PDA

View Full Version : Sachin Tendulkar Tribute Thread



vijax
11-15-2013, 03:08 PM
The last we'll ever see of the Little Master, what an absolute champion of the game

http://media1.santabanta.com/full1/Cricket/Sachin%20Tendulkar/sachin-tendulkar-58a.jpg

TTexasTT
11-15-2013, 03:12 PM
negged

Antonio519
11-15-2013, 03:37 PM
Goat

bpatel82
11-15-2013, 03:54 PM
GOAT. Cricket will never be the same without him.

FMCMuscle
11-15-2013, 04:04 PM
http://www.scoopwhoop.com/uploads/image/821201312000020413348Meme3.gif

MajesticLion
11-15-2013, 04:15 PM
Tendulkar is greatness on a cricket pitch.


I still can't decide who's better between him and Brian Lara though. I've argued over that with friends for years.

vijax
11-15-2013, 04:22 PM
Tendulkar is greatness on a cricket pitch.


I still can't decide who's better between him and Brian Lara though. I've argued over that with friends for years.

For me its Tendulkar all the way, although you're right its a worthy debate. McGrath himself thought Lara was better which is interesting

Woogiefied
11-15-2013, 05:06 PM
Forgive my ignorance but why do they wear those Mickey Mouse gloves? Just protection?

jmiddleton96
11-15-2013, 05:20 PM
He will be missed. A true legend of the game.

bpatel82
11-15-2013, 06:15 PM
Tendulkar is greatness on a cricket pitch.


I still can't decide who's better between him and Brian Lara though. I've argued over that with friends for years.

There is no comparison between Lara and Tendulkar. Lara was great but Tendulkar is GOAT. And it's not even close.

sh0tcall3r
11-15-2013, 06:47 PM
There is no comparison between Lara and Tendulkar. Lara was great but Tendulkar is GOAT. And it's not even close.

Let me guess, you're Indian?

bpatel82
11-15-2013, 07:00 PM
Let me guess, you're Indian?

What does me being an Indian has to do with that?

sh0tcall3r
11-15-2013, 07:08 PM
What does me being an Indian has to do with that?

Obvious bias.

bpatel82
11-15-2013, 07:32 PM
Obvious bias.

Then aware us on why Lara is better than Tendulkar. Tendulkar is superior in almost all the batting (and even bowling) categories by a wide margin.

Name: Brian Lara Sachin Tendulkar
ODI Matches: 299 463
ODI Innings: 289 452
ODI Runs: 10,405 18,426
ODI 50s: 63 96
ODI Centuries: 19 49
ODI Double Centuries: 0 1
ODI Not Outs: 32 41
Highest score (ODI): 169 200 not out
Batting Avg (ODI): 40.48 44.83
Wickets (ODI): 4 159

Test Matches: 131 199
Test Innings: 232 328
Test Runs: 11,953 15,847
Test 50s: 48 67
Test Centuries: 34 51
Batting Avg (Tests): 52.88 53.71
Highest score (Tests): 400 not out 248 not out
Test Not Outs: 6 33

MajesticLion
11-15-2013, 08:22 PM
There is no comparison between Lara and Tendulkar. Lara was great but Tendulkar is GOAT. And it's not even close.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Lara#Records


See for yourself. Lara achieved things Tendulkar could only dream of. I'm not slighting him, just pointing out that there's a valid debate as to this GOAT title people toss around so easily. I haven't even mentioned Viv Richards or Gary Sobers because I may have my own bias there. Lara is beyond bias though, even die-hard opponents feared him.

bpatel82
11-15-2013, 08:46 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Lara#Records


See for yourself. Lara achieved things Tendulkar could only dream of. I'm not slighting him, just pointing out that there's a valid debate as to this GOAT title people toss around so easily. I haven't even mentioned Viv Richards or Gary Sobers because I may have my own bias there. Lara is beyond bias though, even die-hard opponents feared him.

lmao. I know what Lara has achieved. And it's nothing compared to Tendulkar. Look at these records that Tendulkar hold. Even Ponting and Kallis are better batsman than Lara. Only other batsman who can compare to Tendulkar is another GOAT sir Donald Bradman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achievements_of_Sachin_Tendulkar

Edit: Here is what other greats have to say about Tendulkar.

http://sachinandcritics.com/quotes_on_sachin.php

lil_pirie
11-15-2013, 11:18 PM
Rest easy GOAT

bloodhak
11-16-2013, 04:42 AM
It's close but Lara can dominate any attack and is fearless, never backs down from a challenge. Aussie always sledge him,I once recalled Hayden saying that lara would be out in first few overs he face, some how Lara over heard him in the slip and went on to score a century.another time ponting said something about Lara not in form, here scored a century n thank ponting later. Lara loves challenge n thrives on them. No doubt sachin has all the stats given he played longer than Lara but couldn't Lara had such stats if he play that long. The man is an entertainer at the best level...his shots making is an art..even dravid admits to love watching Lara bats....

