federer is not the best man to dominate a sporting game it is Tendulkar (Cricket)

Spider

Hall of Fame
This post is a direct insult and attack to American intelligence.

And no, I do not think of America as the center of the universe, though it is a leading economic, cultural, athletic, humanitarian and political power.

And I also guarantee you that people from Harvard know other countries than the US; again stupidity on your part, as it is unlikely that Australia's brightest university students can compare even on the most elementary of levels with America's educated elite.

Cricket sucks; thank goodness the world cares more about football, basketball, hockey, tennis, etc.

And yet cricket is way more popular than most of the sports in your list, except football (if you are referring to the real one and not American football).
 

LameTennisPlayer

Professional
I thought tennis was no. 1 sport in Australia?
well it depends on what u mean by #1 and popularity,
highest attendance would be AFL, Cricket and Horse Racing
highest participation would be soccer, cricket, tennis

tennis is on the rise as one of the most participated sports, but it wouldn't be the number 1; considering Cricket is the national sport and AFL having the overall highest attendance.
 

ALten1

Rookie
I am guessing it's because of the duration of the game. One match usually takes 7 hours or more to get completed. It would be tough to include all matches within Olympics.

However, there is a new format of the game which started recently (a shorter version) and has become very popular (20/20 cricket), perhaps this might help get it scheduled within the Olympics.

I see now why it gets no t.v. exposure here in the states...7 hours is a long game. Maybe the shorter version will help open it up to the USA and t.v.

Thanks for educating an ingnorant american.
 
D

Deleted member 21996

Guest
Disclaimer - I DO NOT FOLLOW CRICKET

Cricket sucks; thank goodness the world cares more about football,
I hope for the sake of your "Inteligence" argument that you refer to Footbal (the worlds biggest sport) and not the "Thugs in helmets" sport you call footbal and that you play with your hands instead of your feet!

basketball,
nope... not more famous than Cricket world wide....

half the world (all the countries bellow Greenwich meridian) doesnt give a nickel & a dime for Hockey i.e. if you refer to ice hockey.

tennis, etc.
hahahaha.... laughable if not very sad...
 
D

Deleted member 21996

Guest
well it depends on what u mean by #1 and popularity,
highest attendance would be AFL, Cricket and Horse Racing
highest participation would be soccer, cricket, tennis

tennis is on the rise as one of the most participated sports, but it wouldn't be the number 1; considering Cricket is the national sport and AFL having the overall highest attendance.
i also understand that competitive swimming is very big Australia. is it true?
 

LameTennisPlayer

Professional
swimming yes....competitive; not so much, although we have had some success with a few freakazoids i.e Thorpedo, Hackett, Rice, Lenton etc.....
 

LameTennisPlayer

Professional
i kinda lost interest in swimming when they brought out the Polyurethane bodysuits then banned them, destroying all previous records etc...
 

myalterego

Rookie
Yes, football as in European football, not American football.

Cricket is played by lots of people in one large country. One billion Indians playing one sport does not qualify for me as one of the world's most popular sport (or one of).
 

kOaMaster

Hall of Fame
shaun white does dominate his sport too. a lot.
I'm sure there are dozen other examples of sports where one does dominate.

fact is, except a few parts the world does no care about cricket or snowboarding.
 

TheMusicLover

G.O.A.T.

righty

New User
someone once said that there has been no other sport which is been dominated by one man like Federer in tennis . i strongly deny it and would say that Sachin Tendulkar is the man in contest for that title against federer. if anyone has any doubht over it look at the acheivement of little master (tendulkar) in a career spanning over 22 years where he has all the records in cricket in his house.
Except Tendulkar has no where near the trophies as Federer. That is but natural since Cricket is a team sport.

Besides, Tendulkar's achievements are one-dimensional: batting. Kallis has achieved more than Tendulkar, for example.
 

righty

New User
I know why the OP said it coz Tendulakar just scored a double century in cricket ( first man to do so). He is my favorite player. But you are comparing two different sports.
A double century in an ODI does not justify what the OP said. Tendulkar is great, but he is a great batsmen. He is below par as a bowler and is about a fair fielder.

Kallis, in the very same sport is quite a remarkable bat (averages about the same in Tests and ODIs), and has a vastly superior record in bowling. Heck Kallis's bowling would qualify him for one of the best fast bowlers ever if he were from India.
 

LameTennisPlayer

Professional
A few years ago I read somewhere that in terms of popularity tennis was No. 1 sport in Australia. It might have been "ghost reading" on my part. I have said and done stupid things before!
you are right, there was an article about tennis being the most popular sport in Australia, it was in newspapers, tv etc....the fact is it isn't true
 

Andy G

Semi-Pro
There is no argument that anyone can make against Wayne Gretzky. Period. No person has ever dominated their sport the way he did. None. People can say whatever they want, but there is no argument against him. There is a reason he's known as "The Great One".





 

Tempest344

Professional
While Tendulkar is great, in cricket it would have be Don Bradman, average of 99.94 in runs scored over a 20 year career, no one has beaten that. I would rank Tandulkar or Viv Richards as the 2nd best batsman in cricket
 
Last edited:

CyBorg

Legend
Federer is not even the most dominant tennis player of all time. Why have this discussion?

Gretzky and Orr are indeed almost untouchable in hockey for their respective positions.
 

egn

Hall of Fame
Federer is not even the most dominant tennis player of all time. Why have this discussion?

Gretzky and Orr are indeed almost untouchable in hockey for their respective positions.
Federer is looking to change that. If he grabs his 6th year at number 1 this year and a few more majors what is to say he doesn't pass that. He has had some of the most dominant seasons. Who remains ahead of him in dominance terms outside of Laver. He all ready has 16 majors it is hard to say when he is going to be done at this rate because every time someone starts to pass him, he just passes them back. At times we were ranking Djoker and Murray ahead of him he has shown he is superior to them again. Del Potro is next for him to overtake again, but he is already showing he is more consistent and ready for him again. Sure he is not as dominant as he was at his best but few people ever did as consistently good as he did. If he grabs say two more number 1 seasons 18-20 majors who remains ahead of him. The only arguement left is the competition arguement..but honestly at that point it has to go out the window. When you have won everything your competition looks weak. The only more dominant player that remains is Rod Laver and that is who Fed has to pass. This of course speaking based on statistics and seasons Rod Laver is the only one who has the consistent numbers to rank ahead of him in terms of dominance. At least this is my opinion.
 

JoshDragon

Hall of Fame
someone once said that there has been no other sport which is been dominated by one man like Federer in tennis . i strongly deny it and would say that Sachin Tendulkar is the man in contest for that title against federer. if anyone has any doubht over it look at the acheivement of little master (tendulkar) in a career spanning over 22 years where he has all the records in cricket in his house.
No, he's not in the same league as Roger and neither is Tiger. Golf and Cricket are not as physically strenuous as tennis.
 

Markov

Semi-Pro
There is no argument that anyone can make against Wayne Gretzky. Period. No person has ever dominated their sport the way he did. None. People can say whatever they want, but there is no argument against him. There is a reason he's known as "The Great One".





You got that right. But as much as I love ice hockey, and have been playing it for my whole life, I've got to admit that it is not a very widely spread sport.
 

satishnadal

New User
Except Tendulkar has no where near the trophies as Federer. That is but natural since Cricket is a team sport.

Besides, Tendulkar's achievements are one-dimensional: batting. Kallis has achieved more than Tendulkar, for example.
Who said he has more man of the match and man of the series awards numbering to more than 100 which is also a record for any player in cricket
 
Top