Sunil Gavaskar vs Herbert Sutcliffe

[PlayerComparisons]

.

 

[subshakerz]

Gavaskar.

 

[Zinzan]

Gavaskar

 

[BazBall21]

Gavaskar just

 

[Coronis]

Sutcliffe

 

[trundler]

The contrarian black and white gud appreciator has entered the chat.

 

[Coronis]

The contrarian black and white gud appreciator has entered the chat.

His record speaks for itself. Bloke didn’t start FC cricket til he was 24 thanks to the war, didn’t play tests til he was 29 thanks to shitty English selection policy of picking a bunch of blokes to open who had all played cricket pre-war and none of whom averaged over 41 in FC (besides Sandham). Averaged 60.73 for his career, 66.85 vs his strongest opposition, 64.60 @ home, 56.31 away and never averaged under 60 in his career. Bloke was still scoring regular 50’s when he played his last test at the ripe old age of 40.

 

[Prince EWS]

I'm actually a little bit surprised by the results; I thought CW largely regarded Gavaskar the fourth greatest Test opener (with a couple of cooky exceptions).

Coronis even thinks Sutcliffe is better than Hutton (and maybe even Hobbs?) so he's silly but I'm surprised he doesn't have more support on this occasion.

 

[The Sean]

I'm actually a little bit surprised by the results; I thought CW largely regarded Gavaskar the fourth greatest Test opener (with a couple of cooky exceptions).

Coronis even thinks Sutcliffe is better than Hutton (and maybe even Hobbs?) so he's silly but I'm surprised he doesn't have more support on this occasion.

I don't think I've ever seen Sunny rated outside the top three. Barring a few exceptions, I've always thought CW generally rated them Hobbs - Hutton - Gavaskar - Sutcliffe. With Gavsaskar sometimes even in the top two.

 

[Prince EWS]

I don't think I've ever seen Sunny rated outside the top three. Barring a few exceptions, I've always thought CW generally rated them Hobbs - Hutton - Gavaskar - Sutcliffe. With Gavsaskar sometimes even in the top two.

Well the poll backs you up so I'm sure you're right but I never really noticed before.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Weirdly they're exactly as good as each other.

 

[mr_mister]

I'll go Gavaskar but definitely consider Sutcliffe ATG and think him being in Hobbs shadow really ruined his reputation.

If his career had occurred as an Australian, or a Saffa, or a Brit but in the 80s or something or even if Hobbs retired in the early 20s and Sutcliffe had his success by himself without Hobbs partnering him during it, there's no debate. There's no way we poke holes in an opener who averaged 60. Which we do

 

[Coronis]

I'm actually a little bit surprised by the results; I thought CW largely regarded Gavaskar the fourth greatest Test opener (with a couple of cooky exceptions).

Coronis even thinks Sutcliffe is better than Hutton (and maybe even Hobbs?) so he's silly but I'm surprised he doesn't have more support on this occasion.

I have him and Hutton very close/equal, but personal preference plus proven Hobbs synergy makes me put him in XI’s over Hutton.

But its been clear to me ever since I’ve been here that CW in general rates them Hobbs > Hutton > Gavaskar > Sutcliffe (also when people start mentioning Richards a lot seem to put him ahead of Sutcliffe….).

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Sutcliffe.Not in Hobbs league but good enough to edge Gavasker by a small margin.

 

[Prince EWS]

I have him and Hutton very close/equal, but personal preference plus proven Hobbs synergy makes me put him in XI’s over Hutton.

But its been clear to me ever since I’ve been here that CW in general rates them Hobbs > Hutton > Gavaskar > Sutcliffe (also when people start mentioning Richards a lot seem to put him ahead of Sutcliffe….).

Yeah I have Sutcliffe third but I think he's closer to Hutton (2) than Gavaskar (4). I didn't realise CW disagreed with me on this one so much, and I considered myself someone who really rated Gavaskar too. Eye-opening poll for me.

 

[harsh.ag]

It's more about the era for me. I rate Hobbs highly for what he did pre war, not post war. That era was a little easy for batting from all that I've read, compared to what Gavaskar had to face.

 

[ataraxia]

It's more about the era for me. I rate Hobbs highly for what he did pre war, not post war. That era was a little easy for batting from all that I've read, compared to what Gavaskar had to face.

Mostly agree, but I rate post-war Hobbs too because he did after all turn 40 in 1922. (and scored a ton of CC centuries afterwards, era withstanding - it's not like they were on any similar plain to Australian test featherbeds)

 

[Coronis]

Sutcliffe was also known as a master of sticky wickets

 

[Lillian Thomson]

As big a tosser as he is Sunny was probably the perfect opener for Test Cricket. He could see off the new ball, build an innings and accelerate the scoring. Could be attacking or defensive as required by the circumstances of the match. It’s true he could make 36 Not Out of 60 overs in an ODI . But for Tests he was ideal.

 

[mr_mister]

I wonder if regrets that 36*

Got him a permanent reputation as a Boycott level stodgy batsman with no attacking prowess. In reality he took the opening bowlers on plenty of times in his career right?