PDA

View Full Version : Top three match winners in contemporary test cricket!


Shehwar
April 16, 2005, 12:13 AM
There has been a lot of talk about who the best match winner is in contemporary test cricket lately ..When u talk about match winners its not really what his average is or how many runs a particular player scores…Its more got to do with in which situation he scores those runs and what sort of impact it has on the team’s chances of winning the match… The greatness of any player isn't measured just by the amount of runs he scores, or the way he gets them. The capability of an individual to rise to the occasion and play when the chips are down — this is the true barometer of a player's caliber...I have left out Tendulkar who arguably is one of the best batsmen if not the best simply because in spite of playing in a team which has the best batting line up in the world he keeps on failing time and again when it really matters…..The latest example is the 3rd and final test against Pakistan….What all was expected of him was to survive a session and a half….But once again he crumbled under pressure even after being given a life by Asim Kamal…Tendulkar the great player that he is unfortunately scores a lot of meaningless runs which hardly benefits his team…Put him in a pressure cooker situation and he is bound to fail 99% of the time…Yes…he scores a lot of runs….more runs than anybody else…But when asked to do it alone..when he is desperately needed…He fails!...It has been proved time and again… Here is a pretty old article on Sachin Tendulkar pointing out his inabilities to play vital innings when needed for India….:
Review on Tendulkar (http://www.mouthshut.com/review/Sachin_Tendulkar-16161-1.html)


My top three test cricket match winners in contemporary cricket::

1.Brian Lara: I’m sure very few will have any problems with Brian Lara’s position as the greatest match winner of his time…The guy plays in a team where he hardly gets any support from his fellow players…..Starting with his majestic 277 at Sydney in 92-93 against Australia to the match saving 400 not out where he single handedly saved Windies the blushes of a white wash against England, this genius is in a class of his own…..What keeps Lara ahead of the pack is that he thrives to play the most stunning and unbelievable match winning innings under pressure… One can never forget Lara's unbeaten 153 on a broken wicket at Barbados versus Australia in 1998 which won the match for his side… The Prince of Trinidad plays cricket in his very own unstoppable terms…..

Key Fact: 10 000 runs, two world records, 27 centuries including a quadruple, triple and five doubles!

Career Statistics:
10294 runs at an average of 53.33 with 27 centuries!
Highest Score: 400*


2.Inzamam-Ul-Huq: Pakistan’s ‘Captain Fantastic’….Whenever the heat is on….the one player Pakistan look up to is The Multan Giant……He is a proven champion match winner…He doesn’t have the luxury of an Indian or Australian batting line up behind him…...He knowz once he gets out, there won’t be any Pontings or Martins or Laxmans…..Every time this fellow moves onto the crease he knowz that its on him to deliver…Infact it is a norm to see Inzi walking in at Pakistan two or three down for virtually nothing….From the unbelievable last wicket partnership with Mushtaq against the Mighty Aussies in 94-95 to seal a famous win to the priceless 86 that he scored walking in at 10 for 3(2nd innings) in the first test against India in the test series…This champion batsman is the hallmark of an all-time great…..And at least we are well aware of his match winning abilities after the Multan episode…I’m sure no other international batsman would have won Pakistan the match from that situation…That was the only time I desperately wanted my favourite international batsman to get out…
A Fantastic Match Winner! (http://www.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2005/MAR/213754_INDPAK2004-05_24MAR2005.html)

Key Fact: Of the 21 hundreds (13 of them scored overseas!) he's scored, 16 of them have led to Pakistani victories. It's an astonishing high percentage, and among batsmen with at least 15 centuries, it's been bettered only by Don Bradman and Steve Waugh!

Career Statistics:
7453 runs at an average of 50.02 with 21 centuries!
Highest Score: 329



3.Rahul Dravid: ‘The Wall’ that he is famously known as…..And yes the wall he is….India’s crisis man and technically the best batsman in the world….Dravid is a signature of commitment and patience…He has won and saved matches for India, even to the extent of causing a miracle…What sets him apart is his consistency and temperament. Every team that he plays against hopes that he makes a mistake somewhere, but he has no apparent weakness..The toughest batsman to dismiss in test cricket…Rahul has played key roles in India's victories over Sri Lanka at Kandy in 2001, against England at Headingley in 2002, against the Aussies at Adelaide in 2003 and even against Pakistan last year at Rawalpindi… He has been instrumental in India winning Tests overseas….Whenever he scores "huge" tons, India has avoided defeat if not won…Every time India is in trouble, he’ll take up all the responsibly of the world on his shoulders.. The same cannot be said of others in the team…

Key Fact: He has scored more double centuries than any other Indian batsman past or present!

