It is a shame that Sehwag's innings may be regarded in this light. I would venture that this innings was more significant than both Hayden's 380 and Lara's 400 (Hayden played weak opposition and Lara was playing in a dead test match). This was scored in the 1st innings of a first test match against one of the best bowling attacks in the world.

Although Sehwag's knock itself did not put India in a winning position it would have done if the other batsmen had got their strike rates up (Dravid in particular arguably cost India that position). I wonder what would have been said had India won the game?

Im having real problems getting my head around the 'fact' that there have been only three double triplecenturions. When does Lara's 400+ actually start to count as that, a quadruple. Lara is the first but its seems he doesnt have his own category until another 400+ scorer comes along andthey become the 'second quadurplecenturion'.

Many people say that this innings won't be as memorable as it could have been had India won the game. However, bowlers like Ntini and Steyn who are wicket-takers, with strike rates under 55, were absolutely dominated. I will always remmeber the way in which Sehwag flicked an Ntini delivery off his pads for six, that too when he was approaching 200. I never left the TV when Sehwag was batting. I watched every minute of his batting, from session 3 on day two upto session 1 on day 4. I had a lot of other things to do but I just could no do them knowing that I would miss a special innings. The pace at which it was scored was amazing - quicker than a run-a-ball. As Arun Lal said, Sehwag is a great advertisement for Test cricket. At the start of Sehwag's innings there was a sign in the crowd which read, 'the seven wonders of indian cricket - Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid, Laxman, Dhoni, Bhaji, Kumble'. After this test, Sehwags name will have to be added to thE banner-8 WONDERS OF INDIAN CRICKET

HI,this is in reply to the topic discussed about importance of SEHWAG's innings.My point is that had he not ripped apart the famed SouthAfrican pace battery for so long,India might well have gone down by an innings.Greame smith said that had his team would have backed themselves to win the test had they got Sehwag out for 200 around..IT SIMPLY tells us how important the innings was from INDIA'S viewpoint.
So,i simply say that it was one of the greatest innings matchsaving innings.Can anybody argue with me friend's???

Why do englishmen have problems with Indians??If an Englishman had done that they would have had the Queens honor bestowed upon them.Give it the man that he got India with a sniffing chance on such a dead wicket.Lara's was also insignificant as WI drew botht the matches where he scored more than 300. If an Australian or an englishman would have achieved the feet all would have risen on their feet to applaud..If thats the case the Smith Mckenzie record for the opening partnership should be annuled as they have achieved against Bangladesh who in my opinion should never be playing test Cricket..So please Rob remove this feigned sense of superiority as India has overtaken ur land in all forms ..Sports or ecocnomic achievements( TATA has just bought Rovers) .and also we dont lick USA like u all do..

Id like to think that Sehwag's innings helped india save the match. Going by the way the rest of them played, and the way indians folded after Sehwag's departure, it is only fair to say had sehwag not played this innings, India would be comfortably staring at the wrong end of the barrel at the end of the first innings, possibly even following on.

India were 'dreaming of getting a lead of close to 200 at the end of third day's play was mainly because of this stupendous innings. And to put things in perspective about the pace at which he scored, dravid took six balls less for his hundred (272) than what it took Sehwag to compile his symphony of 319 runs (278).

I think calling it 'the greatest insignificant innings' is a bit harsh on the man.

>>>>> Although Sehwag's knock itself did not put India in a winning position it would have done if the other batsmen had got their strike rates up (Dravid in particular arguably cost India that position).

It can be arguably proved that India would not have won if Dravid had got out early, or not held the innings together. And India might have lost too - remember Melbourne when Sehwag made 195 and the rest contributed nothing. Dravid did not need to up the strike rate as the Indian team's strike rate was always between 4-5. The middle order "Sachin-Ganguly-Dhoni" failed and that is the only reason India could not make 700. Anyway, the match would have been a dull draw only. The fact of the matter is that this 319 was not too useful from a result point of view - in fact, no score would have been useful. It was good to watch, and good for Sehwag's average which is back in the mid 50s now.

The statement "greatest Insignificant" is both contradiction and generalisation. If it is based only on the fact a result did not come out of that effort is a hind sight, and post his innings happenings...Like Failure of Sachin/Ganguly to push advantafe further...like slow 100 of Dravid. Sehwag did what was needed, whe he was on pitch, in the first Innings, against a formidable speed and accuracy hurled to him. The fact that SA survived and thrived in their 2nd innings too, contributed to tame end of the battle. Will that make earlier Heroic display of Sehwag 'insignificant,? Sorry Sir, this time round, I can't agree

Dear Rob,
Sad to read such comments from someone who has spent his life dedicated to sport.
Nothing great is ever insignificant and can't only be regarded in the context of winning or losing. But for a drawn result, perhaps this effort would've surpassed your favourite of Lara's. That for 2 days there even seemed the likelihood of a result on that pitch, credit richly goes to Sehwag.
Here is why this effort was very significant :
1. People watch sport not purely for entertainment, many draw inspiration from it too. Here, we saw a man belying traditional notions about test cricket and sticking to his guns and completing a sensational comeback (his last test innings was a 151 in Australia).
2. It gave hope for a result on a dead wicket after the opposition had made 540.
3. Sheer mastery - art.
Moreover, greatness can even emerge in lost causes. There is no doubt this was a great innings and as for the best knock ever, that will always be arguable, for everyone has their favourite.

Flattest of pitches, home ground, inexperienced bowling attack and the surety that there are atleast 5 other batsmen who can save the match. Yes those are all the ingredients you need to play a reckless innings. It was brutal entertainment but ultimately meaningless. Wally Hammom's triple century was very similar and Astle blasted a fiery double ton too. Great innings represent toil and turning a match on it's head. Azhar Mahmood's century against South Africa in foreign conditions and batting in his first Test with the likes of Mushtaq Ahmed, that is a great innings. Laxman's 281, Lara's centuries in the '99 home series against Australia and Inzi's matching winning effort against Bangladesh were pressure cooker innings, that showed the true test of Test cricket.

Id like to think that Sehwag's innings helped india save the match. Going by the way the rest of them played, and the way indians folded after Sehwag's departure, it is only fair to say had sehwag not played this innings, India would be comfortably staring at the wrong end of the barrel at the end of the first innings, possibly even following on.

India were 'dreaming of getting a lead of close to 200 at the end of third day's play was mainly because of this stupendous innings. And to put things in perspective about the pace at which he scored, dravid took six balls less for his hundred (272) than what it took Sehwag to compile his symphony of 319 runs (278).

I think calling it 'the greatest insignificant innings' is a bit harsh on the man.

Anyone who calls this innings insignificant probably didn't see it.
Did you see it Rob? Live? And throughout it's length?

Though not a noted writer like yourself, I have been following this game for over 4 decades now and have travelled the world over following the game and have had the privilege of viewing all of those modern great innings you mentioned either on television or at the ground.

I have never seen anyone bat like that (Sehwag) before. Result or no result. Period. Perhaps you were around to see McCabe's 232 in 1938, but I've seen very little of him or the Don. For me it was a breathtaking display of how it may have been when the great Don destroyed bowling attacks session after session. And in searing heat and humidity.

Sehwag saved the test match for India in Adelaide with 151 and his next test innings did the same thing and gave them a glimmer of hope to perhaps even try and win it.
But, just for the sheer genius and creativity on display, this was significant

Hi,
The greatness of the innings is not decided in hindsight Mr. Rob Steen. You have to assign judgements to them as they flow. And yes, indeed Sehwags innings flowed. In days of cricket having strike rates of late 30s, Sehawag played at more than 100. Sehwags tripe came in 284 balls and Rahul Dravid could manage a measly 100 in 273. Sehwag made 319 off 304 balls where Sachin could manage 0 off 5 balls and Ganguly 24 off 29. Off course he outplayed the fab 4 on the day and due credit should be entailed to this innings. I agree you are not able to digest the fact that Sehwag who was on the sideleines has made such an enormous comeback to the arena. But please believe me, it looked at least for that day that he belonged. Had India got a battery of bowlers with charged batteries, Sehwag could have been the man of the "winning" match. Sehwag places this one as better than Multan because this was under pressure heat and beter bowling and I support him. NIPUN

Context,as you said, is all. So, you should look at the innings in the context in which it came, not in the overall context of a stalemate. On the second day as India commenced their innings, they were under pressure. This pitch was supposed to crack day 3 onwards, so the fear was that South Africa had scored way too many. Sehwag not only obliterated such a thought but even created a window of opportunity for India to grab an unlikely win, certainly saved them the fourth innings. Sure three other batsmen compiled centuries in the same match, but none of them with such ease and irreverence. There are still two Tests to go and Sehwag's counterattack may yet set the tone of the series; it may well be the reason why Smith didn't press for a bold declaration on the fifth day. It's 2nd time around, so it's no longer a freak show, there's nothing flukey about him anymore. Actually, Dravid's double at Adelaide wasn't too different, just textbook elegance, always favored in Test circles.

Hi Rob,
It is a nice piece.Yet,I feel it is a perverted view to describe Sehwag's innings as 'greatest insignificant innings'.It sounds like you are generous enough to laud him for such an effort.You could have very well reserved a better phrase for Sehwag's magnificent effort.

This is total non-sense to degrade a high class innings generated by one of the greatest entertainers in modern day cricket. Even the highly regarded tendulkar's or gangulies are struggling to get hundreds, this man is easily getting big hundreds. Now after his re-entry to test cricket he looks more composed and showing a matured approach. For the forigners, it is really difficult to appreciate the efforts of indians... shame on you Rob...

I have to agree with Will, by the end of the third day Sehwag gave India the chance to entertain thoughts of a victory when 24 hours earlier it looked like South Africa were the only team that could enforce a victory, so it doesn't really seem to top that category. I wouldn't define Nathan Astle's 223 as "the greatest insignificant fourth innings century" either. I'd much rather remember both Sehwag's and Astle's innings as the fastest (in terms of number of balls faced if we're going to get specific).
The term greatness is ambiguous. Many would consider the semifinal between South Africa and Australia in the '99 World Cup to be the greatest ODI rather than the slug-fest at the Wanderers between the same teams. Sehwag's innings was an excellent counter attcking innings (this is the second time he has scored a triple hundred on a dead pitch against an excellent bowling attack), but to struggle to define a niche including the term "greatness" seems a bit excessive and ridiculous.

It is a tad unfair to call it "insignificant". Perhaps with the benefit of hindsight, that might be the case, but when he was batting the game was still wide open. Indian pitches crumble down on the 4th and 5th day and had we posted a good lead, there was an opportunity to get a result. To my mind, what Atherton did against SA and what Astle did against England were great match saving innings. What Laxman and Dravid did against the Aussies was completely different. Their innings converted a losing position into a winning one.

@eddy

Good question, but it is probably some inexplicable quirk of cricket rather than the uniqueness of Lara's achievement because Sir Don had compiled 434, albeit in a first class match and Lara had already made 501 previously. So, the statistical column 400s has not yet been invented for some reason; ought to be by now. It is worth pointing out that when summarizing a batsman's record, a double century or triple is still counted as a CENTURY and the fans are expected to hunt for the details of a batsman's doubles and/or triples.

Tarak:Why do englishmen have problems with Indians??If an Englishman had done that they would have had the Queens honor bestowed upon them.

He mentioned Laxman's 281 as a modern-day epic, so I think his problem is more with the flat pitch and Sehwag's methods. Purists do and will disapprove of his style, but Viru is not listening to them and he better not ever.

Well, Mr. Steen, I had high regard for you for the quality of your articles, but I'm afraid that this one leaves a sour taste in the mouth. I'm no Indian, but you have to stop and admire Sehwag's innings for the sheer brutality! If you don't think that it's great, just consider the fact that no-one else scored with the fluency of Sehwag despite all having played on the same pitch.

To illustrate my point further, take the first match between SL and WI @ Guyana. The pitch for the first 2 days were as flat as a pancake, yet both teams were going at a snail's rate!

I would imagine that any Test innings exceeding 300 is great by default. The effort involved in maintaining that level of concentration under the prevailing conditions, such clear intent, score almost 50 % of your team's runs at better than a run-a-ball, against an excellent pace attack already imbues the innings with greatness. Unfortunately, it didn't break a record (bar it being the fastest, meaningless since it could be be seen as an indictment of the pitch) or force a result; hence the "most meaningless" allotment. It's lack of meaning should not render the innings void of greatness, though. It was a fantastic piece of counter-punching by Sehwag, and on a par with anything else I have seen. Let's look at the innings on it's own, as opposed to placing it in the match outcome context. Although I support SA 100 %, great stuff Veeru, here's hoping you keep it coming for years...

Granted Sehwag belted the living daylights out of SA bowlers, and yes it was one of the "best" innings of all times. But memorable? I think not! I scarcely remember it, and it has hardly been a week. The innings I remember are Dravid's 148 at Leeds ('02), and 233 at Adelaide ('03). Nobody will forget Laxman's 281 at Calcutta, and how about his 148 at Adelaide ('03). I remember how Tendulkar took Warne apart in second innings on a breaking pitch in Chennai ('98), I felt his pain as he battled pinful spasms in his back for 136 in last innings against Pakistan in Chennai ('99) leaving about a dozen runs for last 3 wickets, which were never gotten. These are ALL TIME GREATS, they stand out because runs were made not with the tide but against it. Sehwag's knock was great entertainment. But his three best innings till date for me have been 105 against SA ('01), 195 aainst Australia ('03), and 151 against Australia ('08).

Indians replying to this post: Please, pretty please with sugar on top, please don't get into this racist-imperialist bullcrap about Englishmen and brown people. Gavaskar is enough to pull that wagon and he makes me sick enough as it is.

Rob, I would like to add one more innings to the list of great innings, albeit one that was played in a losing cause: Sachin's 136 against Pakistan, ironically at the same ground. I would disagree with the statement that only a favorable end result guarantees an innings "greatness". There is a certain bit of romanticism involved with having been valiant in a losing cause. Just my two cents ...

It was a tremendous innings in a lacklustre partnership. Dravid is a boringly dependable batsman and while he can usually rotate the strike at will, he was all at sea for the first 3 hours of his innings :S

What I would like to take exception especially considering the nature of the article of "the game’s most intimidating pace attack", "best bowling attacks in the world", "excellent bowling attack" etc. being used to describe the South African bowling attack. What are all of you smoking?

Steyn is still green and yet to perform against the better Test teams.

Ntini has a singularly unflattering record in the subcontinent.

Morkel is as green as green can get.

Kallis is a batting allrounder.

Harris is the long lost second cousin (twice removed) of Ashley Giles.

What are we talking about here really? They have pace and potential. Experience and fortitude? No.

When I got up in the morning I switched on Sky and Sehwag was on about 100. I started watching him bat and became totally entranced. So much so that I didnt go to work until the afternoon feigning a headache(I hope my boss isnt reading this) To my mind it was one of the most brilliant innings I have ever witnessed. Ntini, Steyn and Morkel were made to look ordinary by Sehwag yet when they bowled to Dravid they seemed to be bowling hand grenades. It beggars belief that Sehwag was not good enough to play in the tests against England last summer

In response to Tarak's message, if you want to comment on the positives of Sehwag's innings, please do so. As for slighting England, by saying you guys : your own quotes 'India has overtaken ur land in all forms ..Sports or ecocnomic achievements( TATA has just bought Rovers) .and also we dont lick USA like u all do..', could you kindly do us a favour and call your people back from here. Would be greatly appreciated, and I for one would fly down to India to personally thank you for it. Cheers mate!!!!!!!!!!

40,000 people in the ground and a billion people all over the world think that innings os shewag was "significant" and "great" ....and this article to be "insignificant" and waste of time n resource.....

I think everyone has had a good go at Rob's comments. One reason why we all enjoyed Sehwag's blitzkrieg was due to the lame duck batting display by his compatriots like Dravid. Though people have got bored with Dravid's batting style it is very clear that he was playing for his 10000 runs record. Arun Lal once commented during Sehwag's innings that Test Cricket was saved by Sehwag's batting displays. It was such a contrast to watch Dravid plough through his innings and Sehwag dominate the situation even with a lead of 500 plus to overcome. Never the man who cares for his records, he just thanks the heavens when it is all done and dusted. Ganguly and Dravid should take retirement or other emerging Sehwags will never get the opportunity.
If ever there is another triple century at less than 300 balls, 99% chances are that it will be Sehwag again.......

@ Madan.........At last some support for my observation, if you view the 'blow me' blog ive been trying to convince people of this 'three double triplecenturions' scenerio for the past three days!!! eddy

I agree to Rob's view to an extent. Having watched entire test match ball by ball on TV, I can say there was no chance for a bowler to take a wicket.Whether it would have been Lee,McGrath,Warne,Marshall,Holding,Thompson,Lille,Hadlee,Kapil,Imran, no bowler had even 1% help from the pitch to take a wicket. There was no wind even which could help the bowlers to swing or reverse swing.There was no variable bounce and hardly any ball kept low. The kind of across the line and on the up shots that Sehwag played, he would have easily given a catch to the slips or could have been bowled or lbw if there would have been some movement for bowlers.Having said that, to keep hitting the ball for seven hours continuously is no mean achievement and all credit to him for that. But when bowlers get some help from pitch, I don't think Sehwag has skills to survive as his record suggests.

It is quite sad that the match had no result. But given that it is test cricket's unique aspect that the match could be drawn and still have people raving about it, I have no problems with that. But, as someone else pointed out, the innings did give hope of a result on a truly dead pitch. And only very few people can manage to bat like that. Lara is another example. Of course, how exactly one views his inning will depend on who you talk to. So, I see no point arguing about it.

On a side note, posts like Tarak's have to be removed by the moderator. They contribute nothing to the debate and cause unnecessary rift among cricket lovers.

Lara's innings of 153 not out is the best knock in the last 50 years no question considering the bowling attack he was up against, the state of the pitch, his talent of his own team. Infact that series against Australia was Lara vs Australia. He was under tremendous pressure with captaincy being offered for only the first test. He scored a magnificient 213 in the second to retain the captaincy for the series. I am Indian and support all Indian players but we need to appreciate good cricket always.

As an Indian and a cricket lover -- couldn't agree more.I am sorry that you dont write about English football. That sport needs a few writers like you.

Greatest insignificant innings of all time?? How about greatest insignificant blog post of all time? Just because Lara and McCabe conjured wonderful innings doesn;t devalue Sehwag's effort. If not for him, India would've folded by an innings, RSA would've been cock-a-hoop and India would've surrendered the series in classic Men in Blue style. How about greatest series saving innings of all time, if you had put a name on it. Think (a lot) before you put pen to paper man.

Look at it this way...take away Sehwag's innings, and India would have conceded a first innings deficit of 300, probably followed on, and probably lost. So if that isn't a match-saving innings I don't know what is.

I wonder if you would have the same "sane" view if Kevin Pieterson scored a double century of say 175 balls and England did not win the game. Acknowledge a great counter attacking century which saved the match for India and stop comparing it with other so called media created greats. Looking at the way he bats, he puts the team first and his innings next (Scoring 150+ against Australia in the 4th Innings in Adelaide oval without being his aggressive self,195 in the first test against Australia in Melbourne 2004 series etc). Calling it "The greatest insignificant innings" reminds me of an old story called "The Fox and the Grapes".

Insignificant... Are you kidding me...Nice Try Steen. Some Pom gal might fall for it. But, not somebody that knows cricket.

Please do me a favor. Stop writing for some time and take a break... Will you.

This is a bit funny. First Tony Greig carps about how Dravid is not so great, where he gave more credit to Sehwag. And now Mr. Steen here is even discounting the significance of Sehwag's innings. Amazing! Something must be up the non-indian CI editors' backside, they don't want to appreciate the significance of the Chennai test to India. The end of the test was lame because of South Africa's possibly defensive mentality (but it could also have been a clever ploy to tire out the bowlers for the next test), and also because of Dravid's lack of form. The match for entirety of South Africa's first innings and India's first innings for as long as Sehwag batted, was one of the best. Very few test matches played on such flatbeds have been turned on its head in such spectacular manner. Speaking of insignificant innings, Lara's 375, 400* in tests and 501* in first class, Hayden's 380 against Zimbabwe stand out way above any other innings ever played. Thank you Mr. Steen for your stupid carping.

Not a very good lob, Rob! Unfortunately a dour innings like Atherton's 185 automatically qualifies as an epic back-to-the-wall-knock. However, we look at Sehwag's innings in a different light because of its sheer audacity! Imagine Sehwag getting out for 10, and India collapsing for 290, following on, and losing the game. It could have happened. Therefore I look at Sehwag's innings as a fascinatingly brutal counterattack when it was not expected. He managed to turn a game on its head when it was least expected. This performance could have been the Botham of Headingly or the Laxman of Kolkata, if only the rest of our batting had performed, and if our bowling had more teeth.

Madan, don't waste your time with Tarak. He is rather confused, yammering about Tata and Rover etc.

Anyway Rob is right, it was a wonderful knock, but not a great one. Period! Sehwag will come back with another triple maybe that one will be a great knock. If he does come with another 300+ then that will seal his reputation as a great player!

Rob,
Totally stupid article. I would compare this Sehwag's innings with Lara's 153 for the sheer genuis. In my book Sehwag is a GREAT. For anyone having 10 Test centuries in excess of 150 at a terrific strike is a GREAT. I don't care what you think.

Dear Sir:

Your insights are fascinating but fatally flawed.... or so would a respected English scribe would begin.

I have nothing much to add.

Mr Steen, the unfortunate thing is that he is an opener - does it mean he took the crease "when there was no crisis???"
Maybe if he had taken the crease at 154 for 9, and went on to score 319, it would have qualified.
So openers take note, 'you can never be match-savers'!

Hi Rob,
There is a flaw in your reasoning.As per your definition of a significant innings being either a match winning or a match saving one, this is clearly a match saving one (you seem to convey the opinion that only second innings are match saving ones). Take away shewag's score from the total and India are facing certain follow-on and anything could have happened in the follow -on second innings under pressure. So even by your definition this has to be a significant innings. Given the heat, humidity of chennai and the quality of bowling attack and the speed with which it was conceived it has to be termed an exceptional innings. Besides all other parameters it is important to consider the entertainment factor for the spectators and advertisement for the game . If you take this into account, then this is one of the majestic innings in modern times.

the 2 greatest test match innings of my time are Lara's 153 and VVS Laxman's 281 against australia.they came against the best opposition of their time,under unimaginable pressure.even they can easily rank as the greatest ever.on the context of the match and flair i would rate Laxman's knock slightly ahead of Lara's innings.

What a narrow-minded perspective! The innings was not insignifcant at all if we look at the larger picture. Innings like these help keep Test cricket alive, not to mention the fact that it has helped revive the career of one of the game's best entertainers and stroke makers. If we look at this from the series perspective, there will be an interesting mental battle between the South African pace attack and the Indian batsmen. Will the batsmen tremble if Sehwag gets dismissed early? Will South Africa adapt a surprise strategy for the Indian openers? This has given a whole new twist to the series despite the first game being a draw.
Any innings in test cricket that draws an audience in itself and leaves the spectators in awe is significant. Thats miten's lob.

Insignificant ? How can you experts say that without considering what if shewag hadnt played that knock. At the end of second day 540 behind, when not many teams can even dare survival, India , read sehwag's magnificant triple century. did the unthinkable and reversed the situation for SA where they were under severe pressure to perform yet again to save the game. SA being a great team they are batted extremely well to give the match the dullest of results. So on a hindsight I'll say sehwag's historic knock was match saving one that couldnt have come at a better time. This draw also has put us in a better position to win even one of the remaining test and pocket the series.

Rob, By calling it Insignificant you are essentially belittling an innings that was coregeous and destructive. Didn't you read SA Coach - Micky Arthur's comments the next day that he never thought of the scenario ? What other characterstics do you need to prove that the Sehwag's Innings is way up there? Even if he is not in the same league as Bradman, he nevertheless has shone in his own way. You need to recognize that. Imagine he had just scored 0, India might have collapsed to a follow-on. From that sense, he just save the test. I don't know why it can't be seen that way?

The greatest insignificant innings is also perhaps reserved for Rob's favorite Lara for his 400* at home against England. In fact he was criticized by Steve Waugh in the media for playing out the first innings (without declaring and giving his team a chance to win) just to get his record knowing the test would finish in a draw. Lara in an interview said and I quote "Unlike Australia, West indies is not a winning team and such records would inspire the West indies". Unlike Lara who played for his records, Sehwag helped place India in a potential winning position from requiring 340 just to avoid a follow on. He got the deserving praise from South Africa's coach who said when someone plays an unbelievable innings like that one can only put your hands up and appreciate him or hit him over the head with a stump!

I am not a huge fan of Sehwag and was was baying for his blood when he had a dip of form last year. But, I would always call a spade a spade and give credit where it is due. This was a great innings by any standards but I wouldnt call him a great player yet. He can still be inconsistent and may get out for 0 in the next test. That desnt take the greatness of things away. How can you say this is not a significant innings? 1)This was the first innings of the 1st test, chasing 540 as an opener. So he has produced this gem under pressure 2)If he hdant made that score, who knows? I ndia may have followed on and may even lost the match, so in that context it was a match saving innings 3)Again, he gave indians a sniff of victory with the pace at which he scored. If the indian blwoers could wipe the saffers out (like they themsleves folded), this might have a match winning innings.
For anybody to make a huge score, either the opposition be weak or the pitch flat and not swinging and seaming.

Sehwag was the only one with the audacity to envision a victory after day 2 of the match. On day 3 he made that a very real possibility with supreme dominance of inch of the field & everyone on it and even off it! The SA bowlers, fielders, captain & coach had no answer & nowhere to hide. The look on Styens face after Sehwag just whacked him to the boundary said it all!! So did the way he reached 100, 200 & 300!! He can't be blamed or his innings diminished by the failures of others. The rest of the Indians played slow & the SA even slower (in their 2nd innings!). It was pathetic! I would have Sehwag as my captain any day over Kumble & Co!

Robs description of Sehwags knock sounds as:
unparallel, greatest among greats.He finds himself short of superlatives,adjectives to describe quality of stroke play against most accurate striking bowlers in the contemporary cricket.Rest of the so called great batsmen were struggling against same bowlers.The desired impact of winning need contribution from bowlers also. The other described great innings had support of bowlers if not batsmen.Hence Rob's titling the innings as insignificant firstly does not match with his write up and also sounds bad in ears. In modern day cricket what we have witnessed in 2nd and 3rd day of Chennai test was massacre of aptly equipped army of fast bowlers with flawless ease.There was only one man who was noticeable on the field rest of them were only completing the motions of their allotted acts.Well done Rob but for title.

By this logic every innings played in a drawn match is insignificant.

I think the writer is spot on, notice how he doesnt really mention Lara's 375 & 400, he is talking about his 153 against aussie, which was an altogether different affair!

Media men never cease to amaze me. At the end of day 3, Cricinfo commentators were touting India's prospects of winning after Sehwag managed to bludgeon a spectacular 300-odd run not-out innings with a strike rate greater than 100%. After the test was over, it was described as a dull draw to a monotonous test! How on earth can 319 from 309 deliveries be described as monotonous?!

Whilst the result was not a positive one, the fact that Sehwag through sheer fearlessness managed to create a window of opportunity for India, even after SA posted an imposing total, means his innings must be considered great. Moreover, consider this context: remove Sehwag's innings and India scored 308 for the loss of 9 wickets - still 32 adrift of the follow-on target.

Sehwag's innings may not have singlehandedly won the test match for India but he had a bloody good go. In doing so, he may have saved the match. But on that point, we'll just never know...

Dear Mr Rob you are contradicting your own statement here. you have mentioned in the same article quote (By any estimation, the greatest innings, surely, are those that reverse the tide, either saving or winning a match.) unquote. Has Sehwag innings not saved the Test match for India. Tell me what would have happened if Sehwag has not scored 319 runs, india could have lost the test matches by 10 wickets on fourth day itself.

Nice article !! But Its an Irony that Rob Steen could have classified this as one of the greatest knocks, had Sehwag scored it coming say 5th down in this very same match..after say Sachin, Sourav, Laxman, Dhoni all failed to score well. In which case without Sehwag's knock India really would have followed on and defly lost the match from there on. Same innings, in the same match would have been an epic had it come down the order.

Rob is being unduly harsh here. This was undoubtedly a modern classic. Against quality bowling, Sehwag came out and pretty much thrashed the daylights out of them consistently for four sessions. This was a test match that India was losing on the second day. By the start of day four, it seemed possible for India to push for victory. The Indian middle order and their bowlers messed it up. Sachin and Dhoni did not stand up when it counted -- Ganguly was going well until he got out. The fast bowlers just sprayed it around -- even a restrictive spell and some good fielding would've put some pressure on the Proteas.
Unfortunately the rest of the Indian team did not seem to have taken inspiration from Sehwag's masterpiece. It was the greatest innings that I saw simply because there was only one man could get Sehwag out on that day, and that was Sehwag himself.

I do not understand the logic of the people who rate the ability of a player and the importance of an innings by the incompetency of his contemporaries and the inability of his colleagues to rake up such an innings. Sure Lara's innings was one of the best you saw, but would you have given it the same importance if he did it with 6 wickets to spare rather than 1 ?

you require an adrenaline rush for your brain to actually appreciate the innings played.

most of us, are happy with our brains working at normal harmonal levels.

It seems almost ironic that the greatness of Sehwag's innings is what makes it mediocre in the author's eyes. If sehwag had scored may be just 200 and the match were a bit closer, this would have been a match saving innings- something that would have translated it into a great knock. At times, it more important to just evaluate innings like these not within the context of the game but for what it is in the purest sense; and then enjoy it for what it is and for what it was never.

Sehwag is hardly to blame for the Test being drawn. Most triple centuries come against weakened attacks, this was against a full-strength and potent SA bowling lineup. Most triple centuries also result in drawn matches unless the other team capitulates and loses by an innings.

Full credit to Sehwag. Great innings in my book.

Nice Point Of View!!!

However, Why can't we just leave it as a significant innings in an insignificant test match??
For sure it was a great test of endurance in that heat and humidity, even if you disregard the condition of the pitch.
Now
In response to Mr Kevin George's message," could you kindly do us a favour and call your people back from here. Would be greatly appreciated, and I for one would fly down to India to personally thank you for it. Cheers mate!!!!!!!!!!""

Well, Georgie boy it's a bit too late now, the virus has spread all over UK !! and very soon in the near future the UK govt. is going to make the entry of skilled Indians even more easier than it is now!!! One day you will have to accept/realise that just like IPL we ( Indians ) are here to stay in UK!!! So you can run from us now !!!

Cheers Mate...innít?

I have to agree with Rob. I would be immensely impressed with Sehwag's innings if his had been the only, or one of two, centuries in the match. The fact that centuries were made by such batsmen as Amla and McKenzie, who I'm sure most would agree are not yet batsmen of oustanding quality, makes me wonder what scores batsmen like Ponting, Gilchrist, Jayawardene, Sangakkara and the like might have made on such a lifeless pitch. If Tendulkar had gotten in, there is no doubt in my mind you'd see a similarly attacking innings from him. What I would have given for Gilchrist's last innings to be on a pitch like this.

Good article. I totally agree.

I love watching Sehwag, he is awesome!
But he was batting on a dead track.

It was a good innings, but not as good as alot of people are making it out to be. Look at the other scores in the game. Batting was easier than normal.

Boma.

Replying to the quotes from "Kevin George" Could you kindly get all your people from Goa before they pollute this land any more and then I'll personally visit Eng and have a pint of Carling with you. Cheers to the lager mate!!!! Long live The Queen [Camella]. We gave you Freedie can't ask for more mate.

I'm glad Sehwag didn't get the record. I think it's one of those records that should be in the hands of a true legend of the game - Lara, Sobers, Hutton, etc. I was a bit annoyed for this reason when Hayden held it as well (and I'm Australian!).

Sehwag is not (and never will be) in the same bracket as the three players listed earlier. He's not consistent enough. When he gets his eye in, he does tend to go onto a really big score (which distorts his average somewhat), but to truly measure his worth, you have to ask if the likes of Brian Lara or Len Hutton would ever have spent a year on the sidelines. It's inconceivable.

Sehwag is a very good player, but he's not a great of the game. If he does get a decent score, it tends to be a big one, but he's too inconsistent for that to count for anything.

Good on him for getting a triple, but I'm glad he didn't get near the record.

@Danny

Those other batsmen you mentioned have all had their chances and they have played good innings, but this one is different. You won't see a similar attacking innings from those batsmen because they can't score at that rate consistently without being worried about getting out. Sehwag is special and you have to give him credit for that. It's very difficult to score at a breathtaking pace and score huge, both at the same time. What you're saying amounts to saying, "oh, everyone is making centuries here, so what's the big deal if he got a triple? He does it all the time" :P

Also, to everyone who is bashing Dravid, I think it was a reasonably good innings, since he didn't let wickets fall, and allowed Sehwag to score at his pace. To his credit, Dravid holds the record for the maximum number of century partnerships (72) in Test matches, and that's what he did again.

Although the innings was a remarkable feat, but yet another reason that disqualifies it from great is the nature of the flat track; again Sehwag's other 300 was also made on one of the flattest tracks (Multan) that could exist. Would Sehwaq reproduce something remotely similar on seaming tracks is the question?
I feel it is too soon to claim that Sehwag is already one of 5 greatest Indian batsmen. If he demonstrates consistent weakness against the moving ball, then it wll be hard to put him in that bracket. Not ironically Sehwag's best efforts come against Pakistan, and with Pakistan the matches would usually be played in the flat wickets of the subcontinent. Mind you, Sehwag is a very enterataining player to watch, but judgment on greatness seems to be floating around too much and too soon.

"in modern times, three of the greatest are unquestionably" ....

They were great innings and one could name 100 more innings (10 of them could just be from Gilchrist) that are ALMOST up there. But, one innings certainly ranks equal with that if not above: Gooch's unbeaten 154 @ Headingley against a formidable WI attack in 1991.

The use of the term "unquestionably" is unquestionably unacceptable and ultimately INSULT to some other great innings of the modern times (assuming post-1980).

A very well written piece Rob. Don't forgot about Lara's 213 in the game before - equally brilliant. In this era at least, only Brian and Sachin truly deserve to be called great. The pretenders to the throne are still 'merely' very good at this stage. Cheers.

Well Rob, I think you're being a touch unfair on Sehwag, because your statement, to me, assumes that India could have managed the draw without Sehwag. India is notoriously unpredictable and since the South Africans were coming on strong, I was anticipating a pathetic collapse on the part of the Indian batting line-up. Sehwag's innings, and to a lesser extent Dravid's, took the sting out of the South African attack and kept India afloat. Certainly Grame Smith was confident that South Africa was going to take this first test, but I feel Sehwag was the spanner in Graeme Smith's "works." That said, I consider the result of this match to be regrettable and the BCCI is to blame for allowing matches to be played on pathetic pitches like the one at Chennai. Sehwag's innings would have taken it's rightful place amongst the "great" innings, had this pitch not been so pathetic. Of course, a different pitch might have prevented such an innings from taking place; but the BCCI is still to blame.

totally disagree..again an englishman who cant accept indian / asian success..the best critic of any innings is the opposition n just read Arthur,kallis' comments on the innings.it was absolutely incredible to score at such a pace for so long...firtst tony greig said sachin scorin 15000s in odis s no gr8 task , then he said dravid s an average player n 10000 club is nuthin n now this..im no longer going to read such biased / silly articles...go n watch ur gr8 swashbucklers alistair cook , michael vaughan , strauss n ian bell perform n keep talkin abt ashes 2005 for another century for u ll never win another one

You might refuse to use the word arguably, but that does not put the matter beyond argument. All I hear is you really feel strongly about it, and that you don't think others opinions important (relatively) in the matter. But that does not change the fact that it is just that, your opinion. You don't get to choose whether it is arguable or not, by the very definition of the word arguable.

In response to Kevin George's message: I don't for a minute condone what Tarak said in his post but your message was just as uninformed and prejudiced. I almost want to say yeah we will leave - but in a couple of hundred years or so. After all your forefathers pillaged and raped India for a few hundred years. Cheers Mate!!!!!

Not quite. Lara's and Bradman's twin 300+ scores were equally great insignificant innings for they all ended in draws as well. Hayden's butchering of the hapless Zimbabwe attack apart, only Sobers's 365 stands as a significant great 300+ innings of the best lot. Beauty, my friend, lies in the eye of the beholder - a glass is half full too.

You british people can't digest that some Indian (read black) is doing so well against SA (read white). period.

Miten: innings was not insignifcant at all if we look at the larger picture. Innings like these help keep Test cricket alive

Exactly!!! The crowds milling in the Chennai heat to catch the action had to be seen to be believed. Suddenly, for just one day, Indai v/s SA took precedence over Chennai Superkings and thank God for that. In fact, the queue of fans waiting to get in on the fourth day was so huge that by the time many got in, that which they came for was already not to be, for Sehwag was gone. I don't blame McKenzie, Amla or Dravid in any way and in light of the middle-order collapse, Dravid's knock is even more valuable. They all played solid Test cricket the way they knew it; Sehwag is in a different zone altogether.

Rantings of an Englishman....i fled when i saw the headline and the sehwag pic..somethin within me instinctively yelled...rantings of an englishman

the key words in this post are "greatest insignificant", rather than "most insignificant" the innings was fairly useless but great, as there was no chance of a result on this flatbed; puzzling why pitches are prepared this way.
alot of flack has been thrown at lara's 375,400* and haydens 380 as being boring? how insignificant can a world record that everyone would like to have be? had sehwag snatched the record, obviously it won't be as insignificant as it is.

@Chris

>>I'm glad Sehwag didn't get the record. I think it's one of those records that should be in the hands of a true legend of the game - Lara, Sobers, Hutton, etc. I was a bit annoyed for this reason when Hayden held it as well (and I'm Australian!).

Ahem !

How much cricket do you watch, mate? Before applauding the greatness of Sehwag's innings, I would like to correct you about Hayden, first of all - The man has piled on 8242 runs @ 53.5 over 167 innings with 30 ( yes, 30 ) staggering hundreds, and you had the audacity to be "annoyed"... Thats interesting...

Also, Chris; it should be noted that legends are not born.. they are made.. Sehwag has a long way to go; but I do think that he's a legendary batsman in the making..

Coming back to Sehwag's innings, I think that the readers doesnt need my comments to make their decision on if it was great or not... any cricket lover with a passion for the game would grade it alongside the best test innings the world has ever seen. Period!

Rob Steen's column appears far more insignificant than Sehwag's blitzkrieg. Smashing Ntini, Steyn & co bananas for more than a day while making a mockery of 540 runs and setting up a possible win - not significant enough? If Steen was asked to write his column in the Chennai heat, he may have bettered the stupidity of his argument.

Not only was that 153 by Lara one of the great innings, it was perhaps the greatest match of the last decade. I do think that sometimes great innings by lesser players get overlooked because of the lacking "name value." In that very same match where Lara scored 153.....people forget the first innings. Australia having scored well over 400, WI were facing an irretrievable first innings deficit at 100 for 6. It was a brilliant salvage job by Sherwin Campbell to get them upto 300 plus with a century. That ultimately got them back in the game. No one remembers that as well though.

Not only was that 153 by Lara one of the great innings, it was perhaps the greatest match of the last decade. I do think that sometimes great innings by lesser players get overlooked because of the lacking "name value." In that very same match where Lara scored 153.....people forget the first innings. Australia having scored well over 400, WI were facing an irretrievable first innings deficit at 100 for 6. It was a brilliant salvage job by Sherwin Campbell to get them upto 300 plus with a century. That ultimately got them back in the game. No one remembers that as well though.

Hm. Talking about insignificance, tell me, how did the rest of the batting order perform? With the dismissal of Sehwag, India lost 9 wickets for how much, 160 odd?? Take out Sehwag's innings, and what are you left with as India's response, in response to a 540?

