• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Is Laxman a great batsman?

Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
G.I.Joe said:
Boot out Sehwag, IMO.

4th innings chase?

Yuvraj + Laxman + Tendulkar + Pujara + Ishant

Forgetaboutit :cool:
Click to expand...
Disagree. It has clearly been proven in this thread that Sachin sucks balls. Sehwag too sucks balls though, that is a good point.

I think a new rule should be that Waterboy can bat twice in the 4th innings.

Of course he'll never get to bat twice, because Waterboy will never need to bat twice. He simply won't go out in the 4th innings.

wag
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Dissector said:
Bradman averaged a full 26 runs less in the fourth innings compared to his overall average. Clearly one of the worst fourth-innings chokers in cricket history.:dry:
Click to expand...
You gotta remember that was on Aussie and English tracks which play true on the last day... He would have no hope in subcontinental tracks.. :p
 
Avada Kedavra

Avada Kedavra

Banned
This whole "runs when they matter" theory is kinda flawed.If ojha had been given out then would that have diminished the quality of vvs' knock(notice i said quality,not value)?or if ishant had not batted as stubbornly as he did?

Also, what people forget sometimes is that the more you score in the first dig,the easier it gets in the 2nd one.If Lax had scored those 70 odd in the first innings instead of failing, then ind would have been chasing a smaller total.

It is like saying that it's better to fall sick and take medicines than preventing the sickness.Absurd.

As for the topic,lax is just short of ATG status.Still has about 2-3 years to get there.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Avada Kedavra said:
This whole "runs when they matter" theory is kinda flawed.If ojha had been given out then would that have diminished the quality of vvs' knock(notice i said quality,not value)?or if ishant had not batted as stubbornly as he did?

Also, what people forget sometimes is that the more you score in the first dig,the easier it gets in the 2nd one.If Lax had scored those 70 odd in the first innings instead of failing, then ind would have been chasing a smaller total.

It is like saying that it's better to fall sick and take medicines than preventing the sickness.Absurd.

As for the topic,lax is just short of ATG status.Still has about 2-3 years to get there.
Click to expand...
really think he will make it with that back?


For me, he will retire well before Sachin..
 
T

tooextracool

International Coach
The point I was trying to make, which seems to have been completely misconstrued and misunderstood, is that if I had to choose one out of Laxman or Tendulkar to bat in a pressure situation to win a game for my country, I would choose Laxman. This has nothing to do with their 4th innings record or 4th innings in general, it has nothing to do with Tendulkar not being a great (and believe me I do rate him quite highly especially after his performances off late), it has nothing to do with Laxman being better than Tendulkar (which he is clearly not). I suspect a lot of people on this forum would make the same choice.

Now, what is my point? My point is that if Laxman isnt a great player, the fact that he can be entrusted with this kind of responsibility over Tendulkar either lowers Tendulkar's stature as a batsman or it raised Laxman's stature as a player, and I believe in the latter rather than the former. Laxman is great because at the end of the day he performs against the best opposition on a regular basis and he performs when his country needs him most. I couldnt care less if his average is 3 runs short off what is perceived to be 'greatness'.
 
Jono

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
I don't think anyone would really take issue with that contention at all.

People were more taking issue with one of your earlier posts where you basically suggested all 14k of Sachin's runs had come on flat tracks when other batsmen could have also scored runs.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Also I agree that people should stop taking Laxman's average as by default disqualifying him from greatness.. as the thread starter has pointed out, it has been on the right side of 50 after he was shifted to his best position, and he doesn't cash in on minnows either. If there are other reasons why one thinks he isn't on that level, fair enough, but his career average shouldn't be one of them IMO.
 
T

tooextracool

International Coach
Jono said:
I don't think anyone would really take issue with that contention at all.

People were more taking issue with one of your earlier posts where you basically suggested all 14k of Sachin's runs had come on flat tracks when other batsmen could have also scored runs.
Click to expand...
Thats not what I was trying to get at and my apologies if it appeared that way. I do think that when it comes to performing under pressure Tendulkar has gone missing more often than he should for the majority of his career, but hes done a lot of rectify this over the past couple of years. Perhaps he's far more relaxed given his role in the side at the moment than he was in the 90s where it was make or break with his downfall.

I think though that people put him on a pedestal because of the volume of runs that he has scored and the amount of records he has broken. I mean I can understand that hes arguably the most humble great player in the history of the game and I can see why he has as much of a fan following as he does but sometimes I do think that his accomplishments get overstated.
 
Furball

Furball

Evil Scotsman
vcs said:
Also I agree that people should stop taking Laxman's average as by default disqualifying him from greatness.. as the thread starter has pointed out, it has been on the right side of 50 after he was shifted to his best position, and he doesn't cash in on minnows either. If there are other reasons why one thinks he isn't on that level, fair enough, but his career average shouldn't be one of them IMO.
Click to expand...
The one thing that holds Laxman back from true greatness is that IMO he doesn't score enough hundreds.

He has everything else in his locker. If he'd converted more of his 50s into tons, I don't think there would be much doubt.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
GingerFurball said:
The one thing that holds Laxman back from true greatness is that IMO he doesn't score enough hundreds.

He has everything else in his locker. If he'd converted more of his 50s into tons, I don't think there would be much doubt.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is a fair enough criticism, if you compare him with someone like Damien Martyn for example.
 
weldone

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
Avada Kedavra said:
Also, what people forget sometimes is that the more you score in the first dig,the easier it gets in the 2nd one.If Lax had scored those 70 odd in the first innings instead of failing, then ind would have been chasing a smaller total.
Click to expand...
Agree with this point, in general. And I've made similar points always. I think most of the match-winning knocks come in the first innings. They set the tone for the match, put your team in the driver's seat. Match-winning knocks in the 2nd innings are as (not more) important, though; but they happen less often.

Nothing against Laxman, though. He's a fine player for me. Not an ATG, but a very good player. To me, he's certainly comparable to Viswanath, Azharuddin or Hazare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top