"carrying the burden" in test cricket

i think this deserves its own thread.

here is one way to test this carrying the burden hypothesis. how about we take all the runs scored by tendulkar through his career and divide by all the runs scored by india in every innings he played? divide that by the number of times he got out. do the same analysis for dravid. generate similar numbers for lara, ponting, and kallis. i am happy to try and spend some time on this if we can agree that this is a reasonable measure of carrying the burden measured on some relative and local scale.

(runs scored by batsman in tests)/(runs scored by his team in the tests he featured in*number of outs)

if you don't agree with it, suggest a different metric and let's talk about it.

It is an overblown cliche as carrying the burden didn't exactly translate into winning. Sachin and Azahar played 69 matches together and Azahar did a decent job but doesn't get much credit because of the scandals he was involved in. As for your formula that's a good start but may not yield much as their career averages are within few points.


         M Inngs   NO   Runs   Avg   100s  50s 
Azahar: 69 103     6    4303  44.36  16    14
Sachin: 69 107    10    5218  53.79  19    21


Till 31-Dec-96
--------------
         M Inngs  NO  Runs   Avg    100s  50s    
Azahar: 46  67    3   2899   45.29  10     9
Sachin: 46  70    7   3106   49.30  10    15 

confuzzled dude wrote: As for your formula that's a good start but may not yield much as their career averages are within few points.

which is my point to begin with. i expect to find zero separation between dravid and tendulkar if you use my formula, but a huge difference between lara and the rest of the crowd. amongst indians my prediction is that gavaskar will come out way ahead. this is why i don't understand this carrying the burden business that's often attributed to tendulkar.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote: As for your formula that's a good start but may not yield much as their career averages are within few points.

which is my point to begin with. i expect to find zero separation between dravid and tendulkar if you use my formula, but a huge difference between lara and the rest of the crowd. amongst indians my prediction is that gavaskar will come out way ahead. this is why i don't understand this carrying the burden business that's often attributed to tendulkar.

SRT's star value and the adulation he commands is not based just on cold statistics. watching someone take on the likes of wasim akram, waqar younis etc. at a tender age of 16 leaves a lasting impression. he captured people's hearts in a way dravid/laxman/kumble could not.

bw wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote: As for your formula that's a good start but may not yield much as their career averages are within few points.

which is my point to begin with. i expect to find zero separation between dravid and tendulkar if you use my formula, but a huge difference between lara and the rest of the crowd. amongst indians my prediction is that gavaskar will come out way ahead. this is why i don't understand this carrying the burden business that's often attributed to tendulkar.

SRT's star value and the adulation he commands is not based just on cold statistics. watching someone take on the likes of wasim akram, waqar younis etc. at a tender age of 16 leaves a lasting impression. he captured people's hearts in a way dravid/laxman/kumble could not.

but when the adulation moves on to unsupportable statements of comparison of a cricketer's worth relative to this teammates, it is the responsibility of cricket lovers to question the veracity of such claims. i understand the adulation. we all have our favorites. mine are transparently clear too.

dravid captured my heart and all the cricket lovers in my family back in india. all die hard exclusive dravid fans.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

bw wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote: As for your formula that's a good start but may not yield much as their career averages are within few points.

which is my point to begin with. i expect to find zero separation between dravid and tendulkar if you use my formula, but a huge difference between lara and the rest of the crowd. amongst indians my prediction is that gavaskar will come out way ahead. this is why i don't understand this carrying the burden business that's often attributed to tendulkar.

SRT's star value and the adulation he commands is not based just on cold statistics. watching someone take on the likes of wasim akram, waqar younis etc. at a tender age of 16 leaves a lasting impression. he captured people's hearts in a way dravid/laxman/kumble could not.

but when the adulation moves on to unsupportable statements of comparison of a cricketer's worth relative to this teammates, it is the responsibility of cricket lovers to question the veracity of such claims. i understand the adulation. we all have our favorites. mine are transparently clear too.

dravid captured my heart and all the cricket lovers in my family back in india. all die hard exclusive dravid fans.

not exactly the appropriate time to do this, imo. SRT is retiring and let the fans celebrate him. a lot of hyperbole is natural at this time.