Does that make his innings significant in any way? It is unfortunate that you chose to judge his innings by the overall result of the match and the otherwise dominance of the bat over the ball, rather than by the situation at which the innings was constructed.

Given a choice, I'd watch an insignificant Sehwag innings any day in preference to reading a pityful article such as this from you.

First of all I would like cricinfo please start doing a QA of the articles and prevent such kind of are. Of course with all due respect to the writer, who has written 'great' articles in the past but this article as described in the article was nowhere near 'great'.
It was absolutely unecessary to explain the usage and context of various english words in an article about cricket?
I can say for sure after reading this article that it was neither great nor fantastic nor astounding nor terrific !!

Virender Sehwag's epic innings was one of the greatest innings played by indian batsman but this article was the most insignificant article ever written.

thanks
regards

People and critics alike have not been fair to Sehwag.

- Flat track? Arn't others also batting on the same tracks? Correct me if I'm wrong but I think ALL the test triple centuries have come on easy tracks.

-Not winning/drawing the test? Had Sehwag failed, India could have been under pressure. And had Indian batsmen carried the momentum on the 4th day, SA could have been under pressure! Its a tribute to his genius that a dead-as-a-dodo track gave the possibility of a result within 5 days!

Still, the tag of greatest insignificant innings is not too bad. We can see that Rob's rated this innings better than Lara'a or Hayden's record breaking ones, or for that matter, many other triple centuries.

Fantastic innings at better than a run a ball. What more could be asked of Sehwag? This triple was not scored in mum's backyard on a Saturday afternoon barbecue. It was scored against a fantastic bowling and fielding team. With this innings Sehwag put his team in a good position chasing down SA's huge 1st innings total of 500+. Besides, it was never going to be an Indian win after SA's 1st innings, but Sehwag's innings certainly saved the match for India. People can say what they like about dead wickets, but this wicket was the same for both teams throughout the match. It may not have been helpful to the bowlers, but it was not the kind of wicket that a nobody (like me) could come along make a triple either. It still took considerable skill and powers of concentration on Sehwag's part. Well done, mate. Love your work.

Hanif Muhammad's 337 epic against the mighty Westindies is the greatest knock of all time.!!!

Sehwag cannot be considered a great player nor his last innings great. His innings was impressive, but the Indians in this forum seem to have forgotten the South African's first innings score and their centurions. I would agree with Rob in that great has to be associated with the outcome. Gavaskar,Lara,Richards,Bradman,Beneaud sre great. Tendulkar does not fall into the graet category. How many matches has he ever won for India? Such a boring batsman to watch.

Its shame to hear the comments like this. Ask the South African coach about the importance of the innings. look at the array of strokes played by him. Its a chance less and match saving innings. We should give full credit to him.

this is for Omer-

if the Multan triple century as well as this one was disqualified from greatness thanks to a dead track, then I wonder how come no Pakistani was able to match upto him ? How come no Pakistani batsman has managed to rack up 2 triple centuries despite having played innumerable test matches on dead sub-continental tracks ? the fact is that this was a good bowling attack, and the situation was such that had Sehwag gotten out earlier, India could well have lost the test. it was a stupendous innings in the sheer audacity of stroke play and the counter-attack completely put the pressure back on SA- after having scored 540 !! Had Kevin Pietersen been the batsman to have scored these many runs at this fast clip against SA, I'm pretty sure this kind of an article would'nt have been written by Rob.

The only reality is the scoreboard, so why do we need a defense or attack against a subjective characterisation like "greatness"? Rob, if you think it was not great, you're right. If someone else disagrees, that's fine too. Just because it's so easy and convenient to opine and be heard nowadays, we don't need to comment / counter-comment. And if your view is governed by your being an Englishman, so be it. The comments suggest a nationalist flavour also, don't they?

A few people here sound like they are desperately trying to convince themselves, more so than others, about the chimerical failure of Sehwag on the seaming tracks outside of the Sub-Continent. I fail to assert whether that classifies as perverted dogmatism by a bunch of obstructionists who are plain unwilling to come to terms with reality or genuine gibberish of a herd of ignoramuses, but it is indeed amusing that Sehwag, burdened with all the mediocre credentials thrust on him by this ridiculous fraternity, is still perhaps the only Indian batsman to stand out on particularly pacer-friendly pitches of NZ, Eng, RSA and Aus during his tenure as an opener, that too without sacrificing his usual stroke-play. As to this article, one necessarily needs to be impregnated with an abundance of comic self-importance and confounding parochialism to go with his ability to conjure up profoundly preposterous conclusions in order to retain some sort of crediblity as a cricket-journalist in England!

To start with, I must say that all the Indians who are going against Rob are poor in understanding his column. He is by no means telling that Sehwags innings of 319 is not great or does not deserve any credit. Insted he is trying to convey the fact that this innings of sehwag, though one of the best in test cricket, is not close to any of the match winning innings described above. There is no way that this innings is close to VVS Laxmans 281 or Brian Laras 213 both versus Australia.
A innings becomes great not by the amount of runs that it contains but the situation when those runs came....
Thats all I have to say....

Rob.....Its a wonderful article...

In response to Karthik's criticism of the SA pace attack. All 3 opening seamers have strike rates around 55. That's a wicket every 9 overs, and is up there with the best of them. Steyn is rated as the form paceman currently playing on the planet. Ntini's sad subcontinental record notwithstanding, he is still rated as one of the top ten best pacemen on the planet. Harris was the third most successful Test spinner in the last calendar year, behind Murali and Kumble, and took more wickets than both Harbajan and Kaneria, at an average and strike rate which Giles never achieved in his career. Kallis has a bowling average of around 35, which makes him much better than just a batting allrounder. SA's 4-man bowling attack stands up well against most of the top teams in the world, green or not, poor subcontinent record or not. Therefore, we should not attack Mr Steen's asseessment of SA's attack, and keep the blog focussed on discussing Veeru's awesome achievement.

First Tony Greg (10000 RUns - Average Player) and now another Englishman. Sorry dear you have no right to issue CERTIFICATES, days have gone of your dominance to the world. Sit quitely at Home now and watch the Records on T V instead. I strongly beleive that ASIANS are underestimated in all aspects of life, instead we are LEADING in all, every where be it I T, Defense, Automobiles, Aerospace etc.

My Dear Avinash,

I think you have not seen him make century on debut in SA, His centuries against Aus in Aus....
His centuries against NZ in NZ on green tops in 2003 when everyone else in the Indian team came a cropper.

Give the credit that the Man deserves. There is no denying that this man has revolutionized the way test cricket ( and as an opener along with the likes of Jayasurya ) is played hence on.

Kudos to you Sehwag and may your breed prosper..

We can assume from everyones reactions that Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly and Dhoni would've been completely incapable of saving the test match? If that's the case why are they even in the team? Sehwag has to be the greatest batsman of all time to be able to score 300 on a pitch where none of those guys could bat for time.

In many of the comments I can see a tendency to disparage Dravids innings to show that Sehwag was good. Yes Sehwag indeed was, and yet he has to do a great deal to reach where Lara is. Also in terms of sheer service to the nation, he has a long way to go before he comes close to Dravid too. If Dravid would have failed in this test, India would have lost. Period. Sehwag of course was the star of the test and deserves all the accolades. But lets not blow it out of proportion.

In my opinoin this Innings has more significane that that og Brian Lara's 400.
When Sehwag was in the middle anyone who was following the match had never had a doubt that India would loose the match, if Sehwag would havebeen out before he scored a hundred looking at the way the rest of the indian batting was piled up by the south African pace battery i tink india should have followed on batting in the second innigs & would have faced an innings defeat. I dont think anybody realizes how important this innings was just because the knock came so early in the innings, am sure this innings would have been consudered of much bigger value if he had scored in the second innings if India had followed on.
So lets give all the credit to Sehwag for the way he batted & dominated the best pace attack (arguably) in the world.
Also lets not forget the pressure under which he was batting, his place was on the stakes when satrted the innings @ chennai & he batted with such ease as if he dont care.

Why always indians are under rated ?. One Englishman saying, 10000 runs club is over hyped. Am asking him, how many Englishmen in that club.. In My view, viru's innings is a master class innings.. He played in too hot condition, faced steyn and ntini to score his sencond triple century.

One of the greatest innings by an Indian. Rob's headline would have read " The Greatest Innings Ever" if it were an Englishman in the same circumstances. Its a bias we Indians live with and choose to ignore.

I think of all the comments (I read each and every one with as much interest as I followed Sehwags GREAT innings) on this article the only sane voice seems to come from Jack Dawson. Rob does recognise the innings from Sehwag but he is trying to put it into perspective and comparing it with other GREAT innings. Which one or two or three are more GREAT than the others will always be a point of view depending upon what aspects one wants to consider.
I think people should have debated the opinions without needing to denigrate any one or two or three and some remarks could possibly have been addressed in a more gentlemanly manner - after all aren't we all commenting and opining upon an incident in a gentleman's game then again the recent tendency towards sledging seems to be spreading to the viewing public also.
Sehwag's innings was great to watch - it entertained everyone and so many statistics have been quoted that there can be no doubt that it was a heroic effort - my tuppence on this.

Is Mr Steen the greatest insignificant cricket writer of all time - discuss.

How anyone can think Lara's 153* is the greatest ever innnings, when he was dropped twice, is beyond me.

I disagree. He is an "astoundingly" insignificant writer. And i refuse to use "arguably" in the previous sentence.

Sehwag's batting pains me; it pains me for it makes a mockery of all that i have held dear for so long; it makes a mockery of Tendulkar's genius, his batting and his longlist of fabulous innings, and similarly of Gavaskar's and so on. It makes me wonder what these "greats" were doing, if all that they did could have been done the Sehwag way. He pains me for he upset my revered yardsticks and frameworks of batting, and batting in test matches at that, that allowed me to make sense of a Sachin's or a gavaskar's great knocks. He pains me for he makes me feel i was wrong all along the way.
By god sehwag is brilliant, and if he lasts and ends up playing similar knocks for another 4-5 years he will have reworked our yardsticks for measuring batting greatness. But then the question is how long will he last, and last with his style of batting?

Rob,
I understand and agree with the message you were trying to convey by your article but not by the manner in which it was put. To describe this innings as insignificant is too harsh.I agree that Sehwag's splendid knock pales in comparison to the innings mentioned by you but by no stretch of imagination was this innings insignificant.His innings opened the game and gave India a chance to think of victory even after conceding 540 runs.
Going by your arguments I guess Lara's 400 was the greatest insignificant innings or how about Jayasuriya's 340? Atleast Sehwag had to face much
better bowlers than them.

As Usual another Englishman not praising a wonderful performance by an Indian.
It always happen that if an indian performs, it is not of much significance compared to English player no matter how insignificant it is.
on the other hand if something goes wrong by an indian, even if it is a romour it will be portrayed as the worst ever ( Example of Harbajan's incident in Aus Series this year).
You Englishmen cannot digest the success not only by Indian(also other countymen) Coz you still live in early 1900's
Wake up now!!! the world has changed...

All Credit to Sehwag, who batted magnificiently under the same conditions as did Sachin, Dravid, Graeme Smith & Kallis. Especially the way he batted against the negative tactics of SA captain & Paul Harrris's bowling on legstump over the wicket. He left The SA Coach & Captian Clueless,made them surrender by not taking the second new ball early when it was due.Even The Great Sachin Couldnt Bat like Sehwag in Bangalore against Ashley Giles

bull's eye.. puts things in perspective... i do think ( we) Indians have a habit of making things look bigger than they actually are. I am shocked at why commentators are gloating over Sehwag's knock whereas they should have been crying for Dravid's blood for not winning this test.. Agree with the view that the usage 'great' has been made ubiquitous nowadays. Indians need to cut emotions out of logic, if our cricket is to move forward. My view is that this knock has indeed been made insignificant by incompetency of other india cricketers to force a result. Indian cricket fans hardly have the intellect to realise that. Till that day comes, india will always remain as a fringe player in world cricket.

I APPEAL TO ALL VOICES OF DISSENT TO PLEASE CALM DOWN!
When was the last time you read an Englishman compare a cricker of any other country favorably to an Aussie/English/West Indian? Alas, they are limited in their grandeloquence and are pathological historians. As per them, the only meaningful cricket worth glossing over, and histrionics is played between these three countries, and the others are just silicon enhancers!
As a logical extension, the only performances worth their salt have to be in matches between the Holy Trinity. Thus Lara's innings is the greatest, only the Ashes and the Frank Worrel series are worth anything, Shane Warne is the best there is (even though he has been outshone by Murali by 20 degrees), Atherton (that strokeless dud) has created the fightback of the century, etc. etc. etc.
And even if these graceless and oh-so-full-of-phlegm writers are generous enough to mention names from other countries, they must have done these feats against the Holy Trinity!

Some people have mentioned Sehwag's century in NZ greentops, well he didn't hit a century there but in the only 'greentop' in India: Mohali. But just about every Indian batsman was Tuffey's bunny on that disastrous tour so you can't hold it against Sehwag. Other than that, he has battered Bloemfontein, Nottingham, Gros Islet, Melbourne and Adelaide apart from many 'flat-pitch epics'. So to say that he thrives on flat pitches is to miss the point. Boycott was skeptical when Sehwag was 'promoted' as opener but after all these years, he is the one opener India can rely on to get the team off to a flying start. Anyway, my vote for greatest modern innings would be Sachin's century on a day 4 Chennai pitch that actually turned against Saqlain in the form of his life. It is a shame he is not given credit just because India lost narrowly; most of the other batsmen may well have not batted at all, so abysmal was their contribution.

I think it is a well written article but flawed in its analysis and analogy.Who is to determine the significance of the innings,the writer or the thousands of Indians who paid good money and were kept enthralled through a hot and humid day.They were not so enthralled on the other days.Make no mistake Sehwag is a true entertainer in a day and age of stodgy batsmen.He and others like Gilchrist make test cricket watchable.Enough comments have been made out about how sehwag probably saved the game for India so I won"t reiterate that.There is a point of view in the sub-continent that Asian cricketers do not get the attention and credit they deserve.If this piece is any indication, that view probably has some justification.

Everyone writes analysis showing up their knowledge, blah blah about cricket. But, if you ask me, if wanted to watch a highlight of a match for a couple of hours, his innings(not match) would definitely on the top list.. Sheer entertainment and test cricket needs to bring some entertainment if that has to be conducted. A dull slow paced, old style test match neither brings entertainement to people nor brings the economy of the country up! Only will help the magacine writers. Because, people will only read about that match next day rather watching live :-)

runs=300+
strike rate=100+
temp=37 degree cel.
humidity=80%
opposition=probably best in the world(aus lost this tag).
all this made for a great innings that saved india in that test.
one thing i want to tell all the indian msg poster here is that just stop becoming blind patriots.( im unlike these indian).just read what the headlines said "the greatest insignificant inning"......and thats what it is.and by no means i downgrade this innings, but there was no result (thanks to bcci pitch commitee)
the only one that made this innings from "the best" to "one of the best"....was b.c.c.i

"The greatest insignificant innings" sounds more like an insult than an appreciation. Why can't an experienced cricket writer like you be more careful about the words? Why should one compare Sehwag's triple with Lara's 153? We all know which was one was better. You should better compare Lara's 375 and 400 with Sehwag's 309 and 319 in terms of the strokeplay, strike rate and the quality of bowlers faced. I am sure that Lara cannot have faced better bowlers since he was playing England both the time....cheers....

It is no fault of Sehwag that the match ended in a tame draw. It truly was phenomenal hitting !!

But having said that it's always going to be difficult to compare innings' and pronounce judgements when we have pitches that are so different in nature.... some really testing the batsmen and some so flat.

As such how can anyone say which is better : The ability to conqueer the conditions and a supreme bowling attack (or) just fabulous hitting, the sort which no one can match even on a featherbed !

Enough for this topic now wait for the next sehwag innings......

hmmm
i feel tat this innings cannot be damned as "insignificant"..... it put india losing the match out of question and gave india hope, atleast for a day or so, of victory. That india never took advantage of his innings is not sehwag's mistake. It was a truly memorable innings for the way he dominated the attack, as inexperieced as it was, and audacity of his shotmaking....though it was no where close to being called a great one....

Krish: Till that day comes, india will always remain as a fringe player in world cricket.

Howdy, where have you been, dear sir? Said remark coming at a time when NZ players opted out of practice matches in their England tour to be available for IPL!!! Whether in terms of money or purely by current rankings of CRICKET PERFORMANCE, India is no fringe player, which fringe player beats Aus in an ODI triseries by the way. One tries to be balanced and not bring up these things in a website that people other than Indians browse, but such comments force my hand. My two cents: Anybody who had watched the whole innings rather than random news channel footage would not suggest it is overhyped. Where it stands with the great modern epics is debatable but that it was a stupendous display of cricket cannot be debated, even Rob says so. Objectivity doesn't mean denying credit where it is due.

As somebody said (I don't remember who)-English journalists spend a good amount of their time in training themselves in the usage of clever "put downs". It is obsessive, for even when they are right, it diverts and cheapens the debate. The younger generation is not like that and my English and Aussie friends are very balanced. (btw Sehwag has a good following in Oz!)_. Again the media in both these countries still have some old timers. Things will change in time. Meanwhile, Indians should be careful before falling into the same trap from the other side, ie get into victim mode, using Edward Said's "Orientalism" centered nonsense which has choked free thought in the Arab world. I prefer the outright in your face insult, with no holds barred. It allows me to pretend it never happened. When one argues with sloppy thinking people, (ie most writers on Cricinfo.,Mukul Kesavan, Gideon Haigh etc.) less is more. As regards to the game I have my own likes and dislikes (writers & players).

That was the greatest insignificant article! For the sheer entertainment and brutality, it would rank amongst the most enterprising knock played in India. To me, Laxman's 281 is the most significant inning played. Remember, India were following on, 0-1 in the series and had a 32 year record to defend. That inning of 281 broke the back of the Aussies and they lost.

Well it is a tremendous innings in the context of the match, players career state and given the best bowling attack. Only three innings I can think of are Lara's 153, Laxman's 281 and possibly Lara's 277 itself although the third example was on a featherbed as well. The most important thing to note was Viru's improvisation, audacity and sustained chanceless hitting against a very high quality bowling. How important is this innings is not at all important, what is to be noted is the fact that how many times can one manage a sub 300 ball innings like that. Remember every one compared this knock with Wally Hammonds triple and not Don's triple. Both innings were compared for similarities in acceleration, sustained power hitting and rapid scoring. It is the first time in 54 years that a batsman has scored more than 250 in a day...

All this article proves is that the ability to form grammatically correct sentences does not equate to meaningful writing. You are better off peddling insignificant books, Rob. Just leave the writing to someone else.

What have the English contributed to cricket -- apart from originating the game? It appears to me that rather than play the game better the English choose to be armchair critics specializing in the art of two or three word putdowns which have no substance or context. Rob, go drink your tea and pray that the English do not become more irrelevant in the 21st --- in all walks of life, not just cricket.

Sehwags innings was entertaining, but significant?. Sorry. I agree with the writer completely. Being an Indian the best ever innings were played by VVS Laxman 281 and Gavaskars 96 against Pakistan. Period.

Sehwag's innings didn't come in the dead rubber. He scored the runs with India down 540 runs and actually put India into a winning position. That India didn't capitalise and last 8 wickets failed to force the pace can't be Sehwag's undoing. He didn't play for a draw. So much for dead pitch, Indian bowlers bowled as bad as possible and fielded as bad as possible.

Okay, since the ultra-nationalist Indians are now upset with Rob because his article addressed an Indian batsman, let's all stop for a moment and figure out exactly what Rob was saying. Rob was merely saying that he prefers match winning triple hundreds over triple hundreds that don't affect the result of a drawn match. The key here is that Rob has given the Indian cricket team too much credit and is in fact being too PRO-Indian. The fact of the matter is that without Sehwag the Indian batting lineup would have engaged in a classic collapse/capitulation following South Africa's 500 plus first innings, resulting in India losing the test. Therefore, before we start accusing Rob of racism, let's pause for a moment and realize that Rob is actually PRO-Indian because he thinks that India could have managed the draw without Sehwag. In point of fact, India would probably have lost this match without Sehwag and so Sehwag saved the match with his triple hundred. Rob gives India TOO much credit.

I'm really embarrassed at the number of stupid Indians that post tacky, patriotic, out-of-context stuff without reading (forget UNDERSTANDING) anything or without any thoughtfulness. For all the pride we show as having the largest pool of "technical manpower" (sic!) and the "largest English speaking populace", our (collective) good sense comes to naught. "Technical", my ass! Every sonofabit** is an engineer (probably from some grimy stinkhouse that used to serve as a kindergarten. So, how can we expect such wretched refuse to exhibit any considered thought, forget skepticism and modesty and respect for f*ing FACTS. I dare the bastards who select and print these shits to post this comment. After all, these guys are Indians as well - over-literate on paper but under-educated.

Anytime someone score 300, its a great effort. It is very likely that India would have been in trouble if he was out early. Sehwag like Lara can score very quickly and that is what differentiate these batsmen from others. To score 300 you have to bat like Sehwag did. There is no way you can describe it as insignificant knock. How often do you see a batsman scoring 300? Even the great Sachin has not managed that. The fact that only two other batsman have scored 300 twice and they are Lara and Bradman says it all, we don't need others to say how Sehwag played, it was simply majestic and against a great fielding and bowling side like SA. Don't forget the 195 on the first day against the Aussies(another great side)in 2004. Watching Sehwag or Lara must be close to whatching the great Don Bradman.

I would partially agree with Chanakya for indians bringing in the racism concept into this. Thats real bad. But using filthy language is in no way going to get ur point across chanakya.

Once again, I partially agree with Rob's comments as well. In the sense that, Indians would have suffered without this triple hundred. But it was definitely an entertaining knock and for gods sakes it was the fastest triple hundred and against one of the best attacks in World cricket. What else do u want?

Statistically Sehwag is the best opening batsman for India since Gavaskar.Maybe that tells you more about the quality of openers we have had than the man himself.Anyway Sehwag's last innings,the one in Adelaide,was probably better than this one,because it was in foreign conditions against a better bowling line up.In both cases he batted to save a test match,although its not as cool as winning a test match,its still praiseworthy and its injustice to take any credit away from him.I like the new Sehwag,there is a sense of determination and purpose in the way he is opening in the tests in the last three games,hope he continues his great form.Its funny that prior to the tour of Australia even his domestic form was average,he was basically selected on a whim on the advice of Kumble.

Before demeaning lara let me tell you, Lara probably faced the then best bowling attack in the world while he made 400* . Certainly he faced better attack then shewag has done. England bowling with Harmision on prime, flintoff, simon jones, hoggard were probably the best in the world then. Don't forget England didn't even made 300 in the first innings and were bowled out 285 . So it wasn't all flat wicket as many of you suggest.

Rob has, I think, been unfairly maligned by some probably understandably over-sensitive Indians.

He did not denigrate the innings, rather he praised it lavishly and attempted to place it in context.

It's hard to think of a single Test triple hundred which did not occur on a perfect pitch. Sehwag had the merit of facing an attack which looks better than most of the others, and the physically enervating conditions help offset the perfection of the pitch.
It's worth noting, however, that batsmen like Bradman and hutton faced far more frequently delivered balls so maybe their sustained concentration is the more remarkable. However not even Bradman or Sobers scored at remotely the rate Sehwag achieved. Hammond would have come closest, but New Zealand were the minnows of the day and for decades later.

It's certainly arguable that Sehwag saved the game, but the case is far more obvious for an innings such as McCabe's in 1938. H

Mr. Chanakya Rama Rao: I like your 'in your face remark'. The trouble is, you could be referring to yourself. This is one of the other effects of Edward Said's work, apart from bathing in victimology. Grand generalizations of Indians (excluding yourself) is sloppy as well.

Isn't this great phrase suit this article "Hind sight is 20-20". All the examples this article gives is based on results and that is not fair,better way to define would be known facts at hand and based on that decide what wud be a gr8 knock.In sehwags case the known facts were 1) SA scored heavily 2) Probability of match being a draw was high 3) probanility of india loosing was next. To defy all these and set up the game for india to win ...that needs to be ranked high

I really wish all you Indian supporters would just get over yourselves. The whole guts of the article was that in the context of the game, Sehwag's innings was wasted.

It was not to say that the innings was worse than any others (I'm glad Rob mentioned Richards, Lara and VVS Laxman amongst his favourites, otherwise he would have been accused of being another racist white man. Really, all these racist accusations, especially from Indian supporters reminds me of the tripe that Mugabe serves up any time the Western world tries to take him to task for what he has done).

Perhaps you should all vent your spleen at the hopeless person or people responsible for preparing a track on which no result would have been possible? A 300+ score, in great time, against an effective attack really should have helped India to a result.

Sadly, it appears that the Indians do not care for real Test cricket and are preparing pitches for the upcoming slog-a-thons only.

I wonder how many of the Indians protesting at Rob Steen's article remember Chris Gayle's 317 a couple of years ago against the same opposition in roughly similar circumstances - although in that game SA declared at over 600 rather than being all out for 540.

Since no-one has yet seen fit to cite that example, that is at least an indication of what happens to triple hundreds in draws on flat wickets.

Greatest innings for me is Tendulkar's 136 gainst Pakistan in Chennai with Akram -- greatest left arm fast bowler/reverse swing bowler, Younis--Greatest reverse swing bowler and at that time best strike rate in getting wickets , Saqlain--Best offspinner of that time and inventor of doosra without doosra no offspinner is good ask murali--Mushtaq Ahmad of the best legspin bowler of all time..India was 80/5 Tendulkar Single handedly took India to the brink I know he did not win for the country but for pure technique and flamboyance the best innings i have seen with four of the best bowlers operating with varied style and importantly at their peak and balls really reverse swingling ..ask Dravid in the same match.I would say this is better than Lara's matchwinning effort against Aus with McGarth and Gillespie at their peak in a dead pitch and Warne at his real low ..He was drooped in the series.Anyway this is my opinion and yes you lug holes i am an Indian.

Completely off-topic, I don't like what's coming out of Motera at all. Apparently, Kumble asked the grass on the pitch to be taken off and the curator reminded him of Perth. If it's true, it's disappointing coming from a competitor like Kumble. I fear we may need an innings of greater significance from Sehwag and a few others this time. Why India get so defensive on home soil is beyond me, because you bat out two days, the match is already a lame draw, so it's very hard to lose.

Mike Atherton's 185 was definitely a class innigs to be compared with Lara, the Don, Stan McCabe, etc and Sehwag's 319 was just a meaningless run fest.
Who are you kidding????

Rob couldn't digest this magnificent effort. A man by the name of Sehwag turned the game on its head just by his sheer brilliance. The bowlers couldn't capitiliaze on his effort. He certainly laid the platform.

As for Chanakaya Rama Rao there is only one stupid thought on these list of comments and thats from you. ***hole you are exactly the kinds who have no self esteem and have no pride in who you are. Get stuffed!

yeh i agree with Rob. yes sehwag should be admired for scoring 300 at better than a run a ball. but come on how many times have we seen the man fail? so he has a penchant to score big hundreds ? look at where he has scored them! on absolute flat bed pitches which offer no assistance wat so ever to the bowler. i agree with rob as to whether anyone will actually remember this innings apart from cricinfo and sehwag himself. as for all this patriotism please india wake up and smell the coffee india for all its brilliance in cricket is still one of the worse teams when it comes to consistency. you only have to look at its batting line up. Win 16 tests in a row india and then come tell me about how great your team is until then put up and shut up!!! EVERYONE talks bout how great indian cricket is wait till they lose again because they will because that is india as erratic and wayward as sehwag! when he hits he really hits and whn he misses its pitifull! grow up your not in same league as aus

Mike Atherton's 185 was definitely a class innigs to be compared with Lara, the Don, Stan McCabe, etc and Sehwag's 319 was just a meaningless run fest.
Who are you kidding????

Mr Kevin George, Your forefathers stayed illegaly in India for over 300 years. They looted and killed at will. Its been only a few years of giving some back. Please wait another 250 years before you come to India to thank over anything.

It is captive writing but clearly your “oxymoron” doesn’t cut it. A score of 540, an opener makes 319 facing 278 deliveries – insignificant? Inept analyses at best!

In response to " Ansel Hosein "

If only you had the ability to grant the greatness to a man who has played longer than the time you have spent on earth!!! Please don't be the judge of Sachin's greatness. Judge yourself first!!!

Sunil Gavaskar's 221 at the OVAL in 1979 nearly won India the test match. Sir Leonard Hutton described it as the greatest innings ever played.

@Karthik
Fortitude: 1) Strength of mind that enables one to endure adversity with courage.
I would think reducing a team from 481-1 to 627 all out, or taking 9 wickets for 146 runs after a devastating counter-attack, on a totally dead pitch, shows fortitude. This is an attack which pretty much forced Shaun Pollock to retire maybe a year too early. Steyn has played every Test playing nation other than Zimbabwe and Australia, and since 2006 has pretty much destroyed each team at least once. I'm not sure if you only follow the exploits of just one country, but if you'd seen South Africa over the last year and a bit and came out with those comments, you have no standing to ask anyone else what they're smoking.
I'm curious, whats your opinion now after they've wrecked the Indian top order? To blame the Indian batting for being spineless or incompetent would take credit away from exceptional bowling, and show an inability to appreciate cricket unless its centered around India.

i dont give a rat's ass about how significant or insignificant was sehwag's innings against south africa but who the hell are you to say Bangladesh shouldnt be playing test cricket?!
I am pretty sure those people who made that decission were wiser and smarter enough than you!

Alas, my words proved prophetic when I certainly didn't wish they were. Kumble's honeymoon is over rather abruptly. Very Special and Very Very Special may still improbably rescue India out of the woods and avoid a defeat but the signals he sent out and his tactics were not at all pleasing. If he was concerned about the grass, why didn't he give it to the bowlers instead. After two days of hammering by the Proteas, the grass would have been duly stomped on and left a good pitch for batting. Or was he worried about the reverse swing Steyn and Ntini would extract on the last day. Whatever, but a disastrous day so far and by the evidence of the bowlers' continued tepid performance, there don't seem to be any real demons in the pitch. This is a repeat of Nagpur 04 but only I didn't see it coming so soon.

In response to Aorticdissection and AK:
The issue doesn't need such intellectual dissection and drop names here. It's out there in the open and you couldn't escape even if you wished. Seen any placards in stadiums recently? Notice any difference between what people in different stadiums put out there? Do you see any difference in how they appreciate the game and players? Patriotism in of itself is not repulsive and indeed acceptable. But how! I was meaning to add "be careful about the blind arrogance, lest we fall hard ..." But then the very intelligent AK did it for me by saying I'm the only one stupid one in this forum and one that lack self-esteem. Aha!

Final riposte to Karthik's assessment of SA's bowlers. SA's green boys and underperforming subcontinental failures have wreaked havoc on India's great line-up this morning. And we didn't even need Ashley Giles second cousin (twice removed)... Someone elese warned to look out for Veeru's next innings, all of 6... Featherbeds do not a great cricketing nation make...

Dear Rob,
What do you expected after 540 odd runs from SA after 2 days of test cricket. India wud lose from there or it wud be a borin draw. But it was sheer talent of Viru which made this test memorable. Come on scoring a triple century that too less than run a ball is worth to applaud anytime,anywhere. Just take out the Viru's innings from the test match and replace that with 150 runs from a batsman consuming same number of deliveries. Yet another boring draw right?? So calling this knock insignificant will be stupidity.

i think you had two purposed one was to get attention for your blog which is now succeed going by number of commnets and two i suspect you dont exactly appreciate sewhag but actually having said that know in context of looming large ahmedabad defeat manybe you are right mate !! it was just an insignificant innings

Scoring a triple century and that too the fastest triple century against the bowlers like Ntini, Steyn, and Morkel can NEVER be insignificant.

By calling this innings the greatest insignificant innings, are you suggesting that Ntini, Steyn, and Morkel are insignificant bowlers. It cannot get more absurd than this.

I was kind of expecting the responses I received for my first mail. No surprises there. But, the 6 runs yesterday before being bowled by Steyn was pretty special. I am having a good laugh. So, S. Garg, tujhuk mailagaun, Vicky and JOeZ and the like, this series is 1-0 to the South Africans. Go chew on that..........Absolutely brilliant Dale Steyn. Now for Kallis to score double and make it count. This has been truly pleasing. Thanks guys.

In order to truly deserve the label "great" a challenging pitch should at least be part of the equation. I've certainly seen better and more important innings, speaking of Lara, what about his 196 (out of 347) against SA in 2005. WI lost the match but the gulf in class between Lara and the rest was striking.
The cries of racism anytime anyone doesn't prostrate themselves at the altar of Indian cricket are tiresome as well.

good article. it stimulates thought fromm readers.kudos should be given to sehwag good attaching knock. For the record I agree with most readers LARA'S 153* is still the best innings in cricket history together with Laxman'a Immortal 281.Look at each player and innings. Both won the match and series on par.Lara made 153* will the middle and lower order batsmens and actually gave away almost 60 singles in that innings to keep strike.Laxman always had excellent support from Dravid Ganguly etc.But Both Lara and Laxman did these innnings against MAGRATH WARNE LEE and Gillespie thes 4 of the Top 15 bowlers in the last 20 years of cricket. and both WI and INDIA came from behind in the series. Never will i see an innings as those 2. As much as I love Tendulkar he has never won a match or series for a country and their 1 plus billion supporters. to sehwag continue to do what you do best but take credit for a wonderful attacking innings. But understand LARA and Laxman Knock will be immortal

MOST INSIGNIFICANT INNINGS OF ALL TIME: LARA 400*.
BEST INNINGS OF THE LAST 50 YEARS : VVS 281

In my opinion Tendulkar's 136 against pakistan is a superior knock to Lara's 153.

BEST INNINGS IN THE LAST 50 YEARS : TENDULKAR 136 AGAINST PAKISTAN.

To "Andrew Jenkins "
He got dropped twice AND Mcgrath almost knocked his head off.
you know how it is : Lara's obviously a Rob favourite and nothing succeeds like success.
If West Indies had fallen even a couple of runs short it wouldn't have been one of the "greatest" innings!If India had lost Laxmans innings wouldnt have been "great"..!
I know it sounds ridiculous ..but its true!
Its like saying say a Maradona scores 3 great goals and the team loses ,then it isnt a "great" performance.
but if the team wins its "great".
Rob,Rob,Rob......there have been many many "greater" innings than the Lara 153....but you apparently havent seen them.

Judging by the tone of a large number of readers' comments above, which equate any criticism, or anything less than slavish adoration, of an Indian player with racism Cricinfo is going to have to recruit more writers as it would appear that only an Englishman can comment on the England team, an Indian on the Indian team, etc.

How blinkered can people be by petty nationalism? - Rob quite clearly has Lara’s up there as one of the greatest innings - does he need to have someone from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh as well to ensure he is not viewed as a white supremacist?

Whilst I’m not sure I agree with Rob's analysis he is entitled to his view, as is anyone disagreeing with it who can respond with reasoned argument. Their arguments or comments however should have nothing to do with race, history or national GDP.

What is it about Empire? – get over it. We stopped blaming the Romans a long time ago.

I actually think that Sehwag has as good a claim as anyone to have made the greatest triple century in the game. There's probably only Hanif Mohammad's innings that could contend with that, possibly the Sobers innings that held the record for so long - but of course that was against effectively a two man specialist-bowler attack. No, I don't think any triple centuries count among the all-time great innings: but Sehwag's is closest.

I also think that this claptrap about him having "no technique" is rather silly - his style is merely to have an excellent basic technique to which he adds judged moments of aggresive panache. Sometimes these judgements go wrong leading to his inconsistancy and others we see innings of brilliance such as this. If he gets to a stage where his judgement improves even more he can yet become an all time great.

While I don't agree with him, calling the writer anti-Indian when he clearly cites the Laxman innings as one of the very greatest is wilfully daft

all the more insignificant considering the collapse today !!

How can you say that his innings did not alter the result of the test match? Looking at the way the rest of the team batted, had it not been for Sehwag, we could very well have had to follow on and who knows wat the result might have been after that!

Yes, Laxman's Kolkata heroics and Lara's Bridgetown legend are simply outstanding, but you can in no way belittle sehwag's effort.

Considering the collapse today,and the way Sehwag got out it was a slap on the face of all who were praising like hell. I will say we Indians get carried away with all the media hype. Of the current lot only Dravid and Laxman have played some real gutsy knocks which we all Indians can be proud of.

Same thing I thought... people were ranting too much over Sehwag's innings... although the strike-rate was astonishing. The problem here wasn't Sehwag really, the rest of India couldn't capitalize and the Proteas bowled superbly on day 4. All said, just one slight bone to pick, Lara - the best lefty ever? There are two other camps that might not agree (Sobers and Pollock).

to Harish Motwane
Name the tendulkar innnings which he won a match saved himself from being dropped as captian and to bounce back and actually lead the series from being bowled out for less than 60 runs. hmmmmmmm

Good blog. Sehwag is a great player with many fantastic innings.

I note the reference to Lara a the best left hand batsman; no doubt he was a great player - the best in modern times. However, I believe messrs Sobers and Pollock to be the best left handers.

Lo!!! So the bandwagon now jumps to immediately dump Sehwag and point out his "obvious" flaws. For God's sake, give the Proteas credit, they steamed in, were express fast, angled the ball in and attacked the bat all the time, something which if Aus had done, they wouldn't have lost at Perth either. Sehwag or no Sehwag, we had no chance the way Steyn and more importantly Ntini bowled yesterday, even Sachin couldn't have saved us from such a torrid onslaught, the most we could have hoped for was something barely over 200. Kumble got too desperate to force a result - because if he had taken the ball, there was no way he could have got them cheap and the match would have likely been drawn - and paid a heavy price. Sehwag batted the way he always does and if it had come off (though highly unlikely), things would have been different but the rest have to pick up the tab and can't depend on him every time.

I think it's pretty obvious that Hanif Mohammed's triple-century was by far the greatest of the triple centuries that have been scored. Bradman's weren't too bad either, but most of the rest weren't scored in the great situations that led to Lara's 153, Laxman's 281, etc.

Other top, top innings.
Atherton's 185 against South Africa
Botham's 149 against Australia
Gilchrist's 149 against Pakistan
Waugh's 200 against the West Indies (the most important test series of the 1990's)
Tendulkar's 136 against Pakistan
Bradman's 270 against England
Gooch's 154 against the West Indies

Why are all the Indians here attacking Lara because of this article? Do you guys really think Sehwag is or will ever be anywhere close to the batting genius of Lara? The writer never claimed that Lara's 375 or 400 were genius innings he talked about his 153, stupid! That innings was rated by every great cricketing mind(including your own Indian ones) as the greatest innings ever (his double century i in Jamaica were among the top 5 greatest of all time on most list too). So stop getting yourselves in bunches. Sewhag inning was a greatly entertaining and even Lara would have enjoyed that but it was nowhere near a greatly significant inning, much like Lara double centuries in Sri Lanka against the magic of Murali were greatly played but not greatly significant. But go ahead attacking Lara after all you people refer to blacks (which many of you are darker than) as monkeys right, then u all turn a blind eye and deny that there is anything racist about that.How did Vuru do in test 2? Haha!

I think peoples parochialism is getting in the way of their better judgment here. A great knock no doubt, but put it into some context. The pitch was a batsmens dream, look at the scores from both teams in that last test. Now look at the current results in this test. I think Sehwag would get more appreciation if he made big scores on pitches where conditions and the match situation is more trying. Otherwise he could be known as the greatest track bully of all time along with Hayden. I personally think VVS Laxmans 281 is my modern day legendary knock.

