|
Magazine
Is Sachin an all-time great?
C. RAMMANOHAR REDDY
AS the war clouds over India and Pakistan begin to drift away, we can perhaps afford the luxury of turning our attention to less life-threatening issues. What better "time-pass" subject than cricket?
The question I have chosen to ask is as close as you can get to life and death for Indian fans of cricket: How great a Test batsman is Sachin Tendulkar? He can destroy any attack on any pitch. He is that rare batsman who has all the shots in the book. And by the time he retires he would have set up records that will take another 50 years to surpass. But there is still a nagging question — does Sachin really rank alongside the "all-time greats"?
It is one thing to have an excellent batting average. But what matters in the end is victories in Test matches. A truly great batsman must surely be able to transform the fortunes of his team. So the question then becomes: The best batsmen (and bowlers) create victories for their teams. Compared to other outstanding batsmen of the present and earlier generations, how does Sachin fare when it comes to making a contribution to Test wins?
The entire analysis here is based on numbers. Of course, statistics cannot provide the complete answer. One has to make a qualitative assessment of the opposition, the state of the pitch, the prevailing rules, etc. But such assessments cannot be reduced to numbers they need the powers of persuasive language. Since I can only dream of a future life when I can write like a Neville Cardus or C.L.R. James, I shall stick here to statistics. If Sachin Tendulkar makes a difference in India's Test wins, then his batting average must have been better in those matches. This does beg the question a bit — does India play better when Sachin does well or does Sachin play well when the Indian team does well? But we are talking of greatness, and the greats should be making their teams' fortunes.
The accompanying table compares Sachin's record in all Tests with his batting in Indian Test victories. It also compares Sachin's record with a select group of batsmen from the past and the present. The table says three things. First, Sachin's average is better in the 24 victories in which he has participated. No question then of Sachin doing poorly in the matches India has won. All the batsmen on the list — Gavaskar is the exception — show a better record in victories. But, and this is the second point, while Sachin has done better in the Tests India has won, his performance is not all that better as one would expect. This is where he compares poorly with three others in the list. Sobers, Steve Waugh and Greg Chappell seem to have set up wins or produced their best on the big occasion. Their average in matches won is 20 runs or more than their overall average — a truly exceptional record. Steve Waugh is hardly as complete a batsman as Sachin. But a really great Sachin should be coming up with a record like that of Waugh. Third, have Sachin's centuries come more during India's Test match wins? Again, Sachin's fares poorly here. Most of the batsmen in the list seem to have reserved their tons for the big occasion. More than 75 per cent of the Waugh tons came in matches that Australia won, 50 per cent in the case of Viv Richards and 46 per cent in Sobers. But only six of Sachin's 27 centuries — a lowly 22 per cent - accompanied an Indian victory. If we had an index of usefulness of centuries, then Sachin would figure way down in the league.
Every one will have two and a half questions about this comparison. The half question will be about the basis for selection of the players in the list. The choice was largely arbitrary but covered most players after Bradman with an average of 50 plus and had scored more than 7,000 Test runs. You can include more batsmen from all teams since 1945 — as I have tried elsewhere — and the results are not any more flattering to Sachin. Then the question will be that the record in victories alone does not count. The performance in matches saved must also be considered. But if you look closely you will find that Sachin has delivered in this respect in only two matches: In Manchester in 1990 when against England he scored his first century to save India from possible defeat and then in 1999 against New Zealand when he scored another ton in the second innings in similar circumstances. A final question will be that even a great batsman cannot carry the team on his shoulders, especially when the team is full of inconsistent performers like Ganguly, Dravid and Laxman. Yes, but again look at others who have to carry a similar burden like Andy Flower in the "single batsman team" of Zimbabwe. Flower has an overall average of 54.7 in 65 Tests. But he has the exceptional average of 84.5 in the seven Zimbabwean wins.
Sachin Tendulkar is an exciting, talented and outstanding batsman. But if one important criterion of greatness is setting up Test victories, Sachin is not yet up there in the pantheon. Given his prowess, Sachin does not seem to be able to set up a victory as often as he should. Now, having delivered this verdict I can only wait with trepidation for the punishment that awaits those who question icons.
E-mail the writer at crr100@india.com
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
|
