Pointless quotes beget pointless posts
Meaningless quote of the day:
"He has scored 16,000 runs. I haven't even played 16,000 balls."
- M S Dhoni, asked about Sachin Tendulkar not doing too well in the Commonwealth Series (before yesterday's match, of course)
First, the answer has absolutely nothing to do with the question. It's just another way of using past achievements to brush aside any talk about current form. Also, this peculiar interpretation of Authority: if cricketer A has 16,000 runs and cricketer B has 3,000 runs, the latter has only 3000/16000 x 100 = 18.75 per cent authority to comment on the former (even if the latter is the former's captain). This in turn leads to the misbegotten idea that someone who hasn't actually played cricket at the highest level has Zero per cent authority to make statements about Test-level players. (It applies to other fields too. As a reviewer I'm often asked things like: "What gives you the right to say mean things about Jodhaa Akbar when you've never even stood behind a camera, much less got Aishwarya and Hrithik to writhe together on a palace floor?")
But even looked at on its own terms, Dhoni's quote would have made sense only if his batting strike rate was something like 20 runs per 100 balls (which means he would have needed close to 16,000 balls to score the 3,000-odd ODI runs he currently has to his name). Going by his actual strike rate, if he had faced 16,000 balls, he would have scored close to 15,000 runs. So the difference between balls faced and runs scored isn't as large as the quote makes it sound. A more useful answer would have been, "He has scored 16,000 runs. I haven't even eaten 6,000 omelettes."
Sorry, it's one of those Monday mornings...
"He has scored 16,000 runs. I haven't even played 16,000 balls."
- M S Dhoni, asked about Sachin Tendulkar not doing too well in the Commonwealth Series (before yesterday's match, of course)
First, the answer has absolutely nothing to do with the question. It's just another way of using past achievements to brush aside any talk about current form. Also, this peculiar interpretation of Authority: if cricketer A has 16,000 runs and cricketer B has 3,000 runs, the latter has only 3000/16000 x 100 = 18.75 per cent authority to comment on the former (even if the latter is the former's captain). This in turn leads to the misbegotten idea that someone who hasn't actually played cricket at the highest level has Zero per cent authority to make statements about Test-level players. (It applies to other fields too. As a reviewer I'm often asked things like: "What gives you the right to say mean things about Jodhaa Akbar when you've never even stood behind a camera, much less got Aishwarya and Hrithik to writhe together on a palace floor?")
But even looked at on its own terms, Dhoni's quote would have made sense only if his batting strike rate was something like 20 runs per 100 balls (which means he would have needed close to 16,000 balls to score the 3,000-odd ODI runs he currently has to his name). Going by his actual strike rate, if he had faced 16,000 balls, he would have scored close to 15,000 runs. So the difference between balls faced and runs scored isn't as large as the quote makes it sound. A more useful answer would have been, "He has scored 16,000 runs. I haven't even eaten 6,000 omelettes."
Sorry, it's one of those Monday mornings...
on Monday, March 3rd, 2008, 11:53 am in Cricket, Sports › 
Email this
› 
Facebook this
› 
Reddit this
› Link
› Reader links
Who asked the question? I have noticed an appalling trend of Indian post-match reporters asking more and more inane questions. Yesterday the chirpy and dim NDTV female reporter asked Ponting about Yuvraj and Bhajji sparring, the Indians’ celebrations, whether they played badly because of the recent controversies…disappointing. In fact NDTV, which I initially heralded as a great thing, has been endlessly crap as of late. Or to report like an NDTV hack:
And I must SAY,
that ndTV,
has BEEN,
endLESSLY,
crap, as of late.
The most halting deliveries on the box.
one of the most pointless posts i’ve read this morning :D
you would rather have commented on lalu’s budget speech in the parliament .. technically dhoni’s not too far away from reality ;) and it does sound pretty ok .. btw its commonwealth bank series .. i think you acted as eager as a reporter from ndtv ;)
All it means is that Dhoni backs his team-mate to use his vast experience and find his touch.
And as it turned out, Sachin did make use of that 16000 ball experience and scored a classy 100 in the first final.
Reading your post I get the feeling that you are actually thinking about questioning Tendulkar’s (PBUH) ability. Sir, you are no patriot and if I had your likeness, I’d burn your effigy.
We won, we won, we won we won!
Dhoni was being a Good Bway and showing respect to his seniors, na. Can’t be so cocky as to think pure talent and current performance are everything. He has to pay obeisance to existing gods while climbing up the godly ladder himself.
Dhoni did question Ganguly and Dravid and infact requested for a young team with out either for this tour. So the ratio of runs as you calculated above is not the point. Its the manner in which they were scored and by whom they were scored. So if its cricketer A and B then I get your point but if its Sachin R Tendulkar, dhoni is right no one can question. Not to say that people havent, latest being Manjrekar, almost every mortal has and have been made to look like a fool. Aint this what most of the stories in Hindu Mythology talk about all the time! this is what makes him God.
This was a pointless post about a very valid point!