kyear2
International Coach
+1Reminds me of cricinfo comment section. How every article about any cricketer ends up into a discussion on Tendulkar
And it got infuriating rather quickly
-
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 Viv Richards an Overrated Test Batsman?
- Thread starter sachin200
- Start date
And it got infuriating rather quickly
kyear2
International Coach
No he isn't.
Even forgetting about Viv's attacking nature, one cannot compare the bowling attacks for especially the second half of Sachn's career and the dead home tracks that he has plundered to the pitches, conditions and the attacks that Viv faced and dominated.
smash84
The Tiger King
Last edited:
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Not that I disagree, but it is ironic how you can make this statement when in the Lillee thread you constantly harp about him having no case statistically. When the same things go for Viv here compared to Sachin. The easily-read stats do point to Sachin being better; it is through a bit more of an analysis that you appreciate Viv.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Here is the context of what I responded to. SRT is statistically not the best batsman ever.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Wait til Boxing Day...
Ikki
Hall of Fame Member
Sure, but you are referring to a post which says he is better than Viv statistically. Even if you weren't replying to that, what is your answer to that in general?
For me, such an assertion is simply misguided and can be argued by showing stats that show Viv's case. If I did that I would be fixing the stats eh? If we go by your cut and dry posting you should be saying that SRT is better than Viv statistically, full stop. Do you agree?
Last edited:
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
It shouldn't be an argument when comparing one player against another, no, but the fact that anyone who works with Sachin at some point (coach, media, teammate etc. - G.Chappell most recently I think) makes it a point to mention just how nuts it is when you're around him, and something no other modern player experiences, is a worthwhile point in discussions about him and what he has achieved, and a testament to his career.
But no, not when comparing players I agree.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Bradman had to put up with the same, and had to carry a nation's hopes in the midst of an economic depression.
Yes, India has 1 billion people but it's not like those billion people are all following Tendulkar's every move at the same time.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
Why does one have to be to the detriment of the other? Why can't the pressure they both played under be acknowledged?
I said as much in my post that it shouldn't be a point when comparing players. Just something acknowledged.
And it's not the fact India has 1 billion people, it's the fact that they all have higher expectations of Tendulkar than the other players. No one uses the Indian population argument to big up Sehwag or Dravid or whomever, because they don't face the same external pressure that Sachin does.
Just because a few people exploit this point in arguments doesn't mean it should be discarded.
I said as much in my post that it shouldn't be a point when comparing players. Just something acknowledged.
And it's not the fact India has 1 billion people, it's the fact that they all have higher expectations of Tendulkar than the other players. No one uses the Indian population argument to big up Sehwag or Dravid or whomever, because they don't face the same external pressure that Sachin does.
Just because a few people exploit this point in arguments doesn't mean it should be discarded.
Last edited:
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
If Viv had retired 2-3 years earlier with a higher average he would be regarded higher in my opinion. Because he averaged less than some current players despite playing in a better era for bowling he will always be looked down at by modern fans who didn't actually see him bat and didn't feel the fear when he walked to the crease and you knew he could destroy your team in a heartbeat.
I get the feeling Ricky Ponting is going down the same route by limping out of international cricket with his average dropping and some of his brilliant exploits being forgotten by some.
I get the feeling Ricky Ponting is going down the same route by limping out of international cricket with his average dropping and some of his brilliant exploits being forgotten by some.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
His brilliant exploits won't be forgotten by some. They just won't be known by people 30-40 years down the line I guess and people who never saw him will judge him by his average and compare it to Kallis or Sanga probably (unless thier averages fall near the end of their career too).
Furball
Evil Scotsman
The Ponting comparison is brilliant because it allows people like me to appreciate why the likes of Robelinda, Burgey and Sanz rate Viv so highly. When Burgey made the comparison a couple of weeks ago the penny properly dropped for me.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
Heh, that's not a bad point.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Because your average affects your perception as a player. Someone like James Anderson is still treated as a bit of a joke because he had a poor start - at one point he was averaging over 37. So despite averaging mid 20s for 3 years, the perception of him is still one of a 30+ bowler. Whereas if Steyn was to perform poorly and end his career with a similar average to Anderson, people would remember him more as a 23-24 bowler.
NUFAN
Y no Afghanistan flag
Yeah it's annoying when that happens, clearly anyone who treats Anderson as a joke doesn't actually watch enough of England playing Test Cricket.
I do think it depends on the player. Michael Slater was averaging I'm pretty sure 47.41 (it's just a random thing I remember, could be slightly wrong if anyone bother's to check) when he got dropped on the Ashes tour for Langer. Not many people mention Slats that highly, most likely due to his last few years where his average went down to a more normal 42.
flibbertyjibber
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Worth remembering that Slater got that 47 average in an era with better bowling than what a guy like Samaraweera is averaging 52 in.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
What you do IKKI is pathetic, you create filters, cherry pick the stats that server your agenda.
As for the answer to who was better, I don't care what the stats say, SRT will be never the player VIV was. For me SRT isn't even the best Indian batsman. But If you are going to use stats to say that SRT and Yousuf Yohana are better than Viv then go ahead make a fool of yourself.