Viv Richards vs Brian Lara

[Slifer]

The rate of dismissals is misleading because in Tendulkar's case it is spread out over 9 tests and McGrath didnt have a series where he owned Tendulkar by dismissing him several times, whereas in Lara's case, his dismissals are clumped together particularly in series in which he didnt do well against McGrath and lost his wicket several times, particularly 96 and 2000. This is important because then you claim Tendulkar failed in 2004, whereas McGrath just dismissed him once then.

Anyways, we can argue in circles. I get your points, Lara had some really top notch series against McGrath which mitigates against his lesser series showings and overall scored more runs. I understand your perspective, it is valid, my point is that Tendulkar may have scored slightly less, but was more consistent and never had a series where McGrath had his number, which to me points to him playing McGrath better, whereas in Lara's case you can argue he may have showed more weaknesses but also much higher strengths vs McGrath.

Let's call peace and move on.

We already did. No hard feelings. I'd be interested in seeing people's thoughts on Sobers vs Richards as pure batsmen and reasons for one over the other.

 

[CricAddict]

There is no way any batsman can be more flamboyant than Lara. Is there one? And I say this as one of the biggest Sachin fans here.

 

[subshakerz]

There is no way any batsman can be more flamboyant than Lara. Is there one? And I say this as one of the biggest Sachin fans here.

Lara is the definition of flamboyance.

 

[subshakerz]

Actually, Sangakkara has the second most doubles after the Don. But for missing Lara accomplishments:

Most 500 run series (tied with the Don)

3rd Highest percentage of teams runs scored over a career (after The Don and Headley)

Arguably two of the greatest knocks of all time 153* and 213

2nd highest aggregate in a 3 test series (688)

10th highest aggregate in any series (798)

2 world record scores in tests

One of 4 players with 2 300+ scores

Only player to score 350 + 3 times in a match.

Etc.

To summarize the arguments for Richards:

- Far ahead of the next best bat as no.1
- Awesome record in WSC
- Much better against ATG pace
- More well rounded record in a tougher era and incredible SR
- More destructive and intimidating

 

[Xuhaib]

I have never seen Viv bat properly just have some vague memories of watching a man chewing gum hitting hard while I was more interested in the animal figures in my hand. But I have noticed that most atleast 70% who have seen him at peak regard him the greatest batsman they have seen though they have watched others like Sachin, Lara, pointing etc at their peak. This factor clinches it for me for Viv.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Strike rate of 70 while being good across all conditions is insane

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

There is no way any batsman can be more flamboyant than Lara. Is there one? And I say this as one of the biggest Sachin fans here.

Trent Boult

 

[TheJediBrah]

Trent Boult

Rashid Khan

 

[Beamer]

So for me it's Lara in red ball cricket and Viv in white ball cricket. Mainly because BCL was numero uno during my formative cricket years. I only caught Viv at the tail end, but his white ball career is comparable to modern greats whilst the rest of his generation dawdled along at a s/r of 60odd or less. That's pretty exceptional.

I agree with those who say Lara had his difficult moments against pace whilst Viv was imperious against it, but I would also argue that Lara is one of the greatest players of spin of all time and streets ahead of Viv in that regard, so it evens out overall.

We are lucky to have had them both and I long for the day when we produce a batsman who achieves even 60/70% of what they did. Heck I'd even take 70% of what Shiv achieved at this stage.

 

[BazBall21]

So for me it's Lara in red ball cricket and Viv in white ball cricket. Mainly because BCL was numero uno during my formative cricket years. I only caught Viv at the tail end, but his white ball career is comparable to modern greats whilst the rest of his generation dawdled along at a s/r of 60odd or less. That's pretty exceptional.

I agree with those who say Lara had his difficult moments against pace whilst Viv was imperious against it, but I would also argue that Lara is one of the greatest players of spin of all time and streets ahead of Viv in that regard, so it evens out overall.

We are lucky to have had them both and I long for the day when we produce a batsman who achieves even 60/70% of what they did. Heck I'd even take 70% of what Shiv achieved at this stage.

