Dale Steyn vs Viv Richards

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Why are you portraying Viv's performances in Australia as so much better than Steyn? Steyn bowled two series clinching spells when the match was in the balance on consecutive tours.

You have to be joking. Viv is the best visiting batsmen in Aus. Averages nearly 50 with an SR of 70. Dominated Lilllee/Thomson. In 79/80, he was the main reason they won there, in one of the most important series ever(especially from the POV of it being pivotal in WI domination in that period). His 79/80 series there is the best ever by a visiting bat to Aus. Steyn doesn’t have a series of that measure. His average is just under 50, cause he played Peak Lilee/Thomson in barely his second series. That series as well, he was the saving grace of the team. Steyn was a hit and miss in Aus.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Viv maintained consistency across many series in Aus. Pretty good in his first series(400+@38, when others weren’t able to do anything), godly in his second, poor in his third, decent in fourth, and pretty good in his last. Steyn had a great first series in Aus(which I would not rate as high as Viv 1979, cause even Johnson did pretty well here, whereas Viv outperformed all batters in 79 against Peak Lilee/Thomson/Hogg),decent in second, and only bowled(albeit poorly)for one match in his third.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

It is certainly a very select list.

Who would be the last English player to be a T1 ATG if not Beefy?

Botham and Anderson probably the only English ATGs in recent times. Stokes and Root could get there but very unlikely

 

[OverratedSanity]

You have to be joking. Viv is the best visiting batsmen in Aus. Averages nearly 50 with an SR of 70. Dominated Lilllee/Thomson. In 79/80, he was the main reason they won there, in one of the most important series ever(especially from the POV of it being pivotal in WI domination in that period). His 79/80 series there is the best ever by a visiting bat to Aus. Steyn doesn’t have a series of that measure. His average is just under 50, cause he played Peak Lilee/Thomson in barely his second series. That series as well, he was the saving grace of the team. Steyn was a hit and miss in Aus.

Viv was great, but he averaged 47 and scored 4 tons in Australia. He was even better than those statistics indicate but the idea that a statistical record like that is some extraordinary achievement that makes everything else unworthy of comparison is some real BS. Viv's record in England is head and shoulders above most players, his record in Australia is not.

Plus, most of what you said there for Viv also applies to Steyn. 08-09 where they dethroned Australia was the single most important series win in SA's history. The series in 2012 cemented them as the undisputed best team in the world again. He took a 10fer and scored a 76 in a partnership that brought SA back from a hopeless situation and won them their first series down under. It might be the single greatest all round performance in a game anyone's had in Australia.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I rate Viv highly but jesus christ some people really do go overboard. He averaged ****ing 47 in Australia and you have people talking about that as though nothing else anyone has done is even comparable. Stop it ffs.

 

[BazBall21]

Botham and Anderson probably the only English ATGs in recent times. Stokes and Root could get there but very unlikely

Botham is the best England player of the past 60 years easily.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Botham is the best England player of the past 60 years easily.

Absolutely. I didn’t say otherwise

 

[Adorable Asshole]

Botham is the best England player of the past 60 years easily.

Truemam vs Botham?

 

[a massive zebra]

Viv is the best cricketer of the last 50 years. Immy 2nd.

To call Viv Richards the best cricket of the last 50 years is simply laughable. Excluding the one single year of 1976, Richards made 6,830 Test runs @ 45.23. These stats were replicated by many players from his own generation including several in his own team. Some say Richards would have taken more care regarding his consistent run production if he didn’t play for such a dominant side, yet he played an extensive amount of first class cricket for a large number of domestic teams across multiple countries. Most of these teams were not anywhere near as dominant as West Indies and yet he didn't actually average over 50 for any domestic team.

I think Richards was a very talented batsman with the ability to destroy any bowler, but he was only motivated to dominate the opposition and didn't really care about maximising his run output. If he could dominate for a time and see his team to a good position, making huge scores and breaking records didn't really interest him. Many other batsmen have been far more consistent matchwinners are they were motivated to score as many runs as possible rather than to simply dominate for a short period.

 

[number11]

To call Viv Richards the best cricket of the last 50 years is simply laughable. Excluding the one single year of 1976, Richards made 6,830 Test runs @ 45.23. These stats were replicated by many players from his own generation including several in his own team. Furthermore, Richards played an extensive amount of first class cricket for a large number of domestic teams across multiple countries. Most of these teams were not anywhere near as dominant as West Indies and yet he didn't actually average over 50 for any domestic team.

I think Richards was a very talented batsman with the ability to destroy any bowler, but he was only motivated to dominate the opposition and didn't really care about maximising his run output. If he could dominate for a time and see his team to a good position, making huge scores and breaking records didn't really interest him. Many other batsmen have been far more consistent matchwinners are they were motivated to score as many runs as possible rather than to simply dominate for a short period.