Career Statistics:
7696 runs at an average of 57.86 with 20 centuries!
Highest Score: 270


PS: This is entirely my opinion….I’ll look forward to the top three test cricket match winners of u ppl…cheers…..

Spitfire_x86
April 16, 2005, 12:34 AM
Where is Sehwag?

And Inzamam's 16 match winning centuries out of 21 means only that he doesn't play equally well when Pakistan loses. Tendulkar or Sehwag don't have so many match winning hundreds because their hundred:innings ratio is far better than Inzy's hundred:innings ratio.

Shehwar
April 16, 2005, 12:58 AM
:P Thats a funny statement Spitfire_x86
! Its obvious Inzi doesnt play equally well when Pakistan loses!!! and that is exactly what we are talking about here!!! Match winners!!!!...Its obvious Pakistan loses when Inzi doesn't score heavily cuz he is a match winner and when he fails! Pakistan fails! ...He hardly scores useless or meaningless runs...U wont see him bat against Hong Kong in an ODI cuz he doesn't give a damn about his average unlike 'some players' who are more than keen to pile up hundreds against Kenya, Zimbabwe and us!!!....What exactly are u trying to imply by ur statement???.....And by the way who is Sehwag???....Winning 3-4 matches doesn't make someone a great match winner....remind me of him once he consistently does it for the next 10 years and averages over 50 after 100 test matches.....cheers...

Edited on, April 16, 2005, 6:17 AM GMT, by Shehwar.

Special 1
April 16, 2005, 01:44 AM
Sum1 needs to add GILLY there

Shehwar
April 16, 2005, 02:05 AM
Yeah...Gilly wud definitely be in my top five......Still can't forget the innings of 149* that he played against Pakistan to secure an unlikely victory chasing 369 and coming in at 126/5 probably on his debut....

Spitfire_x86
April 16, 2005, 04:12 AM
Sachin scores 3 centuries in 3 tests. India wins one. Sachin's match winning century ratio is 1:3

Inzy scors 1 century in 3 tests. Pakistan wins one. Inzy's match winning century ratio is 1:1

So by looking at stats, Inzy seems to be a far better match winner, but in reality Sachin is equally good match winner. I bet if he played for Australia, then 90% of his centuries would become match winning centuries. Did you check Hayden, Ponting's "match winning century:total century" stats? It would surely look great.

And don't say "…Tendulkar the great player that he is unfortunately scores a lot of meaningless runs which hardly benefits his team", because big scores in losing matches are also important. In the first two ODI of last year's Ind vs. Pak ODI series, Inzy and Tendulkar's century couldn't win the match for their team, but these knocks kept the matches alive till the end and prevented the matches turning into one sided contests.

Edited on, April 16, 2005, 12:01 PM GMT, by Spitfire_x86.

Shehwar
April 16, 2005, 06:48 AM
Yeah......agreed......But u see bro.....To be considered a real match winner...one has to take into account whether one scores when it really matters.....I bet u cannot put a hand on ur heart and say that Tendulkar has delievered often when the chips were down and he was expected to do it on his own.....Anywayz u r obviously entitled to ur own opinion...take care.....

mwrkhan
April 16, 2005, 06:59 AM
The observations on Tendulkar are absolutely correct. I have followed his career since he made his debut in 1989. I even opened an earlier thread on this aspect.

Spitfire_x86
April 16, 2005, 07:00 AM
India demanded from him too often, so it isn't surprising that he couldn't deliver everytime.

Except his failure in the 3rd Test vs. Pakistan, I would consider other failures normal.

mwrkhan
April 16, 2005, 07:12 AM
Unlike Lara ...... who virtually carries the entire West Indian batting and has been responsible for most of the very few victories that the Windies have had recently ..... Tendulkar has the luxury of being a member of a strong batting line up. Whenever India has won recently and Tendulkar has scored big, someone else has also done the same (eg. Dravid, Sehwag), so the victory could not be attributed to Tendulkar alone. Could you name an instance when Tendulkar's innings was instrumental in an Indian victory? In tests only 11 of Tendulkar's 34 centuries have resulted in victory .... could a statistician look up in how many of those tests some other Indian batsman has also scored a century? Also, how many big innings has Tendulkar scored to save a test match? His debut century against England at Old Trafford (Edgebaston??) in 1990 was one such innings. How many more such innings has he played?

Spitfire_x86
April 16, 2005, 07:14 AM
Ask Tintin to post the stats

insideedge
April 16, 2005, 07:56 AM
Great players are remembered for their failures, lesser players are remembered for their successes. Some people consider Tendulkar a lesser batsmen because not all his centuries result in victory for his team. Still the number of times his centuries have helped his team win is higher than many of the other players who are considered match winners.

Inzamam ia a match winner against Bangladesh, but is he a match winner against Australia as well. He is not, whereas Tendulkar is a match winner against both.

