop playing that shot for the rest of your life. I don’t think that is the right way to look at it.
The same goes for captaincy – it is not an individual thing. I am in total control when I am batting or bowling. But in captaincy, you have to look after the other ten players. You can tell them what to do but you can’t do it for them. So these are two different issues. You can’t compare them. As a batsman I can plan things and make them happen just the way I want them – I can’t always do that as captain.
As captain, you believed that all 14 players should be ready to play the next day, whereas others believe that those who are not playing should be told the previous day...
If you pick a side of fourteen, then all fourteen should be ready to play. There are times when you look at the wicket on the morning of the game and then decide the right combination – it is not like you have to announce the combination the previous evening itself. If you have come to play, then you should be ready to play – how does it matter if you prepare yourself on the eve of the game and the next day the captain tells you that you’re not playing? You are here to play cricket, you have to be prepared for all these things.
Sachin, you will probably never understand what insecurity means – your name is the first that is penciled in, so how can you understand what the fringe player in your squad feels like?
Of course I understand what it is to be insecure about one’s place. I have also started out as any other player. I was dropped on a couple of occasions in New Zealand. One should never think ‘what if I don’t play?’ That is a negative attitude, and that should not happen. If you have been picked to play in the fourteen then you should be ready to play anytime. Someday your turn will come.
What is your vision for Indian domestic cricket?
The first thing that I would like to change is the wickets. We should play on good tracks, where there is enough help for the seamers early on, then the batsmen take over, then the last two days, spinners get a chance too. If we play on tracks like that, it will help us when we travel abroad.
What are your views on the contract system?
The contract system is just another form of security for the player. If something happens to a player when playing for his country, then there should be someone to look after that player. A contract system will help the player know that if something does go wrong, he will still be able to look after his family. I am sure that even you are here interviewing me so you can look after your family. Everybody has an ambition -- but if you go deep inside you eventually want to look after your family.
Did you get the support you wanted when you led?
There are times when you desperately want something to happen, but it doesn’t. So I won’t say that I got it completely, but sometimes one tends to expect little more than what you get. The players tried, but somehow the luck was not enough maybe? We needed 120 runs to win a Test match in Barbados and we lost; we had more than half a day to get three wickets in Johannesburg and it rained; we had a day and a half to get the Windies out in Trinidad and we couldn’t… Sometimes it was luck, sometimes I felt it was not the right kind of effort in the right direction.
Were you always given the team that you wanted?
No, I wouldn’t say that. I didn’t get the players that I wanted. And that was pretty obvious because the team is selected by the selectors and never by the captain.
But the captain always has his say...
The captain can given an opinion. The selection committee was more co-operative during my second stint as captain.
How come Sourav fought and got Harbhajan Singh into the team despite the selectors’ reluctance to pick him?
It wasn’t only Sourav and John Wright who fought for him. It was all of us. All the senior players fought for his inclusion. We pushed for him because we knew that Harbhajan was a very good bowler and that he should be given the right opportunity at the right time. And if somebody doesn’t perform in a game or two, then he shouldn’t be dropped he should be given a reasonable opportunity.
Would you ever want to lead India again?
I haven’t thought of that yet. I just want to enjoy my game. I am open to it but not right now. The door is not shut though.
How does it feel not being captain? Standing at deep in the field at third man or fine leg?
It’s okay. I am enjoying the game. It is a view that I haven’t experienced in a long time. You can read the game better from there too and an odd suggestion or two can always be given to the captain. I might tell him this is how I feel the batsman might play or this is how we can stop the flow of runs. Maybe talk about getting a particular bowler on and changing the field. I do make my suggestions -- then it is up to the skipper to take my advice or not.
You love to bowl...
I always felt that I should have been a fast bowler. I was always attracted to fast bowling. Basically I have always liked players who have been attacking. I love aggressive bowlers and attacking batsmen. My physique does not allow me to become a fast bowler, that’s why somewhere down the line I made a lot of compromises. And this is what I have to live with -- bowling gentle seam-up, sometimes leg spin. I bowl in the nets all the time. There is no pressure on me as a bowler and that is why I can do what I want to do.
What does money mean to you?
Money is important in life – anyone who says it is not is not speaking the truth. I think money is important but it shouldn’t reach the extent where it dictates to you. Take care of the runs and the money will follow you, because whatever is happening is because of cricket. For the last 11 years I have only worried about how to score runs, not about how to make money. And my family has played a big role in that -- they have supported me and shown me the right path; especially my elder brother Ajit and another brother Nitin, who is the eldest amongst us.
Has fame ever gone to your head?
No, and that is another area my family has played a big role in. My brother always tells me, whatever I have achieved, I could have done better. So I always feel incomplete, like whatever I have done is not enough.
Where do you see yourself five years from now?
I will still be in Bombay with my family. I like to live in the present. Whatever has happened has happened; I don’t want to think about it, or about what will happen. I want to score as many runs as possible and win as many matches.
Who do you compete with?
I am not competing with anyone in particular, only with the opposition – I always want to score one run more than the opposition, take one wicket more. I have never ever competed with an individual.
What is the one lesson that cricket has taught you?
Don’t take anything for granted. I think that is the biggest thing in life. Never to take anything for granted. If you do, then you will be on the right path.
http://content-ind.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/373350.html
Opinion | Guest Column >>
A player of two parts
Why the man who now holds the record for the most runs in Tests is two batsmen in one
Suresh Menon
October 17, 2008
Circa 1990: three or four shots for every ball © Getty Images
In November 1989, a London-based writer came to the Indian team's nets in Karachi to seek out a player he was told had the "best on-drive in the game". That player, Sachin Tendulkar, was 16 and yet to play a Test, but he already had his future mapped out - by others as much as by himself. Anything less than the most centuries and the highest aggregate in international cricket would count as failure.
