Is Laxman a great batsman?

[centurymaker]

Was that the case an Test level as well?

Yes. They had similar strike rates back in the days.

 

[TumTum]

Yes. They had similar strike rates back in the days.

Hmm, find it hard to believe tbh. Meaning his comparison with Sehwag.

 

[centurymaker]

Hmm, find it hard to believe tbh. Meaning his comparison with Sehwag.

I was talking about Sachin and lara (1990's-02/03), sehwag was obviously more aggressive even then (2000-03).

 

[TumTum]

Well Lara and Ponting have almost the exact same Test match strike rate...

 

[centurymaker]

Well Lara and Ponting have almost the exact same Test match strike rate...

Dude, SR's have improved quite a bit over the years from 90's to 00's.
by > 20% imo.

For instance, 50 back then is probably like 60ish now.

 

[TumTum]

What about SRT v2.0 then

 

[centurymaker]

What about SRT v2.0 then

I would say it's quite avg. He's now a steady player.

 

[TumTum]

Hmm ok. I still can't believe that SRT had the same SR in Tests as Lara back then, even looking at old footage he always seemed to be a steady player. Only going aggressive and aerial in the the shorter formats of the game.

 

[sachin200]

Sachin and Lara doesn't have same strike rate if u compare at the end of 2002.

infact Lara's strike rate is 59.22 (overall strike rate is 60.51) and sachin's strike rate is 54.63 up until the end of 2002. one test match is excluded because strike rate is not available for the match

 

[Shri]

Tendulkar was as aggressive as Lara for 2 season in tests - 98 and 99. Thats about it. Then in one match when Ganguly and Sachin really had a go at the English bowlers in a test match in England.

 

[sachin200]

Sachin doesn't take on bowlers as many times as Lara or ponting. His philosophy is that there is so much time available so no need to play such risky shots.Sachin generally used to take on bowlers when they are on top and when india has lost wickets early and they have set attacking fields. So in order to make them defensive he used to play like that by counter-attacking.

Some of the counter attacking knocks of sachin are:

119* vs ENG (Manchester) 1990
114 vs AUS (Perth) 1992
122 vs ENG (Edgbaston) 1996
169 vs SA (Capetown) 1997
92 vs WI (Bridgetown) 1997
155*, 79, 177 vs AUS 1998
113 vs NZ (Wellington) 1998
155 vs SA (Bloemfontein) 2001
92 vs ENG (Trentbridge) 2002
51 vs NZ (Wellington) 2002
153 vs AUS (Adelaide) 2008

 

[Altaican]

In the modern era, I meant. Thought of Lara and Gilchrist, but woah. Ponting was extroardinary at times.

IMO, Viv and Gilchrist were the only 2 batsmen who were destructive even against formidable attacks. Lara and Ponting are a rung below them in that category. The situation of the match rarely altered their approach . I remember Viv scoring nearly 360 runs off 430+ balls in the last 3 Test matches against Thommo+Lillee in the fiery 75-76 series. That means Viv scored runs at an average of 60 and at a SR of 80 in Test match cricket against one of the most ferocious attacks in the history of the game. Absolutely insane! That too, Viv actually opened the batting in 2 of the 3 matches. Windies lost all the 3 matches though. Viv's attitude was pretty much the same throughout his career. Remember him scoring nearly 150 at almost a run a ball speed in Perth in his final Test series in Aus.

Gilchrist was similar in his debut series against Akram, Waqar and Akhtar. And also his whirlwind double century against SA, and several other knocks against great attacks.

Sehwag has a similar attitude although I haven't seen him destory formidable attacks (of the level of Lillee-Thommo or Wasim-Waqar in bowler-friendly conditions). Not his fault though.

 

[TumTum]

Not his fault though.

You can't say that. Obviously he can't face the best bowlers of the last few decades, but nonetheless there are still challenging places to bat atm , and he hasn't achieved much there.

 

[Shri]

Not a big enough sample size to conclusively say he sucks in said conditions though. Can see where the thread is heading, won't post here again.

 

[Sanz]

No, just that Laxman is my real worry. He grafts out the tough runs in tough situations.

There is a difference though - Laxman did it 8-down against a fired-up bowling attack on a bouncy pitch, Tendulkar did it 2-down against a bowling attack that had basically given up.

Just wanted to bring this thread up. Not saying that Lax can't or isn't better but Some good trolling was going on then.

 

[Prince EWS]

Just wanted to bring this thread up. Not saying that Lax can't or isn't better but Some good trolling was going on then.

How the **** was that trolling? Whether or not it was 'correct' it was a valid opinion, and still is.

 

[0RI0N]

No, he is not a great player.
He is an erratic and extremely inconsistent batsman.
16 hundreds in 14yrs?
Good vs Aus, ordinary vs everybody else.

 

[Dissector]

Another invaluable innings by Laxman when it really matters.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Yeah, he's really shown that he's "Good vs Aus, ordinary vs everybody else".

 

[vcs]

Genius.