WINDSOFCHANGE93
11-16-2013, 05:56 AM
Thank you Sachin for all the memories. India is proud of you.

http://static.sportskeeda.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/sachin-1107685.jpg

bpatel82
11-16-2013, 09:48 AM
Forgive my ignorance but why do they wear those Mickey Mouse gloves? Just protection?

Yes. Protection. The ball is made by cork covered in leather. It almost feels like a rock coming at you 85-95 mph from a fast bowler.

AmitabhBachchan
11-16-2013, 09:57 AM
all these ninja's cutting onions again. fuq man!

OKkqCBMFc_E

rbs12345
11-16-2013, 12:10 PM
For you cricket fans, can you explain one thing to me?

I've seen it mentioned many times Sir Donald Bradman is the best cricket player to ever live, but is the batting average in cricket the same as in baseball? I know he has a .994 career average, so is that calculated the same way a .994 batting average would be in baseball? That looks like it's too good to be true............

I have a hard time believing that he can have a .994 average while people are talking about how good this Sachin guy is whose average isn't even close to that.......

Sb1995
11-16-2013, 01:16 PM
My name is also Sachin, my father named me after him, yes I am Indian. We will miss you little master :(

sdballer5588
11-16-2013, 01:18 PM
Dude was hilarious in white castle

bpatel82
11-16-2013, 01:36 PM
For you cricket fans, can you explain one thing to me?

I've seen it mentioned many times Sir Donald Bradman is the best cricket player to ever live, but is the batting average in cricket the same as in baseball? I know he has a .994 career average, so is that calculated the same way a .994 batting average would be in baseball? That looks like it's too good to be true............

I have a hard time believing that he can have a .994 average while people are talking about how good this Sachin guy is whose average isn't even close to that.......

Donald Bradman's Test average is 99.94. That means he scored 99.94 runs on average before getting out. That's almost scoring a century whenever he came to the crease. It's a pretty significant record.

rbs12345
11-16-2013, 01:59 PM
Donald Bradman's Test average is 99.94. That means he scored 99.94 runs on average before getting out. That's almost scoring a century whenever he came to the crease. It's a pretty significant record.

Oh, alright, so that doesn't mean he's getting a "hit" 994/1000 times then, right? That's how I took it. Can you score multiple runs per hit?

efoi
11-16-2013, 02:05 PM
the GOAT

jimbob007
11-16-2013, 02:05 PM
Lara probably had more of a genius about his play & would be more likely to make mammoth scores-but he was also an egomaniac who mostly played purely for himself rather than the team & was the worst captain I have ever seen. Tendulkar like Atherton wanted India to do well over personal records.

y_tqz7NeqLQ

jimbob007
11-16-2013, 02:10 PM
For you cricket fans, can you explain one thing to me?

I've seen it mentioned many times Sir Donald Bradman is the best cricket player to ever live, but is the batting average in cricket the same as in baseball? I know he has a .994 career average, so is that calculated the same way a .994 batting average would be in baseball? That looks like it's too good to be true............

I have a hard time believing that he can have a .994 average while people are talking about how good this Sachin guy is whose average isn't even close to that.......

Bradman was a one-off, he averaged 99.94 runs per innings-although there was not the variety of attacks Tendulkar faced, although he did bat on uncovered wickets which were far harder to bat on than what the modern players do, but by the same token he didn't have to face the likes of Warne, McGrath Murali, Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose Walsh etc.

rbs12345
11-16-2013, 02:18 PM
Bradman was a one-off, he averaged 99.94 runs per innings-although there was not the variety of attacks Tendulkar faced, although he did bat on uncovered wickets which were far harder to bat on than what the modern players do, but by the same token he didn't have to face the likes of Warne, McGrath Murali, Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose Walsh etc.

I don't follow cricket, so I'll say this respectfully, but can you explain the following in English to me?

1. The 99.94 is not a .994 batting average, meaning he didn't get hits for 994/1,000 at bats, correct? That was what was confusing me mostly.

2. Can a player score more than one run per at bat or per inning? How is he getting 99.94 runs/inning?

bpatel82
11-16-2013, 03:05 PM
Oh, alright, so that doesn't mean he's getting a "hit" 994/1000 times then, right? That's how I took it. Can you score multiple runs per hit?
Stop comparing baseball stat to cricket. There is no such stat as "hit". If you define a "hit" by a bat making a contact with a ball then, you can score multiple runs per hit. Or a barsman can choose not to do anything and stand there and face another delivery after a hit.

jimbob007
11-16-2013, 03:06 PM
I don't follow cricket, so I'll say this respectfully, but can you explain the following in English to me?