Nearly two decades later, when the inevitable has come to pass, fans may be merely satisfied rather than overcome, and even quite blasé about it. If it was ordained, where is the surprise? Such is the tyranny of inevitability. It throws a veil over the hard work, the physical toll, the mental strain that have gone into the making of a record-breaker. Of the 19 batsmen who have scored more than 8000 runs, only five have held the highest aggregate record, only three have played 150 Tests, but only one, Tendulkar, has been two different batsmen.
Tendulkar made his debut in Pakistan. Of his team-mates then, one has become an insufferable television commentator, and two others have become good ones; one was convicted of murder and sent to jail, another banned for life for match-fixing. One eliminated the line between whistle-blower and perpetrator, one ran a banned series of matches, another was chairman of selectors. One has dropped out of the public eye and another has turned television actor. But Tendulkar bats on. Longevity is intrinsic to greatness.
At 19, the Mumbai boy was already the world's best batsman. Interestingly, Tendulkar seemed to agree with this assessment in a quiet, matter-of-fact way. This lack of arrogance possibly caused him to be less destructive in Test cricket than he might have been, but it was a crucial element in his becoming a national icon. Indians don't like their sporting heroes to be conceited; they give their hearts to modest players who underplay their emotions while performing consistently.
Of the two Tendulkars who played for India, the first had three or four shots for every ball; the second seemed conscious of three or four ways it could have got him out. Yet, amazingly, the spirit of the boy is ever present in the batsman, whether 16 or 35. A decade after making his debut, he was still teaching Shoaib Akhtar at the World Cup the difference between a good batsman and a great one. When pushed to the wall, Tendulkar continues to exhibit a rare creativity. It is not enough to somehow escape, it is necessary to escape while teaching the bowler a lesson he will never forget.
In sport as in art, late works usually crown a lifetime of effort. Looked at from either end of their careers, sportsmen present a harmonious picture. Occasionally, the "late style" (to borrow a phrase made popular by Edward Said) is about intransigence and unresolved contradictions. It doesn't fit into the whole.
Of the batsmen who have made over 9000 Test runs, six found their idiom at the start of their careers and kept with it (including, so far, the four still active). The later Brian Lara was not much different from the early Lara, the Allan Border who made his first run was the same as the one who made the 11,000th. The two exceptions are the Indians, Sunil Gavaskar and Tendulkar.
Like great batsmen of any era, Tendulkar often seemed to be playing on a different planet altogether, keen to sculpt an innings that both merged with the team effort and stood out for its uniqueness
It is not uncommon for batsmen who began their careers as leading stroke-makers to finish as part of the supporting cast. Age converts the carefree into the careworn. Rohan Kanhai is a good example of a batsman who began by inventing strokes against the best bowling and ended by playing "experienced" innings in the shadow of the next generation.
Experience often means that players are more aware of things in their own game that do not work, and are chary of taking chances. Why attempt a risky boundary when there is a safe single to be had? Firebrand speakers become merely adequate, daredevil adventurers become boring teachers, those renowned for thinking out of the box show how comfortable they are sitting in it. It is the same with sportsmen.
"Late style is what happens," wrote Edward Said in his study of musicians and writers, "if art does not abdicate its rights in favour of reality." Great players go against the grain as well as place themselves at the head of a trend.
Gavaskar who began his career as a generic name for batting technique, discovered late the joys of hooking fast bowlers; a ferocious attack on Malcolm Marshall and Michael Holding featured in his 29th Test century. It took him just 94 deliveries, and was one of the fastest in the game's history. This from a batsman who once took 60 overs to make 36 not out in a World Cup match.
Tendulkar's journey, though in the reverse direction, is no less dramatic. If Gavaskar found his responses within the tenets of orthodoxy, Tendulkar, no less orthodox for being a more attacking player, extended the reach of such orthodoxy. Five years ago he began to play a shot to the left of third man, which began with him withdrawing from the line of the ball delivered by a fast bowler and glancing it fine - but on the off side. It called for remarkable control and steely wrists. It wasn't as ugly as the reverse sweep, but lacked the grace of the "straight-bat pull", where he (and later, Virender Sehwag) whipped the ball, tennis-style cross court. Both strokes were created for the one-day game, but are no less effective when played wearing whites.
It may have been the Chennai defeat against Pakistan a decade ago that first sowed the seeds of the new Tendulkar. He was distraught at getting out so close to a win. He saw the need to be around; occupancy of the crease was not just a personal quirk but a team requirement. Tendulkar, the champagne cricketer with a dancer's footwork, curbed himself. He didn't actually become a clock-watching clerk, but he understood the need.
Sydney 2004, when he scored most of his runs on the on side in a devastating display of self-denial © Getty Images
The series of injuries that followed - toes, back, elbow - meant that effervescence was replaced by effectiveness, the straight and narrow was preferred to the fantastic. Like great batsmen of any era, Tendulkar often seemed to be playing on a different planet altogether, keen to sculpt an innings that both merged with the team effort and stood out for its uniqueness. His Sydney double-century in 2004, when he scored no boundary between the bowler and point, came after self-examination revealed that he had been playing away from his body too often. It was almost as if the off side did not exist; on display was discipline as well as proof that he could get the bowlers to bowl where he wanted them to.
The boy who hit Abdul Qadir for three sixes in Peshawar had moved aside for the man who let the ball go outside the off stump with the realisation that not playing was an integral part of playing. In 110 matches before that Sydney Test, Tendulkar was involved in 31 wins; in the 39 Tests following it, he played his part in 16. The win percentage had gone up from 28 to 41 (obviously, there were other circumstances too). Tendulkar, an intelligent man, could not have been unaware of this. When individual effort does not contribute significantly to team victories, there is unhappiness all around. By 30, with nothing left to prove as a batsman, he set about correcting this nagging anomaly, this disconnect between his performance and the team's. If that meant he would have to cut out the flamboyance, then so be it. If fans complained that he was playing within himself, he could point to India's wins.
