Talk:Sachin Tendulkar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
Archive 1 |
[edit] Translation into hindi
I am trying to translate this article into hindi for the hindi wikipedia. Any help will be appreciated. I apologize if this is inappropriate place to ask for help. I will be happy to post this request at the appropriate forum if someone points me to it Truetyper (talk) 01:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bowling
I think Mr S Tendulkar is a moderately effective bowler. Dont you think so? He can bowl a ball by crcling his arm. Sometimes batesman misjudge strokes. I havent seen batsmen stroking to well. Even if they were it produces no effective outcome. The frequency of stroking also decreases. This indicates Mr Tendulkar is good wih his hands to prevent others from stroking, For his leg breaks does he bowl right or left handed? Because of BLIC2005 it says Left handed but I wanna know.
- He bowls all of his styles right-handed. It would be very freaky for someone to able to bowl with either hand. It would be incredibly handy to have such an ability. GizzaChat © 06:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
u'll be freaked, that Sachin does!! yes, he is omnidexter~blah blah, u know what i mean. he has said that in many interviews. he can bat and bowl with both hands. sometimes in the field, he even throws with his left. however, at international level he always bowls and bats with his right hand. he writes with his left Quork 20:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] I think criticism and controversy should be merged
Controversy leads to criticism and criticism is often caused by conotroversy hence they are related. Any other thoughts? GizzaChat © 00:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ball Tampering Incident with Mike Denness
Has there been a discussion in wikipedia on the Mike Denness ball tampering episode that was bought on Sachin Tendulkar. If not, can i add a summary on the incident under the controversies section? good cricketKalyan 18:42, 27 February 2007 hello(UTC)
- Done. Kalyan 13:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Photos
The two photos are exact same (one of them is zoomed and cropped). One is described to be from 2005 at Chepauk Stadium, and the other from 2006 at Chidambaram Stadium. deeptrivia (talk) 15:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- removed Kalyan 13:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a close shot as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.58.70 (talk) 05:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cake Incident
There is this very recent incident-him being photographed cutting a cake which looked like an indian tricolour. controversial. I've added a line about that in the controversies section-can someone elaborate. Wildpixs 05:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC) What about choice of Icecream? Is it quality or some foreign brand? All natiolasitic indians should consume kwality icecream made from indian cow milk as also amul butter. thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.68.30.2 (talk) 22:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Is this incident of any significance? Does this need mention? The case was a result of the anguish from recent world cup exit and need for publicity from social activists. Unless there is some development which implicate Tendulkar and FIR is filed, i suggest that this sentence be removed. Kalyan 15:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] What is POV
I would like to know whether South Africa being the number 2 team is a reliable fact or a Point of View. Doctor Bruno 02:19, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know exactly what you are talking about. If, however, there is a claim of SA being the number 2 team in ODI cricket that is in fact fully supportable and not POV. [1] --LiamE 03:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Formatting of the article
I feel that it would be better if we split up the international career part into Tests and ODI's like the records section. That would make it a lot better to present to the readers. Plz give your opinions abt this. Illidan reules 10:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 2nd best ever test batsman?
KNM - The lead claim of Sachin as the 2nd greatest Test batsman ever atributed to Wisden, as opposed to a Wisden article is massively overstating the case. It was one article using very specific criteria, giving lots of weight to high aggregates denied most cricketers of yesteryear, and throwing up some very idiosyncratic results. To claim that the source says Wisden and and not a Wisden article is silly. The source quoted is not a primary reference and should not be treated as such. To state it as "Wisden" as opposed to an article would suggest that there are no articles in Wisden that disagree.... and there are a great many articles in Wisden that do disagree. It isnt really for me to prove it was one article, it is for you to prove that that is the Wisden consensus which you are trying to validate from one second hand source. In a quick look I've found a Wisden article putting Dravid ahead of him so its questionable whether Wisden thinks he is the best batsman in the current Indian team let alone the second best ever. Other articles put solid cases for Hobbs, Hammond, Lara, Richards, Headley, Ponting and several others. Just for the record, although Sachin got second place in that list he was nowhere near Bradman. Bradman came in with a score of 1349, Sachin in second with 921.5, with several close behind him led by Richards with 913.9. If the same calculation were run again today, Sachin would most likey not make the top 5 as his average has dropped while the others in the top 5 would