1. The 99.94 is not a .994 batting average, meaning he didn't get hits for 994/1,000 at bats, correct? That was what was confusing me mostly.

2. Can a player score more than one run per at bat or per inning? How is he getting 99.94 runs/inning?

Ah I see what you are saying-the equivalent in Cricket is strike rate-which is how many runs you make per 100 balls-estimates are that Bradman scored at aound 60 runs per 100 deliveries faced.

A batsman can score anywhere between 1 & 6 runs every ball he faces-if he hits it to the rope it is 4 runs, if he clears the rope it is 6 runs, although if the bowler bowls a no ball for instance & the batsman clears the rope a run is added for the no ball-so it would be seven. So if the over of 6 balls is bowled without wides or no balls then the maximum a batsman can score from it is 36 runs.

_rVyqoR-yhM

bpatel82
11-16-2013, 03:34 PM
Ah I see what you are saying-the equivalent in Cricket is strike rate-which is how many runs you make per 100 balls-estimates are that Bradman scored at aound 60 runs per 100 deliveries faced.

A batsman can score anywhere between 1 & 6 runs every ball he faces-if he hits it to the rope it is 4 runs, if he clears the rope it is 6 runs, although if the bowler bowls a no ball for instance & the batsman clears the rope a run is added for the no ball-so it would be seven. So if the over of 6 balls is bowled without wides or no balls then the maximum a batsman can score from it is 36 runs.


Or there might be an overthrow in which you could possibly score more than 7!

jimbob007
11-16-2013, 11:32 PM
Or there might be an overthrow in which you could possibly score more than 7!

I have never seen a shy at the stumps that went for six. I suppose that a no ball hit for three & then a throw from near the boundary that misses the stumps & goes for four overthrows-but that is virtually impossible.

Berries1
11-17-2013, 02:43 AM
Bradman was a one-off, he averaged 99.94 runs per innings-although there was not the variety of attacks Tendulkar faced, although he did bat on uncovered wickets which were far harder to bat on than what the modern players do, but by the same token he didn't have to face the likes of Warne, McGrath Murali, Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose Walsh etc.

Bats in bodyline where balls are bowled at his head pretty much every ball without it bouncing ( today's beamer) Misses 4+ years due to world wars and still comes back as the GOAT. Scored many more centuries in first class cricket. If Tendulkar was sitting on an average of 80+ there could be a comparison but 52 vs 99 is not even a question.

Berries1
11-17-2013, 02:45 AM
Tendulkar has an average of 130+ against Bangladesh and they have not played them since 2010 which is another reason the average was not as high as the earlier years. Though he did average 50+ against Australia and England.

ElTito
11-17-2013, 03:03 AM
I don't follow cricket, so I'll say this respectfully, but can you explain the following in English to me?

1. The 99.94 is not a .994 batting average, meaning he didn't get hits for 994/1,000 at bats, correct? That was what was confusing me mostly.

2. Can a player score more than one run per at bat or per inning? How is he getting 99.94 runs/inning?

I don't follow baseball much, so I cant help in terms of comparison.

But if i can give an example in terms of basketball - averaging 99.94runs in cricket, is like averaging 37ppg over your career.

Extremely hard to do.

A batter can score between 1 & 6 runs in a ball, once you hit the ball, you have a choice of staying (so basically getting 0 runs and facing another ball) or you can run to the other end (which is considered 1 run), if you run to the other end and back that's two runs etc. 99.94 is an astonishing average.

occy27
11-17-2013, 03:21 AM
https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1454955_667924236572990_437696054_n.png

jimbob007
11-17-2013, 05:39 AM
Bats in bodyline where balls are bowled at his head pretty much every ball without it bouncing ( today's beamer) Misses 4+ years due to world wars and still comes back as the GOAT. Scored many more centuries in first class cricket. If Tendulkar was sitting on an average of 80+ there could be a comparison but 52 vs 99 is not even a question.

It is impossible to compare different eras-Bradman did not have to play a battery of world class fast bowlers virtually every match, nor spinners like Warne & Murali & didn't have to worry about playing no stroke LBW'S. Tendulkar did not have to bat on uncovered or matted wickets & had the protection of helmets & clothing. I wasn't aware Larwood was sending down beamers-from the footage I have seen he was pitching short to a leg-side field so as he would hit the batsmen in the ribcage or head. I highly doubt if Bradman batted in the same era as Tendullkar he would have averaged 99, he likely would have been in the 60's. I also doubt Tendulkar would have average 99 in that era-more likely in the 70's.

jimbob007
11-17-2013, 05:40 AM
https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/1454955_667924236572990_437696054_n.png

What a pity he wasn't playing the pie chuckers instead of the West Indies.