Who Is The Second Greatest Batsman Ever?

[Teja.]

with both sehwag and gilly scoring 5000+ runs and 17 centuries each at 75+ SR and 46+ average we have to put them on the same plane.

the significant difference between them, though, is that sehwag has more than 5 double centuries including 2 triples and a 293 whereas gilly's highest is 204 - his only double.

when a good batsman scores at a frantic pace he damages the opposition. when he goes on and on like sehwag does at times, he kills them and buries them. sehwag's ability to bat for longer is one significant difference between him and gilly.

i dont attribute this to gilly coming down the order and sehwag coming at the top. no one other than the don has crossed 290 twice. only one other has even crossed it twice. so give the devil his due. purely as a batsman sehwag should be rated above gilly. (and I was the one pushing for gilly in the top 25 batsmen thread.) still, he is not good enough to be considered for the second best batsman title.

My point is if he goes on at this rate over a 120+ test career, he should be considered, right now, definitely not.

 

[Himannv]

no one other than the don has crossed 290 twice. only one other has even crossed it twice.

Somewhat irrelevant, but I think you forgot Lara.

 

[bagapath]

Somewhat irrelevant, but I think you forgot Lara.

i did not. but made a typo.

no one other than don and sehwag has crossed 290 THRICE. only one other (Lara) has even crossed it twice. so it is a very big deal

 

[jeevan]

It's pretty simple. It's easier as Opening Batsman inside the subcontient and harder as a middle-order batsman, but the complete opposite outside the subcontient.

Obviously when the ball is doing a bit, it is going to be harder batting in the top-order then it would be batting in the middle-order because the ball is newer, the pitch is still juicy and the bowlers are fresh. As the ball gets older and the bowlers tire, it becomes gradually easier.

On a turning track, it's going to be more favourable as an Opening-Top order batsman because subcontient tracks don't/rarely offer much to pace bowlers. Getting a few runs under your belt before the spinners come on and getting an eye for the ball is going to help your cause considerably compared to middle-order batsman who come in after a wicket falls, no runs under their belt and being surrounded by fieldsmen around the bat.

And how would you classify the tracks in Australia?

 

[vic_orthdox]

And how would you classify the tracks in Australia?

Problem with Australian tracks is that too often there is not enough in the wicket at the beginning, which can make over 15-79 far too simple to negotiate. The hardest time to bat is early. It's just that in recent times, the "hardest time to bat" hasn't been that difficult at all. The Sydney pitch vs Pakistan reminded me of watching cricket in the early to mid 1990s, where there was the possibility of losing three or four wickets in the first session; but you weren't out of the game because:
a) you were a chance of doing the same to the opposition in their first innings
b) the pitch would still be difficult to bat on last; the extra moisture in the beginning allowing some variable bounce and drying out towards the end of the Test

That rarely seems to happen anymore.

 

[Cevno]

If Opening was so easy in the subcontinent ,i wonder why India really hasn't found a good opening pair for a while now in tests upto Gambhir and Sehwag?

Hell,even Pakistan and Srilanka have struggled for good openers bar one or two.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Well, it's a hell of allot easier on a dead pitch.

You mean the Australian pitches Hayden has played more than half his games in?

 

[vic_orthdox]

If Opening was so easy in the subcontinent ,i wonder why India really hasn't found a good opening pair for a while now in tests upto Gambhir and Sehwag?

Hell,even Pakistan and Srilanka have struggled for good openers bar one or two.

Its interesting. For a non-subcontinental batsman (NSB) it can be very difficult to face spinners first up on pitches with which they are somewhat unfamiliar with. There is a huge advantage for those NSB who have spent some time in the middle before the spinners came on.

Two great examples: Gilchrist, whom this is exemplified with in his record in India. A few good knocks once he managed to get in, and besides that struggled big time early to spin. Also, an exaggerated example is Greg Blewett, who was bamboozled by Mushtaq Ahmed early in his career when batting down the order, having been used to opening in domestic cricket and having faced at least 50 balls before spinners came on.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Australian pitches are generally tough for the first hour so or in the innings before flattening out. Hence why Sehwag's record in Australia is made up of two massive scores, rather then consistency.

 

[Somerset]

I went for WG - obviously I never saw him bat, never spoke to anyone who did and have just seen the usual posed photographs and that tiny clip of him in the nets when he was well into his 50's - that said I still think he's an easy choice by virtue of the degree of his dominance over his peers when he was in his prime - I can never get away from the stat, that I've quoted here several times, that when he scored his 50th First Class century no one else had scored more than 10

I also voted for WG Grace - obviously I can only speak in terms of reports and statistics, but Grace's dominance over his contemporaries in his era is simply remarkable.

 

[honestbharani]

Personally I think Hobbs is a more than decent shout for second best. He's arguably the most prolific batsman of all time and he's been consistent for more than 2 decades.

But he is not an Aussie..

 

[honestbharani]

Instinct? Sounds quite airy to me. Like something a Philosophy student might say. Do you really think your mind is so infallible?

Do you really think stats are so infallible?

 

[honestbharani]

Well, it's a hell of allot easier on a dead pitch.

u mean the same tracks Gilly averages in the 30s???????? What easy tracks they are, indeed?

 

[wfdu_ben91]

u mean the same tracks Gilly averages in the 30s???????? What easy tracks they are, indeed?

Never said Gilchrist was a great batsman though, did I?

 

[honestbharani]

Never said Gilchrist was a great batsman though, did I?

so if you succeed in those tracks, you ARE a great batsman?

 

[Richard]

better player is broad term.

Better player to watch vs. better player for the team vs. better player statistically

With exceptionally rare exceptions, the 2nd and the 3rd are the same thing. The 1st is a notably separate consideration and one I do my utmost always to separate from both in terms of my own judgement and in the reading that of others.

 

[Richard]

And BTW people - seriously, stop arguing with wtf_ben about the nonsensical idea that subcontinental pitches are always easier to open on than those everywhere else. It's something that will merely waste your time and cause much ing for people who have to scroll past the posts.

 

[andyc]

And BTW people - seriously, stop arguing with wtf_ben about the nonsensical idea that subcontinental pitches are always easier to open on than those everywhere else. It's something that will merely waste your time and cause much ing for people who have to scroll past the posts.

No need for this kind of stuff, Richard. If you don't want to reply to his posts, just don't do it, or put him on ignore if you have to. A post that you may want to scroll past could well be one that someone else is very interested in.

 

[Faisal1985]

Do you seriously rate Inzi above SRT, Gavaskar, and Miandad? To me, those 3 are definately better than Inzi. One can put a strong argument that even Hanif and Dravid are better than him. I loved Inzi, he was my favorite Pakistani batsman of the 90's and 00's, and he is under-rated by many. However, he doesn't belong anywhere near the discussion of "second greatest batsman ever". That's just plain reality.

Edit: If your beef is with some of the names that are on the poll, then I agree that Inzi at least is on the same level as a Dravid/Sehwag/Hayden/Flower etc. None of these names belong in the discussion of the second greatest batsman IMHO.

Now you get my point.

Agreed that he may not be as great as the names mentioned i.e. SRT Gavaskar Miandad but he is certainly as good or better than some of the names in the poll.....

 

[Faisal1985]

Well, it's a hell of allot easier on a dead pitch.

No its not.