Shivnarine Chanderpaul

[Perm]

I remember the Shiv vs. Damien Martyn thread around 2-3 years ago, one of the best cricket chat discussions I've ever read here.

Link?

 

[Burgey]

I think you could run a pretty fair argument for him being the best batsman in the world, with Sanga, for the past 12 months at least.

 

[Jono]

Link?

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?t=13665

 

[Perm]

http://forum.cricketweb.net/showthread.php?t=13665

Cheers mate.

 

[sanga1337]

chanders > kallicharan

agreed but Kanhai is still slightly better than chanderpaul IMO.

 

[honestbharani]

Awesome player. As someone here said, he always seems to lift when the situation is dire... Was always a fair bet that he would play even better once Lara retired, coz the responsibility seems to bring the best out of him.


But, please, for God's sakes, he is not a captain. He is not a leader. He is a great team man and a wonderful guy to have as your lead batsman, but making him captain was flattering him. He, and now Sarwan, never look like they are men who can be in charge out there...


And yeah, there is a fair shout for him being the best batsman in the world, ATM.. And all the credit Lara used to get for being in a team full of crap players.. Well, Chanders should get more coz..


a. He is not as talented as Lara
b. With Lara now gone, he is surrounded by an even direr (?) batting line up.



Go Chanders.

 

[Richard]

Always thought West Indies could still have a decent batting-line-up if a few pieces fell into place TBH...

Gayle
Smith
Chanderpaul
Sarwan
Ganga
Bravo
Ramdin
Sammy
Taylor
Decent batting down to nine there. Trouble is that requires Smith actually performing as he should be, Ganga batting in the middle which he hasn't done for years, and a few other things.

 

[Goughy]

Just goes to show how many exceedingly talented batsmen the West Indies have produced over the years.

Agreed.

So if WI had lots of talented bats based on Shiv only making their alltime 3rd XI yet Martyn is better then it begs the question, which Aus alltime team would Martyn make?

 

[Richard]

Cannot believe anyone would honestly rate Martyn > Chanderpaul TBH. Martyn is an average, decent, middle-of-the-road Test batsman for mine. Chanderpaul is a bit special.

 

[biased indian]

Though not a grt batsmen to watch...could have him if wanted to save a test match

 

[LongHopCassidy]

So if WI had lots of talented bats based on Shiv only making their alltime 3rd XI yet Martyn is better then it begs the question, which Aus alltime team would Martyn make?

Let's see:

Hayden
Trumper
Bradman
Chappell
Border
S. Waugh
Gilchrist

Morris
Ponsford
Ponting
Harvey
Macartney
Miller
Healy

Lawry
Simpson
I. Chappell
Boon
K. Hughes
Walters
Marsh

Langer
Taylor
C. Hill
M. Waugh
Hussey (damn right)
McCabe
Tallon

Brown
Slater
Bardsley
Martyn
Lehmann
Richardson
Grout


Yeah, looks about right.

 

[Perm]

So if WI had lots of talented bats based on Shiv only making their alltime 3rd XI yet Martyn is better then it begs the question, which Aus alltime team would Martyn make?

Not too sure TBH, and I can't really be bothered making up teams

As far as Australian middle order batsman go, he'd be behind Ricky Ponting, Allan Border, Steve Waugh, Greg Chappell, Sir Donald Bradman, Norm O'Neill, Stan McCabe, Lindsay Hassett, Neil Harvey, Michael Hussey, Doug Walters and probably a few others like Ian Chappell, David Boon, Dean Jones etc. . That's 13 right there, and once you factor in all-rounders like Miller and Benaud possibly batting at #6 or #7, I'd say Martyn would maybe make the 4th XI. Depends somewhat on the composition of the side.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

It annoys me a bit when people talk about Chanderpaul's "recent" runscoring form, as though he hasn't been doing it for years now. Chanderpaul has been exceptional since his breakthrough series against India in 2002.

Since April 2002:
4805 runs @ 55.91, 16 hundreds and 24 fifties in 105 innings.
And that includes a dire run of 14 innings as captain when he failed to pass 50.

And in one-day internationals since April 2002:
4223 runs @ 44.92, 6 hundreds and 31 fifties in 114 innings. And he's been even better opening the batting.

Under-rated if people still think that Martyn > Chanderpaul.

 

[Perm]

Cannot believe anyone would honestly rate Martyn > Chanderpaul TBH. Martyn is an average, decent, middle-of-the-road Test batsman for mine. Chanderpaul is a bit special.

Chanderpaul is very special, and to an extent I think we are just starting to see this with the phenomenal tour of England he had.

I saw a bit of Damien Martyn's career, but unfortunately most of what I saw came after he was dropped in 2005 following the Ashes. Always rated him very highly as a Test batsman though, and some of the runs he scored against India and Sri Lanka impressed me greatly. One of my favourite people to watch at the crease, as he made run-making look effortless, and was perhaps more elegant than any other Test batsmen I've seen.

