Re: Sachin and Lara: the tragic twilight!
"Brian Lara was slightly in front of Sachin Tendulkar when they were at their peaks" (Glenn McGrath)
ENUFF SAID!
oh ya...
Sachin is an over hyped bastman ([Top That]) :D Cheers!
Re: Sachin and Lara: the tragic twilight!
At their peak Sachin was way ahead of Lara. :)
Re: Sachin and Lara: the tragic twilight!
^^ I totally agree with Ehsan bhai on this one. Sachin at his best is peerless.
Re: Sachin and Lara: the tragic twilight!
ENUFF SAID!
oh ya...
Sachin is an over hyped bastman ([Top That]) :D Cheers!
u r right ,an over hyped batsman rip apart an overhyped bowling during the world cup 2003 .:D
Re: Sachin and Lara: the tragic twilight!
I could be wrong but this is how I will remember both. At their peak Lara was a better test batsman than Tendu, while Tendu was ahead of Lara in ODIs :)
Re: Sachin and Lara: the tragic twilight!
At their peak Sachin was way ahead of Lara. :)
No, at their peak Sachin was more *consistent. *Definitely.
But Lara was in another league altogether. When he was at his best, he was *the *best.
But Sachin was one of the greatest players we will ever see. However, you can't ignore these last few years. I mean, in all honesty, Brett Lee was a better batsmen than he was last year.
Re: Sachin and Lara: the tragic twilight!
Nice article by Rohit Brijnath covering all aspect of Tendulkar’s recent form and debate surrounding his retirement.
Time up for Sachin Tendulkar?
**
If Sachin Tendulkar wants to struggle, that’s his right. But what is left for the maestro to achieve?**
Sachin Tendulkar is not playing well - no doctorate in batting is required to perceive this.
He does not appear a great player, and men like him are not supposed to look anything but great. Normal is not their thing, average is not their way. It is as if he is not allowed to struggle.
Once again, “retire” is being occasionally affixed to his name, but that could merely be the hysteria that follows a poor World Cup.
Errors in judgement
Some say “wait”, others say “go”. Certainly it is harder now, compared to 12 months ago in this same column, to make a case for him to continue playing.
Tendulkar’s recent scores are scarcely embarrassing though, even if they are not overly impressive. It depends how you see him.
On one hand he scored seven and 0 against Bangladesh and Sri Lanka at the World Cup when India needed him most, suggesting he cannot summon his skills on command as he once did. It is unfair perhaps, but when others fail we expect Tendulkar to stand tall.
On the other hand, his one-day average so far this year of 44.28, and 44.85 last year, are in fact higher than his career average of 44.05.
One might argue that it’s not the scores but his errors in judgement that are revealing. Certainly his batting lacks the assurance of earlier years.
This is not a contented player, the joy has been stolen from his game.
Tendulkar still merits a place in the team, but is he satisfied with that? It is cruel to keep measuring a man against his prime, but how much of a lower standard is acceptable for him?
Playing for money?
Eventually even the greatest players make deals with themselves. Where once only a 100 would do, now a 75 is enough.
Why he plays on, we don’t know. But does he? We tend to say he has enough (runs, riches, records), but then athletes are driven to excellence only because their desire is never satiated.
Is he playing for numbers, and what numbers would those be? The Australian captain, Ricky Ponting, is going to own almost every record when it comes to centuries and runs scored.
But Tendulkar need not worry about statistics, for few will see the Australian as a greater batsman than him.
Is he playing for money? That would be difficult to believe. For him to just stay in the team for financial reasons would mean he has turned his back on everything he has stood for.
Is he playing because he knows little else, fearful of the unknown beyond the cricket field?
His life has been bat, bowl and field. Cricket is entwined in his DNA, it gives him his life’s purpose. For men born to hear the crowd’s applause, who have felt the intoxication of a nation cheering for them, it is hard to retire and just be another man.
Is he, at the age 34, clinging tighter to the belief that age is no barrier because he sees the good form of Jayasuriya (37), Hayden (35) and Ponting (33)? Does he remember that Lara - aged 35 in 2005 - knocked up five centuries (Tendulkar has hit one Test century since 2005 in 14 Tests).
Diminished status
It is hard for a player to concede it is all over, the skills not gone but faded to the point where domination is unlikely. It is easier to believe a resurgence is around the corner, any day now. Tendulkar has nothing to prove to us but perhaps he does to himself.
Already minor indignities are being heaped on a proud Indian. He is being “rested”, when not quite tired, from tours where his form could be regained.
He has been asked by the Indian board to explain a passing comment, when in fact an old warrior should be asked (behind closed doors) to speak plainly and freely about what ails Indian cricket.
But Tendulkar, too coy anyway, will not speak his mind for no trust is left in the leaky world of Indian cricket. Still, the chiding from the board has delivered a message to the batsman - his status in Indian cricket has diminished.
His reputation as cricketer has gently fallen, too, as can happen when one of the world’s finest batting practitioners does not display his skills.
It is being said, for instance, with slightly greater frequency that Lara is the greater batsman. This writer disputes that, for Tendulkar, while less damaging in his best days, was more consistent through his prime, and played under far more severe pressure.
But the Indian’s average in the past two or three years could be changing minds.
Tendulkar never asked for a cricketing favour in his life. He made himself, he earned every run, he sweated to greatness.
Proud eagle
The extraordinary sportsman arrives at his exalted position only because he adheres to the highest standards. Forget the media, board, former cricketers and team mates.
Tendulkar must now ask himself: is he adhering still to those standards?
Most Indians cannot look upon him unemotionally, because it is hard to be purely practical about a man who stirs up such passion.
But Tendulkar’s decision must be devoid of emotion, a champion’s cold evaluation of what he is and stands for.
Ironically, the day when selectors are able to make similar hard, unemotional decisions about India’s great players will be the day when Indian cricket has really grown up.
There is something almost unbearable about watching Tendulkar struggle, like a proud eagle with a fractured wing. Yet he has also earned the right to struggle.
A friend, who knows Tendulkar, told me recently that for the great batsman to exit now would be unseemly. It would be far better if Tendulkar scored a century and then left, so we can remember the beautiful boy of our past.
It is a nice thought. But if Tendulkar scored a century, perhaps hope might flare within him that the end is still some distance away.