What's all the fuss about
Everytime there is a list made about batting and someone is ranked above Sachin Tendulkar, the Indian media gets fodder that can last a week. Retired "experts" (that's what Arun Lal and Maninder Singh claim to be anyway) get to make a presence on one news channel or the other and the highly patriotic kinds get to do the "white bashing" although I am sure at least some of the formula makers for any cricket list are Indians.
So here is the one that is causing the current uproar in the media. Frankly the list has existed for many months now and I have seen it a few times in the past. As many batsmen have recently gone up in the 930 points zone, I wanted to see where they stood in the all time list. I heard somewhere that the ICC in some press release mentioned about the recently retired Matty Hayden being the 10th best batsman of all time according to this list. That's where our journalists got into the act and picked up the gun, bashing the list left, right and center for Sachin Tendulkar being ranked 26th. A news channel went to the extent of creating a story that I am not sure was melodramatic or inflammatory, flashing names like Clyde Walcott, Everton Weeks and Jack Hobbs amidst bang bang music and then asking the viewers if they know such peasants. If you ignored the content, you would be excused for mistaking the story for something about 26/11 instead of a futile cricket list. My answer to such channels is that they have no right to do cricket reporting if they haven't heard these names.
The ICC page states what the list is about, The ratings shown are the highest points totals these players have attained and no player is allowed to appear on the list more than once. In other words, it tries to identify which player's most purple patch was more purple than others'. If that wasn't simple enough, it tries to rank the most prolific run scoring times of a player, not the players themselves, with the condition that no player can appear more than once. It works over a sliding window, with more recent performances getting significance and performances going out of the window getting less weightage. The player's rating decreases with every failure. You even lose points for missing matches. So if you had a couple of seasons where you scored prolifically with very few low scores and stayed fit, you are bound to zoom to the top.
So let's see where Sachin Tendulkar stands now. He has been an unfortunate batsman in test cricket. Unfortunate because during the distinguished 20 years he has spent on the cricket field, our equally distinguished BCCI has not been able to afford him a single 5 test home series. When he was at his very best, the time between 1997 and 2001 (culminating in him reaching his top ranking on 21st Feb 2002), India played one series that lasted more than 3 matches. That was right at the start of his peak in 1997 against WI. By the time they played their next 5-tester, against the same opposition at the start of 2002, his peak had began to wear off. During this time, he took on the likes of McGrath, Warne, Akram, Younis, Saqlain, Murali, Donald, Ambrose, Walsh and Pollock, bowlers made of real stuff (which makes him and Lara the 2 best batsmen of modern era). But even after such an illustrious career, his highest series aggregate is a not so earth shattering 493, that he got during the last Aussie summmer. This illustrates his batting has remained consistent over an inhumanly long period of time, but always above that 400 nanometer wavelength range, a spot that could qualify as violently purple.
Sample this against the heights some of the recent batsmen have concurred. Since England's 2005 ashes battery started breaking a bone in their own body instead of the opponents' and with the Warne-McGrath era over, there has been a sharp increase in test match bowling impotency. The recent arrivals of Steyn and Mendis are good signs but batsmen have made merry in the meantime. Ponting, with a highest series aggregate of 706 (which was pre 2005), has led the charge with Yousuf (highest series aggregate 665), Kallis (highest series aggregate 712), Sangakkara (highest series aggregate 428) and Chanderpaul (highest series aggregate 562) all more or less managing a Viv Richards of 1976. It doesn't make their contribution any less heroic, but just adds a perspective to the situation.
If you had to debate where Tendulkar lies on the all time test list minus Bradman (he is unanimously number 1), I would definitely put Lara before him. Steve Waugh and Rahul Dravid would follow on Sachin's heels. And although he has struggled against quality spin, Ricky Ponting has been so rich at other times, that only an inexplicable soft spot in my heart for Sachin and an equally inexplicable hard one for Ricky makes me put Sachin ahead. I haven't watched the likes of Sobers, Richards, Gavaskar, Hobbs, Headly and Hammonds to be able to pass a judgement, but it would be extreme bias to take Sachin out of the top 10 if not the top 5.
What is more baffling though is his twelfth position here. There is no match for his extreme run-making of 1998 and he has been peerless in that format. No amount of Viv Richards or Kevin Peterson or MS Dhoni can match what he has achieved in ODIs. What's equally baffling is Michael Bevan's 13th position for he should be the 2nd best ODI batsman of all time and has had equally intense run zones during his career. So after all, the hyper Indian media might have a point, maybe there is a chink in the formula.
