Print

[Total Members Voted:]

Yes from Tests only

2 (5%)

Yes from ODIs only

8 (20%)

Yes from Both

21 (52.5%)

Not at all

9 (22.5%)

Total Members Voted: 37

Voting closed: March 26, 2007, 10:03:09 PM

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[LosingNow]

Parallel to RD retire voting poll

[Zacked]

Gali Gali shor hai.... SRT Sabse bada choker hai.....

[ramshorns]

Gali Gali shor hai.... SRT Sabse bada choker hai.....

ZACK:Way to go .  I never thought you had this in you.  You have the right.  Applause for sticking with the team and now you can vent.

[feverpitch]

Zack, you're about 9 years behind in realizing this home truth!

[feverpitch]

http://outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20070316&fname=Sachin&sid=1

No Last Hurrah Yet

Sure to warm Indian hearts, the maestro hints at being part of the action in the 2011 World Cup. ...

Ashish Shukla interviews Sachin Tendulkar


If anyone thought the World Cup in Caribbean was the last hurrah for Sachin Tendulkar, the Indian batting great has hinted at playing in 2011 as well if his "body holds good".

"I don't know if this is my final World Cup. The one in 2011 is quite far from here but it all depends on how my body is holding up," said Tendulkar as he graced a UNICEF function for fight against HIV-AIDS among children.

The 2011 edition, which would be Tendulkar's sixth World Cup, will be co-hosted by India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

The 34-year-old Mumbai batsman is set to play his fifth World Cup and currently holds the record for most runs scored in the mega event but yet to taste the glory of winning the Cup.

India had finished runners-up to Australia in the 2003 edition in South Africa.

Tendulkar said his team had the quality to reach the finals but needed to gain early momentum in the tournament.

"We can reach the finals. Our chances are very good but all we need is to stick to basics and gain an early momentum."

He, however, cited the example of the West Indies to stress the point that one-day cricket was a game of uncertainties.

"West Indies were all out for 85 against us but they then defeated Pakistan. In one-day cricket, everyday is a new day.

"We can't take any opposition lightly. We can't afford to be over-confident. Since we would face very different oppositions, we need to have flexibility in planning," he added.

Tendulkar played down all suggestions to his rivalry against Brian Lara and hoped the two batsmen, regarded by most as the best of the present era, will help inspire the next generation.

"I'm glad we both have been able to give some wonderful cricketing years to the world. We have extremely high regard for each other and are good friends and that's what matters to us.

"Eventually, if we are able to inspire the next generation it would matter more to us than runs scored or wickets taken.

"There is no rivalry between us. Cricket is not played among individuals, it's a team sport."

The little master, who holds most of the one-day records, including most centuries, runs and matches, devoted most of the afternoon in trying to promote the cause dear to him.

He visited Robert Greenidge grounds in Gonzales, a parish in Port of Spain, where cheering children and youngsters were at hand to greet him.

Tendulkar cited a personal example to urge everyone to come together to fight against the deadly disease.

"Last year, I was in India in Chennai where a physically challenged boy was brought to me whose ambition was to play with my cricket bat. He was in a wheel-chair, supported by a couple of people but the moment he held my bat, he stood on his own. It completely motivated me and showed where there is will there is way."

Tendulkar said there was more to life than cricket and it was important for individuals in positions to stand up for worthy causes.

"There is more to life than cricket. I am in a position to help so I go out and help."

PTI

[toney]

So he plans to be kicked out rather than bow out. OK...

[poondu]

I think this article came out before the world cup, not that he had any business saying that even before the WC.

[Prafulla]

Sachin need not retire. He must play more, until his replacement is found.

[sudzz]

Sachin need not retire. He must play more, until his replacement is found.

By that logic SMG, Kapil etc should be still around.

[Prafulla]

Ha ha- May be..yes. Jokes apart - there is no point in pushing panic button. They must regroup and take next constructive step and hopefully, with a  long term perspective.

[ramshorns]

Bump.

I may have have fogotten the Shor to Chor verbatim but not the spirit of the post.  Here is the poll and that famous thread where majority asked for Tendulkar to retire from cricket altogether.

[RicePlateReddy]

Bump.

I may have have fogotten the Shor to Chor verbatim but not the spirit of the post.  Here is the poll and that famous thread where majority asked for Tendulkar to retire from cricket altogether.

The majority can be wrong.

Exhibit A, US public polled on Iraq war before the war.
Exhibit B, US public polled on Vietnam War during early days of the war.

Take a poll after a great innings of his and you will see the opposite effect. If you make the hypothesis that people are flakes, I will not argue it!

[justforkix]

Hmmm, I don't see any post of mine here crying for Sachin's retirement

Next thread plz....

[Libran]

After today's innings, time for people asking for his retirement to cut and paste their posts on to a word document and stuff it down their throats ..add some gonkura for effect, maybe

[ramshorns]

Bump.

I may have have fogotten the Shor to Chor verbatim but not the spirit of the post.  Here is the poll and that famous thread where majority asked for Tendulkar to retire from cricket altogether.

The majority can be wrong.

Exhibit A, US public polled on Iraq war before the war.
Exhibit B, US public polled on Vietnam War during early days of the war.

Take a poll after a great innings of his and you will see the opposite effect. If you make the hypothesis that people are flakes, I will not argue it!

