![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
From Twitter 03-23-2011
Mar. 24th, 2011 03:01 amTweets copied by twittinesis.com
Mar. 24th, 2011
Goodbye, farewell
Mar. 24th, 2011 10:39 amToday's quarter-final between Australia and India will (almost certainly) see the last World Cup appearance, and possibly the last one-day international appearance, of either an undisputed all-time cricketing great -- Sachin Tendulkar -- or an almost-great -- Ricky Ponting.
In Tests, Tendulkar is the highest scorer of all time, has played most matches, and has scored most centuries; Ponting is respectively second, fourth and third. In ODIs, Tendulkar again leads in all three stats; Ponting is fourth, third and second. Ponting has been captain for a large part of his career: and in terms of percentage of matches won, is the most successful of long-serving Test captains apart from his predecessor Steve Waugh, and in ODIs the most successful apart from Clive Lloyd. So what makes Tendulkar clearly the greater player?
I think even Ponting's dear old mum would admit that his captaincy has been fortunate. He inherited a hugely successful team, including a number of really great players, and hasn't really had to show great inspiration or creativity. When that has been called for, he has often seemed petulant or grumpy. He has to some extent sacrificed his own batting form for the sake of the captaincy, something Tendulkar has been sesnisbly wary of doing.
Tendulkar, on the other hand, came into a poor team. We think of him now in combination with Rahul Dravid and Sourav Ganguly in the super-powerful Indian middle-order, but he actually predated both those players by several years. Remember this game? At 17 years old, he single-handedly saved India from a heavy defeat -- and there are any number of other similar innings we could point to. And, lest we forget, he has also taken 200 international weickets, including four 4-wicket ODI hauls.
But the question is probably better answered by just watching the two of them bat. Ponting is a very good player -- no doubt about that. He scores all round the wicket, against all types of bowling, and in all conditions. But he bats like a human -- you can see what he's doing. Tendulkar, on the other hand, at his best -- ie, usually -- bats like a god. His two centuries at this current World Cup are perfect examples. The strokeplay is so beautiful and fluent; the emotion conjured is not admiration, but awe.
I used to be quite dismissive when excited Indian fans claimed that Tendulkar was on the same level as Don Bradman -- the man who for seventy years has been head, shoulders, waist and hips above any other batsman in cricket. But I must admit that these days I am starting to wonder.
In Tests, Tendulkar is the highest scorer of all time, has played most matches, and has scored most centuries; Ponting is respectively second, fourth and third. In ODIs, Tendulkar again leads in all three stats; Ponting is fourth, third and second. Ponting has been captain for a large part of his career: and in terms of percentage of matches won, is the most successful of long-serving Test captains apart from his predecessor Steve Waugh, and in ODIs the most successful apart from Clive Lloyd. So what makes Tendulkar clearly the greater player?
I think even Ponting's dear old mum would admit that his captaincy has been fortunate. He inherited a hugely successful team, including a number of really great players, and hasn't really had to show great inspiration or creativity. When that has been called for, he has often seemed petulant or grumpy. He has to some extent sacrificed his own batting form for the sake of the captaincy, something Tendulkar has been sesnisbly wary of doing.
Tendulkar, on the other hand, came into a poor team. We think of him now in combination with Rahul Dravid and Sourav Ganguly in the super-powerful Indian middle-order, but he actually predated both those players by several years. Remember this game? At 17 years old, he single-handedly saved India from a heavy defeat -- and there are any number of other similar innings we could point to. And, lest we forget, he has also taken 200 international weickets, including four 4-wicket ODI hauls.
But the question is probably better answered by just watching the two of them bat. Ponting is a very good player -- no doubt about that. He scores all round the wicket, against all types of bowling, and in all conditions. But he bats like a human -- you can see what he's doing. Tendulkar, on the other hand, at his best -- ie, usually -- bats like a god. His two centuries at this current World Cup are perfect examples. The strokeplay is so beautiful and fluent; the emotion conjured is not admiration, but awe.
I used to be quite dismissive when excited Indian fans claimed that Tendulkar was on the same level as Don Bradman -- the man who for seventy years has been head, shoulders, waist and hips above any other batsman in cricket. But I must admit that these days I am starting to wonder.