all get the same scores again. In addition Dravid and Ponting would no doubt be pushing for a place with their impressive form over recent years. --LiamE 03:16, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- Please see No Original Research. The entire case made by you above, just sounds like Original Research, and it doesn't help the debate here. The sentence in the article is supported with a citation. Thanks. - KNM Talk 03:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- Only the last sentence is OR, the rest clearly is not. Do you think I pulled those numbers or names out of the air? As it stands I feel the article is overstating a second hand source. --LiamE 03:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- Actually I'll give you OR on the last 2 sentences but the rest should be addressed. --LiamE 03:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- That's actually a good analysis, LiamE. Although I might agree on you, all your claims still remain personal opinions of two amateurs unless you can find some solid references backing them. I would be glad to see more Wisden articles analyzing Sachin's career and compared with other contemporaries. Gnanapiti 06:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- Well the Wisden 5 cricketers of the century had 100 pundits on the voting panel. 4 of the 5 winners were batsmen and Tendulkar was not one of them. So I think we can say that Wisden's panel does not think he is definitively second. Since Bradman and Sobers were on 100 and 90 and Sobers might be classed as an allrounder but Hobbs and Richards were at least ahead of Tendulkar on that count. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking the time to read it. My concern is simply that the article overstates Wisden's position. It is unfortunate that the original article seems to be not available online. I have read it, and I have also read several other second hand sources referring to it. To my mind [2] is a far less partisan reading of the Wisden source. The cite given is clearly not neutral. Bradman heads a list by a sunday mile and the headline reads "Sachin the second best ever" Do you really need me to link other wisden/cricinfo artcles where cases for the others are put? I think that relying on partisan second hand source to back up an extravagant claim does a Sachin a mis-service and detracts from his article. "Exceptional claims require exceptional sources" is wiki policy. The second best ever batsman a big claim. As it stands it suggests that there is no dissent to that position at Wisden when their other articles prove otherwise. All I suggest is it is noted it was a particular article that is being referred to but KNM disputes that for what I can only assume are reasons of personnal bias on the matter. --LiamE 16:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- That's actually a good analysis, LiamE. Although I might agree on you, all your claims still remain personal opinions of two amateurs unless you can find some solid references backing them. I would be glad to see more Wisden articles analyzing Sachin's career and compared with other contemporaries. Gnanapiti 06:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] tendulkar has played full 50 overs in a game???
has sachin tendulkar ever played full 50 overs starting from the first over till the last ball of the innings. if yes how many times has it been achieved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.122.18 (talk) 05:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
how the hell can anyone play 50 overs? are you mad? Sai2020 10:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Even in a Test Match, he does not open, so he cannot play from the first over (unless 2 wickets fall in the very first over), but then the Indian innings would not last long enough for him to play 50 overs (that means the other 8 people have to play around 50 overs from the other end. Jokes apart, may be he means Carrying the Bat in ODI - I guess he has done that may be more than once at that, but I am not sure.167.131.0.194 (talk) 22:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
he has carried his bat during his 186* and 141* although i would not think that the 141* would need special mention. Shanbhag.rohan 06:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] POV Pushing by BInguyen
User BInguyen selectively removes references to good performance by Sachin. I request him to stop this POC pushing. All my edits are cited. Yet this user removes all valid points. Doctor Bruno 08:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC) BInguyen.. When you are selectively removing Sachin's good scores, why are you persisting with the poor scores.. and why are you removing the poor performance of Dravid. Your edits, especially with regard to Sachin and Dravid are totally biased. You remove sentences regarding the good performances of Sachin and poor performance of Dravid and you have been doing this repeatedly. Doctor Bruno 08:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Tendulkar has played many games for full 50 overs one of which was against zimbawe in which he demolished olanga,s carrer
[edit] FA?
This shld be made into FA. Just use the standard set on Bhajjis page. Darrowen (talk) 01:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- First I'm going to go through and get rid of all the unnecessary stuff and weasel words etc. Then I'll add stuff. Darrowen (talk) 05:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestion
Will it be wise to move all the records and achievements to Achievements of Sachin Tendulkar or Records and Awards held by Sachin Tendulkar and to simply summarize the most notable ones here? Darrowen (talk) 06:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Photo?