For Me Brian Lara's 153 will always remain the greatest innings of all time....All night i saw the man taking his team to an almost unthinkable win against a great bowling line up on a degraded 4th innings pitch....

I abs love sehwags no nonsense battin and his recent 300 was a superlative batting performance...

But for a cricket viewer late one 1999 night when i bit my nails as walsh batted and prayed mcgrath bowled a loose one...the one shot that always will be etched in my mind will be the cover drive to win the match....153 not out....the greatest..

Brian charles Lara is the greatest batsmen,the greatest entertainer to ever bat...Amen...

I am an indian and lara is my fav...so there is nothing racist as someone is pointing out about indians supporting sehwag...its just that they like his batting....

If Lara was born in India...he would have been nothing short of a god and i even dare say a god mightier than sachin(he is my 2nd fav)

and guys dont demean any great player of any country...its just a rational discussion...

sachins 136 vs pak was a super innings but lax 281 rates above bcos in crickets the innings that wins u the match is the one that matters....

for me sachin's greatest will always be the sharjah knocks albeit its from the ODI's...

and we indians always forget our greatest test batsmen dravid conviniently because he is not flamboyant...

he is afterall our best match winner and match saver ar once...his 233 at adelaide and even his 90's innings in perth 2007 shows the masters match winning abilities...

Its high time he gets his due from the public...

Ha, if some Indians think supporting a West Indian rather than an Indian is racist, we must have a serious inferiority complex. Lara is one of the great batsmen of the game, hand it to him. Though, I would have to agree with everyone who rates Sachin's 136 higher than any of Lara or Laxman or any other modern great's achievements. I also think that if India had held on won, it would have been spoken of in the same light and it's no fault of Sachin that India lost because but for his innings, India didn't have any chance of even getting remotely close to a tall target on day 4 of a turner. The conditions were very difficult for the batsmen and yet Sachin was completely at ease in defence and attack and toyed with Saqlain.

Unfortunately a "great" performance seems to mean a "win" for the team.
Lara has played literally hundreds of innings but apparently only the one or perhapstwo "significant" ,"match winning" innings.
Doesn't this imply that the only thing a batsman can really do is score runs? The rest is pretty much out of his control.

During the Lara 153 The much VAUNTED Aussie bowlers couldnt bowl out the tailenders on the "fourth day pitch".
What if you had say Akram and Younis charging in and mopping up the tail in another match and Lara remaining unbeaten on 150?
would it then not have been a "great" innings.
There is a HUGE confluence of almost infinite things which need to go just right. As,mentioned that out of literally hundreds of innings lara has managed one such, why not more?
its simple ,its all a batsman can do!

if the chips fall his way, great!
if they don't its STILL great!

you cannot in any way use the final result to demean a "great" performance as Rob seems to imply!

Gavaskar made 90 in Ahmedabad against West Indies in 1983. It was teh worst pitch in the history of Indian cricket. The bowling was deadly, with Marshall and Holding in brilliant form, supported by Wayne Daniel, who was the cheif wrecker in that match. Gavaskar made 90 in 120 balls, beginning with 2 cover driven fours off the first two balls fro Marshall. He did not wear a helmet. He toyed with teh attack. This innings is probably the best in history. the rest of the scorecard on both sides in both innings wears a pathetic look. No one else could have played this innings.

"Harish Motwane" raises a point:

If England had scored 3 goals in the '86 WC match against Argentina and so won the match 3-2.... would Maradona's performance still have been classed as "one of the greatest"?

Heck,For me ANY Tendulkar innings even when he is completely out of form is better than Lara at his absolute best.
As Lara once said it's an absolute honour for him to even be talked about in the same breath as Tendulkar.
In fact Lara is very similar to Sewhag. Sewhag also has some huge scores and may well play a couple of 153 type innings.
SO guys, compare like with like. i.e Lara to Sewhag.
Tendulkar's in a league of his own.
I guess that makes me a Tendulkar fan !

TO SrivatsA

For Me Sachin Tendulkar's 136( actually many,many other innings as well!) will always remain the greatest innings of all time....All night(day) i saw the man taking his team to an almost unthinkable win against a great bowling line up on a degraded 4th(5th) innings pitch....

I abs love sehwags no nonsense battin and his recent 300 was a superlative batting performance...

But for a cricket viewer late one 1999 night(day) when i bit my nails as Mongia batted and prayed Akram bowled a loose one...the one shot that always will be etched in my mind will be the cover drive( with such severe back spasms that he could hardly stand) to hole out to saqlain....136 out....the greatest..

Sachin Tendulkar is the greatest batsmen,the greatest entertainer to ever bat...Amen...

you also need a bit of a luck (which people quickly forget) to play a great innings. Think of this:
1) what would have happened if Lara had been caught in the slip when he offered a straightforward chance in making 153.
2) what would have happened if Sachin's back had not cheated him when he got out on 136 agianst pakistan or what if pakistan had dropped that catch like the australians dropped lara's.

I would put Sachin's innings right up there.
you dont have to agree with me.

Lara played for some 17 years. Tendulkar for 18.
They've played some 500 innings between them.

Lara has one "match winning" innings ,Tendulkar apparently none or some near ones.

So, even the DAFTEST person (ROB?)will realise that the critical element involved here is LUCK.

The two finest batsmen of the past two decades hardly managed ANY matchwinning innings in a combined 35 years and 500 innings!!
Doesn't that say everything?

What a waste of space your article is. Instead you could have written a single sentence - 'every innings in a drawn test match is insignificant' - which is what your flawed conclusion is.

t least it helped india to draw the match.So the innings is definitely SIGNIFICANT.

Hanif Mohammed's 336 is the only triple century in a second innings of a test - ever, and ensured a draw against the West Indies; in the West Indies, with all their firepower.

The score card of his match says it all with his 1000mins effort. Truly a test and triumph of human endurance & spirit!

I do not agree to the fact that Sehwag's innings was "insignificant". For the sheer dominance the man showed, the effortless and clinical manner in which he decimated the SA attack, it was pure magic. Lets face it, not many teams have won matches after conceding 500 runs in the first inngs. By that count, had Sehwag not scored, India might well have gone on to lose on that featherbed. For all the folks who are mentioning that Dravid was the person because of whom India could not push for victory, they need to revisit their thoughts. I believe the reason we were not able to go beyond 750 was because the middle order did not contribute as much as they should have and had they done and gotten India a lead of 200+, even on that dead pitch, the result "might" have been different.

@ Mani, your quote 'every innings in a drawn test match is insignificant' i will go even further than that. Every Test run made is significant for the batsman who made them, just as every wicket taken in a drawn or lost match is important to the bowler.
@ P.Remin , 'The two finest batsmen of the past two decades hardly managed ANY matchwinning innings in a combined 35 years and 500 innings!!i think thats largely down to the teams they played in aswell. If Lara had been born, say 5 years earlier, he would have played with Viv and rest. As for Tenders, although India have had the batters, Kumble apart they have struggled to dismiss teams. So dont be so harsh on the two modern masters.

@ Ali ..'ANY Tendulkar innings even when he is completely out of form is better than Lara at his absolute best' Either youve never watched cricket in your life or you are romantically involved with the little master.

I think the innings was average to be honest, Hayden can dlo better so can Ian Bell.

Excellent article as ever. However, you've omitted what is, in my opinion, the second greatest Test innings to Lara's in Barbados in the last 25 years, namely Graham Gooch's unbeaten 154 against West Indies at Headingley in 1991. The pitch was a then typical seamer's paradise, the West Indies attack consisted of Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh and Patterson, the next highest score in the innings was 27, yet Gooch carried his bat to help earn England its first win in any Test against West Indies for 18 years. I think I'm right in suggesting that various computer models invariably rate this innings and Lara's as amongst the greatest ever.

The pitch was an absolute disgrace and the groundsman should never be allowed near a cricket square again. Once again the Indian public suffer for a groundskeepers shortcomings. Bangladesh would have managed a draw on that track and even if India had made 700 there is absolutely no chance a result was going to occur. A slightly juicier track in the second test has led to the usual wide array of flashing blades and leaden footwork. You can have all the talent in the world but you are not going to win a lot of test matches when you are constantly playing on pitches that look more like a stage in the Paris-Dakar rally than a cricket wicket.

As an Indian I am ashamed of all the jingoistic rants going on here! A few like SrivatsA make me proud for he has wriiten eloquently and with an even hand. He and others of that ilk are obviously possessed of the intelligence that escapes the "brayers" here. Lara is the greatest batsman of the last two decades period.

@Ali you have been appropriately dealt with by Salim so I need say no more.

@Chase everyone should read your post and that will put the whole thing in perspective. And as a "darkie" I know the type of racist attitude my own people are capable of so disparage Lara they will then cry about Eng.

On the general subject of the article, it will always be a matter of subjective opinion as to how significant Vuru's innings was. It depends on a whole set of "what ifs" that we can never know the answer to, but we can ALL agree that it was entertaining and in an era when the so called "cricket fans" of India will choose that garbage 20/20 over a test we have to thank Sewhag.

imagine there are ple out there whose perception is like one of those Indian movies- Tendulkar is not god and his innings are very insignificant.Imagine if he had to bear the burden of being the only recognised batsman on his side.Dravid is alot better than than him and Laxman is classier. But LARA is wey better he actually made average 50-60% of all WI runs. tendulkar actually makes his runs on the sub-continent.LARA has always batted alone with little support from his peers
Lara will be superior based on his lack of batsmen on his side

Indian fans are comparing Lara's 153 not out match winning knock to Tendulkar's
136 which didnt win the match. Lets put these two innings in context.

Both innings took place 3 months apart.
At the time of Tendulkar's knock he was rated number 1 batsman in the ratings.
Three months later when Lara began his knock he had already taken over number
1 spot from Tendulkar.
Both innings took place on their home soil.
Tendulkar's innings took place in the first test against
pakistan when everything was still up for grabs.
Lara's innings took place in the third test giving WI a 2-1 series lead.
Both players had scored lowly in the first innings, 0 and 8 respectively.
Both players single-handedly kept their teams in the match, Lara's knock
helped WI win by 1 wicket and Tendulkar's knock got IND within 12 runs of
Pakistan, However Tendulkar was the seventh wicket to fall not the 10th.
They both faced 250 odd balls for their total.
Tendulkar's 136 out of a total of 258 is 52% of IND's total.
Lara's 153* out of a total of 311 is 49% of WI's total.

Tendulkar faced the excellent attack of;
W Akram who took 3 wickets in the inning and was rated 11th at the time.
W Younis who took 2 wickets in the inning and was rated 9th at the time.
S Mushtaq who took 5 wickets in the inning and was rated 18th at the time.
Nadeem Khan took no wickets and was not rated in the top 100 batsmen.
S Afridi took no wickets and was rated 50th at the time.

Lara faced an equally devastating attack of;

G McGrath who took 5 wickets in the inning and was rated 3rd at the time.
J Gillespie who took 3 wickets in the inning and was rated 19th at the time.
S Warne took no wickets an d was rated 18th at the time.
S MacGill who took 1 wicket and was rated 13th at the time.
s Waugh took no wickets and was rated 48th at the time.

I didnt usually pay much attention to the PWC ratings (now the ICC)
but it was interesting to see MacGill higher than Warne and Waugh
higher than Afridi.

Another factor was the weather conditions, pitch conditions but i will
have to dig a littel deeper for those facts.

Conclusion??

Just by looking at these facts and figures i would suggest that if Tendulkar
had managed to stay to the end and bring IND victory, then and only then could
you try and compare his knock with Lara's. True Lara was dropped right near
the end and that tendulkar wasnt. But the main fact is this, Lara WAS there at
the end and Tendulkar wasnt. That is the one clear defining difference between
the knocks,
Lara's brave lone knock brought glory, Tendulkar's brave lone knock bought admiration but
ultimately not an IND victory.

Anyone who dosent regard a triple century as a great innings dosent know much about the game.
I have seen both Laras big scores i saw Jayawardenes, Taylors, Gayles, Haydens and Shewags last triple and in my mind this innings of 319 by shewag rates a lot higher then any of those, the way he ripped the SA attack apart was breathtaking and of the 272 balls he faced to bring up his triple at least 40-60 of those were pitched outside leg by Giles, i mean Paul Harris.
When the team batting first makes 570 in nearly two days then any team would be pushing shit uphill to get a favourable result batting second and the fact that up until lunch on day four a result did look possible and that was only due to the way Shewag batted. Also did Dravid bat any longer or slower then Amla did in his first innings?

Lara's good- no doubt!
Thing is:
Tendulkar's better!

The Lara fans will go on and on(ad nauseam)about a couple of innings, very conveniently ignoring his huge and obscene number of failures.

Vice versa for Tendulkar.

Someones said Lara is similar to Sehwag.That is very true.They're both great in the few innings when in form, both physically and when they mentally "feel like it".
It takes a special type of genius like Tendulkar to play when "you don't feel like it".

Lara had a relatively injury free career.
It's basically the serious injuries that have cut down Tendulkar more than any bowler.

Tendulkar is the allround superior batsman by a country mile.

@Salim Mian

What i meant is that a batsman can only do the best he can.

There are infinite things that are simply out of his control.
The other batsmen may get out,someone takes a great catch,dropped catches,an unplayable ball,poor umpiring decisions ,etc etc etc ad infinitum....Infinite permutations and combinations.

The two finest batsmen of the generation could hardly ever manage it through out magnificent,unmatched carreers:
(The 2 freaks are the highest run getters!)

So it is patently obvious that there are many other factors besides pure skill that are involved.
This is a "team" game so an individual performance should be classified as "great" or "significant" purely on the basis of the performance itself.
The end result is incidental.

Lara's performances in Sri Lanka were great and significant even against a "pre doosra" Murli.
How on earth anyone can blame him(or in other cases Tendulkar) for the losses ,or call his innings insignificant,is simply beyond me

@"Salim Mian".

"Sachin is a GENIUS, I am a mere mortal": Brian Lara.
So, i guess both me and Brian are in love with Tendulkar!

Someone here keeps bring up Maradona. I guess thats a good comparison. If Maradona scores a goal every match and Argentina still loses coz the opposition scores more goals ...do we blame maradona??

"Most Tendulkar centuries come when India loses".
What in god's name is that nonsense supposed to mean?

So if a lesser player than Maradona scores a hattrick in a couple of matchwinning performances, that becomes a yardstick for making him a "better" player than Maradona???

Only the most unrealistally lopsided indian fans or fans besotted with lara will continually point at a couple of lara innings as "proof" of lara being better.

Tendulkar is a far superior,consistent batsman.
(scores a goal almost everytime).Injuries have devasted him more than anything else.If not for the injuries this topic wouldnt even have come up.

Sachin innings of 136 is not even in top 100, forget about being the best. Tendulkar haven't played any innings as significant as Lara and I am not even talking about his 153*.

Lara made 213 against Australia in one of the toughest wicket in the world. Westindies were 30 for 4 when lara was in the crease. Lara scored double hundred and won the test match. Tendulkar have ever played such ininngs.

What about 196 against south africa where westindies were bowled out for 347. The wicket was so bad that batsman were struggling to score at the rate of 2 runs an over. And lara completely dominated thre bowling attack.

I'd like to mention a few more Sachin innings which are forgotten prob because they came a little early in his career: 119 N.O against England, '90, saving India from defeat, 114 at Perth against Aus '92 (no other Indian batsman crossed 50 in that Test), 111 Joburg agst SA '92 (same as Perth, but match drawn this time), 169 agst SA Cape Town '97 with India struggling to avoid follow on. He has time and again stood like a rock against the march of the opposition and what Dravid and Laxman did is to reduce his burden. That does not mean he has ceased to be a matchwinner in Test cricket. The proceedings of the Test at Motera show that without Sachin, India sorely lacks inspiration, regardless of his individual contribution. Dhoni and Ganguly are resisting hard and if they succeed in saving India, it would be a catharsis indeed. If you say I have mentioned too few centuries, he has 39 centuries, so you go through the rest. Same applies to Lara's detractors, obviously.

To me the fact that makes this innings insignificant is the track on which he batted. It flattered the word flat; mate you could play ice-hockey on that track. As for Arun Lal who suggested that innings being the biggest advertisment for Test cricket, what about this track being the worse ad for Test cricket. And for all the indians jumping up and down suggesting his inings created an opportunity for a result; What opportunity are you talking about??? The way South Africa were batting second time round as well suggests to me that getting out under 100 was a crime on that track!

Cheers!!

@no_quiero

The top hundred innings list you mention is by wisden.the key requirement to be on the list was that the innings should result in a win...not a loss or draw.

A similar list mentioned Tendulkar as the 2nd best batsman of all time behind only Bradman at no.1

Without Sachin's aura-like presence, India have once again capitulated, true to form. I hope this time the apparently doubtful decision to Ganguly is not made a big issue, because India were dead and buried even before Dhoni and Ganguly began their resistance. Well-deserved win for the Proteas, they respected India and prepared meticulously for the conditions and the players. India on the other hand had assumed it would be a formality to win, though they had copious words about SA being tough opponents. Half the Test squad wasn't playing in the CB series, so they had more than two months to recuperate and plan for the series, which they don't seem to have. As Smith hadn't failed to mention, if you don't know your combination until the morning of the match, you basically don't have a gameplan at all. Holding onto No.2, let alone no.1, is by no means easy and thank God the wake-up arrived early. They may still win at Kanpur, but this defeat would have surely hurt.

Sehwag's triple century is definitely not one of the best centuries. It is not even his own personal best- that belongs to his first triple century. That rates higher because it was the first time an indian had got to 300+, it was against India's fiercest rivals- Pakistan and India won that match!

@Ali

As a sportsman(albeit in tennis not cricket) I personnally know the havoc serious injuries can wreak on a career.

It forces you to "work around" your injury,curtail certain shots,makes you tentative about your body etc. All severe deterrents to performance.

I personnaly love the Lara flamboyance (if and when it's on).
but "Ali" though obviously a hardcore Tendulkar fan is quite correct in some ways.

If Tendulkar had had a relatively injury free career like Lara he would have been streets ahead on practically every count.

This fellow "eddy" sounds more like a statistician than a cricket lover.

After all his round about mountain of stats he effectively states that the men who should really be commended(or thanked) are Healy for dropping Lara and Akram for "not" dropping Tendulkar!!!

I feel sorry for both poor Lara and Tendulkar!
Both wonderful innings forever condemned to what someone else did (or did not) do!

Anyway with Lara it was definitely a few innings which were high points in his career,that stood out and so effectively saved a basically mediocre career.

As for Tendulkar it's more like a blur of sustained shining brilliance and genius for over a decade.

After seeing the second match, you should change your view for sahwag inning.

It was the best inning ever. If sahwag had not scored that much India would have lost the match and if Indian bowlers have had some more teeth SA would have lost the match.

It was Indian bowling attack that made his inning look ordinary, see even in helping condition Indian bowlers were unable to all out the SA.

So you will call the second test match pitch is also flat?

Graham Gooch's 154 against a hostile west Indian Pace attack in 1991 on a seamer friendly track, utterly dominatin the England innings and ultimately winning the test is quite possibly the greatest test innings ever played by anyone. but as for Sehwag, I would'nt take anything from his innings. what can a man do? he can only play the each ball on its merit, play out of his skin. the batsmen can't make the bowlers bowl better etc, some of it is in the hands of others and the lap of the gods

I came across someone stating that Lara played only one or two significant innings. Here is a list: 277 V Aus, 213 V Aus, 153* V Aus, 178,221 and 130 V SLK, 226 again V Aus and the list could go on.. All these were sheer genius innings an we had the pleasure of watching the God at work. Lara said he was a mortal and Sachin is a genius? Know what Sachin said? "Lara is God's gift to cricket". Even during WI's last tour of Australia, the Australian cricketers rated Lara as most dangerous batsman, and they know cricket better than all of us.. Obviously, Sachin and Lara are the best in modern times. But its unfair to compare both of them, for they had given their 100 percent for the game and their countrymen.

What started out as an piece about Sehwag's 300 has turned into yet another Lara V Tendulkar debate.
My view is this. Lara's recordbreaking knocks (501* 400* 375) and match winning knocks (213, 153*)
will live long in the memory of those who witnessed them. Breaking records will bring
fame and highlight genius. Tendulkar also has records. The most tons in test cricket,
and nearly, the most runs. (His one day career should be regarded seperately
(Dravid himself said when passing 10,000 test runs this week that Test cricket
is the true test and much harder). Tendulkar's records are based on consistancy
and longevity. 100 after 100 after 100. Lara's records are build around pushing
boundaries and incredible endurance. I find it very hard to understand people
like 'Ali' or 'Shar'. Their comments are not measured or even acruate. If Tendulkar
is so far ahead of Lara as a batsmen why is it that he still trails Lara by 170
odd runs having played 6 innings more??? Yes Tendulkar has scored 5 more tons but
then Lara has scored twice as many multiple hundreds than Tendulkar.
In fact if multiple hundreds were added up and counted as tons in their own
right (like 'EDDY' has suggested in another blog) Lara would have 46 tons
and Tendulkar 43.

Indian fans talk about the pressure Tendulkar was under when he went out to
bat for india. 1 billion people counting on him to do well. Tendulkar is
the model professional, he played for his country, his team and himself.
As Wasim or McGrath threw down the ball at him he was only thinking about
that ball, not 1 billion fans. He didnt carry the entire hopes of his team,
and country. He had Dravid and Ganguly and Laxman and Azza etc.
Lara had far less fans counting on him (about 5 million WI'ians worldwide)
but time after time it was him saving the day or trying to save the day,
with help from Chanderpaul only.

Although it is clear that they are two of the greatest ever they are as
different as apples and oranges, both as players and men.
Saying one is better than the other is a matter of opinion and thats
fair enough, saying 'Tendulkar is a far superior,consistent batsman' ALI,
or 'Tendulkar is the allround superior batsman by a country mile' SHAR,
is neither statistically or objectively correct.

I am amused by the amzing bias of the posters. I think Rob is right on the money. He is not trying to take away from or devalue the significance of Sehwags innings. He is simply putting Sehwags innings in perspective of the other "great" innings, and shows that Sehwags innings falls pretty low down the list of great innings. It is pretty similar to Gayle's triple century in Antigua, where there was a flat track and big scores for both teams. I just wish the Sehwags fanatics would quit with their OBVIOUS BIAS and try not to skew what Rob is saying.

@Rakesh THANK YOU! I guess too bad for Ali that Tendulkar is in love with Lara so there is no room for Ali in his life! lol. Anyway these are just too great batsmen acknowledging each other. What should Lara have said instead " me god Sachin sheep"? A better judge is to listen to what others say. Lets see what Chappell had to say about the two:

Comparing Tendulkar with Brian Lara, the former Australian skipper said both are "worlds apart" in effectiveness. "Lara's quick-footed tip toe through a terrific innings against a good Australian bowling attack when the rest of the West Indies top order succumbed easily was in direct contrast to Tendulkar's stumbling effort in the crucial Sri Lanka match," Chappell said.

But better yet let the eye speak for itself anyone who has ever saw the two know in their heart that when the chips are down when it really matters you would rather have Lara and you will get more visual pleasure from it too. Back on topic, test 2 proved how great Vura is!

hi rob,
i completly agree with your view that the 153 is probably the best innings of mordern times.There is another innings that would have probably beaten this innings at the post if it had resulted in an Indian victory.Sachin's 130 odd against Pakistan at the very same venue-chepauk.Braving the Chennai heat(being a Chennai guy myself i can tell you thats hard) and what was a career threatening back injury he took india to the brink before getting out.Had he stayed there at the end it would have probably been a better innings than Lara's.

Dear me, Rob,
Please don't insult Garry Sobers by attempting to elevate Brian Lara above him as the greatest left-hander the game has seen. Lara seldom faced bowling attacks of the standard Sobers had to encounter; and then there's the batting averages: Lara around the 54 mark, Sobers around the 59 mark. Just because Sobers failed to match Lara's highest test and first-class scores, does not mean Sobers was a lesser talent. There are other factors which must go into the mix, some of which have been mentioned above. Remember, Bradman, THE greatest of ALL time, did not achieve Lara's high scores either. Does that mean Lara is greater than Bradman? I seriously doubt it!!!!

Sehwag proved that he is just a fast track bully

Mr Rob

Please look at the scores of other Indian players after Sehwag got out and you will have to say that if he had not score those runs India would have suffered the same humiliating defeat that it got in Motera. So to me it was not an insignificant innings. It was a match saving innings , much like his century at Adelaide

@ E.CAR..yep i might sound like a statistician because
i find its the only way i can objectively respond
to comments such as 'with Lara it was definitely a
few innings which were high points in his career
,that stood out and so effectively saved a basically
mediocre career' S.car or '..'ANY Tendulkar innings
even when he is completely out of form is better
than Lara at his absolute best' ALI. Rather than
get into an slanging match with these 'cricket fans'
i prefer to quote facts. If Lara had so many
failures and was so far behind Tendulkar's superior
batting why does Lara have more Test runs in less
time, less Tests and less innings?. Why does he
have more high scores, second only to Bradman?
The record for the most runs scored in an over,
the second most sixes hit in test cricket, the
most fours hit in test cricket, joint record
for 1000 runs in a year four times?

When we talk and think about Lara's batting im
sure it's largely Test cricket we think of.
When we think of TEndulkar i believe we think
of the whole package ODI's aswell, even if it is
unconsciously. We view Tendulkar as the ultimate
batter because is has done so well in both forms
of the game. It is unfair to compare their OD careers
as Tendulkar has played 100 more games.
When i compare the two i think only of
test cricket, the true test, and in that form of the game
Lara is second to no-one in modern cricket, JUST CHECK
OUT THE FACTS!!!!!!!!

Forgive Rob.
Most Brits have a thing about Lara...
considering that he's singled them out for special punishmnent!- you can hardly blame them!

I don't think any batsman ever,including the Don has pasted England quite like Lara.
The moment he saw them....It seemed to have the same effect on him as the aussies had on laxman or the indians on anwar....
Lara seemed to just rub his hands together in glee and gorge himself!
I can just imagine brit journalists or fans going either ga ga or cringeing at the sight of Lara going on and on and on......!

And another thing that makes lara a better player and batsman than tendulkar - he walked when he nicked it....
Cheers!

@mitch... if u check the stats they will show you that more than half of sachin runs are overseas...also he averages more overseas than at home... also if sachin scores a century and india loses it speaks about the rest of the team...does not tarnish sachin... his 136 was gr8 as was his 169 (not sure) vs SA in 97... but there is one inning where he showed his class... his 116 at MCG in 2000 out of indias 230 odd runs...
Also i do not c the sense in the statement 'sachins 100s come in losing causes'... what the hell were the others doing? btw when lara made his 213...walsh was adjudged not out when he clearly was out....so if that would have been given out WI would have lost...so then laras 213 would have been in a losing cause....that wouldnt have made the innings inferior would it? the same applies to sachin

Oh, get a life, all you fools who want to continually compare Lara and Tendulkar. Which would you rather lose, your right eye or your left eye? Can't answer? Then shut up and enjoy the cricket!!!!

@abhi.

I don't know what you are talking about . What does walsh not getting LBW has to do anything to do with Lara 213. Westindies easlily won that test match by ten wicket and lara had a huge partnership of 344 with jimmy adams.

And you talk about sachin 116 of 230. That is about 50 percent of teams total. If you look at Laras centuries there will be almost 10-15 innings where he had scored over 50 percent of teams total.

You have a point about Sehwag's innings but your comment about Lara's 153 being the best of all time is a joke. It may be your personal favourite but don't force your views on the public. If you remember the Aus wicket-keeper dropped a sitter off Gillespie. How can Laxman's 281 be any less than Lara's even taking into account that Lara played with the tail. Laxamns' was a flawless innings and remember what deficit he was chasing. God save cricket from such comments.

I have read enough. Now, here's the final, final say, and no arguments please:
- For the English, Robert Croft's match-saving 0 made in 63 min is the best test innings ever played
- To the Aussies, Steve Waugh's 200 vs WI is the best innings, and ONLY so bcoz he endured 32 broken teeth and 26 broken ribs during that innings
- As re WI, Courtney Walsh has been and remains their best bat ever, though he never fulfilled his potential
- NZ, Bangladesh, and SL do not deserve an entry bcoz they are SOOO crap
- As re Pak, Saleem Malik has played their best innings ever, albeit it was outside the ground as a match-fixer
- As re SA, Barry Richards could have played their best innings ever, if ONLY so bcoz he was in glorious form in his only ever test series, after which he bashed feeble county attacks season-after-season
- As re India...
...I am still thinking...
...
...
...
if the choice falls between Dravid's 270 or Sachin's 136 in Chennai.

Pl revert with hate mail.

For those who are arguing that Lara's two innings of over 300 were insignificant they must first understand the context in which he made those knocks. First of all, on both occasions Lara broke the world record for highest indvidual test score so even if those knocks did not secure a win for the West Indies they were significant becase they broke records. In fact in Lara's first knock he broke a decade-old record held by Gary Sobers and he was yet a young man just at the time when his team was declining. The second time around that 400 although, was an important knock in that it saved West Indies from being white-washed by England and also healed the wounded hearts of West Indians who were embarrased by England in the three previous test matches. May may lok at that innings and say it was selfish, but Lara proved to the world that he was capable of setting a record, have it broken and go back and set another one. I do feel it for Sehwag with your assesment.

@eddy Well, if you compare only their Test records, Sachin has a better average than Lara despite fewer runs in more innings. This obviously means he has carried his bat through more often though popular perception holds precisely the 'lack' of that as his failing. Bottomline: You really can't choose between them. In the early 90s, when Lara looked like Bradman's successor, anybody would have picked him over Sachin but over the years he has become an enigma of gigantic epics with prolonged lulls while Sachin has steadily delivered on his original promise. I prefer Sachin only because his game is more compact and easier on the eye but I would back Lara to outdo Sachin against hostile pace bowling. Purely on statistical terms, Ponting is still the hot favourite to surpass both, unless his temporary loss of form becomes permanent. That Sachin's idolization in India has to do more with his ODI exploits is spot-on though because most fans here somewhat scorn Test cricket.

The fact that "eddy" and "sanjay" are getting so worked up only proves that deep down they know that Tendulkar is by far the superior batsman.

I think they're confusing "viewing pleasure" as "better".

I've grown up watching Mcenroe, and to me he was the most talented ,skillfull,exciting,instictive genius ever!!

Then came Sampras. I STILL find Mcenroe a zillion times better to watch.

Also Mcenroe at his peak('84) played tennis the likes that noone has ever seen(not by federer,sampras noone.).

But ,even though Mac will always be my sentimental fave out of sheer "viewing pleasure", even i grudgingly have to admit that Sampras was the "better" player.

I dont think some people have got to that level of maturity as yet.

I think some folks in here have a point.
If you check (like "eddy" the accountant here) ,you will see that right from '98/99 Tendulkar has been haunted by numerous serious injuries.
Lara has indeed had a relatively injury free career.

So ,inspite of playing so many ODIs more,if Tendulkar and Lara are still almost neck and neck it does indeed speak volumes for Tendulkar!

If he had been injury free ,Lara wouldn't have even been spoken about in the same breath.

Also, as someone says, Lara used to basically score in surges.
Tendulkar,even in the 2003 WC,played the entire tournament with a broken hand and still managed to fight it out!

So even with half his body gone and breaking apart piece by piece for a decade he's still neck and neck with Lara on the test front!!!

That has GOT to be the ultimate achievement!

Which clown in here said that Tendulkar is better than Lara by a "country mile"?!

Is he crazy?

As Warney says there's "daylight" between Tendulkar and Lara. A country mile is nothing!!

What people conveniently forget is the fact that if Dravid also had scored at a brisk pace, then Sehwag would have got tired because of two reasons: (1)he would have to run more runs, and (2)he would have to face more balls. Dravid ensured that Sehwag got sufficient rest at the non-strikers end keeping in mind the heat and humidity in Chennai. Also, the fact that Dravid was keeping the wicket intact gave Sehwag more freedom to bat.

can everyone commenting here please forget about the tendulkar vs lara theme.The article has nothing to do with either of them.Both of them are great in their own way.Let us not discuss genius on some foolish misplaced patriotism.

Dear Rob,
significant or insignificant the damn thing is that it lit up many a faces and it was worth every penny spent by the people present there.

the gay abundence with which he scored his runs even when he was nearing scores of 200 and 300 shows the simplicity of the man and the way he plays his game while others would have ploded and brought the spectators to tears.

Sad this match did not produce any results but for us mere followers of the game it gave us many a reason to smile

"eddy" the statistician goes on...

After his new round about mountain of selectively chosen stats he effectively states that Tendulkar is the better batsman when also taking ODIs into account.

Further,the majority of laras top performances have come at home.So if you take into account away performances Tendulkar again becomes the better batsman.

Also,if you discount the extra ODIs ,he would have had fewer injuries and so his test record would have been even better!

Here is a batsman who having struggled with serious injuries for more than half his career is still practically even with lara on the test front. This would have been a superhuman achievement for any player.The problem is this players name happens to be "sachin tendulkar" so this incredible achievement is conveniently devalued.

I think the sooner poor "eddy" comes to terms with the fact that is his beloved lara is the second best batsman of the generation,the better!

Reply to IndianMonkey's post Lara walked in Chandigarh in 1994 when in his 90's umpire was Venkat. Lara remains an excellent sportsmen always walked always tended to dominate the bowling that is why the opposition had a chance against him. Had scored the max number of sixes in Tests until Adam Gilchrist overtook him.

@Sanjay: Oh, and what then of the blistering 98 against Pakistan in a crucial World Cup match in 2003? Does comparing one of Sachin's most dismal failures with one of Lara's better innings make any sense, can you not see that it had more to do with spite from Chappell at being sidelined by the board after the World Cup debacle? If excelling in tough conditions where the rest of your teammates collapse is the test of greatness, his 114 at Perth and 136 at Chennai are ample proof. I have said again and again that comparisons - particularly of the statistical kind - between Lara and Sachin can only be made by those who don't realize how privileged they are to see two of the alltime greats in the same era. If you blindly disregard Sachin's achievements and quote dubious statements to push your "idol" Lara up, you are not very different from those who ridiculously play down Lara's achievements just because they are Sachin fans either, are you?

I would say that Tendulkar is the best allround international batsman EVER. Its between him and VIV for the best OD batsman and between him and Lara for the best modern test player. I'd plum for Tendulkar in the OD field and Lara in the test field.

Statistician here....you guyz kill me lol.
i'll do my best to respond......

Seems i do get some support from Madan, Nigel, Adil, Salim.
Allthough E.car, Tap, Buz, seem to dislike my opinions.

If i leave all stats to one side (which i find really hard to do)
i still cannot see how anyone can honestly say that Tendulkar is
'by far superior'. Ive never said in any blog that i feel Lara
is 'by far superior'. In fact their respective Test records and
careers have been very similar (statistically ;) ).

Someone quoted Warne saying that in his opinion there wasnt much
between them, he picked Tendulkar for his 'mental toughness'.
Who am i to disagree with the worlds finest leggy ever?
Maybe it was all the hammer he took of Lara over the years that
made that choice? On the otherhand the other great spin bowler
Murli says Lara is the best he bowled against.
Its all about opinions.

Tendulkar looks nicer at the crease, text-book, something like
Bradman we're told. Lara was all over the place with a sometimes
dodgy techique. Style has a lot to do with perception.
they both have all the shots. 360 degree coverage.

Im very sorry but i have to finish with some stats again :)

Test Cricket, KEEP THAT IN MIND PLEASE

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me how Tendulkar is soooo
superior to Lara in test cricket. i can answer that for
E.car, Tap, Buz etc... he has 5 more tons and a 2 an a bit run
better avg,he looks superior (tech), plays for a superior team and
has played for longer (Lara was pushed out, India wouldnt dream or
treating Sachin like that).

After all the 'massive dips in Lara's game and form' over the years
that's all i can see Tendulkar has over Lara.

As i have said before somewhere Lara made more runs in less time,
with less matches and less innings.

Tendulkar may well be slightly ahead of Lara in certain aspects
of the game and may well be 'better' than Lara, but 'by far superior'????
Never.

I just found out that it was actually Ian Chappell who said that and not Greg as I assumed. Well, it could then be construed as Ian standing up for his bro against the impending fire or just a knee-jerk reaction to his World Cup failure. Bear in mind that he was comparing how both batsmen had aged and that Lara seemed to be doing better and not a general comparison of their batting ability as such. Of course, Sachin surprised all observers last year with great performances in both ODIs and Tests and I doubt he would have said the same thing today. If you construed it as an affirmation that Sachin is in general a stumbling batsman, I cannot begin to describe the amount of bias and prejudice in such a thought. Have a bowl at him and you might learn better.

How can Sehwags innings have insignificant. India were trailing SA by 450 odd and Sehwags knock got them past SA!!!! As for only triple tons that have been significant or insignifiacnt. Both of Lara's by definition were significant because they broke records. The most insignificant 300 was M Taylor's. He retired on 334* (the dons top score). He said it was out of respect...fool, records are there to be broken!!!!! As for all of this Tendulkar Lara nonsense i have this to say.
Tendulkar is my favourite indian batsman ever and i believe i seen most of his innings in India live or on TV. Lara on top of his game and 'in-the-zone' is the most thrilling and
unbelievable batting i have ever seen.

Ashish

Yes it is quite a feat having your last 10 test centuries over 150. He has certainly played some special knocks. He's very "hit or miss" however and has gone missing a lot in between those knocks. His average for those 10 innings is 210, but for the other 52 times at the crease inbetween the average is only 30.
Interestingly too, India has only won one of those 10 tests that Sehwag has scored 150+.

But eddy,as much as I agree that Sachin is not by far superior, I also see that you have mentioned in one of your comments that Lara is second to none to modern test cricket. That is also disputable because you are going by the sole statistic of runs in that case. Sachin has more centuries, though only a few more, and a slightly better average. Now if you too lose sense of proportion and make some statements more out of fervour and adoration for Lara, I will have to attack that. :P Surely, Sachin is going to get there in terms of runs in a matter of a few innings and we have to yet to see where Ponting winds up. And in this comparison of Lara and Sachin, I don't see any mention of Steve Waugh. He may not have looked so attractive, but no other modern batsman pulled his side out of trouble with such regularity and in such varied conditions as Waugh did. He had all the trappings of an ideal Test batsman and lest we forget was a very effective ODI allrounder too.

@ Madan...I cannot hide my admiration for Lara's batting thats clear to see. I cannot talk of SWaugh in the same breath as Sachin and Brian and
i dont think anyone should. He was not a genius as the other two were/are. He worked his nuts off
for his country, never gave in. Your talking about a different kind of batsman there Madan. Now his brother was something else, i'd much rather watch him bat than steve. Sure he didnt win as much matches for AUS or score as much runs or have a better avg but i think thats my entire argument wrapped up. There was somthing about HOW he batted, just like Gower or Hooper or Azza. Style!!! When, and it is WHEN Ponting overtakes both Lara and Tendulkar for the most tons and most runs he still wont be remembered as fondly as Lara,Richards,Sobers,Chappell,Gilchrist,
Jayasuriya, Tendulkar,INzi...etc.. entertainers all of them!!!

To Nigel Williams - simply breaking a record does not qualify an innings for greatness. Yes, there are plenty of statistics nuts who will get excited by a record, but the aim of any player should be to help his side win the match, or if that's not possible then at least to avoid losing it. Lara's 400* was certainly not a great innings - on the contrary, it should have had him sacked as captain immediately, as he was clearly being selfish: batting on solely for the sake of his personal milestone when declaring earlier would have given his team a better chance of winning. He could have learned a few things from Mark Taylor, who left himself on 334* to go for the win rather than the record (as it happened the match was still drawn, but that wasn't Taylor's fault). Most of the highest scores in Tests don't qualify as great: Lara x2 (dead pitch), Hayden (rubbish opposition), Sobers (two bowlers injured), Jayasuriya (another dead pitch).