Akib
April 16, 2005, 08:03 AM
I say Gilchrist, Inzi and Lara.

Shehwar
April 16, 2005, 08:53 AM
Originally posted by insideedge
...Inzamam ia a match winner against Bangladesh, but is he a match winner against Australia as well. He is not, whereas Tendulkar is a match winner against both.

U really have great knowledge about match winners!
:up:

Talking about Inzi not being a match winner against the Aussies...U'd probably say Mushtaq Ahmed won this match against The Aussies in pressure cooker stuation..right?....

Pakistan v Australia, 1994/95, 1st Test (http://www.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1994-95/AUS_IN_PAK/AUS_PAK_T1_28SEP-02OCT1994.html)

I can guaran-damn-tee that Tendulkar wud have got out like a pussy-cat in the situation Inzamam won Pakistan this match....This is just one mere example...cheers...

Ameer
April 16, 2005, 10:35 AM
Tendulkar is the better batsmen but I agree with Shewar, he's not a match winner like Inzamam. I would much rather have a century from Inzamam then a century from Tendulkar, just look at the ratio. You can blame that on the rest of the team but Tendulkar has WAY more support from other top batsmen, unlike Inzamam. Inzamam is the only top batsmen on Pakistan's team, compared to India's Dravid, Laxman, Sehwag, Ganguly and Tendulkar. But he STILL manages to produce match winning innings. Tendulkar's centuries:win ratio is still pathetic even with all those top-class batsmen to back him up.



Edited on, April 16, 2005, 3:38 PM GMT, by Ameer.

Edited on, April 16, 2005, 3:40 PM GMT, by Ameer.

Spitfire_x86
April 16, 2005, 12:32 PM
Pakistan v Australia, 1994/95, 1st Test

I can guaran-damn-tee that Tendulkar wud have got out like a pussy-cat in the situation Inzamam won Pakistan this match....This is just one mere example...cheers...
If Ian Healy didn't miss the chance of stumping, then you wouldn't be able to post this link.

Tendulkar took India to the brink of victory at 1st Test of the 1999 pakistan vs. India test series with an amazing century, which came while he was battling with back injury. India lost the match by 16 runs, maybe they wouldn't if somebody dropped Tendulkar's catch.

Spitfire_x86
April 16, 2005, 12:39 PM
The real fact is, both Tendulkar and Inzy wins matches for their teams. But Inzy gets more applause as match winner because he doesn't have many memorable performance in losing matches. On the other hand, Tendulkar has lot of memorable perfomances losing matches, too. That's why some clown invented the theory that he's not a matchwinner and somehow this theory quickly became very popular.

Ameer
April 16, 2005, 03:59 PM
Look... Inzamam's century:win ratio is 76% compared to Tendulkar's 32%. And Inzamam doesn't have the support from the likes of Sehwag, Laxman, Ganguly and Dravid. I agree though, this isn't a really good way of judging who is a match winner, but if you can come up with a better way, please share it with us.
And seriously... when's the last time Tendulkar has won a match for India?

Edited on, April 16, 2005, 9:01 PM GMT, by Ameer.

James90
April 16, 2005, 07:51 PM
1. Gilchrist (Hobart in particular but so many time he's slammed 100 to get the team out of trouble and then Australia went on to win)
2. Dravid (Adelaide and Rawalpinid in particular)
3. Inzamam (I'm still getting over Multan)

Other mentions: Strauss, Hoggard, McGrath, Laxman, Enamul Jnr :p

Rubayed
April 18, 2005, 12:35 AM
This whole arguement about who is a better match winner is killing me!;) Undoubtedly Sachin is a better batsman than any other. Sachin has won a lot of matches for India by himself BUT!!! without trying to compare him with Inzaman i would like to say that quite often when it was really expected of him he had let his team down and he is also not know as a great finisher of the game. That is where Inzamam excelled and scored quite often when it was really needed!

Tintin
April 18, 2005, 09:54 PM
how many of those tests some other Indian batsman has also scored a century? Also, how many big innings has Tendulkar scored to save a test match?