But Tendulkar is more than the sum of his figures. His mere presence is a morale booster, both for his ten colleagues in the team, and the billion supporters outside it. As remarkable as his record is his self-possession. His head hasn't changed size, his boots haven't grown smaller. He alone knows what it means to be Tendulkar, with its frustrations, its sacrifices, and the need to be Tendulkar at all times. He is a one-man university that teaches sportsmen how to handle money, fame and pressure.
Indians refuse to give Tendulkar the luxury of failure. The mirror he holds up to us is a distorted one, making us seem, like him, invincible, rich and accomplished. When he fails, therefore, it is as if we fail. That is the biggest compliment fans can pay their hero. But it is a heavy burden, even if Tendulkar seems to carry it lightly.
A rough calculation shows that he averages over 200 days in a year travelling for cricket, playing it at the highest level, or practising for it. Two-thirds of a year devoted to cricket, and not one bad day at work? Even Mozart was allowed an occasional off day. The future will treat Tendulkar much better than we have, although we were given the privilege of watching the boy grow into a man and live up to potential. Even that is a remarkable feat. Not every promising player accomplishes as much as he promises. Tendulkar has. Let us celebrate that. His record will be broken. But his impact will last.
Suresh Menon is a writer based in Bangalore
© Cricinfo
http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/cri...750232469.html
Peter Roebuck
October 17, 2008
Page 1 of 2 | Single page
A HUSH goes around the ground whenever the second Indian wicket falls in a home Test match. It is not a mark of disrespect towards the departing batsman but a sign of the excitement felt about the imminent emergence of his replacement.
As Sachin Tendulkar steps onto the field, a roar erupts that could shake trees, and does not abate till he has taken guard. Another deathly quiet falls over the ground when Tendulkar is removed cheaply. Shock came over the faces of spectators when he lost his wicket in Bangalore. India rides a tide of emotion every time its chosen one enters the arena. A power has been put in Tendulkar's hands that could easily be misused.
But it has not been all idolatry. Tendulkar's mistake in the second innings provoked fury among locals convinced he has failed too often at critical moments. Never mind that he had almost saved the match. Critics point towards a flaw in his temperament, an inability to rise to the occasion. They yearn for a Viv Richards to strut his stuff in the glorious hour, or a Brian Lara to take a match by the scruff of its neck. One ancient scribe speaks of "the myth of Tendulkar". Perhaps he has lacked the strength to impose himself at telling times. But a man must be taken as a whole.
Ever since he first appeared as a precocious tousle-haired teenager, Tendulkar has known nothing except exorbitant expectations. It is no small thing to become public property at 16. Nor has there been any hiding place. Not for sportsman the luxury of private studios. Every time he leaves his home it is an appearance; he loves swanky cars but can drive only in the dead of night. It is against this background that his career must be judged. It is not an achievement. It is a miracle.
Remarkably, Tendulkar has managed to retain his health and reputation through it all. His body might be complaining but his spirit endures and he seems immune to stress and sickness. During the course of his tumultuous career, Don Bradman suffered several serious setbacks. Tendulkar has even retained a semblance of normality in his life, a wife, children who tease him and egg him on, friends, a restaurant, the same smile. Although their records are almost as impressive, Rahul Dravid or Virender Sehwag do not attract as much attention.
Throughout, there has been something in Tendulkar that sets him apart. No matter how much he has immersed himself in the comfort of the team, he has been treated as a special case. Partly it is the purity of his style. From the outset, as another child practising as dawn broke over Shivaji Park, he could bat in the classical way. Coaches and contemporaries insist that he was not taught the game; it came from within, like an underground spring.
From the outset, it has merely been a matter of correcting the bad habits that creep in the moment the brain sleeps. His strokes are played with a bat somehow broader and straighter than any other, and his feet seem to move effortlessly into position. It is enough to watch him defend. Yet he does not disdain flourish, rejoices in the sudden crack past point or the nonchalant flick off his pads, strokes that thrill the crowd.
But it goes beyond facts and figures, style, sportsmanship and masterly innings, or else others could join him in his isolated acclaim. Tendulkar has been the hero his country needed. Indians spend billions of dollars every year trying to lighten their skins. Advertisements for the appropriate creams are shown between overs. India knows that its film stars have not crossed cultural lines. Booker Prize winners cannot inspire a nation half as well as the sight of a demonstrably brown boy repeatedly cracking feared bowling around. It was his combination of aggression and productivity that defined him. And he has been untarnished by scandal. Read the papers in India. They are all about corruption and communal agitation and political disputes. Impoverished India yearns for a champion. Its gods are exotic, its films are escapist and its batsman is a conqueror. Affluent India is another matter, and might one day put cricket in its place.
Tendulkar has uplifted lives. He has not railed against colonialism but has instead inspired his countrymen by deed alone. Supporters cherish his introductory masterpieces, daring and almost cheeky, his hundreds scored in adversity, notably in Birmingham and Melbourne, and his later more restrained efforts. It is idiotic to expect a man to be the same at 35 as at 16. Maturity has a beauty of its own, and is not to be avoided.
They remember his superb strokes, resounding straight drives, hooks and the back-foot punches past point that tell him everything is in its proper place, and his duels with Wasim Akram, Shane Warne and Brett Lee.
Now comes the greatest reassurance of them all. Sometime during the Test match starting in the Punjab today, Tendulkar will surely collect the 15 runs need to become Test cricket's highest scorer. Ordinarily, the number of runs a player scores is not regarded as definitive. Apart from skill, the amassing of vast career tallies requires an ability to avoid injury, war and whim. But runs are hard earned in Test cricket, besides which longevity can be as much a bane as a boon. All the more reason to respect this record for it tells a tale of many things, the boy who grew up before our eyes, the batsman who survived everything the bowlers or life could send his way.