You can try comparing and bring in any number of scenarios you want.  The fact remains it has proven beyond a reasonable doubt the Tendulkar is not the difference maker or the man to put over the hump.  If not India would not have won so less portion of their share of Finals he was a part of.  On that presumption it would have fully been justified that he should have retired after WC 2007 since India fortunes do not hinge on this guy to win or lose 2011.  Scoring runs in matches like this when BCCI arranges by a bucketful will not alter anything much when pretty much any decent player can score a hundred.  Tendulkar simply plays for records and would sulk when asked for small sacrifices simply because he can get away with it and has the backing of the BCCI and his stature.

[justforkix]

Sour grapes quite evident because Sachin is still dominating and winning matches for India

[ramshorns]

Sour grapes quite evident because Sachin is still dominating and winning matches for India

Like the WC 2003 final and WC game against SL and losing to BD and shaming the nation and shamelessly taking youngsters place and sulking when it is evident he is not the difference maker in winning a WC or not.  It is quite evident the way GG, YS et al beat Aussies in 20-20 WC and won it all as a small sample.  I know that is sour grapes for Tendulkar fanatics.

[justforkix]

Sour grapes quite evident because Sachin is still dominating and winning matches for India

Like the WC 2003 final and WC game against SL and losing to BD and shaming the nation and shamelessly taking youngsters place and sulking when it is evident he is not the difference maker in winning a WC or not.  It is quite evident the way GG, YS et al beat Aussies in 20-20 WC and won it all as a small sample.  I know that is sour grapes for Tendulkar fanatics.

Prove that Sachin has not been performing since WC2007. Otherwise your argument is just total BS !!! There is no reason to drop a player who is performing, whatever his age may be !!!

[ramshorns]

Sour grapes quite evident because Sachin is still dominating and winning matches for India

Like the WC 2003 final and WC game against SL and losing to BD and shaming the nation and shamelessly taking youngsters place and sulking when it is evident he is not the difference maker in winning a WC or not.  It is quite evident the way GG, YS et al beat Aussies in 20-20 WC and won it all as a small sample.  I know that is sour grapes for Tendulkar fanatics.

Prove that Sachin has not been performing since WC2007. Otherwise your argument is just total BS !!! There is no reason to drop a player who is performing, whatever his age may be !!!

I have said on many threads when it comes to players after a certain point it not about scoring runs alone.  I am not going to repeat it.  You can call it BS or whatever because it does not toe with your line of thinking but that is fine by me.  GG should open in Tendulkar's spot and Rohit in the middle order.  Tendulkar is just not the viable option for WC 2011 like he was for all the prior WC's.   It just does not work that way in team sports.

[justforkix]

That Sachin is not a viable option in WC2011 is purely your extrapolation based on just WC2007 performance. This was your judgement in Mar 2007 after WC2007. Sachin has proved you wrong on so many instances in the last 2 years. It is fine with me that this is your opinion but it does not make any cricketing sense since the player is still performing at a very high level (avg ~47 at s/r of ~85 since WC2007). So, there is no reason to suddenly believe that he will not do so 2 years down the line. Dropping a performing player rarely happens in team sports.

[LosingNow]

Dropping a performing player rarely happens in team sports.

Happens all the time in NFL, NBA, MLB.. it is not as rare as you think. Most recent example, TO from Cowboys.

The most common reasons for dropping a performing player are:
1. Extra-curriculur activities that do not help the team dynamics
2. Planning for future.. when you know/believe that for the next milestone, this performing player will not be available at the level expected and a replacement may perform better or would be a better fit.

The most legitimate  post-WC argument for dropping SRT/RD/SG from the ODI scheme of things - which I made and Dhoni was "supporting" in principle through his statements - was that a) the chances of SRT/RD/SG being in the best 11 from India for 2011 are low, b) we will need fresh set of players to replace their experience, c) it would be good to give 40-50 ODIs experience to these fresh set of players, and d) since it is difficult to give 40-50 ODI experience without trying a bunch of them (as some would fail).. it was important that the team move beyond these 3 and start looking for replacements right away.

Clearly, that strategy is paying off with RD and SG's exclusion from ODIs.. and imo (and I assume Rams') view could have been carried out even with SRT, his current performances notwithstanding.

I, for one, agree with Rams on this issue. While SRT is doing well and is still sometimes a delight to watch (the initial part of his innings can at best be described scratchy and he was hitting rank full tosses to fielders.. so he is clearly not at his best)..and his contributions to Indian cricket are without doubt in the top .. it is not clear, his continued presence in the team is good for Indian team in the long run, specially from WC'11 perspective. IMO, a replacement can easily be blooded in his spot without impacting team India's results. Perhaps Dhoni sees value in his new found "anchor" role and his presence in the locker room. Which is fine

[k-slice]

Terrel Owens was performing for the cowboys??
what world were you watching in??
may be you blame their losses on jessica simpson then?
 TO is a whiny little b***h an NOBODY wants him around their team. save the Bills apparently.
i think $6.5 mil for a year is ging to be money down the drain. i cant say the same about srt.

[RicePlateReddy]

The most legitimate  post-WC argument for dropping SRT/RD/SG from the ODI scheme of things - which I made and Dhoni was "supporting" in principle through his statements - was that a) the chances of SRT/RD/SG being in the best 11 from India for 2011 are low, b) we will need fresh set of players to replace their experience, c) it would be good to give 40-50 ODIs experience to these fresh set of players, and d) since it is difficult to give 40-50 ODI experience without trying a bunch of them (as some would fail).. it was important that the team move beyond these 3 and start looking for replacements right away.

Fair approach and argument, WN. One can make a judgement call on whether SRT will be in form in 2011 and act accordingly. In deciding to drop SG, and RD well before that and retain SRT from among the 3, I believe we at least got to keep the person most likely to still have some shelf life in 2011.