Goodbye, farewell
Mar. 24th, 2011 10:39 amToday's quarter-final between Australia and India will (almost certainly) see the last World Cup appearance, and possibly the last one-day international appearance, of either an undisputed all-time cricketing great -- Sachin Tendulkar -- or an almost-great -- Ricky Ponting.
In Tests, Tendulkar is the highest scorer of all time, has played most matches, and has scored most centuries; Ponting is respectively second, fourth and third. In ODIs, Tendulkar again leads in all three stats; Ponting is fourth, third and second. Ponting has been captain for a large part of his career: and in terms of percentage of matches won, is the most successful of long-serving Test captains apart from his predecessor Steve Waugh, and in ODIs the most successful apart from Clive Lloyd. So what makes Tendulkar clearly the greater player?
I think even Ponting's dear old mum would admit that his captaincy has been fortunate. He inherited a hugely successful team, including a number of really great players, and hasn't really had to show great inspiration or creativity. When that has been called for, he has often seemed petulant or grumpy. He has to some extent sacrificed his own batting form for the sake of the captaincy, something Tendulkar has been sesnisbly wary of doing.
Tendulkar, on the other hand, came into a poor team. We think of him now in combination with Rahul Dravid and Sourav Ganguly in the super-powerful Indian middle-order, but he actually predated both those players by several years. Remember this game? At 17 years old, he single-handedly saved India from a heavy defeat -- and there are any number of other similar innings we could point to. And, lest we forget, he has also taken 200 international weickets, including four 4-wicket ODI hauls.
But the question is probably better answered by just watching the two of them bat. Ponting is a very good player -- no doubt about that. He scores all round the wicket, against all types of bowling, and in all conditions. But he bats like a human -- you can see what he's doing. Tendulkar, on the other hand, at his best -- ie, usually -- bats like a god. His two centuries at this current World Cup are perfect examples. The strokeplay is so beautiful and fluent; the emotion conjured is not admiration, but awe.
I used to be quite dismissive when excited Indian fans claimed that Tendulkar was on the same level as Don Bradman -- the man who for seventy years has been head, shoulders, waist and hips above any other batsman in cricket. But I must admit that these days I am starting to wonder.
In Tests, Tendulkar is the highest scorer of all time, has played most matches, and has scored most centuries; Ponting is respectively second, fourth and third. In ODIs, Tendulkar again leads in all three stats; Ponting is fourth, third and second. Ponting has been captain for a large part of his career: and in terms of percentage of matches won, is the most successful of long-serving Test captains apart from his predecessor Steve Waugh, and in ODIs the most successful apart from Clive Lloyd. So what makes Tendulkar clearly the greater player?
I think even Ponting's dear old mum would admit that his captaincy has been fortunate. He inherited a hugely successful team, including a number of really great players, and hasn't really had to show great inspiration or creativity. When that has been called for, he has often seemed petulant or grumpy. He has to some extent sacrificed his own batting form for the sake of the captaincy, something Tendulkar has been sesnisbly wary of doing.
Tendulkar, on the other hand, came into a poor team. We think of him now in combination with Rahul Dravid and Sourav Ganguly in the super-powerful Indian middle-order, but he actually predated both those players by several years. Remember this game? At 17 years old, he single-handedly saved India from a heavy defeat -- and there are any number of other similar innings we could point to. And, lest we forget, he has also taken 200 international weickets, including four 4-wicket ODI hauls.
But the question is probably better answered by just watching the two of them bat. Ponting is a very good player -- no doubt about that. He scores all round the wicket, against all types of bowling, and in all conditions. But he bats like a human -- you can see what he's doing. Tendulkar, on the other hand, at his best -- ie, usually -- bats like a god. His two centuries at this current World Cup are perfect examples. The strokeplay is so beautiful and fluent; the emotion conjured is not admiration, but awe.
I used to be quite dismissive when excited Indian fans claimed that Tendulkar was on the same level as Don Bradman -- the man who for seventy years has been head, shoulders, waist and hips above any other batsman in cricket. But I must admit that these days I am starting to wonder.