All things considered Tendulkar stands above his contemporaries. For all his fortitude, Steve Waugh was in a lower league, and never imagined otherwise. Lara was dazzling but also destructive. At his best, the Trinidadian was supreme but he toyed with his talent. Vanity and selfishness lingered too long in his character. Viv Richards was explosive but also erratic. Brilliant in his 20s, he did not age as well as the Indian. The West Indies barely survived his anger. It is too early to place Kevin Pietersen.
Tendulkar may be in decline but he has been a champion for 20 years. He has had more on his shoulders than any contemporary and has remained intact. Oh yes, and he has scored a few runs along the way, and given immense pleasure to millions of people, Indian and otherwise.
Page 2 of 2
A HUSH goes around the ground whenever the second Indian wicket falls in a home Test match. It is not a mark of disrespect towards the departing batsman but a sign of the excitement felt about the imminent emergence of his replacement.
As Sachin Tendulkar steps onto the field, a roar erupts that could shake trees, and does not abate till he has taken guard. Another deathly quiet falls over the ground when Tendulkar is removed cheaply. Shock came over the faces of spectators when he lost his wicket in Bangalore. India rides a tide of emotion every time its chosen one enters the arena. A power has been put in Tendulkar's hands that could easily be misused.
But it has not been all idolatry. Tendulkar's mistake in the second innings provoked fury among locals convinced he has failed too often at critical moments. Never mind that he had almost saved the match. Critics point towards a flaw in his temperament, an inability to rise to the occasion. They yearn for a Viv Richards to strut his stuff in the glorious hour, or a Brian Lara to take a match by the scruff of its neck. One ancient scribe speaks of "the myth of Tendulkar". Perhaps he has lacked the strength to impose himself at telling times. But a man must be taken as a whole.
Ever since he first appeared as a precocious tousle-haired teenager, Tendulkar has known nothing except exorbitant expectations. It is no small thing to become public property at 16. Nor has there been any hiding place. Not for sportsman the luxury of private studios. Every time he leaves his home it is an appearance; he loves swanky cars but can drive only in the dead of night. It is against this background that his career must be judged. It is not an achievement. It is a miracle.
Remarkably, Tendulkar has managed to retain his health and reputation through it all. His body might be complaining but his spirit endures and he seems immune to stress and sickness. During the course of his tumultuous career, Don Bradman suffered several serious setbacks. Tendulkar has even retained a semblance of normality in his life, a wife, children who tease him and egg him on, friends, a restaurant, the same smile. Although their records are almost as impressive, Rahul Dravid or Virender Sehwag do not attract as much attention.
Throughout, there has been something in Tendulkar that sets him apart. No matter how much he has immersed himself in the comfort of the team, he has been treated as a special case. Partly it is the purity of his style. From the outset, as another child practising as dawn broke over Shivaji Park, he could bat in the classical way. Coaches and contemporaries insist that he was not taught the game; it came from within, like an underground spring.
From the outset, it has merely been a matter of correcting the bad habits that creep in the moment the brain sleeps. His strokes are played with a bat somehow broader and straighter than any other, and his feet seem to move effortlessly into position. It is enough to watch him defend. Yet he does not disdain flourish, rejoices in the sudden crack past point or the nonchalant flick off his pads, strokes that thrill the crowd.
But it goes beyond facts and figures, style, sportsmanship and masterly innings, or else others could join him in his isolated acclaim. Tendulkar has been the hero his country needed. Indians spend billions of dollars every year trying to lighten their skins. Advertisements for the appropriate creams are shown between overs. India knows that its film stars have not crossed cultural lines. Booker Prize winners cannot inspire a nation half as well as the sight of a demonstrably brown boy repeatedly cracking feared bowling around. It was his combination of aggression and productivity that defined him. And he has been untarnished by scandal. Read the papers in India. They are all about corruption and communal agitation and political disputes. Impoverished India yearns for a champion. Its gods are exotic, its films are escapist and its batsman is a conqueror. Affluent India is another matter, and might one day put cricket in its place.
Tendulkar has uplifted lives. He has not railed against colonialism but has instead inspired his countrymen by deed alone. Supporters cherish his introductory masterpieces, daring and almost cheeky, his hundreds scored in adversity, notably in Birmingham and Melbourne, and his later more restrained efforts. It is idiotic to expect a man to be the same at 35 as at 16. Maturity has a beauty of its own, and is not to be avoided.
They remember his superb strokes, resounding straight drives, hooks and the back-foot punches past point that tell him everything is in its proper place, and his duels with Wasim Akram, Shane Warne and Brett Lee.
Now comes the greatest reassurance of them all. Sometime during the Test match starting in the Punjab today, Tendulkar will surely collect the 15 runs need to become Test cricket's highest scorer. Ordinarily, the number of runs a player scores is not regarded as definitive. Apart from skill, the amassing of vast career tallies requires an ability to avoid injury, war and whim. But runs are hard earned in Test cricket, besides which longevity can be as much a bane as a boon. All the more reason to respect this record for it tells a tale of many things, the boy who grew up before our eyes, the batsman who survived everything the bowlers or life could send his way.
All things considered Tendulkar stands above his contemporaries. For all his fortitude, Steve Waugh was in a lower league, and never imagined otherwise. Lara was dazzling but also destructive. At his best, the Trinidadian was supreme but he toyed with his talent. Vanity and selfishness lingered too long in his character. Viv Richards was explosive but also erratic. Brilliant in his 20s, he did not age as well as the Indian. The West Indies barely survived his anger. It is too early to place Kevin Pietersen.
Tendulkar may be in decline but he has been a champion for 20 years. He has had more on his shoulders than any contemporary and has remained intact. Oh yes, and he has scored a few runs along the way, and given immense pleasure to millions of people, Indian and otherwise.
