Warne Vs Tendulkar

[aflcliche]

My question is, who is the better cricketer?

Obviously completely different playing roles, but that may make the discussion more interesting.
Longevity and statistics are on Tendulkar's side, but Warne revitalised the art of spin bowling and contributed to more victories (obviously because bowlers play a bigger role in winning games).

Tendulkar is seen by many to be top 3 batsmen of all time, while Warne was chosen as one of Wisden's five cricketers of the century. If I were picking a team, I would choose Warne first (as I think most people would, because wickets win matches, but I don't want that to influence the question of who do you think is better cricketer?

Thanks for your contributions.

 

[Torz]

Warne. You could find an equivalent Tendulkar (or close to) fairly easily, but Warne doesn't have too many peers. Murali is probably the exception.

 

[forwardflanker]

Warne despite being overweight and a bogan was all about the team. Can't say the same for Tendulkar. Also agree with the above guy who said it's easier to find batsman who are in same ball park as Tendulkar in terms of ability. So the answer is Warne and it's not close imo

 

[Blue1980]

Warne. You could find an equivalent Tendulkar (or close to) fairly easily, but Warne doesn't have too many peers. Murali is probably the exception.

Agree, India would have won more tests with Warne than Tendulkar

 

[imadodgyumpire]

My question is, who is the better cricketer?

Obviously completely different playing roles, but that may make the discussion more interesting.
Longevity and statistics are on Tendulkar's side, but Warne revitalised the art of spin bowling and contributed to more victories (obviously because bowlers play a bigger role in winning games).

Tendulkar is seen by many to be top 3 batsmen of all time, while Warne was chosen as one of Wisden's five cricketers of the century. If I were picking a team, I would choose Warne first (as I think most people would, because wickets win matches, but I don't want that to influence the question of who do you think is better cricketer?

Thanks for your contributions.

Unfortunately, this point makes you comparison void.

 

[forwardflanker]

Unfortunately, this point makes you comparison void.

What are you talking about? We're talking about test cricket here son, not 20/20. Quality bowler beats a quality bat everyday of the week just like a quality tall will beat a quality midfielder.

Probably the best example I can think of is listing in order of importance the key players in our invincible side of about 10 years ago.

1. Warne.
2. McGrath
3. Gilchrist
4. Ponting
5. Hayden

imo

 

[imadodgyumpire]

What are you talking about?

Didn't the OP say "obviously because bowlers play a bigger role in winning games"? Everyone knows that, they're the most important players in cricket. So, why is he choosing to compare a batsmen and a bowler?

 

[Pera]

Warne. You could find an equivalent Tendulkar (or close to) fairly easily, but Warne doesn't have too many peers. Murali is probably the exception.

You wont find many players averaging just over 57 against probably the greatest test side ever. Tendulkar frequently walloped the best bowlers all over the park while Warne has historically struggled against the better batsman like Lara and Sachin. Warne also struggled in India, where he really should have dominated.

You could make thousands of arguments for and against in these comparisons. If it was a school yard and I had first pick, I'd choose Sachin. Who could really care though?

 

[Slax]

You wont find many players averaging just over 57 against probably the greatest test side ever. Tendulkar frequently walloped the best bowlers all over the park while Warne has historically struggled against the better batsman like Lara and Sachin. Warne also struggled in India, where he really should have dominated.

You could make thousands of arguments for and against in these comparisons. If it was a school yard and I had first pick, I'd choose Sachin. Who could really care though?

Didn't VVS average more against Aus than Sachin?

I actually find all the sachin talk a little confusing because I actually don't rate him in my top 3 batsmen of over the last 20 years. I also like to take into consideration not just the opposition but who you have standing down the other end of the pitch, if you consistently have top batsmen with you it is easier than if you don't. Brian Lara only ever had Chanderpaul to bat with for most of his career, the rest of the team were very unreliable.

 

[sherb]

Warne was the better bowler.

Tendulkar the better batsman.

End of discussion.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Warne for me.

 

[Pera]

Didn't VVS average more against Aus than Sachin?

I actually find all the sachin talk a little confusing because I actually don't rate him in my top 3 batsmen of over the last 20 years. I also like to take into consideration not just the opposition but who you have standing down the other end of the pitch, if you consistently have top batsmen with you it is easier than if you don't. Brian Lara only ever had Chanderpaul to bat with for most of his career, the rest of the team were very unreliable.

Nah 49 for VVS. Im sure the his performances in the last series though would have knocked his average down against Australia.

And in that case, you dont rate Warne, considering he had McGath (arguably the greatest quick ever), Gillespie, Lee, etc bowling at the other end?

 

[Slax]

Nah 49 for VVS. Im sure the his performances in the last series though would have knocked his average down against Australia.

And in that case, you dont rate Warne, considering he had McGath (arguably the greatest quick ever), Gillespie, Lee, etc bowling at the other end?

For what it's worth McGrath is not the greatest quick ever, and really not even close. We look through rose coloured glasses at those we've seen in recent times as well as records without considering that top players will play over 50 more tests than those who retired more than 25 years ago. Look at records of the likes of Lillee, Haddlee, Trueman and then compare to McGrath and you might see a different picture.

 

[Cooldude]

Warnie, he was a wizard to end all wizardry

 

[Pera]

For what it's worth McGrath is not the greatest quick ever, and really not even close. We look through rose coloured glasses at those we've seen in recent times as well as records without considering that top players will play over 50 more tests than those who retired more than 25 years ago. Look at records of the likes of Lillee, Haddlee, Trueman and then compare to McGrath and you might see a different picture.

I was using McGrath as an example and thats an argument for another thread.

Im more interested in why you think Warne gets the nod when it comes to having key players in the side? Like I said, he fed off McGrath, Gillespie, Lee's bowling from the other end while Sachin really only had Dravid and Sehwag (India always had shoddy keepers and Ganguly was just a good average player at #6).

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Give me a Lara or a Sangakkara ahead of Tendulkar any day. Can't think of anyone I'd pick before Warne.

 

[Public Enemy No1]

Warne easily. Performed in the big games.

In big games the Aussies would get out Tendulkar for fun

 

[skipper kelly]

Warne easily. Performed in the big games.

In big games the Aussies would get out Tendulkar for fun

He did average 57 V Australia. Not too bad

 

[Team DJ]

Have to take 20 wickets to win a test. Hence why if in school yard style i was to pick a team, Warne is always number 1. Even against Bradman. Theres been heaps of blokes that can score runs. Not many can match win with the ball.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Give me a Lara or a Sangakkara ahead of Tendulkar any day. Can't think of anyone I'd pick before Warne.

Prefered watching Lara, but I think Tendulkar > Lara personally. Always felt Brian would give you a chance.

 

[skipper kelly]

Look at records of the likes of Lillee, Haddlee, Trueman and then compare to McGrath and you might see a different picture.

Trueman 67 matches, 307 wickets, 21.57 average
Lillee 70 matches, 355 wickets, 23.92 average
Hadlee 86 matches, 431 wickets, 22.29 average

McGrath 124 matches, 563 wickets, 21.64 average.

Looking at the records the picture looks very similar.

 

[trickyonne]

Warne. He is unmatched in his art in the modern era, maybe even all time, while Tendulkar has several peers when it comes to great batsmen in this era (Lara, Ponting, Kallis etc)

 

[Rack Watts]

Who is the second best leg spinner to Warnie?

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Who is the second best leg spinner to Warnie?

Bill O'Reilly?

 

[Rack Watts]

Bill O'Reilly?

I thought, if by sheer number of wickets it might be Anil Kumble?