SRT has mass appeal especially because of the trajectory his career took and not to mention, the desert storm, wc 2003, etc. i don't think anyone takes away any credit from dravid wrt contribution in tests. the fact that he was #3 and not SRT says it all. dravid is revered mostly by educated, middle class cricket fans because they can relate to him (and kumble). SRT is adulated by one and all, from lychee farmers to housewives to cricket pundits.

i agree with bw. SRT did lots to boost indian cricket team's self esteem. he wrecked the rawalpindi express. he performed as a one man team till ganguly and dravid made their debuts. he gave some scintillating performances in sharjah leading to victory (over, esp. pakistan). at that time pakistan was the principal foe and nothing made us happier than defeating pakistan. he maintained the interest of the indian public in cricket and ensured that dravid and ganguly joined a world class team and not a shadow of a team like what west indies now is.

if you want to talk about boosting self esteem, there was excellent precedent in the generation prior to tendulkar. IMO the gentlemen who gave the indian team a spine were none other then messers gavaskar and kapil dev. facing up to the most feared pace battery to have graced the game led by the great steely andy roberts without a helmet and scoring boatloads of runs against them in a sustained manner is a greater achievement than scoring some off the flash-in-the pan shoaib akhtar.



and the standard response by the tendulkar groupies is that even gavaskar concedes that tendulkar is the greatest. well, gavaskar the BCCI stooge, compensated very well by fatty and his predecessors i am sure, is a very different beast than the fearless opening batsman that i admired in my boyhood. so i don't set much store by what he says now.  

bw is probably right that i should not be doing this now. but there is never a good time because these tendulkar acolytes never let up and at some point their claims should be questioned.

to be absolutely clear, nobody is denying tendulkar's greatness. but he has plenty of company in the stratosphere and is by no means alone. that's really all one wants to say.

andy roberts shares some memories of the best batsmen he bowled to (start watching from the 3:25 mark)

and btw retired brigadierwala - if you wanted to point out tendulkar's performance against quality fast bowling in pakistan, IMO his facing up to akram and a young younis when he was only 16 is a much better example.

Stats apart, the beauty of Tendulkar, from what I been told, is that while he didn't play perfect book cricket like Dravid, and while Saurav had lovable artistic shots and leadership, Tendulkar was the most naturally talented, the born-once-in-a-century types, who could pretty much strike any kinda shot on any kinda ball, and that's what thrilled the public and cricket pundits alike. Also, he didn't even finish high school, maybe because of this, or maybe because he is so short, or maybe there is a certain rawness in him, or for whatever other reason, public somehow held him dearer to their heart. The same public who loved Kapil Dev more than Gavaskar, because Gavaskar was the shrewd classy one, while Kapil Dev was the unpolished all hearts bared one. To top it all, Sachin is a real gentleman, along with Kumble and Dravid (heard from some cricket insiders). He never ever did anything anywhere anytime that would embarrass his family. Not to mention his undying humility, and a classy wife. There are many more reasons to love Sachin other than the cold hard stats you keep touting, not to mention at the worst timing. 

Another point, Gavaskar is too smart to be a BCCI stooge. He has a wonderful way with words, and if he didn't really think Tendulkar was the greatest, he would have said so in some clever way by now.

signed

-daughter of a diehard Sachin fan

i like tendulkar too.

-- nephew and son of diehard dravid fans.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:and btw retired brigadierwala - if you wanted to point out tendulkar's performance against quality fast bowling in pakistan, IMO his facing up to akram and a young younis when he was only 16 is a much better example.

that is correct. my comment "demolished the rawalpindi express" was a reference to that but i guess it was not clear. i never saw or followed those tests btw.

the 16 yr. old in karachi:

btw we don't need any cricket insiders to tell us about dravid's classiness. it pours out and clear as day every time he steps on to a cricket field or opens his mouth in public.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:btw we don't need any cricket insiders to tell us about dravid's classiness. it pours out and clear as day every time he steps on to a cricket field or opens his mouth in public.