... continued...

Hutton is debatable - yes, the attack included Bill O'Reilly, but otherwise wasn't that special and the pitch was another dead one (the groundsman had been hoping for a four figure total), so that probably doesn't qualify as "great" either. Jayawardene is a more likely candidate - a decent attack, and the pitch can't have been that great as SA had just been bowled out for under 150 - but the one triple that was unquestionably great was Hanif Mohammad's. Facing a first innings deficit of 473, he batted for three days to save the game; no-one has approached it before or since. Looking at the overall career records, Hanif was not as good a batsman as Lara or Tendulkar, but his 337 was surely a greater innings than either of them ever played, if not the greatest ever.

Ashish, your comment on Taylor's innings is complete codswallop. He did not decline the opportunity to break Bradman's record out of "respect", he did so to maximise his team's chances of victory.

Both players have had dips in form,
and both have similiar ducks totals 17 and 14.
Lara was blinded by fame and the records and women.
Tendulkar by Indian pressures and injury.
Between june 97 and march 99 Lara didnt score a 100.
By far his worst spell, 27 innings. the worst
run Tendulkar went on was 18 innings with out
a ton between december 05 to may 07.
The most consistant spell
Tendulkar had was 5 tons in 11 innings,
and he has a high score of 248*
The most consistant spell Lara had was
4 tons in 8 innings,
and a high score of 400*

So its official Lara's lows were lower
than Tendulkar's but Lara's highs were higher
than Tendulkar's.

@eddy, oh Mark Waugh was always a delight to watch and Azhar on song is virtually an unmatched sight in cricket, only Laxman comes close. But the dour, fighting batsman is important in Test cricket. I would also say that somebody who has withstood bowlers like Donald, Walsh, Gough, Kumble, Saqlain across Sabina Park, Kolkata, Adelaide and many other venues must be doing a little more than working his nuts off. There were no major chinks in his technique and once well set, he was difficult to dislodge, understatement. As for Punter, he's a stylish bat but his big forward-across movement and continued clumsiness against spin qualifies my opinion on his batsmanship. Ponting the cricketer and person is a different story. :P And I still think it is an IF, Sachin wants to play on till the 2011 WC and is back to his best, he could still do enough to deny Ponting, provided...injuries, and he's already down with one.

If Sehwag hadn't scored those runs, India would have suffered a heavy defeat. SA had piled up a huge score in their first innings and India started their batting reply under great pressure.
Sehwag made batting look so easy that instead of appreciating his super human effort, people started to question the quality of the pitch.
The pitch might have been benign but if you subtract Sehwag's runs from the total, the other batsmen didn't make too many runs and not at the pace at which he scored. Sehwag not only made a ton of runs, but he also gave confidence to other batsmen to face the South African quicks without fear. To appreicate the true value of Sehwag's innings, imagine what would have been had he departed for a first ball duck. Most likely, the match would have ended in 4 days in favor of SA.

@no-q... i may have spelled out the wrong inning...it may be the 153 whre WI won by 1 wicket... thats what i am saying... if schin makes a 100 and yet india lose it is touted as 'sachin makes 100s in losing causes'... i was just pointing out that if that walsh wicket would have fallen then WI wud have lost and laras innings wud have been in a losing cause... that would have not made it less significant

@ Michael Jones. People are taking about Lara and Sachin and Sehwag and then you talk about TAYLOR. HA, what a joke. And to say he declared on 334* to try and win a match is rubbish. Why declare there and not 333 or 335. I read that he didnt want to overtake the Don out of respect for the man. I agree with Ashish, records are there to be broken, Lara didnt retire or declare on 365 in admiration to WI's greatest player. Taylor missed his chance at personal glory (yes cricket is a team game but made up of indiviual performances) or worse he bottled it! Remember even the Don had to break Sandham's record and then Hammond broke the Don's. When Lara 1st broke the record it had been 30 years old. And just to make the record mean something again (and not Hayden's 380 against self-confessed chicken farmers) he took the boundaries of batting further than ever before, 400*!!!
Declare on 344*???!!!!! what a joke.

@paulmart...
Mate, thats what i said..lara always walked...and as far as tendulkar is concerned...he hits the cover off the ball, and has a giggle when the ump turns down the appeal...and these are the kind of people whose words sunil gavaskar would like us to accept...what a bloody loadda crap..

@ Salim. Simple reason: that was his score overnight, so he decided to declare then rather than bat on just for one or two overs in the morning to get the record. The reason Lara didn't declare when he reached 365 was even simpler - it wasn't his choice, because he wasn't captain at the time! If you judge the innings on the quality of the bowlers faced, Taylor would still beat Lara - Shoaib Akhtar and Mushtqa Ahmed against Andy Caddick and Ian Salisbury, no contest.

@Michael Jones
I think you are speaking the word of ricky ponting rather than yourself. If you look at the match Brian lara gave plenty of time for his team to win the test match. When the test match ended half an hour earlier in the final day england were just 40 runs behind westindies. That means if full play was on Westindies may well had to bat again. So how can you say lara batted for long.

Secondly, Lara was captain at that time. If he wanted to be selfish he could have carried out batting without declaring and made 500 runs and break his own first class record.

personally for me the greatest test innings of the Modern era has been the 136 Tendulkar scored against Pak in Chennai..on a worn out 5th day pitch , with the ball reverse swinging..with the pitch spinning a lot..with the weather being hot and humid ..i mean difficult conditions..with 4 bowlers of all types ..one greatest leftarm pace bowler and greater reverse swing bowler(Akram)..(Dravid can wouch for it..)..another.. one of the greatest fast bowlers..or swing bowlers(Waqar)(In the modern era no one batsman can play good swing from the so called greatest team(Aus) to the so called great batsman(Ponting)..Third the best offspinner of all time(in my mind.. in this day and age when bats are so powerful ) ..Guy who invented the doosra..4th Mushtaq Ahmed ..one of the best legspinner..the attack had it all ...and last but not the least yes i am an Indian and any problems with that..

1)
sachin is a genius i am a mere mortal- lara
lara is god's gift to cricket- tendulkar.
so
a)if lara is a mere mortal and still god's gift to cricket it follows that
b)Tendulkar is god's ULTIMATE gift to cricket!

2)
tendulkar x n (serious injuries) = lara
tendulkar x 0 (serious injuries) = lara x 2!!!

cheers!

To add to my earlier list of great knocks:

Dean Jones getting 210 against India in the sapping heat of Madras in the ties test.

What a magnificent innings. The best I've ever had the fortune to see, in terms of sheer grit, other than Waugh's 200 (although I didn't see Gooch's 154). Neither player were stylish shotmakers in their innings, but they got stuck in when it was really needed.

I think every body has the right to have an opinion in this modern world. People have gone beyond their limits to prove their point. Sehwag did some thing twice no Indian batsman could do in 75 yrs. of Indian test cricket history. We have definitely played against much weaker bowling attacks . As an Indian I SALUTE Sehwag for his innings and I am proud of him.Since there is so much crapp to read in the comments, it would be better to remove this article from the web site now.

ROB is a Englishman,he and others like him seem to live in a timecapsule..so it doesnt really surprise me he comments the way he does however to put sehwags innings in persepective, had he not scored those runs the way only he can India would have been in serious trouble with rest of the batting not really clicking. To call it the greatest knock ever is not really fair to Sehwag. He did mention it was the greatest knock he ever played though.

As far as racism goes Indians are no different than anyone else but at least they didnt run slave ships to carry black people to work in cotton fields and then deny moral responsibility for slavery and its funny how some uncle toms on here mention racism as aexclusive Indian phenomena. hey chase when was the last time you bit a apple!

@ Ali, you seem to be caught up in what both Tendulkar and Lara have said about each other. Do you really think Tendulkar would say 'im the best' or that Lara would say 'im better than tendulklar'???????????????? they respect each other greatly. Bradman said Sobers was the greatest cricketer he has ever seen, so what does that mean??? your arguement falls flat.

YOUTUBE : "Sachin Breaks Free ".

I thought this was supposed to be a discussion about cricket - mentioning what one country did or didn't do to another 200 years ago adds nothing to the debate. Obviously I'm not proud of Britain's role in the slave trade, but blaming all English people now for what some English people did a few centuries ago is itself at least stereotyping, if not actually xenophobic.

I'm also English, so let's see if I can express my view without half the population of India jumping in to say I'm biased against them. As the best innings played for England in the last 15 years (as much as I can remember) I'd pick Trescothick's double ton against South Africa, although Butcher's 173* against the Aussies and Atherton's 185* at Joburg come close. None of those, however, was as good as Laxman's 281, which I would rate as the best Test innings in that period, and not as good as several others - Lara's 153*, Waugh's 200, Tendulkar's 136 and one that doesn't usually get such a mention - Gary Kirsten's 278

Why are you all comparing Lara and Tendulkar? Neither was as good as Sobers and neither will score the test runs or centuries that Ricky Ponting will end up with.

The bowling attack Kirsten faced was, admittedly, not the greatest, and on those grounds it probably wouldn't rate as highly as some of the others, but it came in the face of a massive first innings deficit and he batted for longer than anyone bar Hanif has in a Test.

@ no_quiero: firstly, interesting name. Is there anything in particular which you do not want, or just not want in general?

Secondly, I have no idea what Ricky Ponting thinks about this matter and to be quite frank I don't care - what I posted earlier was entirely my own view.

Secondly, if you can't win a Test after scoring 650, it must mean one of four things: most or all of the rest of the match was rained off (not the case in Antigua), the opposition had one or more brilliant batsmen (definitely not the case with England), the bowling attack was rubbish (Collins, Edwards, Collymore and Best - not the greatest) or the pitch was completely dead (definitely the case at the Recreation Ground).

So, bearing in mind the state of the pitch, Lara should have given his bowlers as much time as possible to bowl England out twice - even if they'd exceeded West Indies' total in the process, WI could have chased 100-150 in the fourth innings, in less than a session if necessary.

Yes, Lara could have batted on even longer, and had he done so he would have strengthened the case for him being sacked as captain even more.

@Chris
Hey Chris
MADRAS = CHENNAI( name has been changed)

@ Michael Jones
I think you we find that Lara's 375 was scored against
Fraser, Caddick, Tufnell and Lewis and that his 400*
was scored against the far greater attack of Hoggard,Flintoff
Harmison and Jones, the very same line up that won the AShes
months later!!!

Taylor's 334* was scored against Akhtar,Mohammad Zahid????
Mushtaq Ahmed, Azhar Mahmood.

I think you'll find Mr Michael Jones that statisically and
in the PWC ratings that Lara's 400* was scored against
the superior bowling line. In fact i bet the 375 bowling
line-up was better too!
(Fraser 177 wicks @ 27 and Akhtar 178 wicks @ 26)not much diff!

Get your facts right before saying any M Taylor innings was better
than Lara's.

@eddy you are quite right in your analysis you have shown statistically LARA is better than tendulkar one has too put his genius ability to his side with no recognized batsmen who rarely contribute to building big scores.
Dravid has done better for India than tendulkar Imagine having a team with Dravid tendulkar ganguly laxman azz or sewhag. in lara 153 West Indies were 105 for 5, then still 70 short with eight wickets down--one mistake by their captain would have cost them the match and probably the series. Instead he made half their runs and rescued West Indies cricket from its lowest ebb

What's the point ?...So boring article..I almost fell asleep..

Why is this chap "eddy" so insistent on comparing a clearly inferior batsman like Lara to Tendulkar???

Beats me.

This fellow "eddy"(=mitch?), will next apparently start comparing even chaps like sehwag ,etc cause they've managed to put up a few big scores.

Don't they know ANYTHING about batting??
As someone said they're more statisticians (who conveniently pick and chose whatever stats suit them) than fellows with any real cricket knowledge.

Will you once and for all stop INSULTING Tendulkar by comparing him to Lara and other inferior batsman?

ITs Tendulkar/Bradman. Period.
Place the others in whatever order you so please.
These two occupy a different pedestal.

@eddy
What Tendulkar and Lara said carries a guzzillion times more weight than what you say!!
thats what i'd say!

I thought I'd hit the nail in my earlier post.
However,If you leave it to "eddy the statistician", he'll easily get the relevant stats to "prove" that Roy Emerson is better that Mac,Fed,Borg etc.etc.

Get some help ,eddy.

i feel i must stand up for 'eddy' once more. if 'eddy' went about calling Lara the greatest or far superior etc like ive seen many Tendulkar fans do, he would be presenting a strictly subjective view like the tendulkar fans. 'eddy' decided to make his point through stats and figures. is that any less valid than emotional views? FUNNY, I HAVENT SEEN ONE STAT GIVEN BY THE TENDULKAR FANS, i guess that tons apart, he has no stats in the Test match game that compare to Lara's. Keep at it Eddy, they're running scared!

Lara inferior to Tendukar? Stats doesnt say so. Lets compare the big test innings these two have payed.
200 + Scores: Lara - 9 times,Sachin - 4 times.
Out of 4 times Sachin went past 200, two of them were against the minnows(1 V Zimbabwe and 1 V Bangladesh). 1 was against Australia, without Warne and McGrath.
Out of 9 times Lara went past 200, NONE of them was against the minnows. He had scored 200 thrice against Australia, when Aussies were fuly loaded(with Warne and McGrath).
Also, the other innings were scored at a much respectable strike rate for Test Cricket. If People argue that Lara scored 400 and 375 on flat track, one can also argue that many of Sachin's high scores came in flat tracks as well. Flat track or not, a big score is a score, because not all people in the world can score 400, even on St.John's, Antigua.
Some of the exceptional double-hundreds by Lara includes 277 V Aus, 213 V Aus, 221 V SL, 202 V RSA and most recently, the 216 V Pak. (CONTINUED...)

CONTINUATION...
Also, taking into account the hundred plus scores, Lara(second only to Bradman) averages higher than Sachin.
Also, if we divide the career runs by number of innings played(without considering the not-outs), Lara again averages higher than Sachin.
Who has the most scores of 150 plus? You are right. None other than Brian Charles Lara.
Now, answer this. Is Lara inferior to Sachin? Its a no-brainer. The answer is "Hell No".

Guys please read what Michael Artherton had written in Wisden Almanack: "No other contemporary player, save perhaps Mohammad Azharuddin, could deflect the ball so finely and so powerfully with a turn of the blade and flick of the wrists. Lara had subtlety in an age of power and brute force.

"This unrestricted repertoire, the widest of arcs being open to him, and the ability to hit good balls to the boundary made him uniquely feared by opposing captains. You might worry about Adam Gilchrist, say, butchering an attack and smashing a bowler to smithereens, but Lara made captains, not bowlers, look silly. If you knew you were going to die, you’d prefer a single bludgeoning blow to the head, or a quick bullet to the brain, rather than death by a thousand ever-so-precise cuts. Eleven fielders were never enough; there were always gaps to plug.".

This will stand as a testimony to the fact that Lara is as good as anybody, if not the greatest ever.

Roy Emerson :13 grand slams,
therefore better than:
Laver,Mcenroe,Borg,Connors,Becker,Federer.......

go eddy (and co!)

Obviously some folks have been following laras career.
If they'd followed tendulkars half as well they would realise that he has had numerous serious injuries since '98,lara practically none.

That is the only reason the lara sops can even talk about lara in the same breath as tendulkar.
Other wise Tend would miles and miles ahead.
He already is as far as batting perfection is concerned.
But since we have pure statisticians here,
sachin - injuries= zillion times (even "statistally" better than lara).
Cheers!

@salim
Brrr. All us guys who think tendulkar is a FAR superior bat are scared now?!!?
God,where do you people come from?

You know sehwags past 150 in all his last 10 tons.
so ,as per your convoluted accountant logic....
(" selectively chosen stats"...as someone so well put it)..
isn't sehwag better than lara now?
Lara's never managed anyway near that figure....last 10 tons all 150+. just imagine!
my my sehwags the greatest!

Same old story.
The Pakis and WI fans trying to denigrate Tendulkar.

The one "match winnings" of lara was also set up by the great Walsh/Ambrose,bowling Aus for a mere 146,so even making a chase feasible.Can you imagine what the great indian bowling line up would have done? Theyd probably have given away 400 runs as usual.

There are many batsmen who've got many big scores.
So i guess they're all better than Tendulkar??
As,Buz says...get some help.

Well. Some folks surely don't know about injury to lara. Lara broke his hand during the prime in his career. Lara played a lot of test matches with shoulder injury.
And for your information when lara made 400*, even during that innings he had swollen finger. Don't forget when lara was being troubled by his painful finger we have seen him hit quite a few number of one handed six.

@Rakesh R
So basically whoever can make the higher scores is the better batsman?
errr...
what about batting abilities such as
1) Ability against ALL types of bowling.
(Lara against superfast bowling was a sad joke)
2) Mental toughness
3) Consistency (as many people here have mentioned , If tendulkar hadnt got injured so often we wouldnt even be having this discussion)
4)Actually if lara had been a prehelmet batsman he would have been watching tendulkar bat from hospital.
Tendulkar only started getting hit recently,when he is fading with all the injuries compounding.
did you ever see tendulkar get hit on the head in the '90s?
Lara used to get hit almost every alternate over against super fast bowling.

So,if you conveniently take some stats like" he has more high scores".....heck ,LOTS of people do!
so what?

@Rakesh R
As usual......not only selective stats!
but also selective reading!!!!!
Forgot this part from the same article??how convenient no?
"
Warne, assessing the cricketers he played against, was once heard to say that Sachin Tendulkar came first, daylight second and Lara third. That may be so.
"

Some people are just making statements, as they do not have facts supporting their arguments that Sachin is better than Lara.. Bring some facts guys..

Tendulkar was plagued by injuries. Yes, accepted. But, he has managed to play equal number of tests(infact more) when Lara retired, hasnt he?. So, please do not bring the injury factory. People are using some fance english words like zillion etc., but, you cannot cover-up the facts by using such fancy words, my friend. You need some statistics to back it up as well. Im not degrading Sachin here. Im just saying that both of them are equal and cannot be compared to anyone else or among themselves.

I simply can't imagine real true fans of any sport sifting through computer filtered statistics programmes in such a desperate effort to "prove" their point.

I wonder what statistics they would get for say the Pele/Maradona debate? It would be simply unbelievable for a true football fan to start quoting some computer filtered statistics to buff up one player.

I suggest you try offering some of these filtered statistics to the local fans when they're screaming themselves hoarse after a tendulkar straight drive.

On second thought , I suggest you don't!

someone asked Sachin fans to come up statistics..lets see

1. We all know that Sachin's overall average 55.31 is greater than Lara's overall average 52.88

2. Sachin has more centuries 39 compared to Lara's 34

3. Sacin has less zeros 14 compared to Lara's 17 although Sachin has played 6 more innings than Lara

4. Sachin away average(55.58) is more than his home average (54.95) whereas there is a big difference between Lara's home (58.65) and away ( 47.80 ) averages. Lara scores big in home conditions compared to away conditions.

5. Sachin has 23 away centuries compared to 16 home centuries whereas Lara's home and away centuries are equal at 17.

6. Someone mentioned that Lara has scored 2-3 double centuries in Aus..I agree.but what about the consistency factor? Lara's average is just 41.97 in Aus with only 4 centuries out of 35 innings whereas Sachin has an average of 58.53 with 6 centuries out of just 30 innings..every 5 innings Sachin has scored a century in Aus whereas Lara's centuries came only every 9 innings..who is more consistent here? a few big knocks are not enough..

7. In India Lara averages just 33 whereas in WI Sachin averages 47.69

8. Only in Pak, SA and Zim, Lara's average is greater than Sachin whereas Sachin leads in all other test playing countries..

9. People usually mention Lara plays spin better..I don't agree to that..Sachin also has greater success against spinners..Lara's average in SL is 100.85 mind boggling aha?..take a breather..Sachin averages 111.66 in SL with 4 centuries..howzzat? and we all know how he tormented Warne in 1990's when Warne was at his absolute peak

10. Out of 20 years Sachin has played international cricket, he has averaged over 50 in 11 years which is 55%..of the 9 years he missed above 50 average, he averaged above 40 in 4 years..so he really failed in only 5 years ( 25% )

Lets see Lara's

Out of 16 years Lara played, he crossed 50 average only in 8 years which is 50% and only 1 out of the remaining 8 years he scored above 40 average..so he failed to meet up his career average in 7 years out of his 16 international years (45%)

11. Out of the 20 years, Sachin failed to score a century only in 5 years whereas Lara failed to score century in 5 out of his 16 years

12. Sachin's overall team 2nd innings average is 41.44 whereas Lara's 2nd innings average is 38.18

13. Someone mentioned Lara scores only big scores..Lara has 19 scores of 150 + whereas Sachin has 17..just 2 difference..I agree he leads in 200s and 300s.

14. Lara's average till the end of 2002 was below 50..49.49 precisely. He picked up in the last 3-4 years of his career and his average zoomed to 52 and hey Sachin is not finished yet..this year he averages around 69

someone here mentioned that we should take the average without considering Not Outs..what a joke? then how to account for the innings that ended without the team fully getting out, like a rain interrupted innings or a 2nd innings in a drawn match ? its not their fault that they couldn't score more in those innings..it will be an injustice to the player if we do that

Heck,I thought Tendulkar was
1)the highest run getter in ODIs ,soon to be highest in tests.

2)Highest centurion in both forms of the game.

3)Better average in both forms of the game.

4)Better strike rate in both forms of the game.

5)Better record away than at home .

Oh,i forgot,now theyll say "only tests,not odis!"
why?
coz the "stats" there dont suit their boy!!
LOL!

just wanted to add one more point to my earlier post..as mentioned, Lara had an average of only 49.49 till the end of 2002 whereas Sachin's average was 57.58..8 runs difference..wow..till 2002 Sachin was the king. only in the last few years he has struggled due to various injuries but has come back splendidly in this session and am sure he will reach more peaks soon..wait and watch

A lot of sub threads as usual;people not commenting on the actual blog but on others comments. First of all if i may define INSIGNIFICANT Rob- Something which does not have importance. I hope you agree. Facing a mountain of runs and a potent aggressive pace attack backed by flying fieldsmen who convert 1/4 of a chance, sehwag went on to play an innings which arguably is one of the best counter attack by an opening batsman after fetching the ball for 2days!.This undoubtedly saved the match for India.I am copying and pasting a line written by Rob"By any estimation, the greatest innings, surely, are those that reverse the tide, either saving or winning a match" I am not sure if you have played any level of cricket but any cricketer worth his salt would agree that if sehwag hadn't scored 300+ India would have been looking down the barrel.A test batsman is expected to win a match or draw it.By god if you still think he didn't save the test,step back and stop looking through the pigeonhole!

Good GOD, aren't all you Tendulkar apologists tired of trying to prove that YOUR particular hero is wonderful. I guess that must mean YOU are also wonderful, and therefore your life seems a little less sad. Oh my poor Tendulkar , he's so fragile, he's injured the poor thing! How do you think he was injured, putting on his boots? No, it was at the altar of ODI's that he got his RSI( Repetitive Strain Injuries ) and therefore his loss of Test integrity is his own CHOICE!!! He has been the second best ODI player ever (can't beat the King!) but he can't hold a candle to Lara in Test presence. Of course, if someone could PROVE otherwise, I would be willing to accept any evidence to the contrary. Good luck finding any though! BTW, well done Sehwag for what was definitely a Significant Innings. He turned a crushing loss into a boring draw.

I saw Sachin supporters are obsessed with averages. If Sachin Average is better than lara than Why still he haven't surpasses Lara as an all time highest scorer despite playing higher number of test matches.

The answer is simple. Sachin averages higher (because he plays for not outs) but it is Lara who scores more runs than sachin in the test matches.

If I have to chose one player than I will chose the player who will score more runs.

@ Vimalan you have been doing your homework!!
i especially like the way you have decided to get data from 2002, talk about injuries, ODI info!!, not outs (due to playing for a better side) but most of all i think you have indeed proven your point. Tendulkar has in many ways been slightly ahead of lara in terms of average, and has a better 100 per inning ratio, etc...After all of these wonderful facts and figures, and this is the heart of the matter, i cant remember one Sachin innings as clearly as lara's 153*, 277, or 213. Sachin has yet to make a legendary innings.
136 was almost it, but in the end he fell short and IND lost.Check out all of these blogs and thats the only inning that is mentioned by IND fans...please tell me if there's some innning im missing?

@ riverlime, Rakesh, no_quiero, mitch, salim , thanks for the support.

It's quite clear that neither group of supporters will change their
view and opinion, and i guess thats fine. Personally i think we see
batting diffrently if we follow one or the other. Both ARE/WERE the
greatest players of their time. Both have very, very excellent
Test records. I think the Sachin fans see consistency, text-book style,
shots all round the ground, undying love for the game,
gentlemanly conduct, a hero.

with Lara there was the agony and the ecstasy, the flamboyance, and
the despair (his last ODI!!)The fear of his failure (thus WI failure)
and the delight in his incredible knocks. That is what i think the
difference is between the two. When tendulkar walks to the crease
you expect a ton. When Lara walked to the crease anything could happen,
i.e. scores that had never been reached before or second ball ducks,
singlehandedly keeping WI in matches and series or taking phone calls at first slip :).
Lara asked the crowd at that last ODI if he entertained, he did that and much more.
As i have said Sachin is a hero, squeeky clean and admired.
Lara is a different kind of hero, almost the anti-hero. Like Sobers, Viv,
Botham, Miandad and Lillie. They did it their way.

Lara failed on plenty occasions (as all batsmen must) but when he got it right
he played innings that no-one had seen b4 (or since). Thats why, in my humble
opinion, Lara was the best entertainer since Viv Richards and the most incredible
batsman since Bradman.

Hey look, no stats!!!! :)

Thank you guys for proving that statistically ALSO Tendulkar is better.
I for one couldn't be bothered to "filter" computer stats to suit my case as these poor nerds who call themselves "sports fans".

Get a life boys,go out on that cricket or football pitch! instead of spending hours on "statsguru!" lol.

So thank you.
Tendulkars the best technically,allround shotmaking,against all types of bowling,mentally,consistently and also statistically!!
Cheers!

In my humble opinion:

I think this thing has degraded to an EGO trip.

Stats may, and are,used as a BASE.
For eg. you need say a average of approx.50 and above or say 6/7 grand slams in tennis to be considered in the "GREAT" category.

After that stats start to lose any real meaning.
As someone mentioned above Roy Emerson was for years the leading grand slam holder,but no tennis fan would consider him the "greatest".

This kind of accolade requires numerous other variables. Many still consider Laver as the greatest. This is due to his 2 career GRAND SLAMS,
which effectively judges a players ability to perform on all surfaces.
In batting the batsman's ability against all types of bowling is critical.
It is no secret that lara had serious deficiences against extreme pace.
Not so with Richards or even Tendulkar.

CONTINUED

Another fact that suggests Lara and Sachin are neck and neck in Test Cricket is that both these players took exactly the same number of innings to reach 10,000 runs! Well, I was speaking only about Test Cricket, because it is widely accepted fact that Test matches are the ultimate test for a player. I can also quote some facts about ODI though. In ODI cricket also, Lara scored 1000,2000,3000,....upto 8000 runs quicker than Sachin. This was the stage when Lara publically said he was no longer interested in ODI. But, he was just forced to play ODI by the WICB, just to motivate his team members. Also, Sachin had equally good players like Dravid and Ganguly for the past 13 years. For Lara? Absolutely nobody. He was the lone warrior. More often than not, Lara ended up score more than 60% of the team's total! Innings under that much pressure is always rated a bit extra... People are not going to understand that!

So after the "base" stats there are INFINITE "intangibles" that come in.And also INFINITE permutations and combinations in the number and type of stats.
In the Ali/Sugar Ray debate the LAST thing you will hear is boxing fans quoting some "Stats".

I simply can't believe some cricket "FANS"(!) in here are actually sitting on their computers and filtering stats like who's got more "150+" scores!!!
Actually,statistically there are many batsman better off than Viv Richards.
If you chose you can even get the stats to "prove" that Allan Border was better than KING VIV.Good heavens! god help us all!

Thank you,all you nerds for "proving " Tendulkar is better!
Actually,its something i felt all along!!!
Tendulkar's not finished as yet while Lara is done and dusted.
I just SINCERELY hope that tendulkar doesn't get any more "150+" scores and certainly not a triple or anything......because then the lara nerds will not even have that single "big scores" stat to rely upon!

NOW the poor sods have conceded defeat and are on the "great innings" trip.
Check the grand voyage..from a 17yr old at old trafford and 19yr old at perth....back to Aus.
Sooo many MAGNIFICENT innings! Just take a look at practically ANY test or odi ton or blitz.

You only remember some Lara innings because they came between huge drops and failures.
With tendulkar a "constant blur of sustained brilliance and genius"for two decades!!
And "Rakesh R"
Tendulkar has had to face more pressure than Lara could ever dream of!!
Rem.Kambli......This guy was as physically talented as Lara and Tendulkar,if not more!
Saw what happened to him?? Crushed under a fraction of the pressure Tendulkar has sustained for 2 decades.

As someone said ,for Lara's sake,even though im a HUGE tend fan i hope Tend DOESN'T score more "150+" scores or some triple!!
Really!! coz then the lara boys will not even have their last leg or "stat" to stand on!
I still like lara though, so i wish that stays as is

Oh well.
As i said before, eddy and co.still don't "get it".
They're still confusing "viewing pleasure" with better.
Anyway,
cheerio

Greatness is also a matter of perception. How many non-indians think Tendulkar is the better of the two , i wonder? (not that many,hey?) And how many non-WI think Lara is the better? (almost everyone else!) Tendulkar had chances to be thought of as Lara's equal, but he preferred the fast-food version of ODI's to the haute cuisine of Tests, and so has paid the price of being considered an accumulator of runs rather than an artist with the bat. And don't take my word for it. Ask Wisden, whose review team last year adjudged Lara to be the "greatest among his peers", partly due to his mercurial artistry with shot-making. (to be fair, his only peer was taken to be Tendulkar, with ponting et al not even considered up there AS YET).

As a strictly neutral observer,and admirer of both Tendulkar and Lara, I'd say:

1)If looking at pure batting abilities,Tendulkar was the better batsman.
2)If looking at the visual aspect Lara at his attacking best was more "fun" to watch.

Thats my two bits worth.....

Do people think we actually filter Lara's stats through statsguru? God save them. All Lara's innings are embedded into our minds.. As a matter of fact, I can remember each inning ball by ball. THe pleasure of watching Lara in full flow is unmatched! Also, people were commenting on different parameters like Fast Bowling, Spin and pitch conditions etc. to judge a player. Let me tell you this. Great cricketers like Wasim Akram, Brett Lee, Shane Bond, Glenn McGrath and even our own Rahul Dravid have rated Sachin and Lara equally. Murali rated Lara slightly ahead, while Warne rated Sachin slightly ahead. Sachin and Lara command equal respect from all the cricketers of the present and past generation. Obviously, these great players' opinion and assertion counts a million times more than ours do. Hence, the only logical conclusion seem to be accepting the fact that both Lara and Sachin are equally great. None is higher or lower than the other. End of story.

I think 'Eddy's' last blog summed up his argument perfectly. There can be no denying Tendulkar's consistency over the years. And there can be no denying Lara's failures and faults over the years.
But Lara possessed more magic, produced more drama and reached higher heights than Tendulkar.

terry

@Vimalan. you gave 14 reasons why you believed Tendulkar
is better than Lara. 9 were linked to average.
No-one here is saying that Lara has a better
average than Tendulkar, but you appear to suggest
that if you have a higher average you must be a
better batsman. Now if cricket followed what most
people would consider 'average' that may be correct,
but it doesnt!, and that still wouldnt account for
a miriad of subjective and objective opinions on the batsman.
BUT CRICKET IS UNIQUE when it comes to accounting
for a batsmans average as we all know. Ask most WI fans
and they would still consider V Richards as their
greatest batsman. He 'Averaged' two runs less than
Lara, yet he had 6 more not outs than Lara. In fact
out of the top 20 run makers of all time only 3 had
less than 10 not outs, Lara and two english openers
Gooch, atherton. Thats why when you work out their
runs per innings (RPI) its very very close to their
'average'. Border and Waugh had 40 odd yes 40 not outs each,
and thus both have 'averages' above 50, when their RPI or
'true average' as i like to call, is closer to 42!!

Bowlers dont get such a lift to their figures as batsman.
Bowlers that are denied wicket/s by a declaration
dont get inflated figures for what MIGHT have been.

Thats why using 'average' as a tool to separate batsman is
suspect at best. (Bradman's RPI is 88)

Lara's averages around the world and overall are very close
to his true average / RPI (52.33 average RPI 51.52).
On average (and i mean average in the true sense of the word)
Lara scored 51/52 runs every time he batted. a very fair reflection,
not potential runs, or imagined runs, REAL RUNS!!!!!!!!

Tendulkar 'averages' 55.31 with 25 not outs. His RPI or true average
is in fact 49.50. Far, Far better the Border and Waugh and also shows
that 'ON AVERage' he also scored about 50 runs per inning he played.

Please dont use AVerages to Show how superior Tendulkar is because
Batting Cricket averages are VERY VERY VERY misleading!!!!

@Salim
many Lara followers before me in the thread argued that Sachin fans are claiming him to be better emotionally without any stats..I wanted to prove them wrong with statistics..thats the sole purpose of my argument

coming back to your use of RPI to indicate average, i think it is not a right way to go..there may be more than handful of innings which could have been terminated shortly due to various reasons like declaration, last innings in a drawn match, rain affected innings, etc..Also, if a person remains Not out even after scoring a hundred means he had played a flawless innings and can score more. so I certainly think it is right to exclude all Not outs while calculating average..I am sure those people who decided this rule were more knowledgeable than we two are..If you argue with Lara's batting style or technique or mental toughness to show his greatness, fair enough argument but statistically Sachin is definitely better than Lara in many terms if not miles ahead..

@salim

if tendulkar scored at less than his career avg. (say even 50)for his 25 not outs he would be a good thousand runs ahead.

And whatever stats you chose to pick (selectively as per your convenience)are supposed to be NOT misleading?
Yeah right.

Id say Tendulkar is the far superior batsman.
Lara may be more exciting when he was in allout attacking mode because he would try to attack every single ball,but thats it.

@riverlime
don't take my word for it.I saw it several times on channel 9. Ask Richie Benaud (the oldest and most respected current cricket expert).
"Tendulkar is the best batsman i've seen since 1948."
I could give you a huge list of guys with similar sentiments (and this list would be a lot longer than laras),but I think Richie Benaud ,who's seen them all including Bradman should know just a teenee weenee little bit of what he's talking about.
Don't you think?
Cheers mate.

@salim
great.now the stats other people use are misleading because they dont support lara.
so only the ones supporting lara are correct?
whats wrong with you people

First the clowns ask for stats.
Then when you give it to them ,they say" oh,not these ones....only those ones".

Tendulkar is in the stratosphere as a batsman.
Just those horrible injuries have brought him down to the lara ground level.
But if he can get back even 60/70% of his form for the next 3 years ,he'll wipe out lara...something he only deserves.

@Salim
agreed Lara has played many breathtaking innings during his career, but many of them came in a lost cause or in a drawn match. Of his 9 200+ scores only one came in a win, that 213 against Aus. So the point I am making here is, result of the outcome does not decide the greatness of an innings.

Going by that yardstick, Sachin’s 136 against Pak should be on top of all times on par with Lara’s 153 as it came in a 5th day Chennai pitch against one of the most varied and best bowling attacks at its best (Akram, Waqar, Saqlain, Mustaq and Afridi).

Over the years, Sachin has played so many great legendary innings. If you people don’t remember them, it just shows your bias or selective syndrome. Also it is very easy for people to forget things in such a long career with many extraordinary feats.. let me give some samples..this list is not to show Sachin is superior to Lara but just to showcase Sachin’s specials to blind Lara fans like you..If you get a chance and heart, please watch the videos of these innings and then you will realize

119 not out against Eng at Old Trafford as a 17 year old, it came in the last innings of the match when India was chasing a target of 408, he came at crease when 5-127 and finished with 343/6..who knows with more time India could have achieved the impossible

148 not out at Sydney..at the age of 18..became the youngest ever centurion in Aus

114 at Perth in what was the fastest pitch in the world against the likes of Mcdermott, Hughes, Reiffel, Whitney and Moody at a strike rate of 71..this is still considered as one of the best innings ever played in Aus and one of Sachin’s personal favorites

111 against SA at Johannesburg against the like of Donald, McMillan, Mathews, next highest was 25.. scored more than 50% of teams total

122 against Eng at Edgbaston in1996, it came in the 2nd innings with a strike rate of 69 next highest was 18..scored more than 50% of teams total

169 against SA at Cape Town in 1996 against the likes of Donald, Pollock, Klusener, McMillan, this came after India struggling at 5/58..anyone seen this innings can never forget, remember Bacher’s brilliant diving catch at deep square leg when he was the last man out?

92 against WI at Barbados, this was against Ambrose, Bishop, Dillon and Rose..this was the match India lost while chasing a target of just 120 in the 2nd innings

155 not out in the 2nd innings against Aus at Chennai in 1998..this came in just 191 balls..this was the famous innings when Sachin started to give nightmares to Warne by repeatedly charging down the track and hitting him over the top..this virually sealed the match to India’s favour

177 against Aus at Bangalore in the same series..it came in just 207 balls

113 against NZ at Wellington in a very difficult pitch..this came in the 2nd innings..it was a brilliant counter attacking innings..took just 151 balls

136 against Pak at Chennai…we all know about this innings

116 against Aus at Melbourne in 2000 series against Mcgrath, Fleming, Lee, Warne..he scored more than 50% of his team’s total..he was given MoM although India lost this test and he also get the Man of the Series although India lost all 3 matches in the series

97 against SA at Mumbai in 2000 against Donald, Pollock, Kulsener, Kallis, Boje..in the whole only one other batsman scored a 50..an exact 50 by Kirsten..no one else from either of the teams scored a 50..that will give you the state of the pitch and quality of his innings against a great bowling attack

155 against SA at Bloemfontein in 2001..it was a brilliant counter attacking innings..scored just in 184 balls..this came after India was struggling at 4/68..

86 against WI at Jamaica in 2002..this came in the last innings of the match when India was chasing a target of 408..no one crossed 30..this too also came at a fast pace

176 against WI at Kolkata in 2002..this came in the last innings of the match and on the last day pitch when India was struggling 4/87..without him and Laxman, India could have easily lost the match..frustration of WI bowlers is easily understood by the 9 bowlers bowling in that innings

the recent 154 and 153 against Aus at Sydney and Adelaide..both of them were scored at a very good strike rate

I did not consider many other innings which came on relatively easier pitches or when others also scored runs..so this sample just shows Sachin is not inferior to Lara when it comes to playing that special innings and he is also more consistent than Lara
PS : I am a big fan of Lara as well

btw, I don't understand why Tests alone should be considered to define greatness..Agreed, it is the toughest form..just a simple question though..If ODIs are considered to be easier, then why Lara does not posses a record as Sachin and why Sachin alone is miles ahead than almost all the players who have played this version ever except maybe Richards. I still think Test and ODI should be combined while discussion batting greatness. When we talk about the king Richards, we always include his ODI exploits like that 189 against Eng, that 150 + against Aus, his world cup exploits and so many..can you people honestly think about Richards as only a test batsman and claim him to be the best? no way..then when it comes to Sachin alone why you people don't want to include ODIs? just for your convenience ?

@riverline
according to me Tendulkar is more artistic and more beautiful to watch than Lara but Lara takes more risks..if wrist play is the pure definition of art, then no one is better than Azhar with Laxman and Mark Waugh following a close 2nd. not even Lara is equal to these people..