Yeah I think Lara has some real nostalgia value as the last immortal level WI cricketer now they’re in such a prolonged dire phase. Can’t imagine them having a batsman of his calibre now their best bat is Jermaine Blackwood. I pray for the good times in Windies cricket to return.

 

[subshakerz]

I agree with those who say Lara had his difficult moments against pace whilst Viv was imperious against it, but I would also argue that Lara is one of the greatest players of spin of all time and streets ahead of Viv in that regard, so it evens out overall.

To me this is a bit of a false equivalence.

Lara was supreme against spin and Viv against pace, but I don't think Viv was nearly as suspect against high quality spin as Lara was against high quality pace.

Viv had strong series against Qadir/Qasim and the the Indian spinners and overall a pretty good record against spin. They say he struggled against Chandra but that was his debut series. True he didnt face Warne and Murali but we don't know how he would have done.

 

[trundler]

Richards's better away record is a huge point in his favour IMO. 2/3rds of his matches were played away too. No minnows.

 

[Slifer]

So for me it's Lara in red ball cricket and Viv in white ball cricket. Mainly because BCL was numero uno during my formative cricket years. I only caught Viv at the tail end, but his white ball career is comparable to modern greats whilst the rest of his generation dawdled along at a s/r of 60odd or less. That's pretty exceptional.

I agree with those who say Lara had his difficult moments against pace whilst Viv was imperious against it, but I would also argue that Lara is one of the greatest players of spin of all time and streets ahead of Viv in that regard, so it evens out overall.

We are lucky to have had them both and I long for the day when we produce a batsman who achieves even 60/70% of what they did. Heck I'd even take 70% of what Shiv achieved at this stage.

I'd even settle for a Jimmy Adams or Richie Richardson level batsman tbh. Such are our scant batting resources at the moment.

 

[trundler]

I'd even settle for a Jimmy Adams or Richie Richardson level batsman tbh. Such are out scant batting resources at the moment.

Richie Rich bats 3 for every side in the world ATM though.

 

[Beamer]

I'd even settle for a Jimmy Adams or Richie Richardson level batsman tbh. Such are out scant batting resources at the moment.

I'd settle for Sarwan or Gayle. They averaged 40 and are streets ahead of anything we have now.

 

[Beamer]

To me this is a bit of a false equivalence.

Lara was supreme against spin and Viv against pace, but I don't think Viv was nearly as suspect against high quality spin as Lara was against high quality pace.

Viv had strong series against Qadir/Qasim and the the Indian spinners and overall a pretty good record against spin. They say he struggled against Chandra but that was his debut series. True he didnt face Warne and Murali but we don't know how he would have done.

My reasoning is that Lara completely dominated Warne, Murali (in SL no less) and MacGill. He was next level against spin in a way that put him in a different league to Viv. So to me the difference between the two r.e pace and spin is equivalent.

I also feel BCL had to put up with a lot more pressure than Viv on a consistent basis as our bowling attack was poo for most of his career. So we were almost always under the pump. Viv was in a completely different situation, with a bowling attack that won us matches even when the batting failed.

 

[subshakerz]

My reasoning is that Lara completely dominated Warne, Murali (in SL no less) and MacGill. He was next level against spin in a way that put him in a different league to Viv. So to me the difference between the two r.e pace and spin is equivalent.

I also feel BCL had to put up with a lot more pressure than Viv on a consistent basis as our bowling attack was poo for most of his career. So we were almost always under the pump. Viv was in a completely different situation, with a bowling attack that won us matches even when the batting failed.

I agree with your second point, Lara was definitely more of a lone gun than Viv.

But I think Viv was next level against Imran, Lillee and Hadlee, and was perfectly capable of having a good record against Murali and Warne, perhaps not next level like Lara, but perhaps Tendulkar-esque.

 

[Chrish]

There is no way any batsman can be more flamboyant than Lara. Is there one? And I say this as one of the biggest Sachin fans here.

Not necessarily flamboyant but I find Smith fascinating to watch in the same manner as Lara..

 

[Slifer]

 

[ashley bach]

Absolute brutal footage, and a great summary of how Viv never took a backward step.