There must be a better photo somewhere! If anyone is friendly with him or a fan club of sorts please request a photo be donated. Benjiboi 20:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
people are that lazy to not even look in Flickr? look what i found.. Sai2020 10:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] References
It would be helpful if a reference overhaul took place to format them all in the same style. Benjiboi 20:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] new pics
how are they? Sai2020 10:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Incorrect Numbers
Sachin's Career Aggregate and No. of Innings. As of January 17th 2008, Sachin's aggreagate was 11603 in 145 matches(and not 11606 in 144 matches). The average will of course change accordingly. Can someone fix that, this article is protected and I cannot change it.167.131.0.194 (talk) 22:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
: Looks like no one saw this until now - now it is 11616 runs in 145 matches and 235 innings at 55.31.71.236.190.42 (talk) 18:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Done.DesiStrider (talk) 22:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Test centuries
Hi - i noticed that the information in the Test Centuries section of the article is a subset & pale comparison to the List of international cricket centuries by Sachin Tendulkar page. I think the Test centuries table is redundant. I think it should be removed
My 2 cents is that a different table - summarizing Sachin's test centuries against opponents would be a better fit for the main page because it would give an overview.
--Kalyan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.8.222.82 (talk) 10:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed for removal of the centuries table, given that those details now has its own page, which in itself is a featured list. Anyone has any oppositions? - KNM Talk 07:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Since there was no opposition, I have gone ahead and removed the list of centuries, and added List of International cricket centuries by Sachin Tendulkar link in See Also section. - KNM Talk 18:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Last ODI?
Its rather presumptuous to list the last ODI as being 4 March 2008, the match isnt over yet and if Australia win it will be incorrect. Editing to show he is still active in this form of the game, for a few hours at least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.13.50 (talk) 06:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- I presume, you are referring to the Last ODI in the infobox. Well, there it actually means, the latest ODI and not as the last / final ODI of his career. IMO, his "last ODI" is still far away from now. - KNM Talk 07:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] UNSUPPORTED CLAIM OF GREATEST ODI PLAYER
I want to see the exact official article that states that Tendulkar was ranked the best ODI bat ever ahead of the incomparable King Viv. Till very recently, the 'great' Tendulkar averaged a tremendous 26 and 28 etc in Australia and South Africa and had a grand total of zero centuries on their soil and his only three centuries outside the dream-batting tracks of Asia came against formidable attacks like Zimbabwe and Kenya.
King Viv and many others played on much more difficult tracks, against much better bowlers, with no protective gear, and hardly any batsman-friendly rules. King Viv averaged around 50 all over Australia and other places and with a SR of 90+ when 30 and 70 were the hallmark of greatness. How then can Tendulkar with 40+ and 86 in an era where 90 seems to be the norm be ranked one? I shall tag the statement in the article if I do not see a valid reference (NOT another Wikipedia article) to it within the next two days.
I had said that I wanted a valid citation for Tendulkar being ranked 1 and King Viv at 2 in ODIs. King Viv was ranked 1 and still is by MOST non-Indian fans and many Indians as well, with Bevan at 2. Tendulkar has fattened his ODI stats with huge scores against weak attacks and on the great batting tracks of Asia. His averages are in the range of 26-28 against McGrath and Warne in Aus, while against Lillee, Thommo, Pascoe, Hogg, etc Viv averaged 48 with sr above 90.
This is not a site to write falsities and lies according to personal bias and 'patriotic' feelings.—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:Anup RamakrishnanAnup Ramakrishnan (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)|Anup RamakrishnanAnup Ramakrishnan (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)]] ([[User talk:Anup RamakrishnanAnup Ramakrishnan (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Anup RamakrishnanAnup Ramakrishnan (talk) 19:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)|contribs]])
-
-
- Well, some guys struggle more on slow and low tracks. eg Ponting in India. Also a lot of players slow down in the middle overs when the slow bowlers come on. Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 01:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- When Viv richards played, he did not got any kind of pressure, his team the best and he got excellent support from openers and above all he does not have pressure from people. Apart from it technology which is playing number one part in present game. Richards has excaped other teams seeing his batting style and analyasing his defects. Even though richards great player in those days, getting other player for bowlers was equally hard. More Over, west indies team has number one piece of bowling with marshall, ambrose, walsh and others, Tendulukar never had this advantage.
- On the other hand Sachin is facing severe pressure form teammate, most of the times, India will make good score only if Sachin plays(no matter India wins are looses). Sachin has to play more number of games per year, he did not get chance to practice under great bowlers like ambrose, walsh, marshall.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.68.25 (talk • contribs)
Yes, all those pressure of a poor batting line-up and of expectations from 1 billion+ people of the country blah blah blah blah .... Hear it so often from biased Tendulkar fans.