@ Peter, u have a point, but that suggests thats Lara was only great when he attcked, Lara had a great defence also. U dont just wake up in the morning and get 400*, 375, 277, 213 etc... by attacking and 'fun' batting. This man had vast powers of concentration, great defence and excellent technique (even though it wasnt text-book technique). V Richards had a very unorthodox technique and people used to say when he was young 'you wont get any runs hitting across the line like that'
HA. People said similar things about Lara jumping across his stumps, and at times it was his undoing, but hey, 11953 runs, 400* , 52.88 avg, 34 tons (uncluding 7 doubles 1 triple 1 quadruple), didnt seem to do Richards or Lara any harm.

Very special people and players rip up the guide books and find their own way.

just to reiterate one more point, one of the best commentators and judgers of the game ever, Richie Benaud, and the greatest of them all, The Don Bradman, both of them while picking their all time XI included only Sachin from present day batsmen and Lara is not figured in any of the list. any arguments?..oh yaa, you guys are more knowledgeable than these two to rate Lara ahead of Sachin

PS : this was considering only test matches and not ODIs

@ Vimalan...WOW your a bigger stats nerd than 'EDDY'.

There is a desparation in some of these pro Tendulkar blogs. India fans have to stick up for their one and only true Legend of the game. Tendulkar is a legend of cricket like no other Indian b4 him. Before him they had Sunny and Dev. Both great players but a level or two down from such legends as Bradman, Sobers, Viv, Hobbs. Warne. Two Aus Two WI and a ENG. I'd put Lillie, Marshall, Khan and Lara and Tendulkar in the level below the Wisden 5 .
Please lets have no silliness now about Tendulkar being better than any in the Wisden 5.

@vimalan, My word, you have a lot of issues, friend. I mean, really, SIX consecutive posts? Just because you have lost an argument? and then using FIGURES to "prove " your point?? you must be getting to the end of your mental tether by now. Don't crack up , okay? It's just friendly banter amongst cricket fans. no effigies now. Oh, and pray Tendulkar gets over his incessant injuries, because, really, 76 all out? I guess the original thread of this post was correct after all.

Well. In any cricketing thread you expect ninety five percent of responses to be from Indian fan. And going by the name of the people who are supporting Sachin it isn't difficult to know that those are Indian names.

For most of the non indian and non westindian it will be Brian Lara. I am neither Indian, nor westindian nor I am an englishman.

And for god sake please don't talk about tendulkar's consistency. He haven't been in even top ten in ICC cricket ratings for god knows how long where as lara had been regular in top 3 in the ratings. Even during the worst time of lara he was never out of top 20. But alas tendulkar had been very recently been out of top 20.

How does Jacques Kallis stand amongst Lara and Tendulkar seen as though he averages around the same and scores his runs on more bowler friendly wickets then that of the sub-continent or the caribbean. You cannot compare greats to one another because anyone that can average over 50 in any era of cricket is a ledgend of the sport.

@riverline
there you go..no reply to my questions but personal attack..haha..when did i lose my argument? its you who lost the argument and trying to cover up now..btw i am not a nerd and i have all the issues which any normal human beings have..thanks for your wishes anyway..

@no_quiero
i am an indian but accept Bradman as the greatest ever, king Richards as the most attacking, Sobers as the greatest all rounder, Barnes as the greatest bowler, Warne as the greatest leg spinner, Akram as the greatest left arm pacer and also Sachin as the best all round batsman including Tests and ODIs..where is my Indianness here?..its just a cliche that only Indians support Sachin..how do you know most of the non WI consider Lara as the best? are you their representative ?

GOD first made Lara.
That was for practice.
Then he made Sachin Tendulkar.

What, this debate is still on??? OK, I hate both Sachin and Lara then :P because they have such obstinate and stupid fans indulging in petty one-upmanship. Give me my beloved Azza, at least lot of people hate him because he was a 'match-fixer' and I can quietly and peacefully admire his batting, which, when he was on song, was the most beautiful sight in cricket.

@vimalan

Thanks vim. But actually the list can literally go on and on.
So varied are the tone and tenor of Tendulkar's innings.
He always changed the nature and gears of his batting to suit the team requirements.

What about the 130 odd (in the series decider against Aus in 2001,a matchwinning and series winning knock), the 241 n.o in Aus (again in the decider in 2004,where he refused to play a cover drive),the recent knocks in Eng ( where he stood firm and took several blows to his body,without ego to avoid hooking/pulling to avoid a collapse)?

Oh,I could go on...and the numerous odi knocks??
Phew.

Tendulkar has EVERY facet of SKILL as a batsman...
mental toughness,ability to change gears at will,graft, attack,curtail certain strokes,innovate,rotate the strike at will, play in the "v" at BOTH sides of the wicekt,perfect defence,ability against ALL types of bowling.

Although the Ten baiters enjoy baiting him,years from now most will realise what a complete bat he was.

Id say sachin's the better batsman guys.
Lara is more jazzy.

this guy above is totally rite..not surprisin to see the contradictions come frm u guys.....sehwag's innings was good i admit tht but it wasnt the best..and technically beside bradman all 300+ scorers drew in their test matches....you cant just on and on about a guy who does marvels once evry 20 matches,thts not consistent..2 big centuries vs pakin multan then he plays crap for a year.then comes bak then does crap..like afridi it just dusnt pay off...afridi also has a 40+ average in test..blve it or not but he dusnt perform in 60% of them once evry few matches he gets a big score and voila he's a hero again..lara is no doubt the best batsmen tht has evr played in the modern cricket era and bradman of the past

Mr.no_quiero, Iam Indian, but for me Lara is a man and Tendulkar is chicken. We are also having men like Dravid and Laxman. I dont go by no.of centuries or runs scored(that is also important) but how many times a player has stood up for his country. Tendulkar was made by media which is all encompasing in India.If Lara was Indian all these above posts supporting Tendulkar would never have made. If Iam going to list top Indians(batting) then it would read like this, 1.Dravid 2.Gavaskar 3.Laxman 4. Azhar 5.Sachin (because of amount runs and centuries, bcoz I mentioned this are also imporant).

The age of tendulakar...IS OVER.Tendulkar has never played a great innings...good Test innings yes. GREAt? Good yes but never great.
136 vs Pak 1999? I don't think so...Ind stil lost by a country mile(16 runs).

Lara's 4th greatest innings 132 vs Aus at a dog of WACA pitch 1997.Even Tendulkar's best innings cannot compare to that innings.No need to even mention the 153*.

the great Tendulkar scores 248* against Bangaldesh.WOW..that's amazing.

Tendulkar's not even the best batsmen in the Indian team.

@ vimalan.....ive seen the 'Richie Benaud - His Greatest XI' DVD.
True Richie is/was one of the greatest commentators,along with Laker and arlott, but as a selector???????gime a break!!! You wouldnt at all need two allrounders, if you couldt make 500 runs or take 20 wickets with these players forget it. So I khan would miss out, Sobers would stay. Thats were lara would fit in with Tendulkar and VIv at 4,5,6. And why would you need the Big hitting Gilchrist with Bradman, Viv , tendulkar, Lara, sobers???? A. knott a far superior keeper and never never dropped the ball. i'd stick with sunny and hobbs up front, and warne as the spinner. And the seamers, Wasim and Marshall. Mr Barnes' stats are unbelievable but i doubt anybody had more control over the cricket ball than M marshall and W Akram. That team would beat Ritchie's and most other's.

@ vimalan....following on the last blog ive just tracked down Richie's XI on wikipedia, but more importantly his short list. In the short list for fast bowlers there was no Marshall, Garner, Holding, Ambrose, Wasim, Waqar, Donald!!! His shortlist was a joke dominated by Aus players. Richie was a very fair commentator but a bias selector!Austrialia's love Tendulkar, the little master has scored a beautiful '9' hundreds against them but to Austrailia's delight only 2 have resulted in an INdian win. Its a win, win situation for the Austrialian fans, class batting but with no harm done!

Okay, to all these people claiming that Sachin Tendulkar is better than Brian Lara; the final word on the statistical analysis bit, is the all-time high LG ICC test batting ratings for these players. Sachin Tendulkar has NEVER hit the benchmark 900 point mark for tests, peaking at 898; whereas Brian Lara has done so, peaking at 911. Therefore Brian Lara is better than Sachin Tendulkar, especially since they competed in similar eras. Sunil Gavaskar beats both Brian Lara and Sachin Tendulkar with Sunil Gavaskar peaking at 916. Of the three, Sachin is the worst and Sunil the best with Brian in between.

Nice one there salim, about Benaud's credibility. Glad to see I have some support against the tidal wave of lemmings screaming "tendulkar is the best part of my entire life!!", at the top of their voices.
Why don't you doubters just check the search function at the bottom of cricinfo's website and enter "greatest amongst his peers" to get the final word from WISDEN'S review team , who have seen more cricket than all of us combined.( don't do this if you want to retain your fantasies though, because it may cause deflation of egos).
Man, am I tired of baiting you idolisers. It really is too easy. I think I've had enough. Any more and I'll be sick.

@salim,vimalan.

err salim,
my last post was in english I believe.
Richie Benaud has categorically said that Tendulkar is the best batsman he's seen since 1948..

As usual,looking at your previous posts,you conveniently and selectively suit stats or convolute the argument.

Why are you convoluting the argument by talking about the world 11???who mentioned that?
Even if lara was there,
Benaud has said
"Tendulkar is the best since 1948"...got it?english?

And honestly speaking ,I'd say he carries more weight than any current observer in cricket.....certainly more than the "experts" in here.

Laras finished.gone.
Tendulkars got a few years left.
when he's finished we'll talk....

by then he'd have wiped out lara completely,so as someone mentioned this topic won't even come up
(as someone also mentioned the lara fans can thank the lord for tendulkars injuries.....other wise without them this topic wouldnt have come up even now!)
so thank your lord...

Well,I'm from Australia and i just love,love Sachin.
Lara's all very flashy,
but
Sachin just oozes class.
He's like a rolls royce.

Oh, Sachin is by far and away the better batsman.
He may well go down as the greatest batsman ever,considering his allround abilities in all forms of the game...with due apologies to the don!

I don't think Lara's in the same ball park.
In fact ,if you see- the top 3 batsman of the generation would probably be Tendulkar,Lara and Ponting.

And both Lara and Ponting state that "Tendulkar's the best they've seen or played against"!!
That must be the finest and most "weightiest" compliment!

@Philip John Joseph

strange thing is philip,if you ask both lara and gavaskar,
they both say tendulkar is the best!!
would you say that they know about batting than you(or the other tendulkar baiters in here)do????

@Salim
if you think Australians love Sachin because only 2 of his 9 centuries came in a win, then why did Richie chose Richards and Sobers who have had far more success in terms of winning ratio against Aus than Lara in his playing XI?

even in the Don Bradman XI, he selected Sobers along with Sachin in the middle order..what do you say about it?

@Philip
reaching points above 900 shows a batsman's peak at a particular session and does not reflect his overall form/quality..now if you look at the full list, there are so many players who reached a peak of above 900, 24 players precisely and the list includes people like Ponting, Sangakkara, Hayden, Kallis, M Yousuf, Walters, Hussey, Pieterson, etc..do you say these people are better than Lara and Sachin? this is the most ridiculous logic to define greatness..its not about peak form mate, but about consistency, quality of bowlers faced, match situation and so many other factors..come up with some other argument

@Abdul Basit

seriously you are funny man..Sachin is chicken huh? and you place Azhar, Laxman, Dravid above him ?..good joke..even a staunch Lara fan will not agree to you..we are having an argument about who is better, Lara or Sachin? and all of Lara's supporters here agreed that Sachin is a great player and their only argument is Lara is better..but you are trying to make this discussion a laughter place..one can wake people who actually sleep but not those who pretend

@lara_legend

I have already listed many great innings by Sachin in this form..either watch those matches in video if you get a chance or read about them but just don't come to conclusion that they are not great just because you are a Lara fan

that 132 at Perth by Lara was a great innings..agreed..but there were other contributions in the same innings by Samuels, Hooper and others. Sachin also has scored a 114 at Perth at a dog of a pitch at the age of 18 in 1992. How come when Lara scores it is considered as a great innings but when Sachin scores with the same parameters, it is not considered as great? prejudice? or blind fanaticism ?

@Salim

one more question

even only 3 of Lara's 9 centuries came in a win for WI? then why didn't the Don and Richie chose Sachin ahead of Lara? isn't it a win-win situation for Aussies? or is it because of that one additional century ?

@Salim...very interesting about Benaud's XI, i c your point.
@ Philip John Joseph...in trying to accommodate
the Tendulkar fans you have given in!! True the
PWC ratings (now LG ICC) have never awarded Tendulkar 900 points but to suggest Sunnny was better than Lara and Tendulkar just because he
had i higher rating????? In all the years Lara played cricket he never went above 911, even after 213, 153* 100 in three tests against AUS in 1999. Yet we have seen Hayden reach 935, Sangakkara reach 938 (the same as VIV's and Sobers' highest!!) and Ponting even reach 942!!
So much for the rankings....Stick with your previous line of attack Philip, Lara deserves better.

As a current playing cricketer(I bat at no.3,albeit at club level!),I would rather possess Tendulkar's skill set than Lara's.

This is due to Tendulkar's clear superiority against express pace bowling.Even the fondest of Lara afficiandos would secretly agree with this.

Facing real pace has got to be the toughest and SCARIEST part of batting.Murale/Warne may outfox you ,but they sure as hell aren't going to scare you.

Although the fastest bowler we have gets into the 130's just occasionally(!), I would simply love to have Tendulkar's TIME,talent and technique against hostile fast bowling.

I think the area where Lara does score over Tendulkar is he doesn't waver after say 150. He can go on and on. However, as I can again vouch,once you get there most of these scores are for personal landmarks and rarely affect the outcome of a match.......
Unless of course you can also score say a triple at better than a run a ball than Sehwag did!!

There is a piece on 'All our Yesterdays' 12th April in the cricinfo home page about Lara's 400*. This whole debate was about insignificant innings. I think it somes up what regaining the record meant to the WI supporters and also saved a whitewash and revitalised Lara for the remainder of his test career.
Hardly insiginificant to everyone involved in WI cricket.

@ Eddy: try getting your own facts right before suggesting that I should do likewise. At the start of the Antigua match Flintoff had a Test bowling average of 41, Jones had only played five Tests (albeit with the decent record of 15 wickets @ 26), Harmison was banned from bowling for running on the pitch and 83 overs out of the 202 in the innings were bowled by Gareth Batty (Test average 67), Michael Vaughan (94) and Marcus Trescothick (155) - obviously the greatest attack ever. Admittedly Taylor's innings was made on a completely flat pitch, but then so have almost all Test triple centuries (and/or against rubbish attacks). Anyone claiming that Taylor was a better batsman than Lara overall would need the men in white coats, but claiming his triple to be a better innings than either of Lara's records is perfectly valid. It wasn't as good, of course, as several of Lara's other innings, most notably the 153*.

Tendulkar had 4 test hundreds when he was still 19 yrs old!

And all 4 of them are classics.

1990 at old trafford : match saving
91/92 at sydney :148 *(Benaud still says thats the best knock he's seen on Aus soil)
91/92 at Perth :Only batsman who stood his own on a lightning fast pitch.
1992 at johburt :again ony bat.2nd highest score was 25(k.dev),against donald and co.on a lighting pitch.

All these were when he was 19yrs old or less!!
I've had the utter priveledge seeing them all.

If you TENDULKAR BAITERS get a chance please do see them. I think the people in here are quite young and so dont even remember that far back.

But if you can get your hands on these hundreds( tape/dvd),trust me ,its well worth it!
So much for the short sighted people who havent seen Tendulkars "great knocks".

i accept lara is better than sachin....but dont compare gavaskar with lara...god sake....it is a shame for a true genius like Lara....Lara statement in an interview is right....if he declared that day and let england play the stupid westindian bowlers would have taken only one or two wickets at the end of the innings....any way it vud have ended up in draw....windies ver not aussies having mcg n shane to bowl a team out with a target settled for them....think fidel edwards, dillon, taylor, and collymore...god i pray god none of the team should get bowlers like that...disgusting....
Lara is always the best only one comparable 2 Don in tests...

@Elton

I was just wondering whether there were any actual cricketers in here or just “arm chair critics”!

There’s one chap “salim” in here who’s been shooting his mouth off and roundly criticising Richie Benaud because he doesn’t agree with him!!! Has this chap ever held a bat/ball in his life?

Elton, I broadly agree with your views.
I actually saw Tendulkar play Lee recently and some shots were quite astounding.
It is calculated that it takes about 0.4/0.5 secs reaction time to face bowling at about Lee’s speed.

There were some instances where it seemed as though Tendulkar was actually changing/making up his mind to play a shot as the ball was about a foot away from his nose as he was swaying away!!!

What would you say that requires? 0.05 secs reaction time?? Is it physically/humanly possible to react like that?
Any batsman, including Lara, would have been thrilled just to get out of harms way,never mind contemplate a shot !
As a batsman ,I'd say Tendulkar is No.1.

I don't quite get you people.

Lara was a flawed genius.
Tendulkar was a pure genius.

Either way they were both geniuses.

Lara's gone.Tendulkar's got a bit left.
Enjoy it while it lasts.
We were lucky to see these guys in our lifetime.
Trust me,we won't see the likes again.

@ ASH and Peter....I really dont understand what im hearing now.
All of a sudden R Benaud is now suppose to be the oracle.
What he says is gospel? He is a lovely man and a great
commentator but he couldnt pick his nose let alone an
all time XI. His bias of Austrailian players is perhaps
understandable, but at the expense of Wasim? Waqar? Marshall?
Ambrose? give me abreak. Im even reading here about
reaction times batsman have????
The best batsman 'HE'S' seen since 1948. That's his
opinion and to be honest i respect that, it's his
opinion, but then opinions are like bums, everybody's
got one. Ok then 'cricket guru's' answer me this.
Sober's and Richards came after 1948 so how come
they made the Wisden players of the century??? And
these players were voted on by many, many experts
and ex-players! By following Benauds opinion you
ignore the fact that many more people thought v richards
s warne and g sobers were better players than tendulkar.

i still cant get over the reaction time thing from
peter. obviously a true cricket fan, noticing the
finer things about cricket.

someone said this before earlier in the blogs and
no-one, but no-one has commented.Lara's low's were
lower than Tendulkars but Lara's
highs have been the highest. that somes it up.

People talk of lara's few high points and many failures.
34 hundreds is a few high points???????????????
Remember he doesnt have 20 or 30 not outs to inflate his
average, he actually scored about 50 (on average) every
time he batted,,,hows that for many failures?????

Tendulakr will break the run scoring record in the
summer against Pakistan and he will hold that record
and the Ton record for a few years b4 Ponting takes his
crown. Ponting will/could never score 400,375 or play
an innings like 153* or 277,213. The indian fans loved
it when Lara retired, loved it, when lara was still
playing he was still capable of scoring great knocks
(200 aginst Pakistan in his second last match).

When tendulkar overtakes Lara i will respect that and admire
tendulkar for that achievement, when Ponting overtakes
Tendulkar the indian fans will cry and cry like the babies
they are.

Believe it or not i think Tendulkar is class, brilliant, but
i just like Lara more for his magic, the same magic i saw in
viv.

Eddy's post about the ICC points brings out the double standards of Lara fans. You need stats to "prove" Lara is better but then when some batsmen score over Lara on statistics, you say he was an entertainer. Well, if you are talking purely about the ability to annihilate the bowling time and again, nobody will ever match Vivian Richards, not even Lara or Tendulkar. Richards was the only batsman who conceivably had no butterflies floating in his stomach even when he faced the first ball of his innings. Peter's point about reaction time is very valid and not one that people like Salim can shrug off just because it doesn't suit their argument. I have seen Sachin decide his shot only at the very last moment even against torrid pace bowling and that is simply astonishing because most batsmen be it Lara or Ponting tend to pick the line and commit to their strokes early. Reaction time is not the only criteria of batsmanship but it shows why Sachin is so special.

@Madan...i used to respect your views as considered and even.....now even you are talking about reaction times!...what has this debate turned into?!!!!!. Ok forget all the stats and the ratings, i find myself agreeing with 'salim', AGAIN, still nobody has acknowledged that ,yes lara had more dips in form but his highs were way above what we have seen from tendulkar SO FAR. Not one innings to match the stamina and concentration as a 400* or a 375 and not one innings that thrilled, excited and delievered like a 213 or 153*. That is all the Lara fans have been saying. It's the special moments that people remember years later. Murli has more wickets than Warne, better avg, more 5 wick more 10 wick but we all still remember THAT ball of the century by warne against Gatting. It's much more than just being a genius(which all 4 are), it's about being able to perform the improbable, even the impossible... thats what lara has over sachin and warne has over murli.

I'm going to break Brian's and Sachin's runs into
calender years, series, matches, innings and overs.

Most runs in calender year:

Sachin Brian
1st 1392
2nd 1344
3rd 1222
4th 1178
5th 1151
6th 1110
7th 1088
8th 1003
9th 1000

So apart from one year, Lara scored more.

Most runs in a series

Sachin Brian
1st 798
2nd 765
3rd 688
4th 546
5th 533
6th 531
7th 493

note: Lara made 448 in his last
series. 3 matches V Pak.

Most runs in a match

Sachin Brian
1st 400
2nd 375
3rd 351
4th 301

Most runs in a innings

Sachin Brian
1st 400*
2nd 375
3rd 277
4th 248*

Most runs in a over

sachin Brian
1st 28
2nd 26
3rd unknown unknown

The facts are clear for everyone 2 see.

Come on guyz, what's all this fuss about.
So Lara had more runs (400+) than Tendulkar when they had played the same number of innings (232).
Tendulkar also had 4 more tons at the time.
So Tendulkar now has 5 more tons than Lara, Lara has 5 more multiple tons. Sure Tendulkar played fast bowling better, Lara played spin bowling better. They are too different to compare. Their batting styles are too different. I honestly dont believe you can compare orthodox and unorthodox batsmen together. I'd think you guyz would be better off comparing Tendulkar to Sunny or Bradman or Chappell. All excellent technicians, txt-book batting. And Lara would be better compared with Richards or Sobers or even Compton.
You cant compare apples and oranges as someone has said.

@Ashish

Thank you Ashish for choosing stats to suit yourself.
If you look up "vimalan" and "Sind" have chosen some statistics to prove their point.

I'd say "vimalan" and "Sind"s stats are more relevant than yours.You may say your selectively chosen stats are more relevant.

As far as batting is concerned Tendulkar is a far better batsman against all forms of bowling in all forms of the game.

Its like a tennis player saying he is very good on grass but not on clay.
Lara is very good against spin and medium pace but positively sucks against Real Pace.

If you could only open your eyes and actually watch it may help.

So picking whatever stats seem to favour you in whatever form of the game favours you is a good time pass for you.

As someone mentioned if you "arm chair critics"
could only get your butts of the computer chair and noses out of "statsguru" and actually learn something about batting you may (note may) appreciate the genius of Tendulkar.

eddy, please understand that your fascination of long innings is only one perspective and you cannot construe it as more important than other criteria. By the way, Sachin batted 10 hours in 2004 at Sydney though it was hardly one of his better innings but it counts for sheer endurance. I cannot understand your disdain for reaction time, it's a great measure of batting SKILLS and ability. If you're talking of entertaining innings, he has plenty of those, the 155 N.O and 177 against Australia in India for instance. Even his 70-odd at Perth was entertaining for his unorthodox strokes. Just because a batsman did not cross 150 or 200 doesn't mean the innings was not entertaining, right? You are consistently looking at some stats in exclusion to others to "prove" Lara is better. There is nothing to prove, Lara's gone, enjoy Sachin while he's around. I don't want to 'prove' anything, I like watching Sachin more, that's all. AND, I would rather watch Azza or VVS than Sach or Lara.

@eddy

You are so obsessed with lara that you can't see genius elsewhere.
That is the biggest problem.

This constant harping about a couple of innings is weird if not a sign of pathological problems.

As some one said earlier about Mcenroe. The tennis he played in 1984 :was with such magic,flair and creativity that it is hard to believe. The match against Connors (Wimb final) was the best a human being has ever played on grass.

But EVEN then most people who are really IN THE KNOW about tennis as a sport would plump for Sampras or Federer as the "better" player.

Mcenroe was an instinctive ,creative genius who "thrilled" ,BUT there are MANY other factors involved!

I experienced the same problem. The EMOTIONAL IMPACT of Mcenroe (and some of the matches he played) blinded me to the genius and talent of other players.

But over a period of time You too will realize that Tendulkar is the better batsman, not only far better than Lara,but perhaps the best you will ever see

@ashish

Hi ashish ,scroll up .
There are enough stats in there to "prove" Tendulkar is better.
Which,incidentally,he is.

@eddy and "co".

In my humblest of humble of opinions I'd venture to say that Tendulkar is the "better" batsman.

Some innings which may have "thrilled,excited" you and what not are all very fine.
But perhaps you may realise that that is a subjective experience.

For.eg.
You may class watching a clown in a
circus or a raucous Rock concert as "entertaining"or "exciting".

I may prefer to watch a Beethoven symphony( which is incidentally what watching Tendulkar's batting reminds me of).

What is "entertaining" or "exciting" to you may not be the same to another person.

So your subjective,emotional experience of an event is all very fine.

But if we are on the Topic of "superior" or "better" ,there are numerous clinical and technical factors which are of more and vital importance in making a judgement.

If you "dispassionately" view all the relevant factors perhaps you too may reach the conclusion that I have.

To me,Tendulkar is the superior batsman.
("daylight")

Apparently, Lara has a couple of big scores ,since because of reasons best known to him he decided to go on batting on a tiny,Antigua feather bed...

And as someone earlier said apparently Lara "delivers" because Healy dropped Lara during his 153 and Akram didn't drop Tendulkar during his 136.

Didn't Gayle also hammer a triple at Antigua recently?
Sarwan was on for a triple when his dear Captain Lara "declared"...Do even the most fanatical of Lara fans believe Lara would have declared if he himself was batting?

So ,pretty soon we're going to have the WI and Paki fans firmly telling all and sundry about how Chris Gayle is a better batsman than Tendulkar because he is "oh so exciting and thrilling" and has such "big scores".

Lord,have mercy because they know not what they do......

Lara is like a bit of pot. May,repeat may,get you high but the joy is very shortlived and you sooner than later will probably get a bad headache.

Tendulkar is like a Havana cigar.
Complete satisfaction for the connosieur ,the finest and most wholesome you can possibly get.

@Ashish
IVe copied "Sinds" earlier post below:

quote

Heck,I thought Tendulkar was
1)the highest run getter in ODIs ,soon to be highest in tests.

2)Highest centurion in both forms of the game.

3)Better average in both forms of the game.

4)Better strike rate in both forms of the game.

5)Better record away than at home .

Oh,i forgot,now theyll say "only tests,not odis!"
why?
coz the "stats" there dont suit their boy!!
LOL!

unquote

The facts are there for everyone to see.

Excuse me,but I don't get it:

Lara is very good at spin.Murali would say so.
But Tendulkar is as good...Ask warnie.

Against Medium pace,swing again not much to chose.

But against extreme pace Tendulkar is in a different league altogether. The real pacers right from Donald onwards would say so.

So,in the balance,coupled with Tendulkars better balance,technique,defense and ability to play more shots than Lara(yes you heard correct...he can play shots Lara can't): This thing is a no contest.

Tendulkar is probably the best batsman ever.
Where in the world does Lara come in?

Considering all forms of the game i'd say the ranking would be:
1)Tendulkar
2)Bradman

You can argue and put the rest however you want.

Tendulkar will go down as the Greatest Batsman in the history of cricket.
Lara will be glad to be a footnote in the Tendulkar Saga.

i will give up now, not because you guyz have changed my mind or that i have conceded, i'm afraid that you guyz just dont understand what ive been saying 4 the past 2 weeks. Watch the 400* dvd and listen to the comments of the pros and ex-pros dont just take it from me. You ignore everthing ive tried to put forward. NOT ONE INNINGS TO COMPARE WITH 153* for excitment and NOT ONE INNINGS TO COMPARE WITH 400* for mental strength. Tendulkar - NO RECORD BREAKING INNINGS. NO MAGIC. The next step would be to say Tendulkar was better than Richards!!!!!!

Tendulkar is like a Rolex wrist watch.
Perfect engineering,not a part out of place,perfect economy of movement....

Lara is like a good old grandfather clock.
A lot more fun,big fat pendulum,swing back and forth like a big backlift and followthrough,a cuckoo which beeps forth periodically,loud sounds,very loud.......

Some people like grandfather clocks.

I prefer the Rolex.

Thanks eddy, you have done us a big favour, lol. Lara-worship is both understandable and acceptable but how do you expect anybody to agree that there is no magic in Tendulkar's batting because if you actually believe that, then mate you frankly don't deserve to watch cricket. It's ok to prefer one of the two modern greats but to paint one of them as a dour, boring technician is to be prejudiced and to miss the point.

@Eddy, salim, rakesh et al. Guys, stop wasting your breath. Using logic with these hardheaded Tendulkar apologists is like casting pearls before swine. They will never listen to reason because then they have nothing else to hold on to. Let them comfort themselves with whatever inane excuses give them peace. The rest of the world knows who has been the best postwar batsman...

@madan

Thanks madan ,so rightly said. I think the lara fanatics conveniently (as usual) forget that indians simply love lara.We love the backlift ,flair etc. We don't have the paki aversion towards tendulkar simply because tend. is indian.
Its a simple case of maturity.

But loving watching Lara bat,and so refusing to acknowledgement his glaring faults is something else altogether.

As an allround batsman ,against all types of bowling,in all forms of the game,considering the completely unrealistic and crushing pressure he has sustained,Tend. is indeed the superior batsman.

As you mentioned (and several others in here),"magic","entertaining","exciting" are also subjective terms.

But a purported "cricket fan" or "cricket lover" who doesn't find every shot of Tendulkar touched with "genius" and "Magic" is simply bigoted and biased.

Riverlime: The rest of the world knows who has been the best postwar batsman.

Don't know about you mate, but I sure do know who it is: it's Sir Viv Richards the inimitable. Er, I hope you didn't mean post- 'Gulf' war because Sachin is 'pre' in that case, lol.

@riverlime

If by "postwar" you mean the Iraq war in about 2002, I would agree with you.
For the last 5/6 years batsman such as lara,ponting,kallis etc have really gorged themselves on batsman friendly wickets with no great bowlers of real pace around.Tendulkar was left out in this "runfest" because of injuries.

But if by "postwar" you mean worldwar2 then obviously Tendulkar is the best.

There's something seriously wrong with some guys in here.
Lara manages to avoid boredom on a tiny Antigua featherbed: that becomes "mental strength".

Healy drops Lara, and Akram doesn't drop Tendulkar : that becomes "magic".

phew.

To me,practically every shot Tendulkar plays is dripping with magic and genius.

At the end of the day I think Lara summed it up perfectly:
"Sachin's a genius ,I'm a mere mortal".

Perfection is the reserve of the Gods.
But I think Sachin has come as close to batting perfection as we shall ever see.

At first I laughed at the Grandfather clock/rolex comments in here, but in a way its quite true.

With Lara there was this big ,grand theatre even before he made contact with the ball. Big shuffle,feet dancing,windmilling limbs,huge backlift...pure drama and theatre irrespective of what actually happened.

With Tendulkar you might hardly see anything ,till the fielder jogs to the boundary to pick up the ball!! I could swear that there were times where he hardly moved his foot an inch and simply punched/defended the ball...and it zoomed to the boundary!

I'd say Sachin was indeed like a Swiss watch.
Exquisite engineering,not a wasted part or movement,and extremely beautiful in its pure functioning.

@ T.P....i loved your comment. and in many ways i see your point and respect it...even agree with it. It's your view, you like Tendulkar more, thats fine, I like Lara more. Saying who we prefer is in the end the nicest way to end this debate.
Thanks 4 all the debate ALi, Madan. Riverlime, Rakesh , Salim, Buz, Sheet,Ashish, Sheet,PJJ.. etc..
it's been fun.....eddy

@ eddy..... this is for you......
I've changed my mind,
Tendulkar is the superior batsmen...
Check out some of these classic knocks,
they will go down in the annals of
cricket as some of the best ever played...

248* V Bangladesh
101 V Bangladesh
122* V Bangladesh
176 V Zimbabwe
201* V Zimbabwe
122 V Zimabawe

14 matches against the cream of world cricket
1474 runs and 6 tons (two double !!!!!!!!!!)

In 5 matches against Bangladesh
Tendulkar somehow managed to fight
and craft his highest ever score
and another two tons.
Against the giants of southern
africa he played even more matches(9).
Three more tons against such formidible foes....
I stand in awe of these achievements.

Surely only Bradman could have matched
these stunning statistics against some
of the best and most respected bowlers in
Test match cricket.

P.S. of course Lara also played against
these titans of Test cricket..4 matches
in total, 2 against Bangladesh, 2 against
Zim. He managed 2 tons from 4 matches.
Tendulkar managed 6 from 14. Best ratio?

Lara's run record is boosted by 395 runs
by playing these mammoths of the game.
Tendulkar's is boosted by 1474!!!

Now it's not Tendulkar's fault he has played
3 times as much cricket against such lofty
opposition as lara did, but two unbeaten
double tons didnt hurt his average and
neither does 6 tons and close to 15 hundred
runs.

3 TIMES MORE cricket against those mighty foes.

Im speechless, gobsmacked in awe of the little
master.
Im a converted Tendulkar follower!

@salim

since you've got your nose stuck in "statsguru" could you please also spit out the figures against Australia please?

@salim

err...salim
Against Aus:
Tendulkar 9 hundreds in 25 matches. avg.56
Lara 9 hundreds in 31 matches. avg.51

Best ratio??
As i said the real problem is the paki aversion to tendulkar as an indian.
which is the basic and most fundamental reason for the nitpicking against genius,that's all.

I'd say practically every player on the planet has higher scores and avg. against bang and zim.
but good ol' salim here cannot see beyond picking on only tend.

get your anti india goggles off salim,then you may,repeat may,appreciate genius.

@salim

dear salim,what your stats reveal is this:
that you have a far greater knowledge of "ACCOUNTING " than CRICKET.

If you did know a little about cricket/batting you would know that the best players get themselves ready against the best.

Which is why Tendulkar has the BEST record against AUS.among ALL modern players (better than lara's)

So,assuming he played those extra ten matches against other "better" test playing nations he could well have got more runs/hundreds.

As with your extensive research you say he got 6 hundreds in 14 matches...well,he has got 7 in 16 matches against sri lanka!

understood? dont think so.....

@ Salim :)

@salim

lol salim. so tend. got some runs against bang and zim: so is that all you've got left to denigrate tend.?
a little back you were hounding 'vimalan'about stats!
so apparently,with your flawed logic,if tend. hadn't played those matches against bang/zim he wouldnt have scored at all!?
have you seen his record against say Aus, the best team in the last two decades?
wake up and smell the coffee

@salim

you guys will never get over tend.smashing you in the world cups,will you?!! lol

@salim

i was just wondering when the thin veneer of civilisation was going to wear off and the pakis start to vent their frustrations against Tendulkar for being sooo good!!

@ ALI...you wanted some stats on Tendulkar V AUS.

Matches 25 Lara's is 31

Innings 47 Lara's is 58

HIGH SCORE 241* Lara's is 277

RUNS SCORED 2352 Lara's is 2856

AVG 56 Lara's is 51

RPI 50 Lara's is 49

RPM 94 Lara's is 92

200's 1 Lara's is 3

150+'s 5 Lara's is 5

100's 9 Lara's is 9

50's 9 Lara's is 11

Ducks 4 Lara's is 5

Not outs 5 Lara's is 2

4's 285 Lara's is 381

6's 18 Lara's is 21

My guess is that you were expecting Tendulkar's
record to be head and shoulders above Lara. As you can clearly see they're very very close.
What's your opinion?

@ALI :Why does pro-lara sentiment always get turned around to anti-INDIA sentiment? Try to keep nationalism out of it will you? Just because someone's OPINION doesn't favour your own isn't a sign that they hate India! You, my friend , are making this Lara vs. INDIA!! Are you nuts? (Or are you trying to live up to the racism tag the Australians slapped onto Bhaji?)

@salim

Tendulkar's record against Aus IS better isnt it?
Also tend.s record agains Aus in Aus is better.

Thanks "P.Ink". Well noted. As someone noted earlier this “salim” (and others) angst against tendulkar seems to be bordering on the pathological.

It seems the ONLY way remaining for him to buff up lara is by attempting to tear down tendulkar! All other methods have failed.
“eddy” seems to be slightly more level headed.

As you correctly mentioned Tendulkar would have then probably played those ten matches ELSEWHERE.

I, for one, wish he would have played them against sri lanka (as you mention) and against Australia .

More fine runs and hundreds against Aus. would have only INCREASED tendulkar’s legend!(if thats possible!)
@His current rate he would have then got 4 hundreds and more than 1100 runs(taking his avg.against Aus)!
Then poor “salim” wouldn’t even have had this last card to play!

So thanks “Salim”, for continuing to dig your own grave. Keep it up!

@riverlime

how else can you explain it? doesn't practically every player (inc.lara) have better stats against those countries?

So,if tend hadnt played those extra matches does that mean he wouldnt have scored at all?does this mean that he doesnt have hundreds and runs against the best opposition?

If the only way remaining for you to raise lara in your own estimation is to denigrate tend...then it only shows that lara indeed DOESNT have ANY qualities over tend.

If you had conversely chosen stats against the BEST i.e AUS , to say that he's the BEST AGAINST THE BEST TEAM(over 2 decades), that makes more sense ,no?

To say both Lara and Tend have scored more against Bamg/zim but fortunately/unfortunately tend has more matches..what sense does it make??

He could have well played those extra matches against England instead on a "tiny Antigua featherbed" !with many more runs!

Get the drift? To intentionally pick those stats means you're simply averse to tend. at all costs!

@salim,etc

So far ,I could at least be bothered to read your comments.
I'd agree with some other peoples comments in here though.
What are you trying to say with your stats??
That tend. doesnt score against anyone else except Bang/Zim??
Doesn't everyone "fill their boots" against them?

Didn't Lara go on and on against Eng.in Antigua just to "fill his boots" .Someone up made a good analysis about the pathetic state of the Eng.bowling during lara's 400.

The general trend of the argument in here is that on most parameters of batting ,in all types of the game against all types of bowling Tendulkar is the superior batsman.
In what way do your selective stats prove otherwise?

If he hadnt scored some runs you would then convolute the argument and say"look,he can't even score against them!!"
I'm afraid your premises and conclusion are getting more confused and garbled.

SO once you START with a fixed BIAS you will USE stats BOTH ways to suit your end?get it? doubt it

@riverlim

they mean Pak vs tend. which if you look at it objectively makes a lot of sense.

Ind vs lara ,doesnt because as others said indians love lara.He is extremely popular in ind.

I rem.when gavaskar was at his peak,even then indians loved viv:and most rated viv as the better batsman.(worldwide too)

But with tend. most would think that tend. is the better batsman(worldwide too).

As far as salim is concerned anyone who is vaguely familiar with reasoning would realise that he is working backwards.(as again someone said)
i.e he has first reached his conclusion (and then trying to fit in the premises accordingly).
In this scenario almost any set of stats can be used out of context to justify some point.

I watched ten vs zim,he seemed lackadaisical.Its tough for Champs to get psyched up vs zim.
Rec.vs ban he was working his way back from surgery.so he even bothered to play.

i wish he would play vs aus.he got the "hang" more of the bowlin & so hammered them more!

@riverlime

If after two decades ,and some 27000 international runs and the sheer glory of Tendulkar's batting .... if someone can only see runs against Ban/zim ,how do you explain that?!!!?

