The class of mid 00's

[OverratedSanity]

Amla has a brilliant Test CV, though the recent years have tarnished the glow slightly.

I don't think that should be held as a huge negative against him, Sachin's average did dip from close to 56-57 to under 54 by the end, doesn't mean we put him below Sangakkara and Kallis.

What is impressive about Amla is he's had impressive, series-winning contributions in Australia, England and India (well, 10 balls away), tours where he absolutely dominated from start to finish. Then, he's batted No. 3 in SA, where it is always tough for top-order batsmen. I don't know where I'd put him exactly, but like Pietersen, he's probably a bit higher than people with a similar average as him (Jayawardene, Younis Khan, Clarke).

Agree for the rest of your post but as much as I love him, he's definitely not as good as YK imo.

 

[vcs]

They are both great, but Amla is ahead for me. Younis has had more opportunities to cash in on flatter pitches IMO (not a slight on him).

 

[_00_deathscar]

Look at his record against Australia in 90s and 00s the best team going around at the time. If what Sachin did doesn't stand out (even after ignoring the length of time he played for), you have been watching different ODI cricket.

Speaking of AB and lack of honours, if ever there was a case of a player doing his utmost while others around him failed (thus explaining a lack of notable honours or 'winning contributions' although he did have quite a few still, including obviously the World Cup), then it's Sachin. That 175 vs Australia chasing 351 was excruciating. Should have been the very first 200 that - what an innings.

And it's also worth nothing that the (late) 90s and 00s Australia side was incredibly dominant - thus, to an extent, hindering what Sachin could have won in ODIs, even with "not the world's best bowling attack". Sachin tearing apart Waqar, Wasim and Shoaib in the 03 World Cup was quite a sight (a real meaningful contribution). Shame it all went to waste for the final.

Perhaps India today is nearly as dominant as that Australia side in the ODIs, and certainly at home, but haven't managed to really twist it (semi finals, finals etc).

 

[honestbharani]

My post was pretty clear, and very polite as well. It's on you if you fail to understand, and respond rudely (as per usual) in response

TIL, saying "no" is impolite.

And FWIW, I said he had done a lot, implying more than the others in your list, and for a lot longer - you basically said the only thing Sachin has on those others was longevity. I was pointing out it was a lot more than that.

 

[honestbharani]

Speaking of AB and lack of honours, if ever there was a case of a player doing his utmost while others around him failed (thus explaining a lack of notable honours or 'winning contributions' although he did have quite a few still, including obviously the World Cup), then it's Sachin. That 175 vs Australia chasing 351 was excruciating. Should have been the very first 200 that - what an innings.

And it's also worth nothing that the (late) 90s and 00s Australia side was incredibly dominant - thus, to an extent, hindering what Sachin could have won in ODIs, even with "not the world's best bowling attack". Sachin tearing apart Waqar, Wasim and Shoaib in the 03 World Cup was quite a sight (a real meaningful contribution). Shame it all went to waste for the final.

Perhaps India today is nearly as dominant as that Australia side in the ODIs, and certainly at home, but haven't managed to really twist it (semi finals, finals etc).

Really dont think you need to invent such reasons (like the recent pieces on Chases by crapinfo stats guys) to show why Sachin is an ODI ATG. His record speaks for itself. He has won enough, he has done enough, he is the best of all ODI batsmen I have seen live, and second best ever to someone as awesome as King Viv.

 

[ankitj]

Speaking of AB and lack of honours, if ever there was a case of a player doing his utmost while others around him failed (thus explaining a lack of notable honours or 'winning contributions' although he did have quite a few still, including obviously the World Cup), then it's Sachin. That 175 vs Australia chasing 351 was excruciating. Should have been the very first 200 that - what an innings.

And it's also worth nothing that the (late) 90s and 00s Australia side was incredibly dominant - thus, to an extent, hindering what Sachin could have won in ODIs, even with "not the world's best bowling attack". Sachin tearing apart Waqar, Wasim and Shoaib in the 03 World Cup was quite a sight (a real meaningful contribution). Shame it all went to waste for the final.