As you mentioned, having one old man in the team is not strategically bad if the wisdom and experience helps. We have heard many accounts from the tyros on how Sachin's presence and sage advice have had a great effect. We should also appreciate how Jayasuriya, as veteran opener, has complemented Lanka as they build out their team on younger legs.

Your argument is understandable. But making the case for exclusion by harping on how SRT is overrated, the failure in 2007 WC, never delivering where it mattered, failing in critical situations, is a dwarf (metaphorically) compared to xyz etc. -- simply does not pass the sniff test.

[LosingNow]

But making the case for exclusion by harping on how SRT is overrated, the failure in 2007 WC, never delivering where it mattered, failing in critical situations, is a dwarf (metaphorically) compared to xyz etc. -- simply does not pass the sniff test.

Agree.. but that is Rams' way of making his point

[LosingNow]

Terrel Owens was performing for the cowboys??
what world were you watching in??
may be you blame their losses on jessica simpson then?
 TO is a whiny little b***h an NOBODY wants him around their team. save the Bills apparently.
i think $6.5 mil for a year is ging to be money down the drain. i cant say the same about srt.

TO is still a top 5 receiver in the league. (and second to Jerry Rice in all-time TDs.)

[justforkix]

Happens all the time in NFL, NBA, MLB.. it is not as rare as you think. Most recent example, TO from Cowboys.

The most common reasons for dropping a performing player are:
1. Extra-curriculur activities that do not help the team dynamics
2. Planning for future.. when you know/believe that for the next milestone, this performing player will not be available at the level expected and a replacement may perform better or would be a better fit.

1. obviously does not apply to Sachin.
2. I agree if one feels Sachin will not be able to play till 2011.

Obviously team management does not feel that way. And I don't think it is prudent to take such calls 4 years prior to the WC as that will be purely a judgement call unless the player in question is really old or always hampered by injuries. And now given that Sachin is performing as good as anyone else in the team now, 2 years from previous WC and 2 years before next WC, it is pretty clear which call was the right one.

[dhruvdeepak]

The most legitimate  post-WC argument for dropping SRT/RD/SG from the ODI scheme of things - which I made and Dhoni was "supporting" in principle through his statements - was that a) the chances of SRT/RD/SG being in the best 11 from India for 2011 are low, b) we will need fresh set of players to replace their experience, c) it would be good to give 40-50 ODIs experience to these fresh set of players, and d) since it is difficult to give 40-50 ODI experience without trying a bunch of them (as some would fail).. it was important that the team move beyond these 3 and start looking for replacements right away.

Fair approach and argument, WN. One can make a judgement call on whether SRT will be in form in 2011 and act accordingly. In deciding to drop SG, and RD well before that and retain SRT from among the 3, I believe we at least got to keep the person most likely to still have some shelf life in 2011.

As you mentioned, having one old man in the team is not strategically bad if the wisdom and experience helps. We have heard many accounts from the tyros on how Sachin's presence and sage advice have had a great effect. We should also appreciate how Jayasuriya, as veteran opener, has complemented Lanka as they build out their team on younger legs.

Your argument is understandable. But making the case for exclusion by harping on how SRT is overrated, the failure in 2007 WC, never delivering where it mattered, failing in critical situations, is a dwarf (metaphorically) compared to xyz etc. -- simply does not pass the sniff test.

i disagree with the premise of 'building up to the next world cup'. you're playing 100s of ODIs between world cups which admittedly at times are pointless, but why is the world cup the only important event in the calendar?

it is flawed as a system.

there is plenty more to play for in the 150 odd odis that come between world cups. in two years, India has come to be recognized as one of the top two ODI teams in the world.

is this not an important achievement? whether we win the next world cup or not is irrelevant. we are a STRONG, winning team at the moment and we probably will be for the next while.

i think our comprehensive defeat of SL (world cup finalists mind you, and the ones who beat us out of the WC) both home and away proved a strong point. and for me avenged the pain of the early WC exit. i should know about it, i was there.

never mind us defeating Aus in Aus in one of the more gruelling schedules in the ODI calendar, the CB series. (note again, the WC winners and WC runners up were in that tournament).

were we the worst team in the world just after the WC? all the other teams, including BD and Ireland, finished ahead of us, didnt they? the answer is no. we just lost 2 ODI matches. sorry that is just not conclusive evidence for me.

if we actually had an international ODI championship that lasted 1-2 years, and it culminated in playoffs, and we fared as abysmally in that as we did in the 07 WC (didnt make the playoffs or something), then yes i would say this is a humiliating moment that we are not one of the top 6 or something teams in the world. and that would warrant a dramatic restructuring etc.

but not out of losing 2 odis! sheesh. plenty of great teams have had losing streaks longer than 2!

simply putting the WC on a pedestal because we have a senseless international calendar is ridiculous. EVEN assuming that the WC is indeed THAT important, or perhaps the only important thing, then the window of opportunity we had for the last one - 3 odis - is too small to prove anything.

if you guys are putting it as '4 years of work that go into prepping a WC team' then im sorry 3 odis is not enough of a showcase. we play too many (hundreds more) between WCs for those 3 odis to assume the sort of significance you are alluding to.

just look at Aus at the moment in ODIs. what relevance does the 'world cup champion' tag hold to them? they lost to India, lost to SA, couldnt beat NZ (all at home - this is their recent record).