Tendulkar batting on good batting tracks has been hit by Waqar, Aaqib, Donald, Shoaib, Lee, Jones so on and on. On treacherous, uncovered tracks, King Viv battled the fastest and best ever bowlers like Thommo, Lillee, Pascoe, Hogg, Gilmour, Walker, Malone, Prior, Snow, Willis, Dilley, Botham, Imran, Nawaz, Kapil, Hadlee in both the unofficial Packer Series and otherwise. In the Packer Series he took on Procter and LeRoux of South Africa in addition to those above, and dismantled all these men in the toughest batting conditions without even a helmet. Tendulkar would not have lasted even two deliveries in those conditions. Even the biggest moron alive will tell you whether batting was more difficult in the 70s/80s and earlier or after 1990.
In the '90 and after period, Tendulkar had one to all of Azharuddin, Ganguly, Dravid, Laxman, Sehwag etc to support him - the second best lineups of the 90s after those of Australia, and much better than those from West Indies, England, New Zealand, and superior to South Africa, Sri Lanka and Pakistan as well.
And speaking of the 1 billion+ population, half of them do not get to eat two square meals a day, and his 'care' for the nation was well illustrated during the Ferrari Car Tax concession....
This page is quite easily the most C-grade and substandard page I have ever visited on this site. I have read and posted on quite a few topics and on many more pages, but have not seen any even remotely as cheap, biased, sullying and pathetic as this.
Though I am Indian, my sense of 'patriotism' stretches far beyond adoring a scumbag who at worth over 200 crores INR shows his true bloodlines and class by seeking a rebate of 1.12 crores of tax on a free gift. FACT remains - and this is for ALL Tendulkar fans to know that this man is not a matchwinner one of the most essential qualities for a batsman to be among the greatest ever. Despite playing all his career on good batting pitches, with loads of protective gear, so many batsmen-protecting rules, and inferior bowlers.
His averages and SR in ODIs are still inferior to Vivian Richards', who had figures of 48 and 90+ across all cricket-playing nations, when 30 and 70 respectively were great figures, and was neither a home-bully nor a flat-track bully like Tendulkar. He played in an era of uncovered, difficult pitches, without even a helmet, no batsman-friendly rules and against far better attacks. His era saw Australia, England, India and New Zealand all have superior attacks to those they had in the 90s and this decade. Even Pakistan had a better attack, while South Africa were not playing, and Sri Lanka hardly played or figured. Look up how many Tendulkar has plundered against weak attacks like Zimbabwe and Kenya etc.
Till now I was civil in my posting but I shall rip this page apart if wrongful assertions are forced down anybody's throat without valid citations ever ever ever again only to glorify this most overrated batsman, player and person in the history of Modern Sport. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anup Ramakrishnan (talk • contribs) 00:30, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
--Sounds like someone is bitter! 'Scumbag'? Don't for a moment think that your petty emotional ramblings and pathetic threats ('I will rip this page apart...') will somehow help moderate this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.192.78 (talk) 19:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] LAST CALL
Okay, this is the very last instance that I am just reverting the last edit. I shall report this page and resort to other drastic measures if I do not find the citation for a fact that never was - that he was chosen the best ODI batsman ever. He WAS NOT, there is no way in hell he can be - a man who averages a pathetic 26 to 28 in ODIs against Aus, SA, Eng etc in their grounds, with a grand 3 centuries outside the batsman friendly tracks of Asia, that too against teams like Zimbabwe, Kenya etc, is far from being the greatest ODI bat ever. KING Vivian Richards was voted the best ODI batsman ever by Wisden in 2002, and that is the bottomline that some of you pathetic fans of this man cannot digest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anup Ramakrishnan (talk • contribs) 14:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please restrain your langauage. Please state your requirement in 2 simple sentences. If you are looking for proof on Sachin being the best ODI batsman, please find the same here. With regards to the quality of the article, i absolutely agree. I fixed the contents of his early life, stats, created a seperate page listing his ODI MoM awards, business and awards. I didn't have time to fix his long career. Instead of writing strong statements deploring the current state of affairs, please go ahead and fix the article. --Kalyan (talk) 13:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
--What a pathetic 'fan' of Viv this Anup Ramakrishnan is. I'm sure Viv would be embarassed himself if he read these ramblings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.192.78 (talk) 19:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Article Style
I think the article style is less encyclopaedic and more like that of a fan site. Take a look at the subheadings:
- Rise through the ranks
- injuries and decline
- return to form.
Also there are many unreferenced credits . The very second paragraph is on "Playing style" whereas the general tendecy is to have a sportsman's life history after the introduction. Can someone please look into this? --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 07:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)