That Viv wasn't obsessed with stats is to his credit, not detriment. Viv dominated all comers and struck fear into even the finest bowlers. If he cared for records, he'd have had them all. Viv was about winning, not padding stats.

The only over viable candidate for #1 is the gent they had at #2. Imran Khan has an excellent case, but I can readily accept Viv as #1.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Viv was great, but he averaged 47 and scored 4 tons in Australia. He was even better than those statistics indicate but the idea that a statistical record like that is some extraordinary achievement that makes everything else unworthy of comparison is some real BS. Viv's record in England is head and shoulders above most players, his record in Australia is not.

Plus, most of what you said there for Viv also applies to Steyn. 08-09 where they dethroned Australia was the single most important series win in SA's history. The series in 2012 cemented them as the undisputed best team in the world again. He took a 10fer and scored a 76 in a partnership that brought SA back from a hopeless situation and won them their first series down under. It might be the single greatest all round performance in a game anyone's had in Australia.

And Steyn averaged 28-29. Viv averagrd 48.Plus Viv’s SR was nearly 70. Viv maintained his record for 5 series. Steyn has a poorer record after barely 2 series

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Excluding the one single year of 1976, Richards made 6,830 Test runs @ 45.23.

So outside of 1976 Viv was basically Laxman level

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Viv was great, but he averaged 47 and scored 4 tons in Australia. He was even better than those statistics indicate but the idea that a statistical record like that is some extraordinary achievement that makes everything else unworthy of comparison is some real BS. Viv's record in England is head and shoulders above most players, his record in Australia is not.

Plus, most of what you said there for Viv also applies to Steyn. 08-09 where they dethroned Australia was the single most important series win in SA's history. The series in 2012 cemented them as the undisputed best team in the world again. He took a 10fer and scored a 76 in a partnership that brought SA back from a hopeless situation and won them their first series down under. It might be the single greatest all round performance in a game anyone's had in Australia.

There are few batsmen like Sachin, who are in the same league as Viv in Aus, but Steyn is far from the best to have toured Aus.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

So outside of 1976 Viv was basically Laxman level

If you exclude his best year, why don’t you exclude his worst years as well. And then if you include his WSC, he averages more or less 50 again.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

If you exclude his best year, why don’t you exclude his worst years as well. And then if you include his WSC, he averages more or less 50 again.

I’m not saying to exclude his best year tho

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

That Viv wasn't obsessed with stats is to his credit, not detriment. Viv dominated all comers and struck fear into even the finest bowlers. If he cared for records, he'd have had them all. Viv was about winning, not padding stats.

The only over viable candidate for #1 is the gent they had at #2. Imran Khan has an excellent case, but I can readily accept Viv as #1.

If Viv could have all the records, he would have had all the records. As simple as that.

How do you define stats obsessed really? Not like Viv threw his wickets after scoring a Ton or Double from winning position.

 

[BazBall21]

Truemam vs Botham?

Botham.

 

[a massive zebra]

That Viv wasn't obsessed with stats is to his credit, not detriment. Viv dominated all comers and struck fear into even the finest bowlers. If he cared for records, he'd have had them all. Viv was about winning, not padding stats.

The only over viable candidate for #1 is the gent they had at #2. Imran Khan has an excellent case, but I can readily accept Viv as #1.

To claim a lack of consistency should be to ones credit is simply ludicrous. There is a clear difference between "padding stats" and putting together a consistently world class run output in Test cricket across many years. Richards did neither.

Many of the domestic teams Richards payed for (Leeward Islands, Winward Islands, Somerset, Glamorgan, Queensland) were nowhere near as successful as West Indies. If, as you say, he was "about winning" and was the "best cricketer of the last 50 years", he should have been able to rise to the challenge and transform these sides into winning machines with the impact of his own dominance. Yet as I said earlier, he averaged under 50 for all of them.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I rate Viv highly but jesus christ some people really do go overboard. He averaged ****ing 47 in Australia and you have people talking about that as though nothing else anyone has done is even comparable. Stop it ffs.

All I’ve said is Steyn is not as good as Viv in Aus. Viv is amongst the top tier of batsmen to visit Aus. He averages 48 with an SR of 70. Steyn should average 24-25 to equal him which he doesn’t. Plus Viv maintained a better record across more series. There are batters as good or marginally better than Viv who have toured Aus. Plus there are atleast 5-6 bowlers who are a tier above Steyn in Aus: Imran(exclude his last series, he played solely as a bat), Akram, Hadlee, Ambrose etc.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I’m not saying to exclude his best year tho

You basically said outside of 1976. CW has a weird kink for downgrading Viv cause of his concentrated peak