Jump to content

Talk:Sachin Tendulkar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 203.217.13.50 (talk) at 06:07, 4 March 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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)[reply]



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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

removed Kalyan 13:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]


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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]


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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Actually I'll give you OR on the last 2 sentences but the rest should be addressed. --LiamE 03:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
It does seem to be giving WP:UNDUE weight to one article. To prove that it is only one Wisden article and not Wisden as a whole, I hope you can cite the other articles from Wisden which say otherwise. GizzaDiscuss © 02:16, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

how the hell can anyone play 50 overs? are you mad? Sai2020 10:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

FA?

This shld be made into FA. Just use the standard set on Bhajjis page. Darrowen (talk) 01:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

people are that lazy to not even look in Flickr? look what i found.. Sai2020 10:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

new pics

how are they? Sai2020 10:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

: 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)[reply]

Done.DesiStrider (talk) 22:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sachin_Tendulkar&oldid=195743561"