I think "ali" has a point!

@riverlime.

unfortunately i would almost agree with "ali".
as "madan" said prefering one over the other is a matter of personal preference.
But "salim" here is indeed displaying a marked aversion to tendulkar.

Even the most ho hum fan would be in awe and admiration of tendulkar.
if you see, even the tone of "salims" post reaks of bigotry and aversion.
If all you can see of tendulkar's performances in almost 18yrs is some performances against ban/zim...it can only be put down to the fact that for whatever reason you cannot see tendulkar hailed generally as the "best". How anyone can be blind to the majesty of tendulkars batting against practically all opposition ,in all forms of the game is simply beyond me.

Actually looking at it neutrally it would indeed be difficult to envision paki fans worshipping tendulkar,dont you think?

so ,as much as i dislike saying it i think "ali" has a point.but its not his fault,"salim" himself opened the can of worms

@riverlime

I think the guys have a point don't you?
As someone said, if after 2 decades,some 28000 international runs,god knows how many hundreds,and the sheer glory and majesty of tendulkar's batting.....if all you can see is some runs against ban/zim,well; to put it mildly somethings wrong somewhere.

If thats all "salim" has left against tendulkar then i'm afraid he's really scraping the barrel.
And as someone said his aversion/revulsion/hatred (what have you) against tendulkar comes blazing through with childish comments such as "tendulkar convert,gobsmacked..." etc.

So,in the balance it's hard not to agree with "ali" and the rest don't you think?

Even though Sachin has scored so many runs he seriously lacks quality innings compared to Lara. Even against australia tendulkar has maintatined not outs however, lara has scored more runs.

And that 241* was one of the most boring innings i have seen. And regarding 155* in Chennai, please don't boast because it was against one of the weakest bowling attack australia have ever had. Who was the bowler, Adam dale, Gavin robertson, fleming and with only one quality bowler in shane warne playing with an injured shoulder.

the age of tendulkar...is Over.Name a great innings that SRT has played(not a good one).You can't.

best cricket moment (2003 World cup Final)...The humiliation of India by RT Ponting.I love this game...bye now

@Buz

LOL buz.
good point.
if tend. scores against ban/zim it's bad.
if he woudn't have scored "salim" and co. would have again said its bad- "see,he doesn't even score against them"!!

no-win situation.

as someone said,he's first reached his conclusion and then is busy going about trying to justify it!
lol
all the best ,salim

By the way,Tendulkar is the best!

@ D.i....your quote 'i was just wondering when the thin veneer of civilisation was going to wear off and the pakis start to vent their frustrations' Oh my thats a real shame and shows what most non-indian fans feel about indian cricket. You insult Pakistan and dare to comment on civilisation!!! I remember well when your 'fans' burned the stadium when it was clear they were about to lose the WC semi against the Lankans. And you call players monkey's and make monkey noises.
Dont talk to me about civilisation,, i was talking about Sachin and Brian. Fool.

@salim

well,salim in my view two of the most "useless",self-serving innings in the history of cricket were the 375 and 400.At an average of 700 !!!
In the 375 ,only 5 wickets fell for WI and 15 wickets over the entire 5 days of the match!
during the 400 ,again only 5 WI wickets and 19 wickets during the entire 5 days.

That should tell you something about the bowling/pitch.Both innings were on a dead,featherbed with no goal whatsoever but to "fill Laras boots" and to intentionally go for records.

So you could make a strong argument that playing bang in bang is tougher than playing eng in antigua!

Tendulkar in ban. could have also kept on and on several times attempting the record.he did not.

I guess you should keep that in mind.

I'm a bit worried that some bloggers
are using words like 'bigotry'
and 'civilisation'. What started
out as being a Lara, Tendulkar debate
has turned yet again into an IND V PAK
slanging match.
'Salim's' blog on BC and ST results
against AUS and ZIM/BANG both prove
and disprove his point.
Yes Sachin's results are slightly
better than Brian's. An extra run
run per inning, 2 more runs
per match..etc obviously Lara
has more runs having played 11
more innings. What i find interesting
is that Sachin has the same tons as
Lara and the same 100+ having played
11 innings less! Of course Lara has
more 200's. I think these stats prove
that Tendulkat did indeed have a
better time against AUS than Lara,
but only just.
Salim's point about ZIM and BANG
is a moot point. Was Tendulkar
not suppose to play against them???
And it's not Lara's fault he played
the weak teams so little. It's just
the way it goes, if the shoe had been
on the other foot Lara would no doubt
have scored heavily as well.
I agree with most comments that Sachin would
have just scored the same amout against another
team, but he does have a larger percentage
of games against these weak team then Lara.

But thats just guess work, we are looking at
the runs in the book.

I think Tendulkar's consistent performances
around the world against most teams give him the
edge over lara, but Lara was never about
consistency was he, he was the fancy-dan
record breaker. Im many ways when you look at
Lara inconsistency its amazing that his
stats still match up with Tendulkars in many
ways...i guess that shows how high his
highs were.

@salim,riverlime

hey guys.check this against bang.
YOUTUBE:"Sachin Breaks Free".

Perhaps,you may enjoy some GENIUS.

@salim

I think that u've completely missed the point here.
No one is arguing against Lara being a great batsman and in my view the 2nd best batsman of the generation.

The argument is that in all respects,against all bowlers,all over the world,in any form of the game Tendulkar is the better batsman.

If you take a checklist and start ticking boxes against all parameters you will know what I mean. Diverting the topic by picking and chosing any abstruse stats does not change the quality of batsmanship.
I too wd hv loved ten vs aus instd of ban instead!

As mentioned Lara's style of batting may be more flamboyant,flashy etc. but enjoying his batting and thereby steadfastly refusing to acknowledge his obvious and glaring faults ,is something else altogether.

Lara,himself,will be the first to admit his numerous faults.

Remember it was Lara himself who said "Sachin's a genius,i'm a mere mortal".
Why did he chose Sachin specifically for such a compliment?

Think about it.

Hello, Salim, check the comparison in Australia, as others have said. Sachin's average in Aus is 58.53 - higher than his overall avg. Lara's is just 41.97, much lower than his overall. Lara has scored 200 runs more by dint of playing more matches but hey presto, he has fewer centuries (4 against 6) and fewer fifties (4 against 5) in more matches. You do the math, but you certainly cannot refute that Sachin has given better than his average in Australia while Lara has somewhat underperformed by his own standards.

@ The Tendulkar Fans.
I hear the word 'Superior' used
far to often in these blogs. When you
say superior what do you actually mean???

Superior looking batsman?

Superior batting?

Superior results?

Superior stats?

Have you heard that song, 'you say
toMATEo, i say toMATo, you say poTATEo
i say poTATo'.

Tendulkar fans talk about his averages being higher
than Lara's and hence he is better.
Lara fans see 25 not outs inflating that very same avg.

Lara fans talk about 400* 375* 277 and see record breaking
feats of genius.
Tendulkar fans see selfesh batting, rubbish bowling and friendly
batting tracks.

Tendulkar fans talk about his 39 tons, Lara fans see 6 against
Zim and Bang.

Lara fans talk about his 153*, Tendulakr fans talk about his 136.

Tendulakr fans talk about his great consistency and Lara's failures.
Lara fans note that he actually has scored more runs per match and
per inning.

Tendulkar fans talk about the St Johns wicket, Lara fans talk about
all sub-continent wickets.

Tendulkar fans talk about his silky txt-book batting style and Lara's
dodgy technique, Lara Fans see flair, and unorthodox west indian batting.

Tendulkar fans talk about how Bradman liked himself (technique) to Tendulkar
as thus Tendulkar fans believe he's the best since DON.

Don was a hundred making machine (29), but remember 41% of those were doubles.
Tendulkar's percentage of doubles out of his tons total is 10%.
Lara percentage is 26%. Far more Bradmanesqe.

In fact Sri Lankan duo Sangakkara and Atapattu scored 6 doubles out of only
16 tons overall! thats a whooping 37%

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Both have 'superior' stats and aspects to their game, it's
all about perception and opinion.

@ terry....not bad!
@ C.ghan....400 and 375 useless?? I bet uve never scored a ton i your life and have NO idea what it takes. BY FAR THE WORST COMMENT ON THIS PAGE, and obviously made from a non-cricket player/follower.
@ Madan..nows whos picking selective stats, i gave overalls totals and averages.

@madan,vimalan and co.

Guys, its obvious these tendulkar baiters know nothing about batting.
There's an old saying:
"IT TAKES TALENT TO RECOGNIZE GENIUS".
Since these clowns refuse to see the superlative genius in Tendulkar,it doesn't say anything about Tendulkar,but only about themselves.

Here's some TALENT who all acknowledge the GENIUS of Tendulkar:
Lara,Ponting,Inzamam,Jayasuriya....the best batsman of the rival teams all acknowledge Tendulkar as the best.

ANY ONE who's played even club level cricket will realize that Tendulkar is a once in a century batsman.
As this article itself clearly mentions!!! some triples are almost meaningless.
No triples,whatever doubles,whatever avg.,whatever....for millions of cricketers and fans(including the batsmen mentioned above!!) TENDULKAR IS SIMPLY THE GREATEST!!

@ Ashsish. very true, different strokes for different folks!!

@salim

I don't know.But thinking about it I'd agree that the 375 and 400 were pretty useless.
This article itself,where Sehwag scored an unbelievable triple at better at a run a ball talks about "insignificant" innings.
Both those lara innings were on dead pitches with NO GOAL whatsoever but to "fill his boots" and keep scoring since he was in and no chance of getting out (as someone mentioned in both those innings only 5 WI wickets fell)resulting in a run agg.of 775 with an avg.of 775!

Actually ,Sehwags innings here was far more exciting!and much much faster.

As someone said its probably relatively tougher playing BAN in BAN than ENG in Antigua!! So before you "filter" out whatever stats suit you ,perhaps you want to take a look at those "useless" and "insignificant" innings.

@Neet

Hit the nail on the head!
If you ask me who’s better between say Beethoven and Mozart ,I would require to have a good knowledge about classical music in the first place.
But if you ask “salim” and co.,they would:
1)first ascertain whether or not Beethoven was Indian.
2)Then jump on to “statsguru” to filter out stats such as Mozart has got 17 sonatas 15 penatas and one 6 ½ hr musical against only 19 sonatas for Beethoven 12 penatas and a 3 hr musical.
3)Therefore ,of course Mozart is better !simple!

But if you ask anyone who knows anything about music/batting they would point out tendulkars superiority against pace,technique, all forms of the game etc .etc.etc.

So,as you mention both LARA and PONTING ,tendulkars peers categorically state Tendulkar is the "BEST they've seen or played against": that says a lot more than “salim” and co.in here doesn’t it?
And unfortunately,as I mentioned before,how many pakis do you really expect to hail tendulkar in the first place?

@madan,salim

good god,madan,haven't you learned by now?
only stats which show lara in a good light and tendulkar in a poor light are allowed in here.
how dare you selectively chose stats which show that tendulkar has done much better in australia?
tut tut,one would have thought you would know better by now.

@Ali, sind , shram, prar, et al. Guys , you seem to think that because I have asked that nationalistic rivalries be kept out of this blog, and because I say that Tendulkar is second-best, I must be Pakistani!!! (Btw, I never commented on the Zim/Bang stats, or on featherbed pitches.For me, runs are runs). Guess what , I'm not. Nor are most of the Lara supporters on this thread. However, it is fascinating to see how little provocation it takes for your petty little rivalries to rise to the surface. All non-subcontinentals here (myself included) must be laughing their heads off at your antics!! Give it up guys, stop insulting Pakistani people by assuming their support can ONLY stem from hatred of the alternative. That only points to yours.
For the record, Ponting will soon (maybe 2-3 years at his current average) hold both the total runs and most centuries records. Who will be called greatest , then? so stop the name-calling and let's banter amicably.

@Ali:
:P

@Salim: Yessir, I guess it's ok to paint Sachin as a Zim/Bang piler (as if Lara didn't pile up against them either) but not ok to point out that he has done better in Australia. FYI, he still has a better average against Aus than Lara, not by head and shoulders agreed but better, bottomline. When confronted with facts, kindly accept them, especially when you choose to twist facts to suit your purpose.

@Ashish: So??? The whole argument began because some Sachin fans rated his 136 as the best modern innings and Lara fans, as usual, could not respect a different perspective. His 153 N.O is a modern epic, no two ways, but if people think some other innings was better, it's their opinion and nobody invited any statistical dissection of the two innings, both of which went far beyond any statistical glory. In any case, a great Test innings, I thought, was about the drama surrounding the match situation and not the statistics ascribed to it.

@riverlime.

Well,if you ask the WI fans most(not all) would root for Lara.
if you ask the indian fans ,most would root for tendulkar(not all).
this is natural, and also the local fans have witnessed first hand the sheer excitement and buzz these guys bring.
It is the prerogative of only the very great to be able to fill up entire stadiums and have millions glued to the tv solely by their singular presence.
If you ever get a chance,do come to india and watch tendulkar. To me,tendulkar on song and 60,000 fans going berserk is an otherwordly experience and the most amazing exp.You can't hear yourself think!

They've all come to watch tendulkar bat. To cope with this kind of pressure for so long is unreal.
which is why over the years tendulkar changed his batting to focus on eliminating error rather than continually attacking like lara. There is simply no comparison between the pressure he faces and others face.

CONTd.

@riverlime....well said.

@riverlime

If you look at it objectively and not from a fan's "emotional" viewpoint, I guess Tendulkar would have to go down as the best.

This viewpoint is shared by practically all the top batsmen of the generation :Lara,Ponting,Inzy,Steve Waugh,Mark Waugh,Jayasuriya etc.etc.

Conversely ,if you ask the bowlers you may get a mixed reply. I think people forget that simply being either right or left handed confers several advantages to the batsman. It is a known fact that bowlers such as Murali/Pollock etc. are poor against lefties.
Frank Tyson has written a very interesting article about how he hated bowling to lefties because of the innate advantages involved.

Also,Mark Taylor,who's played the bulk of his cricket against Lara/Tend. recently said that he would have both of them in his dream ODI team but not Lara in his test team because it's much easier to get him out.

So,as someone mentioned quite correctly most batsmen if given a choice would chose Tend.s skill set.

Sachin ALL the way
incomparable,non pareil,the one and only........

@riverlime

Noone has "insulted" the pakis. Ppl have simply pointed out that it is difficult to imagine a paki hailing tendulkar. the fact that you have miscontstrued this fact as an "insult" points out to your sensitivity as probably being a paki yourself.

@eddy

thx eddy.but in all seriousness what's there really to chose between them?Bradman's considered the greatest coz he's virtually swamped everyone by the sheer weight of his runs.

But lara/tendulkar? Lara got a couple of 300+(but so does a relatively mediocre player like sehway,and he's just 29:he may get more)."matchwinning" knocks-that's hogwash.Lara had ambrose/walsh,tendulkar kumble..these bowlers have to set up a situation for a "matchwinning" knock in the first place. And thereafter(as we have been reminded in here umpteen times)lady luck plays a huge factor.

So what is there to chose between them.

2 sides of the same coin.one leftie one rightie.one slightly better at spin,one better at pace,one more attacking,one with a better defence...well,who's better? Da Vinci or Leonardo?

The one cricket fantasy of mine which will remain forever unfulfilled is tendulkar and lara batting in one team at 4 & 5 against Aus. Now THAT would be something wouldnt it!

Ai Caramba

@Buz , You're not really that impervious to logic, are you? Surely you're just trying to wind me up. Saying that "it is difficult to imagine a paki hailing tendulkar" is a fact and not an insult , is a statement you would expect from a 12 year old . (If you ARE 12 , then you will learn this as you grow up).Can you not see that saying someone is motivated only by negativity casts a slur on their character?
And can you not see that the term "paki" carries with it racist connotations, at least in Caucasian societies? If you were well travelled enough you would know that, and you would also know that it is not directed solely at people from Pakistan , but anyone brown-skinned, INCLUDING INDIANS!!! My god, if you are Indian, you are making a laughing-stock of yourself.
And for the coup-de-grace, I have never even been to Pakistan ,although i hear it is beautiful. (I find having to deny Pakistani heritage also distasteful, as though that is a bad thing.)

As and Aussie,if Benaud says Tendulkar's the best batsman he's ever seen- well,that's good enough for me.

@ Charles....to be honest if you choose R Benaud as any kind of indicator of greatness you will be sadly misled. Sure he has seen more cricket than most of us and i agree he is tops when it comes to commentating but thats as far as it goes. He was remember an average/good cricketer, 24 avg with bat and 27 with the ball.I'd much prefer to take Bradman's or Sobers' view on great batsmen (it takes one to know one). Bradman said that Tendulkar reminded him of his own batting technique , although he stated that Sachin AND lara were the best of their time. Sobers' was quoted at seeing Lara as a younster as saying he will be the best batsman when he grows up.
Remember this also...if Benaud is such a great judge of cricketers, how come there was not one WI quicky in his all time XI, i mean he didnt even choose one of Marshall, Wasim, Waqar, Holding, Ambrose, Donald in a shortlist of 30, yes 30 odd players!!!!!!!

on the cricinfo home page type in 'greatest amongst his peers' and you will read interesting views on tendulkar, lara and other greats from Ravi S, Sanj M, T grieg, I chappell etc.

@salim,terry

This "conversation" you talk about was when Lara was scoring huge and Tend.was practically finished and struggling with his injuries.

Also S.Manj has had a running feud with Tendulkar for sometime now. I.Chappel is G.Chappels brother.so they would both rather be caught with their pants down than plumb for Tend.

T.Greig recently said,about a month back,that Tend. was the greatest cricketer he had ever seen.
And Shastri again recently,after the above mentioned talk,again said both Ten.and Lara were the best.

As regards Richie,he has seen both Lara and Tend.from the beginning.And every other batsman from 1948 as well!!

Also if you take a poll of the great players you would get players voting for both Tend and Lara.But many many MORE for Tend.

So, as USUAL,you pick whatever suits you,and conveniently try to brush the inconvenient parts under the carpet! Grow up!

@charles

Am with you on that one charles. Benaud's got to be the best,most knowledgeable judge of cricket you could possibly get.

Tendulkar is the GREATEST.

As Lara once said, he's proud of even being spoken in "the same breath" as Tendulkar!

Viv had the power and charisma.
Lara had the flash,flamboyance and artistry.
But Martin Crowe summed it up perfectly about Tendulkar's :
"He bats like GOD".

Tendulkar's got EVERYTHING. Not a SINGLE weakness.
He's the greatest batsman you will ever see.

Sachin's the greatest.
It's not good enough being superb against spin and medium pace like Lara.
Lara was embarassing against genuine pace.

Tendulkar can play anyone,anywhere,anytime.
He is the greatest .
As VIV said "Sachin's 99.5 % perfect"...that's as good a batsman as you are ever going to get.

@salim

well,too bad sobers didn't see tendulkar when tendulkar was young...he would have changed his mind!
Tendulkar is simply batsman the world has seen.
Bradman is the only one in the same frame because as someone has said he's simply got so many runs.

But for overall batting excellence and purity noone comes anywhere near Tendulkar.

many of u all fail realise that Sachin have some of the best batsmen in the world on his side- ddraid gnguly laxman sehwag and bowlers - singh kumble,srinath- Lara on the other hand lacks support from fly by nite batsmen. he showed quality and class and unlike sachin will never put u too sleep. Sachin knocks are quite boring especially vs those strong sub-continent bangladesh zim. sachin has all the support necessary to make winning contributions yet Dravid is becomming to outshine him in Tests cricket.
Sachin to his adoring fans is like "a movie/tv star" so what in five years time we will see sehwag be there new "hero"
yes 1 billion plus population is worthy but realistically minus the bang and zim runs and test
do you all really think sachin is better "HELL NOOOOO"
Dravid is even better to watch bat than tendulkar
as for class Laxman is wey better than sachin
"wake you movie goers"

@ Ali....so marshall, wasim, waqar, donald, holding, ambrose are not good enough to get in a short list of 30? I mean are we really suppose to believe that Truman, Lindwall and Larwood are better than the players ive just mentioned?????.....If you do agree with Benaud then 'WOW u really know your fast bowling', if you dont agree your just confirming his suspect credibility as a judge of great cricketers...which is it?

@ ALI...hey what d'you mean 'grow up'!!! i was just telling folks about the 'greatest amongst peers' piece. i just found it interesting especially after all of the blogs here! i think it was written (from a conversation) during the time of Lara's last test match and 4 months before he retired completely. You dont agree with these ex-players so you have given excuses why their opinions dont mean much. I dont believe i'm the one that needs to grow up. Come back and chat again when you're out of nappies.

@mitch

Sachin is the greatest batsman ever.
Its like this fabulous kohinoor in which mitch and his pathetic little(actually very little) band of tendulkar baiters insist on dwelling endlessly on some imaginary flaw...instead of having the iq,cricket knowledge and just plain sense to appreciate pure genius.
Poor chaps.
I hope Sachin the Greatest plays forever and ever!

Err mitch,
The "movie goers" happen to include bradman,benaud,richards,LARA himself,mark and steve waugh,ponting etc etc etc etc etc.....

I guess you're the only one dumb enough to miss the greatest show on earth, namely the SACHIN TENDULKAR show!

Poor you!

LOL,guess where "mitch" is from despite his alter nick?! these guys(our neighbours) are sooo transparent and obvious,no?

Hey guys ,want to come for a movie?:
"The Great Sachin Show",
starring the greatest batsman ever: Sachin Tendulkar.
Chief guest and fan no.1 Brian Lara has confirmed his attendance.

At the show will be the banner from the SCG:
"Commit all your sins while Sachin is batting. They will go unnoticed because even the Lord is watching"!
EEhhh haaa

@sheet

Am with you on that one, sheet!
Let the tendulkar baiters (their small miserable band) continue their pitiful,petty carping....
while we with open minds are free to watch this pure diamond of a batsman .

May he bat forever and continue to give us endless pleasure!
As said above, He's got to be the only batsman who can play anyone,anywhere,anytime.

He is simply the greatest ever,in every sense of the word!

The age of tendulkar is over...his ave against my beloved South Africa is quite pathetic...overrated batsmen..boring...plays for averages...sad really...

lara
153* 213 400* 375 277 132...oh and the small matter of a levi's..that's 501 to you Indians

Remember when McGrath asked Sarwan that very funny question, well the same question could be posed 2 you guys and Tendulkar. He's married for heaven sake!

Tendulkar's the best batsman of the age.
Possibly the best ever.

Thing is as mentioned above, Bradman's got this average!
But I think the one line that sums it up so perfectly about Tendulkar is
"He can play anyone ,anywhere,anytime"!
Brilliant!

Lara's terrific when "in the mood",and definitely not against real extreme pace. So ,it's really quite difficult placing him in the (Bradman,viv,tendulkar) bracket.

Where Lara does score is in his ability to score big and in his flashy strokeplay.
But for allround batting excellence Lara simply cannot be compared to Tendulkar, notwithstanding the tiny band of "Tendulkar baiters".

As,someone mentioned before,if a person cannot see the awesome genius of Tendulkar he obviously has a very limited knowledge of cricket/batting.

Anyone, who's anyone,who knows anything about cricket will vouch for Tendulkar's abundant and unique genius.

Rightly said ppl.

myopic fans like lara_leg cannot see glaring examples of selfishness and playing for averages like the triples + in antigua which resulted in a run aggregate of some 800 and a similar average.
so it only shows their narrow field of vision and shallow mentality.

Let the real cricket fans celebrate the superlative and pure genius of Tendulkar. (We also celebrated the genius of Lara).
But Tendulkar is undoubtedly the most complete and best batsman of the generation.
What's the point of even bothering with the little band of Ten.baiters who obviously don't know anything about cricket?

As so many have said, I wish Tendulkar could play forever.
We will never get another batsman like him.
The best,most complete batsman ever!

@salim

Lol,salim. I was really surprised that it soo long for your true nature and culture to show up!
amazing!
As ,so many people have mentioned....
if someone cannot see the fabulous genius of tendulkar it is only a reflection on themselves and points to a personal aversion to tendulkar.
any person with the slightest knowledge of cricket would acknowledge tendulkars genius.
So keep it up ,your true colours are finally showing!

Tendulkar's the greatest batsman ever.
I doubt bradman would have done so well in tests if he had to go allout under so much pressure for 400 ODIs as well.

childish comments from salim,lar...,etc.are now starting to reveal desperation(and as someone said the very thin veneer of civilisation is slipping off) and deep pathological and psychological problems more than any "batting knowledge".

experts of the game from john woodcock,benaud...down to lara himself, ponting and countless others have all said tendulkar is the best without qualification and are all in awe of his batting....

So,the sheer mental refusal of this fact and the effort required in the same reveals serious problems which may require psychological counselling.

@ Ali, glad you enjoyed my joke about Tendulkar, i knew it would be to your 'taste'.
@ Sheet...greatest batsmen ever!!!! how?
he doesnt have the best average, he doesnt
have the most runs, doesnt have the highest score, he DOES have the most tons so i guess that makes him the best (Soon Ponting will be the best ever then????!)
You mention ODI, it's the ODI's that have robbed Tendulkar of more test runs and caused his injuries, if he had played a 100 less i would perhaps agree that he may have completing dominated test cricket. Believe me WHO cares about ODI's????? Nobody remembers them, perhaps viv's 189 and Anwar's 194. Test cricket has been robbed of its mantle as the 'real cricket' and the 'true test' of a cricket player, not 50 overs or the 20 over slogg!

@Ali and the rest of the blinded...
i see you failed to respond to my earlier debunking of Benaud as a creditable observer or selector of great cricketers. So who would you guyz pick Truman, Lindwall and Larwood before marshall, wasim, waqar, donald, holding, ambrose??
please respond.

@Salim

you didn't respond to my earlier question on why Sobers and Richards were picked by Richie and The Don himself in their teams when you said Sachin was picked only because only 2 of his 9 centuries were in victories against Aussies..if thats the case why they picked these two players who have far more success against Aussies as a team, then why they were not ignored and why only Lara was ignored?...please answer that..

this is what you posted earlier
"Austrialia's love Tendulkar, the little master has scored a beautiful '9' hundreds against them but to Austrailia's delight only 2 have resulted in an INdian win. Its a win, win situation for the Austrialian fans, class batting but with no harm done!"

@ali and co.

Pls dont bother about salim and their tiny,petty band of ten.baiters. these ppl have probably never held a bat in their lives.
as usual,he tries to ignore that it is not only benaud,but a huge majority of cricketers and experts both ex and present in awe of tendulkar.

as mentioned if the Don had played so much cricket against so many diff. countries on so many grounds(and more than 400 ODIs)one wonders whether his test record would have been so good.

It is the mark of the truly skillful that they can play in any format of the game.which is why viv and ten.could play "anyone ,anywhere,anytime,in any format"!!.this doesnt apply to lara.

We and the vast majority of cricketers,cricket experts and fans know that tendulkar is the best.
Taking into account all factors probably the best EVER!

so pls ignore salim and co., who are obviously suffering from a mental block and intent only on harping continually on some imaginary flaw of blinding genius.

Hmm,you guys were right.
Salim and co. do need some help.
Has he ever even seen truman and co.?
And why is he ignoring the fact that its not just benaud but Lara himself and countless others who say tendulkar is the best??!!
If you take into account all facets of batsmanship there is not much doubt that Tendulkar's got to be the best batsman ever.
And dont just ask me or the millions of fans and cricketers.....most of the experts(including benaud,but not only him!)say the same!

You guys are right!
"salim" has even mentally blocked out tendulkar's superb 98 against pak in the 2003WC, against akram,waqar,akhtar etc. He doesn't even remember that!lol. only one anwar and viv innings.

Talk about mental blocks!

Sachin will go down as the greatest batsman the world has ever seen.

Hey guys,as so many people have mentioned:you dont expect our beloved neighbours to go "sachin,sachin"!.....do you?!
They would rather shoot themselves in the foot than admit that sachin is the greatest!
which of course( most people who know anything about cricket )know he is!
Not just the greatest of the generation but along with bradman the greatest ever.
As viv said "sachins 99.5% perfect".
viv,not benaud.

so,salim and the other baiters,focus their whole and sole attention on the remaining 0.5% taking great pains to avoid the good bits.
this is like looking at the brilliance of the sun and squinting your eyes and pointing out only the defects of the sunspots.
sachin,like any other human being,will never be 100% perfect..so salim and others will forever have something to point out.so why bother?

so there is effectively no point even responding to them...as someone said if you can see only the microscopic scratch and not the rest of the kohinoor...well ,what do u do?

@ Sheet, please dont talk about civilisation when one of India's high profile players has been slapping his own team mates, and calling others monkey's.

i knew it would only be a matter of time b4 someone said this.....'as mentioned if the Don had played so much cricket against so many diff. countries on so many grounds(and more than 400 ODIs)one wonders whether his test record would have been so good'
Up until this moment the sachin fans have stopped short of saying wot 'SHEET' suggested above. Tendulkar may or may not be 'better' than Lara but to compare him to the Don?????

@Buz

Thx buz. as you say...no point.your comment is probably the best one in here.

@Ali

Actually,in my opinion, the best comment is by "T.p" above.
I'd say both tendulkar and lara are both gold plated,copper bottomed geniuses..who have played at the top level for a long,long time.

As "T.p" says they are 2 sides of the same coin,one better at spin the other better at pace etc.etc.,and with very contrasting styles.

I think once the bickering is over the true cricket fan will realise how blessed we were to have had both of them grace the game.

@ Venk...agree with you....'T.p' was agreeing with our friend 'Eddy' who started this whole debate Lara V Ten (where is eddy?, Am i the only lara supporter left on this blog!!) I personally think Lara has done more in cricket and batting than tendulkar but this is felt like blasphemy to some tendulkar fans. IT IS ONLY MY OPINION, which is subjective but as i and many others have stated, there are stats and records and memories and innings that back up my subjectivity.

@salim

Rest assured that the ten.fans feel that he has done much more for cricket than lara.
West Indies was at one point a great team and they had a history. India was never ever known as a great team.
For ages it was only tend. that both the country and overseas fans used to look forward to.
Dravid,Ganguly etc came in the late '90s and actually flowered with tendulkar, another testament to his greatness.

As far as stats and records there are many more that back up tendulkar.....and for many more years..durability is one of the basic HALLMARKS of genius.

memories of lara are limited to a very few matches.
where tend. is concerned ,for me and countless fans worldwide, the memories and innings are unending.
And with the entire spectrum of batting genius..
from matchsaving stubborn defence,to tragic losses,to shotmaking blitzes,to being so out of form he actually cut out entire shots from his reportoire, to somehow continue scoring with injuries n intense pain.u name it!

@salim

Actually salim, if you actually read "T.p" s comments you will realize he is NOT agreeing with eddy.
He is stating that sachin is the better batsman. But in the final analysis there is not much to chose.
Also,once you have made a choice,you will obviously retain certain memories ,stats etc,which back up your choice.
The same with sachin fans.

I too feel that all in all sachin was the better batsman. Lara was constantly attacking and played some classic knocks no doubt.But so many came after such poor performances it was almost a relief.
With sachin i remember years and years where everytime he went out to bat everyone expected,nay,demanded a hundred.
He has played his entire career under such freakishly unrealistic expectancies.
Lara was always allowed to fail. sure the fans didnt quite enjoy it,but they were like more cool about it as in "ok,next time".
no such luck for sachin. He had to perform everytime.
& till injuries finished him he almost actually did!

Salim,I know what u mean.
But i too would go for tendulkar.
Lara was great during his purple patches as ponting was till now.I think ponting could well have got huge scores but other batsmen in aus are good.so it actually helps,like lara,to have some "not so good" batsman in your team so u are free to pile up big scores(no dec)
Once tendulkar gets the max runs the one record lara will have is the high score. this will be the only significant record in both forms of the game.
not much else.
As far as"stats and records and memories and innings that back up my subjectivity" are concerned in my opinion tendulkar is well ahead on practically every front ,not to mention his greater allround abilities,and lack of any weaknesses in his batting.
as mentioned, i can well understand what you meant tho,coz lara at his best was absolutely thrilling since he would attack almost every ball.
I love watching lara on song too.

But to me,both objectively & subjectively, tendulkar's the best.

@salim

the fact that you mention "blasphemy" should itself give you a vague idea at the very least of what sachin tendulkar means to cricket and so what he has done for cricket and batting.
This fan following is not limited to India.

During Gavaskar's time no one ,including the Indians ,would plumb for gavaskar over richards as the best batsman.
But tendulkar has overwhelming support as the best.
Obviously,for all such debates,you would have ppl who would go for lara,including players and experts.
That is only natural,as they were both phenomenal.
But the vast majority of even "experts" vote would go to tendulkar.
I'm no "expert" at all,basically not even a club level player,but for me tendulkar is the supreme batsman.

Best Batsman? - Sachin Tendulkar

@ all tenders fans... im unsure what 'purple patch' means in relation to lara. i get the impression that tend fans view Lara like this. some massive scores followed by some very poor ones. huge dips in form and then an avalanche of runs. as someone stated much earilier when tendulkar reached his 232 inning (lara's retirement inning) he had for MORE tons and 400 LESS runs. i believe this is a very very very close comparison. Lara's record is incredibly consistant, 34 tons , 52 avg only 6 not outs.
You may think he was up and down but no-more then any other batsman that has played for more than 15 years at the top level.
The ONE thing i will agree with you is this. Indian fans are far more passionate, fanatical than WI fans. When lara failed it was 'oh well he'll some some next time' with tendulkar it was burning posters and stoning houses and shops. now thats pressure.

If the great tendulkar is the best since Bradman...then logic dictates that he should ave at least 70 runs per innings...sincethe next best to bradman ...G Pollock ave 60...tendulakr cannot ave 55 and then expext to be the greatest since the Don...

fave cric moment...the humilaiation of india...2003 world cup...Ponting slaughters the pathetic INDIANS... disgusting team really...

THE AGE OF tendulkar IS OVER.

From 'all our yesterday's' 1969 2nd May
Brian Lara, who was born today, was one of the game's most exciting batsman and author of some of the most famous innings of all time: 375, 400 and 501, the highest in Test and first-class history, as well as 213 and 153 not out to single-handedly beat Australia in 1998-99. But his career had its fair share of problems and run-ins with authority, and as a captain he often struggled to inspire colleagues, although he was battling to lead a side in decline. Many hoped he would bow out on a high at the World Cup in the Caribbean, but West Indies were poor and Lara quit as captain amid rumours that he was pushed by the board. He deserved better.

@ Salim.... i think you all know my feelings on this debate but here's a recent piece ive read:
Resent quotes from Dwayne Bravo,

Bravo - who also grew up in Brian Lara's hometown, Santa Cruz, Trinidad
- says even Lara, Bravo's hero, looked up to Tendulkar during his playing days.
"I grew up in the same village as Brian Lara. Lara is my hero and even he too
looks up to Tendulkar. He always talks about him."

According to Bravo, just observing the way the two legends,
with whom he has been "fortunate" to share the dressing room with, is itself
a big learning lesson. "Both Lara and Tendulkar have a lot of knowledge.
You learn so much by just watching how they move around, how they speak
and how they treat their cricketing gear, especially the bat."

Well salim,I’m with you part of the way.
As Roebuck said” Tendulkar is the great player ,while lara is the player of great innings”.
To a certain extent that is true. Lara has played a handful of classic innings.he seemed to get primed for the big occasion. With a mindset of attack,no matter what,once he was in, the odds were stacked on him getting atleast a handful of grand innings in a long career. Similar to say a “sehwag”.

But to say ten.doesnt have great innings is plain ridiculous.
This guy has more than 80 international hundreds and more fifties and god knows how many smaller valuable blitzes. That is over some 200 international innings of endless class and “memories” to fans. You can practically blindly pick anyone and it will probably be a gem.
With Ten.,in contrast,every innings merited complete devotion.
No matter whether it was a test,odi,or exhibition.
Every innings was based on team requirements.
It is beyond belief,that over almost 20 yrs tendulkar has managed to keep scoring ,in every form of the game,against all opposition,all bowlers,all over the world. No bowler can claim to have dominated him. Lara was quite poor against express pace.

Everytime Ten. went out to bat ,he would somehow manage to get some runs,serious injuries,poor form whatever. He could always bring some not seen before new facet of genius to counter something,even his own body and injuries.

His genius has constantly adapted,from attacking ,to defence ,grinding ,whatever..
If you take out your anti-tendulkar goggles off you may appreciate the sheer enormity and magnitude of this achievement.

Again it’s a question of “weightage” .do you value a few innings out of hundreds in some 15 yrs as in the case of lara more than a player who will probably get either a 50 or 100 no matter what for year after year?
Lara had this surge in the last few yrs of his career,where he scored lots of runs and 100s on flat tracks against avg.bowling coinciding with the period of Ten.s decline due to injuries. This stretch has given him respectable figures and salvaged his career,not to mention the aggregate of almost 800 and avg.of 800 in 2 matches on a dead,small Antigua track.

I think ,in future we will surely get more “laras” i.e purely attacking players who will play a few awesome innings.
But I doubt if we will get another “Tendulkar”.
Enjoy it while it lasts.

@Marzban

As people have mentioned, over the years after numerous injuries,Tendulkar has incredibly adapted to somehow keep scoring. No doubt in the process he has become a more “dour” batsman. While lara refused to change his style of non stop attack.
Perhaps this is what people are referring to when they say Lara was more “exciting” especially in the last few years of their respective careers.
Since 2000,the injuries effectively terminated Tendulkar. In 2003 he scored 153 runs ,even Murali scored more. Since ’98, with every passing year I’ve thought that this year would now be the last of his career,that his body just cant take anymore... Cant figure out how he’s still going.

I remember watching Sunny and thinking “this guy is the most impregnable batsman ever”, twice as much of the ‘wall’ as Dravid ever was.
I remember watching Richards and thinking “this guy is the most destructive batsman ever”,as in say Gilchrist times two.
And then I saw Tendulkar:
He is the only batsman I’ve ever seen who is both impregnable and overwhelming when in good form.
The absolutely incredible thing is Tendulkar has actually constantly adapted his style,changed gears and shots and somehow or the other kept on scoring.
Lara never did,nor did Richards. They kept attacking till practically the last ball of their careers.
Not so Tendulkar. He had the genius and skill to do anything with the bat.
Unbelievable.

@Marzban

thanks Marzban. I'm not much of a stats man.
But mentioning the well over 200 innings (all in some way or other a classic) somewhat gets across what i mean. you can literally pull out any Tendulkar innings ,in any form of the game ,and you may well soon be admiring some fabulous shots!!

Lara fans will go on about a couple of innings.
With Tendulkar fans,as i've said so many times and so have others it is more a "BLUR" of continuous brilliance and genius.
Again, i don't believe too much in stats. they conceal more than they reveal and are only vague indicators.If taken without appropriate background context,in fact,they are almost useless.
But here they give some idea of what i meant.

All the tendulkar fan have tried to suggest that lara is bad against express pace. Which i fail to agree. I remember the breathtaking dual between Lara and Brett Lee in 2003. They also say Tendulkar is model of consistency. I say. No he is not.
How consistency has he been in last 4-5 years before Australia series. I can't even remember him getting in top 10 in cricket ratings during this time. Rather he have also been out of top 20 for a long time.

Even Kallis, Dravid have scored runs. Best players are best because they dominate the attack in getting the runs. But I have to say Sachin has Gavaskared his way of batting for last 4-5 years bar few innings.

I remember when sachin made 194* against pakistan he played so slow during 190s that Dravid was forced to declare. Compare that to Lara who equaled record of Matthew hayden with a six. Difference is visible.

@no_queiro

agreed. since about 2001 ten. has been virtually finished,with one injury after another.
hardly did he get his rythm back that he got injured again.So,he has been far from attacking and somehow made runs.

like what is happening now.he just got into form and again ...hopefully this is not like previous serious injuries.