---

and on sachin tendulkar. apparently our understanding of cricket is different. i thought it was a team game. you know, that sometimes cohesive unit that plays together against other cohesive units and try to contribute equally to the team's success?

so why in the world does someone have to retire and be labelled a failure because he couldnt do superhuman things like score a 300 or chase 359 in a WC final, or somehow take India to the next stage in the 07 WC all on his own? its quite a simple system to comprehend actually: you win as a team and you lose as a team.
sorry you didnt get the memo about it. too bad. singular individual efforts are fruitless, and not inadequate if you dont get enough contributions to take your team over the line.
winning teams do not depend on one person to get them over the line.
it is a wonder that sachin helped get us over the line as consistently as he did back in the 90s and early 2000s. he certainly did NOT have a winning team while he performed out of sight. there was the occasional taste of success (yeah he was that good and for a long extended time) - like in sharjah in 98.
if anything you have to contrast his standalone career to india's fortunes and realize how good he is versus how bad the Indian team was. a player's ability to 'get the team over the line' is contingent on how many runs his team-mates score and how many wickets they take. not to mention what the opposition does!! no one can do it alone, and no one has.

someone not performing in 2 odis out of 3 is not warrant to label them a failure.

even more ridiculous is the notion that someone who scores 600+ runs (the most in any WC's history) that helps take his team to the WC final, and then get labelled an individual failure because he didnt score a magical 100 in the final that would get his team past 359.

even more ridiculous than that is the stubborn refusal to admit you are wrong when said 'choker' spends all of 2008 rubbing your face in his success. 100s in chases, 100s batting first you name it and its been done, its been done well, and its in the books.

clearly his decision to not retire (if that was even an option other than in your mind for whatever reason) was the right one.

"shamed the nation". please. grow up.


it may or may not interest you, but here's his performance in ODI finals:

Tournaments with 3+ teams -

filtered    1991-2008    38    37    5    1695    134    52.96    1964    86.30    5    10    4    167    20    

Tournaments with 5+ teams -


filtered    1993-2004    7    6    2    206    74    51.50    279    73.83    0    2    0    25    2    

(there's no way on cricinfo to filter for bilateral series 'finals')

[ramshorns]

and on sachin tendulkar. apparently our understanding of cricket is different. i thought it was a team game. you know, that sometimes cohesive unit that plays together against other cohesive units and try to contribute equally to the team's success?

so why in the world does someone have to retire and be labelled a failure because he couldnt do superhuman things like score a 300 or chase 359 in a WC final, or somehow take India to the next stage in the 07 WC all on his own? its quite a simple system to comprehend actually: you win as a team and you lose as a team.
sorry you didnt get the memo about it. too bad. singular individual efforts are fruitless, and not inadequate if you dont get enough contributions to take your team over the line.
winning teams do not depend on one person to get them over the line.
it is a wonder that sachin helped get us over the line as consistently as he did back in the 90s and early 2000s. he certainly did NOT have a winning team while he performed out of sight. there was the occasional taste of success (yeah he was that good and for a long extended time) - like in sharjah in 98.
if anything you have to contrast his standalone career to india's fortunes and realize how good he is versus how bad the Indian team was. a player's ability to 'get the team over the line' is contingent on how many runs his team-mates score and how many wickets they take. not to mention what the opposition does!! no one can do it alone, and no one has.

someone not performing in 2 odis out of 3 is not warrant to label them a failure.

even more ridiculous is the notion that someone who scores 600+ runs (the most in any WC's history) that helps take his team to the WC final, and then get labelled an individual failure because he didnt score a magical 100 in the final that would get his team past 359.


clearly his decision to not retire (if that was even an option other than in your mind for whatever reason) was the right one.

"shamed the nation". please. grow up.


it may or may not interest you, but here's his performance in ODI finals:

Tournaments with 3+ teams -

filtered    1991-2008    38    37    5    1695    134    52.96    1964    86.30    5    10    4    167    20   

Tournaments with 5+ teams -


filtered    1993-2004    7    6    2    206    74    51.50    279    73.83    0    2    0    25    2   

(there's no way on cricinfo to filter for bilateral series 'finals')

Yes our basic understanding of and prespective is different and I am glad that it is the way it is regarding Tendulkar.

We have been in these debates before.

My basic premise as always with Tendulkar post 2007 is he is a story of the past as far as the shorter version of the game is concerned from a team perspective.  In the past a lot of cricketers who were good enough to play and score like Tendulkar are asked to retire or let go with an eye on the future.  Tendulkar's case should be no different IMO and GG should consistently open in ODI's in his place since he has few more years than Tendulkar has at this point.  Plus at this stage we are not going to miss him since there are enough players with hundred plus games in the kitty.

As you can see our basic premise is different and hence we shall never agree.  So let me may say what I have to.

even more ridiculous than that is the stubborn refusal to admit you are wrong when said 'choker' spends all of 2008 rubbing your face in his success. 100s in chases, 100s batting first you name it and its been done, its been done well, and its in the books.

So great it took him 19 years to rub it into someone's face despite he and his mates rubbing it on the entire nation during the March of 2007.  It is not me being stubborn to admit it is the Tendulkar fanactics that conviniently give him all the credit when he scores and wins and attach the team tag when we lose.  It is them who are ridiculous not the ones asking for a 35 plus year old with niggling injuries to make way for the likes of GG to open who are at this stage more to offer than Tendulkar.

[LosingNow]

winning teams do not depend on one person to get them over the line.

Agree in general..and I assume you are talking about cricket. BTW, even in cricket, one person - Steve Waugh - took the Aussies to the final (get over the line!).