Score Team % Res H/A Vs Other high scores
Score

Away

119* 343/6 D A Eng 67*, 50
148* 483 D A Aus 206, 54
114 272 41.91 L A Aus 43, 34
111 227 48.90 D A Saf 25, 21
104* 359/4 W A SL 104, 95
122 219 55.71 L A Eng 18, 15
177 521 D A Eng 136, 84
169 359 47.08 L A Saf 115, 23
143 537/8 D A SL 126, 111
139 375 D A SL 147, 29
113 356 L A NZ 48, 34
124* 306/5 D A SL 78, 30
116 238 48.74 L A Aus 31, 28
155 379 40.90 L A Sa 105, 34
117 339 W A WI 69*, 67
193 628/8 W A Eng 148, 128
241* 705/7 D A Aus 178, 72
194* 675/5 W A Pak 309, 59
248* 526 W A BD 75, 71

Home

165 560/6 W H Eng 106, 78
142 511 W H SL 124, 61
179 546/9 D H WI 107, 97
148 512 D H SL 173, 93
155* 418/4 W H Aus 64, 64
177 424 L H Aus 74, 40
136 258 52.71 L H Pak 52, 10
126* 505/3 D H NZ 144, 75
217 583/7 D H NZ 125, 110
122 458/4 W H Zim 200*, 58
201* 609/6 D H Zim 162, 110
126 501 W H Aus 84, 81
103 291 D H Eng 75, 41
176 570/7 W H Zim 105, 100*
176 471/8 D H WI 154*, 27


Some other losing efforts

92 319 L A WI 78, 26
97 225 43.11 L H Sa 41, 22
76 & 176 43.18 L H A 26, 20
65 219 44, 39
86 252 L A WI 30, 28



More breakups later.

Arnab
April 18, 2005, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by Rubayed
This whole arguement about who is a better match winner is killing me!;) Undoubtedly Sachin is a better batsman than any other. Sachin has won a lot of matches for India by himself BUT!!! without trying to compare him with Inzaman i would like to say that quite often when it was really expected of him he had let his team down and he is also not know as a great finisher of the game. That is where Inzamam excelled and scored quite often when it was really needed!

I don't see it. Inzamam went through a LOT of horrible slumps for months. Not sachin.

AsifTheManRahman
April 19, 2005, 01:16 PM
well, one would have to agree that by saying "Sachin wasn't himself" or that "Sachin didn't give what he was expected of", one is actually referring to the immense talent and ability that this guy has, and the fact that expectations surrounding Sachin are usually for something superhumane. for example, if he scores four thirties in a row, fans go nuts, whereas if someone else does something similar, people are like...oh well, he's having some problems converting those to bigger ones but he'll come back.

chyicarus
April 19, 2005, 02:47 PM
I'm surprised not anyone mentioned any bowler. When i first read this article i thought that at least -1 or 2 bowlers will be mentioned.
In a Test match you have to get the side out in order to win matches, not just chase runs. Its true, definitely i agree to most of your theories but i personally think Glenn McGrath can turn matches with his bowling.

Shehwar
April 20, 2005, 02:13 AM
Yeah....I emphasized on the batsmen while writing it......And heck yeah...Mcgrath can sure turn matches with his bowling......

reverse_swing
April 22, 2005, 11:27 AM
Tendulkar has scored 22 tons when India has been setting the target in the one-dayers. Fifteen out of these 22 tons have resulted in a win for India while the seven ocassions on which Sachin scored a ton batting first, India lost! Moreover, when India has been chasing Sachin has truck 15 centuries, out of which 13 have resulted in wins while in two matches that Sachin scored a ton while chasing, India lost. The remaining 1 century at Chester-le-street vs England in 2002 ended with no result..due to rain.

source: TimesofIndia!

Shehwar
April 23, 2005, 02:03 AM
LoLz......Thats great bro.....absolutely great!......Can u do one thing though......remind me of these stats when we talk about ODI matchwinners.....We are talking about TEST CRICKET --- The match winners in the real thingy!..if u know wot i mean...cheers......

imranpk
April 23, 2005, 10:01 AM
lol :saint:

chyicarus
April 23, 2005, 11:42 AM
some ppl doesn't read the titile of the thread and just blurts out rubbish(pronounced like Geoff Boycott)

Again, i see batting prevailing over bowling in Test cricket. One time- bowlers used to rule over batters and getting a century in Test cricket was a huge achievement.
We're not even getting genuine bowlers in the likes of Wasim, Waqar, Lillee, Thompson, Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh, Wes Hall, etc etc. Because the emphasis is more on batting. And cricket is slowly becoming more an entertainment than a battle of wits and heart.

Akib
April 23, 2005, 12:13 PM
You have a good point chyicarus...

From the bowlers i think Ambrose. I think i read somewhere (i think cricinfo) he took 8 wickets agaisnt England.

reverse_swing
April 23, 2005, 02:11 PM
Edited on, April 23, 2005, 8:00 PM GMT, by reverse_swing.

chyicarus
April 23, 2005, 02:51 PM
I shouldn't have used those players as examples in this thread- simply becoz it has the word "comtemporary" in it. My Bad!

shaoun
April 25, 2005, 11:45 PM
i think inzaman is the best match winner rightnow. brian lara is one man team. west indies will really be in trouble after lara retires because even when he scores tons of runs west indies loses by innins. its really shame to see a great cricket team turn out to be like this.