Lara by contrast,as so many ppl have mentioned has salvaged his career in the last yrs of his career.
As you mention ,other batsmen (who i consider lesser than ten.)as ponting,kallis,sangakara etc have all massively outscored ten. with many more 100s since 2001

But,there is absolutely no doubt that ten. is far superior against extreme pace.
In his prime,pre injury ,in the '90s you'd never see tendulkar ever get hit ,or rushed against extreme pace.
Lara used to get hit regularly,found short pithced stuff difficult even in his prime.

I remember lara playing donald in his prime.
if you watch ten. play donald ,you will see the amazing diff.

Guys, i dont know and dont care about the stats or the so called great match winnings or superiority against pace or spin or whatever ....

what i do know for sure is no matter how im feeling, all i have to do is see a sachin straight drive,off front or back foot.........

and suddenly all is well with the world!!

@no_queiro
sehwags got to even a triple with a six.most of his big hundreds ,even triples are much much faster than laras. he has got to hundreds also many times with a six,
therefore sehwag is a better batsman than lara right??!!
you obviously dont know anything about batting or cricket.
as someone said above it takes talent to recognise genius.
most of the talented batsmen of the generation including lara,both waughs,ponting,inzy,atapatu,jayasuriya etc etc etc all say tendulkar is the best.
when will you ppl realise that even lara agrees on this.

@ Arzu.........compare Sehwag and LARA? you're having a laugh. Sure Sehwag and Gayle and Taylor and inzi and a couple of lankans have sored tripled recently but how many of them broke the record? look at the league of players that have scored triples, some greats, some good players. Bradmen, sobers, lara and then you have taylor gooch, jaya gayle,etc. the great ones broke the record!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
501*,400* 375. 153* 277. tendulkar has not ONE innings to match any of these.

@Buz

You were right BUZ i agree with you .
Your comment was spot on.no point.
even their OWN hero lara categorically states that tend is the best.
so we are talking about serious mental blocks and problems here.
also they have started including even some english county first class matches now.
how about we throw in some tend school boy matches where he was probably ALSO the greatest school boy cricketer ever?!
like you said ,buz,some ppl will never learn.
hope lara HIMSELF and practically every other top batsman of the generation may convince them? no way.he wont even bother to read what millions of other fans and experts have written. but you would expect at least a half baked so called cricket fan to atleast look at the magnificence of tends batting?no chance. the mental block is permanent.
like this other clown lara_leg...,who keeps going like a little child that the "age of tend is over..."Tend started before lara and he's still going.do these ppl know anything a cricket

@salim,

hello salim. im afraid you are terribly confused.
pls answer just one simple question:
Do woodcock,bradman,benaud,steve and mark waugh,atapatu,jayasuriya,inzamam,gavaskar,ponting,boycott,harvey,roebuck,crowe,brian lara,richards,barry,greg,mark taylor,greig,coward,fletcher and numerous batsmen know more about batting than you do?
they all go for tendulkar as the best.
if you know anything about batting ,such as a great batsman like lara does,then you can even talk about it .
other wise you sound more and more like a chartered accountant.

Dont think salim and his friends have seen too much of tendulkar.

I didnt realise it before ,but actually comparing lara to sehwag is a very good comparison.
they are remarkably similar.

Tendulkar ,along with bradman,are the greatest batsmen ever: in a different league altogether.

Looks like the age is definately over...I guess the Indians have admitted defeat...tendulkar "the greates batsman" bar DG Bradman aves a hefty 55...
Over rated scum bucket!!!(Tendulkar that is)!!!

greatest cricketing momemt : The humiliation of India 1996vs South africa 100 and 66 all out...Love it!!!!

The greatest bowler of the generation of Lara and Sachin, Glenn Mc Grath have rated Lara higher than Sachin. Mc Grath and Lara dual have always brought fascinating contest. It was never a stalemate. Either glenn got out Lara early or Lara have completely dominated the proceeding. None of Tendulkar inning can compare 213,226, 153, 277, 182 or 132 against Australia.

Tendulkar'r record against Australia when McGrath played have been relatively poor.

And even shane Warne who rated Sachin higher. But world knows who have dominated the spinner better. And if anybody forgot it was Lara because of whom Warne was contemplating retirement during 1999 because Brian Lara completely demoralised Warne.

@ RON, you have managed to take this debate to a new low. comparing Lara and Sehwag, have you ever watched test cricket? And when you talk about Bradman and tendulkar being in a different league what league do you mean? the 500 runs in a inning league? NO! the 400 league?NO! most runs ever league? NO!. most 4's most 6's league? NO! 1000 runs a year league? NO! NONE of us watched bradman play so dont put him in anyones league, as for tendulkar he didnt make the wisden 5 players of the century (hutton,sobers,viv got more votes)
So what league are you referring to?
@ sheet.. ive seen many many tendulkar innings and he is one of the greats. he's just not as thrilling, exciting, capable of genius innings as Lara was. thats just plain facts.

Those of us that have actually played the game of cricket,
(I have at a club level in Pakistan,
england and Trinidad)) will understand this fully..
When you play a limited overs game of 40 or 50 overs,
and you are a opener you have a fair chance of scoring
a ton or maybe even a ton 50. Throughout the season of
25/30 games a very good batsman may score 1500/2000
runs with 18 or so tons. With 2 or three day games
the chances of scoring tons (and big tons) increase.
As we all know it only takes one ball to remove even
the greatest batsman. HUndreds are always there.

Ive played sunday friendly
games and pre-season warm-up games against under 21,
18 and under 15 kids cricket teams and believe
it or not they get adults out and usually fair 'ok'.
Now this is my point ........we all could bat for
ages against 10 year olds and rack up run after
run after run. We will no-doubt make one mistake,
taking one chance too many, or taking the p against
weaker opposition. what boggles my mind is how someone
can make 501 without getting out once. Any batsman out
there will understand what i mean. 500 is what teams
make! 400* is also a case in point. Ask any pro player
(and i have, a.Stewart, d. haynes,) and they truely
dont understand how these kind of runs can be made.

IT DOESNT MATTER WHAT PITCH or TEAM you are up against
scoring 500 or 400 is genius.

All crit's of these knocks do not understand batting at all,
even Ponting hasnt got a clue about making runs of this kind.

ONly Bradman and Hanif M could tell you what it
takes.

why has no-one ever scored 500 in a 1st class match?
why has no-one ever scored 400 in a test match?....

because it's almost impossible!!!

Ask Tendulkar about 501 and 400 and im sure youd hear
a true and honest and humble comment of someting he is
in awe of.

how dare anyone compare Lara to Sehwag.
Lara can only be compared to three batsman, Bradman,
Richards and Tendulkar.
Lara had the huge ton making of bradman, the
runs scored comparison of Tendulkar and the attacking attitude
and flamboyance of VIV.

@salim,gorkha..

lara=sehwag
tendulkar=god

And i see that you have conveniently avoided the fact that most players (as so many ppl have listed above)go for tendulkar as the best.

apparently ,you've played some
cricket...so then maybe you should know what injuries can do and put stats after 2000 in context?
but obviously you wont because it doesnt suit you...as "buz" has so well put it.

anyway I guess Lara has played a little more and at a higher level than you.

So ,Lara himself ,categorically states that tendulkar is the best.
(so now you ppl know more about batting than lara? similar to some stupid comments you earlier made about benaud?)
its a pretty simple question really:

DOES LARA KNOW MORE ABOUT BATTING THAN YOU DO?

Hey "buz". you were absolutely right?!
they definitely are your "beloved neighbours"!
lol!
and its soo obvious that they are more anti tendulkar than pro anything!
now every other parameter of batting excellence has conveniently been shelved aside for the couple of "high" scores!!
at county level and a dead antigua track where lara played on and on just to play for the record.
he was also dropped that innings too...but ofcourse salim wont rem that.

But thanks for you guys bringing up sehwag .
he is exactly like salim and co.likes them:
"thrilling, exciting, capable of genius innings ".

actually he and lara are exactly alike...
and as someone said
Tendulkar,and bradman,are in a different league altogether!

The best judges of batting excellence are perforce the top batsmen themselves.
Especially those who've played in this era,and so have faced similar challenges: pitches,odis,etc.

And the majority of the top modern batsmen (inc.lara )vouch for tendulkar as the best batsman.

sure ,lara has a few big scores and some grand innings.since when has the highest score become the sole parameter for "best batsman"?
all it points to is a willingness to keep scoring for selfish reasons disregarding the match state for record purposes.
matchwinning inn ? good comment by "tp" above.

"Gork..." mentions some inn.s of lara against Aus with the comment that tendulkar hasnt any inn.s Even the most basic cricket follower would know that to be an extremely silly comment.

If you rank the top 5 batsmen of the generation it would probably be :
1)tendulkar
2)lara
3)steve waugh
4)ponting
5)mark,inzamam,dravid.

Amazingly all batsmen from 2 to 5 say tendulkar is he best. now they should know.

why does tend.has more centuries in both form of the game?
soon he will be the highest run scorer in tests,already in odis.
why does lara get out so many more times than tend in about the same amount of innings?
Is he iffy outside offstump,does he have a poorer defence?
getting high scores is ALWAYS on a dead pitch and once your in is no indicator of any superlative skill.
why does lara have so much difficulty facing pace?
does he see the ball late?poor technique or just basic lack of skill in the most deadly test of the batsmans art?
do ppl realize mcgrath was medium pace? do ppl realize that the fastest bowlers such as donald and akram hold tend.in much higher regard?
as so many ppl have mentioned even sehwag has many big scores and they have been scored at a far superior pace than lara's knocks.
so sehwag is the equal of lara?
then why use the same idiotic logic to compare lara to tend.
anyone who knows about batting would realize tend. is the FAR superior bat.

Lara is the most overrated batsman of the era.
anyone reasonably skilled batsman can play on flat tracks as and when the mood comes over him.

Sachin is the best and greatest batsman of the era. As Warnie says by "daylight".

Oh guys,
nevermind
"woodcock,bradman,benaud,steve and mark waugh,atapatu,jayasuriya,inzamam,gavaskar,ponting,boycott,harvey,roebuck,crowe,brian lara,richards,barry,greg,mark taylor,greig,coward,fletcher" etc etc
not to forget brian lara HIMSELF.

what do these ppl know about batting ?nothing!
salim,gorkh etc know much more than them!
heck,tendulkar got the record in school level.he got some triples not out and doubles in 4 innings for and average of 1000 plus.why has noone done that?

does anyone listen to the above top ex players? of course not.we only listen to salim who has played so much first class cricket that he knows much more than them all including ponting now(after benaud).when will he stop making a complete ass out of himself,god alone knows.

Actually Sehwag is way more exciting than lara.
otherwise they are very very similar.twins.
Even Healy says so.
Graham thorpe watched laras triples and he says sehwags recent triple is better.lol!
so much for so called "great"batting.
as boycott says on a dead,small,flat track even his mom will put together big scores.in what way does it prove some sort of batting superiority is beyond anyone.
lara ,as he himself clearly states tendulkar is the best.lara is "maybe" the 2nd best of the generation,although steve waugh may contest that.

Sachin is the best batsman of the generation and if all factors are taken into account the greatest EVER!

OFcourse, tendulkar is the greatest batsman of the generation.
what sort of stupidity is this to say lara has some big scores ,so he's better?
CONTEXT,is everything.
Practically all of lara's supposedly good innings have had huge doses of luck.
both triples,the 153 etc.
having seen both lara and tendulkar for a long time there is no doubt ,and in the mind of other contemporary batsmen also,that tendulkar is far superior.
Rgd,mcgrath ppl forget that out of the 6 times he has got him 3 were the most ridiculous decisions.1 right after tennis elbow where he hadnt held a bat for 6mths. only 2 were in the fair realms of a battle between a good bowler and a great batsman.context.

Against raw pace tendulkar is head and shoulders above lara.no comparison.

injuries since 2000/01 ,and laras run scoring on batting tracks against avg bowling pumped up his figures.context.
if some ppl have played cricket as they claim shudnt they know that stats without context are meaningless?

Comparing lara to tendulkar? are you daft?
Tendulkar is better at almost every single parameter of batting quality.
the only area where lara may claim to be better is against spin, that too because he was under much less pressure and so could stick to all out attack, thereby tremendously pressurizing the bowler. Also,those stupid big scores which were scored with the sole aim of achieving the record are supposed to show batting excellence??

Tendulkar is better at everything else: extreme speed,defence,balance,short pitched bowling,
range of shots,ability to adapt,in all forms of the game,much better away from home............
And any one who has followed the game will know that ten'r has been finished with injuries ,where lara has filled his boots in the last few years.
If not for the injuries this stupid argument wouldnt have even arisen.
Even lara acknowledgs Ten is the BEST he's ever seen!!
No comparison.
Tendulkar is far and away the best player of the generation.

Since so many of you mentioned Tendulkar’s injuries from 2001 (which actually started in ’98), here are some stats till 31st dec 2000.

Matches innings runs avg. hundreds

Tendulkar
79 125 6416 57.28 24
Lara
74 129 6070 48.56 15

Clear and ample proof of the fact that Lara feasted on runs in the last years of his career on batting friendly tracks with average bowling.
While Tendulkar steadily declined due to injuries.
Any,even the most biased observer,can well imagine that if Tendulkar was not so unfortunate with injuries he would have walloped Lara on every parameter.
Perhaps only the high scores ,which as so many have mentioned,on a tiny ,dead Antigua track undertaken for the sole and only reason to achieve records and pump up Lara’s figures.

I think Lara realises this. Which is why he has expressly stated that Tendulkar is the Best ,infact the “best batsman he has ever seen or played against”.

Most cricketers anyway know that in pure batting terms Tendulkar is the as close to the ultimate batsman you can get ,as viv said.
In fact ,Tendulkar is by far and away the greatest batsman we will ever see.

Sobers, Bradman, Hanif M & Gavaskar were all better than the sweet spotted bat carrying, flat track bullies of today who never played on a wet wicket. Batsmans game nowadays. Sir Viv was the last "great"

@NAB

AGREED.
But tendulkar would atleast have survived any hostile fast paced bowling at his best.
Ever seen him hit or in any great trouble in his prime against Donald,Akram,Waqar?

Lara is indeed a flat track bully with a sweet spotted bat specially against spinners. He would never ever have survived against hostile fast bowling on green tracks.

Viv also didnt have the monster scores like lara, but(like the aussie team now) scoring ridiculous personal high scores wasnt even the goal,like it CLEARLY was for lara.
The goal was to score about 400/500 runs at a fast pace and then get at the opposition.
Lara has infact been lucky on this basis that he was free to bat for as long as he wanted.
I rem. when sarwan was due for a triple and lara declared!!
can you imagine lara doing that if he himself was batting??
I think lara is well aware of all the various facts behind various stats which is why he TOO clearly says TENDULKAR is the best he's ever seen or played against.

Hey guys!

After the same number of innings for Sehwag (so far in his career) and Lara at a similar stage (actually one more for lara),check this out:

Matches inn runs avg. 100
Sehwag
57 96 4813 51.75 14
lara
57 97 4741 50.43 10

Sehwags not as good as lara....
HE'S BETTER!! LOLLL!
what a frigging joke.Sehwags already got a couple of better triples,much faster and more "exciting" ones than lara!!he will get more...
just imagine if tendulkar had stayed injury free,
these chaps wouldnt have bothered even talking about lara in the same breath.(which is correct)
as so many have mentioned,just as tendulkar was hitting his peak at about 28 he started getting one serious injury and surgery after another.
ANyway,we and practically every expert and cricketer KNOW,irrespective of stats taken out of context........
well said above
lara=sehwag( actually sehwags better isnt it?)
tendulkar=god.
TENDULKAR'S THE GREATEST!!

WHY OH WHY are people so obsessed with Lara saying Tendulkar is better
. He hardly is going to say that he himself is the best. In fact Tendulkar
said Lara was gods gift to cricket, so how do you read that?!!
ALSO i hear a lot about injuries! God are we really suppose to
imagine how great Tendulkar would have been injury free????????
How about taking away 400 ODI's and his test cricket may not
have suffered, you cant have it both ways!
Ifs and Maybe's never scored a run. what about this IF.
IF lara had been born 5-7 years earlier he would have
played in a team that ruled the world, would he have been
even greater? IF's are pointless!!!

@ Mohammed...... you are wrong, Lara said the best
batting he had ever seen with or against him was
Kallis' performances against the WI in 2003 when
he scored 158,44,177,73,130,130 (a spell of scoring
that even TEn or Lara hasnt matched)
And also you talk about Lara's 400* and 375 'pumping'
up his figures...What about Tendulkar's 25 not outs
which inflate his figures compared to Lara's 6 NO's!!!

@ NAB.......you are partly correct.

Lara started his test career later than Tendulkar and finnished b4.
Both, we are lead to believe, because of WI's cricket foolishness.
We have heard that a senior player in the WI's team (viv?) opposed
Lara's inclusion even though Lara was in England with the team when
Viv and Greenidge played their last series.
Also we have heard that Lara would have been dropped for the tour
of england after the world cup in WI, so he quit.

So it appears that Lara was denied at the start and the end of his
fantasic career of more matches and more runs.

I'll put this question into the debate. If Lara had played for as long as Tendulkar
would/could he have added to his 34 tons? It's guess work i know but
What is clear is that the probability is that he would have. He was a very
talented batsman at 18 years old and still scoring double tons in his last
test series against PAK when he was 36/37.

Now the second part of the question. can tendulkar score more than 250?
or 300 or 400? Apart from 248 we have seen no evidence that he is capable
of scoring so heavyly.

What the Tendulkar fans class as so special is what Lara could have done given
the opportunity and what Ponting is doing now(at a faster rate).

Scoring hundreds is simply a matter of being a very good batsman
and having the time and opportunity to score them,
501*,400*, 375. is something much harder and special.

When Lara broke the record of Allan Border for highest run getter of all time he said,any decent batsman with so many matches will either broke such records of highest runs and centuries or be very near it.

Sachin Tendulkar records is like that. If Lara has played same number of matches he will have similar record as Sachin. (Lara already have more runs then Sachin playing less number of Test).

However, even if Sachin plays a million years you cannot gurantee he will break record of Lara's 400, 501 or 28 run in an over. Thats why I feel Lara is in completely different league.

@roshan

if tendulkar had played at antigua and was captain and decided "i will not declare till i score as much as i want"....he would have scored as much as he wanted to.
As soon as lara got to 400 he declared...isnt it abundantly obvious he was playing purely for the record?
when sehwag went out to bat on the next morning,he went out playing like a 20 over game,if he had gone purely for the record he could have easily have got it.
as it is he has got his triples at a much faster pace than lara.
and could you pls tell me what is so great about hammering an unknown spinner,who has hardly played international cricket?
and as so many ppl have said what sort of logic states that some high scores translate into the best batsman?
as for salim,it is not ONLY lara,but practically 2 to 5 as someone said above who said tendulkar is the best.

As mentioned above if you look at it sehwag is actually better than lara.those stats are after laras best series against aus in 98 at home.

There is no question of if,as if if was hypothetical.
anyone who has watched the game has seen tendulkar struggling tremendously with injuries and surgeries.
other lesser players than tendulkar(which of course includes lara)such as ponting,dravid,kallis etc and MANY others have hugely outscored tendulkar since 2000.

i can understand if we were talking about some cricket a century back.but here we can actually see and watch things,so tendulkars injuries are not a matter of conjecture.they are a FACT.

so taking things as usual without appropriate context,as salim,has done through out his posts just to show lara in a better light,is purely for ppl who do not follow cricket.
there are many batsman with much better stats than richards. but as so many ppl have mentioned context is vital.
many mediocre batsman have many more runs and hundreds than tendulkar since 2000,doesnt this tell you something? if you honestly ask yourself?
the question is ARE you capable of such honesty?

@salim

lara on tendulkar(to quote verbatim)
1)sachin is a genius,i am a mere mortal.
2)sachin is the best ive ever seen or played against.
3)you know genius when you see it ,and let me tell you sachin is pure genius.
4)For me, the best batsman in the world is Sachin Tendulkar. I admire Jacques Kallis' consistency and Ricky Ponting, with the purple patch he's going though. Everybody gets 15 minutes of fame. But if there's one person I've admired over a 15-year period, it's definitely Sachin.

well salim,even if you are staunchly anti tendulkar i guess its pretty clear isnt it?
I dont like saying this, but i think you need to open your mind a little. some ppl who have mentioned tendulkars injuries aren't lying or necessarily simply concocting stories. if you really are a cricket lover i am sure you will take all factors into account. a high backlift and a continual disposition toward all out attack and big scores like sehwag isnt everything ,as lara himself obviously realises.

@Tan
Mahr. Lol. To score 400 you need to score quickly. Ask Dravid, he was so bored by Sachin batting that he declared when he was in 190's because it seemed he would take an eternity to get 200.

No matter how much you demean, sachin can only dream of scores like 400, 501, 375 or 28 or 26 runs in an over. Sachin record are based on huge number of matches he played. But Lara innings are based on individual brilliance. Of course he have gathered runs after playing a lot of matches but he will always be remembered for kind of innings he is capable of playing. And as Roshan said even if Sachin bats a million times you cannot guarantee that sachin will break Lara's Record.

Well I was being a bit satirical but I think there is some truth in my previous post. Apart from Murali amd Warne (McGrath was very good as well) there hasn't quite been the bowling there was when Waqar Donald Wasim were around.. Before that the WI pacemen and before that Lillee & Thomson. .

If you go back further test teams were skittled out for very low scores at times, even those with great batsmen in them. Facing Underwood on a wet wicket was even harder than facing Murali, he was a lesser bowler but the conditions were more bowler friendly, play a reverse sweep and you would have been hit in the face, although Mushtaq Mohammed did play a type of that shot. The only real improvement since that time has been the reverse swing, and there aren't even so many practitioners of that now. Simon Jones got it going for the Ashes in 2005, that's why England won IMO.. needed a welshman!

I think Lara and Tendulkar are great batsmen but not BETTER than the earlier ones I mentioned

@sunny
you havent answered the questions,but tried to avoid it as your other friends.

1)the first point is since when has scoring big scores become the only parameter of batting quality?
2)what is so great about hammering a completely unknown spinner? do you even remember who lara scored those runs off?
3)tendulkar scored unbeaten triples as a schoolboy.
4)richards scored his runs at a much faster pace than lara,but didnt score triples.because that simply wasnt the goal as it clearly was for lara.
5)sehwag scored his triples at a much faster pace than lara,as said if he was going for the record would have easily have got it.
6)sehwag as per the stats put up above is a better player than lara.
7)how come practically all batsman vote for tendulkar as the best?all. no answer?

as usual you ppl are simply incapable of answering any of the above but intentionally and knowingly keep harping on a couple of inn because you know u have nothing since ten is so OBVIOUSLY THE BEST.

at roshan,sun..
Agreed.
Lara has got 2/3 higher scores.
On that parameter he is “better” than ten. Actually ten.got unbeaten triples as a schoolboy but he declared! Unlike good old brian,as we all know (no answer to the sarwan episode above?)
But ten.is better at pace,balance,all round shotmaking,defence( as so many ppl ask how come he is not out 25 times.u mean lara gets out on purpose?),away from home,in any form of the game etc.
Also somehow you can only rem.tens 194* ,not anything else?so laras flops are ignored while ten.s are highlighted.

So any “neutral” observer would surely take all parameters into account.
Not only injuries,but also say state of pitch,(only 5 batsman were down during laras record scores),match condition etc.

Unfortunately,from the tenor of your comments one can clearly deduce that you are certainly not “neutral”, but as many ppl have said if you intentionally don’t take tens.injuries into account this is clearly of a case of “anti ten” more than “pro anything”.
These injuries/surgeries are not something which have been simply imagined.

Once you have decided that you only want to see laras big scores and ten.failures after both of them have played international cricket for almost 2decades then there is no point of even having a conversation.

So on every other parameter of batting excellence ten.is better.
Is this perhaps what all top batsmen,right from benauds era, are referring to when they say ten.is the best?

@tan
honesty you say?!
they obviously arent ,otherwise they know this topic is over!
now they know that it practically is as they are on there last and only card! lara has some big scores!
lol
after their full careers that is all they have left.sad no?
ppl have also proven that even SEHWAG is better than lara!
they might as well admit tendulkar is the best, which anyone who knows anything about cricket..
like benaud,lara,steve and mark waugh,inzy,ponting etc etc say he is!

@salim,roshan,etc (all beloved neighbours)

what u are saying is exactly what we are saying.
so are in agreement.
there were 3 test innings in which lara scored more than tendulkar.
so lara was "better" in these innings,on dead tracks,where hardly any other batsmen from his team got out either.
But tendulkar was better for the remaining 20 odd years,in other innings ,in all forms of the game.
see?
we agree completely.so 99% of the time to lara's 1% ,tendulkar is better.
This is what all the other best batsmen and other pros all the way back 60years to benaud are reffering to.
good to see that you can at least see some logic sometimes.

Exactly,what everyone is saying...on every other parameter of batting excellece tendulkar is far superior.

@mohammed and co.
guys why are you even bothering about your "beloved neighbours" and other anti tendulkar so called cricket fans.

Obviously the pakis (avg.fans not cricketers)will never admit it(except akram,waqar,qadir and saqlain i.e the top guys who have actually played tendulkar say tendulkar is best.)and some wi and ind fans.

Every top batsman,(INCLUDING lara)expert and fan knows tendulkar is the best.
best comment by "buz" above :
as richards says tendulkar is 99.5% perfect and no human being can ever be 100% ,so these ppl will always have the 0.5% to carp about (conveniently and incredibly turning a blind eye to the 99.5%)...they will not answer any question put forward above because they know they cant...since tendulkar is better on every facet of batting .....so,really,why even bother?

Lara played for almost 16 years and scored 11953 runs from 232 innings, at 51.5 per innings.
Tendulkar has been playing for almost 19 years and has scored 11782 runs from 238 innings, at 49.5 per innings.

Some of the great batsmen in the days of bowler freindly wickets based their techinique on defence eg Hanif, Boycott, as you could not base your technique mostly on attack then, (though Sobers was very good in both departments, an all round batsmen as well as an all rounder in bowling/batting/fielding sense.)

Nowadays a lot of batsmen are predominatley attacking eg Hayden, but put them on a very poor wickets and a lot of them would be found out IMO.

Tendulkar is an "all round" batsmen I would give him the edge over Lara, but Lara is often more attractive to watch and has great concentration obviously!

I think I agree with Roebuck - I don't usually!

I do think that SOME of the Tendulkar fans on here have been over disparaging to Lara though, in his later years he carried the WI team to a greater extent, Tendulkar often had Dravid or Ganguly batting at the other end, a great help.

@Daryll...if Tendulkar is better why does he have less runs than Lara, having played more games and innings????????????????????????????????????????
@krin you have a nerve talking about flat tracks, we all know that the easiest place to bat in the world is on the sub-continent and Tendulkar has played well over half of his cricket on ind, pak, bang and lankan dead pitches.

@salim,if you actually read and open your eye and watch the glory of tendulkars batting you may become a little less fanatically antitendulkar.
at least a dozen ppl have mentioned tendulkars injuries and with relevant stats.
but ofcourse that doesnt suit your blinkered vision so you have mentally blocked it.
tendulkar has a better record away,so much for home pitches.
as ppl have said you can fairly compare sehwag with lara,as they both meet your requirements of "great batting".
and as usual you are simply incapable of answering the questions posed above,the simplest of all being:
"why do practically top batsmen,including lara, go for tendulkar as the best...?"
simple,because tendulkar IS the best.
by a long shot.

@krin,daryll

absolutely spot on!
actually tendulkar was better 99.5% of the time,not 99%...slight error there.
Got to agree with Benaud though.....
Tendulkar is not only the best of the generation, but the best since 1948!!!!!
amazing...but something all batting and tendulkar fans have instinctively known......
the still head,the balance,the poise,the lack of effort,the allround shot making,the time,the precision,economy of effort,the complete comfort level against all sorts of bowling,all over the world,any form of the game,the "x"factor which keeps you glued come what may,even after all those injuries you cant take your eyes off sachin when he is batting.........ah,sachin..as the banner at the SCG said" commit all your sins when sachin is batting ,because even the lord is watching "!! how true.....the greatest!

Search Cricinfo for "greatest among his peers" and see what Messrs. Manjrekar, Greig, Shastri and Chappell came up with when directly posed that most difficult of Questions. (Check in your emotion and patriotism at the door first. That way logic has a fighting chance.)

@salim and co.
so now you are attemtping very hard to ignore stats when tendulkar was uninjured.
so they are knowingly trying to compare a lame thoroughbred to a normal one.
further some clown above talks about rpi.s. why?
bcoz he must have obviously seen the averages and seen tendulkars as better.i mean how childish can you get?
and so now lara is sposed to be a better batsman than tendulkar because he gets out many MORE times than tendulkar?
do these ppl realise what asses they are making out of themselves.
this salim is attempting to say he knows more than benaud and ponting......not to mention the remaining huge list of experts and ex cricketers who go back to a time well before he or his father was born.
Heck,lara himself,ponting,steve and mark waugh,inzy,jayasuriya,atapatu....practically all top batsmen of the era vote for tendulkar as the best..
only ppl who are fanatically anti tendulkar will keep arguing so foolishly.
sachin is in a different zone.

@Ali.............you silly BOY. i love the way Tendulkar bats, i just think that Lara has done far far more in cricket than the little master.

@bah...check what "woodcock,bradman,benaud,steve and mark waugh,atapatu,jayasuriya,inzamam,gavaskar,ponting,boycott,harvey,roebuck,crowe,brian lara,richards,barry,greg,mark taylor,greig,coward,fletcher" etc etc
not to forget brian lara HIMSELF"
have to say.by the way tony greig recently said tendulkar is the greatest cricketer ever.not just of this generation.

@salim: there are a far greater majority of even ex cricketers and experts who think tendulkar has done far more.
No sportsman has impacted so many people for so long since mohammad ali.
Considering the unrealistic and idiotic expectations from someone who is after all only human, the length of time he has played, the type of bowlers he has played(none of which can claim to have got his number in 20yrs), the stunning contribution in all forms of the game all over the world,and the perhaps even more astonishing manner in which he has battled career threatening injuries...Tendulkar is undoubtedly the greatest.

@Sheet: It seems you've ignored my recommendation to leave aside emotion in making any comments, considering the repetitive and overwhelming nature of your posts. Perhaps you should re-read them before posting.
Don't get caught up in your own hyperbole. Greig would never place Tendulkar above Viv (whom he played and lost against), much less Sobers or The Don.
No one is implying that Tendulkar is not one of the all time greats of cricket. His name will reverberate through the cricketing firmament for ages to come. However he never will be said to have had that "X-factor" that makes Lara that little bit special. (Ask anyone not blinded by misguided patriotism).
Please don't take this as an attack on you personally, or as a slight on the honour of your country. It is merely a dispassionate observation.

@ Sheet.......wow now ive heard it all. So Tendulkar is second only to Ali as a world sporting icon. I'd wager that More indians know abou Pele than Brazils or any north or south americans know about Tendulkar. Football is the worlds game. Yep there are a billion indians but there are far many more football fans out there that know Peles name, Pele's impact is far greater. Infact go outside the colonies and ask anyone who Bradman is!

@ Mahr: I Reiterate:
Lara - 11953 in 232 innings (Career:16 yrs)
Tendulkar - 11782 in 238 innings (Career:19* yrs)
No opinions there. Nor any emotionally charged patriotism. (I'm sure you have enough of your own)

A quote from the finest seam bowler of the past 10 years....."There's been quite a few who on their day that have done well and obviously the two standouts are Brian and Sachin," he told a news conference on Friday.

"I feel from bowling to those two guys that probably Brian was slightly in front of Sachin when they were both at their peak."...G McGrath april 2006.

There can be no better judge of the two than the bowler that got them both out the most times.

@ Salim...thats interesting last blog mate. So the top 3 leading bowlers of the past 10 years have stated this.... McGrath - lara 1st ten 2nd,
Warne - Ten 1st Lara 2nd, Murli - Lara 1st ten 2nd. I think it's quiet telling that the people who REALLY knew how good these batsman were saw it this way.
Other bloggers have named many many other cricketers (mostly batsmen) that have called Tend the better batsman. Do you have to be a batsman to be a true judge of batting or are the leading bowlers the best judge. Other batsman may have personal axes to grind against Lara or Tendulkar and lets face it, Tendulkar sounds like a very likable guy and Lara is a bit of a playboy.
If i had to pick between Ponting, Kallis and Inzi as judges or Warne , McGrath and Murli i'd pick the bowlers .

@terry
look what Mcgrath said about Sachin in 2002.

"I have never made a secret of the fact that I rate Tendulkar the best batsman in the business. As far as I am concerned he is technically the most sound player I have ever bowled to. Add to that the manner in which he plays, always trying to dominate the bowler. Among his contemporaries, Steve Waugh, Brian Lara and Inzamam-ul Haq are often compared to the little maestro. Each has his trademark, but Tendulkar combines all of their qualities to make him the best of the lot. Steve is all about determination and making the bowler earn his wicket. Inzamam possesses a good eye and his lazy elegance makes him one of the best players to watch. Lara has flamboyance, and when he gets in, he always scores big centuries.

But Tendulkar possesses determination, a good eye and has a very high rate of consistency as far as centuries go. This puts him on top of my list along with Waugh. " sounds interesting ??

@ Terry and Vimalan.......HA!!! so Vim has gone back to 2003 to find a quote from Mcgrath. Funny, since 2003 it seems as tho McGrath has changed his opinion!!!!! Theres a desparation in the fact that Vim had to go back 5 years to find this quote. Mcgrath made the more recent quote during the last world cup only 14 months ago. Your quote is obviously quite a dated one as he even puts S waugh 'on top' with Tendaulkar, a declaration that many would find hard to understand 5 YEARS LATER. Mcgrath had many run-ins with Lara over the years but in the end he stated his true opinion of Lara in 2006. As 'terry' has said two out of the three best and leading bowlers of the past decade rated Lara higher. Thats just the way it is, unless you can dig deeper into time to find another ancient quote.

@vimalan,
McGrath more recently said Lara is better batsman than Sachin. It hardly matters what players say in 2000-2001. When Mc Grath said that in 2002 he didn't calculated the dip in form and style of Sachin over the years.

@Salim,@Rossi
I know you will come to this..how come he say Sachin as the best in 2002 and changes his opinion "slightly" in 2006 although he never played against Sachin after 2002 barring the 2 test matches in 2004 in India when Sachin was fully injured?

1. According to Mcgrath, Sachin was the best till 2002, that is a full 13 years of international cricket Sachin and Lara played till that time. And for the last 4 years Lara was "slightly" better. I never knew that an opinion based on 13 years has less weight compared to an opinion change based on last 4 years. Remember, by 2002, Lara had already played some of his greatest knocks against Aus, 153, 213 and that 132 in Perth, yet still Mcgrath rated Sachin the best at that time.

2. Mcgrath has dismissed Sachin 6 times in Tests including those two controversial LBWs in the 1999-00 series whereas he has dismissed Lara 15 times, agreed he has played more against Lara but 15 times??. Sachin has never been a bunny like Lara.

@Salim
See what your own Akram who is the greatest left arm seamer ever played the game said about Sachin in 2006.
"Tendulkar has clearly been one of the three best batsmen I have ever seen on a cricket field. I would rate him alongwith Viv Richards and Sunny Gavaskar as the “unbowlable” batsmen of my era. I remember there was a time when I would put my ability to question only because Gavaskar was still not in my bag. Finally I had him in Hyderabad — caught in the second slip! The memory of it is still so refreshing. With Tendulkar too we always went to the field thinking if we get him, we would be through. And so it was most of the times!

I would even rate Tendulkar as better than Brian Lara. The world can swoon over the records and mercurial ability of the West Indian but for me Tendulkar brings infinite value to the dressing room. You judge a man by the respect he gets within his own set of men. Tendulkar is beyond reproach on this issue;Lara would only set the tongues wagging"

@Bah
you are unfortunately full of hot air.
"repeating" stats which suit you -exactly like the other pakis in here.
what about the other stats,what about the context behind the stats...why dont you actually read some comments in here?
Tendulkar is "daylight" ahead of Lara.
Its just since 2000/01 because and only because of tendulkars injuries that lara has pulled even.

@bah,terry etc.
Do you ppl actually watch cricket or simply sit on your computers extracting data?
Do you think tendulkars injuries were imagined.
Have you read any of the posts above?
What about the 2 greatest FAST bowlers of the generation(mcgrath was medium pace) DONALD and AKRAM who go for tendulkar as way above lara?
If you take ALL factors of batting(NOT whatever suits you)....technique,ability against all bowling,all forms of the game,all surfaces,away and home,durability,etc etc and put them in a box and squeeze...the only batsman to meet all requirements would be tendulkar.
Lara is the most overrated batsman of the generation and good against flat tracks and spinners/medium pacers.
Put him against genuine pace on a fast track and thats the end of him.
The only ppl who would go for lara are the naturally antitendulkar pakis,and a few wi and ind fans.
Tendulkar is by far and away the best...no question.

@vimalan
Vimalan pls read "buz'"s comment above.
As he mentions Tendulkar will never be 100% perfect. As Viv Richards mentions "he is 99.5% perfect".....so these chaps will go on about the 0.5%.
So why bother.
Dont you get it? They dont WANT to see the full story! It doesnt suit clowns like terry,bah etc.
Infact "Bah Humbug" has chosen such a perfect nick. He even avoids the reality of his own name and all his posts are effectively bah humbug.....so deep inside he knows that tendulkar is the best but as so many ppl have mentioned "are neighbours would rather shoot themselves in the foot than admit sachin is the best"!!!!!

@Vimalan
Very true.
Lara was a flat track bully who feasted on spin and medium pace.
Most overrated batsman of the era,and actually he would have fitted in only in this era.
Tendulkar is a batsman for the ages,for any era.
If lara had played a few years back he too,like us,would have been watching Tendulkar bat on TV.
Only thing is Lara would have been watching from a hospitable bed.

@ VIM...i would listen to anything Wasim had to say as i judge him and MMarshall as the greatest ever, but Mcgrath, warne and murli are the greatest over the time Lara and tendulkar have played. And again you make points about personallty like that is some kind of judge of batting.. YES tendulkar is a fine and upstanding man , and YES lara has been a in the spotlight 4 his personal life and decsions, but we're talking about batting here, just batting. Wasim said viv (his hero) and sunny, yep SUNNY were the best with ten.
I love wasim but no-one but no-one should rate sunny in the same breath as Lara. anything else?

BOTTOMLINE:
As so many people have put it so tactfully:
You dont expect our beloved neighbours to go "sachin,sachin"! do you...they would rather shoot themselves in the foot.

@ Vimalan.....15 times is a lot of times to be dimissed by the same bowler, but i'd bet McGrath would hardly call Lara his bunny...226,122,110,182,100, 153*, 213, 132 were all scored against Australia when McGrath played! Often Lara had to face McGrath with the new ball as Windies openers didnt last long, hence so many dismissals like Atherton, or stewart, or campbell.
and another thing about the 15 dismissals, they came in 24 matches. Tendulkar was taken 6 times in only nine matches, an 0.10 difference in dismissals per matches!!!
p.s. i'll think ur find that Lara averages better than tendulkar against GM - 41 compared 22!

@terry,vimalan

Terry ,sad thing is not ONLY do you pick and chose whatever stats suit your blinkered argument ...you dont even know how to see the context behind them.