In other TEAM sports, one person - the great Michael Jeffrey Jordan - by himself took the Chicago Bulls to 6 NBA championships. Tendulkar (the superhuman) in cricket is equated (by fans, media etc.) with the greats of other sports, including Michael Jordan. Like it or not, this is a hole in his otherwise incredibly amazing resume compared to the other greats.

[kban1]

Happens all the time in NFL, NBA, MLB.. it is not as rare as you think. Most recent example, TO from Cowboys.

Just a horrible example to make a point.

As a Cowboys fan who has been watching everyone of their games, let me just say you could not be more off.

TO's numbers notwithstanding, during the past season he has struggled with press coverage and productivity at crucial times. And even so he was worth holding on to had it not been for the late season rebellion and disruption. Thats why he was let go.

Clearly this situation does not fit SRT.

The most common reasons for dropping a performing player are:
1. Extra-curriculur activities that do not help the team dynamics

Not applicable to SRT

2. Planning for future.. when you know/believe that for the next milestone, this performing player will not be available at the level expected and a replacement may perform better or would be a better fit.

Again not applicable as to SRT. SRt is performing at a level (post Wc 07), which is higher than his career average and SR. And the performance has been consistemnt enough to say that it would be surprising if it goes to hell in  a hand basket overnight.

As far as everyone who would be the replacement for SRT, we dont know who they are --and the ones we do know have shown little to indicate they have either the ability or the maturity to replace him --on his current form. Your point would be valid if SRT was not performing at such a high level.

The most legitimate  post-WC argument for dropping SRT/RD/SG from the ODI scheme of things - which I made    and Dhoni was "supporting" in principle through his statements - was that a) the chances of SRT/RD/SG being in the best 11 from India for 2011 are low, b) we will need fresh set of players to replace their experience, c) it would be good to give 40-50 ODIs experience to these fresh set of players, and d) since it is difficult to give 40-50 ODI experience without trying a bunch of them (as some would fail).. it was important that the team move beyond these 3 and start looking for replacements right away.

No arguments with the basic premise, although you and I have disagreed with the timing or the pace of the transition.

Having said that, what was more obvious wrt SG & RD is not obvious with SRT at all. Both RD & SG are poor fielders, are not that good between the wickets, are about 1.5-2 yrs older than SRT, bat at a lower SR, and have a significantly narrower range of shots / innovations when compared to SRT and in the context of ODI's.

From all of that, SG and RD would not have lasted till WC 2011 anyways. They would have left or been eased out --abruptly as they were, or via rotational transition.  This is totally inapplicable to SRT, given his performance.

Clearly, that strategy is paying off with RD and SG's exclusion from ODIs.. and imo (and I assume Rams') view could have been carried out even with SRT, his current performances notwithstanding.

This is a ridiculous suggestion wrt SRT -- dropping a player who is performing well and looking good for the future "event" comes only from an irrationally youth obsessed mindset prevalent in the Indian sports scene, where once close to 30 (forget 30 plus as FITM Bedi once said) every player is passed over for the next SRT. This is hardly the way sports is played across the world, even the much admired Australians yet we wish to use this for our sporting scenarios. And I am sure, some will refer to Hayden and Waugh and Australia in trying to talk about Australian transition without recognizing that Hayden was down and out, Waugh was never a great ODI player (not in SRT's class) without referring to the fact that in Australia, age is never the criteria for selection or retention (as it relates to transition planning), performance is.

I, for one, agree with Rams on this issue. While SRT is doing well and is still sometimes a delight to watch (the initial part of his innings can at best be described scratchy and he was hitting rank full tosses to fielders.. so he is clearly not at his best)..

Based on one innings ? that too, one on a slightly two paced pitch where the new ball was gripping ?

hello, some cricketing logic please ? New to the crease, eyes not set, new ball, fresher bowlers. Other than VS when on song, almost every batsman has this issue, including the other "opener" -- Gambhir suffers from these failings, pitch and bowling context taken into consideration.

and his contributions to Indian cricket are without doubt in the top .. it is not clear, his continued presence in the team is good for Indian team in the long run, specially from WC'11 perspective.

Isn't that the selector and Dhoni's call ? And why is it not good ? last I checked, India's biggest overseas win in recent years -- against Aus in the CB series came literally on his shoulders. As far as the long run, the guy is 35 (not 40), and he has already started preserving himself (in conjucntion with team management). Given his performance (which I dare say with conficdence is unlikely to be matched by any of the younger brigade), this does not make sense.

IMO, a replacement can easily be blooded in his spot without impacting team India's results.

I am sure a tendulkar is available a dime a dozen.

Perhaps Dhoni sees value in his new found "anchor" role and his presence in the locker room. Which is fine

Perhaps you shouldnt feel so bad that Dhoni has not "followed" your second prescription. A strike rate of 1 out of 2 is still pretty good, you know 

[ramshorns]

But making the case for exclusion by harping on how SRT is overrated, the failure in 2007 WC, never delivering where it mattered, failing in critical situations, is a dwarf (metaphorically) compared to xyz etc. -- simply does not pass the sniff test.

Agree.. but that is Rams' way of making his point

All jokes aside I clearly remember how most of these people singing praises here now, post-wc more or less said at that time for SRT to consider his options as far as ODI's are concerned and perhaps retire.

All my points I made on Tendulkar have merit in them and if you add the WC shortcoming it was time for all the big guns like AK/SRT/RD/SG to move on. 

Clearly different from misquoting me and saying since we lost to BD in WC2007 Tendulkar should retire.  Hardly what I suggested.