[/code]
I don't understand these **?$heads always whining about Sir "being on the decline" blah blah blah.. dei vennaingala, scores-a paarunga da.. shots a paarungada :hammer:
peter roebuck :mad:
goyyalaaaa..."indha vanja pugazhiyellam vera yartayavadhu vechuko"
Sehwag bowling podum bothu sachin kooptu yetho sonnaru...
The very next ball sehwag bowled Hussey! :o :D :clap: :notworthy:
Sehwag sachin kitta oodi vanthu hug pannitaru! :P
:yes:Quote:
Everything. I love Pink Floyd and Dire Straits. I also like Lata Mangeshkar, Kishore Kumar and Asha Bhosle. I also like the new singers. That keeps me going. I love (the Dire Straits album) ‘Sultans of Swing’.
:notworthy:Quote:
Originally Posted by sourav
Sir's bowling talents are not used at all :cry:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sourav
http://www.tabla.com.sg/epaper/fvxp/...p?param=&page=
Go to second page 8-)
http://epaper.dinamalar.com/DM/MADHU...01_003_001.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by crajkumar_be
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Defau...Mode=HTML&GZ=T
Long Playing Record
In an age of hype, more perhaps has been asked of Sachin Tendulkar than other greats of the game. SURESH MENON examines whether the life on the field has kept in step with the myth
IT IS POSSIBLE that Sachin Tendulkar can walk on water. That wouldn’t surprise a billion Indians, who also probably believe he can catch bullets in his teeth and has X-ray vision. When he was hauled up for ball tampering in South Africa (a technical, rather than a deliberate crime), the whole nation jumped to his defence, and it nearly split the cricketing world. Now Adam Gilchrist has dared to speak the unspeakable — suggesting that Sachin might be human after all, and subject to the pulls and pressures of humankind.
Of course, by the time you read this, order is likely to have been restored. Gilchrist will say Sachin is a great player and a personal friend, and everything he wrote about the player changing his version of what happened during the Symonds-Harbhajan fracas was taken out of context. He will blame it on the media for blowing up the story. And laugh all the way to the bank as his book sells.
What sort of a man is this who can do no wrong? I once read about the footballer Pele being hauled up by a referee — later, the referee was reprimanded for this act. Perhaps, some day an umpire might be officially chastised for giving Tendulkar out leg before. Future biographers might go out of their way to look for stories that show up Tendulkar in poor light, to balance the near-saintly qualities that are in the public domain. They might struggle. The stories they find might merely show that Tendulkar was human after all — and that’s not a bad thing to be.
Indians like their heroes to be modest, non-controversial, high performers. Heroes have to continue to be heroes even when no one is looking, and had our national obsession with Tendulkar been based solely on his game, it wouldn’t have mattered.
But we want our heroes to be pure as the driven snow, and that is why any suggestion of impropriety is taken as a personal insult — and, by extension, a national insult. Our heroes tend to be conscious of this, and live the life of heroes. Tendulkar, it must be said, has had to make less effort than most, because he is by nature hero material. Sunil Gavaskar put it best when he said that Tendulkar’s most striking feature was his balance, “both on and off the field.”
BALANCE WAS the key to the batting of the two men whose record Tendulkar’s will be compared to, Don Bradman and Gavaskar.
If Bradman himself hadn’t said so, it is unlikely that Tendulkar would be clubbed with him. When the Don pointed out the similarity between the two to his wife, Tendulkar was only 23; it might have destroyed a lesser man. But it is a tribute to the Indian’s skill and temperament that he continues to give bowlers everywhere nightmares (literally in his case, as Shane Warne has confessed), and now emerges 12 years later as the greatest run scorer in the game. But is he the greatest batsman of all time?
Cover Story
The glib answer first. Yes. Because it is in the nature of sport to produce bigger and better champions. In sports, where progress can be measured, this is seen in the faster timings, longer jumps and greater heights recorded by modern athletes. In 1988, Ben Johnson needed to pump himself with stanozolol to run the 100 metres in 9.79 seconds. In Beijing this year, Usain Bolt ran it in a comfortable 9.69 seconds, actually easing up towards the end.
Better training methods, more access to information, more focused nutrition, controlled lifestyles, scientific methods of analysis — sportsmen are bound to improve over a period, and therefore, by definition, the champions of today are bound to be greater than the champions of yesterday.
What about team sports? The paleontologist and baseball nut Stephen Jay Gould in an essay, Why no one hits 400 anymore, explains why that magic figure has not been attained since 1941. He put it down to declining variation, and far from endorsing the myth that the champions of the past were greater and that standards have fallen, he showed how it proves the opposite — that the standard of the sport has improved.
Declining variation is simply the dif-ference between the average and the stellar performance. As more players get better overall, the difference between the figures of the top player and the rest falls. Or, as Gould puts it, systems equilibrate as they improve, a point demonstrated by analysing decades of baseball scores.
The former England cricketer and writer, Ed Smith, has carried the Gould argument over into cricket, arguing that “The sophistication of the modern game works against freakish solo domination.”
Cover Story
Statisticians adopted Gould’s baseball methods to analyse all Test batsmen between 1877 and 1977, and concluded, in the words of Smith, “that for a current player to be relatively as good as Bradman — factoring in the bunching together of today’s great players — he would need to average around 77.” The batsman with the best average after Bradman is Australia’s Mike Hussey, who, in 27 Tests, averages 67.28. No one is even suggesting that Hussey is a ‘great’ batsman, so clearly, we must look elsewhere for a definition of greatness. Figures alone aren’t enough. We must look at other elements.
Longevity is one (Bradman played from 1928 to 1948 with a break for the war years), impact on team results is another, impact on the opposition, quality of bowling attack faced — these are quantifiable. What about the weight of expectations, the pressure from a billion and more fans, the influence on the game itself, the power to change the way people think? A nation rode on Bradman’s shoulders every time he went out to bat, but it was a small nation in terms of numbers, barely comparable to the nation on Tendulkar’s back.