I was talking about the character and nature, stuff that is usually only known to the unrelated manager types traveling with the teams. From that batch, those three - sachin, dravid and kumble - were the only flawless ones.

Brigadier HK (Retd) wrote:

the 16 yr. old in karachi:

great pic. wish azza hadn't screwed up his legacy so badly.

Brigadier HK (Retd) wrote:i agree with bw. SRT did lots to boost indian cricket team's self esteem. he wrecked the rawalpindi express. he performed as a one man team till ganguly and dravid made their debuts. he gave some scintillating performances in sharjah leading to victory (over, esp. pakistan). at that time pakistan was the principal foe and nothing made us happier than defeating pakistan. he maintained the interest of the indian public in cricket and ensured that dravid and ganguly joined a world class team and not a shadow of a team like what west indies now is.

Boosting self esteem! India won their first world  cup in '83 in England; Captain of that team Kapil Dev, was just 25 years old. India won '85 B&H world championship cup in Australia. Also, if you compare test record of the teams between '85-'90 & '90-96 you probably will notice that teams of the late '80s did better. All this takes nothing away from Sachin's individual greatness rather clarifies that he is not bigger than the game.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Brigadier HK (Retd) wrote:i agree with bw. SRT did lots to boost indian cricket team's self esteem. he wrecked the rawalpindi express. he performed as a one man team till ganguly and dravid made their debuts. he gave some scintillating performances in sharjah leading to victory (over, esp. pakistan). at that time pakistan was the principal foe and nothing made us happier than defeating pakistan. he maintained the interest of the indian public in cricket and ensured that dravid and ganguly joined a world class team and not a shadow of a team like what west indies now is.

Boosting self esteem! India won their first world  cup in '83 in England; Captain of that team Kapil Dev, was just 25 years old. India won '85 B&H world championship cup in Australia. Also, if you compare test record of the teams between '85-'90 & '90-96 you probably will notice that teams of the late '80s did better. All this takes nothing away from Sachin's individual greatness rather clarifies that he is not bigger than the game.

noted.

Brigadier HK (Retd) wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:and btw retired brigadierwala - if you wanted to point out tendulkar's performance against quality fast bowling in pakistan, IMO his facing up to akram and a young younis when he was only 16 is a much better example.

that is correct. my comment "demolished the rawalpindi express" was a reference to that but i guess it was not clear. i never saw or followed those tests btw.

the 16 yr. old in karachi:

mohammedtech!  Brigadier, are you a Pakistani jasoos in guise

confuzzled dude wrote:

Brigadier HK (Retd) wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:and btw retired brigadierwala - if you wanted to point out tendulkar's performance against quality fast bowling in pakistan, IMO his facing up to akram and a young younis when he was only 16 is a much better example.

that is correct. my comment "demolished the rawalpindi express" was a reference to that but i guess it was not clear. i never saw or followed those tests btw.

the 16 yr. old in karachi:

mohammedtech!  Brigadier, are you a Pakistani jasoos in guise

ha ha ha, no no no no. i filched this one from here: https://twitter.com/editorsuresh/status/400656447337283584/photo/1

Vidya Bagchi wrote:Stats apart, the beauty of Tendulkar, from what I been told, is that while he didn't play perfect book cricket like Dravid, and while Saurav had lovable artistic shots and leadership, Tendulkar was the most naturally talented, the born-once-in-a-century types, who could pretty much strike any kinda shot on any kinda ball, and that's what thrilled the public and cricket pundits alike. Also, he didn't even finish high school, maybe because of this, or maybe because he is so short, or maybe there is a certain rawness in him, or for whatever other reason, public somehow held him dearer to their heart. The same public who loved Kapil Dev more than Gavaskar, because Gavaskar was the shrewd classy one, while Kapil Dev was the unpolished all hearts bared one. To top it all, Sachin is a real gentleman, along with Kumble and Dravid (heard from some cricket insiders). He never ever did anything anywhere anytime that would embarrass his family. Not to mention his undying humility, and a classy wife. There are many more reasons to love Sachin other than the cold hard stats you keep touting, not to mention at the worst timing. 