[ramshorns]

Dropping a performing player rarely happens in team sports.

Happens all the time in NFL, NBA, MLB.. it is not as rare as you think. Most recent example, TO from Cowboys.

The most common reasons for dropping a performing player are:
1. Extra-curriculur activities that do not help the team dynamics
2. Planning for future.. when you know/believe that for the next milestone, this performing player will not be available at the level expected and a replacement may perform better or would be a better fit.

The most legitimate  post-WC argument for dropping SRT/RD/SG from the ODI scheme of things - which I made and Dhoni was "supporting" in principle through his statements - was that a) the chances of SRT/RD/SG being in the best 11 from India for 2011 are low, b) we will need fresh set of players to replace their experience, c) it would be good to give 40-50 ODIs experience to these fresh set of players, and d) since it is difficult to give 40-50 ODI experience without trying a bunch of them (as some would fail).. it was important that the team move beyond these 3 and start looking for replacements right away.

Clearly, that strategy is paying off with RD and SG's exclusion from ODIs.. and imo (and I assume Rams') view could have been carried out even with SRT, his current performances notwithstanding.

I, for one, agree with Rams on this issue. While SRT is doing well and is still sometimes a delight to watch (the initial part of his innings can at best be described scratchy and he was hitting rank full tosses to fielders.. so he is clearly not at his best)..and his contributions to Indian cricket are without doubt in the top .. it is not clear, his continued presence in the team is good for Indian team in the long run, specially from WC'11 perspective. IMO, a replacement can easily be blooded in his spot without impacting team India's results. Perhaps Dhoni sees value in his new found "anchor" role and his presence in the locker room. Which is fine

WN:I completely agree with the premise of your post and it is precisely more or less what I am saying all along since the aftermath of the WC.

Actually the silent and image conscious Tendulkar sometimes can be as much a headache and a baggage as a Owens is, only that the latter is more vocal and want to hog the limelight while the former gets whatever he needs done while wanting to open, or pick and choose games, skip fitness tests after an injury at the NCA or whatever.

[LosingNow]

The most legitimate  post-WC argument for dropping SRT/RD/SG from the ODI scheme of things - which I made and Dhoni was "supporting" in principle through his statements - was that a) the chances of SRT/RD/SG being in the best 11 from India for 2011 are low, b) we will need fresh set of players to replace their experience, c) it would be good to give 40-50 ODIs experience to these fresh set of players, and d) since it is difficult to give 40-50 ODI experience without trying a bunch of them (as some would fail).. it was important that the team move beyond these 3 and start looking for replacements right away.

Fair approach and argument, WN. One can make a judgement call on whether SRT will be in form in 2011 and act accordingly. In deciding to drop SG, and RD well before that and retain SRT from among the 3, I believe we at least got to keep the person most likely to still have some shelf life in 2011.

As you mentioned, having one old man in the team is not strategically bad if the wisdom and experience helps. We have heard many accounts from the tyros on how Sachin's presence and sage advice have had a great effect. We should also appreciate how Jayasuriya, as veteran opener, has complemented Lanka as they build out their team on younger legs.

Your argument is understandable. But making the case for exclusion by harping on how SRT is overrated, the failure in 2007 WC, never delivering where it mattered, failing in critical situations, is a dwarf (metaphorically) compared to xyz etc. -- simply does not pass the sniff test.

i disagree with the premise of 'building up to the next world cup'. you're playing 100s of ODIs between world cups which admittedly at times are pointless, but why is the world cup the only important event in the calendar?

it is flawed as a system.

there is plenty more to play for in the 150 odd odis that come between world cups. in two years, India has come to be recognized as one of the top two ODI teams in the world.

is this not an important achievement? whether we win the next world cup or not is irrelevant. we are a STRONG, winning team at the moment and we probably will be for the next while.

i think our comprehensive defeat of SL (world cup finalists mind you, and the ones who beat us out of the WC) both home and away proved a strong point. and for me avenged the pain of the early WC exit. i should know about it, i was there.

never mind us defeating Aus in Aus in one of the more gruelling schedules in the ODI calendar, the CB series. (note again, the WC winners and WC runners up were in that tournament).

were we the worst team in the world just after the WC? all the other teams, including BD and Ireland, finished ahead of us, didnt they? the answer is no. we just lost 2 ODI matches. sorry that is just not conclusive evidence for me.

if we actually had an international ODI championship that lasted 1-2 years, and it culminated in playoffs, and we fared as abysmally in that as we did in the 07 WC (didnt make the playoffs or something), then yes i would say this is a humiliating moment that we are not one of the top 6 or something teams in the world. and that would warrant a dramatic restructuring etc.

but not out of losing 2 odis! sheesh. plenty of great teams have had losing streaks longer than 2!

simply putting the WC on a pedestal because we have a senseless international calendar is ridiculous. EVEN assuming that the WC is indeed THAT important, or perhaps the only important thing, then the window of opportunity we had for the last one - 3 odis - is too small to prove anything.

if you guys are putting it as '4 years of work that go into prepping a WC team' then im sorry 3 odis is not enough of a showcase. we play too many (hundreds more) between WCs for those 3 odis to assume the sort of significance you are alluding to.

just look at Aus at the moment in ODIs. what relevance does the 'world cup champion' tag hold to them? they lost to India, lost to SA, couldnt beat NZ (all at home - this is their recent record).


