Sachin Tendulkar is the Batting God…Against Everyone

For the amount of adulation and respect great sportsmen, indeed great men in general, are reported to receive, it is fairly amusing to watch the current crop of human race trying to bring down everything great about the modern world.

Maybe it is the global warming, or the ever increasing carbon foot print, but whatever it may be, the general consensus is that the successful are to be loathed and their image be torn down as quickly and swiftly as possible.

Or is it really a global consensus, or just a bunch of disgruntled “ journalists” trying to earn a name for themselves?

In Britain, a critique of Manchester United, easily the most successful club in the region over the past two decades is never too often heard. And the man who took them up there, is probably the most hated in the press. If someone has been bad to another, it is human nature to avoid, or stop talking, to the evil-doer.

Yet Ferguson is vilified for not wanting to interact with big media houses such as BBC and more recently Sky Sports. Why?” He has a duty towards his fans,” one hears them screaming. The screamers though, aren’t even close to being fans. Alas, they are the vultures who love seeing someone struggle in agony than enjoy in victory. They are in short failures in life.

Ferguson doesn’t need huge media houses to send his message to half the planet, which is indeed the size of the followers of Man United. He has at his “office” 75,000 visitors every match day, and a few million every month flock to United’s official website for the man’s thoughts. For a person so sought after, not wanting to see two media houses out of the plathora that exist is hardly an embargo upon the fans.

If there can be one parallel in sport to Ferguson, it could only be someone who is equally revered by a billion or so, yet hated by the few who either never made it (quo Moin Khan) or simply never tried. Yes, he is easily the most successful cricketer in the history of the sport.

He may not have been a part of an all conquering team, but he has certainly enjoyed every form of success barring a World Cup. He has been the name that has brought wealth to cricket. The Indian Premier League is nothing but a footnote on the books where entire columns of debit have been entered in front of his name.

The only cricketer to be so globally revered, acknowledged, and indeed appreciated, as the only of his sport who is allowed to mix it in the big money league of footballers, tennis stars and other global ambassadors to sport, it could hardly be a case of mistaken identity?

Ricky Ponting and Shane Warne arguably hailed from far superior sporting countries, already home to big sporting names in tennis and football. Brian Lara, with his proximity to the United States and penchant for doing audaciously well against England, and with the added bonus of being a natural English speaker, had far greater opportunities to establish himself as the face of his sport in the global arena.

Yet it was Sachin Tendulkar, an eerie name from an eerie corner of the planet, that the globe decided should bear the responsibility of bearing cricket’s baton. When Nike and Adidas fight it out over him in courts, you know what is at stake.

So are all these people fools? If Tendulkar was not the best at what he does, he wouldn’t appeal to them. Maria  Sharapova can sign a 45 million euro deal and still languish at 14th place on the ATP rankings, but then Tendulkar is hardly blessed with supermodel looks.

David Beckham, often ostracised for his public image as a chocolate boy, and not necessarily a good footballer, is today reiterating why he was once the first choice right midfield pick for Sir Alex. Mixing it with the likes of Ronaldinho, Pato, and Pirlo, Beckham’s image is getting repainted from poster boy, to comeback man, finally, the world is talking about Beckham because of his football, and not his Armani underwear.

Alas, we have deviated from the point. How does it matter that Tendulkar has never been spoken about for anything apart from his exploits on the field? Even while Lara, Ponting, and Warne embroiled themselves in controversy after controversy, with not even half of Tendulkar’s media glare on them, Tendulkar remained saint like. That in itself sets him apart from his peers. Of course, these things matter little when the task at hand is to degrade his status as a “batting god.”

The tactless “ writers ” need to fall at the feet of Cricinfo’s Statsguru, and criticise Tendulkar for scoring against Bangladesh.

Imagine Wayne Rooney getting slagged for scoring against Angola! While he would be justly vilified for failing to score against a weak footballing nation, you would never hear a criticism of him for actually doing his job.

If instead the afore mentioned genius had looked at more conclusive statistics, Tendulkar’s superiority would be crystal clear.

So let this writer do the needful and recap a story that for most is etched in memory.

Australia
That Tendulkar has treated Australians, the way Australians treat the rest of the cricketing world is enough to put directly at the head of all batsmen of his era. Lara averages a disappointing 42 in Australia is no coincidence. It’s a fate that has befallen almost all batsmen to travel down under. Except one of course.

In 58 innings against Australia, Lara has managed a very impressive 2856 runs, the most by any batsman since Tendulkar’s debut in ‘89. But Tendulkar out does him with 2748 in just three fewer innings.

Yet it is when the real test, playing in their most favoured home conditions, begins, that Tendulkar really turns it on. Tendulkar’s 1522 runs, easily the most by any batsman on Australian turf in the past two decades, not only out-do Lara’s 1469, they have taken the Master five fewer innings to achieve.

If there is any greater test of batsmanship than doing well against the best at their strongest, this writer has yet to witness it. Tendulkar has not only done well, he has literally had Australia on it’s knees. Averaging 58.53, when the next highest run getter, Lara, has averaged 41.97, a whooping 16.56 runs fewer per inning, it’s safe to say there are no exaggerations when proclaiming Tendulkar as a batting marvel, and the best Test batsman of his generation.

Best of the Rest
So if a batsman does so well against the best, it is assumed that the worst wouldn’t  be able to do much to stop him. Therefore, it shouldn’t be surprising that Tendulkar has piled on runs against the so called minnows. While Bangladesh and Zimbabwe have languished at the bottom of the Test ranking system, it is safe to say that West Indies and New Zealand have hardly fared better.

West Indies bowling never really recovered its sheen of the ‘80s, and New Zealand, though effective on their own turf, have never really had bowlers capable of picking twenty wickets in a Test match in the past two decades.

If not for leaders like Stephen Flemmins and gritty and disciplined bowlers like Vettori, New Zealand cricket may well have been below Bangladesh on the ICC table. Credit to Lara for fighting to keep West Indies a respectable team, but when it came to batting against the above four, it has been a cake walk, not only for Tendulkar, but also for every other batsman to have played them.

So it makes sense to reason, that if all runs scored against these teams are to be omitted we will get a clear picture of who the real quality batsman are.

As expected Lara, Tedulkar and Ponting cover the top three, and while Lara runs away as the leader of the pack, it is upon closer observation that Tendulkar’s real value comes to the fore. At home Lara and Ponting have been tigers, pouncing on opposition faster than you can say “hundred,” but away from home, neither average 50.

Tendulkar, scoring 4,907, just 201 fewer than Lara in five fewer innings, has more hundreds, and runs per innings than either Lara or Ponting. It really says something about the calibre of the cricketer.

It’s not surprising that Ponting and Lara struggle so much away from home. In Test cricket, where conditions vary so vastly from country to country, batting well away from home isn’t an easy task. In fact, for most, an average of over 40 is indeed a very impressive return from tours away from home. But Tendulkar is not “most batsmen.”

Tendulkar is Tendulkar, and he sets his own benchmark. An average of 53.33, five more than Lara and an astounding 12 more than Ponting, is indicative of the class and calibre of a cricketer who has absolutely no qualms about batting at London or Sydney or Colombo. Tendulkar treats each with equal disdain. Because Tendulkar is the best.

So Tendulkar thwarts Lara and Ponting irrespective of the opposition. Where does the debate lie next time there are calls for Tendulkar’s head? One can only imagine.