Bradman’s stature has grown for every year that he hasn’t played, and doubtless Tendulkar’s will, too, after he is finished with the game. That is the romance of the sport. A decade ago, I had written that Tendulkar was like the Taj Mahal — there was nothing new to be said about either. By then he was already the best batsman in the world.
When someone asked the then world record holder, Fred Trueman, about the man likely to break his record of 307 Test wickets, he replied that whoever it was would be ‘bloody tired’. By that reckoning, Tendulkar ought to be the most tired player in the world — yet, he brings to his game the same enthusiasm that was evident when he went to bed as a 15-year-old wearing his full gear.
INCRICKET, as in art or literature, there cannot be a single ‘greatest’ (the exception we shall come to later). Ernest Hemingway was fond of calling himself the heavyweight champion writer of the world, and our own Francis Newton Souza commented when the artist Francis Bacon died that he was now ‘the greatest in the world’. But was Picasso a greater artist than Michelangelo? Those who swear by Picasso think so, while those who swear by Michelangelo think not. Perhaps, there exists some Valhalla where such questions are finally laid to rest.
Despite knowing there cannot be a clear answer, we wish to know who is the greatest. Such a question is the bedrock of all sporting discussions. Woods or Nicklaus? Pele or Maradona? Spitz or Phelps? Such debates have fuelled more arguments, sold more newspapers, and emptied more kegs of beer in bars around the world than arguments about politics or religion. Not even Bradman, with his average of 99.94 and 29 centuries in just 52 Tests, enjoyed unanimous acceptance as the greatest. In Australia, there were those who thought Victor Trumper was the greater player, although he finished with an average of 39.04.
In any case, if Bradman was the greatest, what about Gary Sobers, who could bat more aggressively, bowl both fast and left arm spin with equal felicity, and field better than anyone else, either close-in or in the deep? Or WG Grace, who virtually invented modern batsmanship?
Bradman and Tendulkar have much in common, the most significant being that they were the repository of all knowledge of the batsmanship of their time. Tendulkar is — like Bradman was — a one-stop shop, where state-of-the-art batsmanship is on display. You could go to Sourav Ganguly for the cover drive, VVS Laxman for the on-drive, Rahul Dravid for the square cut, Kevin Pietersen for the lofted drive and so on. Or you could get them all under one roof, as it were, with Tendulkar.
Cover Story
Where the careers of Bradman and Tendulkar begin to diverge is in the range and variety of international cricket the Indian has played. There were no One-Day Internationals in Bradman’s time. Bradman toured only England; he only played Tests at 10 venues — five in Australia and five in England. In contrast, Tendulkar has played Tests in 10 countries, One-Dayers in 17. He has played at 94 venues. Bradman batted on uncovered wickets, Tendulkar had to counter reverse swing. A whole new strategy — bodyline — had to be worked out just to counter Bradman’s genius. It consisted of bowling fast, virtually unplayable deliveries at the batsman’s body, with a phalanx of fielders on the leg side. If you played the ball, you were caught; if you didn’t, you risked serious injury. Bradman had his worst-ever series, averaging just 56.57, and bodyline was outlawed for good.
IF THE comparison has to be meaningful, then Tendulkar ought to be compared with someone closer to his times, with similar public expectations and pressures. Rahul Dravid’s average is almost identical to Tendulkar’s, but thanks to Tendulkar himself, he has not had to carry the hopes of a country in the same manner, although for a period early in this century, he was actually the better batsman. And thus we get into the Tendulkar versus Gavaskar debate — pointless, like all such debates, but perhaps it will help us with the question of the greatest.
When Sunil Gavaskar was a young world-beater scoring centuries against the finest bowlers, he was compared to Vijay Merchant, who played 10 Test matches, and averaged 48 but was considered the most complete batsman of his time. Merchant’s stature was sustained by endorsements from Bradman and his own first class record, where his average was second only to Bradman’s. That he was India’s greatest batsman became a ‘fact’ that gained by reputation and repetition.
When Gavaskar began to break records, old timers believed it was blasphemy to place him above Merchant, although he batted against better opposition (all Merchant’s Tests were played against England) and in the greater pressure cauldron that was modern cricket. Both were openers who worshipped at the altar of classical batsmanship. A middle ground had to be found, so Merchant was deemed the greatest batsman in pre-Independent India (although he played his final Test in 1951), and Gavaskar the best since Independence. Honour satisfied, it was a happy compromise.
A similar compromise will be arrived at when the Gavaskar-Tendulkar comparison is made. Both made their 34th centuries in their 119th Test. So, who is the better batsman? The answer will say more about the person answering than the two players. It will tell us his age, since the youngsters are bound to plump for Tendulkar; it will tell us about temperament, since Gavaskar is the more defensive player. It will tell us about compromise, since those on the fence will mouth one or all of the following clichés — ‘You cannot compare an opening batsman with a middle order batsman’, ‘You cannot compare batsmen of two eras’, ‘Comparisons are odious’, or, ‘Apples and oranges’.
That is why when someone sticks his neck out and backs one or the other, it becomes news. Pakistan’s Wasim Akram, perhaps the greatest left arm fast bowler to have played the game, has said that “Sunil (Gavaskar) was the more difficult batsman to bowl to.” New Zealander Chris Cairns had said, “Sachin, who has more runs than Sunny in the two forms of the game, has the edge as he has scored his runs at a faster clip consistently.” Akram was a raw youth when he first confronted Gavaskar; by the time he bowled to Tendulkar after a 10-year gap, he was the complete bowler and more confident of his prowess. Cairns never bowled to Gavaskar. Viv Richards thought that Tendulkar was 99.5 percent perfect, adding, “I would pay to see him play.”