---

and on sachin tendulkar. apparently our understanding of cricket is different. i thought it was a team game. you know, that sometimes cohesive unit that plays together against other cohesive units and try to contribute equally to the team's success?

so why in the world does someone have to retire and be labelled a failure because he couldnt do superhuman things like score a 300 or chase 359 in a WC final, or somehow take India to the next stage in the 07 WC all on his own? its quite a simple system to comprehend actually: you win as a team and you lose as a team.
sorry you didnt get the memo about it. too bad. singular individual efforts are fruitless, and not inadequate if you dont get enough contributions to take your team over the line.
winning teams do not depend on one person to get them over the line.
it is a wonder that sachin helped get us over the line as consistently as he did back in the 90s and early 2000s. he certainly did NOT have a winning team while he performed out of sight. there was the occasional taste of success (yeah he was that good and for a long extended time) - like in sharjah in 98.
if anything you have to contrast his standalone career to india's fortunes and realize how good he is versus how bad the Indian team was. a player's ability to 'get the team over the line' is contingent on how many runs his team-mates score and how many wickets they take. not to mention what the opposition does!! no one can do it alone, and no one has.

someone not performing in 2 odis out of 3 is not warrant to label them a failure.

even more ridiculous is the notion that someone who scores 600+ runs (the most in any WC's history) that helps take his team to the WC final, and then get labelled an individual failure because he didnt score a magical 100 in the final that would get his team past 359.

even more ridiculous than that is the stubborn refusal to admit you are wrong when said 'choker' spends all of 2008 rubbing your face in his success. 100s in chases, 100s batting first you name it and its been done, its been done well, and its in the books.

clearly his decision to not retire (if that was even an option other than in your mind for whatever reason) was the right one.

"shamed the nation". please. grow up.


it may or may not interest you, but here's his performance in ODI finals:

Tournaments with 3+ teams -

filtered    1991-2008    38    37    5    1695    134    52.96    1964    86.30    5    10    4    167    20    

Tournaments with 5+ teams -


filtered    1993-2004    7    6    2    206    74    51.50    279    73.83    0    2    0    25    2    

(there's no way on cricinfo to filter for bilateral series 'finals')

Did we have a ticker-tape open bus parade after the CB win or the SL series win or for us being #2 or #3 in ODI table? To think that WC is not a special event is a folly and sounding more like a rationalization for our early elimination than anything else.

Don't get me wrong, I am happy that we are kicking Aussie, English and Lankan butts.. I am happy that we have been the best ODI side in the last 12+ months (I created a thread for that).. but let's call a spade a spade, the WC is important, our performance in WC07 was shambolic and we do not want that to be repeated in WC11.. if anything the team management, selectors have clearly laid out the vision/goal of winning WC11.

[ramshorns]

As much as I hate 20-20 and refuse to accept it as real cricket I was in India the night we won the 20-20 WC and it was going crazy in Hyderabad like no other.  Fire works late in the night after that Joginder over and what not.  CB simply pales in comparision though still a great win certainly over other wins like Natwest Trophy and few other tri-series wins what with we beating Aussies in their own back yard.  However no where close to a WC win when huge cash amounts were doled out the likes of which were never seen in the past. 

[RicePlateReddy]

As much as I hate 20-20 and refuse to accept it as real cricket I was in India the night we won the 20-20 WC and it was going crazy in Hyderabad like no other.  Fire works late in the night after that Joginder over and what not.  CB simply pales in comparision though still a great win certainly over other wins like Natwest Trophy and few other tri-series wins what with we beating Aussies in their own back yard.  However no where close to a WC win when huge cash amounts were doled out the likes of which were never seen in the past.

1. Dhoni said the CB series win was a greater victory than T20 World Cup (where he was captain too!). What do you have to say about that.

2. Also, after the CB series win, you had said this was India's greatest win in a limited over tournament after WC 1983. Do you recollect?

[RicePlateReddy]

Don't get me wrong, I am happy that we are kicking Aussie, English and Lankan butts.. I am happy that we have been the best ODI side in the last 12+ months (I created a thread for that).. but let's call a spade a spade, the WC is important, our performance in WC07 was shambolic and we do not want that to be repeated in WC11.. if anything the team management, selectors have clearly laid out the vision/goal of winning WC11.

In the spirit of calling a spade a spade, let us acknowledge that:

(a) We have no way of knowing if SRT will be washed out by 2011 at this moment. His recent performances suggest otherwise. McCullum as WK mentioned that he felt every shot of his was middled last game, except when he intentionally meant not to.

(b) If he can maintain the consistency until the World Cup, there is no good reason not to play him, just because of the pathetic '07 matches.

[LosingNow]

Don't get me wrong, I am happy that we are kicking Aussie, English and Lankan butts.. I am happy that we have been the best ODI side in the last 12+ months (I created a thread for that).. but let's call a spade a spade, the WC is important, our performance in WC07 was shambolic and we do not want that to be repeated in WC11.. if anything the team management, selectors have clearly laid out the vision/goal of winning WC11.

In the spirit of calling a spade a spade, let us acknowledge that:

(a) We have no way of knowing if SRT will be washed out by 2011 at this moment. His recent performances suggest otherwise. McCullum as WK mentioned that he felt every shot of his was middled last game, except when he intentionally meant not to.

(b) If he can maintain the consistency until the World Cup, there is no good reason not to play him, just because of the pathetic '07 matches.

Fair enough..

I think more than his cricket ability (which I am noticing a decline in already), I think his physical fitness is a bigger issue. This body has been through the grind for 20 years.. and with the workload these days.. I just don't see how he can still be at peak fitness levels (which is what WC excellence requires) by 2011. I mean it is elbow one day, back the other, and now stomach.. obvious signs of a beaten body.