Another point, Gavaskar is too smart to be a BCCI stooge. He has a wonderful way with words, and if he didn't really think Tendulkar was the greatest, he would have said so in some clever way by now.

signed

-daughter of a diehard Sachin fan

At first, I thought you were saying he didn't finish high school because of his height (presumably flunking out the b-ball core course requirement). Anyway, yeah, high school dropouts who are vertically challenged can be quite endearing:), but to wax serious for a moment, he was a great player, but even to the limited extent I have followed cricket over the past few years, 'SRT is God' is a little extreme. 

P.S> I also thought his speech was a little too verbose .

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Brigadier HK (Retd) wrote:

the 16 yr. old in karachi:

great pic. wish azza hadn't screwed up his legacy so badly.

what are you talking. Azza is a natural CONman. His (mis)deeds were what sharpened his skills and qualified him.

there is no denying that SRT, by far, is the most popular cricketer ever. nobody comes close. period.

there are several factors to that. even before he became an international cricketer, SRT was quite a hero in Mumbai. he had hit a hundred on his debut of ranji, irani and deodhar. when he toured pak as a 16-year-old, he created quite a buzz by refusing to go back despite taking a hit and then hitting abdul qadir for 4 sixes in an over in a (show) match. you treat a pakistani bowler twice your age with utter disdain in pakistan (of all countries) and you become an instant hero in india. from then on, it was only uphill for SRT. he saved a match by scoring a hundred on the debut tour of ENG. he then followed it with two hundreds on the debut tour of AUS, one of which was at WACA. then came another hundred (next best was 25) on the debut tour of SA (by far the toughest place to score runs even today, let alone 90s). then he toured sri lanka for the first time and scored a hundred there as well. the point i am trying to make is SRT got better and better with time and proved that he was no home-track bully. that he could handle all types of attacks anywhere.

during the 90s, SRT also had other heroics in ODIs to his name. he bowled the very last over against SA in the hero cup SF and won the match. in the final, he neutralized a very dangerous BCL with his bowling and we won that game (kumble took 6). he dominated the aussie bowling in the sharjah cup as well as in some asia cup or some such in dhaka. he was india's only hope in the '96 WC. he hit a hundred against kenya after losing his father. add to this his good bowling performances in ODIs in this decade.

in the next decade, he did fantastic in the 2003 WC and took IND to the semi final. while doing that he whacked akhtars and caddicks sending the entire nation into frenzy. he won us the VB cup in AUS (which i rate better than the WC win). he hit 170+- against NZ and AUS before he hit a double hundred in the ODIs. he kept getting better and better and better, scoring more and more runs while fighting injuries.

other factors are endorsements by the don himself (among other noted cricketers who did not always speak to BCCI's gun), warne's alleged nightmares, tremendous public sympathy for scoring in so many losing causes, doing splendid against the best team of the 90s - AUS consistently, a controversy-free career, humility and decent looks.

SRT was a complete cricketer. he did well, no dominated, all the formats of the game while batting, home or away. he was a safe fielder and he bowled well at times. it was impossible to not like such an endearing cricketer. a billion people considered him one of their own and never envied him. SRT deserves all that he has got.

Ball Taakre wrote: a billion people considered him one of their own and never envied him. SRT deserves all that he has got.

 
 
Another overused cliché, might be the effect of Bollywood. I don't think even half a billion Indians follow cricket.

you know what i meant!

Ball Taakre wrote:you know what i meant!