For about 5 years Martyn averaged over 55 against some fairly good bowling attacks and at one stage he was in the top echelon of batsmen going around. Admittedly he did have far more support than Chanderpaul had, or still has, but he still managed to average over 50 against Sri Lanka, Pakistan, South Africa, New Zealand and pretty much average 50 against India. The biggest thing that counts against Martyn IMO is the fact that he wasn't a prolific run-scorer against England. Fantastic batsman, pleasure to watch, and somebody who could score runs in trying conditions.

 

[iamdavid]

Chanderpaul is very special, and to an extent I think we are just starting to see this with the phenomenal tour of England he had.

I saw a bit of Damien Martyn's career, but unfortunately most of what I saw came after he was dropped in 2005 following the Ashes. Always rated him very highly as a Test batsman though, and some of the runs he scored against India and Sri Lanka impressed me greatly. One of my favourite people to watch at the crease, as he made run-making look effortless, and was perhaps more elegant than any other Test batsmen I've seen.

For about 5 years Martyn averaged over 55 against some fairly good bowling attacks and at one stage he was in the top echelon of batsmen going around. Admittedly he did have far more support than Chanderpaul had, or still has, but he still managed to average over 50 against Sri Lanka, Pakistan, South Africa, New Zealand and pretty much average 50 against India. The biggest thing that counts against Martyn IMO is the fact that he wasn't a prolific run-scorer against England. Fantastic batsman, pleasure to watch, and somebody who could score runs in trying conditions.

Hmm I dunno about that, he was poor in 2005 (although unlucky at times), and middle of the road in 02/03, but in 2001 he was sensational, his first two test hundreds and arguably the batsman of the tour.

 

[Perm]

Hmm I dunno about that, he was poor in 2005 (although unlucky at times), and middle of the road in 02/03, but in 2001 he was sensational, his first two test hundreds and arguably the batsman of the tour.

His overall average (a poor way to judge, I agree) is only something like 37 against England, which, compared to his record against other countries, is pretty poor. Not sure how much of a difference it would make if you took out the last couple of Tests he played against England, when he was a shadow of his former self. Probably boost it to around 40 I'd imagine.

His first Ashes series was immense though, you're right. Just a shame that things conspired against Martyn in 2005 and cast a darkness across the rest of his career.

 

[oitoitoi]

TBH I've though Chanderpaul's been a very good player for a long time now, indeed the first time I really took notice of him was way back in 1998 when he scored 126 in the Princess Diana memorial match for the rest of the world against a genuinely top class MCC side. He was overshadowed by a Tendulkar hundred but I remember wishing as a kid that he could play for India instead (I thought he was a 2nd generation NRI like me rather than a true Guyanan). He's been top class since 2001 or so it's just that the media has always focused on Lara, Gayle and even Sarwan ahead of him. The thing that's always held him back is his inability to find that 2nd gear; he's either very defensive or super-attacking (remember that 77 ball hundred he blitzed against the Aussies in a test?). How the guy bats is still a mystery to me, he has the oddest technique I've ever seen! At 35 I wonder how long he has left, he'll leave a giant hole in the WI middle order when he goes with no real replacement in the forseeable future.

As for Damien Martyn being better, well they were very different kinds of players. Chanderpaul was the rock around which an innings could be built, Gayle actually once said that he was their Rahul Dravid. Martyn was a classical no.4, a free flowing (when at his best) innings builder. When he was at his peak he was up there with Tendulkar and Lara, however that peak didn't last long and he fell away very quickly. His treatment after the 2005 ashes was disgraceful, I remember him getting 2 absolutely shocking LBW decisions in that series and the lack of faith shown in him was awful. Regarding his average of 37 against England, well England were hardly the strongest opposition he faced for most of his career and his excellence against South African and Pakistan (probably the 2 strongest bowling attacks he faced at his peak) far outweighs it. The best players score runs against the best opposition and that's what counts the most. Martyn was also a touch unlucky in that he probably should have been recalled much earlier than he was which would have given him more test matches in his prime.

One thing you have to take into account when looking at Aussie batsmen's careers is that they're generally only picked when they're in their prime (e.g. Hussey), very few are selected on potential (e.g. Michael Clarke) like so many Asian batsmen. It's a credit to their first class system that so many players are able to make the transition with so much success.

 

[Richard]

No, Martyn was never in Tendulkar or Lara's class IMO. Looked as good as them maybe, but never had the run-scoring calibre against equally good bowling-attacks.

 

[silentstriker]

Chanderpaul is now better than Martyn was, IMO.

 

[Richard]

Hmm I dunno about that, he was poor in 2005 (although unlucky at times), and middle of the road in 02/03, but in 2001 he was sensational, his first two test hundreds and arguably the batsman of the tour.

He was almost as lucky in 2001 as he was unlucky in 2005 TBH.