Every now and then one keeps hearing sachin is not a match winner. No, this post is not in support of sachin. But i really want to know … who actually is a match winner …
Dravid....he gets the job done more often than not.
Think March 1.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Some1: *
Dravid....he gets the job done more often than not.
Think March 1.
[/QUOTE]
But again ............ last match against pakistan and yesterdays match against srilanka ....... these matches were important for india to stay in the tournament .......... but he failed badly .......... playing bad shots both the time
I said "more often than not" , didn't I.
Nobody can win matches for the team all the time....
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Some1: *
I said "more often than not" , didn't I.
Nobody can win matches for the team all the time....
[/QUOTE]
Then whats wrong with sachin ............
^ dravid - more often than not...
tendulkar - hardly ever...
^ correct.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by KAKA-ATOM-BUM: *
^ dravid - more often than not...
tendulkar - hardly ever...
[/QUOTE]
Kaka,
apne 2 line me discussion khatam kar di. :p
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by KAKA-ATOM-BUM: *
^ dravid - more often than not...
tendulkar - hardly ever...
[/QUOTE]
thats what u feel (most of u )............... i want to know is there any specific criteria to say that a player is match winner or not .............. or it is always like what u feel or what i feel ............
Again its not only about india ........ i would like to know about any international cricketer (match winner).
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by maihu_don: *
thats what u feel (most of u )............... i want to know is there any specific criteria to say that a player is match winner or not .............. or it is always like what u feel or what i feel ............
Again its not only about india ........ i would like to know about any international cricketer (match winner).
[/QUOTE]
There are 2 types of match winner.
One is one who comes in no-pressure situation and wins the match for his team.
Other types are those who act in very crunch situation, a situation where team has very small hope left and then wins the match for team.
Now many players played either of the roles many times in their career. But some tend to play first one more often than 2nd one.
People like Sachin & jaysurya are one who won many matches in 1st situation and very few in 2nd situation.
Where as peole like Dravid,Lara,Waugh have won many matches in 2nd situation.
This is based on my experiences of watching so many matches over a period of time. There isnot any compelling statistics to support it or oppose it but it can be intresting area to work on.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by fair_&_balance: *
............
People like Sachin & jaysurya are one who won many matches in 1st situation and very few in 2nd situation. ......
[/QUOTE]
Now ur having jaysurya along with sachin and just few hours back (ind v/s SL) you were telling that sachin should learn something from jaysurya .......
Again theses are your feelings, This is what essentially i wont to know , whether every international cricketer is a match winner (on given day any one can do anything eg MALIK.....) ...... or there are selected few ...
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by maihu_don: *
Now ur having jaysurya along with sachin and just few hours back (ind v/s SL) you were telling that sachin should learn something from jaysurya .......
Again theses are your feelings, This is what essentially i wont to know , whether every international cricketer is a match winner (on given day any one can do anything eg MALIK.....) ...... or there are selected few ...
[/QUOTE]
Read the word "often" I didnt say that one who does first doesnt do 2nd one.
Yes yesterday he played one of few inning where he got his team almost our of hole.
I am reluctant to praise jayasuriya's inning. Fact remains that he didn't get it done. No matter how close they got.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Atlanta: *
I am reluctant to praise jayasuriya's inning. Fact remains that he didn't get it done. No matter how close they got.
[/QUOTE]
but still it was better than Sachin's efforts.
Isn't it a bit hard to be in "crunch time" when ur the opener in every innning?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by I'm Kool: *
Isn't it a bit hard to be in "crunch time" when ur the opener in every innning?
[/QUOTE]
YEP and it is a good point.So as an Opener it is less likely to be there when cruch situation comes. But question is do you deliver during whatever small number of situation you have to face.
In my mind, Jayasuria single-handedly won SL the World Cup in 1996. So he is an established match-winner. According to my definition, the match winner doesn't have to be there till the last ball to score the last runs or get the last wicket. He may just as well be the one who laid a solid ground work to a level where the rest of the team can just take it from there and complete the project --- and WIN! Jaysuria's heroics in the first 15 overs would usually just do that, atleast in 1996. So he is one.
The end result is very important. Did your team actually win, or did it get just this close to the finish line and lost? In Tuesday's match India won and SL lost (duh!). For this reason Jayasuria's performance in Tuesday's match was not, by definition, match winning... instead Sehwag's was. Having said that, one good or bad performance, does not make one a match-winner, nor takes the status away, respectively.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
In my mind, Jayasuria single-handedly won SL the World Cup in 1996. So he is an established match-winner. According to my definition, the match winner doesn't have to be there till the last ball to score the last runs or get the last wicket. He may just as well be the one who laid a solid ground work to a level where the rest of the team can just take it from there and complete the project --- and WIN! Jaysuria's heroics in the first 15 overs would usually just do that, atleast in 1996. So he is one.
The end result is very important. Did your team actually win, or did it get just this close to the finish line and lost? In Tuesday's match India won and SL lost (duh!). For this reason Jayasuria's performance in Tuesday's match was not, by definition, match winning... instead Sehwag's was. Having said that, one good or bad performance, does not make one a match-winner, nor takes the status away, respectively.
[/QUOTE]
I totally agree with you and if you take that kinda example then I think Sachin did win a lot of matches for India Including taking india to the Last world Cup final. But if you consider another scenario where a player wins a match from a really ****ty scenario then you will see both Jaysurya and Sachin have done it very very few times( It may have to do a lot with the fact that in Onedayers the are Openers).
I am talking about Scenarios like these...
Javed winng the one in Sharjah with last ball six..
Dravid & Yuvraj winning the 4th ODI ina Pakistan few motnhs back.
Inzi winning that test match against BD 2 yrs back.
Waugh winning that famous "U just dropped the WorldCup..mate" match in 1996 WC.
Kaif and Yuvraj chasing 325 in Natwest final from a situation of 140/5.
Salim Laik winning that famous (73 in 39 ball ) match in calcutta.
You need someone to bat for your life who will you pick...Dravid,Javed,Waugh,Sachin.Jaysurya
.
In my list Sachin and Jaysurya will come last.
Shohaib hasnt performed that well in recent times ........ so whether it is ok to say that he is not a match winner. Thats not true, he can run thro a batting line up, So he is a match winner.
Suppose a team is chasing targets like 300 or more than that u need openers who can score max runs in first 15 overs and bring down the required run rate ....... if they do that and get out , its up to the rest to finish the match.
It is quite obvious that its not possible for openers to be ACCEPTED as match winners ........... it is always lower middle order who will be ACCEPTED as match winners ...........
whoever says shoaib isnt a match=winner let him produce a test innings bowling figures of 6/11 and then talk....