 
 
My problem with statements like this is, they imply Sachin is bigger than cricket and trivialize others accomplishments. At no point in his career India solely depended on him; Moreover, cricket fans know who to count on in crunch situations (in test matches) and it is not Sachin.

the book review link that nevada posted answers the central question i raised in this thread, viz. the percentage of tendulkar's contribution to the total runs scored by his team averaged through his career:

from nevada's link:

For starters, where does Tendulkar figure in the list of top 45 batsmen who have scored 15% or more of their team’s total runs in the course of their Test career? The answer: Nowhere. Predictably, Don Bradman tops the list, Brian Lara is at number three, and Sunil Gavaskar is at number 16. His absence on this list belies the claim often made that Tendulkar’s low impact was because he played in weak teams—for if he had been outdoing his teammates by that wide a margin, he would have figured somewhere near the top in this list of batsmen with the highest percentages of their team’s runs.

that should put to rest this carrying the burden nonsense.

eta: i expect dravid, ganguly, and laxman to also not be on this list. together and with tendulkar they ensured that none of them had an outsized impact individually on the team. being on this list is difficult - you're either superman or you played with a lousy team. that he's not on this list proves only that he's not the former, for he certainly didn't play with a lousy team for much of his career. quite the opposite.

and some related ODI stats from the same book review:

Here’s another: In ODIs, India won the match 67% of the time when Sachin scored a century. Sounds impressive? Well, this happens to be the lowest win percentage for any opener or top order batsman. For instance, India won 82% of the time when Tendulkar’s fellow opener Saurav Ganguly scored a century; Australia won 100% of the time when Adam Gilchrist scored a 100. The corresponding win percentages are 93% for Virender Sehwag, 84% for Brian Lara, 80% for Saeed Anwar, and 83% for Ricky Ponting.

noisy_dravidfan wrote:the book review link that nevada posted answers the central question i raised in this thread, viz. the percentage of tendulkar's contribution to the total runs scored by his team averaged through his career:

from nevada's link:

For starters, where does Tendulkar figure in the list of top 45 batsmen who have scored 15% or more of their team’s total runs in the course of their Test career? The answer: Nowhere. Predictably, Don Bradman tops the list, Brian Lara is at number three, and Sunil Gavaskar is at number 16. His absence on this list belies the claim often made that Tendulkar’s low impact was because he played in weak teams—for if he had been outdoing his teammates by that wide a margin, he would have figured somewhere near the top in this list of batsmen with the highest percentages of their team’s runs.

that should put to rest this carrying the burden nonsense.

eta: i expect dravid, ganguly, and laxman to also not be on this list. together and with tendulkar they ensured that none of them had an outsized impact individually on the team. being on this list is difficult - you're either superman or you played with a lousy team. that he's not on this list proves only that he's not the former, for he certainly didn't play with a lousy team for much of his career. quite the opposite.

the reason gavaksar and lara are on the list should also be clear. the don, well, he was a different story. even gavaskar was only 16. that's because of a little guy who had lumberjack wrists who could late cut and square cut like he was using a rapier, vengsarkar, and later in his career mohinder amarnath.

Speaking of boosting india's confidence, late 60s leadership of mansoor Ali than, exploits of gavaskar in wi and wadekar's team victory in England and spin quartet come first.
sachin is first in tv generation and the lead beneficiary of a econ
omically rising India .
classy dravid does not diminish the greatness of tendulkar.

noisy_dravidfan wrote:and some related ODI stats from the same book review:

Here’s another: In ODIs, India won the match 67% of the time when Sachin scored a century. Sounds impressive? Well, this happens to be the lowest win percentage for any opener or top order batsman. For instance, India won 82% of the time when Tendulkar’s fellow opener Saurav Ganguly scored a century; Australia won 100% of the time when Adam Gilchrist scored a 100. The corresponding win percentages are 93% for Virender Sehwag, 84% for Brian Lara, 80% for Saeed Anwar, and 83% for Ricky Ponting.

This is such a misleading stat; Sehwag at best is a mediocre ODI player