Perhaps India today is nearly as dominant as that Australia side in the ODIs, and certainly at home, but haven't managed to really twist it (semi finals, finals etc).

Yet Tendulkar won MoM awards at a rate bettered only by Richards and Greenidge. Wonder how he won that many if he was not winning games!

 

[smash84]

They are both great, but Amla is ahead for me. Younis has had more opportunities to cash in on flatter pitches IMO (not a slight on him).

Younis definitely ahead of Amla. Played quite a few match winning innings himself. The guy gets under rated but he was a beast of a batsman and ahead of Amla imo.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Ramnaresh Sarwan had all the makings to be a great ODI player, but his decline was so bad.

Remember that bandana he always wore.

 

[stephen]

Amla had a really poor recent tour to Australia. Which makes up for the fact that he was basically Bradman on his previous tour here. I don't think I've ever been as in awe of a foreign batsman as I was of Amla on that tour.

 

[NUFAN]

I don't think I've ever been as in awe of a foreign batsman as I was of Amla on that tour.

I can think of 2 other instances：Virat and Vaughan.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I can think of 2 other instances：Virat and Vaughan.

Vaughan definitely. That guy was so good for a short period of time.
Virat was good too, but not nearly the same level. The wickets that series were garbage, it was a miracle that we managed to get 2 results out of 4 Tests.

 

[Gob]

I can think of 2 other instances：Virat and Vaughan.

Vaughan did it before Virat tbf

 

[NUFAN]

Vaughan did it before Virat tbf

Why must I list them in sequence？

 

[OverratedSanity]

Younis definitely ahead of Amla. Played quite a few match winning innings himself. The guy gets under rated but he was a beast of a batsman and ahead of Amla imo.

Younis is up there in the Dravid/Kallis level for me. Still underrated by most people even after retiring.

 

[honestbharani]

I think what happens sometimes is you start looking at series defining innings or group of innings than just matches. Perhaps in that respect, Amla comes out on top. But to me, its a very hard group of players to separate and Younis and Amla are both right up there. I am not a fan of having to sort within the basket. Both gave a lot of joy for fans of pure batsmanship in very different ways. They both performed their roles in their sides admirably and have left the game better for their presence.

 

[smash84]

Younis is up there in the Dravid/Kallis level for me. Still underrated by most people even after retiring.

yep, by the end of his career he had acheived quite a lot. And his last 7 years under Misbah were quite productive

 

[Slifer]

Vaughan definitely. That guy was so good for a short period of time.
Virat was good too, but not nearly the same level. The wickets that series were garbage, it was a miracle that we managed to get 2 results out of 4 Tests.

Not to mention Vaughan did it vs an atg bowling atk and Kohli did vs a good atk.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Not to mention Vaughan did it vs an atg bowling atk and Kohli did vs a good atk.

For a year or 2, there was nothing sweeter than a Michael Vaughan cover drive, or pull shot. It's a real pretty he didn't stay good for very long.

Just looked at his stats, he only averaged 36 in First-class cricket, and that's playing mostly in County cricket which is not the highest standard.

Are there any other players who had similar careers to him in that they were for the most of their career relatively ordinary, but had a purple patch of a few years where they were just incredible?

edit: The only other I can think of off the top of my head is Andrew Flintoff (was so good from 2004-2006), except that may be a bit hash on Freddie. He was still a pretty solid bowler at least all the way until 2009ish

 

[morgieb]

Not to mention Vaughan did it vs an atg bowling atk and Kohli did vs a good atk.

Not that much difference between McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Warne, Bichel and MacGill and Harris, Johnson, Hazlewood, Lyon, Starc and Siddle imo.

 

[Prince EWS]

Not that much difference between McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Warne, Bichel and MacGill and Harris, Johnson, Hazlewood, Lyon, Starc and Siddle imo.

I'm no Lyon hater but Warne makes the difference pretty big IMO.