[ramshorns]

As much as I hate 20-20 and refuse to accept it as real cricket I was in India the night we won the 20-20 WC and it was going crazy in Hyderabad like no other.  Fire works late in the night after that Joginder over and what not.  CB simply pales in comparision though still a great win certainly over other wins like Natwest Trophy and few other tri-series wins what with we beating Aussies in their own back yard.  However no where close to a WC win when huge cash amounts were doled out the likes of which were never seen in the past.

2. Also, after the CB series win, you had said this was India's greatest win in a limited over tournament after WC 1983. Do you recollect?

Yes I did say that and ranked it next to the 83' and 85' wins.  I still stand by it and give full credit to MSD/Tendulkar/GG/YS/Rohit/Kumar for winning us that.

But then 20-20 WC is totally different and I could not believe how it was recieved in India at the time.  I think the WC tag adds to the galmour and I will not dare comparing anything to a WC win.

1. Dhoni said the CB series win was a greater victory than T20 World Cup (where he was captain too!). What do you have to say about that.

That is totally different.  But if one's puts into perspective the whole thing do we realise the sheer magnitude or the enormity of it that does not equate to CB.  I am not sure how much stock one can put into Dhoni's words and take it at face value.  Even I personally to an extent agree with Dhoni and can see why he said that.

[dhruvdeepak]

As much as I hate 20-20 and refuse to accept it as real cricket I was in India the night we won the 20-20 WC and it was going crazy in Hyderabad like no other.  Fire works late in the night after that Joginder over and what not.  CB simply pales in comparision though still a great win certainly over other wins like Natwest Trophy and few other tri-series wins what with we beating Aussies in their own back yard.  However no where close to a WC win when huge cash amounts were doled out the likes of which were never seen in the past.

2. Also, after the CB series win, you had said this was India's greatest win in a limited over tournament after WC 1983. Do you recollect?

Yes I did say that and ranked it next to the 83' and 85' wins.  I still stand by it and give full credit to MSD/Tendulkar/GG/YS/Rohit/Kumar for winning us that.

But then 20-20 WC is totally different and I could not believe how it was recieved in India at the time.  I think the WC tag adds to the galmour and I will not dare comparing anything to a WC win.

1. Dhoni said the CB series win was a greater victory than T20 World Cup (where he was captain too!). What do you have to say about that.

That is totally different.  But if one's puts into perspective the whole thing do we realise the sheer magnitude or the enormity of it that does not equate to CB.  I am not sure how much stock one can put into Dhoni's words and take it at face value.  Even I personally to an extent agree with Dhoni and can see why he said that.

that's it isnt it. its just glamor. there's little more value in the WC tag other than the fact that you're playing against all the other teams.

but what makes it more important than consistently winning matches and series in the years between?

[12th_Man]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/cricket/news/article.cfm?c_id=29&objectid=10560835

Regardless of whether Sachin Tendulkar graces Seddon Park with his presence tomorrow, the Indian batting maestro has already treated New Zealand cricket followers to an enduring reminder of his class.

In only three innings on tour, Tendulkar has atoned for what was, by his exacting standards, a galling experience the last time he visited here in the summer of 2002-03.

Tendulkar, who rolled an ankle in training back then, had only a limited role in the seven-match one-day series won by 5-2 by a Shane Bond-inspired New Zealand.

In the three matches he was fit to play in Wellington, Auckland and Hamilton, one of modern day cricket's greats managed only a duck and two singles.

Tendulkar fared little better in two test match defeats, a 51 at the Basin Reserve his biggest contribution as India's batsmen were woefully exposed on green, seaming pitches under leaden skies.

Unusually for a batsman who has proved adept at adjusting to any conditions, New Zealand has not always proved a reliable source of runs for Mumbai's favourite son.

He made a duck in his test debut against New Zealand at Lancaster Park in February 1990 and the following month Tendulkar, still secondary school aged, also failed to score in his first ODI on New Zealand soil at Carisbrook.

Those tours apart the bowlers have generally suffered though - and no more so than in Christchurch on Sunday night when Tendulkar conjured a sublime 163 from 133 balls, his first ODI century on New Zealand soil.

It took a bruised abdominal muscle - which threatens his participation in game four - to curtail what might have been a unique ODI double hundred.

Instead he was satisfied with India's commanding 58-run victory, an unbeatable 2-0 series lead, his 43rd ODI ton and a record 58th man-of-the-match award to go with it.

Finally making a ODI hundred on this his seventh, and likely final, tour of New Zealand was also satisfying though as he pointed out, the 19-year wait was not as pronounced as it appeared.

Tendulkar has played only 18 of his 425 ODI matches in New Zealand and from those matches had a respectable 635 runs at 38.35.

"I got close to a hundred in the period around 1992-94 and the next tour was in 2002-03. I missed a few matches with my ankle injury, so I've not played that many games."

Tendulkar sat out the Twenty20 matches last month and since then has steadily got into the groove in the ODI arena.

He made 20 from 23 in Napier in his acclimatisation innings and then cooly collected 61 from 69 before the Wellington match was washed out.

However, the pointers to a substantial knock were unmistakable and it duly arrived on the drop-in pitch at Christchurch.

The batting conditions have certainly warmed his heart, though New Zealand bowlers obviously don't share his enthusiasm.

"Last time we came here it was sort of a disaster for both the sides," he said.

"The bowlers got false confidence and the batsmen were looking for technical problems where they didn't exist. I've never played on tracks like those."

And by the looks of it, never again.