The essential difference between Gavaskar and Tendulkar was in their approach. Gavaskar (who could be a carefree attacking batsman as he showed us when he took on Malcolm Marshall and company in a home series) was forced to play a defensive role in the interests of the team. He meant more to the Indian team of the 1970s and 1980s than Tendulkar does to the Indian team today. There are two reasons for this. Gavaskar didn’t have the luxury of a batting line-up that Tendulkar enjoys. Except for Gundappa Vishwanath and Dilip Vengsarkar at either end of his career, there was no one who scored big, scored consistently, and helped to reduce the burden on the opener. Tendulkar has Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly, VVS Laxman and Virender Sehwag, and that, by his own admission, is a relief.
The second reason for Gavaskar’s defensiveness was psychological, and testimony to the country’s limited ambitions on the cricket field. For so long had India been the underdogs and whipping boys of international cricket that often, not losing was a victory in itself. And Gavaskar was the master at ensuring not losing. His naturally-defensive temperament (he was one of the most defensive captains the game has seen, guaranteeing at least a draw in every match before attempting to win it) meshed well with our national consciousness then. As a nation, we were just beginning to emerge into self-sufficiency, and despite the confidence that Ajit Wadekar’s victories in the West Indies and England in 1971 brought about, our cricket team only gradually reflected national confidence. It wasn’t until the World Cup win in 1983 that our cricket shook off the defensive approach and began to think positively.
AS TENDULKAR’S cricket matured, so did our sense of nationhood. Economic liberalisation seemed to have brought about a psychological liberation in our cricket team too. Tendulkar’s aggressive batsmanship fed into this New India with its greater self-confidence. Losing the odd match in pursuit of a win was no longer a national crime (Tiger Pataudi’s creed too, but his team was too timid to follow his lead), and that suited Tendulkar’s batting as well.
Both Gavaskar and Tendulkar are, thus, creatures of their times; if we have to understand them better, we must acknowledge this. It is only from this perspective that we can ask that question again: Who is the better batsman?
It was easier for Tendulkar to bat like Gavaskar, than for Gavaskar to bat like Tendulkar. One of the finest strokes I saw Gavaskar play was when he stood up to Imran Khan and played the ball dead at his feet. This is not merely correct or technically perfect batsmanhsip. It had as much poetry as Tendulkar’s youthful destruction of Abdul Qadir on a blustery day in Peshawar — he went through with the shot on one occasion knowing he was beaten, by relying on his natural timing and strong wrists to carry the ball over the boundary. Perhaps there is a hint here. Perhaps Gavaskar was impregnable against top class pace, while Tendulkar could murder spin. In any case, Gavaskar would not have allowed a weakness against the incoming delivery to be as ruthlessly and regularly exposed as Tendulkar has done in recent years.
The easy answer, therefore, would be: Gavaskar to bat for your life and draw a match; Tendulkar to open up possibilities of a win. Or, the head says Gavaskar; the heart Tendulkar. But we must remember that Gavaskar gave bowlers fewer chances. Also, he played the better bowling, going in against some of the fastest bowlers to have played the game — from Andy Roberts and the West Indian pace battery to Imran Khan at his peak.
But the curious fact is that a Gavaskar was replaceable. India stuttered a bit at the top of the order after his retirement, but soon settled down. The Gavaskar legacy was carried forward by the likes of Ravi Shastri, Dilip Vengsarkar, Sanjay Manjrekar and Rahul Dravid.
GREAT PLAYERS leave behind legacies, but geniuses merely leave a hole that is covered up — they cannot have successors. A Bradman came, was seen, and conquered, but didn’t give rise to a school of Bradmans. Likewise with Gary Sobers. It will be the same with Tendulkar. He will be missed like any giant will be; but it will just mean that we will have to readjust our sights. From drooling over a genius in the middle-order, we will have to settle for the merely great.
A genius can also be discouraging. Watching a Tendulkar bat might cause a lesser player to give up the game, saying: “What’s the use? I can never play like that.” It is the Gavaskars and the Dravids who inspire younger batsmen to emulate them.
So, despite the question we started off with, the purpose of this piece is not so much to answer that question as to provide pointers to a possible answer. The solution depends on what you are looking for. It depends, too, on when it is asked. Richards’s criterion — “I will pay to see him play” — might make more sense in today’s financially shaky world. Like writers and artists and politicians, sportsmen too, go through periods of revisionism, when one or the other aspect of their endeavours gains priority over another. In Gavaskar’s time, there was a regular debate over whether he or Vishwanath — despite his inferior average — was the better batsman. Vishwanath was the more stylish, played more attractively, had more strokes to the ball, and India never lost a Test when he made a century. Yet today, no one speaks of him in the same breath as Gavaskar. In the long run, the figures matter as a basis for comparison.
When Tendulkar was starting out, his first Ranji captain, Dilip Vengsarkar, said he was a combination of Gavaskar and Vishwanath. For years, when Tendulkar batted, he made everything around him look that bit less imposing; all activity around him that bit more banal. Yet, whoever replaces him is unlikely to feel the pressure of the opener who replaced Gavaskar, because he will be under no compulsion to bat like Tendulkar. It is accepted that such a thing is impossible.
We spoke of an exception to the rule regarding the greatest, and that is in One-Day cricket. Here, possibly because figures are more important, there is no doubt that Tendulkar is the greatest batsman in the game’s history. He has played 417 matches, scored 16,361 runs, hit 42 centuries, and India have won more than they have lost when he has played (206 wins against 186 losses). He had to wait till his 79th match for his first century; earlier, when an injury to Navjot Sidhu forced him to open for the first time in Auckland, he made 82 off 49 balls with just 22 scoring strokes.
THE COMPARISONS with Bradman and Gavaskar fall apart the moment Tendulkar’s One-Day record is brought into the equation. Gavaskar hated One-Day cricket and didn’t care who knew it. Bradman never had the chance. We can, therefore, say that Tendulkar is the greatest all-round batsman in the history of the game.