So here is the one that is causing the current uproar in the media. Frankly the list has existed for many months now and I have seen it a few times in the past. As many batsmen have recently gone up in the 930 points zone, I wanted to see where they stood in the all time list. I heard somewhere that the ICC in some press release mentioned about the recently retired Matty Hayden being the 10th best batsman of all time according to this list. That's where our journalists got into the act and picked up the gun, bashing the list left, right and center for Sachin Tendulkar being ranked 26th. A news channel went to the extent of creating a story that I am not sure was melodramatic or inflammatory, flashing names like Clyde Walcott, Everton Weeks and Jack Hobbs amidst bang bang music and then asking the viewers if they know such peasants. If you ignored the content, you would be excused for mistaking the story for something about 26/11 instead of a futile cricket list. My answer to such channels is that they have no right to do cricket reporting if they haven't heard these names.
The ICC page states what the list is about, The ratings shown are the highest points totals these players have attained and no player is allowed to appear on the list more than once. In other words, it tries to identify which player's most purple patch was more purple than others'. If that wasn't simple enough, it tries to rank the most prolific run scoring times of a player, not the players themselves, with the condition that no player can appear more than once. It works over a sliding window, with more recent performances getting significance and performances going out of the window getting less weightage. The player's rating decreases with every failure. You even lose points for missing matches. So if you had a couple of seasons where you scored prolifically with very few low scores and stayed fit, you are bound to zoom to the top.
So let's see where Sachin Tendulkar stands now. He has been an unfortunate batsman in test cricket. Unfortunate because during the distinguished 20 years he has spent on the cricket field, our equally distinguished BCCI has not been able to afford him a single 5 test home series. When he was at his very best, the time between 1997 and 2001 (culminating in him reaching his top ranking on 21st Feb 2002), India played one series that lasted more than 3 matches. That was right at the start of his peak in 1997 against WI. By the time they played their next 5-tester, against the same opposition at the start of 2002, his peak had began to wear off. During this time, he took on the likes of McGrath, Warne, Akram, Younis, Saqlain, Murali, Donald, Ambrose, Walsh and Pollock, bowlers made of real stuff (which makes him and Lara the 2 best batsmen of modern era). But even after such an illustrious career, his highest series aggregate is a not so earth shattering 493, that he got during the last Aussie summmer. This illustrates his batting has remained consistent over an inhumanly long period of time, but always above that 400 nanometer wavelength range, a spot that could qualify as violently purple.
Sample this against the heights some of the recent batsmen have concurred. Since England's 2005 ashes battery started breaking a bone in their own body instead of the opponents' and with the Warne-McGrath era over, there has been a sharp increase in test match bowling impotency. The recent arrivals of Steyn and Mendis are good signs but batsmen have made merry in the meantime. Ponting, with a highest series aggregate of 706 (which was pre 2005), has led the charge with Yousuf (highest series aggregate 665), Kallis (highest series aggregate 712), Sangakkara (highest series aggregate 428) and Chanderpaul (highest series aggregate 562) all more or less managing a Viv Richards of 1976. It doesn't make their contribution any less heroic, but just adds a perspective to the situation.
If you had to debate where Tendulkar lies on the all time test list minus Bradman (he is unanimously number 1), I would definitely put Lara before him. Steve Waugh and Rahul Dravid would follow on Sachin's heels. And although he has struggled against quality spin, Ricky Ponting has been so rich at other times, that only an inexplicable soft spot in my heart for Sachin and an equally inexplicable hard one for Ricky makes me put Sachin ahead. I haven't watched the likes of Sobers, Richards, Gavaskar, Hobbs, Headly and Hammonds to be able to pass a judgement, but it would be extreme bias to take Sachin out of the top 10 if not the top 5.
What is more baffling though is his twelfth position here. There is no match for his extreme run-making of 1998 and he has been peerless in that format. No amount of Viv Richards or Kevin Peterson or MS Dhoni can match what he has achieved in ODIs. What's equally baffling is Michael Bevan's 13th position for he should be the 2nd best ODI batsman of all time and has had equally intense run zones during his career. So after all, the hyper Indian media might have a point, maybe there is a chink in the formula.
posted by w_o @ 5:47 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home