Stupid statements like your".01" etc reveal a pure accountant mentality NOT a sporting or cricket mentality.
With Tendulkar,If injury free like Lara ,he would have handled Mcgrath better the more he faced him. The sign of getting the "hang" of the bowler which any top batsman is expected to do.
Secondly, the average you mention is from statsguru which only mentions the average in innings where the bowler has got the batsman out.
SO if say tendulkar scored a 100 ,but was out to another bowler than mcgrath,it will not show up against mcgraths average.since mcgrath has got lara 15 times and of course lara has scored runs in the same matches his avg.may be more in the database. get it?
SO not only do you chose stats selectively,you dont even know how the relevant database works!

To sheet and all the other sad sacks out there: Guys, give it up. You will obviously never be convinced that Tendulkar lives in Lara's shadow. The rest of the world knows otherwise. Raw, unadulterated statistics seem to be against Tendulkar because the poor soft boy has gone and hurt his poor ickle arm. Boo-hoo. Maybe he shouldn't have played so many ODI's, then.
First McGrath is quoted, then recanted when his quotes go the wrong way. You fellows seem to need a hero to make your lives seem less hopeless, and have decided that Tendulkar will save you from yourselves. doubtless all that pressure took its toll on him. Have you people even considered that perhaps it is YOUR fault that he was injured, trying to please YOU!!
Had he been freer to play as he liked , then maybe his talent would have been more unfettered, and the REST OF THE WORLD would agree with your opinions.
By the way, just to burst Sheet's bubble, No, i'm not your "neighbour". I post from the UK. Oops!!

@Salim
there you go man..You denounce the judgment of a man who has played the game for more than 15 years, who has bowled against almost all top order batsmen in his career, who is considered as one of the top bowlers of all time and who is definitely greater than Mcgrath, just because he didn't rate Lara as the best..haha what a joke man..If a bowler of the caliber of Akram tells Sunny as one of the best batsmen better than Lara, he means it and we certainly believe he has more credentials than you to judge a batsman..wont he? if you still want to live in your own world, then can't help you..

@Salim

If you still have doubts, read below what Allan Donald who was certainly one of the best fast bowlers of 90s, says in 2007
"In my era, I think he is the best player I have ever had the pleasure of playing against. He is something special, very freakish, and I think that what he has done for the game and his country has been absolutely phenomenal"

This was Donald in 2001
"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."

@Salim
I can go on and on and still you seem to be adamant that you are a better judge than esteemed people like Don Bradman, Benaud, Sunny, Richards, Lara himself, Akram, Donald, Warne, Lee, S Waugh, Ponting and so many people..if you still want to live in your own world, all the best to you

@ VIM.... deep down you all know Lara was more special if not so consistent. Tendulkar can/will only dream of the knocks Lara made. p.s. Bradman never scored 500 0r 400 in a test did he, let alone richards, sunny, ponting, etc? By that definition Lara IS in a league of his own.

@vimalan,bah

spot on vimalan.
Bah is definitely basically from you know where,although he lives elsewhere!!
as for rest of the world where do you think all these ppl and more are from?:
"woodcock,bradman,benaud,steve and mark waugh,atapatu,jayasuriya,inzamam,gavaskar,ponting,boycott,harvey,roebuck,crowe,brian lara,richards,barry,greg,mark taylor,greig,coward,fletcher "

to name just a few.
ROFL. God im gonna die laughing at the paucity of logic from these clowns.lolll

Vimalan, tell me when did sir Don told Sachin is the best batsman in the world. He clearly named Sachin and Lara as the two batsman and said batting of Sachin reminded him of himself. And Brian Lara when he said those words about Sachin, it shows how modest and down to earth person he is. And do you expect when people ask him "whom do you think is better , you or sachin?", he will go bragging about himself.

Geinus of Brian lara is most of his hundred has come when the chips were down. He also batted wonderfully when he was captain of westindies where as Sachin's batting succumed to the pressure of Captaincy.

Lara isnt half consistent as Sachin Haha Vimalan where did you or Donald got this fact from.
Sachin 39 100's and 49 Fiftees in 147 test
Lara 34 100's and 48 fiftees in 131 test. Add to that 9 of lara's hundreds are double hundred, one of which is triple hundred and one is quadruple.

To Mr. Jonathan and everyone else who is striking down Lara in favor of Tendulkar.Don't get me wrong Tendulkar is one of the premiere batsman ever,arguably the greatest but when asked to shane Warne,muralitharan,alec stewart along with many others have claimed lara to be the best player to have faced in their history as a cricketer.Lara is the only player to score a quadruple century,the leading all-time test run scorer,the only player to reclaim the test record along with many other significant records.Tendulkar only has the most test 100's to me which is great but Lara is truly king.Now many of you claim that his 400* was selfish but in contrary he stated that he did this for the people of the caribbean.West indies cricket has been spiralling down hill for some years now (you will agree) and all we had was Lara and his records at that point in time.We really needed something like this to keep our faith alive in our team. I hope you don't take my comments to heart.We love our cricket.

to Jonathan you are seriously misconcepted with love of Tendulkar in comparison to Lara.I don't think your argument holds water just because the "White Lightning" berates lara.Donald was a fine bowler but greater has praised Lara and has rated him the greatest they have ever face.McGrath is one of these, murali',Warne along with many others and Lara was never injury free.In Shri Lanka after amassing 688 runs in 2 tests he suffered a broken elbow and was out of the game for 18 months.It took Joey Carew,garfield Sobers and mant others olong with a new batting stance to get back to fitness and in the following year against england scored the 400* record.Get the facts straight.

thank you terry for sticking it to these guys.Even if you check tendulkar's avg. against the windies he averages in the low thirties when lara against india avg. in the 40's.lara has more test runs in his career than tendulkar in fewer matches but I say to everyone cherish the few moments you will see tendulkar on the field from now on.he is the twilight of his career,lara has gone and we do not know when we will see players of their syle,class,flare and sheer brilliance so let's just be thankful we can say to our children yes I saw lara break the record twice or see tendulkar score the greatest run aggregate in cricket history.They both are the greatest to have ever played the game.

@bah

You know ,i somewhat actually agree with your last post!
It is the fans with their unrealistic expectations which are partly to blame for wearing out tend.failure simply wasnt allowed to tend unlike other mortals.
The loudest noise possible with a raucous 100,000 crowd at the eden gardens would turn to almost pindrop silence if tend was out!!
No sportsman ever has had such an effect. totally unreal.
So without doubt stupid expectations have worn away tend,and perhaps contributed to serious injuries and surgeries.
But while the cause is debatable the FACT of the injuries is NOT.
ANY observer of the game would have noted the HUGE difference of the tend in the nineties and thereafter.
Further most of the stats you give include lara's in the last few yrs of his career.
did you know PONTING has scored 20! centuries and averaged 68! since 2002?!!

Undoubtedly batting has been easier but tend has been unable to cash in on the run glut.
2000s lara.90s tho tend was the best.

Sigh.... I tire of this endless to-ing and fro-ing.Lets just say that Tendulkar was like an efficient, well-oiled machine capable of printing out endless replicas of textbook cricket, while Lara was the tortured Van Gogh, just as likely to harm himself (mentally, in this case) as to create "Sunflowers".
Which would you remember in a century, the printing machine or the painter?
(I'm trying another tack, since statistics seem to always lie against Tendulkar, viz. L-11953 runs in 16 yrs vs T-11782 in 19 yrs, L-232 innings vs T-238, High Score L-400 vs T-248).
And even though I'm not Pakistani, why do you maniacs seem to think that if you label someone by their place of origin,that would necessarily weaken their arguments against yours?
Are you really that insecure that you necessarily feel that because YOUR "logic" is tainted by hatred of the alternative,everyone else is doing the same? Nope.
(For me, Sehwag's 318 was more true to his nature, than any of Tendulkar's was to his.)

@bah
Finally you perhaps yourself realise what you are talking...though I doubt it.
This may sound strange to you given your obviously limited knowledge of cricket but it could be argued that Lara was more traditional than ten.
Except for the very high backlift, though Sobers too and others had high backlifts (so that makes him like van gogh! lol), the rest was quite traditional.
Tendulkar has almost reinvented the game...how many so called "printing press" classical batsman have you seen hitting punched backfoot drives past the bowler or through covers(none? including Lara).Try doing it against pace ,the ball will inevitably squirt off the bat to the square region. This is why Lara was forever cutting. It much easier and requires much less pure skill.

Tendulkar in fact has played the game more his “own way” than Lara. His style of minimal effort, sighting the ball early and only then committing to either back of front foot with a single decisive movement is revolutionary.
ALL batsmen, without exception, have several trigger movements.

So, tendulkar has taken all the classical and text book elements and then added his fabulous genius to produce arguably the most UNIQUE batsman ever.
Lara is very very very much like Sobers and his ilk.

Also, though this may sound strange to you tendulkar has a far greater range of shots than Lara.
Lara though like any great batsman had a wide range of shots but heavily favoured the cut shot.
To me infact, any tendulkar shot, had much more class than any Lara shot.
Only and only on the cut can Lara claim to be the equal of, or better than tendulkar.
Lara simply cannot play many shots that tendulkar can play with almost casual ease.
Coupled with Tendulkars almost disdainful ease against extreme pace bowling when at his peak......
Lara was great for the gallery: a formula one racing around at full throttle.
But tendulkar was one for both the gallery and the cognoscenti…..infinite subtle skill coupled with brute power.
Just because he could cause the ball to race to the boundary ,much faster and with less effort and windmilling of the limbs than Lara, does not make him any less watchable.
In fact many cricket experts would put tendulkar as the van Gogh and Lara as the printing press.

@nick,
When you say Sachin has a greater array of Stokes than lara, and Lara is only comparable to him in cut shot is very laughable. And of course for a neutral like me Brian Lara is more pleasing to the eye than Tendulkar because there are many players like Dravid, Kallis who plays an orthodox strokes like tendulkar. Lara is unorthodox and have a greater range of strokes. Plus lara is better six hitter and dictates the proceedings. I remember Lara scoring 28 runs in the second last over of the day of test match. Most of the average player would have been looking to see off the day. But not lara. Lara also equalled world record of Hayden with a six.
And two top bowlers Murali and McGrath of their generation have already named Lara as the better batsman. Sachin has a pathetic average of 26 when McGrath is playing a test match. And even shane warne who may have said Sachin is better but he probably forgot that it is because of Lara in 1999 that Shane warne was contemplating Retirement

@flower_brothers
I’m afraid you are dead wrong.

As rgds the avg.against McGrath pls read my above post. You ppl don’t even know how the databases work. As mentioned if tendulkar gets a hundred with McGrath in the attack but someone else gets him out the runs against McGrath aren’t counted.

I fully agree with "nick".
Have you ever watched SOBERS or say ROY FREDERICKS bat??
Please do, they are EXTREMELY similar to Lara. Infact there is nothing unique about Lara ,although in a way you are correct in that he has remained true to his Caribbean roots and maintained an all out attack style.

As mentioned Sachin is a completely unique batsman.
This is quite true.
If you go to your local club coach, he isn’t going to teach you anything remotely like Tendukar’s style….although he probably would the other batsmen you mention Kallis, Dravid and even Lara. In fact Sobers worked with Lara to reduce his backlift to improve his batting.

Your batting coach will tell you how to hold the bat correctly, the correct weight of the bat for you, how to get your feet to the pitch of the ball, the importance of a good backlift and followthrough etc etc.
Sachin has virtually turned all this on its head.
Footwork as he uses it is only to maintain his perfect balance, which is arguably better than any batsman ever, not little steps to necessarily get to the exact pitch.
The grip is all wrong, too much at the bottom and too much use of the bottom hand.
The strokes ,not only the backfoot punches down the ground, but straight bat paddle sweeps and controlled glides over slips, flicks to midwicket off a ball outside off,etc etc are not to be found in any text book….
Or indeed more classical and conventional batsmen, including Lara simply cannot play these shots.
Agreed, murali and McGrath may root for Lara, but then warne, akram, Donald go for sachin. However, when you ask the batsman they are in overwhelming favour of sachin.

Further like “Bah Humbug” when you say someone is like a "van Gogh" the first and most important criteria is that you must know something about art in the first place.
For eg. To the general observer there may not be much difference between an avg. artist and van Gogh. Indeed the observer may prefer the avg .painter because his works may be more “loud” or gaudy.
So it takes good knowledge about an art to classify a work in the first place.
As many ppl have said it takes talent to recognise genius.
Which is why when practically every great batsman that ever lived roots for Tendulkar, it cannot be so easily dismissed as you are attempting to do.

Tendulkar has spawned tonnes of imitators including Sehwag.
Dhoni recently said that he tried hard to copy sachin's style but when he finally saw himself batting on tape he saw the difference.

Many ,many batsmen have batted like Lara and many more will. We will get many more Laras in the future.

But we will never get another Sachin.
He is a complete one off.

@ NIck.........tendulakr has more shots than lara????????????????? thats just no true . BOTH players had ALL the shots. Lara was the most excellent sweeper ive ever seen and the best at using his feet to get the pitch of the ball against spinners (hence the 2nd most sixes in history).

And perhaps the most telling fact of all that NO tendulkar fan has answered during this blog debate.
IF TENDULKAR IS/WAS SUPERIOR TO LARA WHY HAS HE LESS RUNS THAN LARA HAVING PLAYED MORE INNINGS?
Surely if you have more runs than someone else having played less you have been more successful!?

@flower and co.

Please let me recap your logic:
1)First you attempt to use stats to beef up your point. But as several ppl above have mentioned you don't even know how to use the stats in programmes such as statsguru.
2)You use stats out of context. If you intentionally and knowingly put forward stats comparing a fit thoroughbred to an injured one...it reveals a lot about your mentality.
3)Shane Warne was mauled right on his debut by a 19r old Tendulkar.So he should have contemplated retirement right then,correct?
I mean,of course,spinners are never hammered are they?
Or every time they are hammered,they simply retire.
4)If you are so enamoured by the "sixes" and "oooh so attacking" stuff I am sure Sehwag would be your favourite even over Lara,right?

There are several points but it is a waste of time with the complete abandonment of logic on your part, as "buz" above has mentioned.

@flower
Well, flower, to a certain extent I agree with you.
Lara has been more exciting during the last leg of his career.
However, it is true that Lara is not some original….his batting style and all out aggression and flamboyance is very true to the Caribbean culture of batting.

Tendulkar, on the other hand, has turned traditional Mumbai batsmanship on its head.
Not only with his completely unique style but with his aggressive intent where he took the attack to the bowlers.
Since injuries ravaged him, however, he has certainly not been the force he used to be or managed to put “fear” into the bowlers as Lara managed to do.

Since the back injury in ‘98/99, and lay off and lengthy treatments, he first cut out the lofted strokes because his body simply couldn’t take it.
And, as you know you can’t hit too many sixes without lofting the ball, can you?
Then further injuries caused him to cut out the hook, and pull (he was a viciously powerful puller).
At one point he even cut out his patented straight drive, because of the load on the shoulders,hand,elbow.
He was actually reduced to deflections square of the wicket!! Needless to say since he was then forever playing across the line, the rate of his getting out shot up.

As people have mentioned earlier the 2000s were “party time” for batsmen. Ponting has got 20 hundreds and averaged 68 since 2002. No one would place ponting as that superior to tendulkar. So if Tendulkar had stayed fit the mind boggles at what his aggregate would have been.
However, I find it simply incredible that inspite of everything he has still practically managed to pull even with Lara in test runs.
From an attacking batsman, circumstances have definitely reduced him to more of an accumulator, a batsman who has cut out many of his strokes, but even then he has managed to score!!!
Lara never had to change his batting style throughout his career.
Can you imagine Lara, body broken down, nudging the ball either side square of the wicket and accumulating runs?
Lara with his flamboyance and extravagant strokes always batted in top gear.
Tendulkar, on the other hand could do practically anything, as he has proved.
Perhaps, even the anti tendulkar folks, will years down the line appreciate his rare and unique genius.

Here people who don't even know how to use statsguru come up with statistics to prove their point..poor people

@Ranjin
Sachin averages 57.73 vs Windies and Lara averages 34.55 vs India..we already completed all these statistical analysis, so pls don't try to act smart here..Also you mentioned few people Mcgrath, Murali and Alec Stewert whom you think said Lara is greater..I listed Don Bradman, Benaud, Sunny, Richards, Lara himself, Akram, Donald, Warne, Lee, S Waugh, Ponting and so many people who rate Sachin as the best..which one is better ?

@no_quiero
Don indeed rated Sachin better than Lara when he included only Sachin from modern players ahead of Lara and others in his all time playing XI just before his death..search in google for Bradman's XI and you'll know the answer

@flower_brothers
don't give wrong info if you don't know how to use statsguru..Sachin has an average of 36.77 when playing against Mcgrath in the team..he never had the luxury like Lara to play in a full series against Mcgrath..he has played only two full series that too of only 3 test matches and he averaged 46.33 and 50.66 respectively. Do you want to know how much Lara averaged when playing against Donald, Akram, Waqar Younis, and other top bowlers? Do you know what the great Akram or Donald said about Sachin? pls read the posts above.

Mr.Flower...considering your screen name ,either you are ashamed of your name or have some unnatural tendencies.
Further, given the drivel you have spouted it is amply evident that you are either blissfully unaware of actual cricket or cricket history and yesteryear players,or you are more of an "accountant" type like your other friends in here.
Perhaps ,for reasons best known to you,you may not agree to my earlier post.
But, as so many persons have mentioned im not the only one. The vast majority of cricket experts and players ,INCLUDING Lara,vouch for Tendulkar.
So,perhaps like one "salim" in here ,you will start denigrating everyone from Benaud,Woodcock,Bradman down to Ponting,Waugh,Donald,Akram etc etc becuase all state tendulkar is the best?
Perhaps you ppl are in the wrong blog.

Vimalan. Don't try to deceive others. How many test have Sachin played when Wasim, Waqar were really on top of their career. Waqar was not only even his shadow of early 90's when he played against sachin in 1999, and Wasim wasn't good bowler but wasn't as good as he was in early ninetees.

good point by all you ppl.

I guess tendulkar made the difficult look so simple.For eg.playing those punched drives "on the up" off fast bowling with effortless ease and almost yawning at the same time!
which is why ppl perhaps tend to think of tendulkar as conventional.

while lara ,with his laboured,hyper and over exaggerated style made even the smallest thing look difficult.

Well, we all know where greatness lies dont we?

@ all cricket fans....is anyone going to answer 'Salim's' question or not!!!????
"IF TENDULKAR IS/WAS SUPERIOR TO LARA WHY HAS HE LESS RUNS THAN LARA HAVING PLAYED MORE INNINGS?
Surely if you have more runs than someone else having played less you have been more successful!?" how do we explain that simple fact?

I remember there was one poll among Australian players about who is the most dangerous batsman in the world. An overwhelming 53% said Brian Lara.

Most of the Sachin's record are based on accumulation over the test career of almost 20 years. If Lara would have played similar number of matches he may end up with similar runs and Centuries. So how to measure the greatness.

So I believe Sachin's record doesnot bring as much awe as Lara . A batsman who has world record of scoring over 350 runs in a test match not even once or twice but thrice, who can hit 28 runs, 26 runs in an over, who has scored over 20 percent runs of his team over all which i believe is only second to Bradman. SACHIN CANNOT GURANTEE OF BEATING THESE RECORDS EVEN AFTER PLAYING MILLION YEARS. However, you can defintely gurantee if lara would have played for few more years he would have beaten the records of Sachin. Thats where the difference lies.

@ Ali, Nick, Vim etc HA !
My last blog posted on monday 19th was conviently ignored so ill ask again.'IF TENDULKAR IS/WAS SUPERIOR TO LARA WHY HAS HE LESS RUNS THAN LARA HAVING PLAYED MORE INNINGS?
Surely if you have more runs than someone else having played less you have been more successful!?

Actually it is not just Sobers and Roy Fredericks but also several other batsmen like Alvin Kallicharan who all preceded Lara and whose style Lara has so obviously copied and adopted.

Lara has essentially one record left,the high score. The max runs an over will go shortly and so will the max test runs.
He will then go down as another in a long string of flamboyant lefty west indian batsman.
Lara is essentially a continuation of a legacy.

Tendulkar is a legacy all of his own.

i re-read many of the blogs on this page posted over the last month my favourite is this by 'ASHISH'Posted by: ashish on 04/18/2008

@ The Tendulkar Fans.
I hear the word 'Superior' used
far to often in these blogs. When you
say superior what do you actually mean???

Superior looking batsman?

Superior batting?

Superior results?

Superior stats?

Have you heard that song, 'you say
toMATEo, i say toMATo, you say poTATEo
i say poTATo'.

Tendulkar fans talk about his averages being higher
than Lara's and hence he is better.
Lara fans see 25 not outs inflating that very same avg.

Lara fans talk about 400* 375* 277 and see record breaking
feats of genius.
Tendulkar fans see selfesh batting, rubbish bowling and friendly
batting tracks.

Tendulkar fans talk about his 39 tons, Lara fans see 6 against
Zim and Bang.

Lara fans talk about his 153*, Tendulakr fans talk about his 136.

Tendulakr fans talk about his great consistency and Lara's failures.
Lara fans note that he actually has scored more runs per match and
per inning.

Tendulkar fans talk about the St Johns wicket, Lara fans talk about
all sub-continent wickets.

Tendulkar fans talk about his silky txt-book batting style and Lara's
dodgy technique, Lara Fans see flair, and unorthodox west indian batting.

Tendulkar fans talk about how Bradman liked himself (technique) to Tendulkar
as thus Tendulkar fans believe he's the best since DON.

Don was a hundred making machine (29), but remember 41% of those were doubles.
Tendulkar's percentage of doubles out of his tons total is 10%.
Lara percentage is 26%. Far more Bradmanesqe.

In fact Sri Lankan duo Sangakkara and Atapattu scored 6 doubles out of only
16 tons overall! thats a whooping 37%

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Both have 'superior' stats and aspects to their game, it's
all about perception and opinion.

@salim
Well salim, as so many ppl have said if you knowingly and willing insist on using stats to compare an injured,limp horse to a fit one that says more about your MENTALITY than it does about any batting prowess doesnt it?

If we were talking about some sport which we have not seen or are not much aware of,say icehockey and you came up with a question that so and so has scored more goals in less games may be someone would have even BOTHERED to listen.

But ppl in here are EXPECTED to know at least something about cricket ,and in particular batting and tend and laras careers.

So,if you knowingly take a particular stat, even after so many many have shown ones "pre injuries", it just shows that you indeed have no argument whatsoever but reveal a very shallow and egoistic mentality.

And you havent answered a more pertinent question. why do practically ALL the greats ,INCLUDING lara, say tend is the best?

"the best ive seen or played against"..lara -he has even seen viv.

@terry,salim.
well,sehwag has got more runs in less innings that lara at the same stage of his career.
more hundreds,higher strikerate,more sixes etc.
so obviously,as per your profound cricket knowledge sehwag is the better batsman right?

Also you seem to forget that tendulkar remained not out 25 times as compared to laras 6.
so it seems that now you claim that lara is a better batsman BECAUSE he gets out more times than T'kar.

of course, because it doesnt suit you ,you have simply ignored tendulkars injuries. can any unbiased cricket observer be so stupid?
The amazing thing is EVEN with all the injuries, if those 19 EXTRA not outs are taken into account he would STILL have got the few hundred runs more.

but it amazes me,that the problem here is that no one even vaguely familiar with cricket is taking
your nonsense seriously...but the sad thing is you are trying to fool yourselves!! that is the lowest point of man.
Lara has said clearly that t'kar is the best.why?

To terry, salim.
Seriously guys are you joking or are you for real?
Several ppl have answered your incredibly lop sided and myopic question.
If you even bother to read above you will see:
1) Injuries are the sole cause of Lara outscoring tendulkar. Just as an example, in 2003 tendulkar scored 153 runs!! To Laras 1344! This was purely and solely due to tendulkars injuries. Surely even the tendulkar haters like yourself realize he could have easily scored a few hundred runs if injury free? Then what?
2) Tendulkar has some 20 NOT OUTS more than Lara. So if you take even a LOWER career avg. of even 50 he would STILL have many more runs than Lara. I find it absolutely amazing that after spewing so many silly stats you conveniently chose to remain ignorant of the basic ones.
3) Lara’s career is OVER. Tendulkar could well be still at the ¾ stage and may well play some 50 tests more. So he is still quite far from finished.
4) Sehwag has better stats than Lara in practically all the parameters you mention and he is more attacking and hit more sixes etc. So, using your OWN logic, not anyone else’s Sehwag is OBVIOUSLY THE BETTER batsman, right???!!!

I hope the realization of your own stupidity will hit you in the face.

So , inspite of attempting to intentionally ignore the above ,including injuries and not outs , the fact that you still go on ,reveals that as someone mentioned that you don’t actually WANT to listen to anyone else but your childish biased views. So though your questions have been answered ALL so called Lara fans (actually I am one too, but I simply think Tendulkar was the better batsman (and is, remember his career is not over)) have NOT BEEN ABLE TO ANSWER ALMOST ANY OF THE ABOVE QUESTIONS of which on of the main ones is:
Why do practically all the great players and old observers of the game from almost 60yrs back starting from Benaud,woodcock,bradman….all the way down to the modern giants Waugh,ponting and Lara vote for tendulkar as the best batsman not only of the era but the best THEY HAVE EVER SEEN??!!
Lara has categorically stated that sachin is a genius, pure genius, the best he’s ever seen etc etc.

So the VERY SIMPLE question being asked here is do all these great players and observers of the game (INCLUDING Lara) do know more about than the game than salim,terry and co .here.??
VERY SIMPLE QUESTION, RIGHT?

hey guys
arent you forgetting the ODIs?
Tendulkar has got 16000+ runs and 42 hundreds there too.
In tests,as you ppl have mentioned,its just the injuries that allowed lara to get a ahead a few runs, temporarily i may add.
As so many ppl mentioned the 2000s were "party time" for batsmen. Pity tendulkar was either injured or recovering most of the time to make hay as the others did....ponting,lara,kallis,dravid,etc etc all had an absolute ball.In fact for all this talk about lara being in a weak team, it actually helped him to go about scoring big scores. if he was playing earlier with a good team(good batsmen and top bowlers,like richards) then he like richards would have to score quick and declare the innings ,not keep on as long as he chose to.

I hope Tend plays for another 5 yrs and stays injury free.
And of course,Tendulkar is the greatest batsman of the modern generation.The only competition for greatest ever is bradman.
Lara himself has always been the first to say so.

@ peter,Rohington,nick and ali. forgive me but injuries have nothing to do with innings and runs scored. Are you suggesting that TEN was playing when he was injured or something? simple fact is lara scored more runs in less time, less matches and more importantly less innings. what has injuries got to do with that?????.as for ODI, Tendulkar is far far superior to lara, but as you all know im talking about test cricket. When people talk about Ten they think of the whole package, its hard to separate both formats from his aura as a batsmen..im comparing test careers not overall careers. if you take the whole picture tendulkar is ahead, no arguement here. But in tests Lara has the edge. As for people, pros, expros opinions you'd get just as many for each player, opinions are like bums, everybody has one. you cannot compare sehwag yet as he has played just a fraction of lara and tend. if he got to 232 innings and had more runs than lara then i would listen. When tendulklar reached 232 innnings(laras last) a few months back he had 4 more tons and 400 odd less runs. If u take into account lara's many records added on to his superior runs scoring in the same amout of time(innings) you must see that Lara WAS
more successful than tend over the period that he played 232 INNINGS.

Someone please remind me what Tendulkar said about Lara's batting.

@salim
salim are you dumb or simply cannot read?
of course ,how can you compare and injured batsman to a fit one...are u joking around here?

and what about the NOT OUTS????????????????

god help you.
I dont think anyone is going to ever take you seriously anymore

@salim and co.
Please read all the above again.
and do me a favour will you?
Please stop calling yourself a cricket fan.
You dont deserve it.

@salim,terry,hmm
Hmm,tendulkar has said that both warne and lara are “extremely natural players and gods gift to cricket”…both undoubtedly true and noone is denying it.
BUT Lara has OFTEN categorically and clearly stated that “sachin is a genius ,im a mere mortal” and that “sachin is the BEST ive ever SEEN or played against”
Please note a very important point here.
You may idolise someone without that person necessarily being the best.
Lara,and practically all the top batsmen categorise tendulkar as the best.

Salim ,terry….as SO many many ppl have mentioned …….how can you simply ignore the NOT OUTS because it doesn’t suit your blinkered view of the world?
Psychological problems?
Looks like.
Salim,if you can actually say something like “what have injuries got to do with it”?
I am afraid there is no one who will ever take you seriously anymore.

As mentioned if you take even a lower avg of say 50 for tendulkars 20 more NOT OUTS he would STILL inspite of the injuries and Lara being fit throughout ……..STILL have more runs.
SO, on what basis can you ignore NOT OUTS?

Further as many ppl have mentioned …….THE SIMPLE QUESTION .
DO "woodcock,bradman,benaud,steve and mark waugh,atapatu,jayasuriya,inzamam,gavaskar,ponting,boycott,harvey,roebuck,crowe,brian lara,richards,barry,greg,mark taylor,greig,coward,fletcher " AND LARA HIMSELF!!!!!!!!!
KNOW MORE ABOUT CRICKET THAN YOU????
I mean since you keep going on about how good Lara is ,surely he should be good enough to see greatness and genius in others right?
SIMPLEST POSSIBLE QUESTION.
As with any “greatest” debate in any sport you will get sides for either camp.
But when there is overwhelming support for tendulkar practically from woodcock (who remember has ALSO seen bradman) right down to the new boys…..on what basis can you even ATTEMPT to counter that with extremely puerile stuff ,he has scored more runs in less matches,without taking into account not outs,injuries,context etc etc???
Can you in all seriousness call your self a sports fan?

Sachin Tendulkar is without the slightest trace of doubt the greatest batsman ever.
Only Bradman comes into the picture and can compete.Bradman ,having seen all batsmen for the greater part of a century obviously felt the same.

If salim and co. are simply stuck with the runs,innings stats...without appropriate context,not outs,injuries etc Im afraid they are simply barking into the wind.

As several persons have mentioned,then by salim/terry's own logic sewhag is a far superior batsman to lara!!

Lara is undoubtedly a great batsman too.but he will be just another in a long legacy of dashing west indian batsmen.....Sobers,Fredericks,Kallicharan etc.
Tendulkar stands alone.
As most ppl(inc. practically all the old greats)know Tendulkar will probably go down as the greatest ever....probably even greater than bradman.

No batsman has done so much,for so long,in all formats,all over the world,against all bowling than tendulkar.
He is indeed the unparalled diamond among batsman.

While talking about one day record of Lara we should not forget he coming at batting postion of 4, 5, 6 very often. When Lara was batting at number 1, 2, 3 position he actually was fastest to score 3000, 4000, 5000 runs in one day cricket or somethign like that. Those who talk about tendulkar's injury should also consider lara's batting postion in one day cricket and also remember sachin playing majority of matches in subcontinent. I don't think sachin's record in one day in places like Australia, New Zealand or England is as great as it is in subcontinent.

If Lara has said some good things about Sachin then one should not forget Sachin has said Lara as being the finest player. Sachin could well have said I am the finest player. But like Lara he was modest and opted out by saying other one is the best.

@terry,edison
Edison,Tendulkar has a superior record away than at home,unlike Lara.
Further, as others have mentioned the fact that he was in fact in a relatively weak batting side actually helped him to be free to pile up big scores in his own time.
Unlike say Richards, who had to score big,and simply could not even entertain the thought of triples ,never mind batting on and on to simply achieve a four hundred.
With 3 or 4 other top batsman and a good bowling line up, the main batsman in the side has a completely different mindset than Lara . Even lara’s stats are superior to Richards……But if Viv had batted fit and injury free in the 2000s? with pure batting tracks and average bowling attacks?

Terry,Salim...I am afraid I agree with the others and that you seem to be losing the plot. I mean if you can really say things like injuries"don't matter", not outs "don't matter",the fact that tendulkars career is not over "doesn't matter" etc.....how do you expect anyone to really listen to you anymore?

In fact people are absolutely correct in saying that as per all your parameters which you deem required for batting excellence Sehwag comes out on top of Lara.
So ,is Sehwag then a better batsman than Lara?
So ,you see, just going on ad infinitum about some particular stat which may or may not happen to favour one player is meaningless.

As many persons know statistics without appropriate context do not have much meaning. As a rough example A.Border has several superior stats to V. Richards.
Statistics do serve as a rough base and guideline,but taking any one or even a few statistics out of numerous ones and hammering away at them without context and ignoring all other factors does not hold any value whatsoever to persons who are actually aware of that particular sport.
This may have an impression to persons who are unaware about the finer points of a sport,but since we are all commenting in here,it is assumed that we all have a reasonably good knowledge about the game.

Several persons have mentioned that practically all greats of the game say tendulkar is the best batsman ,not just of the age,but the best they have ever seen.
How on earth can you attempt to simply dismiss that with going on and on about just a couple of out of context stats ?

If you want the list of players who said Lara is better batsman than Sachin then it could be a long list as well.

Former Australian Captain has indirectly said Sachin is more like boycott in last 5-6 years and Lara is more like Viv Richards. He said Lara is better because sachin has failed to dominate the bowling attack regularly in last 5-6 years. He said guy like Geoffry Boycott will never give me a sleepless night. Two Indians Sanjay Manjrekar and Ravi shastri also named Lara as the better. Tony Greig had the similar view.

Former England Skipper Mike Atherton said Sachin has turned into a Comic Hero in last 4-5 years.

Australian spinner stuart Mcgill said "I have spoken to Daniel Vettori and (Sri Lanka's Muttiah) Muralitharan and they agree on that," He added, "He ( Tendulkar ) is certainly a huge challenge but if you speak to most of the spin bowlers around the world, Brian Lara is the one."

Late Bob woolmer reckoned Lara was number 1 and there is daylight.

I wonder which is better, "god's gift to cricket" or a "genius" ?
Search Cricinfo for "Greatest among his peers" for the official Wisden report. This is the only PANEL specifically asked that question, rather than random quotes of individuals. In other words they had to come to an agreed consensus.
Only the brave should read it though. Cowards need not apply.

"woodcock,bradman,benaud,steve and mark waugh,atapatu,jayasuriya,inzamam,gavaskar,ponting,boycott,harvey,roebuck,crowe,brian lara,richards,barry,greg,mark taylor,greig,coward,fletcher" etc etc etc etc

not to forget brian lara HIMSELF".........

TENDULKAR NO.1.

IF CRICKET IS A RELIGION,
SACHIN IS GOD!

Lara will go down as just another great batsman.
An all time great no doubt.
But Tendulkar will go down as the Greatest.

Im of this opinion. Tendulkar is the greatest OVERALL batsman ever.
By overall in mean tests and ODI combined. Of course the Don never
played ODI's so we'll never know on that front. He has excelled at
both forms of the game (not so sure about 20/20 yet) and by mid-
summer have the most runs in tests and ODI's.

'Jenner' believes Tendulakr is the greatest ever, and as i have stated
above i agree that he has been the most successful international player
ever. This is where it gets a bit tricky for me.

To say Tendulkar is the greatest TEST player ever is not so clear cut.
There as several players with greater averages and 1 player with more
runs. When he overtakes Brian Lara's 11953 in june/july(he needs 171 runs)
he would have played (given his runs per inning avg) about 9 more innings,
or if he scores 171 in one inning, 7 more innings.

So if we take 50 tests matches to be a significant amount to judge a player
we find that Bradman, Sutcliffe, Barrington, Ponting, Hammond, Sobers,kallis,
Yousef, Hobbs and Hutton all have better avgerages than Tendulkar.

Ok lets be even fairer, lets just take batsmen that have played 100 tests!
Both Kallis and Ponting have better averages than Tendulkar. In fact Ponting
scores a better inning/ton ratio than Tendulkar, so even Tendulkar's ton
record is underfire.

Without question Tendulkar is the most successful overal batsman ever,
but if we look at just his Test career there are others that challenge
him and surpass him in certain areas. As someone else has said before,
Tendulkar has played more matches and innings than Lara and
still doesnt hold the record for the most runs ever.

So excluding Bradman and only counting players that have played over
100 tests, 3 players can successfully challenge Tendulakr for best
modern test player. PONTING and KALLIS (through their averages and inning/ton ratio)
and Lara through his superior run/inning making and high score records.

I personally would put Lara 1st tendulkar 2nd and Ponting 3rd in modern test cricket.
I would place Tendulkar 1st V richards 2nd in cricket overall ever.

I got a tape of Sachin against Pakistan in the 2003 WC.
Just saw it again.
OOOOOhhhhhh!!!!!!
Lara cant even DREAM of batting like that against Akram,Waqar,Akhtar .....!!!

SACHIN RAMESH TENDULKAR:
"THE BEST THERE WAS,IS AND WILL BE": Shane Warne

Greig, Vaughn, Hooper, Botham, Pollock, Atherton, Srikkanth, Murali, Vettori, Sobers, Dravid, Kallis, Roebuck, McGrath, Shastri, Boycott, Vaas, Chappell(Greg), Kapil, Imran, etc,(I could go on for several pages) have all proclaimed Lara to be the pre-eminent batsman of his generation, not to mention the WISDEN review committee of Nov. 2006, who, when DIRECTLY asked to compare them, found Lara to be the "Greatest among his peers". Search Cricinfo's website for yourselves.
Not to mention TENDULKAR, who says that Lara is "God's gift to batting".
If you won't listen to the others, at least listen to him.

Highest wicket taking fast bowler of all time Glenn McGrath said Lara is the best.
Highest wicket taking spinner muralitharan said Lara is the best.
End of an argument.

@terry.........i c your point about ponting hes just about to score his 35 ton as i'm writing this blog. 1 more ton than lara having played 14 less matches and 37 less innings. Now he's only 5 tons behind Tendulkar having played 30 less test matches and 43 less innings. By Tendulkar fans criteria Ponting will soon have the most runs and most tons so he will be the best test player ever!!!???

@ricky
absolutely pure lies.
Ponting: sachins the best i have ever seen or played against
The so called wisden review has "4" players.Shastri, manjrekar, greig, ian.(sachins best friend greg chapels brother)
Since then Tony Greig has said "tendulkar is the greatest cricketer EVER"...not just of the generation.
ROebuck, Vaas, Boycot, Dravid....you along with salim also need psychological treatment!!lol
How can you lie to yourself?
At least be true to yourself. The above post is such that not only will ANYONE else but how can you yourself believe it?
Since you are obviously dreaming up things ,you have obviously realized deep down that tendulkar is the greatest otherwise why bother with lying?
"woodcock, bradman, benaud steve and mark waugh, atapatu, jayasuriya, inzamam, gavaskar, ponting, boycott, harvey, roebuck, crowe, brian lara, richards, barry, greg, mark taylor, greig, coward, fletcher" etc etc etc etc

not to forget brian lara HIMSELF".........

TENDULKAR NO.1.

@salim...ah ,now you see what i mean?
When you ask is ponting the greatest?
first you use stats to say lara is the best. Then you directly contradict the basis of your logic.You are Confused.
This is EXACTLY what others have been saying against using pure stats without CONTEXT.
Lara ,along with many others has piled up runs in the 2000s on batting friendly tracks against average runs. Sachin got left out of the “filling your boots fun” because of injuries.

@final verdict:
Mcgrath (medium pace- NOT fast bowler)

Greatest spinner of the generation (warne): best batsman :tendulkar
Even saqlain when asked (remember he invented the doosra before murali even thought of it): tendulkar is the best.
Greatest FAST bowler of the generation(akram(Donald also says the same)): best batsman:tendulkar
2nd best batsman of the generation(lara): says best batsman :tendulkar
3rd best batsman of the generation(ponting):best batsman:tendulkar
4th best batsman of the generation (Waugh):best batsman:tendulkar
Greatest and most experienced cricket observer ever(Benaud):best batsman :tendulkar
End of argument.