There is a purity to his technique, an elimination of inessentials, and a desire to dominate that places him above all his contemporaries, including Brian Lara. His defence is textbook, while his flair for attack is both creative and controlled. Despite the injuries to various body parts, he has carried on manfully, bringing joy to millions.
He no longer attempts the kind of shots that put Pakistan’s Shoaib Akhtar in his place in the 2003 World Cup. Or Warne asking for his autograph five years earlier. To have reached the peak while coming to terms with age and slowed reflexes speaks of a rare acceptance. At 35, Tendulkar is roughly at the age when Alexander the Great declared he had no more worlds to conquer.
But Tendulkar will not say such a thing. Not because he is modest, which he is, but because he knows that he cannot pass into history as the greatest One- Day batsman without a World Cup to show for it. The 2011 World Cup is in the subcontinent. Tendulkar will be 38 (the same age as Gavaskar when he retired). If he paces himself, he could well make his sixth World Cup the most memorable one for himself and his countrymen. But three years is a long time in sport, and by then Tendulkar would have been playing almost continuously for 23 years.
He has already rendered irrelevant the question we began with, like sportsmen who have risen above their sport and spilt over into our collective consciousness, where technique, temperament, records and statistics no longer matter.
http://www.tehelka.com/story_main40....over_story.asp
Very good article sourav. Thanks.
A STORY A DAY - All About Sachin You Know!!!
Guys
This part is dedicated to the stories regarding Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar. I would update this section alone once in a week about some stories off the field,on the field or anything related to sachin tendulkar. The posts here are of course as you guessed it are taken from orkut and would be shared for the pleasure ofour hubbers.
Incident 1: A STORY A DAY - All About Sachin You Know!!!
Dedication Of Sachin
A Good read indeed.
===============
It was amazing to see Sachin Tendulkar's committment on Dec 25th 2003 in Melbourne at the MCG. It was the eve of the boxing day test vs Australia. The entire Indian team was playing volleyball in the ground. Sachin was in the nets practicing with his MRF against people like Irfan, Murali Kartik, kumble etc. After about 2 hours the bowlers got tired and shane warne came to the nets. At that time Warne was a commenter in the series. He was serving his drugs ban at the time. Warne came and bowled a few at him and he had organised a few Australian State level bowlers at Tenduklars request. There were all different types of them - leg breakers, offies, fast men, medium pacers etc. he batted for about 3 hours against them. and then took one stump and batted with it until he broke it. I have never heard or seen anything like this before. he was timing the ball so well and hitting it so hard that everyone was watching with awe and total disbelief. And in the mean time the likes of ganguly, dravid, agarkar were playing volley, taking a break and wasting time. Tendulkar showed once again his infinite capacity to practice and practice and everyone including Warne was convinced that a double hundred was round the corner. His entire day was about 10 hours of batting, batting and only batting. Ofcourse everyone knows that next day Brett Lee got him for a golden duck caught by Gilchrist. Warne wasnt too wrong though! about 10 days later he made 242* at Sydney. Ive read most of the posts about who is Tendulkar's greatest fan...I think his relentless committment towards his country is his greatest fan. It never abandons him in time of need. Tendulkars 75 international hundreds are testimony enough for anyone to believe this :)
===============
http://www.orkut.com/Main#CommMsgs.a...059&na=1&nst=1
R.Shasthri said that Sachin has stopped bowling after his injury :?Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
That's an awesome thread :notworthy: Great initiative AF :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
I'll also update often :)
I'm sorry I didnt know of such a news!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Sridhar
Well, he said it in the commentary, while discussing about Kumble's bowling options.
http://in.sports.yahoo.com/081102/20/6yybx.html
Sunday November 2, 07:52 PM
Kumble will be an inspiration for generations to come: Sachin
New Delhi, Nov 2 (PTI) Sachin Tendulkar today described Anil Kumble as a great player and will be an inspiration for generations to come.
"It's truly an honour and privilege to have played in the same era. He will remain an inspiration for the next generations. To become another Anil Kumble one will have to work really, really hard," he said.
Tendulkar recalled a match in Antigua when Kumble came into the match with his jaw in bandage and got Brian Lara out.
"This is one match I can't forget," he said to emphasise that Kumble had a "big heart". "He is one sportsperson who has a big heart".
"I have not come across a greater cricketer, who is good so dedicated to his work," he added.
Rahul Dravid, Kumble's predecessor as Indian captain and his statemate from Karnataka, described the leg-spinner as the country's greatest cricketer.
"He is an extraordinary man with extraordinary career. It's been a privilege to play with him," he said.
"It was emotional for all of us but it's a great time to celebrate the farewell of one of India's greatest cricketers," he added.
Is there any statistics about Sachin toal no. times he got out in between 40-49 (in Tests)
// yesterday got out for 47 :(
There was a time when Sachin is used to take couple of wkts when ever given chance (in ODIS) & Azhar is the one who used him consistently.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajithfederer
But, Sourav, as he started becoming a winning captain.. he ignored, Sachin, the Bowler & I cud c sachin standing lonely near the boundry, but mostly slips wud be occupied by some others :(
but he bowled an over on the 3rd day :? even sourav seems to be not bowling off late - so far in this series NILQuote:
Originally Posted by Sanguine Sridhar
Karthik, There are 16 such instances. Cricinfo :notworthy: :notworthy:
List of scores from 40 - 49 in Tests
Quote:
Originally Posted by HonestRaj
:ty: feddy.... 16 is a very huge number :(
Karthik, Check this for number 17, :lol:
List of scores between 90 - 99 / ODI's
:sigh2:
Only Sachin possible :P
If those cud have been converted to 100.. it wud be nearly 60 centuries in ODI's.
Oru payalum nerunga mudiyadhu.. not even in their wildest of dreams.
Hmmm.. ellam avan seyal !!!!!
http://cricket.expressindia.com/news...christ/380834/
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgb